Later On

The establishment is driven to protect itself and the status quo: if there were change, the people in power might lose their position, so they fight change with all their energy. For example, take a look at this by Darren Hutchinson:

Students in the Medill Innocence Project at Northwestern University investigate claims of innocence and wrongful conviction by inmates. Over the course of a decade, the Medill project has helped secure the release of 11 innocent persons, five of whom were slated for execution.

Rather than applauding the students for their difficult and compelling work, prosecutors have hit them with a low blow. In a current case involving a claim of innocence by Anthony McKinney, Cook County prosecutors have served the Medill project with a shocking subpoena. According to the New York Times, the subpoena demands "the grades, grading criteria, class syllabus, expense reports and e-mail messages of the journalism students themselves."

The subpoena is highly inappropriate

The subpoena raises several red flags. First, the information the prosecutors seek is completely unrelated to the question of McKinney’s guilt or innocence. Second, student grades are normally protected from disclosure by federal law. Third, the program is operated by the school of journalism and likely qualifies for protection by state journalism shield laws and the First Amendment. Fourth, the professor’s course materials are possibly protected from disclosure by the concept of academic freedom — which the Supreme Court has construed as a value secured by the First Amendment.

Sally Daly, a spokesperson for the Cook County District Attorney’s Office, denies any wrongdoing by prosecutors. Instead, Daly points the finger at students. Daly claims that prosecutors are concerned that students could have qualified for higher grades if they concluded that the inmate was innocent. This is a highly unusual — and insulting — assertion. First, any reputable professor would grade a student’s research by evaluating the methodology and written presentation, rather than using the final conclusion as a litmus test. Second, prosecutors should make their own independent determination regarding McKinney’s guilt or innocence — rather than treating the students as suspects…

Continue reading.

Hmm—these are top 15, from most to least stressful:

Social worker
Special events coordinator
Probation officer
News reporter
Music ministry director
Membership manager
Fundraiser
Commercial photographer
Assisted living director
Minister
Marriage/family therapist
Curator
Substance abuse counselor
Film/TV producer
High school teacher

Interesting:

The rationale behind torture is that pain will make the guilty confess, but a new study by researchers at Harvard University finds that the pain of torture can make even the innocent seem guilty.

Participants in the study met a woman suspected of cheating to win money. The woman was then "tortured" by having her hand immersed in ice water while study participants listened to the session over an intercom. She never confessed to anything, but the more she suffered during the torture, the guiltier she was perceived to be.

The research, published in the "Journal of Experimental Social Psychology," was conducted by Kurt Gray, graduate student in psychology, and Daniel M. Wegner, professor of psychology, both in Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

"Our research suggests that torture may not uncover guilt so much as lead to its perception," says Gray. "It is as though people who know of the victim’s pain must somehow convince themselves that it was a good idea—and so come to believe that the person who was tortured deserved it."

Not all torture victims appear guilty, however. When participants in the study only listened to a recording of a previous torture session—rather than taking part as witnesses of ongoing torture—they saw the victim who expressed more pain as less guilty. Gray explains the different results as arising from different levels of complicity.

Read the rest of this entry »

From the column mentioned earlier:

In 2006, researchers from Harvard published a study in the New England Journal of Medicine  that was designed to avoid the limits, and the biases, of prior research. What they found kills the notion of frivolous lawsuits. It suggests that most people who sue are suing for good reason.

The researchers reviewed nearly 1,500 claims from five different malpractice insurers. First, they reviewed the merits of each case by determining whether a patient was injured and, if so, whether it was due to physician error. Most of the suits were not frivolous: Almost two-thirds of cases involved errors by doctors. Second, they followed each claim to see if the legal system acted appropriately. The majority of the time, it did. Seventy-three percent of injuries in which a doctor committed an error resulted in payments. Seventy-two percent of cases in which there was an injury not due to physician error did not result in payment. Those conclusions do not paint the picture of a medical-legal system burdened by ambulance-chasing lawyers and their litigious clients.

Instead of a swamp of frivolous lawsuits, what the data shows is a system that functions. Insubstantial claims tend to collapse, while the medical industry usually opts to pay off injured patients instead of going to trial. The doctors and the insurers choose to fight to win when they think they can, and when there is enough money at stake, and usually do win.

I encourage those who support a particular position on this (or any) issue to follow Dr. Parikh’s example and cite actual studies and statistics instead of making vague general statements.

Kübler-Ross’s theory and book have an undeserved popularity, it seems. George A. Bonanno, a clinical psychologist at Columbia University and author of The Other Side of Sadness: What the New Science of Bereavement Can Tell Us about Life after Loss, blogs as follows:

Most people cope quite well with loss or potentially traumatic life events. Nobody wants a loved one to die. Nobody wants to deal with serious injury or threat. But unfortunately these things happen, and when they do, it’s never easy. Most of us suffer, at least for a short period of time, and we have to adapt. But the truth—the empirical reality—is that most of us do cope well. We take it, we suffer; we suck in our gut, and move on. Our research has shown this over and over. The funny thing is, if I can use the word funny, is that most of us don’t want to believe the empirical reality. We simply don’t believe the data.

Take grief for example. Most people believe that grief is more or less the same for everybody and that the only way to get over a loss is to work through a series of phases or stages. The most well-known version of this idea comes from the late Elizabeth Kübler-Ross. She argued that bereaved people typically pass though five unique stages: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. People can get stuck in a stage, this theory tells us, and if they skip a stage they will end up suffering for a longer period of time. It’s a simple scheme. Although not everyone endorses it, many do and some people swear by it. People like stages models, I think, because they appear to help us know what to expect, to prepare for the pending psychological onslaught that we anticipate when a loved one dies.

But what if the stage idea is wrong? Even if its helpful, it is important to know whether or not its true. Surprisingly, when we look at the research on bereavement, we don’t see anything remotely like stages of grief. In fact, as I summarized in my recent book The other side of sadness: What the new science of bereavement tells us about life after loss, when my colleagues and I actually followed bereaved people over long periods of time we always found tremendous variability in how people react to loss. Over the years, we have tried to make sense of this variability and eventually we began to identify the most common or characteristic patterns of grief reaction over time. One of these patterns, which we have called chronic grief or "prolonged grief," represents an extreme and enduring grief reaction. We see prolonged grief in about one in every ten bereaved people. It is an unfortunate outcome. People with prolonged grief struggle for years, yearning and pining for the lost loved one. They never seem to get any better. For them, grief is one long horrible experience and it only seems to get worse over time.

Another pattern we call the "recovery" pattern. Recovering people also experience intense suffering but for a shorter period of time, usually a few months, maybe as long as a year, and then gradually pull themselves back. As they get over the loss, they slowly began begin to look and act like the person they were before the loss. Although people who show the recovery pattern seem healthy and for the most part they are, they still hurt, even years later. And if you talk with them about grief, they say things like, "a loss is forever, you never get over it."

The recovery pattern is about as common as prolonged grief. Together these two outcomes account for only a relatively small portion of bereavement people, usually about a third. What about the remainder? …

Continue reading.

And quite deservedly so, I’d say. Mary Elizabeth Williams at Salon.com:

When Paul Haggis, the writer of "Million Dollar Baby" and "Crash," kicked his faith to the curb after 35 years, he did so as only an Oscar-winning scribe could: with a badass screed. His resignation letter, dated Aug. 19, emerged on ex-Scientologist Mark Rathburn’s blog yesterday and promptly went viral.

In his letter, Haggis explains, "for ten months now I have been writing to ask you to make a public statement denouncing the actions of the Church of Scientology of San Diego. Their public sponsorship of Proposition 8, a hate-filled legislation that succeeded in taking away the civil rights of gay and lesbian citizens of California — rights that were granted them by the Supreme Court of our state — shames us." Though the Church claims not to dictate personal sexual practices and has several openly gay members, it’s perhaps no coincidence that Scientology also has a reputation as Hollywood’s biggest closet, with gay rumors persistently dogging famous members like Tom Cruise and John Travolta.

Even before Haggis’ resignation came to light, it had not been a good week for the Church’s public relations. On Friday, ABC’s "Nightline" aired a scathing investigation of celebrity Scientology by gotcha journalist nonpareil Martin Bashir (of the infamous Michael Jackson interview). The Church’s high-profile membership, its secrecy and unusual practices — which Salon explored extensively back in 2005 — have long made it a subject of fascination and disdain.

But the real corker of the recent "Nightline" story came when Bashir brought up founder L. Ron Hubbard’s most confidential — and controversial — doctrines.  Many organized religions sound like so much sci-fi gobbledygook to outside ears, but Scientologists aren’t known for their generous senses of humor on the subject. And so, when Bashir asked Church spokesman Tommy Davis the age-old question, "Do you believe that the galactic emperor called Xenu brought his people to earth 75 million years ago and buried them in volcanoes?" Davis immediately became defensive. "I am not going to discuss the disgusting perversions of Scientology’s beliefs … things that are so fundamentally offensive for Scientologists to discuss." When Bashir gently tried another tactic, asking about L. Ron Hubbard’s personal beliefs in Xenu, Davis unclipped his microphone and stalked off.

Davis, the son of actress Anne Archer (perhaps best known for her role in "Fatal Attraction"), has a history of getting huffy about the whole Xenu thing. Two years ago he stormed off an interview with Britain’s Panorama, saying, "I’m angry. Real angry." And last year, he responded to a question about "alien parasites" on CNN by chortling, "Does that sound silly to you? It’s unrecognizable to me." But in an interview for KESQ last March, Davis did cop to being "familiar with" "the confidential scriptures of the Church."

Davis is also well known to the Church’s newest ex-member, Paul Haggis: It was to him that Haggis addressed his resignation letter. In it, Haggis cited …

Continue reading.

Simply Recipes has the recipe for the above and I’m going to make it. Ingredients:

• 1 Tbsp creamy peanut butter
• 6 Tbsp vegetable oil
• 1/2 teaspoon toasted (dark) sesame oil
• 4 Tbsp seasoned rice vinegar (if seasoned rice vinegar is not available, add a teaspoon or two of sugar to regular rice vinegar)
• 4 cups thinly sliced cabbage (Napa, green, purple, or a combination)
• 1/2 cup grated carrots
• 1/4 cup toasted, salted, shelled, peeled peanuts

Optional

• Chopped fresh cilantro
• Thinly sliced green onions or chives

She also has a clever hint for roasted pumpkin seeds: start by simmering them in brine for 10 minutes.

Glenn Greenwald has an important column today comparing the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan with the US presence there:

I’m traveling still today, but I wanted to note an amazing Op-Ed that was referenced in a book I’m reading:  the Op-Ed is by Nikolai Lanine, published in The Toronto Globe and Mail in November, 2006.  Lanine was drafted into the Russian Army at the age of 18 and spent several years as part of the Russian occupying force in Afghanistan.  Thereafter, he moved to Canada, and in 2006, his wife’s first cousin, a medic in the Canadian Army, was killed in Afghanistan.  Lanine wrote this column after attending his funeral, and recounted what he and his comrades in the Russian Army believed they were doing in Afghanistan:

I identified with the Canadian soldiers at the funeral mourning the loss of their friend. Like them, I went to Afghanistan believing in "fighting terrorism" and "liberating Afghans." During my first mission, we were protecting refugees escaping an area that was under attack by the mujahedeen. I was deeply affected by their misery, and by the poverty and suffering of the Afghan people in general. In my mind, our presence was "helping Afghans," particularly with educating women and children. My combat unit participated in "humanitarian aid" – accompanying doctors and delivering food, fuel, clothing, school and other supplies to Afghan villages.

It was only later that I began to wonder: Did that aid justify our aggression ?

Exactly the same quandaries arose which the U.S. confronts today, and the same justifications were concocted to dismiss them:

Read the rest of this entry »

Rahul K. Parikh, M.D., at Salon.com has a very interesting post, in which he provides data to show the tort reform is essentially irrelevant. (One commenter disagreed, but failed to provide any links to any factual data, which Dr. Parikh does provide in his post.)

Flu season has come early and I’m writing far too many prescriptions for Tamiflu. I’m trying my best to adhere to the guidelines set by the Centers for Disease Control for who should get the drug (kids under 5 years of age, or kids who have a chronic illness like asthma or diabetes). But in more than a few instances, I’ve ignored the guidelines and given Tamiflu to perfectly healthy kids with no risk factors for influenza-related complications.

Part of the reason I’m writing so many extra prescriptions stems from stories about healthy people getting sick with H1N1 and ending up critically ill or dead. One of those stories aired recently on "60 Minutes" — a healthy high school football player in Arkansas developed a fever after a game. He went to his doctor, who thought he had a garden variety flu and sent him home. Two days later, the boy collapsed and was airlifted to the nearest pediatric intensive care unit. He developed a bacterial pneumonia on top of his H1N1 flu, which led to severe damage to his lungs. He couldn’t breathe on his own, so he remains in the ICU on a ventilator.

The H1N1 strain of influenza is no more lethal than any other strain of flu. Mortality is less than 1 percent. Nevertheless, by over-prescribing an expensive drug that has only marginal benefits, I’m unequivocally practicing what is known as defensive medicine. As in, the kind of medicine that protects doctors as much as patients.

Read the rest of this entry »

In an email from the Center for American Progress:

More than 1,500 participants from the United States, Israel and elsewhere attended the first annual conference of the "pro-Israel, pro-peace" lobbying group J Street in Washington, DC this week. The group has sought to promote policies toward the Middle East that recognize that two secure, viable states — one Jewish, one Palestinian — are a key national security interest of both the United States and Israel. In his keynote address on Tuesday, President Obama’s National Security Adviser Gen. James Jones said that if the Obama administration could "solve any one problem," resolving the 60-year Arab-Israeli conflict would be it.  During the 2008 campaign, Obama called the conflict a "constant sore," and said that "the lack of a resolution…provides an excuse for anti-American militant jihadists to engage in inexcusable actions, and so we have a national-security interest" in bringing the conflict to an end. As a demonstration of that commitment, Obama named former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell his special envoy for the Middle East immediately after taking office in January. J Street has sought to support the administration in broadening the debate over U.S. policy in the Middle East and in promoting the push for peace. In his welcoming remarks, J Street Executive Director Jeremy Ben-Ami stated his group’s position: "We clearly and unequivocally want the United States to lead and to do whatever can be done to end the conflict and bridge the differences between the sides."

Read the rest of this entry »

Via The Wife:

I came across these peppers at Whole Foods. The sign said that they are a short-season Italian pepper with no spiciness. Italian, eh? I decided to try them in the tuna-pasta recipe I posted a couple of days ago.

After I poured the oregano olive oil off the tuna fillets into the sauté pan, I added a small chopped onion and two of these peppers, chopped. I also added just a little more olive oil along with salt and freshly ground pepper and a little crushed red pepper and then sautéed that until the onion was transparent. At that point I added the pint of tiny plum tomatoes and stirred to coat, then put them in the 400º F oven. The rest of the recipe I followed.

It was great and tasted quite different, though obviously of the same family of recipes.

Other variations occurred to me: shallots instead of onions, add pine nuts, try some lemon zest at the end, perhaps some chopped scallions.

One thing that makes this dish so great is the use of Italian parsley as the greens. Wonderful taste.

Today’s shave was absolutely superb. It began, as every day, with washing my beard at the sink with MR GLO. Then the Edwin Jagger synthetic-bristle brush worked up a truly great lather from Floris London JF triple-milled shaving soap. The Apollo Mikron, with a newish Astra Keramik Platinum blade, delivered three very smooth and effective passes, with no hint of a nick. And, finally, a good splash of Floris London JF aftershave. What a great start to the day!

And—just to be clear—there’s absolutely nothing wrong with a good synthetic-bristle shaving brush.

Fantastic stuff. Check out the site: 8020.net.

From Treehugger (and more info at the link):

The war is a counter-productive and is not winnable. We should learn from the past and get out of there, but we won’t: we’re in the clutches of imperial ambition. (See the Chalmers Johnson talk Speaking Freely Vol 4: Chalmers Johnsons.) Karen DeYoung in the Washington Post:

When Matthew Hoh joined the Foreign Service early this year, he was exactly the kind of smart civil-military hybrid the administration was looking for to help expand its development efforts in Afghanistan.

A former Marine Corps captain with combat experience in Iraq, Hoh had also served in uniform at the Pentagon, and as a civilian in Iraq and at the State Department. By July, he was the senior U.S. civilian in Zabul province, a Taliban hotbed.

But last month, in a move that has sent ripples all the way to the White House, Hoh, 36, became the first U.S. official known to resign in protest over the Afghan war, which he had come to believe simply fueled the insurgency.

"I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States’ presence in Afghanistan," he wrote Sept. 10 in a four-page letter to the department’s head of personnel. "I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end."

The reaction to Hoh’s letter was immediate. Senior U.S. officials, concerned that they would lose an outstanding officer and perhaps gain a prominent critic, appealed to him to stay…

Continue reading. And also read Glenn Greenwald’s take on this.

David Sirota:

The story of drug policy is often told through the lens of hypocrisy and potential revenues. How contradictory is it for us to legalize and promote alcohol, but ban marijuana? And at a time of deficits, how much public revenue could we generate by legalizing marijuana and taxing it?

These are important points – but just as significant are the two other questions that don’t get much attention: How much public money are we now wasting by criminalizing marijuana, and how much is that criminalization endangering our security?

I raise these questions not just to highlight how much the prison-industrial complex’s "zero tolerance" drug laws are making us spend on incarcerating non-violent drug offenders, but to additionally highlight how huge a chunk of law enforcement resources are now going to enforce drug laws – rather than to protect our communities.

At a national level, we know, for instance, that much of the resources being plowed into using the Patriot Act are being used not to fight terrorism, but to enforce prohibitionist drug laws. This trend is now bleeding into local law enforcement operations as well. Case in point is the massive anti-pot operation here in Colorado. In a state so choked by budget deficits that we’re slashing our police force to the bone, our law enforcement officials are spending huge amounts of public money busting pot grow houses.

Remember, these are finite resources – creating a huge task force aimed at stopping pot growers means we can’t, say, create a similarly sized task force aimed at investigating securities fraud or even stopping violent street crime.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Eldest points out BookSwim.com, a subscription serve that lets you check out books indefinitely with no late charges. The Netflix idea, but for books. May be worth a try. I would have LOVED this in the little town where I grew up: no library.

Important note: Rentals include textbooks.

I do like Durance L’òme’s sea-buckthorn shaving soap in its cool porcelain bowl, and the Omega Syntex brush lathered it as though the two were made for each other. I don’t think I’ve ever had better lather from this soap.

The Merkur Progress with a still-newish Astra Keramik Platinum blade, did a very smooth job, and Mr. Taylor’s aftershave is a favorite. Very good start to the day.

Very useful for the urban chicken keepers.