SAGE

I don't want to make a stink, as a death is a death and all deaths are sad times for someone. The death of a single person can effect hundreds of others. But I was reading on the jump in deaths from the swine flu and had to think...so what. 5700 people in a week. I guess that is a lot of people. I mean that would be everyone I went to high school with over my 5 years there.

But we are talking about 5700 out of 6.something billion. Why is this such a panic issue? Why is it getting this kind of media? and why is the language of the media that of pending doom, global disaster and mass death?

I guess on the one hand there is the belief that information is one of the best ways to battle anything. Thus the media feels it is its responcibility to get the information out there. (though most news reports are a fair amount of non-information, rarely making not that handwashing is still the single greatest defence against these kinds of infections...you'd think that would get a thousand plugs a day)

Also, there is perhaps a sense that slow information in the past has fueled the spread of some of our more deadly global pandemics. If only someone had put up the flags about HIV back in the 80s would we be where we are now in that fight? Or following the SARS outbreak... the Avian flu, mad cow...if only we had got the information to the masses and scared them suffiently that they would be cautious and kind in avoiding and preventing spread of the infection.

Of course H1N1 Influenza is the hallmark of a kind of Orwellian future coming to life. For generations (well at least one generation) we have been getting warning about the use of antibiotics in animals, about the problems with the feed, changes to genetics etc...that the way we treat our food will put us at risk. That our treatment is going to produce new microbes, capable of moving between species, a pathway that was mostly theoretical, speculated and wished for in science fiction novels. So perhaps there is some "I told you so" in all this media time.

Nonetheless, while it is important that the media offer this imformation that people take the risk of infection seriously, it should be coupled with the handwashing information.

Blackface

It is black history month in the UK and so as in February in Norh America, stories of 'black' history and racism abound in the local media. One story I happened on today, talked about how modern examples of blackface (the business of painting someone to look black). The article goes on to talk about how this kind of race impersonation is disrespectful and highlights how we us race, wrongly, for our entertainment.

The article even suggested that you would never find the opposite happening for entertainment. But there are heaps and heaps of examples all over the place, that are either truly benign or wrongly ignored. There is the classic, Legolas from The Lord of the Rings. I don't know Orlando Bloom's bloodline, but pale skinned, straigth blond hair with blue eyes is not it. I remember feeling quite dupped when I learned what Mr Bloom really looked like (having not known him before the LOTR films).

Of the perhaps even worse examples of Zhang Ziyi, a native Chinese, playing Sayuri in Memoirs of a Geisha. In this case it is very possible that most of us didn't even realize how we were being deceived, or worse that it was a deception...that there are infact differences between Chinese and Japanese.

Like Hate-crime laws, I find it really difficult to face things like black history months. Aren't all crimes, hate crimes? And isn't all history worthy of highight. Would it not be better to have "Hypocracy" history month or "racism" history month or "revolution" hisotry month in which all forms of hypocracy are studied, in which every kind of racism is faced, discussed and worthy of air time, and in which revolutions of every nation are put on equal footing, are explored together to help us all understand how and why we are different, and where our borders overlap and share common ground.

I think this theme based approach, rather than subject based approach would do far more to help us learn about black history...but also about all our histories.

Then perhaps we wouldn't stand for blonde children playing the role of Annie, or of white people playing russians, or french staring as italians...or humans playing the roles of elves...

Bunny biofuel

There is a (I think) very funny case of concern in Sweden about the use of the bodies of culled rabbits. It is pretty mean to laugh, but it is very funny in some rather ironic and sad ways.

The problem: invasive rabbits are harming the city environment, so the city has employed hunters to cull them. 6000 last year 3000 this year. We will see how many in the future. Well after culling, the bodies are frozen and then incinerated. The catch, this particular incinerator uses the energy produced from the process to create heat for homes. So inadvertently rabbits are being used as biofuel to heat homes. Although, that is a bit of an oversimplification, as they aren't solely being used, and they are going to be destroyed anyway. And how many homes can be heated by the bodies of 3000 rabbits anyway?

But in many ways it feels a bit like science fiction, doesn't it? A bit like one of those Ray Bradbury stories of old citizens being encouraged to kill themselves, or of dredging the sea to make a kind of slurry for feeding the thousands...which is the funny part.

But it is an interesting question of efficiency. The company is already burning peat moss and wood for this process, along with various waste products, and had 1000 years ago rabbits died and become part of the peat bog, there would be no problem with burning them to make fuel. Or had a large number of people served rabbit soup and thrown out a bunch of rabbit carcasses, there would be no problem burning them. This is because there are intermediate steps, removing the direct animal to energy flow.

But it isn't like the government is going out killing rabbits for the purpose of making energy, that is just an added bonus (or effect if you will). But it does kind of leave that eerie feeling, that if it is okay to dispose of rabbit bodies in this way, how long before human bodies too may be recycled to heat our homes. Does it matter? And there it is...that question of man...our greatest hubris, or greatest truth...are humans sacred?

Anyway, I hope the cute bunnies stop over populating the streets of Stockholm so that the cull can end, and we can avoid that elephant for a few more years.

Green space living

Coming from someone who lives in a jungle, this may seem like an odd blog...It may just be that I need to stop reading the BBC. But they do have some interesting news. Like this report about the effects of green spaces on our health. I do love the green in and around my home, and I fully agree with the findings of the research, as they are very apparent in my life too. But it is grossly one-sided research, and I wonder if they might also acknowledge the problems of allergies, insects and pest that go with green space. The maintenance, and feeling of guilt and resentment that accompany that maintenance work. What about the dangers of parks in cities especially where people tend to be a little less balanced and more likely to go crazy and attack someone...

I am fully for living in jungles. To limiting cities to populations of 300,000 and rewarding cities for populations of under 30,000. To planting more trees, and enforcing civic clean up days when citizens are encouraged and positively rewarded for taking pride in their community and contributing to its maintenance. But we have to be realistic as we promote these better living environments. We have to be honest and allow people to know that its not all green grass over there. That there are downsides too. Otherwise people just get disappointed when they make the change and learn the truth for themselves.

Pushing products

I recently posted about the EU's quest for supported claims. That they want any medical sounding claims on products to be supported by research. A, I think, very expensive and futile objective...but then we are talking about the EU.

Well, then I finished using my tube of Crest toothpaste. As I was winkling out that last little divot of paste I read the tube, probably for the first time in the three months I have been using it. And it said that is was an "All in one" toothpaste. And a twinge of panic gripped me. All in one...does that mean I shouldn't have been flossing these past months? Or I shouldn't have been using mouthwash, if only occasionally? What is included in this All that the tube was speaking of?

Unfortunately, beyond the claim that everything was there, there wasn't much else to let me know what complementary oral care I should continue with, and what was really unnecessary. I thought of the minutes of my life I may have wasted flossing, when this toothpaste should have been sufficient. I tried to assure myself that I had at that time removed build up with that little bit of thread...and that perhaps it was All in one, but I may not have been using it properly anyway...I never did read the use instructions.

Then another thought occurred to me...my next tube of paste was Colgate Complete. Was this the same as an All in one? Or did it just mean it was a complete toothpaste, and that other complementary care was still necessary? What about those years of just using the regular red tube Colgate...was that an incomplete toothpaste? Should someone be held accountable for the inferior oral care provided by that product. I mean we should always be good DOB scouts shouldn't we?

So I opened the box to see if the new Colgate would give me a better sense of what complete meant. It said tarter control and breath freshening* I thought, hmm what is the * for? So I looked down the side of the tube It said *with brushing...

With brushing?

Well...how else do you use toothpaste? This is when I really started to panic. i tried to imagine other ways toothpaste might be employed that would provide other kinds of tooth care. Maybe as a kind of soak, or an application, maybe to be taken as a drink? Diluted and used as a rinse?

But in the end, I decided that my smile is beautiful, and still beautiful just with the care I am giving it. And if there might be better care out there, it is okay, because I could be doing a lot worse. And this is what I think the EU science supported-claims need to take into consideration. By forcing companies to back claims scientifically, makes the claims even stronger in the public eye, making individuals even more controlled by the claims made to push a product. Which, as I ahve demonstrated can cause a lot of needless worry (and blogging). Really we should be working to weaken that bond, to encourage people to be their own scientists, to observe their bodies, and the effects of their environment on them. I know some claims can be dangerous, and some of us aren't equipped to handle the investigation...but I am sure we can learn.

Although, the latest episode of South Park "Dead Celebrities" #1308 does suggest, through the Chipoltaway product placement, that this is wishful thinking.

Food

Global food production must increase by 70% in the next 40 years...according to a report by the UN council for food. In the news report, as I haven't gone hunting up the original as UN pages are always so slow loading, there is a certain hysteria that nags me to say something about the state of food.

And I find it is now that I must say this because I have recently gained a house gremlin. That is a strange creature who likes to buy food and bring it to my house. And leave it there for me to eat. I like to buy food cook it and then eat it that day or maybe the next day for breakfast. I keep certain stock foods like salt sugar and rice. But most other things I pick up once or twice a week at the market. This is because if i buy more food it will end up in the garbage. As I tried to explain to my house gremlin.

And this is the point I want to make. It seems that 70%, presumably above the regular rate of increase in production is a lot. And I just wonder how much of it could be made up for by eating smarter not harder. In developed countries, so much food everyday gets used helping keep up the diversity of local landfills and incinerators. I wonder if merely learning to waste less food would be sufficient to account for food shortages in developed countries?

Obviously or well presumably a large part of the shortage trouble is and will be in densely populated, poorly developed countries and areas of countries, but seeing as cities are going to do nothing but grow, perhaps we need to help grow a culture of wasteless living in them. Before we go mowing down more forest, "reclaiming" more ocean for land, and irrigating desertland. Helping city dwellers be more conscious of wasted food, may also help us become more conscious of food issues around the world. And perhaps inspire some fabulous thinker to find more creative solutions than just uping production.

EU wants it specific

I just read an article about the debunking of the probiotic effects of yogurt drinks. The article was concerned with the EU's attempts to ensure that any "medical-sounding" claims made on food products be supported by facts. They want it verified by scientific observation that the probiots in many yogurt products are "good for you". And what is the percentage, what is the short and long term group mean distribution of effects, and how do these effects come about...perhaps.

This is all in their attempt to protect the public, (there it is my favourite phrase), from misleading or false advertising, and to ensure that all products are fairly represented. Personally, I think it is time to do away with advertising on foods. All food packaging (if any packaging at all) should just say what is in side. Maybe how to cook it. And even those instructions should read something like: add water or add fire or add both...go on experiment.

I don't get it. Or rather, I don't get what people don't get about food. Can't you just eat something and feel it was good for you, or feel, "hmm maybe i shouldn't eat too much of that." I mean, don't you just feel good after eating high quality bread, or a peach, versus when you eat dollar a zip-locked loaf bread and a tinned peach? Can't you feel after a yogurt...oh that was a lot of sugar, or that was a little tarte but my tummy feels calm...

Maybe some of the high fruit, high processed yogurts aren't as healthy as they claim, but eating yogurt is a good habit. Just take away a company's right to promote by claims...I think this is nicer. Instead of spending billions on questionable, arguable research let's spend it teaching people how to enjoy food, how to eat food and how to appreciate how food makes their bodies feel.

I have friends who I know are allergic to tomatoes or maybe cheese who don't know it. I see, we eat pizza or a nice lasgna, 10 minutes later they look lethargic and strained, not long after they are off to the loo. They enjoy the gustatory experience so much that they don't associate the coupled digestive experience with the ingredients their bodies don't like. I know I am probably mildly sensetive to bread. I eat it, especially when I eat a lot of it, and I get depressed, sleepy, groggy. And its a positive feedback cycle too, when I start getting depressed I crave more bread, I eat it, I feel more sick and sad, so I crave and eat more. But when I catch on and go for a bowl of soup or some rice instead of bread it is only a matter of time before my whole condition shifts again.

When we pay attention to our body, we can find out how wise it is. And then all the faulty health claims in the world don't matter a stitch and companies can tell you what you want, but you will say, "your words sound wise, but I know otherwise, my body whispers to me what it needs to keep fit and vital"

But I guess we need some lessons in the listening part. It isn't easy and it does take time. But i think if i could get funding for research I could demonstrate how much money would be saved by governments if food didn't need promoting.

Terminating an adoption

It is all over may social networks and I am reading a lot about this case of the Tedaldis. Do you know the story? 18 months after adopting a child her husband and her decided to return it, as they weren't bonding to the child the way they had bonded with their biological daughters.

It is a pretty sad story. As is every story of a child being rejected, abandoned and left "for someone else" to take care of. The child in question had been abondoned as an infant by the side of a road and was taken into state care. Then adopted to the Tedaldis family.

It seems impossible that a family would go through the process of adopting and child only to turn it away again, but it happens...and happens frequently. But need we react with name calling and disgust? I don't know. It is a very sad story. It is sad because it reminds us how little love we give sometimes. It is sad because it reminds us of how we have abandoned those we should love. It is sad because it is so true to the experience of each of us.

Life is often a series of abandonments. But it is also full of people willing to take us in. To give us love, attention and affection when we least expect it.

It may be years, decades even before this child finds love. Although with the media coverage of the story probably he will be one of the lucky ones and soon find the people who can and will love and care for him. Who knows, perhaps even his biological parents seeing the hardness of their first abondonment repeated will be inspired to face up and give their son the love he needs. But in the end, in some way we all get the love we need.