"Overpopulation" Talk Is Pandering to Prejudice

by David Berreby

Big Think

A few weeks back, the old-school anti-fertility group Optimum Population Trust issued its index of "overpopulated" nations. It names 77 countries which, it says, are "consuming more resources than they are producing and are dependent on other countries, and ultimately the Earth a whole, to make good the difference." Singapore is ranked Number 1, the most overpopulated state, on their list. That's the same Singapore that, as The Economistreported last month, works hard to get its citizens to have more children. Which is a nice illustration of the difference between political reality and a fantasy of "stabilization and gradual population decrease". Among policymakers and social scientists, this idea is about as dead as the Soviet Union. It's politically absurd and scientifically unjustified. Yet, as the Trust's existence demonstrates, the notion persists in a certain kind of environmentalist.

In this and the next few posts, I'll describe what I think is the real state of the debate about population and the environment. (After all, it's "women and power" time here at Big Think, and all attempts to control fertility depend on how much power women have over their own bodies.)

First, though, let's look at the real-world consequences of this fervent supposedly "green" belief that the world is being ruined by the sheer raw number of people on it. Some environmentalists clearly have closed their minds to any evidence to the contrary, and that makes life awkward for environmental organizations. As I've said elsewhere, to be a political advocate for sound science is hard—you work between the open-mindedness of your mission and the close-mindedness of your "base."

This post and its successors are a case in point: I gathered this material for an article commissioned by OnEarth, the magazine of the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of the sleekest, smartest and most effective of environmental advocacy groups. The editors proposed the topic because, they told me, population growth was the single largest source of letters from their readers. They wanted an article that would clue those readers into the latest thinking and data on the issue—to bring them out of their 1970's mindset (my words, not theirs, but that was the spirit).

We would, we decided, do this with some care: The article I wrote didn't trumpet that familiar "population control" beliefs were wrong; it reported, truthfully, that other people, including some of the best minds at work in the field, had other ideas.

Did that article appear, sparking a lively and instructive debate? Reader, it did not.

The magazine's publisher, I learned, decided the organization's 1.2 million members couldn't bear such news. Maybe he was right. What would have been the point of sending people word that their prejudices might be mistaken, if that only caused them to shut their ears (and, more importantly, their checkbooks)? I will say this, though: If you're an NRDC member who fervently and angrily believes "overpopulation" is the key to all our troubles, please—please!—preach to me about the narrow-mindedness and ignorance of Tea Partiers and climate deniers. I love a good laugh as much as the next guy.

Read Full Article

Related Article:

Climate Change: A Failed Attempt To Establish "Scientific Dictatorship"

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!

Print this page

Mining The Real Story

Mark Seddon 
Big Think

The World has watched and cheered to the rafters the human drama unfolding in Chile. That thirty three miners could be trapped underground for two months, survive and be winched to the surface in a capsule that looked as though it was once used in Star Trek is an extraordinary and joyous thing.  To watch the faces of the families, of the rescuers, of the ordinary Chileans has been to experience something refreshing for a change – the victory of hope over despair.

Twenty four television coverage has allowed the World a front row seat on the human drama that has been unfolding. This is a story of course made for television, but shortly the caravan will move on. Perhaps the next great human drama won’t have such a happy ending, but even with this one at the San Jose mine, the bulk of the media shows scant interest in the conditions that led the miners to be trapped there in the first place. Why it was that the mining company, in a race for profit, sent miners into dangerous sections of the mine. There has been little effort even to send a reporting team beyond the mine to find out how people scratch a living from the edge of the desert, why it is so many were forced to this area to simply find work and what is it really like to work deep underground.

Miners the World over will not be surprised by any of this. Of course they will have delighted at the great rescue, for miners and their families are traditionally rooted in basic solidarity. For any miner whoever thought he could function as an individual and not as part of a team would never last long. But miners by the nature of their work underground are all too often unseen and overlooked. In Chile they work dangerous seams far from the public eye – and the drive for profit all too frequently does not mean that ‘safety comes first’.

I have been down coalmines in Wales, England, Poland and Outer Mongolia, and while the British mining industry had a much safer record than that of China, the job of digging the coal for the nation’s power stations was still an extremely tough and dangerous job. Miners in the old Communist states were eulogised as ‘heroes of labour’, and used to enjoy better wages than some other groups of workers, but today, wherever you look, from the diamond and gold mines of the South African reef, to the coal mines of the Donbas and Polish Silesia, miners do not get the respect and the reward they deserve. China’s mines remain some of the most dangerous in the World.

In Britain, in 1984, the bulk of Britain’s 200,000 coal miners went on strike in order to prevent their industry from being more or less shut down. That year long strike, a dispute marked by terrible hardship and suffering showed Britain at its best – through its mining communities. They lost, and a once great industry is gone. Those hundreds of thousands of miners faced years of unemployment, and frequently ill health. They were not marooned underground for two months like the Chilean miners, but they were abandoned in a different way. Which is why I imagine that miners, the World over to day, would appreciate it if the media spent just a little bit of time reporting the other side of the story. Their story.

Read Full Article

Resources:

The Day the Earth Caved In: An American Mining Tragedy

Growing Up in Coal Country

Big Coal: The Dirty Secret Behind America's Energy Future

The Devil's Breath: The Story of the Hillcrest Mine Disaster

1911 PENNSYLVANIA COAL MINING CHILD LABOR MULE [8 x 12 Photograph]

Reckoning at Eagle Creek: The Secret Legacy of Coal in the Heartland

Bloodletting in Appalachia: The Story of West Virginia's Four Major Mine Wars and Other Thrilling Incidents of Its Coal Fields

Bringing Down the Mountains: The Impact of Mountaintop Removal on Southern West Virginia Communities

Efood that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!

Print this page

Truth and Peace: How To Be A Peaceful, Happy, Truth Seeking Activist

by Mark Daniels
Global Political Awakening

The people who are involved in some way with social and political activism must find a way to maintain a sense of peace and serenity in the midst of some rather troubling information and facts.  While seeking to expose government and corporate corruption, modern day eugenics and population control strategies, the global conspiracy to enslave the masses, and much, much more; activists, writers, journalists, artists and others must also take the time to "take care of oneself" physically, emotionally, and spiritually.  A balanced life is essential to maintaining the energy and strength necessary to push forward against the ever increasingly oppressive organizations and institutions whose members seek to protect and maintain their power and control.   As Zbigniew Brzezinski recently stated "There is a new and unique development in human history that is taking place around the world; it is unprecedented in reach and volume, and it is also the greatest threat to all global power structures: the ‘global political awakening.’ 


How To Be Happy


"Positive psychology is a movement in social psychology which attempts to change the way that we think about humans," explains positive psychology expert Shawn Achor. "Instead of focusing merely on the average, which is what we normally do in traditional psychology—we would find out what the average person is like, or how the average person responds—instead, what we look at are people who are up above the curve for some given dimension. Maybe that means that they are extremely energetic, that they are very happy, they’re very productive.  And our goal is to find out why that is."

In his Big Think interview, Achor, the author of "The Happiness Advantage," tells us that, unlike regular psychology, which focuses on the average or below average, he studies people who are in some way exceptional, with the hopes of applying that knowledge to the greater population. 

We can actually reprogram our brains to be happier, says Achor. "The brain is like a single processor in a computer." Someone who is chronically negative or pessimistic is merely scanning first for the stresses and the hassles of life. And because the brain has finite resources, it cannot also scan for the positive elements. As a result, that person continuously reinforces his own negativity, causing himself to feel unhappy. The key to positive psychology is training the mind to divert its resources in a different way, finding ways to be optimistic and reasons to be grateful. After a period of about 21 days, the pattern of positive thinking can be retrained permanently in the brain, something Achor calls the Tetris Effect. And he tells us five ways that we can be happier by harnessing this Tetris Effect. 

And you can not only change your own outlook but also influence that of the people around you, something that has always been known but never fully understood. It has to do with something called "mirror neurons" in your brain. "These mirror neurons are the reason why a yawn spreads at board meetings," Achor explains. "Your brian, when you see something in your visual field, raises the likelihood of your experiencing that as well." The same goes for positivity—as well as negativity—which is why leaders can have such a profound effect in business.  "You can have one person in the room that is very expressive of their negativity and stress and it can spread to the entire team," Achor says. He also gives several other pieces of advice about leveraging the happiness advantage in the business world. 

Ultimately, Achor wants people to understand that happiness should not be kept on our cognitive horizons; it is not something that will magically appear after reaching a certain level in a company or a school. "Happiness is a work ethic," Achor says. "It's something that requires our brains to train just like an athlete has to train.  

Training oneself to be happier is an essential ingredient in one's overall level of peace and serenity.  For a more in depth analysis, you can read Shawn's book, The Happiness Advantage: The Seven Principles of Positive Psychology That Fuel Success and Performance at Work.  Additionally, we may find solace in a spiritual discipline which can allow us to escape from the tireless efforts of fighting for peace and justice for all.

Of course, exercise and nutrition are basic building blocks for increased physical and mental energy which contribute greatly to one's overall level of happiness.

We must constantly guard against the tendency to allow our well-intentioned activism to direct and control our lives to the exclusion of personal peace and serenity.

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad) 


Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"! 


Print this page

Why Would Anyone Object to DNA Evidence?

Barry Scheck

In a recent BigThink interview, Barry Scheck, Attorney and Founder of the Innocence Project,  explains the impediments to the presentation of DNA evidence to the courts in an effort to overturn wrongful convictions.  The impediments, according to Scheck, are  "procedural bars" to getting a post-conviction DNA test, much less getting them admitted in court.

In fact, there were no states that permitted post-conviction DNA testing and there were only nine states that said that you could raise a claim of newly discovered evidence to show that you were innocent at any time.  So many states had time limits, statutes of limitations....there’s a lot of reluctance to upset victims within a community.  So that’s a second factor that inhibits prosecutors sometimes and police from acknowledging a wrongful conviction or even opposing an effort to get a DNA test...And then finally, and this may be more subtle, but I think it’s a very, very important factor because in a lot of cases we would find the prosecutor, who was standing in the way of the DNA testing and refusing to acknowledge the obvious implications of the new evidence, wasn’t even in office when the crime was committed.  And the reason, I think, that some of these prosecutors were so reluctant to go along with what was I think a clearly just outcome or even to find out the truth or get better scientific evidence that would shed light on the truth, is that they’re afraid of the next case. 

Source Article

FREE trial - Get out of Debt with DebtGoal Huge Coupon Savings! 

$15 off orders of $40 or more at Botanic Choice. Free Shipping on $50 or more. Coupon Code BC15. Expires 9/30/2010

Citizen 3.0: The Future of Government

by Parag and Ayesha Khanna on September 2, 2010, 11:38 PM
BigThink

“Politicians don’t know the difference between a server and a waiter,” declared Andew Rasiej, founder of the Personal Democracy Forum, at Hybrid Reality’s recent salon on the emerging revolution in governance technology. The servers he was referring to, of course, are those that house Internet data. But if government doesn’t understand technology, then how can technology change government?

The political media ecology is undergoing the most rapid transformation, a trend accelerated by citizens rather than politicians. In the 2008 presidential election, only one-tenth of the 1.8 billion views of online videos referencing Barack Obama or John McCain were actually generated by the Democratic or Republican parties. The social media and other technologies now being applied to government reform and innovation are still experimental, and 20^th century analogies don’t capture the potential scale of change. In the past, the content communicated over the radio or television and published in books was owned by someone. Today, anyone with an IPhone effectively has their own printing press and TV studio in one. Government seems as prepared to respond to and regulate these technologies as the record industry.

Not only are political perspectives and opinions being formed ever more through social interactions rather than one-way official communications, but citizens are banding together to deliver public services in what might be called “We.gov.” One notable example isSeeClickFix which allows residents of over 50 American cities to photograph potholes or other damaged public infrastructure and send them into the mayor’s office where they are instantly plotted on Google Maps and slated for repair. The mayor of the 21^st century will leverage citizen innovation and resourcefulness to get things done more efficiently than today’s bureaucrats.

Digital democracy could mean drastic changes in the old habits of politics. Why do we need polling stations in America, for example, when even the Philippines just had electronic voting in its elections? And why take a whole day off on the first Tuesday or November to go and vote, when it can be done with one click online? With information disclosure through websites like data.gov, citizens can also begin to create apps that empower citizens to use that data proactively and in ways to improve government transparency. In 2008, “Twitter Vote” all but eliminated improper delays at polling stations as 10,000 citizens across the country rapidly logged reports of hold-ups. Citizens having more information about government and greater ability to express their views are two pillars of more accountable governance.

There are at least two reasons for concern, however, when it comes to the intersection of accelerated techno-politics. The first is the “filter bubble” phenomenon of partisan cable news television magnified to the scale of the Internet. If citizens only choose to listen to like-minded voices, we could wind up with more fiction than fact in political life, and more politics without better policy. Related to this, our education system hasn’t kept pace with technological developments, let alone their impact on politics. Might we return to the world of the Founding Fathers, who for this reason envisaged a more limited democracy? There are undoubtedly risks as we enter this experimental phase of techno-politics, but that is all the more reason to nurture the next generation to become Citizen 3.0 instead of arm-chair “slack-tivists." 

Source Article

FREE trial - Get out of Debt with DebtGoal Huge Coupon Savings! $15 off orders of $40 or more at Botanic Choice. Free Shipping on $50 or more. Coupon Code BC15. Expires 9/30/2010

Lithium-Water Proponent Stirs Up More Debate

Big Think Editors on August 31, 2010, 10:42 AM

Today is the last day of the Month of Thinking Dangerously here at Big Think, and in that spirit, we are presenting some more dangerous ideas from bioethicist Jacob Appel. Never one to shy away from controversy, he inaugurated this month with the suggestion that we should drug the drinking water with lithium, and he has plenty more ideas that are sure to spark debate. 

First, Appel tells us that assisted suicide should be an option for everyone—at least, almost everyone. He's fine with a system that, for a very acute period of time, would protect people from their worst instincts: "I think the paradigmatic example of someone you might want to prevent from committing suicide is the teenager who breaks up with a boyfriend or girlfriend and tries to overdose on Tylenol.  And to tell them, for a few days, we’re going to hospitalize you against your will doesn’t seem that unreasonable to me." But for others who have suffered from chronic depression throughout their lives, who are thinking clearly and rationally yet want to commit suicide, it should be within their rights to do so. 

All medications should also be available over-the-counter, he believes. In the age of the Internet, people should be able to inform themselves about the risks of particular medications without consulting a doctor. In fact, says Appel, "most people go to the doctor and say, 'This is what I want medically,' and there are enough doctors out there than honor this request anyways." The harm of forcing people to see the doctor is the cost of doctor visits might be keeping some people from getting the medical care they need. And this poses "a far greater a risk than the small number of people who might not be educated enough or informed themselves enough to use medicine in a dangerous way."

FREE trial - Get out of Debt with DebtGoal

Appel also expounds upon some of the other dangerous ideas presented earlier in the month. For instance, he agrees with economist and Big Think blogger Marina Adshade that polygamy should be legalized, but he goes further than that, arguing that prostitution, bestiality, and incest should be made legal as well. "The objections to all of these phenomena are really not what people say they are," he says. "People say they are concerned about the welfare of the individuals, but what they are really interested in doing is imposing their own social values, or their own religious values on other people. "

And like James Hughes, Appel believes parents should have certain freedoms to choose the type of child they want. Specifically, Appel says they should be able to choose their child's sexual orientation. "The real concern I have is I want people to be born into families that want them," he says."My concern is for the potential gay child born into the bigoted family who mistreats that child, who disowns that child, who drives that child to suicide. And that to me, that suffering, is far more concerning than the possibility that we won’t force more progressive cultural values on people who don’t want them." 


Read More From BigThink

Control the Weather

Comment:  What missing in the following article?  The article fails to mention HAARP, the U.S. Military's weather manipulation installation.  Please click here for more information about HAARP.

Max Miller on August 28, 2010
BigThink

Using lasers to manipulate the weather sounds like science fiction, but researchers at the University of Geneva have done just that. In May, Dr. Jerome Kasparian unveiled the results of a study which used a high-powered laser to simulate rain cloud formations. 

Kasparian told Big Think that the genesis of his group's experiment came from an ongoing controversy about the possible contribution of cosmic rays to cloud formation, based on the ionization of the air that would promote the formation of clusters which then grow into particles and then into droplets. "We have very high-powered lasers that can ionize the air much more efficiently than cosmic rays," says Kasparian, "and we thought if the cosmic rays can have an effect, the laser should too.” And, sure enough, the laser created tiny rain droplets both in controlled lab settings and in the atmosphere.

Water requires a non-gaseous surface to transition from a vapor to liquid. So for rain to form there must be both humidity in the air as well as small particles called condensation nuclei, which provide these surfaces on which the water molecules can condense. Effectively, Kasparian’s laser created ionized particles that mimicked condensation nuclei. 

This is the same idea behind cloud seeding, a controversial technology that purports to trigger rain by seeding clouds with particles like silver iodine. These particles, whether dropped into clouds from airplanes or shot into them with cannons, supposedly act as artificial condensation nuclei, triggering rain. The U.S. first developed cloud-seeding technology after World War II in an attempt to control hurricanes, but most of the experiments (conducted under the names Project Cirrus and Project Stormfury), were deemed a failure. Kasparian told us that, despite many experiments, cloud seeding is very difficult to verify because it is difficult to have control conditions. “You launch your silver iodine and get some rain, but you don’t know what would have happened otherwise.” 

Nevertheless, China claims to have perfected the science behind cloud seeding. Between 2001 and 2005, nearly 3,000 flights triggered 210 billion cubic meters of water over an area making up nearly a third of China's territory, according to an official from China's National Meterological Bureau. The problem, Kasparian says, is that “the Chinese only communicate the results of their experiments afterward.” They may try 10 times and fail, but if the only communicate the results of the one time it begins to rain (naturally or triggered by the silver iodine), the technology seems to work. 

But Kasparian’s work with lasers has returned an air of scientific respectability to this effort. And last year the former world’s-richest-man, Bill Gates, also got into weather control,applying for a patent with 11 others for a technology to cool down ocean surface temperatures, thereby weakening hurricanes. Hurricanes derive their destructive power from warm water temperatures at the surface of the ocean, so Gates's idea is to construct hundreds of massive, vertical tubes in the ocean that would force warm water from the surface down to cooler depths. Named Salter sinks, these structures are explained in the following video.  

Kerry Emanuel, a hurricane expert from MIT, believes that this technology is feasible. Cutting the temperature of the ocean by just 4.5 degrees Fahrenheit beneath the eye of a storm could effectively kill it, he says. According to a study published in Natural Hazards Review in 2008, hurricanes have caused $10 billion in damage annually over the past century. Minimizing the damaged caused by hurricanes might help to cover the cost of Gates's plan. 

Takeaway Man has always dreamed of taming the heavens, and Kasparian’s experiment is a step toward that goal. If this technology is developed further it could have huge implications for agriculture. And if these more radical attempts to control hurricanes prove fruitful, they could save thousands of lives and billions of dollars. Hurricane Katrina, alone, is estimated to have cost between $80 and $125 billion, making it one of the most expensive natural disasters in U.S. history.  U.S. weather modification technology lags far behind that of China, which invests roughly $100 million annually in controlling the weather. “It’s the epicenter of all weather modification activity,” says  Bill Woodley, a former researcher with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Why We Should Reject This

Controlling the weather is such a potentially dangerous technology that the United Nations banned its use in wartime in 1977—before the relevant technology even existed. Though the sort of weather warfare that may have seemed plausible in the '70s will probably never be possible, there are still dangers to even modest weather manipulation. When weather patterns are altered to suit one area or population, there will likely be adverse effects for someone else.

The same would be true if we were ever able to guide the paths of hurricanes, diverting them from striking population-dense areas; we would have to contend with serious social and legal problems as a result, says MIT's Moshe Alamaro, who has suggested "painting" the tops of hurricanes with carbon particles to disrupt airflows within the storm. "If a hurricane were coming towards Miami with the potential to cause damage and kill people and we diverted it, another town or village hit by it would sue us. They'll say the hurricane is no longer an act of God, but that we caused it."

As for Gates's plan to cool surface temperatures using Salter sinks, the cost would be astronomical. To hurricane-proof just the southern Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico (assuming that it would work in the first place) would require coverage of 528,000 square miles of ocean, says Neal Dorst of the Hurricane Research Division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

More Resources

—"Laser induced water-condensation in air" (2010) co-authored by Kasparian [PDF]

—Natural Hazards Review study (2005) on the damage cause by hurricanes in the last century [PDF]

—Study on weakening hurricanes published in Journal of Weather Modification (2006) by Moshe Alamaro [PDF]

Doctors Are Bad for Your Health

BigThink
Max Miller on August 21, 2010, 12:00 AM


You may want to think twice before your next visit to the doctor's office. According to Dr. Barbara Starfield's now-famousstudy, iatrogenic deaths (those resulting from treatment by physicians or surgeons) are the third leading cause of mortality in the United States, resulting in the loss of 225,000 lives per year. Of that total, nosocomial (hospital-acquired) infections kill 80,000, physician errors claim 27,000, and unnecessary surgery results in 12,000 deaths.  

But iatrogenic errors aren’t the only reason people should avoid hospitals, says physician and health care administrator Archelle Georgiou. She tells Big Think that relying on doctors may actually shorten your lifespan. Georgiou bases this idea on her studies of the earth’s so-called “blue zones,” isolated communities around the world whose inhabitants live longer and healthier lives than the greater populace.

In the Greek blue zone, the island of Ikaria, inhabitants are more than 4 times more likely to live to age 90 than Americans are—yet there is virtually no health care infrastructure. Georgiou tells us: “There are no hospitals or major surgery capabilities…. People needing emergency care are transported by helicopter to Samos (a neighboring island), and all elective surgery is done in Athens.”

A procedure like an arthroscopy or a hysterectomy that would take 3-5 days in the U.S. consumes 3-5 weeks for Ikarians, who must relocate to Athens for the procedure and convalescence. Therefore, "their threshold for elective surgery is significantly higher than ours," Georgiou says. The result is that people depend on themselves rather than doctors for non-life threatening ailments. And, knowing that health care is so inconvenient, Ikarians take greater care not to get sick—they eat a healthy diet rich in vegetables and exercise daily.

Our greater access to health care (discounting, of course, the millions of uninsured Americans) might make us more likely to live unhealthfully. “U.S. culture is steeped with a 'find it and fix it' mentality,” Georgiou tells us. Rather than try to prevent illnesses, we rely on our doctor's ability to fix what ails us. And the result is that "we spend significantly more on health care than any other nation but without the benefit of improved outcomes or longevity.” In the U.S., our life expectancy is only 78, yet we spend 2.5 times more money per capita than Japan, the country with the highest life expectancy (82.6 years). One-half to one-third of the $2.2 trillion per year America spends on health care is simply unnecessary, says former AMA chairman Raymond Scalettar.

Our reliance on doctors may be tied to our faith, Georgiou believes. According to the World Values Survey, the U.S. ranks high on the traditional versus secular-rational values scale (in between Ireland and Northern Ireland). “Our nation’s traditional values make us more religious, more deferential to authority, more paternalistic,” she says. In other words, the impulse that causes us to listen to our pastors is the same one that makes us heed our physicians. “As a result, Americans have abdicated personal responsibility and delegated the responsibility for their health to their doctor and to the health care system. We don’t ask questions, we just do what the doctor says."

Takeaway One in every twenty patients contract potentially fatal infections in hospitals. In 2002 there were nearly 38 million hospital visits in the U.S., placing the number of hospital-acquired infections around 1.9 million per year. Weaning ourselves off our health care addiction would not only help reduce this number but also help rein in the nation’s ballooning health care costs.

Why We Should Reject This

What is true on the tiny island of Ikaria, might not hold true in a country as big and diverse as the U.S. Dr. Steven Schroeder, a professor of health and health care at UCSF, says that poverty, rather than a over-reliance on doctors, is to blame for our poor showing in global health comparisons. Poor Americans are four times more likely to die an early death than the rich. It is safe to assume that many of these poor are among the 45 million uninsured in our country, meaning that their access to health care, like the Ikarians, is restricted to emergency room care (the most expensive kind of health care). To be sure, other behavioral aspects of their lives might be to blame for their lower life expectancy, but over-reliance on doctors is surely not the cause. 

And while it may be true that Americans generally should lead healthier lives, studies have shown that regularly visiting the doctor is a potent weapon against the second leading cause of death in the United States: cancer. Cancer screenings can catch the disease in its early stages, increasing a patient’s likelihood of long-term survival. And people who have routine check ups are more likely to undergo these screenings. According to the American Cancer Society, campaigns to increase usage of Pap testing and mammography have contributed to a 70% decrease in cervical cancer incidence rates since the introduction of the Pap test in the 1950s as well as a steady decline in breast cancer mortality rates since 1990. But more can still be done: the National Cancer Institute says that of the estimated 569,490 who will die of cancer in the U.S. in 2010, as much as 35% of these premature deaths could have been avoided through screening. 

More Resources

— "Is U.S. Health Really the Best in the World [PDF]," a 2000 study published by Barbara Starfield in the Journal of the American Medical Association

— "The Impact of Hospital-Acquired Bloodstream Infections [PDF]," a study published in the Emerging Infectious Disease Journal in 2001

Market Mavens: Climategate Propagandists

by Mark Daniels

In a recent BigThink article, Market Mavens: A Two Step Flow of Influence On Energy Choices, Matthew C. Nisbet reports "A major finding from social science research is that individual behavior choices are often shaped by perceptions of what other people are doing, especially our peers and other trusted individuals.  A key agent in this process are what researchers call opinion-leaders, special individuals across communities and social groups that can serve as vital go-betweens and information brokers, passing on messages about energy conservation that speak directly to their otherwise inattentive peers, co-workers, and friends.  In this “two step-flow of information,” opinion-leaders do not necessarily hold formal positions of power or prestige in communities, but rather serve as the connective communication tissue that alerted their peers to what mattered among political events, social issues, and consumer choices."


Nisbet goes on to explain how he and a student published a paper (PDF) last year which describes how "opinion-leaders can be used in both climate change and energy conservation campaigns. Here’s part of what they wrote relevant to opinion-leader campaigns targeting consumer decisions; highlighting past research from the field of consumer behavior on the role of “market mavens” as opinion-leaders:

….previous research has identified “market mavens” as holding expertise and influence in broader marketplace-related information rather than just a type or class of consumer good.  Market mavens are enthusiastic advice givers, with studies showing that mavens do not have to be early users or purchasers of a product to pass-on information. In lieu of personal product use, a market maven’s expertise derives from closer attention to magazines and consumer-focused Web sites. They also exhibit greater participation in activities such as using coupons, recreational shopping, reading advertisements, responding to direct mail, and providing retailers with personal information (Feick and Price, 1987; Walsh, Gwinner, & Swanson, 2004). In surveys, market mavens are identified using a six item scale first developed by Feick and Price (1987) [We include these measures in the appendix to the paper].

Market mavens can be valuable targets in …. campaigns promoting new energy-efficient products or consumer technology.   Applied to these campaigns, Clark and Goldsmith (2005) recommend appealing to several identified personality attributes of market mavens including status and perceived uniqueness. Yet they also warn that market mavens do not want to purchase products that place them “too far outside” of perceived norms. The implication is that campaign messages and advertising should emphasize the “different but still socially acceptable” nature of a product, focusing on its newness and status-enhancing attributes.

An example relevant to [energy conservation] is the marketing success of Toyota’s Prius.  In focus groups, prospective hybrid buyers say they believe that driving a distinctively-shaped Prius sends a conspicuous signal about values, a message that respondents expect to generate acclaim from peers. As auto manufacturers continue to introduce hybrid versions of their traditional models, they are now careful to let “buyers broadcast their earth-friendliness” by way of three-inch hybrid labels, and/or unique grille, wheels, or tail lights (Brand Neutral, 2006; Kerwin, 2003; Schneider, 2004).

In general, mavens talk significantly more about campaigns and sales at stores, and pay closer attention to advertising and special offers (Higie, Feick, & Price, 1987). Research also shows that market mavens are motivated psychologically by a sense of duty to pass on product information; by a sense of pleasure they derive from doing so; and by a desire to appear as a “competent helper” to friends and peers…

…this research suggests that advertising to mavens should emphasize appeals such as “Now that you know how [insert energy saving product] work, you have a duty to tell others.”  Additionally, stores should make it easy for mavens to enjoy spreading the word about sustainable products, adding social media features to a campaign and creating rewards such as “bonus points” when mavens get others to purchase a product (Walsh, Gwinner, & Swanson, 2004). Overall, market-mavens hold important implications for big-box store chains such as Wal-Mart that have set “green” campaign goals that include selling fluorescent light bulbs and other energy-saving products. In reaching mass consumers, market-mavens are likely to be the central go-betweens for these stores.

Why does Nesbit and other Climategate enthusiasts feel such an urgency to brainwash the world into believing that "we" are causing the world to be unsafe?  Nesbit makes clear in his article that the real aim is to enrich the corporations selling the "global warming myth"-"In reaching mass consumers, market-mavens are likely to be the central go-betweens for these stores."  Quite frankly, there is much money to be made pushing their agenda.  Why do you think Al Gore became such an "expert" over night? Is it possible that he was given his "new role" as Climategate Czar as compensation for conceding the Presidency to Bush-Interesting timing-huh?

As the Climategate Propagandists continue to promote their fallacious arguments to the world, I can only hope that the people of the world will not "BUY" the lie or any of the products they are selling.

It is time to Wake Up!  You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!

Carl Bernstein and Big Think Shill for the Globalist Agenda

Carl Bernstein and Big Think Shill for the Globalist Agenda
by Mark Daniels

In an article written by the Big Think Editors today, "Carl Bernstein:  The "Golden Age" of Investigative Journalism Never Existed", Carl Bernstein is quoted as an expert on Journalism.  The article begins by telling readers that Mr. Bernstein is "more concerned about todays' readers, because he thinks there is much less reading of serious journalism going on today".  Although he is more concerned about today's readers, he does attempt to place some blame on the journalists.

In his Big Think interview, Bernstein says the secret to becoming a great journalist is being a good listener—something that he says journalists today usually aren't. As television superseded newspapers as the major news medium in the '70s, '80s, and '90s, Bernstein says, "A lot of reporters ran in with microphones and stuck them in people’s faces with the object of sound bytes really for the purpose of manufacturing controversy. The real purpose of reporting, of journalism is to illuminate what is real, you know, real existential truth. What’s going on around us? That’s not sensationalism, that’s not manufactured controversy, that’s not—it’s about context and listening."

Bernstein also talks about the Watergate era and the legacy of his and Bob Woodward's investigation of the Nixon White House.

Asked if such an investigation could happen with today's media, Bernstein says that such a question is not really about the press. "Do I think that there are news organizations that if they had the same kind of information that Bob Woodward and I had in Watergate would go ahead and print the stories? Absolutely, I do," he says. "I think what is really a bigger question is, how would readers respond? How would the political system respond? The great thing about Watergate is, is that the system worked. The American system worked." Today, Bernstein is not so sure that the system would be as accountable. He also talks about what it was like to score such a major story so early in his career—and what it's been like trying to follow up that success.

Finally, Bernstein suggests that the United States needs to reinstate the draft.  This is where the Big Think Editors and Bernstein show us the real intentions of this propaganda.  They shill for the draft and mandatory national service.

"If there was a draft, I don’t think for a minute we would have had this horrible war in Iraq," says Bernstein. "I don’t think members of Congress would have voted to send their own children into that theater, or into Afghanistan, not a chance. That the end of the draft has permitted a cowardly politics, a huge consequence to who we are as a people I think there’s a need in this country for national service for all young people, for a year or two, whether it be in the military, whether it be building roads, whether it be in public health, whether it be in helping to teach children. But the idea that there is no unifying activity for young people such as could be provided for national service is a terrible shortcoming in our culture."

Did you notice that they failed to mention the fact the "elites", including members of Congress...remember the Bush family legacy....seem to always find a path to avoiding the draft.   These people will stop and nothing to promote their propaganda to the unsuspecting public. Watch the following Big Think video to hear Carl Bernstein in his own words.  Bernstein goes on to talk about the "old nation-state" with the ability to shut down the press, assassinate journalists, etc.  This is a clear attack on the Sovereignty of the United States  and other "nation-states' because he goes on the talk about the corruption in government; the need to change educational system, etc.


They are obviously trying to soften up the masses to accept major changes within our societies claiming, of course, that these changes will get rid of corruption.  Sometimes I don't know if I should laugh or cry.  It is time to Wake Up!  You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!!!!!!!!!!!!

RELATED ARTICLE

RESOURCES:

A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media

Mainstream MediaMainstream Media

The Habits of Highly Deceptive Media: Decoding Spin and Lies in Mainstream News

Climategate Debunked: Big Brother, Mainstream Media, Cover-ups

For Liberty: How the Ron Paul Revolution Watered the Withered Tree of Liberty

Pens and Swords: How the American Mainstream Media Report the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Writing Dissent: Taking Radical Ideas from the Margins to the Mainstream (Media & Culture (New York, N.Y.), Vol. 5.)

Duped America: How Democrats And The Mainstream Media Have Duped The American People And Are Harming Our Country

Death Before Slavery

Mass media: Media (communication), Mainstream, Media influence, Central media, News media, Podcast, Media bias, Echo chamber (media)

Inside Iraq The Untold Stories