I came across an article in Time recently: “Why Breast Cancer is spreading Around the World,” by Kathleen Kingsbury (Time, October 15, 2007) “Plus: A Guide to the Latest Treatments,” the cover package promised.
From the data presented in the article, it is clear that breast cancer rates have risen along with the adoption of western lifestyles and diets in developing countries, yet with a bizarre sense of arrogance, the article focuses on the deprivation of the women of these countries because they don’t have access to modern medicine and equipment. Oh, those poor women who don’t have our advances! Ironically, they didn’t have cancer that needed treatment until they assumed our “advances”: processed food and high-stress but sedentary lives.
Though it supposedly sets out to reveal truths, science often has a dizzying ability to obscure them instead. The researchers who were consulted for this article apparently reported that the reason for the skyrocketing rates of breast cancer in developing countries is that improved public health allows women to live long enough to be susceptible to breast cancer. Several of the women described in the article are 40!
Aren’t the scientists, doctors and even journalists here missing something that is exceedingly obvious? If we could let go for just a minute of our manifest destiny to be the smartest and best, we might see the incredible opportunity here to turn back the clock on this modern disease. Rather than modern medicine for a disease brought on by modern life, isn’t it possible that the cure for all of us lies in a return to the traditional practices and diets that allowed people in undeveloped areas of the world good health before they began following our example?
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Monday, July 2, 2007
On Acquired Stupidity Syndrome (ASS):
Alli, the next big over the counter diet drug, works by preventing the body from absorbing 25% of the fat it takes in. It garnered an article in Newsweek (The Word is ‘Leakage’ by Raina Kelley, Newsweek, June 25, 2007) focused on what most people will consider its major side effect—“anal leakage.” I’m going to predict, like Newsweek, that this messy little problem will encourage a lot of comedians but won’t deter a lot of dieters. Clearly, hope springs eternal when it comes to the quest to eat whatever we want and to be as thin as Lara Flynn Boyle.
And clearly, for many people, something as obviously abnormal as anal leakage is not a red flag that this thing they’re putting in their bodies is bad news. It’s amazing to me that despite an abundance of evidence of the deterioration of our collective health—epidemics of infertility, Crone’s Disease, IBS, GERD, Cancer and heart disease-- how willing Americans are to put in their bodies substances that are, at best, questionable—“foods” that are essentially industrial waste products, poisons like mercury in minute yet real amounts, and drugs that are unnecessary-- simply because of good marketing, experts who are on somebody’s payroll (or just lack a reasonable degree of skepticism), or an abiding wish to be thin (which, let’s face it, is also a result of marketing). I call this Acquired Stupidity Syndrome because I think people choose to believe there’s no problem, despite common sense, because it’s easier to buy processed food than to cook, to take a drug than to eat better, to let “experts” think for them than to think for themselves.
Nutritionists say users of Alli must be sure to take vitamin supplements because the drug decreases the body’s ability to absorb fat-soluble minerals and vitamins E, A, D and K. Did anybody hear that???? Fat is necessary! It’s good for you! It’s a whole lot more important for your body to get fat-soluble minerals and vitamins E, A, D and K than it is to weigh a certain amount (and it’s likely that when a person is getting the right balance of nutrients, obesity will be corrected).
Each of these nutrients does many important things in the body. I’ll hit the highlights:
Vitamin E is needed for tissue repair—it retards the aging process;
Vitamin A is an antioxidant—it protects against free radicals and cancer;
Vitamin D is important for calcium absorption and therefore for strong bones, teeth and normal growth;
Vitamin K is needed for blood clotting, plays an important role in bone formation and prevents bone loss.
Some minerals (fat is needed for the body to absorb all of these):
Sulphur helps protect the body from infection, protects against radiation and pollution and slows the aging process;
Vanadium helps control cholesterol levels in the blood;
Magnesium deficiency can actually cause obesity!
The human body is an enormously complicated organism. It is unhealthy to be fat. It doesn’t necessarily follow that it is unhealthy to eat fat. Has anyone noticed that while the country has been busy decreasing its fat intake, the population has been getting fatter?! Maybe we need to rethink the “fat is bad” idea.
If you are someone with leakage from ASS (or any of its other symptoms) you may want to acquire some sense. Eat reasonable portions and a balanced diet made up of whole, real foods: naturally raised meat, eggs, butter, raw cheese, lacto-fermented foods like yogurt, properly prepared whole grains.* Exercise. Drink some water (that’s not laden with chlorine and fluoride and NOT stored in a plastic bottle) and enjoy the healthy body nature gave you, whatever its shape.
*Use links below to the Weston A. Price Foundation for more information on traditional nutrition.
Sources: Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon and Eat Fat, Lose Fat by Sally Fallon and Mary Enig
And clearly, for many people, something as obviously abnormal as anal leakage is not a red flag that this thing they’re putting in their bodies is bad news. It’s amazing to me that despite an abundance of evidence of the deterioration of our collective health—epidemics of infertility, Crone’s Disease, IBS, GERD, Cancer and heart disease-- how willing Americans are to put in their bodies substances that are, at best, questionable—“foods” that are essentially industrial waste products, poisons like mercury in minute yet real amounts, and drugs that are unnecessary-- simply because of good marketing, experts who are on somebody’s payroll (or just lack a reasonable degree of skepticism), or an abiding wish to be thin (which, let’s face it, is also a result of marketing). I call this Acquired Stupidity Syndrome because I think people choose to believe there’s no problem, despite common sense, because it’s easier to buy processed food than to cook, to take a drug than to eat better, to let “experts” think for them than to think for themselves.
Nutritionists say users of Alli must be sure to take vitamin supplements because the drug decreases the body’s ability to absorb fat-soluble minerals and vitamins E, A, D and K. Did anybody hear that???? Fat is necessary! It’s good for you! It’s a whole lot more important for your body to get fat-soluble minerals and vitamins E, A, D and K than it is to weigh a certain amount (and it’s likely that when a person is getting the right balance of nutrients, obesity will be corrected).
Each of these nutrients does many important things in the body. I’ll hit the highlights:
Vitamin E is needed for tissue repair—it retards the aging process;
Vitamin A is an antioxidant—it protects against free radicals and cancer;
Vitamin D is important for calcium absorption and therefore for strong bones, teeth and normal growth;
Vitamin K is needed for blood clotting, plays an important role in bone formation and prevents bone loss.
Some minerals (fat is needed for the body to absorb all of these):
Sulphur helps protect the body from infection, protects against radiation and pollution and slows the aging process;
Vanadium helps control cholesterol levels in the blood;
Magnesium deficiency can actually cause obesity!
The human body is an enormously complicated organism. It is unhealthy to be fat. It doesn’t necessarily follow that it is unhealthy to eat fat. Has anyone noticed that while the country has been busy decreasing its fat intake, the population has been getting fatter?! Maybe we need to rethink the “fat is bad” idea.
If you are someone with leakage from ASS (or any of its other symptoms) you may want to acquire some sense. Eat reasonable portions and a balanced diet made up of whole, real foods: naturally raised meat, eggs, butter, raw cheese, lacto-fermented foods like yogurt, properly prepared whole grains.* Exercise. Drink some water (that’s not laden with chlorine and fluoride and NOT stored in a plastic bottle) and enjoy the healthy body nature gave you, whatever its shape.
*Use links below to the Weston A. Price Foundation for more information on traditional nutrition.
Sources: Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon and Eat Fat, Lose Fat by Sally Fallon and Mary Enig
Monday, June 4, 2007
On losing the first primary and the last democrats:
That’s democrats with a small “d.” (A brilliant college professor of mine named James Morone used the size of the d to distinguish between citizens of a democracy and members of one of the two major parties in our political system.)
There was an article in the Globe yesterday morning (“Despite Challenges, N.H. Primary Thrives,” by Lisa Wangsness and James W. Pindell, The Boston Globe, June 3, 2007) about the encroachment of other states on New Hampshire’s status as first primary state. So far candidates are still paying attention to NH but they are spending less time than they used to and holding fewer small events. One long-time NH resident was lamenting the loss of intimacy in the campaign this season.
There’s been a lot of talk about how changing the order and density of the early primaries and caucuses will lead to earlier selection of the nominee and big money’s playing an even greater role in that selection. These are certainly real concerns, but there’s a threat that we’ll lose something even greater.
Reading the article yesterday, I was struck by the idea that NH in a presidential election year is one of the last places where old-fashioned democracy can be found. In this day and age when, for most of us, politicians are reduced to sound bites and scandals, NH is a place where they still kiss babies and learn voters’ first names. It’s where the talking heads sit down in someone’s living room and ask ordinary people what they think.
The whole reason other states want to move their primaries up is to try to gain back some of that attention and importance; to ensure that their votes will mean something. Unfortunately, we will probably accomplish the opposite by indulging them.
Instead of undermining the special status that makes real democracy possible in NH for a few months every four years, we need to discover ways to replicate that level of civic engagement elsewhere-- every day of every year.
http://www.casefoundation.org/spotlight/civic_engagement/
summary
The link to the Globe article can be found below.
There was an article in the Globe yesterday morning (“Despite Challenges, N.H. Primary Thrives,” by Lisa Wangsness and James W. Pindell, The Boston Globe, June 3, 2007) about the encroachment of other states on New Hampshire’s status as first primary state. So far candidates are still paying attention to NH but they are spending less time than they used to and holding fewer small events. One long-time NH resident was lamenting the loss of intimacy in the campaign this season.
There’s been a lot of talk about how changing the order and density of the early primaries and caucuses will lead to earlier selection of the nominee and big money’s playing an even greater role in that selection. These are certainly real concerns, but there’s a threat that we’ll lose something even greater.
Reading the article yesterday, I was struck by the idea that NH in a presidential election year is one of the last places where old-fashioned democracy can be found. In this day and age when, for most of us, politicians are reduced to sound bites and scandals, NH is a place where they still kiss babies and learn voters’ first names. It’s where the talking heads sit down in someone’s living room and ask ordinary people what they think.
The whole reason other states want to move their primaries up is to try to gain back some of that attention and importance; to ensure that their votes will mean something. Unfortunately, we will probably accomplish the opposite by indulging them.
Instead of undermining the special status that makes real democracy possible in NH for a few months every four years, we need to discover ways to replicate that level of civic engagement elsewhere-- every day of every year.
http://www.casefoundation.org/spotlight/civic_engagement/
summary
The link to the Globe article can be found below.
Friday, June 1, 2007
On bullying, Hollywood style:
I hesitate to admit that I’ve watched American Idol or So You Think You Can Dance but if you’re going to comment on social phenomena, you’ve got to keep your finger on the pulse of society. If the number of votes for Taylor Hicks last season-- more votes than any president has received-- is any indication, American Idol has captured a lot of hearts. (I’ve also got a small child, which tends to limit one’s evening activities.)
I can appreciate good singing and dancing. I enjoy watching an amateur’s journey to accomplishment. I think, watching these competitions, we all get excited about the possibility of making that kind of unlikely transformation from our own ordinary selves to someone celebrated by the masses. That’s why the shows draw so many votes.
On the whole, these are feel good shows, so why is it necessary for them to sanction schoolyard bullying in the name of entertainment?
The same possibility that makes the shows fun to watch, brings everyone and his brother out to audition. Sure, some of them have self-esteem that’s greater than their talent. I think that‘s a positive thing. Why do the ultra-rich, ultra-successful judges need to ridicule people they consider pitiful? If it is so obvious when someone has such an egregious lack of talent, why does it need to be mentioned at all? And why are viewers so entranced by the spectacle? It reminds me of the worst of the behavior I witnessed on the playground as a child. It wasn’t fun to watch then and it’s no better now.
I wish I could shrug them off as just a few more stupid TV shows, but what America tunes in to tells a lot about what our values are. For me this talent/humiliation show phenomenon is just another indicator of how uncivil our society has become. Yes, the impulse to raise ourselves up by putting others down has always existed, in just about everybody in some measure, but have we always approved it with 60+ million votes (and millions of advertising dollars)?
I’ve heard parents discussing American Idol as one of the few “safe” choices for family viewing. With weeks of ruthless audition episodes kicking it off each season, is it really safe for anybody?
I can appreciate good singing and dancing. I enjoy watching an amateur’s journey to accomplishment. I think, watching these competitions, we all get excited about the possibility of making that kind of unlikely transformation from our own ordinary selves to someone celebrated by the masses. That’s why the shows draw so many votes.
On the whole, these are feel good shows, so why is it necessary for them to sanction schoolyard bullying in the name of entertainment?
The same possibility that makes the shows fun to watch, brings everyone and his brother out to audition. Sure, some of them have self-esteem that’s greater than their talent. I think that‘s a positive thing. Why do the ultra-rich, ultra-successful judges need to ridicule people they consider pitiful? If it is so obvious when someone has such an egregious lack of talent, why does it need to be mentioned at all? And why are viewers so entranced by the spectacle? It reminds me of the worst of the behavior I witnessed on the playground as a child. It wasn’t fun to watch then and it’s no better now.
I wish I could shrug them off as just a few more stupid TV shows, but what America tunes in to tells a lot about what our values are. For me this talent/humiliation show phenomenon is just another indicator of how uncivil our society has become. Yes, the impulse to raise ourselves up by putting others down has always existed, in just about everybody in some measure, but have we always approved it with 60+ million votes (and millions of advertising dollars)?
I’ve heard parents discussing American Idol as one of the few “safe” choices for family viewing. With weeks of ruthless audition episodes kicking it off each season, is it really safe for anybody?
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
On skewering Imus but missing the point:
What Don Imus said is inexcusable and it is probably appropriate that he was fired, if only because access to a national radio audience is not something that should be awarded someone who repeatedly uses the platform to utter rude remarks. (I probably would have said the same thing about Imus even before the “nappy-headed hos” comment.)
Firing Don Imus may allow the media storm to blow over and CBS to find a reliable new source of ad revenue, but the thing is: firing one person doesn’t do much to address our societal problem with race. (Keep in mind, several other “luminaries” have been embroiled similarly in recent memory with no discernible or lasting impact.) Actually I’m not all that surprised by Imus’ behavior. I am more disappointed in the resulting “moral outrage,” which has been a little, um, weak and obligatory. We’re having a knee-jerk P.C. reaction rather than seizing an opportunity to look deeply at our national disease, with intent to cure it once and for all.
I think the things Imus, Michael Richards, Mel Gibson and the others have said are so telling because they slip out despite the expectations that we behave. These are the famous (now infamous), whose every word is listened to by many and/or recorded. How many others “slip” under the radar in insidious ways which, taken together, prevent real equality?
I don’t pretend to have all the answers, but unlike most of the pundits, I have spent some time thinking about the real problem. Here’s what I’ve come up with:
Possible solution: Reparations
I don't know if we as a society are ever going to get over the race thing because I don't think most white people think they do anything to oppress black people or that they have any responsibility in the present because of the past. Despite some talk of reparations, society has never made amends for what it has done to black people. I don’t think most white people really think reparations are owed—witness the way many white people react to affirmative action. But making reparations in tangible form ($) would be the societal analog of the heartfelt apology in a family relationship. It would absolve the oppressors of guilt, while acknowledging the herculean struggle of those who have been oppressed these several hundred years, and helping to reverse the damage in real terms.
Possible Solution: Get to Know Each Other Better
I think deep down many white people think there is a lot of truth to the stereotypes of black people and what's complicated about stereotypes is that that's always the case. But all human beings are complicated and multi-dimensional. Black people have contributed so much to our culture-- and white people show their respect/envy/awe (interesting that the synonyms of awe in my thesaurus are: fear, terror, dread, fright, trepidation, fearfulness) of that in a way by copying, usurping, imitating black people in music etc. a la Elvis Presley right through Emminem-- but there's still no broader respect. It may be the same mentality that allowed masters to beat a slave one day and make babies with her the next... and then beat them too. Call it morbid fascination or (God forbid) jungle fever. What it is really is xenophobia—fear of the other.
What we need is for everybody to really know and care about some people from each of the other groups. Knowing real people with all their complexities makes it easier to see the similarities among us and harder to subscribe to stereotypes. To do this, we need to take down the institutional walls that still divide us from healthcare to red-lining to education to salaries.
Possible Solution: Become Color Blind?
I don't think race, which is not real but a construct so, more accurately, color will ever be something we don't see. And I agree with all that greeting card sentiment about America as tossed salad rather than melting pot. Diversity makes life rich and interesting, why would we want to ignore it? Much harder is to see people as they are and value people who are different from us anyway.
King didn’t say the goal was to be color-blind. He said someday he dreamed we’d see people not for the color of their skin but for the content of their characters. Those women on the Rutgers team have shown who they are: hard-working, talented, accomplished, poised as well as black. Don Imus looked past all that and saw the same old stereotype (or maybe even dredged it up purposely to neutralize strong women who embodied the anti-stereotype). He’s not an aberration. If we keep pretending he is, we will never live King’s dream.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/business/media/10imus.html?ref=media
Firing Don Imus may allow the media storm to blow over and CBS to find a reliable new source of ad revenue, but the thing is: firing one person doesn’t do much to address our societal problem with race. (Keep in mind, several other “luminaries” have been embroiled similarly in recent memory with no discernible or lasting impact.) Actually I’m not all that surprised by Imus’ behavior. I am more disappointed in the resulting “moral outrage,” which has been a little, um, weak and obligatory. We’re having a knee-jerk P.C. reaction rather than seizing an opportunity to look deeply at our national disease, with intent to cure it once and for all.
I think the things Imus, Michael Richards, Mel Gibson and the others have said are so telling because they slip out despite the expectations that we behave. These are the famous (now infamous), whose every word is listened to by many and/or recorded. How many others “slip” under the radar in insidious ways which, taken together, prevent real equality?
I don’t pretend to have all the answers, but unlike most of the pundits, I have spent some time thinking about the real problem. Here’s what I’ve come up with:
Possible solution: Reparations
I don't know if we as a society are ever going to get over the race thing because I don't think most white people think they do anything to oppress black people or that they have any responsibility in the present because of the past. Despite some talk of reparations, society has never made amends for what it has done to black people. I don’t think most white people really think reparations are owed—witness the way many white people react to affirmative action. But making reparations in tangible form ($) would be the societal analog of the heartfelt apology in a family relationship. It would absolve the oppressors of guilt, while acknowledging the herculean struggle of those who have been oppressed these several hundred years, and helping to reverse the damage in real terms.
Possible Solution: Get to Know Each Other Better
I think deep down many white people think there is a lot of truth to the stereotypes of black people and what's complicated about stereotypes is that that's always the case. But all human beings are complicated and multi-dimensional. Black people have contributed so much to our culture-- and white people show their respect/envy/awe (interesting that the synonyms of awe in my thesaurus are: fear, terror, dread, fright, trepidation, fearfulness) of that in a way by copying, usurping, imitating black people in music etc. a la Elvis Presley right through Emminem-- but there's still no broader respect. It may be the same mentality that allowed masters to beat a slave one day and make babies with her the next... and then beat them too. Call it morbid fascination or (God forbid) jungle fever. What it is really is xenophobia—fear of the other.
What we need is for everybody to really know and care about some people from each of the other groups. Knowing real people with all their complexities makes it easier to see the similarities among us and harder to subscribe to stereotypes. To do this, we need to take down the institutional walls that still divide us from healthcare to red-lining to education to salaries.
Possible Solution: Become Color Blind?
I don't think race, which is not real but a construct so, more accurately, color will ever be something we don't see. And I agree with all that greeting card sentiment about America as tossed salad rather than melting pot. Diversity makes life rich and interesting, why would we want to ignore it? Much harder is to see people as they are and value people who are different from us anyway.
King didn’t say the goal was to be color-blind. He said someday he dreamed we’d see people not for the color of their skin but for the content of their characters. Those women on the Rutgers team have shown who they are: hard-working, talented, accomplished, poised as well as black. Don Imus looked past all that and saw the same old stereotype (or maybe even dredged it up purposely to neutralize strong women who embodied the anti-stereotype). He’s not an aberration. If we keep pretending he is, we will never live King’s dream.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/business/media/10imus.html?ref=media
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
[Letters Never Printed] On misinfotainment:
My husband and I wrote this letter to NBC and the Boston Globe soon after the West Wing episode "King Corn" aired in January 2005. The West Wing is not the only program that has misrepresented Turks and other muslims. I'm posting this now because I think the information and opinions here are still relevant and may be new to some writers, producers, TV viewers and blogwatchers.
You can rent Season 7 of The West Wing including "King Corn" from Netflix. I've provided a link below.
We enjoy The West Wing and generally find its treatment of issues intelligent, which is why its characterization of Turkey in a recent episode was particularly disturbing.
In “King Corn” (January 26, 2005), news broadcasts told of a Turkish woman who was to be executed by beheading as punishment for adultery. This storyline was obviously meant to evoke a recent real-life news item about Turkey’s debate of a proposed law that would make adultery a crime. The fictional case strays too far from the real one, however. (The proposal was later dropped and it certainly never called for execution as punishment.) The West Wing irresponsibly portrays Turkey, which is a modern, secular democracy, as an Islamic state engaging in the kind of barbarism being used by terrorists but which many Americans wrongly associate with Islam itself. Americans who know little about Turkey might believe this case is either real or really indicative of the kind of country Turkey is. In fact Turkey has not executed anyone since the early 80's. (How many have been executed in the U.S. since then, I wonder?) As part of its bid to gain admission to the European Union it moved to ban the death penalty completely 2 years ago.
Turkey’s population is 99% Muslim but it is not a religious state. It has a secular parliamentary system modeled on European governments. Turkey once had a female Prime Minister and has many female representatives in its parliament. Women can choose whether to cover their heads and many do not (in fact, women are not allowed to wear head scarves on the campus of a state university or while working in a government office). Women can divorce and remarry freely. Turkey is an important long time ally of the U.S. and is proof that “Islamic country” and “democratic country” are not mutually exclusive identities.
West Wing is a drama and its producers may choose to fictionalize real events to lend maximum drama to the show. But if they do this, they need to invent country names as well as events-- they did this with “Qumar,” which is Iraq thinly disguised. In our society, where entertainment and news are so often indistinguishable from one another, it is irresponsible to give the impression of telling the truth while leaving a perception that is outright false and damaging to the image of a people.
Netflix: West Wing Season 7, 2005 (including "King Corn")
http://www.netflix.com/MovieDisplay?movieid=70052405&trkid=
189530&strkid=1847356956_1_0&hnjr=5
You can rent Season 7 of The West Wing including "King Corn" from Netflix. I've provided a link below.
We enjoy The West Wing and generally find its treatment of issues intelligent, which is why its characterization of Turkey in a recent episode was particularly disturbing.
In “King Corn” (January 26, 2005), news broadcasts told of a Turkish woman who was to be executed by beheading as punishment for adultery. This storyline was obviously meant to evoke a recent real-life news item about Turkey’s debate of a proposed law that would make adultery a crime. The fictional case strays too far from the real one, however. (The proposal was later dropped and it certainly never called for execution as punishment.) The West Wing irresponsibly portrays Turkey, which is a modern, secular democracy, as an Islamic state engaging in the kind of barbarism being used by terrorists but which many Americans wrongly associate with Islam itself. Americans who know little about Turkey might believe this case is either real or really indicative of the kind of country Turkey is. In fact Turkey has not executed anyone since the early 80's. (How many have been executed in the U.S. since then, I wonder?) As part of its bid to gain admission to the European Union it moved to ban the death penalty completely 2 years ago.
Turkey’s population is 99% Muslim but it is not a religious state. It has a secular parliamentary system modeled on European governments. Turkey once had a female Prime Minister and has many female representatives in its parliament. Women can choose whether to cover their heads and many do not (in fact, women are not allowed to wear head scarves on the campus of a state university or while working in a government office). Women can divorce and remarry freely. Turkey is an important long time ally of the U.S. and is proof that “Islamic country” and “democratic country” are not mutually exclusive identities.
West Wing is a drama and its producers may choose to fictionalize real events to lend maximum drama to the show. But if they do this, they need to invent country names as well as events-- they did this with “Qumar,” which is Iraq thinly disguised. In our society, where entertainment and news are so often indistinguishable from one another, it is irresponsible to give the impression of telling the truth while leaving a perception that is outright false and damaging to the image of a people.
Netflix: West Wing Season 7, 2005 (including "King Corn")
http://www.netflix.com/MovieDisplay?movieid=70052405&trkid=
189530&strkid=1847356956_1_0&hnjr=5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
