Dying To Stay Healthy

I'm feeling the need for a break from politics today so this is a generational post. As I age I find myself thinking more about my mortality.  I'm thinking more about years now rather than decades.

Forgetting what Obamacare is going to do to make maintaining my well being more difficult, I can't help but think about the commercials that emanate from television and the constant stream of contradictory studies that are reported religiously be they valid or not and the tests I'm encouraged to take.  What am I to do?

The commercials for various medications are the most intrusive.  By the time they list all the disclaimers the last thing I want to do is take the stuff.  I especially like it when they tell me to be sure to tell my doctor if I have high blood pressure or corns or whatever. If my doctor doesn't already know why would I have him in the first place?

It seems everything we eat is suspect.  Take wine for instance.  I enjoy good wine.  Too much is bad for me, just enough is supposed to be a tonic for my heart. What is it now, no more than a glass a day for a woman?  What size glass? A standard pour?  Is that four or six ounces? It can depend on whether you're buying wine by the glass at a wine bar or if you're in a tasting room! Actually,  I don't need a study to tell me.  If I have too much both my head and my stomach let me know in the morning.

Coffee - good or bad? How much?  Again, when I get the jitters it has been too much!  Sugar bad.  Artificial sweeteners came along and now the jury is out on them.  I could go on forever.

And the tests.  Bone density, mammograms, colonoscopies, blood sugar, cholesterol, etc.  My Mom never had any of those, didn't worry about them and lived to a ripe old 95.  I fear if the disease doesn't kill me the worry about getting one will.

Why just today two headlines caught my attention. One informing me that butter flavoring may be linked to Alzheimer's and chemotherapy can boost cancer growth! Well, I don't like artificial butter or any other artificial flavoring.  My theory is a reasonable amount won't kill you.  What about my cholesterol?  If I'd get off my duff and away from this computer, and get out into the yard where something always needs done I'd have little to worry about.

I'll leave you with a couple more to ponder. High blood pressure drugs may be linked to lip cancer and you might be able to determine someone's sexuality by gazing into their eyes.

Maybe I'm too old for romance but the thought of kissing those lips and gazing into those eyes might give me pause.  Too much information and all that.

I often speak of my Mother's mantra, "I lived in the good old days."  Yep.  I finally get it.  The key word here is 'lived'!

The Picket Project - Surrendering Intellect by Over Trusting Experts

Here we are, Saturday again and time for another post from the Picket Project.  It's testimony to a point I often try to make - we need to think for ourselves.  As usual it takes my point and digs much deeper.  Enjoy.

When someone claims to have the right answers for solving a problem, the origin of their solutions is rarely obvious.  Every agenda may bring with it any number of unanswered questions:

• Is their reasoning for pushing this agenda valid?
• What do they know that I do not?
• Are they attempting to manipulate me for personal gain?

Since even well meaning, intelligent people make mistakes – it is important to challenge any agenda before accepting it as true.

Trusting Experts

While it is reasonable to assume that a person experienced in national and statewide decision making would be an invaluable resource for finding the right answers at the right time, the real question should not be about how much experience a person has had, but what have they learned from their experiences.  This is, however, much harder to gauge because experience does not always lead to expertise.  And even expertise is not a guarantee of infallibility.

Noreena Hertz talks about experts in a similar light. She discusses how we, as a people, rely too much on experts as a whole; that we surrender our uncertainty for the illusion of certainty. Experts in any particular field are prone to negative group thinking, close mindedness, over confidence, and a dismissal of outside opinions.



Even in the sciences, experts do not entirely base their understandings on strict, unchangeable natural laws – but also on ever-changing models that best represent what has been observed.  But these models are not perfect, and without proper analysis and criticism, they can contribute to a ‘tunnel vision’ mentality where obvious factors and beautiful solutions sometimes go unrecognized.  Over reliance on these imperfect models can solidify a certain way of looking at the world, creating a misguided interpretation of the facts.

While we cannot dismiss expertise entirely, we each need to do our own research to verify and validate the claims we are given.  To challenge what you are told, as well as what you already know, is a healthy decision to make.  This is a very reasonable and intuitive idea.

It is by challenging experts and asking the big questions, that we dig behind their expertise and recognize that their methodologies can easily be flawed.  By creating a space for actively managed dissent, new and diverse ideas can be brought into the discussion and analyzed in their own light.  It is by embracing the notion that non-experts can have a unique perspective on the problems at hand, that critical factors can be discovered which may normally be missed.

We at the Picket Project embrace the idea that whether a claim is made by a PhD or an accomplished government official, an expert’s opinion is only as good as the support he can provide for that opinion.  We each hold the right and the duty to challenge those claims. As we do, we foster knowledge in ourselves and promote better solutions for everyone. There is no place this idea is more important than in political theory and policy making where, more so now than ever, the best solutions are needed. 

As always, we look forward to hearing your opinions; we will be regularly updating our content based on the conversations started here through the comment system on the blog, our Facebook page, and Twitter using the #PicketProject hashtag.

Links:

• How to use experts - and when not to: Noreena Hertz on TED.com (ted.com)
• Rethinking the Concept of "Outliers": Why Non-Experts are Better at Disruptive Innovation (forbes.com)
• The shifting critics of experts and expert agencies (inpropriapersona.com)

A Vacuum Of Leadership

We have become a country of extremes.  The 'conservatives' on the Republican right and the   'liberals' on the Democrat left playing tug of war for the soul of the country.  I'm convinced neither side has won due to a lack of leadership. 

 Leadership requires more than personality.  It requires ideas, solutions, resolve and perhaps most of all responsibility.  Where is it?

It seems oddly pathetic Obama will have Bill Clinton as keynote speaker at his convention.  The two aren't particularly fond of one another and to make matters more of an embarrassment, Mr. Clinton is by far the more popular of the two.  My, we Americans are a forgiving bunch considering the shame he brought on the office of the presidency.  As our economy continues to drift in a morass of uncertainty, Mr. Obama is not running on his record.  He doesn't have one on which to run.

Instead, as had been predicted, the campaign has disintegrated into nothing more than the most foul insults and insinuations to come out of Washington in some time.  That's saying something.

What is clear I think is that Mr. Obama really doesn't want to take responsibility for anything nor does he want any of the rest of us to.  Forget the removal of bin Laden. He has claimed to have done it, but by his own philosophy he really didn't.  Just like any of us who are successful didn't do it ourselves, he didn't take out bin Laden by himself.  Not by a long shot. That, however, is where the similarity ends.  Give credit where it's due when due and claim it for self when deserved.

Of the two candidates at least Mr. Romney has some genuine success in a world outside of politics.  His problem is he is taking the bait put out by the Democrats because of his inability to 'connect' with us.  Personally I do not begrudge him his success nor his wealth.  I do not think it is unfair that he and others like him have more than I do.  That's because I'm comfortable with myself.  Could I have done better?  You bet.  But the fact that I didn't lies with myself - no one else.

With our so called leaders in such disarray, its no wonder there is a vacuum.  Obama really knew nothing about management nor governing when he took office.  Rather than growing into the job it seems to me he has run from it.  He leads from behind.  He apologizes. He dictates or takes matters into his own hands whether it's legal or not.  He campaigns by pandering.  When he's unsuccessful it's always someone else's fault.

Mr. Romney seems on an equal plane.  If he had leadership capabilities he'd be laying out specifics where he could and vision where he couldn't.  Instead he is busy trying to explain away gaffes and in a sense, himself.  I really wish he would just admit to who and what he is.  It's okay.  Some of us still admire success and individualism.  Some of us are comfortable with not being equal - we don't think it's 'unfair'.

This sameness in the two men, the lack of leadership traits, is reflected in the polls.  A more dynamic, visionary and confident candidate would be far ahead of Mr. Obama.  An Obama willing and able to govern without the approval of everyone in the world would be leaving Mr. Romney in the dust.

With over 300,000,000 people in the United States, it's hard to believe this is the best we could come up with to vie to be the leader of the free world.  Or even the pretender.

Beware The Tea Party Darlings

The Republican Party has lost it's identity to the Tea Party and hasn't a clue what to do.

More and more so called Republicans are turning away from the moderates in their own party in an on going and effective effort to reshape the GOP into one of far right conservatism.  Whatever conservatism is these days.

If that isn't reason for a viable third party I don't know what is.

It has happened again in Texas where a darling of the Tea Party beat a more moderate opponent in a runoff for Kay Bailey Hutchisons's Senate seat. I question the stance of any candidate that has the active support of Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum, Rand Paul, Glenn Beck and Jim DeMint. Why is that?  Because they are all far right and by some considered to be on the fringe.  In some respects they want to intrude into your life just as much as the Democrats only with religious dictates rather than governmental.  Family values.  On their terms.  Not yours.

We've seen from the 2010 elections what happens when people with an ideology and an inability or unwillingness to think about what's best for the country and act accordingly are voted into office. Analyze and compromise are not in their vocabularies.

We hear a great deal about true conservatives without a firm definition.  We hear a great deal about wanting to take back our country but is electing the inflexible really the way to do it?

Granted many Republicans who have been turned out of office have been there too long.  However, these new nominees and electees are not the one man wonders they are made out to be.  They begin their terms with no seniority which minimizes their clout from the get go.  They alone, as one person, will not bring new leadership for years to come, nor shrink government, nor give it back to the people,  especially by refusing to compromise.

Stuart Rothenberg, editor of the nonpartisan Rothenberg Report, had this to say about the candidate I'm referring to, Ted Cruz. "...Cruz is not willing to compromise even if it means being irrelevant to the legislative process."

Read that again.  What's the point of electing a man like that to...well, legislate?

Isn't it time to cut the Tea Partiers loose?  They serve no purpose other than obstruction.  Like spoiled children, if things aren't the way they want them they throw the equivalent of a tantrum.  It's no way to run a country.  Actually, they aren't running the country at all except maybe into the ground. Is there anyone in office who is actually for the country in either party?

The Unions Are Failing Our Kids

I'm not much of a union fan.  They have a mindset I find offensive.  They don't seem to be willing to admit they are far better off than the average private sector  employee.  They have better salaries and certainly better benefits yet they are continually asking for more as if it were an entitlement. It also seems not to occur to them this is the reason so many people are anti-union.  Their tactics don't help either.

On an adult level a battle can be waged but when kids are used as pawns it's criminal.  After all, kids are the most valuable commodity this country has and it behooves all of us, including the unions, to see they receive the best education possible.

When I read about union efforts aimed at protecting the teacher rather than educating the child I wonder if it isn't time to eliminate them and let school districts and teachers fight over pay and benefits between themselves.  Especially when the unions, as in  New York ,  are using their position to protect sexual predators.  It is beyond defending especially in this age of Jerry Sandusky and/or the Catholic church with their recent problems.

Then too there is union opposition to charter schools.  In  Louisiana they are using their stereotypical bullying to prevent private and parochial schools from accepting students with vouchers.

Their excuse that it's unconstitutional rings hollow.  It will play out in the courts but until then the threats should not be going out stating they will use 'whatever means necessary' to prevent voucher students from attending those schools and additionally threatening them with litigation.

Let's face it, if the schools, the teachers, were doing their jobs there would be no need for charter schools or vouchers.  Even here in little Coeur d'Alene we have an excellent charter academy that's ranked number one in the state and it has a waiting list. This is indicative of parents wanting the best for their children.  Where one happens to live has nothing to do with that fact.

Unions have been around for a long time but have they outlived their usefulness?  Using teachers unions as an example perhaps so.  When it comes to protecting the teachers, good, bad and indifferent rather than working toward improving the educational system as a whole I see no point in having them what's more supporting them.

In the New York cases there is a lengthy process before a final arbitrator is chosen by both the school district and the union. An outrageous paycheck of $1400 a day certainly buys a lot of loyalty to the union representing the offending teacher resulting more often than not with a slap on the wrist when dismissal might be far more appropriate.  Such actions are an insult to not only the students and their parents, but also to every good teacher that exists.  I'd like to think they are in the majority but I'll have to see a great deal of improvement in our kids as they come out of school  to be convinced. The unions could help deliver that improvement but I've yet to see a desire to do so.