Just before the year ends - a word or two.
The site is undergoing a change or two. For one thing, the pink is gone!
The big news around here for the last week or so has been my mother's health. Gifted with genes that do their version of the energizer bunny, the woman has reached the age of 92, so taking the step into the great beyond could be something she might do any time now. In fact, she damn near did just that, last week. She was admitted to the hospital, complaining of being short of breath. While she was still in emergency, not getting a whole lot of attention in particular, she began having "cardiac events" during which her heart would either speed up to near 200 HR, or slow down to near 20, or 30. That got her lots of attention, fast. Moved to the CrCU, she spent several hours relatively stable before she began having the same type of events repeatedly. The one doctor said he had done all he could, and a nurse advised us to have a priest administer last rites, which was done. After each event, she was left visibly worsened, and I quite expected her to die in my arms more than once, since I was supporting her as she gasped for breath. Then another doctor suggested a temporary pacemaker (I never knew there was such a thing) and as soon as it was done, it had an almost miraculous effect. Her blood pressure and HR stabilized and she was soon sporting colour in her face again, and enough breath to talk with those of us there that night. That was before Christmas, and she has held her own until today, when she was given a permanent pacemaker. Now the word is that she could be back to her retirement residence within days. Quite the turnaround.
After spending my lifetime listening to stories of how much my mother and father wanted a boy while they awaited my birth; of being introduced to people with the line, "We wanted a boy and this is what we got instead." I for one was more than able to see the irony in my being the one who was cradling her as she struggled to hold onto life last week. Maybe she'll manage to hang in there until she gets around to the day when they put 100 candles on a birthday cake for her, It would be nice.
I wonder, if she does, might she ever say she was glad I did not arrive as the planned-for boy?
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
A Study So Clearly Racist
The above words were taken from the apology made on May 16, 1997, by then-President Bill Clinton for the "study" known as the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment. I just found out about it, and I am struggling still to absorb what I have learned about the perfidy of the federal American government and the medical personnel involved.
From 1932 to 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service conducted an experiment on 399 black men, mostly illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama. All the men had syphilis, but they were never told what disease they had. Told instead that they were being treated for “bad blood,” they were misled by doctors who had no intention of attempting to cure them. The experiment's data was always intended to be collected from autopsies done on the men, who were deliberately allowed to progressively worsen with a disease that can cause tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, and insanity before it finally kills. One of the takers of the Hippocratic oath involved in the study said, “As I see it, we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”
Because the men were simple, uneducated people, the experimenters had no difficulty in lulling them into a false sense of security by promising free medical care to men who had likely never before been treated by a doctor. They were given tiny amounts of bismuth, neoarsphenamine, and mercury, the ineffective treatments used at that time for syphilis. When the experimenters wanted their subjects to submit to a painful spinal tap, they were sent letters telling them it was their "last chance for special free treatment". The PHS gave free hot meals to the men when they came for "check ups", and in a touch of irony, promised them burial insurance. Even the Surgeon General of the United States took part in the duplicity, sending certificates of appreciation to those subjects still alive after 25 years in the study, this experiment that used them as lab animals.
Supposedly, the study was conducted in order to determine in what ways syphilis affected blacks as opposed to whites. The theory was that whites experienced more neurological complications from syphilis whereas blacks experienced more cardiovascular damage. By the end of this exercise in racism, 28 of the men had died directly of syphilis, 100 were dead of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children had been born with congenital syphilis. When news of the study reached the media in 1972, news anchor Harry Reasoner described this medical travesty was described well when he said it used "human beings as laboratory animals in a long and inefficient study of how long it takes syphilis to kill someone.” Thas is the only supposed value that can be attributed to the study. During the 1940's, when penicillin was discovered and found to be the first actual cure for this dreadful affliction, the men in the study were deliberately denied the medication. 250 of the men in the study volunteered to serve in WW II, and were ordered to get treatment for syphilis but were actually exempted by the PHS. When the World Health Organization issued its Declaration of Helsinki in 1964, which specified that “informed consent” was needed for experiment involving human beings, the compassionate types conducting the study continued blithely to deny the men the information they should have been given about the fact that they were being used as lab rats.
The study was finally brought to a screeching halt when Peter Buxtun, a former PHS venereal disease interviewer, decided he could no longer live with his conscience, and he blew the whistle. Once the spotlight of public scrutiny was trained on the debacle, the government declared the experiment to be over and for the first time provided effective medical attention to the survivors. A class action suit was filed, providing a $10 million out-of-court settlement for the men and their families. Seemingly unbothered by any remorse, however, an Alabama state health officer stated “somebody is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.”
President Clinton spoke the words of an apology that referred to the study as "a time not so very long ago that many Americans would prefer not to remember, but we dare not forget. It was a time when our nation failed to live up to its ideals, when our nation broke the trust with our people that is the very foundation of our democracy. It is not only in remembering that shameful past that we can make amends and repair our nation, but it is in remembering that past that we can build a better present and a better future. And without remembering it, we cannot make amends and we cannot go forward." He went on to say to the assemblage that included eight survivors, "The United States government did something that was wrong -- deeply, profoundly, morally wrong. It was an outrage to our commitment to integrity and equality for all our citizens. To the survivors, to the wives and family members, the children and the grandchildren, I say what you know: No power on Earth can give you back the lives lost, the pain suffered, the years of internal torment and anguish. What was done cannot be undone. But we can end the silence. We can stop turning our heads away. We can look at you in the eye and finally say on behalf of the American people, what the United States government did was shameful, and I am sorry."
When you read about the study and realize the scope of its viciousness, the depth of its racism, there is little else you can do but shake your head in sad disbelief. The fact that it was conducted by members of the medical community, people sworn to protect life leaves an incredibly bitter taste in the mouth. How could those taking part in the running of the study - whites AND blacks alike - turn their back on their avowed mission and purposely create suffering? How could they possible deny the inevitable comparisons to the Nazi experiments conducted on Jews? How could they dare to defend their participation by saying they were exempt from personal responsibility because they were just carrying out orders from the PHS? A black nurse, Eunice Rivers, said after the experiment ended, “we were taught that we never diagnosed, we never prescribed; we followed the doctor's instructions!” Did Rivers and all the others not hear in their empty words the echoes of the defense used at the Nuremberg trials? Did they not choke on every syllable when they tried to claim the study was conducted for scientific gain? How could they claim that it was a study of untreated syphilis when they began it all by giving the men treatment, however slight? Would this not have rendered invalid any supposed observations? How could those in the know at the office of the surgeon general sleep at night while this study was ongoing?
When you read about this travesty in medical science and realize that no one was censured or punished in any way for it, can you blame the black community as a whole for its difficulty in trusting its white counterpart? Can you blame anyone for a nagging mistrust of the medical community as a whole? How is anyone supposed to feel totally safe, putting themselves into hands that have dabbled before in such blatant abuse of that trust?
Don't you wonder just how many other "studies" might be ongoing even now, studies that play fast and loose with the Hippocratic oath and/or the right of the people to believe that elected officials do indeed have their best interests at heart? Clinton said, "We face a challenge in our time. Science and technology are rapidly changing our lives with the promise of making us much healthier, much more productive and more prosperous. But with these changes we must work harder to see that as we advance we don't leave behind our conscience. No ground is gained and, indeed, much is lost if we lose our moral bearings in the name of progress."
Much has already been lost.
From 1932 to 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service conducted an experiment on 399 black men, mostly illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama. All the men had syphilis, but they were never told what disease they had. Told instead that they were being treated for “bad blood,” they were misled by doctors who had no intention of attempting to cure them. The experiment's data was always intended to be collected from autopsies done on the men, who were deliberately allowed to progressively worsen with a disease that can cause tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, and insanity before it finally kills. One of the takers of the Hippocratic oath involved in the study said, “As I see it, we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”
Because the men were simple, uneducated people, the experimenters had no difficulty in lulling them into a false sense of security by promising free medical care to men who had likely never before been treated by a doctor. They were given tiny amounts of bismuth, neoarsphenamine, and mercury, the ineffective treatments used at that time for syphilis. When the experimenters wanted their subjects to submit to a painful spinal tap, they were sent letters telling them it was their "last chance for special free treatment". The PHS gave free hot meals to the men when they came for "check ups", and in a touch of irony, promised them burial insurance. Even the Surgeon General of the United States took part in the duplicity, sending certificates of appreciation to those subjects still alive after 25 years in the study, this experiment that used them as lab animals.
Supposedly, the study was conducted in order to determine in what ways syphilis affected blacks as opposed to whites. The theory was that whites experienced more neurological complications from syphilis whereas blacks experienced more cardiovascular damage. By the end of this exercise in racism, 28 of the men had died directly of syphilis, 100 were dead of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children had been born with congenital syphilis. When news of the study reached the media in 1972, news anchor Harry Reasoner described this medical travesty was described well when he said it used "human beings as laboratory animals in a long and inefficient study of how long it takes syphilis to kill someone.” Thas is the only supposed value that can be attributed to the study. During the 1940's, when penicillin was discovered and found to be the first actual cure for this dreadful affliction, the men in the study were deliberately denied the medication. 250 of the men in the study volunteered to serve in WW II, and were ordered to get treatment for syphilis but were actually exempted by the PHS. When the World Health Organization issued its Declaration of Helsinki in 1964, which specified that “informed consent” was needed for experiment involving human beings, the compassionate types conducting the study continued blithely to deny the men the information they should have been given about the fact that they were being used as lab rats.
The study was finally brought to a screeching halt when Peter Buxtun, a former PHS venereal disease interviewer, decided he could no longer live with his conscience, and he blew the whistle. Once the spotlight of public scrutiny was trained on the debacle, the government declared the experiment to be over and for the first time provided effective medical attention to the survivors. A class action suit was filed, providing a $10 million out-of-court settlement for the men and their families. Seemingly unbothered by any remorse, however, an Alabama state health officer stated “somebody is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.”
President Clinton spoke the words of an apology that referred to the study as "a time not so very long ago that many Americans would prefer not to remember, but we dare not forget. It was a time when our nation failed to live up to its ideals, when our nation broke the trust with our people that is the very foundation of our democracy. It is not only in remembering that shameful past that we can make amends and repair our nation, but it is in remembering that past that we can build a better present and a better future. And without remembering it, we cannot make amends and we cannot go forward." He went on to say to the assemblage that included eight survivors, "The United States government did something that was wrong -- deeply, profoundly, morally wrong. It was an outrage to our commitment to integrity and equality for all our citizens. To the survivors, to the wives and family members, the children and the grandchildren, I say what you know: No power on Earth can give you back the lives lost, the pain suffered, the years of internal torment and anguish. What was done cannot be undone. But we can end the silence. We can stop turning our heads away. We can look at you in the eye and finally say on behalf of the American people, what the United States government did was shameful, and I am sorry."When you read about the study and realize the scope of its viciousness, the depth of its racism, there is little else you can do but shake your head in sad disbelief. The fact that it was conducted by members of the medical community, people sworn to protect life leaves an incredibly bitter taste in the mouth. How could those taking part in the running of the study - whites AND blacks alike - turn their back on their avowed mission and purposely create suffering? How could they possible deny the inevitable comparisons to the Nazi experiments conducted on Jews? How could they dare to defend their participation by saying they were exempt from personal responsibility because they were just carrying out orders from the PHS? A black nurse, Eunice Rivers, said after the experiment ended, “we were taught that we never diagnosed, we never prescribed; we followed the doctor's instructions!” Did Rivers and all the others not hear in their empty words the echoes of the defense used at the Nuremberg trials? Did they not choke on every syllable when they tried to claim the study was conducted for scientific gain? How could they claim that it was a study of untreated syphilis when they began it all by giving the men treatment, however slight? Would this not have rendered invalid any supposed observations? How could those in the know at the office of the surgeon general sleep at night while this study was ongoing?
When you read about this travesty in medical science and realize that no one was censured or punished in any way for it, can you blame the black community as a whole for its difficulty in trusting its white counterpart? Can you blame anyone for a nagging mistrust of the medical community as a whole? How is anyone supposed to feel totally safe, putting themselves into hands that have dabbled before in such blatant abuse of that trust?
Don't you wonder just how many other "studies" might be ongoing even now, studies that play fast and loose with the Hippocratic oath and/or the right of the people to believe that elected officials do indeed have their best interests at heart? Clinton said, "We face a challenge in our time. Science and technology are rapidly changing our lives with the promise of making us much healthier, much more productive and more prosperous. But with these changes we must work harder to see that as we advance we don't leave behind our conscience. No ground is gained and, indeed, much is lost if we lose our moral bearings in the name of progress."
Much has already been lost.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Christmas Shopping the Easy Way
Click here and you'll be whisked away to Kiva's site where you can purchase a gift certificate for the lucky people on your gift list. You can choose the amount, of course, but the usual amount of just $25. only has to be given once in order for it to become gift that gives and gives again, over and over. It will start its useful life as a loan to a third world entrepreneur, and once it's repaid, the person to whom you gave it can redirect it to yet another worthy recipient.
If you're feeling that some of those on your gift list might want a little more, you can also click here and you'll get a chance to check out their online store where you can purchase Kiva hats, shirts, BBQ aprons, bumper stickers and lots more. While you're there, you might just see an item that would be perfect for a gift from you to you! Why not?
In this last week, more than 5,000 new lenders joined the Kiva roster and a new loan was made every 21 seconds. As they put it, " Kiva lets you lend to a specific entrepreneur in the developing world - empowering them to lift themselves out of poverty."
It seems to me that would be the perfect Christmas gift, truly in keeping with the spirit of the season.
Thursday, December 04, 2008
A Thought or Two
Apparently the American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended dropping the age at which children could be prescribed statins from 10 years to just 8 years. At the moment, there are no studies on the drugs' long-term side effects on children. The AAP also recommended that cholesterol screening for overweight kids be started as early as age two. Think of the mega-bucks that would cost.
For God's sake, people, give your heads a shake. The majority of these kids do not need a magic pill of any kind. What they, and obviously their parents as well, do need is a lifestyle change. They probably need to get outdoors and actually do something more active than vegetating in front of the idiot tube. They probably need to eat more fruits and vegetables, and less artery-destroying crap from such purveyors of cholesterol as burger joints and doughnut shops. There are major changes that need to be made for these kids, but it's highly unlikely that any of them come in a pill bottle.
The council of my hometown, Toronto, has just voted to mandate a change or two in this fair city. These changes have me and every other person who cares about the environment behind them 100%. Beginning in June, shoppers will start to pay five cents for every plastic bag given to them at stores. For their part, retailers will be required to accept reusable bags or containers from shoppers.
The other part of the vote included a decision to ban the sale or distribution of bottles water immediately at City Hall and civic centres. Bottled water at facilities such as arenas and city-owned theatres will be banned by the end of 2011. The bottled water ban came about in spite of lobbying from water companies, who were bleating about the "rights" of people to buy water in plastic bottles. Read that as the company's "right" to keep making a profit off sales that harm everyone - themselves as well as their uneducated customers - by the harm they impose on our environment.
One of the really great parts about this vote, to my way of thinking, was that it wasn't even close. Those who voted for the measures numbered 30 while the nay-sayers were only 13 in total. Obviously, Toronto can be proud of having a council that numbers some intellects among its members.
Continuing with thoughts of the environment and what we can do to help protect it, I'd like to share a bit with you about buying locally. Everyone is learning about the lengthy travel route that many imported goods take to get to our homes leaving horrendous carbon footprints all over our Earth, but for lots of people such information is not enough to elicit efforts from them to change their buying habits. I firmly believe that for many the quickest way to affect change is to show them how a step taken will directly relate to their wallets. Although the following words come from a recent press release from Green Enterprise Toronto , they are relevant to everyone, everywhere.
"Money spent at locally-owned independent businesses goes around longer in the local economy. As local business people pay for all kinds of local services, spend their profits and pay taxes locally, local businesses yield two to four times the economic benefit to you, the local resident, as comparable non-local businesses. This means more local income, wealth, and jobs. Big box stores are steamrolling their way into cities and towns throughout Canada, pushing down wages and forcing small, local businesses to close because they can’t compete with these mega-companies’ predatory practices. A study in Chicago’s Andersonville neighborhood found that local businesses re-circulate 70% more money locally than chain stores do, per square foot occupied. The San Francisco Retail Diversity Study found that a slight shift in consumer purchasing behavior – diverting just 10% of purchases from national chain stores to locally-owned businesses – would, each year, create 1,300 new jobs in the city and yield nearly $200 million in incremental economic activity." (emphasis my own)
That's sure as hell food for thought for anyone wondering why they should try to buy locally a little more often, wouldn't you say?
For God's sake, people, give your heads a shake. The majority of these kids do not need a magic pill of any kind. What they, and obviously their parents as well, do need is a lifestyle change. They probably need to get outdoors and actually do something more active than vegetating in front of the idiot tube. They probably need to eat more fruits and vegetables, and less artery-destroying crap from such purveyors of cholesterol as burger joints and doughnut shops. There are major changes that need to be made for these kids, but it's highly unlikely that any of them come in a pill bottle.
The council of my hometown, Toronto, has just voted to mandate a change or two in this fair city. These changes have me and every other person who cares about the environment behind them 100%. Beginning in June, shoppers will start to pay five cents for every plastic bag given to them at stores. For their part, retailers will be required to accept reusable bags or containers from shoppers.
The other part of the vote included a decision to ban the sale or distribution of bottles water immediately at City Hall and civic centres. Bottled water at facilities such as arenas and city-owned theatres will be banned by the end of 2011. The bottled water ban came about in spite of lobbying from water companies, who were bleating about the "rights" of people to buy water in plastic bottles. Read that as the company's "right" to keep making a profit off sales that harm everyone - themselves as well as their uneducated customers - by the harm they impose on our environment.
One of the really great parts about this vote, to my way of thinking, was that it wasn't even close. Those who voted for the measures numbered 30 while the nay-sayers were only 13 in total. Obviously, Toronto can be proud of having a council that numbers some intellects among its members.
Continuing with thoughts of the environment and what we can do to help protect it, I'd like to share a bit with you about buying locally. Everyone is learning about the lengthy travel route that many imported goods take to get to our homes leaving horrendous carbon footprints all over our Earth, but for lots of people such information is not enough to elicit efforts from them to change their buying habits. I firmly believe that for many the quickest way to affect change is to show them how a step taken will directly relate to their wallets. Although the following words come from a recent press release from Green Enterprise Toronto , they are relevant to everyone, everywhere.
"Money spent at locally-owned independent businesses goes around longer in the local economy. As local business people pay for all kinds of local services, spend their profits and pay taxes locally, local businesses yield two to four times the economic benefit to you, the local resident, as comparable non-local businesses. This means more local income, wealth, and jobs. Big box stores are steamrolling their way into cities and towns throughout Canada, pushing down wages and forcing small, local businesses to close because they can’t compete with these mega-companies’ predatory practices. A study in Chicago’s Andersonville neighborhood found that local businesses re-circulate 70% more money locally than chain stores do, per square foot occupied. The San Francisco Retail Diversity Study found that a slight shift in consumer purchasing behavior – diverting just 10% of purchases from national chain stores to locally-owned businesses – would, each year, create 1,300 new jobs in the city and yield nearly $200 million in incremental economic activity." (emphasis my own)
That's sure as hell food for thought for anyone wondering why they should try to buy locally a little more often, wouldn't you say?
A Vicious Smile, Indeed
Last night I watched Stephen Harper's address to the nation about the proposed coalition takeover of the federal government next week if Harper's government goes down to defeat in the non-confidence vote. Harper whined on again about the Bloc being part of the coalition, telling his listeners that this was why the coalition was something that gave him the heebie-jeebies. The man should bloody well get his facts straight just for once. The Bloc is NOT a part of the coalition. They had pledged simply to support the coalition in matters of confidence, and only for a limited time. Of course, admitting to that wouldn't do Harper any good in his bid to keep his job no matter what. Neither would reminding Canadians about his allying himself with the Bloc in 2005 as Harper's party voted unsuccessfully with the Bloc Quebecois in an attempt to bring down Paul Martin's Liberals.
Now comes word that the Governor-General has given her consent to Harper's request to temporarily shut down Parliament. This allows him to wiggle his way off the hook, for now at least, in what I think is a negative precedent. Previously, a vote of confidence served to keep whatever Prime Minister on the governmental straight and narrow, and to vacate their position if the democratic process went against him. Does our GG realize she may be paving the way for future PM's to begin ignoring the voice of the people? This is the first time that a PM has been allowed to avoid a vote of confidence. You can bet it won't be the last time, now that the precedent has been set.
Back to last night's address by our illustrious leader. When he began smiling at the camera, the first thing that happened was I gagged. As soon as my stomach stopped roiling its contents, the next thing that happened was words like "oily" and "greasy" presented themselves to my mind, but some vague feeling of their not being quite the words needed kept me from accepting them. I puzzled over that until this morning when I saw a brief segment of the address shown on TV. As I watched the insincerity dripping down off his face onto those papers he kept straightening as he mouthed his empty words, it came to me in a flash. The smile Canada saw last night on the face of its PM was the very smile we would see on the face of a cat, if felines were given to such facial expression. It would be the smile seen just before the cat disemboweled its prey.
Now comes word that the Governor-General has given her consent to Harper's request to temporarily shut down Parliament. This allows him to wiggle his way off the hook, for now at least, in what I think is a negative precedent. Previously, a vote of confidence served to keep whatever Prime Minister on the governmental straight and narrow, and to vacate their position if the democratic process went against him. Does our GG realize she may be paving the way for future PM's to begin ignoring the voice of the people? This is the first time that a PM has been allowed to avoid a vote of confidence. You can bet it won't be the last time, now that the precedent has been set.
Back to last night's address by our illustrious leader. When he began smiling at the camera, the first thing that happened was I gagged. As soon as my stomach stopped roiling its contents, the next thing that happened was words like "oily" and "greasy" presented themselves to my mind, but some vague feeling of their not being quite the words needed kept me from accepting them. I puzzled over that until this morning when I saw a brief segment of the address shown on TV. As I watched the insincerity dripping down off his face onto those papers he kept straightening as he mouthed his empty words, it came to me in a flash. The smile Canada saw last night on the face of its PM was the very smile we would see on the face of a cat, if felines were given to such facial expression. It would be the smile seen just before the cat disemboweled its prey.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)