This and That

Critical thinking leads to some interesting questions and observations.

A friend recently asked me why he has to pay for syringes for his wife’s diabetes injections while drug addicts on the street can get them for free, funded by taxpayers like him.

How can people plan to pay for their children’s education or their own retirement when they can’t even plan for an annual vacation?  “According to a survey by financial planning company LearnVest, 74 percent of Americans have taken on debt to go on vacation.  The study surveyed 1,000 adults. It showed that, on average, Americans take on about $1,100 in debt for each vacation.”

The article adds:  “Around 55 percent of Americans forget to plan ahead for vacations when setting their budget for the year, according to the survey. It also shows that one-third of Americans would rather save money for a vacation than for a house or retirement.”  (See my earlier comments on vacation planning and gasoline price.)

People are puzzling about the drastic increase in overweight pets.  An analysis from veterinary clinics across the country of about 2.5 million dogs and 500,000 cats treated last year found an increase of more than 150% in overweight dogs and cats over the last 10 years.  About 1 in 3 are either overweight or obese.  The only surprise here is that they are still doing better than their owners.  (Can I say owners or do I have to call them pet parents for fear of offending someone?)

What is the city council of Minneapolis thinking?  They want to “require stores to charge a fee for any type of bag — paper or plastic — they give out.”  Can’t they see that this will hurt the poor the most?  Don’t they know that more people know about recycling than know that cloth grocery bags should be washed out periodically to avoid cross-contamination?

Two studies, one from University of Washington and the other the University of California, Berkeley, about the effects of the first tier of minimum wage increases in Seattle came to different conclusions.  One says it hurts the workers; the other says the workers benefit.  But Forbes reports there are “potential problems with both studies.”  The jury is still out and many economists do agree that the potential success or failure will be influenced by factors unique to the Seattle economy.  This is why it’s so important to conduct most of these experiments on the state and local level, rather than trying to impose a one-size-fits-all solution from Washington, then wring our hands as flaws later appear.

Here is a link to an informative table.  It shows murder rates by state by year from 2001 to 2015 with highlights showing which states had the death penalty (also by year).  It appears that the death penalty has no effect at all on the murder rates, even looking at data from individual states that banned it during that time period.  But some persist in defending capital punishment despite the fact that besides apparently not deterring crime, those cases are many times more costly than comparable cases.

Also interesting is that, despite what we might hear on the news or from politicians, the overall murder rate in America is half of what it was in 1980.

It’s a strange world we live in.  We all must be critical thinkers and question rather than passively accept any idea just because it sounds good.

More Responsibility Examples

Responsibility is the behavioral trait that distinguishes those who own their actions and admit their mistakes from those who try to find someone or something else to blame.  From sports to politics to everyday experiences the practice of good responsibility seems to be getting more unusual.  The sun got in my eyes, I’m addicted, I’m a victim, the cards are stacked against me, it’s the computer’s fault and a host of other excuses with the full support of “advocates” have become common.

Problems with responsibility have significant drawbacks.  Passing off the cause of the problem onto some outside influence never leads to a solution, just more of the same.  And as I have emphasized many times in the past, when we step away from our responsibilities, someone else, often the government, is happy to step in to force behavior on us – even if that new rule turns out to have unintended consequences.

This is common in corporate America as well where executives claim ignorance of corporate wrongdoing or in everyday customer service.  Here are a couple of strange examples from the world of casino gambling.

At one casino in Illinois a woman was startled by the bells and flashing lights on the slot machine she was playing.  The machine told her she had won $28 million!  She immediately heard the call for a supervisor, who told her not to touch the machine.  She remained calm enough during the ensuing chaos to take a couple of pictures of the machine.

The casino refused to pay her after an internal investigation found a computer error responsible for the jackpot message.  Executives would not comment directly, but continued to blame computer error for the mistake and offered her a free dinner instead.

In another casino a 90 year-old woman from Antioch, IA put her money in the slot and soon found a message on the screen awarding her a 185-credit along with the message, “The reels have rolled your way! Bonus Award $41,797,550.16.”

Again the casino refused to pay, again blaming a computer error, and paid her the $1.85 for the initial credit.  After a couple of years in court, the casino won the case.

The slot machine manufacturer had warned these casinos of a problem, which they were supposed to have fixed.  Perhaps some admission of fault was in order.  A free dinner or $1.85 hardly seems like an adequate settlement for a problem they were supposed to have dealt with.  But even a judge agreed that it wasn’t their fault; it was the computer – as if the computer were some distant third party and not their computer!

The other point is that when individuals fail to take responsibility, institutions take over. For a recent example, we turn to the Nebraska schools.  Apparently some parents couldn’t be relied on to track their children’s health numbers, so the schools have been conducting routine health screenings including a measurement of body-mass index (BMI).  If this ratio of weight to height is too high, the parents are notified of possible diet or exercise issues.

Some parents thought this could cause potential embarrassment for children, affecting their psychological health while trying to look out for their physical health.  Others felt the time would be better spent on traditional school subjects like adding and reading rather than measuring body size.

As of this month, the schools are allowed to decide whether to include that measure in routine health screenings.  In those schools that do not drop it, parents can send a note to school opting their kids out.  Some districts have already announced that they will continue the practice unless they receive the note.

Still, for some reason the state feels it is necessary to screen the health of students.  That reason is surely related to their perception that parents will not or cannot take responsibility for health screenings of their own children.  (BMI calculation can easily be done at home at no cost with a bathroom scale and a tape measure.)

These are just a few of so many examples.  Responsibility failings are easy to spot.  And when institutions spot them in a few citizens, they are quick to take over, imposing rules even on those who are conscientious and capable.

Behavioral Aspects of the War on Drugs

The War on Drugs has been going on for 50 years with little to show for it except on-going criminal/gang activity, the highest prison population in the world and the occasional headline story of a “drug-lord” or “kingpin” captured or convicted – cheered by the police and press as a great victory, and cheered by the next in line in the drug cartel as a long-awaited promotion.  But are we making any progress?

Based on a survey of 67,800 one source found:  “In 2013, an estimated 24.6 million Americans aged 12 or older – 9.4 percent of the population – had used an illicit drug in the past month. This number is up from 8.3 percent in 2002.”  No progress there.  And the CDC puts this number at 10.1% in 2015.  Up again.  US News piles on with a report of a “heroin epidemic” showing a 15-year increase.  So the main purpose has been thwarted, and we get the bonus of unintended consequences.

One major failing is how drug prohibition keeps organized crime in business and funds terrorist activities – Afghanistan being the world’s number one producer of heroin.  The dynamic of illegal activities and violence in America is eerily similar to that of alcohol prohibition in the last century although drug-war proponents refuse to admit it.  Today the government has, in effect, handed control of a multi-billion dollar market to violent criminal networks and gangs overseas, in Mexico and in the streets of our major cities.  With all the money involved the incentive is far too great to persuade them to give up even when faced with threats of arrest or being murdered by rival operators.

A second failure comes with the increased danger of the products.  Drugs are dangerous themselves, but the danger escalates when illegal, often backroom operations are involved in production and distribution.  Buyers can’t be sure of what they are getting, purity or dosage.  The danger is many times greater than unintentional overdoses of prescription drugs with that info available right on the label.

Another danger comes to law-abiding citizens indirectly from higher exposure to the criminal element on city streets and from muggings and property crimes to support the habit (with fewer resources freed up to investigate those other crimes).  Those already addicted who want help have less chance of getting it, afraid of reporting their problem.  And what about kids asleep in the bedroom while their parents cook up meth in the kitchen?

Just as legalizing alcohol did not lead to a spike in drinking, there is no reason to believe that legalizing drugs would lead to a sharp increase in drug use.  Colorado and a few other states have become laboratories to test the validity of this assumption while enjoying added benefits.  Yesterday Fox Business reported that Colorado “made an extra $200 million in tax revenue last year from legalized marijuana sales” and New Jersey expects to raise $300 million a year.  Revenue from marijuana sales no longer goes to street gangs, Mexican smugglers or other shady characters.

Legalizing drugs is not an endorsement of drug abuse any more than legal liquor is an endorsement of alcoholism.  The idea would be to control quality and regulate supply.  No one wants to see fellow citizens struggle with drug addiction; but the current situation is unacceptable, and doing the same thing, or doing the same thing with increased intensity, will not change the outcomes. 

It makes sense to take the same approach to the illicit drug abuse problem as we are taking to the more recent prescription abuse problem.  It should not be treated as a legal problem but a public health and education problem.  On balance, the failed war on drugs has been much more deadly and destructive than the drugs themselves, solely because the drugs are illegal, leading to deadly violence between warring factions, battles between the police and suppliers and harm to innocent bystanders from shootouts, chases and explosions.

But recreational drug use is immoral!  So are gambling and drinking, some say, and smoking and dancing and rock and roll!  Where do you draw the line?

Chiropractic - Handle With Care

Several months ago I noticed a couple of friends going to the chiropractor on a regular basis and tried to talk them into trying a yoga class instead.  They said they were too old and stiff for yoga, a typical response, and besides, Medicare paid for the chiropractor.  I wasn’t sure this was correct, but let it go.

Recently though, I ran across a fact sheet from the government and learned the following: “Spinal manipulation is a covered service under Medicare. However, maintenance care is not considered by Medicare to be medically reasonable and necessary, and is not reimbursable by Medicare. Only acute and chronic spinal manipulation services are considered active care and may, therefore, be reimbursable.”  It went on to define maintenance therapy, which sounded exactly like what my friends were getting.  Of course, I don’t have all the information and may be wrong, or the chiropractor may be violating the law.

From what I have read most chiropractors are honest and sincere.  They and their patients believe that treatment of subluxations in the spine provides relief from pain and other back problems.  Likewise Medicare recognizes subluxation as a problem that calls for medical attention.  But this in itself may be a problem.

One of many skeptical sources shares a different view.  “According to classical chiropractic, a ‘subluxation’ is a misalignment of the spine that allegedly interferes with nerve signals from the brain. However, there is no scientific evidence for spinal subluxations and none have ever been observed by medical practitioners such as orthopedic surgeons, neurosurgeons, or radiologists. On May 25, 2010, The General Chiropractic Council (GCC), a UK-wide statutory body with regulatory powers, issued the following statement:  The chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex is an historical concept but it remains a theoretical model. It is not supported by any clinical research evidence that would allow claims to be made that it is the cause of disease or health concerns.”  It’s like a metaphor that American professionals and  their patients take seriously.

Besides proper coding and billing, chiropractors must also be careful about the results they promise.  Some have advertised that spinal manipulation can improve general health, cure many different diseases, cure children of earaches, autism, and asthma, and prevent spinal degeneration.  None of these claims have any scientific backing.

Then there are the cases of unethical behavior like this one in Utah where the doctor was disciplined for financially abusing two patients and failing to cooperate with board investigations among other offenses.  But ethical failings happen in every profession.

In short, it is smart to be skeptical about the benefits of a visit to the chiropractor.  Maybe yoga, physical therapy or some other stretching routine will yield the same benefits.  Maybe most of the effect is placebo, based on a belief it will work.  All I know is that when I do a weekly review of medical articles, information about an investigation of problems with one chiropractor or another – ethics, false claims, and other problems – appears quite often.

(For a comprehensive scientific critique of the practice, see this YouTube video.  But I know many will read this or even view the video and still ignore facts that don't agree with a worldview they don't want to change.)

Dietary Fad Alert!

It’s almost like I can see into the future.  At least these kinds of fads don’t surprise me anymore.  If you pay attention to behavior, they won’t surprise you either and better still, you won’t be caught in the trap of the latest health craze.

And what is the latest health craze?  There are so many it’s hard to keep track, but this one is right up there:  Lectins.  The Washington Post tells us, “Going ‘lectin-free’ is primed to become the next big thing in dieting.”  They characterize lectin-free as “the latest pseudo-science diet fad.”

The article explains that research over the years has found both positive and negative effects from lectins, a type of protein found throughout nature.  Unlike gluten, lectins are not a single compound, but many different ones with many different functions.  They have been researched for years in isolation, but there are not yet any definitive findings about health effects.  Some are toxic and some make it difficult for certain people to absorb certain vitamins, whereas others have beneficial qualities, such as assisting the body to resist cancer.

“The problem is that online health gurus are painting all lectins with the same brush, and playing up the negative effects without the evidence to back it up.”  These warnings are easy to find on line, but it’s like saying some members of the nightshade family are highly toxic so it’s dangerous to eat tomatoes, potatoes or bell peppers.

Much more information is included in this article, but it appears to be just one more publicity-seeking scare tactic used by people who fancy themselves “online health gurus” and crave attention over truth.

MSN agrees.  Asking if lectin is the new gluten, they put it bluntly: “Why you shouldn't fall for the latest dumb diet fad.”  In fact the Mediterranean diet, that some consider the gold-standard to reduce the chance of heart disease, “contains plenty of foods containing lectins.”

This is just one more case of foodie fanaticism.  As I wrote just last week, there is a “tendency for people to blindly adopt views on health and good eating regardless of a lack of scientific support.”

If you too have been a keen observer of behavior, you will expect to see in the near future people who are sure that going lectin-free is the best (safest and healthiest) answer for themselves and their families.  They will have fallen for the “latest dumb diet fad” and no discussion of science or logic will talk them out of it; they read it on Facebook or their favorite “online health guru” said it’s so.  If it goes far enough, the food industry will chime in with labels boasting “lectin-free” just to increase sales among science-challenged consumers.  We've seen this happen so many times with gluten, organic, GMOs, pink slime, sea salt and rBGH, why would anything change now?

And so it goes in America today.  Money is thrown away on so many unsupported beliefs, magical supplements and worthless gadgets.  And then we worry about consumer debt and retirement insecurity.  When will we ever learn?