The blog World of Psychology published an excellent post by Margarita Tartakovsky that examined an atrocious "editor's letter" that recently appeared in the chick mag Women's Health. The letter, by editor-in-chief Michele Promaulayko, was an abysmal failure in women's ongoing search for dignity in a world that demeans us at every turn. You can go over to World of Psychology to read the heinous text, then the five insightful criticisms of it made by Ms. Tartakovsky.

I cannot contain within myself a sixth criticism that was no doubt omitted only due to lack of space (really, a lot more than just five criticisms could have been made, but that would have required a whole series of blog posts). Ms. Promaulayko boasts, "We came up with a plan to help you look great naked—or in a barely there swimsuit."

Why exactly, Ms. Promaulayko, should women be so eager to parade around naked—or nearly so—in public? You did not say "nude," which implies a certain dignity in the natural human form—you said "naked," which is a much more sordidly suggestive word. Why should we do this? Because modern women should have no self-respect whatsoever? Because we should have no sense of modesty, nor view our bodies as temples? Is it because you feel it's important to women's health to manipulate and frustrate men (not to mention, the Catholic in me must add, tempt them to sin), or to to play petty games of intimidation with other women? Really, Ms. Promaulayko.

And no, the answer is not "it's encoded in our DNA."

Infant formula is critically valuable for babies who cannot nurse. It contains expensive ingredients and its quality cannot be evaluated easily by consumers. All these factors lead to baby formula being a frequent target for contamination, adulteration, and confusion. With formula, the result isn't just consumers not getting their money's worth; it can be malnutrition, illness, and even death for young children.

Contamination

I have heard of powdered formula bound for third-world countries being cut with plaster and other white powders, although I can't confirm those rumors. But one form of contamination, originating in China, is prominent in the news today: melamine. And just as with pet food a year and a half ago, melamine contamination has reportedly led to infant deaths in China.

Melamine is an industrial chemical that contains nitrogen. The only significant food ingredient that contains nitrogen is protein, so the measure of protein in food is often based on the measure of nitrogen. By adding melamine, unscrupulous food manufacturers can give their product the artificial appearance of a high protein content and sell it at a higher price.

Ingested in large quantities, melamine causes kidney stones that lead to kidney failure. Nearly 13,000 Chinese children have been hospitalized with melamine poisoning from consuming tainted formula, and at least four have died, according to the British Medical Journal.

Inappropriate marketing

But contamination is not the only problem with infant food in the world; another is inappropriate marketing. There is an international code for infant formula marketing, which focuses mainly insisting that formula companies acknowledge that breast milk is best. Occasionally, a more outrageous situation comes up, such as a food not meant for babies being marketed as infant formula.

That's the situation with Bear Brand Coffee Creamer from Nestlé, sold in the southeast Asian country of Laos. In addition to coffee creamer, products with the Bear Brand label include infant formula and canned cows' milk. The label shows a bear cradling a baby bear as if nursing it. In a country where perhaps half of the rural population is illiterate, it is no small wonder that the coffee creamer is widely used (yes, widely) as a "breast milk substitute." There are case reports of severe malnutrition-related illnesses and deaths in young Laotian children who were fed Bear Brand Coffee Creamer instead of breast milk or infant formula. Again, the British Medical Journal has the story (hat tip to Chanpheng Lew (saosalavan) on Plurk).

If you couldn't read, would you think this product is good for children? Click image to enlarge:

I admit I was fascinated when I first heard about the Law of Attraction. Mainly, I was fascinated that so many people were so attracted to an idea so intellectually unattractive. Among those who have been taken in are the likes of Oprah Winfrey.

So I peeked a little deeper into the world of New Age channelled beings. They are an intriguing bunch! Here are the top ten things I learned:

10. Abraham, channeled by Esther Hicks, is not a single spirit, but a whole group of them. They thus often go by the name Abraham-Hicks. (This confusing nomenclature does not mean that Abraham are a bunch of rednecks, as it might appear at first glance.)

9. Abraham teach, among other things, that "anything that you can imagine is yours to be or do or have." Abraham do not, however, teach you not to split infinitives. (They would probably prefer that I say "to not split infinitives.")

8. Channelled spirits do not teach spelling, either. Take poor Djwal Khul. Other versions of his name variously add and remove H's. His followers often just give up and call him DK.

7. The continent of Lemuria was a short-lived hypothesis of the 19th century. A better understanding of plate tectonics made it obvious to science that Lemuria never existed — but the channelled spirit Ramtha, who claims to hail from that land, never got the message. Perhaps Ramtha is actually from the real sunken continent Zealandia. They didn't have geography classes 35,000 years ago.

6. Ramtha teaches that we are all gods. In fact, he calls us "forgotten gods" because we have forgotten our divinity. Apparently Ramtha himself forgot this when he led 2.5 million warriors into battle against the Atlanteans.

5. In the New Age, spiritual beings may be warm fuzzy teachers (except Ramtha), but extraterrestrials are militaristic. Just consider Ashtar Galactic Command, led by the ET Ashtar Sheran.

4. Channelled beings care a lot about their copyrights. Abraham's channeller Esther Hicks has been removed from the "Law of Attraction" video The Secret due to "contract issues." Meanwhile, the Austrian Supreme Court recognizes that only Judy Zebra Knight is allowed to channel Ramtha.

3. Channelled beings have their own secret societies. The Illuminati of the New Age is called the Great White Brotherhood. Despite their provocative name, they do not seem to have any connection to David Duke or the National Alliance.

2. Though Christians generally view the New Age movement to be inimical to their faith, Jesus is very busy in the New Age. He is constantly being reincarnated (despite not being dead). He dictates texts like A Course in Miracles that are in utter contradiction of his earlier words found in the Bible. In the New Age, poor Jesus is a pretty confused guy, and I suspect he must be very tired.

1. Jesus is part of the Great White Brotherhood. Of course he is.

It sounds like a concept from a physics textbook — or from a self-help book on dating. The term itself is attractive, and makes one wonder, What compelling idea does this stand for?

It develops that "The Law of Attraction" actually says that when you activate within you a vibration for something, that thing will be drawn to you, whether it is good or bad.

Yeah.

The Law of Attraction was revealed by a group of spirit entities collectively known as Abraham, speaking through the medium of one Esther Hicks. She and her husband Jerry have attracted to themselves beaucoup bucks through the vibration of canny marketing.

Though Abraham is a personal being (or, rather, collection of beings), the Law of Attraction is apparently an impersonal supernatural force. In Catholic belief, there is no such thing as an impersonal supernatural force; thus the "Law" that is "attracting" things to the Hicks and their followers must be coming from some supernatural person — and it clearly isn't God.

Under Abraham's teachings, there is no charity. The Hicks give, but only to people who seem to want it, never to those who need it. Speaking of a waitress who "attracted" an envelope full of cash from him, Jerry Hicks explains: "She yelled: 'Oh my God, you can't believe what you have done for me. I was going to lose my apartment.' We said: 'If you'd told us that, we wouldn't have given you the money....'"

This quotation is from an interview in the U.K. publication The Independent. It's a story that shows a bewildering degree of shallowness on the part of Hicks couple. For instance, under the Law of Attraction, one brings all bad things upon oneself through bad vibes. When the interviewer inquires whether this applies to the millions of lives taken in the Holocaust, Esther Hicks responds with a banal story about a chicken named Renegade.

The point of the chicken story seems to be that like Renegade, victims of murder and other tragedies bring their fate upon themselves. They only get what they ask for — or, in the words of Esther, "the person receiving prejudice is the one who has the vibration that is attracting it." For his part, Jerry wonders aloud, "So what did they [the Jews] do to bring that on themselves, do you suppose?"

It's the weekend! I felt it was time to take a break from the weighty Right to Health Care series. What better way to relax than with online psychics?

At Online Psychic, you are invited to test your connection to a psychic. For FREE. Who could resist?

The link took me to a screen showing five face cards: K♥ J♣ Q♠ K♠ J♦ . Scrolling text (as if someone were... typing in real time!) informed me that a live connection was being established, then instructed me to pick a card and concentrate on it. The message warned that there may not be a strong psychic connection between us, in which case I should come back tomorrow.

I clicked "Continue," and Nancy's scrolling text told that me there was a strong psychic connection between us (oh goodie!) and that she had replaced the card I chose. And indeed, the card I chose had been replaced... as had been all four other cards: Q♣ K♦ Q♥ K♣ J♥ . And now I was invited to receive a more detailed reading about my life from Nancy for the low, low price of just $29.95.

Uh huh. Moving on...

At Free Psychic Network, I was presented with a box in which I was invited to type a question. I typed my question and clicked "Submit," and was carried to a page where I could submit my question (again) and have the answer e-mailed to me. I cleverly observed that this was a different site called Live Person, so apparently the question box was an ad. It's not an encouraging sign when your psychic subcontracts.

Nevertheless, I scrolled down and found a button for a Free Psychic Reading. No promises of a live psychic on the other end for me! My reading was:

Fortunate Encounter

I see a fortunate encounter with a stranger in your future.
The Crystal Ball Is Clear.
An nexpected chance meeting will provide a spring board for your carreer. (sic)

So my psychic is an optimist, but not a gifted typist.

Next I found Psychic Earth, which announces "Totally Free Psychics For Free Absolutely Free Psychic readings Online." A big golden button on the homepage advertises "Online readings only 1.20 (sic) per minute! Order here." The fine print at the bottom of the page (under the fold, of course) notes that "free readings are offered in the free reading room during scheduled times." The "free reading room" is a chatroom that was empty when I visited it.

So I ended up 0 for 3. I guess I need to find a better way to spend my weekend.

The makers of Cymbalta, an antidepressant, have also made commercials. Without saying anything positive or negative about the drug, it must be said that the commercials capture the heart and pain of depression in a way that puts the filmmakers of Cannes and Sundance to shame. View the first twenty seconds or so of this commercial to feel what it is like to have this illness. Their previous ad was even better, but it could not be found online. (Have a link? Post it in a comment!)



What is it like to have depression?

There are people out there with depression. He knows it's something real. He knows it makes them sick. That's not what he has. He is not sick. He is just bad. There is something wrong with him; he is defective; and he tries not to think about it because it hurts, but he knows it is true. He is terrified to admit these feelings because he doesn't want to believe he is bad. But he knows it is true.

I was walking to my therapist appointment. It was fall, and the management at the office building had planted pansies in beds in front of the building. I saw those pansies because I was looking down. I almost never raised my head in those days. And what I felt was guilt, guilt over those pansies -- guilt because I had never planted my garden that summer, that there were weeds there. Oh, what a bad and worthless person I was, because of those pansies. And I had the presence of mind to know that this feeling was utterly irrational and unrealistic. And it didn't matter; I still felt the guilt. Even today I cannot see pansies without remembering that day.

Death becomes your constant companion. The depressed person dies an invisible death a thousand times a day. She knows she will die young; she knows it is inevitable. She feels it. Her mind wanders because depression makes it difficult to concentrate, and it wanders to the manner of her own death. If she is in the car, she know she will die soon in a gruesome accident. If she is walking down the street, she knows she will be murdered in a random killing. If she is at home, she knows she will die alone when a piece of furniture falls on her, and nobody will notice that she is gone until she has been dead for weeks. She is not afraid of it, but she is already grieving it.

My dream was short, because I slept only in short spurts, and woke up four or five times a night. It was a mercy that this dream was short. The bedroom door was closed, and a river of blood began to flow under the door into the bedroom. In the river of blood were the severed heads of babies. Sleep was my refuge from pain, but sometimes it betrayed me.

She knows she is destroying her family. She knows she is causing pain for her husband and devastating her children. She knows they would be better off without her. She knows her suicide is the second worst thing that can happen to them, but the thing that would be worse would be her continued presence. She is held back only by knowing that the life insurance won't pay out for her suicide in the first two years, so she has to wait six more months. Her husband doesn't even realize that she has just six months to live if they don't find a successful treatment.

That is what it is like to have depression.




del.icio.us

A new drug called Riobant (rimonabant) has been developed to help people lose weight. Users lose an average of ten pounds more over a year than people using a placebo. Story here.

The drug is an "endocannabinoid receptor antagonist," which is another way of saying that it's reverse marijuana. Apparently you lose weight because you get the anti-munchies.

Think for a second what else marijuana does, though: It makes you feel happy. So would reverse marijuana make you sad? Turns out the answer is yes. Users of rimonabant reported a high incidence of depression, anxiety, and insomnia compared to the placebo group.

Normally, a doctor and/or patient would weigh the risks of a drug against its potential benefits. Obesity is a risk factor for deadly diseases such as heart disease, so on the surface it would seem rimonabant might be worth the risk for obese people with unhealthy arteries. Unfortunately, weight loss associated with rimonabant does not improve coronary artery health.

So in my opinion, this drug should not be approved. "Psychiatric side effects" are a huge deal. Depression is one of the leading causes of disability in the U.S. The benefit of slight weight loss (less than a pound a month, remember) does not outweigh the risk of these unwanted effects, if the weight loss has only cosmetic impact.

Anybody disagree? Would losing weight, but not improving health, be worth depression, anxiety, and insomnia?

I just bought my first iPod, a tiny iPod Shuffle. Since I bought it online, I was able to get a pretty dark red one instead of silver or pastel. It was a web exclusive. A red iPod doesn't really seem remarkable, but this wasn't just a red iPod: it was a Product (RED) iPod.

Product (RED) (hereafter PR, as the full name is hard to type) was conceived by such luminaries as Oprah and Bono as a way to raise funds for AIDS treatment in Africa. The PR website features a "manifesto" that talks about choice, as in, we all have a choice whether to help poor AIDS sufferers in poor dark backward Africa.

Forgive my cynicism. I'm idealistic. I always thought donating was something you did to help others, not to brag about helping others by flaunting your PR products. Actually, I wonder how much "help" really goes to the AIDS relief effort. A dollar per product? A penny?

PR is an overt marketing ploy. It's brilliant, really: it feeds on Western consumer culture by making the purchase of unnecessary stuff -- already a noble pursuit -- into a bona fide virtue. No sacrifice necessary! Just buy the stuff you would already buy, except you get the privilege of imagining that you are actually making a donation -- although you don't pay any extra for the product you buy. Of course not -- remember, there's no sacrifice necessary! And you get to feel like such a generous, righteous soul without slowing down your material lifestyle.

Yes, I bought a PR iPod. As I said, I liked the color. Yes, I hope some of the purchase price actually helps someone. But no, the availability of PR did not make me buy the player -- I already planned on it -- and emphatically no, I don't think I did any great or generous thing by buying it.

Coming soon: Organs -- they're not just for donating anymore!