Hans Rosling: Religions and Babies

I have been very concerned about population growth.  I cannot see how the planet can sustain us all if the population continues to grow exponentially.

So I was very encouraged to come across this fantastic talk by Hans Rosling which looks at the subject of population growth and uses statistics that I found very re-assuring.

In particular I found it very interesting that his talk dismisses the assertion of some on the Christian right who claim that Muslims are going to take over the world by default via their reproductive rates.  He does not address the difference in birth rate between religions within the same country - which has raised fears of an eventual Muslim 'take over' in some Western European countries.  However I think this talk presents a lot of good information.  And I particularly loved the presentations of the graphs over time.

If you have trouble watching the video you could watch it over on the TED site:  http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies.html

If you want to see more from Hans Rosling and his mind blowing charts then I recommend you head over to his website:  Gap Minder

Murderers, Tyrants and Madmen.

I have been reading "Merchants of Doubt: How a handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming." (Book review coming soon on my reading blog).  In this book Oreskes and Conway trace some of the scariest science denying trends in recent decades and expose the links to political ideology.

Some of the politically motivated organizations who are frequently found trying to refute widely accepted scientific theories are identified in "Merchants of Doubt".  One of the most prominent is the Heartland Institute.  It has the impressive record of using all its might to deny the dangers of second hand smoke, among other things.  Unsurprisingly, given it's free market MO, it also denies anthropogenic climate change and uses it might to try and cast doubt on this.

If you start with the premise that regulation by governments is wrong then you may be predisposed to overlook evidence that certain activities, promoted in our free market, are actually harmful.  And of course you will be set on a path of denying that one of the obvious and effective ways to curtail the harm is through regulation.

After reading about The Heartland Institute, in The Merchants of Doubt, I was interested to come across this billboard that was recently put but by The Heartland Institute. 

Here is a snippet from the Heartland Institute's web site that was issued with the unveiling of the billboard on 3rd May.

“The most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists,” said Heartland’s president, Joseph Bast. “They are Charles Manson, a mass murderer; Fidel Castro, a tyrant; and Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber. Global warming alarmists include Osama bin Laden and James J. Lee (who took hostages inside the headquarters of the Discovery Channel in 2010).  http://heartland.org/press-releases/2012/05/03/do-you-still-believe-global-warming-billboards-hit-chicago

Umm, what??

I have come across a lot of advocates of global warming in recent years; in the media, in books and on-line.  And I can honestly say that Manson, Castro, Kaczynski, bin Laden and Lee have never been prominent, or even referred to!

The public backlash to this offensive billboard caused them to pull the billboard after only 24 hours.  They issued a statement that you can read here on their website.  Did they apologise for their shocking tactics?  Read for yourself:

"We do not apologize for running the ad, and we will continue to experiment with ways to communicate the ‘realist’ message on the climate.”

I like this video response by Peter Sinclair, to Bast's murderers, tyrants and madmen claim.

Peter Sinclair’s monthly Yale Forum video uses historical footage to debunk an assertion that the most well-known climate change ‘advocates’ are … ‘murderers, tyrants, and madmen.’  http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2012/05/margaret-thatcher-others-neither-murderers-tyrants-nor-madmen/

Some interesting footage from the 80's and 90's.  You know, around the time that that anthropogenic climate change became almost universally* accepted amongst climate scientists, despite what the mainstream media, climate damaging industry and right wing capitalists would have you believe.


* Some sources re: Scientific Consensus on Anthropogenic Climate Change
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Scientific_consensus
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/mains2-4.html

Memories and the Art of Rewriting the Past.

I have been think about memory a lot recently.

I got goosebumps and might have even teared up a little the first time I saw Memory performed live (if my memory serves me correctly).  But this is not the memory I am referring to, although the lyrics are relevant to my musings.

I have been noticing the very human tendency to re-write the past giving ourselves a more golden glow.  I see this tendency at work in other people, and have talked to people who have also witnessed this tendency in others.  This brings me to wonder how much I embody this foible.

What I find perplexing, and perhaps a little disheartening, is that the very act of reminiscing may change our memories.  On a neuronal level, accessing a memory pathway seems to have the potential to change that pathway, effectively re-writing our memories.  Which perhaps explains the mechanism behind why people often really believe their version of the past, even when confronted with evidence to the contrary.

I first read about this neuronal re-writing of memories in The Brain That Changes Itself - a book that I would highly recommend to anyone.  But if you want a quick peek at this idea you could check out this article on Smithsonian.com: How Our Brains Make Memories.*  The researcher behind this article (Nadar) thinks "it may be impossible for humans or any other animal to bring a memory to mind without altering it in some way."  I really hope that he is not correct about this.  We rely on our memories so much.  I think that our view of our self and our place in our community/society largely hangs on our memories and the emotional and narrative meaning we attach to them.  If our memories are unreliable then how can we be certain about anything meaningful?

From a psychological perspective I think that we sometimes use this "coping strategy" to cushion ourselves from regrets.  But do we then reduce our chances of learning from the past? Without learning from the past how can our future selves grow into a more developed and mature version of our self?

I recently read "The Sense of an Ending" by Julian Barnes for book club.  I found the themes of the book very interesting.  I liked the way Barnes dealt with the unreliability of memories and examined how our version of the past may not be as accurate as we like to believe.  He examined the idea of corroboration of memories.  

As we move through time how can we look back to our past and recall events with any accuracy or objectivity?  Maybe we can't.  But maybe, with corroboration from others who were there, and even from our own writing at the time, we can discover truths about our selves and our history.  The big question though still remains: even with accurate reminiscing can we use the information to change those parts of ourselves that it would be beneficial to change.

I have been thinking about what steps we can take to minimize the corruption of our memories and preserve a truthful recollection of our past. 

Reading the book has lead me to want to journal more regularly so that I will have more of my own "in the moment" reflections to look back on in years to come.  I understand that my record of my thoughts, behavior and interaction right now will already be skewed and by no means objective.  But, being contemporaneous, any records I make now will surely be more reliable than my future memories of this present time.  

I will also be interested in corroboration from your memories and records of the past - so please try to lay down some accurate memories.

But then again, why would I want accurate memories?  Left to the natural effects of time and reminiscing, perhaps in the future I will remember my current self as much more witty, intelligent, beautiful, caring and happy than I really am.  Maybe that will be more comforting as I slump in my nursing home arm chair dribbling than remembering myself with more accuracy.  Is it that what happened to Griselda?  Is her memory of her youthful self is more glamorous than warranted?

Memory
All alone in the moonlight
I can smile at the old days
I was beautiful then
I remember the time I knew what happiness was
Let the memory live again 

* The article includes a description of an experiment to test memory in rats that included administering electric shocks to the rats so I do not recommend reading past the first page of the article if you will find this distressing.

CHOGM Special Powers Act 2011

I just found out that there is a Special Powers Act that has been passed in aid of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting that is being held here in Perth.

As part of the Special Powers the tough guys at the top have compiled an "Excluded Persons List".  Hmmm, maybe they should leave the list making to Father Christmas!

These people have received notice that they are not to enter any of the CHOGM restricted areas.  And that is a lot of areas.

Below is a link to a couple of news articles about this and a copy of the letter that these people have received.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa/10834043/dozens-hit-with-chogm-bans/

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa/10834043/dozens-hit-with-chogm-bans/

A Victorian Hangman Tells His Love

I don't often feel proud to be Australian.  But this week I have had reason to.  

The last time the Australian state sanctioned the killing of one of it's citizens was in 1967*.  Sure our human rights record is pretty atrocious in so many other areas, but at least we have this one sorted.  Not so America, as we have unfortunately witnessed this week.  

Image copied from here.

It feels like "unfortunately" is far too soft and common a word to describe the murder of Troy Davis by the State of Georgia.

As I have been thinking about this issue I remembered this poem by Bruce Dawe.  I remember how it chilled me when I first read it as a naive 16 year old.  And it still chills me now.

A Victorian Hangman Tells His Love**

Dear one, forgive my appearing before you like this,
in a two-piece tracksuit, welder’s goggles
and a green cloth cap like some gross bee – this is the State’s idea…
I would have come
arrayed like a bridegroom for these nuptials
knowing how often you have dreamed about this
moment of consummation in your cell.
If I must bind your arms now to your sides
with a leather strap and ask if you have anything to say
– these too are formalities I would dispense with:
I know your heart is too full at this moment
to say much and that the tranquilliser which I trust
you did not reject out of a stubborn pride
should by this have eased your ache for speech, breath
and the other incidentals which distract us from our end.
Let us now walk a step. This noose
with which we’re wed is something of an heirloom, the last three
members of our holy family were wed with it, the softwood beam
it hangs from like a lover’s tree notched with their weight.
See now I slip it over your neck, the knot
under the left jaw, with a slip ring
to hold the knot in place… There. Perfect.
Allow me to adjust the canvas hood
which will enable you to anticipate the officially prescribed darkness
by some seconds.
The journalists are ready with the flash-bulbs of their eyes
raised to the simple altar, the doctor twitches like a stethoscope
– you have been given a clean bill of health, like any
modern bride.
With this spring of mine
from the trap, hitting the door lever, you will go forth
into a new life which I, alas, am not yet fit to share.
Be assured, you will sink into the generous pool of public feeling
as gently as a leaf – accept your rôle, feel chosen.
You are this evening’s headlines. Come, my love.

The poem is about the hanging of Ronald Ryan.  He was the last victim of capital punishment in Australia.   I have lifted the poem from here .  It is a lecture given by Bruce Dawe.  In discussing his poem he says:

"Manners, conventions, customs are means by which the state seeks, at times, to legitimize the illegitimate."

The lecture was given in  2008 but these words apply perfectly to the State of Georgia.  They have tried to legitimize the illegitimate.  Moral discussions about capital punishment cannot center around issues of innocence and guilt.  If the taking of a life is unlawful for the citizens, how can it not be unlawful for the state?

 *Capital punishment was not abolished in Australia until many years later but no death sentences were carried out after 1967. 

** I have reproduced the poem in a font called "Georgia".

Undermining my Teetotalism

I am not much of a drinker and it is pretty rare for me to have a drink at home.  However, for the last couple of nights I have been kicking back with a relaxing gin and tonic.

I grew up in a tea-totaling church.  This branch of the church (Assemblies of God if you're interested) gradually came to accept a bit of "sensible" imbibing over the years.  And so I got to graduate from Lemon, Lime and Bitters, to occasionally having something a little more potent.

I have spent a lot of my 4th decade unraveling the knots I acquired in this environment but I still have not acquired the knack of drinking very much.

I have found it interesting to observe how others relate to alcohol after deconverting from the same, or similar, religious upbringings.  Some continue to avoid it: "I have lived perfectly well for this long without drinking why start now?"  Others suddenly embrace alcohol, and by embrace I mean at every possibly opportunity as they try to rapidly make up for missing out on teenage hangovers and embarrassing lapses of dignity at parties.

I have tended more towards the conservative side.  Partly because I have a voracious sweet tooth and most alcohol still tastes crappy to me (though I don't leave your bottle of butterscotch schnapps lying around).  But probably it is mostly because I am a control freak and the thought of being drunk is scary.

I watched Paul last night (while nibbling on dips and bread and sipping my G&T) and had a good laugh.  I loved Kristin Wiigs character who undergoes an instantaneous deconversion.  She makes it look so simple.  All you need to do is find an accommodating alien to lay hands on you and impart his knowledge and experiences.

Below is a little promo youtube thingy.  I have included it here because it shows some of her post-deconversion antics.  It is a pretty predictable movie so I don't think it will spoil it too much if you have not already seen it.

I love the character's reaction to her suddenly altered world view and new found freedom.  Pretty different to how I have reacted.   There is a lot for me to think about right there.

Jessi Arrington: Wearing nothing new

Wow.  This is so simple and yet so inspiring.  I love it!

Whether you want to save some pennies, save the environment or are just plain anti-consumerism, this might just be the idea you are looking for.

I have two questions:
1. Can you do this as successfully as Jessi Arrington if your personal style (or lack there of) is a little less flamboyant?  She rocks those outfits! But I just don't have the confidence to pull off gold glittery skirt especially with knee-hi white socks.
2. Doesn't $50 seem a little expensive for a second hand outfit?

Either Thrift shops in the US are way more expensive than here in Australia, or Arrington is shopping at fancier second hand stores than me.  Most items of clothing in the charity "op shops" I like to visit are under $5.

My favorite piece of clothing is from just such a shop.  A Salvation Army store to be precise.  I have worn it and worn it.  Almost every time I wear it someone tells me how much they like it.  To think I almost didn't buy it because it seemed to expensive at $15!

My favorite skirt.

Unfortunately I got the bottom of it caught in the wheel of my chair at work one day and it tore.  I was devastated.  But a very kind friend sewed it for me and did such a wonderful job you cannot even see the repair.  Now I don't wear it to work too often and if I do I am very careful not to roll around on my chair as much!

Perfect for twirling!

When I set myself a similar challenge to "Buy nothing new" in February 2009 it was surprisingly easy to stick to.  In fact, it was so easy that I found it quite challenging to go back to buying clothes after that.

My mum told me about a similar concept: "Buy nothing with a bar code".  It is intimidating to think of how that principle would apply to buying food!  I am certainly not ready for that.  No where near ready for that!

Disclaimer & The Importance of Laughing in Earnest.

I forgot to mention - my daily blog for September will be happening on The Vegan Apprentice.

I have a few posts in mind for this blog this month, but daily?  No, not going to happen.  Not this month anyway.

Although, come to think of it, I could just about do a post a day with patient bloopers collected over my years in general practice.  Lately some of my patients have, inadvertently I am sure, upped the ante in the bloopers stakes.  Hmmm, or maybe its a plot.  Something along the lines of "Try and make Mandy laugh in a patients face".  If that is the case, so far I am winning.  I always manage to keep a straight face.  Well, at least until the consultation is over.  I do have some decorum!

It's probably not a devious plot.


In fact maybe it is a good plot.  One designed to bring me more laughter.  And I do love to laugh.  And then I get to laugh about it again when I come home and tell my husband.


(It's not a plot at all is it?)

Anyway, here is an example from this week:

After examining a reasonably well 9 year old boy:
Me: He has a head cold and does not need any antibiotics.  (This is the abbreviated version).
Mother: Do you have time for one more question?
Me: Sure
Mother: I have been trying to teach him how to breathe. Do you have any tips on teaching children how to breathe?

I would love to hear your bloopers.   Opportunities for laughter should be shared.  

PS. No patients where harmed in the writing of this blog post.  Confidentiality upheld at all times.  :)

Matt Cutts: Try something new for 30 days

Over the last few days I have been umming and ahhing about whether to commit to 30 Day Blog September.   If you don't know what I am referring to then check Good Reason Blog.

There will always be excuses for taking on any challenge in life and I was manufacturing a few for myself.  Then I stumbled across this neat TED talk by Matt Cutts (never heard of him before either?) and realised I had nothing to lose.  Except of course pride if I didn't complete it - but I will complete it!  So win-win!!

Here are some examples he gave of 30 day challenges.

The interesting thing for me is that it was a 30 day challenge that gave me the inspiration to kick off this blog.  It all started with November 2008: Supermarket Free Zone.  Then there was December 2009: Non-fiction read-a-thon.  Followed by January 2009: Regular Exercise and February 2009: Consumer Detox, which I actually carried on past the end of the short month for the next 18 months.

I guess my vegan apprenticeship is a kind of challenge but it is bigger deal than a monthly challenge for me.  Though I think a vegan 30 day challenge would be a pretty cool experiment for those who have never tried it.  Or, for those a little less keen, maybe a "Vegan day once a week for a month", or even a "Vegan dinner one day a week for a month" would be a great challenge to set yourself! 

I really enjoyed setting myself those challenges and the motivation it gave me to do something different.  Unfortunately I did not get around to setting myself any more monthly challenges after those first four months.  So here is just the push I needed to get started again.  Not saying I will set a challenge every month (2012: monthly challenge every month year???) but I am going to do it more regularly than I have for the last couple of years.

Cutts says that when he started setting himself monthly challenges "instead of the months flying by, forgotten, the time was much more memorable."  That sounds good to me! 

Decision Fatigue - A Pervasive Malaise

Have you ever looked back on a decision and wondered: "What on earth was I thinking?"  I certainly have.

My husband came across a very interesting article this week in The New York Times Magazine which might help explain some of these lapses in judgement:  Do you suffer from decision fatigue?

Image from the NYT Magazine

I found it very interesting and it is well worth a read.  I plan to keep this in mind when in situations that demand decisions.  Hopefully it will result in less retrospectascope regret.

It reminds me how important it is to take a 5 minute break and have a snack at work.  I now have a name for that sluggish, frustrated feeling I can get mid afternoon on a busy day!  I will tell the receptionists at work: "No more squeeze-ins please.  I am suffering from decision fatigue."

I learned early on in my career that it is good medical practice for me to keep a piece of fruit, muesli bar or sandwich handy (or even chocolate!).  But I sometimes feel guilty snatching a quick cup of tea between patients.   This article reminds me how important this really is.  Keeping a patient waiting for another 5 minutes may inconvenience them.  But trying to provide a consultation when suffering from decision fatigue will result in me not being able to give that person a good quality consultation and may result in much more than inconvenience.

Next time you are faced with a situation where you are required to make a lot of decisions - beware decision fatigue!  Allow yourself to take a break, fix your blood glucose levels if necessary, and avoid making a decision you will later regret.

No More Drug Lunches for Me.

It has been two months since my last Drug Lunch.

That statement may require some explaining. By "Drug" I mean Pharmaceutical Company, and by "Lunch" I mean any gift (edible or otherwise).

What is a Drug Lunch?

Pharmaceutical sales reps regularly visit doctors and they generally bring food.  Over lunch they chat about the products of their company.  They offer sample boxes of medications (to give to patients of course) and "trinkets" such as measuring tapes, boxes of tongue depressors and patient education booklets, all blazoned with the company's logo and feature products.

Pharmaceutical companies also run "educational" events such as dinner meetings with a local specialist as the speaker, and more elaborate weekend conferences with international guest speakers covering a range of medical topics.  For example a company promoting a new antidepressant medication may organise for a local psychiatrist to give a talk on the treatment of depression to up-skill GPs.

This is pretty tame compared to the all expenses paid weekends away to golf resorts for doctors and their partners that used to be on offer.  In Australia the marketing strategies of pharmaceutical companies have come under scrutiny and regulation since the 1960's and now any perks offered have to be directly related to educational content.  Pharmaceutical companies also have to be able to justify how much they spend on meals - so the fine wining and dining has mostly been replaced by more modest meals.

In practice, for me, that meant free sandwiches or sushi for lunch on a pretty regular basis, with cake for dessert on a good day, and a bunch of stuff in my office with pharmaceutical company logos and products on it.

For more info on the current regulations/guidelines click here: Medicines Australia - Code of Conduct 

The Challenge:

I had a little about the potential conflict of interest but had been procrastinating on doing anything about it.  The kick that I needed to finally do some thing about this came from a facebook discussion of all places!  Someone posted a response on a friend's status update, their comment included the following:

"It is time to remove the title of doctor from people because the Medical profession is all about money. Research is not for cures, only repetitive medications for ongoing profit. Disband the AMA then we can fund health appropriately. " 

Silly me waded into the discussion - defending doctors and our prescribing patterns.  Here is a snippet:

"I also won't dispute with you that big pharma is about profit, I would go further and say that big pharma is corrupt to it's core, but pardon me if I still chose to judiciously prescribe their products in the best interests of my patients."

The person responded politely and then posed the following question:

"Do any Doctor's receive any benefits from prescribing particular brands/products including business trips etc.? "

The simplistic answer is no.  Doctors' do not receive incentives for prescribing particular products.  But the question got me thinking.  And reading.  And the more I thought and the more I read the more it became obvious that my interactions with pharmaceutical companies were probably compromising my professional integrity and ability to practice unbiased medicine.

It is insidious, not innocuous:

Nearly all doctors I know interact with pharmaceutical companies sometimes.  And most of the doctors that I have talked to feel that they do not allow pharmaceutical company information to affect their prescribing habits.  This is what I used to think too.  But the research disagrees.  You can find links to articles dealing with this topic on the No Free Lunch site.  Here is one example:

"These alterations in prescribing patterns occurred even though the majority of physicians who attended the symposia believed that such enticements would not alter their prescribing patterns."  - Wateska L, Orlowski JP "The effects of pharmaceutical firm enticements on physician prescribing patterns.  There's no such thing as a free lunch."  Published in Chest, 1992 Jul;102 (1):270-3.  Abstract available here.

It must seem pretty arrogant (of just stupid) of me to have thought that I was not affected.  But to be honest, most of the time I just did not think about the implications of these interactions.  Which I am sure is just how the pharmaceutical companies want it.
 The bottom line is that pharmaceutical companies wouldn't bother if it didn't work!

Once I started to actually think about the issue the ethical decision became crystal clear.

My pledge:

I will accept no gift, however large or small, edible or inedible, from a pharmaceutical company.  I will accept no information, education or training from a pharmaceutical company, no matter how reliable or prestigious the invited speakers may seem.

The Response:

I wondered how my decision would be received at work.  I suspected that my colleagues would think I was strange, or being over the top.  (Hmm, maybe they already think that!)  But actually my decision has been received very positively. 

More Info:

If you would like more information on this issue you could check out the following organizations:

No Free Lunch

I came across this web site pretty quickly when I started googling info on doctors and pharmaceutical companies.  The organisation was started in America by health professionals concerned about the influence that pharmaceutical companies have over the health industry.

No Free Lunch encourages doctors to take the pledge reproduced below, and to let their patients know about it.   The organization maintains a list of health professionals in the US who have signed on.

"I, __________________, am committed to practicing medicine in the best interest of my patients and on the basis of the best available evidence, rather than on the basis of advertising or promotion.   

I therefore pledge to accept no money, gifts, or hospitality from the pharmaceutical industry; to seek unbiased sources of information and not rely on information disseminated by drug companies; and to avoid conflicts of interest in my practice, teaching, and/or research." 

 - copied from No Free Lunch.

Healthy Skepticism

I asked a friend if there was a similar organisation in Australia and he pointed me in the direction of Healthy Skepticism.  (He is doing some research into this area and must have wondered why it took me so long to reach the decision to boycott drug lunches.)

Healthy Skepticism was started in 1983 in Adelaide Australia, but has members from around the world.  From the web site:

"Healthy Skepticism is an independent, international, not for profit organisation for people with an interest in improving health. We aim to improve health by reducing harm from misleading drug promotion.

 - from The Identity Statement of Healthy Skepticism

Healthy Skepticism is in the process of merging with No Free Lunch.  Strength in numbers!

Doctors Reform Society

The DRS was formed in 1973 in Australia, specifically to support the introduction of Medicare, which was opposed by the Australian Medical Association at the time.  The DRS has much broader interests than just the issue of pharmaceutical marketing but I think it is relevant to this discussion. 

From the DRS website:

The DRS functions as a medico-political think tank, a lobby group and a public resource centre.
It is not affiliated to any political party, receives no corporate funding, and relies financially on subscriptions and donations.
The DRS will speak out against any political party, organisation or individual that threatens public health care.

- copied from the About Us section of the DRS website.

So, where am I at now?

• I have not attended a "Drug Lunch" in the last 2 months
• I have become a member of Healthy Skepticism.  
• I plan to attend the August meeting of the Perth branch of the DRS.  
• I have not finished removing all the Pharmaceutical paraphernalia from my consulting room but I am getting there. 
• I am looking at educational events that are not sponsored by any pharmaceutical companies.  This means I will have to pay to attend them but at least my conscience, and hopefully my clinical judgement, will be clearer.

Swiss Suffrage Shock

I was sitting in my politics lecture this week busily taking notes and being impressed by Swiss style democracy.  Switzerland is the closest example we have of direct democracy in modern society.

On average there are 7 referendums per year in Switzerland.  Major policy decisions and all changes to the constitution are decided via referendums.   The reliance on referendums dates back to 1848.  It has led to a very stable government and, contrary to what you might initially think, is a very efficient and progressive system.  For example the referendums have led to approving legislation regarding carbon taxation and recognition of same-sex partnerships .  Voting in referendums is not compulsory and voters tend to be well informed.  As opposed to what we see in modern representative democracies - politicians are part-timers without huge media prestige. 

However, just as I was thinking yay

for the Swiss, the lecture said:

"Switzerland did not grant women the vote until 1971"

I said:  "Gasp"

I mean I actually, literally, audibly gasped. 

And a number of swivel necked and primarily female students turned to look at me.  They seemed nonplussed by the information and but apparently surprised by my shock.  It's not that these students are mute.  They can raise a decent "murmur" when something piques their interest.

Why did these other students seem unsurprised by what the lecture had said but so shocked by my gasp? I have a few theories:

1. They already knew about this appalling example of the abuse of women's rights and were surprised that I did not already know this.  How could any self respecting female politics student not know this?

2. They were not actually listening to the lecture as they were too busy robotically taking notes.  Of course when they read over these notes as part of their exam preparation their shocked gasp will bring their parents or other house mates running to see what the matter is.

3. They are all so terribly young that 1971 sounds like such a long time ago.  Any time in history that predates the internet and Twilight must have been so horribly primitive that they are surprised anyone had the vote, let alone women.  Of course for someone born just 3 years after 1971 it seems unspeakably outrageous that the women's suffrage movement in Switzerland had to fight so long for this basic sign of respect.

4. They just didn't care.  They have been born into a time and place where their rights as women to vote, get an education and pursue any career of their choice are unquestioned.  Unfortunately these rights are now taken for granted, and consequently are undervalued.

I find it quite astounding and disturbing that Switzerland took so long to grant women the vote.  And I wonder long would it have taken for women to achieve the right to vote in Australia if the issue was decided by a referendum amongst male voters? 

For a time line of women's suffrage in Switzerland:

Women's Right to Vote In Switzerland

As a comparison, here is a link to the a time line of when the vote was granted to women by country:

Time Line of International Women's Suffrage

I have picked out a few examples from the timeline in case you can't be bothered perusing the whole list:

1893 - New Zealand

1902 - Australia

1906 - Finland

1917 - Canada

1918 - UK, Germany, Russia, Ireland,

1920 - US

1924 - Mongolia

1930 - South Africa - Whites only of course

1944 - France

1945 - Italy, Japan, Indonesia

1948 - Israel

1949 - China

1963 - Afganistan, Iran,

1971 - Switzerland

1994 - South Africa - blacks

There is more to me than what I eat.

My vegan apprenticeship is going well.  I am enjoying reading, learning, experimenting, tasting.  I am doing one strict day per week of a vegan diet and for the other 6 days per week I am working on excluding animal products without being fanatical.

But this is not all there is to me!  No-one likes to be pigeon-holed and I have already experienced this during my years of being a vegetarian:
 -  "Oh you're a vegetarian" (You are obviously some kind of animal-loving, tree-hugging nut.)
And I experienced it for years when I was a Christian:
 -  "Oh you're a christian"  (You are obviously a weird, judgemental and anti-fun nut).

I guess that is part of human nature.  We all (yes me too) judge a book by it's label.
But there is more to me than what I eat.

I also recognise that this vegan apprenticeship is just another development in my "I need something to focus on" quest.  I am a crusader.  It hurts to admit that.  But I do recognise a need in me to have something outside myself that I am "living for".  I am not an apathetic person.  And I am not satisfied with life being mundane.  But since (gradually) leaving the church I have struggled at times to know where to direct my crusading energies.  I get interested in an issue, (whether environmental, social or political) but soon realise that the "problems" of the world are bigger and more complicated that just that issue.  I want to keep things in perspective but this is very hard to achieve.

Maybe I just need to relax a bit more.
Not in the sense of frittering away my time on a-muse-ments.  A tendency in western society that really concerns me!
But in the sense of relaxing into my life as it is right now, with a bigger measure of acceptance, and taking time to smell the proverbial roses.

Or maybe I am just making things overly complicated and being too hard on myself.   I think I will just enjoy the day and enjoy my new found interest in veganism without worrying so much about the bigger picture today.

So what yummy new vegan recipe shall I try today.
:)

The Apprenticeship Begins.

Today is the first day in my quest to change to a vegan diet.

I have been a vegetarian for nearly 5 years.  And honestly, changing to a vegetarian diet was so easy!  I have occasionally missed gelatine (oh marshmallows how I used to love your squishy sweetness).  But I really have not missed other products that animals have had to die to produce.

For quite some time now my conscience has been nudging me towards veganism.  But convenience and taste buds have been bitterly opposing.

Last night I watched the "Farm to Fridge"  - thanks to my meat eating mum posting it on facebook.  And teary eyed and feeling terribly guilty about the cows who have been suffering to feed my dairy addition, I decided it was time to make real commitment.  And so my vegan apprenticeship starts today!

Certainly I am against animal suffering.  But my main reason for wanting to go Vegan is environmental.  The dairy industry has an enormous ecological footprint.  More on that in future blogs.

So my challenge is to cut out dairy.   One day at a time.  And I do mean 1 day at a time because right now more than one day dairy free seems daunting.  I know - I am a wuss!


Step 1 - one dairy free day per week.  If you knew how much I loved my cups of white tea you would know how hard this is going to be for me.  No, soy milk is just not the same.

And I will start to try out new vegan recipes, both sweet and savory.  I will aim to try at least one new vegan recipe per week.  I also plan to post recipes, nutritional info and my veganification experiences on my new blog: The Vegan Apprentice.   I will continue to post non-vegan blog posts here from time to time.

Well, now I am off to the supermarket now to buy some soya milk.

A 10% decrease in weight is associated with...

Looking for a New Years Resolution that is worth making? Maybe the following my provide some inspiration.

A 10% decrease in weight is associated with .....
(obviously this only applies if you are currently overweight)

↓ >20% total mortality
↓ >30% diabetes-related deaths
↓ >40% obesity related cancer deaths
↓ 10 mmHg systolic BP
↓ 20 mmHg diastolic BP... See More
↓ 50% in fasting blood glucose in newly diagnosed DM
↓ 10% total cholesterol
↓ 15% LDL cholesterol
↓ 30% triglycerides
↑ 8% HDL cholesterol
↓ frequency of sleep apnoea
↓ breathlessness and improves lung function
Improves back and joint pain
Improves ovarian function

And for all you folks out there who have been thinking about breast cancer (thanks to that sophisticated "what colour bra are you wearing?" status updates), did you know that increasing your physical activity can decrease your risk of breast cancer. In fact exercise is astoundingly good at increasing your health, well being and longevity.

Health benefits of physical activity:
(30 minutes of moderate intensity exercise on most, or preferably all, days of the week.)

• All-cause mortality risk reduced by 50%
• Cardiovascular disease risk reduced by up to 50%
• Hypertension prevention and management
• Stroke risk reduced by up to 30%
• Type 2 diabetes prevention (risk reduced by 30–50%) and management
• Cancer risk (colon, breast) reduced
• Osteoarthritis management (pain control, maintenance of muscle strength, joint structure and function)
• Osteoporosis risk reduction
• Falls risk in the elderly reduced by resistance exercises
• Weight management and reduction (when combined with dietary changes)
• Mental illness (anxiety, depression and subjective feelings of stress) prevention and management

Now turn off your computer and go for brisk walk!

(PS the stats are shamelessly cut and pasted from a RACGP online education module I am doing today.)

Worth Watching

I talked to someone on the telephone yesterday at length about how can we possibly account for the tragedy and evil in the world. Where is the meaning in our lives? Is there something beyond random chance at work?

As humans, we have a rich heritage of mythology, which has persisted through the ages and across diverse cultures. What are the lessons that we, as individuals and as the human race, can learn from this wisdom passed down in story form, and from the breadth of our history?

The person I was talking to has started on the process of discovering and asking their own questions quite recently. I could identify very strongly with their dismay in realising that the more they thought about "things" all it did was reveal more questions, rather than resulting in answers.

I find this talk by Jordan Peterson very helpful.
>> Jordan Peterson: The Nature of Evil
He is a Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto (formerly a professor at Harvard). He has obviously been thinking about these issues for much longer, and much more in depth, than I have.

I highly recommended watching this presentation. It is well worth taking the time to watch and think about some of the ideas he presents.

Plastic Bag Fiasco.

A large supermarket chain here in NZ decided to impose a 5c charge on plastic shopping bags. The charge lasted only 4 weeks in the Wellington area before it was down-graded to a "voluntary" charge due to customer complaints. Hmmph!!

Pathetic!!!! Cheap-arsed, narrow-minded, short-sighted, environment-buggering, complaining idiots!. Such a small, simple, tiny change and yet event this is too much to for some neanderthals apparently. Grrrrr. What makes it even more annoying is that the 5c charge actually works extremely well. Over the last 5 years there has been a 22% reduction in plastic bag use here in NZ. Compare this with the dramatic drop caused by the 5c charge".

"In the short time the compulsory scheme had been in place, participating supermarkets had reduced bag use by 50 per cent, or 40 million bags" Foodstuffs Wellington managing director Tony McNeil.

Reported in the New Zealand Herald.

Reducing plastic shopping bags is such a tiny change that it barely rates a mention in the environmental debate. But you would think that it might be an introductory area in which change was not that difficult to effect and perhaps might get people thinking more about the damage we are causing to our environment and the looming issue of climate change. But no, apparently even this is too much to ask.

Success.

Someone asked me today, "What do you do?"
This must be one of the most commonly asked questions between new acquaintances.

(No, I didn't draw it, wish I did. The artist is Bill Burg)

I am sure that sometimes the question is asked with genuine interest. But how often is it asked so that we can put each other into recognizable stereotypes.

Don't know about you, but I feel like there is more to me than my job. So next time I am in that "Nice to meet you" phase of a conversation I am going to try not to perpetuate this annoying habit we seem to have collectively developed, and talk about something else instead.
:)

Perpetual Perks

Here in NZ we are in the middle of our own mini-mini-mini parliamentary members' allowances scandal. While there are no shocks of UK proportion (there are not many moats in NZ that require cleaning I guess), there has been enough to keep the media happy for a few days.

The most interesting thing I heard from the radio show talk fest was the ongoing cost of ex-prime ministers to the Australian tax payers. (Kiwis do love to reference Australia when discussing their internal affairs). I had no idea that ex-prime ministers where eligible for such big bucks for the rest of their lives and was quite surprised to hear the figures, but apparently this information is available through Freedom of Information. The Herald Sun ran the article this week.

	John Howard's $1m splash on us JOHN Howard is costing taxpayers more in retirement than he did while running the country.

"Australia's five living former prime ministers submitted expenses tallying almost $3 million last year, the figures show."

The costs relate to running the offices of these fellows. Obviously they can't be expected to work from home like many other private individuals do, or fund the expenses of their offices themselves I suppose!

Yes I know that in the overall picture of the Australian tax-payers' budget this is a minuscule amount. But it seems to me that this is an extravagant, if not unwarranted, perk for those who have formerly been PM. Even if I could stretch my mind to think that our ex-prime ministers deserve some kind of pension, surely it should be a little more modest. Say, half the salary of the current prime minister at most. After all, I am working from the assumption that these men went into politics for the love not the money. Even if some may suspect that love to be of power rather than their country.

What do you think? Should receive ongoing financial support once they no longer work for the country? If so, what would be a reasonable sum to be available to them and should it be a life-long entitlement?

Well, given this ongoing cost, I don't think too many tax-paying Aussies will be wishing John Howard a long life - if they ever were!

A Win! (I suppose you could call this a boast).

It's been a busy week at work:

Swine flu, a big Measles outbreak, a patient with a bee sting in the mouth (the first time I have had to give adrenaline to a patient, and never mind the patients vital stats, I am sure mine own where off the chart while we waited for the ambulance to arrive), and of course the usual stream of patients who burst into tears and need much more than the time allotted to their appointment.

But, among the busyness I did have one very satisfying moment. A regular came in to see me, affectionately known as my "f***ing, f***ing, f***ing" patient (and that's just on the way down the corridor to my consulting room). He is a young guy but has had some adverse circumstances and is waiting for major orthopaedic surgery. But this week when he came in he looked fitter, healthier and happier than I had ever seen him before.

I asked him how things had been going. He animatedly told me that he was doing really well and that he had been aqua jogging at least 5 times per week for over a month and that he was loving it!

He raved about how good he was feeling and the changes that he was already noticing including losing 4kg, noticing his muscles "popping" out, and his double chin shrinking. He was just as enthusiastic about the social aspects, having met a lot of fellow aqua joggers. "It's just like Shortland St, everyone gets to know ya and says hi. They are giving me stick and saying they are going to put glue and Vaseline on my crutches when I go in after the surgery". He was clearly loving it!

I asked him what made him think of taking up aqua jogging. He looked at me a bit confused and said "You did. You told me I should."

O yeah, so I did. And yes I felt a little sheepish about not remembering giving him this advice.

But then I am frequently telling so many of my patients about the benefits of exercise. And I do try to give a few suggestions of exercise that would be appropriate for them. Most of the time I know my advice falls on deaf ears and I feel like a broken down record repeating the same message.

So it was such a buzz to hear that, against all odds, this tough, blue-collar, kiwi bloke had followed my advice to take up aqua jogging and that it had made a big difference in his life.

Now that's enough to keep me feeling positive about my job for at least another 6 months.

By the way, he didn't swear or complain once through the whole consultation, and that in it's self is practically a miracle.
:)