Showing posts with label obesity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obesity. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

3228 Sad Souls

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

"The deterioration of every government begins with the decay of the
principles on which it was founded."
- C. L. De Montesquieu; The Spirit of the Laws, VIII ---

--------------------------------

The following was a post to the Mensa online group from our local scientist, Andi. I don't know how much is is her words, and how much is from an article she's quoting, but since I make no money on this blog, I don't think anyone will object either way.

The article is interesting. I think we all are already fully aware of the social effects of economic inequality, but this is a higher view.

--------------------------

Op-Ed Columnist
Equality, a True Soul Food
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: January 1, 2011, "New York Times"

John Steinbeck observed that “a sad soul can kill you quicker, far quicker, than a germ.”
Damon Winter/The New York Times

Nicholas D. Kristof
On the Ground

That insight, now confirmed by epidemiological studies, is worth bearing in mind at a time of such polarizing inequality that the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans possess a greater collective net worth than the bottom 90 percent.

There’s growing evidence that the toll of our stunning inequality is not just economic but also is a melancholy of the soul. The upshot appears to be high rates of violent crime, high narcotics use, high teenage birthrates and even high rates of heart disease.

That’s the argument of an important book by two distinguished British epidemiologists, Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett. They argue that gross inequality tears at the human psyche, creating anxiety, distrust and an array of mental and physical ailments — and they cite mountains of data to support their argument.

“If you fail to avoid high inequality, you will need more prisons and more police,” they assert. “You will have to deal with higher rates of mental illness, drug abuse and every other kind of problem.” They explore these issues in their book, “The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger.”

The heart of their argument is that humans are social animals and that in highly unequal societies those at the bottom suffer from a range of pathologies. For example, a long-term study of British civil servants found that messengers, doormen and others with low status were much more likely to die of heart disease, suicide and some cancers and had substantially worse overall health.

There’s similar evidence from other primates. For example, macaque monkeys are also highly social animals, and scientists put them in cages and taught them how to push a lever so that they could get cocaine. Those at the bottom of the monkey hierarchy took much more cocaine than high-status monkeys.

Other experiments found that low-status monkeys suffered physical problems, including atherosclerosis in their arteries and an increase in abdominal fat. And as with monkeys, so with humans. Researchers have found that when people become unemployed or suffer economic setbacks, they gain weight. One 12-year study of American men found that when their income slipped, they gained an average of 5.5 pounds.

The correlation is strong around the world between countries with greater inequality and greater drug use. Paradoxically, countries with more relaxed narcotics laws, like the Netherlands, have relatively low domestic drug use — perhaps because they are more egalitarian.

Professors Wilkinson and Pickett crunch the numbers and show that the same relationship holds true for a range of social problems. Among rich countries, those that are more unequal appear to have more mental illness, infant mortality, obesity, high school dropouts, teenage births, homicides, and so on.

They find the same thing is true among the 50 American states. More unequal states, like Mississippi and Louisiana, do poorly by these social measures. More equal states, like New Hampshire and Minnesota, do far better.

So why is inequality so harmful? “The Spirit Level” suggests that inequality undermines social trust and community life, corroding societies as a whole. It also suggests that humans, as social beings, become stressed when they find themselves at the bottom of a hierarchy.

That stress leads to biological changes, such as the release of the hormone cortisol, and to the accumulation of abdominal fat (perhaps an evolutionary adaptation in preparation for starvation ahead?). The result is physical ailments like heart disease, and social ailments like violent crime, mutual distrust, self-destructive behaviors and persistent poverty. Another result is the establishment of alternative systems in which one can win respect and acquire self-esteem, such as gangs.

Granted, humans are not all equal in ability: There will always be some who are more wealthy — and others who constitute the bottom. But inequality does not have to be as harsh, oppressive and polarized as it is in America today. Germany and Japan have attained modern, efficient economies with far less inequality than we have — and far fewer social problems. Likewise, the gap between rich and poor fell during the Clinton administration, according to data cited in “The Spirit Level,” even though that was a period of economic vigor.

“Inequality is divisive, and even small differences seem to make an important difference,” Professors Wilkinson and Pickett note. They suggest that it is not just the poor who benefit from the social cohesion that comes with equality, but the entire society.

So as we debate national policy in 2011 — from the estate tax to unemployment insurance to early childhood education — let’s push to reduce the stunning levels of inequality in America today. These inequities seem profoundly unhealthy, for us and for our nation’s soul.

Friday, June 18, 2010

2992 More things I don't understand

Friday, June 18, 2010

"All human beings should try to learn before they die
what they are running from, and to, and why."
-- James Thurber --

---------------------------------------------------------------

I've finally found someone willing to work on the van, and now I can't find the keys.

Typical.

---------------------------------

From yesterday's episode of "The Drs", a true story:

A guy working in a pizzeria was injured when a freezer door swung open unexpectedly and hit him in the back. He needs back surgery. A court ruled that the employer (through workman's compensation insurance?) must pay for the back surgery.

So far, so good. Sounds right and fair to me.

However, the guy weighs well over 300 lbs. Back surgery on someone that overweight is unlikely to be successful, so no reputable surgeon will operate until he loses weight first.

So the court has ruled that the employer must also pay for lap band surgery! If Workman's Comp won't pay for it, the employer must pay out of his own pocket.

What!?! How is the employer responsible for the guy's being too fat for back surgery?

I think this is very wrong.

The result will be that no one will want to hire overweight people, if they'll end up held responsible for the consequences of that obesity.

Bad bad bad court!

----------------------------------

Just found an article on the above: http://www.weightlosssurgerychannel.com/breaking-wls-news/lap-band-surgery-to-be-covered-by-pizza-shop.html/

----------------------------------

On POTUS radio today, two guys were discussing what that mineral discovery in Afghanistan might mean to the Afghan people.

The "expert" said not much, that the local warlords and government officials would be putting the profits into their personal bank accounts, and the Afghan people won't see much improvement in their lives from it, that in fact it's happening already. China has been for some time paying warlords and certain government officials for the right to mine in Afghanistan.

Both the interviewer and the expert were unhappy with that.

That left me wondering. What did they want to see happen? That the general population would share in the wealth somehow, sort of like some oil-rich middle eastern countries, where every citizen gets a cut of the oil money, so much so that most of them have no need to work? Or like Alaska, where citizens get a cut of oil and gas contracts? Isn't that, um, socialism? [Wikipedia defines socialism as "a social and economic system (or the political philosophy advocating such a system) in which the economic means of production are owned and controlled collectively by the people.]

I suspect that local people are working in the Chinese mines, so they have a job and are getting paid. The profits are going to the top dogs. If you want to make a whole bunch of money, you just have to grow yourself into a top dog. Um, isn't that the essence of capitalism?

So, um, if capitalism is so wonderful and socialism is so bad, what exactly is the problem with what's happening in Afghanistan?
.

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

1194 Back Again, Again

Wednesday, April 4, 2007
[Edit - fixed the date.]

I'm back from a visit with Daughter and Hercules, and I'm so tired at this point I literally can't see straight. I occasionally pull all-nighters, and they don't seem to affect me too badly, so I don't know why I'm so tired. Maybe it was from thinking a lot as opposed to doing a lot.

It was a very good visit. A lot of very good things happened. Rather than attempt to compose an entry tonight, I'm going to simply paste in an email I wrote earlier this evening.

A few explanatory notes:
The person to whom I am writing the note, a family member, had sent me one of those "going around the internet things". The text was about how you can tell that summer's coming when young women start displaying their belly buttons, followed by a photo of a very heavy woman sitting on a park bench. The skirt of the woman's dress reaches to her knees, and hanging down from under the hem, between her spread knees, is a fold of drooping belly, complete with belly button.

And I hope the woman who sent me the sculpture park photos will not be offended. The outrage at the deterioration of morality upon which I comment was not hers, but that of the person who sent it to her.

I have edited to remove real names and insert the usual [aliases].

------------start of email-----------

I opened the "spring belly button" on the ancient desktop, and so the photo "revealed" very slowly, a line at a time. It crept down and I thought, "yes, not a belly button I'd want to see", and then it got to the skirt hem, then below, and then I almost fell off the chair! OMG!!

My second thought was "the poor woman". She probably didn't realize what was showing. I think we can be pretty certain that even if she knew her picture was being taken, she wouldn't want to be broadcast looking like that all over the internet! I worry that somehow, someone, some way, maybe someone who knows her, will send it to her. Of course, the photo may have been "shopped", and she didn't really look like that at all, but she's still a real person, and that might even be worse.

I guess I'm a prude. Am I strange to worry about the feelings of a stranger?

I got a broadcast from a woman in a retirement community in Miami, a blogging-buddy, complaining about how "this sculpture park" (in Denmark, I think) proves the erosion of morality today. Included were about 30 photos of anatomically correct statues, mostly couples in XXX-rated positions.

Now, I have to wonder, why would someone who is so concerned about the erosion of morals send those photos to 70 of their closest friends?

Ok, yeah, I'm a prude, and proud of it.

---------------------------------------
I was amazed at the latest photos of [niece]'s tummy. Now THAT's a belly button to be proud of! I can't believe how perfectly round she is. I also can't believe there's still so long to go. This is the first tummy I've seen where the word "burst" is the first thought. "Twins" is the second.

-----------------------------------------
I was visiting [Daughter] and [Hercules] Monday and Tuesday. [Daughter] and I went out with her realtor and looked at some houses. It was interesting and fun.

[Daughter] is very easily swayed by propinquity to woods. She's in love with, and they have a (too low) bid in on, a house that's more than they can afford, and very tiny, but that backs on woods and a creek. I pointed out that she and [Hercules] often need to have space between them. This house has the rooms arranged all around the center, so that no matter where they are in the house, they'd never be more than just around the corner from each other. She agreed that could be a problem.

One house she liked was in very bad condition, but much larger and $70,000 less than most of what they'd seen, so maybe they could fix it up. I found some, and I suspect extensive, dry rot. I advised her she'd not be buying a house, but a lot and foundation. This house was meant for someone who wants to tear down and custom-build.

Another house was extremely ugly inside, and the tenants lived like pigs. It was really bad. But the structure looked sound and well-kept, and there was nothing a crowbar, paint, new flooring and new molding wouldn't fix. It had great potential. Best of all, it had three or four bedrooms, an attic that smelled like an attic should, and was big enough that if they were in opposite ends, they'd be completely unaware of each other. Oh, and the roof looked new. Even if they don't go for that house (it's next to a busy road), I hope she at least learned a little bit from my comments. (I had promised myself I would make no persuasive comments at all, but, well, I tried to be quiet, but she asked....)

She and [Hercules] are both frustrated that they can't find something that a) they both agree on, b) they can afford, and c) doesn't sell out from under them. I explained to her my "theory of fate":

I told her that things happen as they should. If they don't find the perfect house now, or what seems to be the perfect house is torn away from them, it's because it's not yet the right time, or not yet the right house. It will all happen as it should.

That doesn't mean that bad things don't happen. Sometimes bad things happen because they should, because there is an experience you are meant to have, or a lesson you need to learn. You might buy the absolute perfect house, and then find it's on a floodplain. Those kinds of bad things you recover from eventually, and you are stronger, smarter, and better for them.

That's only if you have been honest and moral going into something. If you cheat, or do something you know is wrong, then any bad outcome is not a survivable beneficial lesson, but deserved retribution, from which you learn and earn nothing. It's not part of your "path", because you left your path. I really believe this.

[Daughter] was surprised when I said that. "Retribution" sounded like, um, God, religion, which isn't "me". I said it's not necessarily a religious thing. It's not an old man up there meting out punishment. It's just the way things work. Actually, it's probably psychology. Surviving, learning, and strengthening from something you did not cause is easier than from something you know was your own "badness". But that's not all of it. I do believe that some things are "ordained", are meant to happen on your path to enlightenment. I believe that if you do and be "good", stay true to yourself, then things will happen as they should, and even if they seem bad, they are necessary.

-------------------------------------
On the personal front, after many less than satisfactory experiences, I have killed all my online dating profiles. If I ever try that again, I'm going to be a lot more mysterious on paper, and insist on a fast meeting, so that the dashed expectations aren't so painful.

On March 3rd, I met a new man at a weekend Mensa gathering in New Jersey. Absolutely everything is wrong with the whole thing! He lives too far away ([Northern NJ]), he's too tall, too urban, too much into sports, too into pop culture, and much much too young (46). I absolutely cannot see him walking in the woods or going to county fairs with me. But he's nice looking, has a fast and eclectic mind that fascinates me, a backstory I'd like to hear, and he seems to be impressed with something about me. Not sure what, but I'll take it. He had dinner with[Daughter], [Hercules], and me last Monday. [Daughter]'s opinion is that maybe it won't work in the long run, but otherwise she approves and says "Have fun, Mom!"

Well, we'll see. He's certainly very attentive. I haven't had that in a very long time.


------------end of email-----------

When I said "everything is wrong", I am referring to "The Requirements". I sort of had an idea of what I wanted to find in a man. (I'm going to call this guy "The Man".) The Man is nice looking, but appearance wasn't a requirement. Among the requirements were that a candidate for my affections had to be smarter and faster than I, and possess an intricate mind. I think he does. It's the first thing I noticed about him. I suspect that he can not only stand up to me, but is capable of manipulating the "Master Manipulator" (as I have been called, but never believed). He could be very dangerous.

In no other way does he fit any of the other oh-so-important requirements, like age, height, propinquity, retirement (available time), social similarities, etc. It's interesting that I'm beginning to think that maybe those aren't so important after all.
He does do volunteer work with autistic kids. A service requirement I hadn't considered.

Dangerous.
Hmmmm.
"Have fun, Mom!"
.

Monday, August 21, 2006

844 MWG - The People

Monday, August 21, 2006

I don't know how many people attended the Mensa World Gathering. I had heard a few months ago that they had over 2,000 registered. There would have been more since then, and people were arriving as early as Tuesday with no pre-registration or hotel reservations. I suppose a future issue of the Journal will have the details.

There was a map outside the hospitality room for people to stick a pin in to show where they were from:
Observation - Mensans are getting older. I noticed it, and overheard several others remark on it. We were heavily into late middle age, with more than a few in their 70s and 80s and perhaps even beyond. I also noticed that at least half, maybe more, of the members are frankly obese, and half of those are into the morbidly obese range. We're talking over 450 pounds. So many men and women who walked by rolling from side to side, so many backsides rising and heaving and roiling with every step. It was pretty ugly.

By the third day, many had rented 3-wheeled buggies from the hotel, and used them to go from room to room. (More like hospitality room to restock the snack load to meeting room to hospitality room to meeting room to ....) I was disgusted by the number of horribly fat people who seemed to be stuffing yummies into their faces constantly, even during the sessions.

Worse was the cellophane crinklers. Hey folks, learn how to do it! If you insist on eating through a meeting, learn to hold the bag in one hand, and pour the candies quietly into the other hand. Cramming your fat paw into the crinkle crinkle crinkle bag every 8 seconds is incredibly annoying! Not to mention disgusting.

Weight and age became problems when it was discovered that the hotel trolleys (golf-cart looking trams that could ferry up to nine passengers around the lake to their rooms) didn't run after 10:30 pm. The sessions ran until long after midnight. I walked out of the conference center at 10:45 Tuesday night and found two very fat women and an elderly man with a cane engaged in an argument with a trolley driver. They were insisting that the hotel had said the trolley ran until 11 pm. The trolley driver was insisting that they stopped at 10:30. He gave in when he realized that there was otherwise no way these people could possibly make it to their rooms on the other side of the lake. I hope they tipped him, but these being Mensans (notoriously tight-fisted) I doubt it.

The next day, this appeared: Mensa had sprung for some additional trolley time.

The hotel said the trolleys ran "every five minutes". Bull poopy! As far as I could tell, there were only two of them, and you would wait easily 15 to 25 minutes before one made it around the lake, depending on how many stops it had to make, and by then the number of people waiting was so large that fewer than half could get on, so one actually ended up waiting more than a half hour. I rode the trolley only once, and then only to check it out. I could walk to my room in 20 minutes, so the wait didn't seem worth it.

In every group of Mensans, there is usually at least one who is determined to "show up" the speaker. These are the ones who will study up on the topic ahead of time, and then ask "innocent" questions carefully designed to either trip up the speaker, or make it look like they know more than the speaker. I didn't see too much of that this time. The audiences were remarkably respectful. I don't know why. Of course, there were still a few, and it was funny, because every time it happened, it was obvious the questioner had been working at formulating his question instead of listening, because when they triumphantly asked the zinger question, the speaker had already answered it in his presentation moments before. Now that was funny!

Well, there was one presentation where it became annoying. I think maybe I didn't write about this one (there were several I didn't mention). It was about walking tours of Paris, and there were three women in the room who wanted to make sure that everyone knew that they were at least as familiar with Paris as the speaker. And since there were the three of them, they then tried to out-Paris each other. It began to be difficult for the speaker to continue her presentation. No matter what she recommended to see, one of these three had something better.

Here's a view of the hospitality room:
The snack tables were across the back wall, and there was a bar in the back right corner. I'm not sure what they had at the bar, but it didn't look like it was heavily patronized. Along the left wall there were four (count 'em, four!) computers for the use of the several thousand members. Fifteen minute time limit, enforced I assume by the next person in line to use one. I didn't even try.

There were Mensans working with the hotel security, which I thought was pretty neat. They had badges and pagers and all. One of them was in the back of the room in a session, and I guess he forgot to turn the pager/scanner off or down, because we heard:
SKREEK!
First voice: "Um, Joe? Do you know if anyone has found that lost package yet?"
Joe: "Lost package? What lost package? (Pause) Oh, do you mean the kid?"
CLICK!