10 years ago, Haiti became eligible for loans from the Inter-American Development Bank. The loans, totaling $146 million, would have helped immediately, funding interventions to save the lives of Haitian women and children. These funds had already been internally appropriated, designated for use in Haiti.
The United States government has a third of the voting rights on the IDB board. Documents recently released under the Freedom of Information Act revealed that these loans were not dispersed because of a political decision by the US. Although the money had already been appropriated, none of it was given out - even the $54 million that was going only to water and sanitation projects, relatively apolitical lifesaving interventions.
Haiti had already paid $10 million in advance interest on the loans, but the recent election of Jean-Bertrande Aristide so displeased the Bush administration that they decided to block dispersal of these loans for any Haitians. Haiti stopped, of course, paying interest; but this caused them to "default" on the loans, which made them officially ineligible for any further loans. The FOIA-released documents demonstrate that this was a deliberate scheme, so the continued blockage of loans to Haiti would appear to be legitimate and not politically-motivated, which is exactly what it was.
May 20, 2010
May 6, 2010
Chemicals Cause Gender Confusion?
Danes and Finns’ long standing rivalry has a new iteration. Danish males have smaller genitalia lower sperm counts, higher rates of cancer. The scientific communities in these countries have been studying these rates, and not just for national pride. The man parts they study are indicative of broader hormonal imbalances and widespread issues with reproduction/fertility and cancer.
What’s causing the imbalance? Chemicals:
Do these chemical alterations of hormone levels only affect physical characteristics? Of course not. Boys exposed to higher uterine levels of phthalates are less likely to play with toy guns than those exposed to lower levels. Phthalates are found in soft plastics (shower curtains, baby toys), plastic packaging, lotions, fragrances, cosmetics, deodorants, and pharmaceutical coatings.
I ran across another version of this idea while doing research on Silent Spring. Janisse Ray, in the chapter “Changing Sex” of the book Courage for the Earth, first describes a study in 1994 that discovered that after pesticides and chemicals were dumped in a lake, alligator testosterone levels dropped to the point that males and females were almost indistinguishable, showing relatively equal amounts of testosterone. Female alligators showed double the normal amounts of estrogen. Unsurprisingly, populations of young alligators declined by 90%. Males also had less-developed phalli and testes; chemicals were “disrupting animals’ reception of their own hormones” (pg. 112).
Ray goes on to enumerate many studies on fish where males are found to have immature eggs in their testes, fish that become “intersex.” Whales, black bears, seagulls, and snails are also seeing physical confusion of gender. More than 100,000 chemicals that may be capable of such endocrine disruption, according to a 2003 report by the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment and the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, are currently on the market. These chemicals can be found throughout our food chain, in mothers’ milk.
Research has directly linked phthalate levels in mothers to adverse affects on human male reproductive development – lower testosterone development, incomplete genital development. That’s not to even mention the studies that show problems with a number of chemicals and mice’s reproductive development.
Finally, the most interesting part of the article: Ray talks about a friend of hers who is transgender, from female to male, now married to a scientist who works on environmental toxins and endocrine disruption. They theorize that environmental toxins could explain the modern rise of transgender people. This had occurred to me before, but I had always thought that chemicals were perhaps making boys more like girls, so they wanted to be girls, and vice-versa; Ray and her friend take the opposite tact. What if her friend, “C.B.,” had been a boy at birth, but environmental toxins had adjusted his testosterone and estrogen levels so that he physically developed as a girl?
If you want more information, just google “anogenital index” for a bunch of articles about chemicals affecting hormonal development.
What’s causing the imbalance? Chemicals:
Industrial chemicals like polychlorinated biphenols (banned since the 1970s but doggedly persistent in land, water, and food), flame retardants, dioxins, and pesticides like DDT. "It turns out the chemical burden is not the same" for Danish and Finnish baby boys, says researcher Main, who was surprised by the finding. "It's higher here. The higher your burden, as measured in breast milk, the higher the risk of undescended testes."The United States has higher chemical burdens than even Denmark. A recent study has linked maternal phthalate exposure (in hairspray) to sons with penile deformities. Another study connected abnormal sperm to blood levels of chemicals used to make nonstick coatings. The theory that chemicals disrupt hormones early in the womb is gaining ground.
Do these chemical alterations of hormone levels only affect physical characteristics? Of course not. Boys exposed to higher uterine levels of phthalates are less likely to play with toy guns than those exposed to lower levels. Phthalates are found in soft plastics (shower curtains, baby toys), plastic packaging, lotions, fragrances, cosmetics, deodorants, and pharmaceutical coatings.
I ran across another version of this idea while doing research on Silent Spring. Janisse Ray, in the chapter “Changing Sex” of the book Courage for the Earth, first describes a study in 1994 that discovered that after pesticides and chemicals were dumped in a lake, alligator testosterone levels dropped to the point that males and females were almost indistinguishable, showing relatively equal amounts of testosterone. Female alligators showed double the normal amounts of estrogen. Unsurprisingly, populations of young alligators declined by 90%. Males also had less-developed phalli and testes; chemicals were “disrupting animals’ reception of their own hormones” (pg. 112).
Ray goes on to enumerate many studies on fish where males are found to have immature eggs in their testes, fish that become “intersex.” Whales, black bears, seagulls, and snails are also seeing physical confusion of gender. More than 100,000 chemicals that may be capable of such endocrine disruption, according to a 2003 report by the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment and the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, are currently on the market. These chemicals can be found throughout our food chain, in mothers’ milk.
Research has directly linked phthalate levels in mothers to adverse affects on human male reproductive development – lower testosterone development, incomplete genital development. That’s not to even mention the studies that show problems with a number of chemicals and mice’s reproductive development.
Finally, the most interesting part of the article: Ray talks about a friend of hers who is transgender, from female to male, now married to a scientist who works on environmental toxins and endocrine disruption. They theorize that environmental toxins could explain the modern rise of transgender people. This had occurred to me before, but I had always thought that chemicals were perhaps making boys more like girls, so they wanted to be girls, and vice-versa; Ray and her friend take the opposite tact. What if her friend, “C.B.,” had been a boy at birth, but environmental toxins had adjusted his testosterone and estrogen levels so that he physically developed as a girl?
If you want more information, just google “anogenital index” for a bunch of articles about chemicals affecting hormonal development.
Mar 28, 2010
Country Music is Suicidal
And so can you!
It's official. Increased radio airtime of country music --> increased suicide rate. Apparently this isn't as much of a newsflash as it might be; the study was released in 1992. But it used regression analysis to control for all the other variables that affect suicide rate and demographics, and concluded that the more country music on the radio, the higher the white suicide rate.
I enjoy a little country now and then, but I've generally considered it best for my health to seek other modes of melodic entertainment. A techno song a day keeps the doctor away (and those voices too)
**click on the title of the post to see the study
It's official. Increased radio airtime of country music --> increased suicide rate. Apparently this isn't as much of a newsflash as it might be; the study was released in 1992. But it used regression analysis to control for all the other variables that affect suicide rate and demographics, and concluded that the more country music on the radio, the higher the white suicide rate.
I enjoy a little country now and then, but I've generally considered it best for my health to seek other modes of melodic entertainment. A techno song a day keeps the doctor away (and those voices too)
**click on the title of the post to see the study
Fanny Packs
I think fanny packs get a bad rap. Their unfortunately predominate use by obnoxious Western tourists in the 1990s lead to their, quite possible permanent, demise. When Weird Al is mocking fanny packs, you know they've gone from out to far out.
Disclaimer: I don't own a fanny pack, but I'm playfully reconsidering that decision.
Fanny packs may be the most useful carrying invention since pockets. They chafe very little (much less than holding everything in your cargo pants would), because they sit at the waist, which typically doesn't move a whole lot. Considering their versatility, I would say the fanny pack's major competitor is the small backpack (daypack-size). While the backpack requires the use of the shoulders, potentially tiring them out, and demands a full dismount in order to access its primary pockets, the fanny pack is perpetually accessible around the waist. Furthermore, if one wears a fanny pack frontways, then your stuff is less likely to get stolen than in a backpack that you can't see.
Apparently, fanny packs may be making a comeback. Obviously, they shall have to ditch that horrific name. Gucci has a "waist belt bag," and Rihanna was spotted wearing a Louis Vuitton "pouch."
Better than a murse, let's bring the waist belt bag pouch back!
Disclaimer: I don't own a fanny pack, but I'm playfully reconsidering that decision.
Fanny packs may be the most useful carrying invention since pockets. They chafe very little (much less than holding everything in your cargo pants would), because they sit at the waist, which typically doesn't move a whole lot. Considering their versatility, I would say the fanny pack's major competitor is the small backpack (daypack-size). While the backpack requires the use of the shoulders, potentially tiring them out, and demands a full dismount in order to access its primary pockets, the fanny pack is perpetually accessible around the waist. Furthermore, if one wears a fanny pack frontways, then your stuff is less likely to get stolen than in a backpack that you can't see.
Apparently, fanny packs may be making a comeback. Obviously, they shall have to ditch that horrific name. Gucci has a "waist belt bag," and Rihanna was spotted wearing a Louis Vuitton "pouch."
Better than a murse, let's bring the waist belt bag pouch back!
Mar 7, 2010
Want a cheap vacation?
I just wanted to give a plug to helpx.net. I've told a lot of people about this place, and everyone is always excited to hear about it, and probably a little surprised they never have before.
It's like CouchSurfing but generally less sketchy and more involved. People from across the world post if they have a place for a traveler to stay, and will give them room and board in exchange for some work (typically for free; if not then for a very small sum).
A lot of people have farms, either organic or not (although if you're looking to do an organic farm stay wwoofing may be better). Many have some kind of small business; and quite a few just want to share their lives and country with a traveler. From Bedouin in the Jordanian desert to rice farmers in Thailand to a friendly family in Fiji, there are places everywhere.
I'm going to Mancora, Peru for spring break through HelpX. We'll see how it goes.
It's like CouchSurfing but generally less sketchy and more involved. People from across the world post if they have a place for a traveler to stay, and will give them room and board in exchange for some work (typically for free; if not then for a very small sum).
A lot of people have farms, either organic or not (although if you're looking to do an organic farm stay wwoofing may be better). Many have some kind of small business; and quite a few just want to share their lives and country with a traveler. From Bedouin in the Jordanian desert to rice farmers in Thailand to a friendly family in Fiji, there are places everywhere.
I'm going to Mancora, Peru for spring break through HelpX. We'll see how it goes.
Mar 4, 2010
From Brainwashing to Terrorist Interrogation
When 20 US POWs chose to stay in Communist China after the Korean War, the US intelligence community went nuts. Reports of brainwashing had been floating around for awhile, but now it was a confirmed phenomenon. The CIA and various military branches were determined to replicate and improve upon whatever tactics the enemy had up their sleeve.
So they created MKULTRA and a number of other questionable programs that did unethical and illegal things to people to try to control their minds, their behavior. The most common experiments involved LSD or other drugs, sensory deprivation, and stress positions. They ended up working out ways to break people down, deconstruct personalities, and cause "regression."
Somehow, these organizations decided that the ability to cause a psychotic breakdown was a great technique in an interrogator's arsenal. Good enough to be pretty much the only one. So the KUBARK manual was created, explaining how to use stress positions, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, circadian rhythm disruption and other techniques to disorient a prisoner. It also advised hypnotism.
The KUBARK manual (it came out in the early 60s) was then the basis for the next 40 years of interrogation manuals, including the ones used at the controversial School of Americas. It also was the basis for the SERE (Survive Evade Resist Escape) program, which was designed to put military officers and special forces operators through intense simulations of Soviet/Communist capture and interrogation (read: torture). The SERE students underwent the techniques described in the KUBARK manual, which were based on the research from MKULTRA.
When we started capturing terrorists post-9/11, no one knew what to do with them (except the FBI, apparently, but everyone decided to ignore them and go the unethical route). So the CIA hired SERE trainer and director John Mitchell to interrogate prisoners. Hence waterboarding, hooding of prisoners, disorientation, "rap torture"....all the specific techniques we saw used in Guantanamo, secret prisons, and Abu Ghraib.
This is just dumb. I don't understand how anyone made the leap between "research to learn how to break someone down" to "effective interrogation technique." There is literally zero research on the effects of these methods on convincing a prisoner with a secret to betray it. There is no reason to believe that the disorientation, humiliation, and physical stress that are still a standard part of interrogation procedure (see John Yoo's memos for this) have any positive effect whatsoever on the gaining of actionable intelligence.
So they created MKULTRA and a number of other questionable programs that did unethical and illegal things to people to try to control their minds, their behavior. The most common experiments involved LSD or other drugs, sensory deprivation, and stress positions. They ended up working out ways to break people down, deconstruct personalities, and cause "regression."
Somehow, these organizations decided that the ability to cause a psychotic breakdown was a great technique in an interrogator's arsenal. Good enough to be pretty much the only one. So the KUBARK manual was created, explaining how to use stress positions, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, circadian rhythm disruption and other techniques to disorient a prisoner. It also advised hypnotism.
The KUBARK manual (it came out in the early 60s) was then the basis for the next 40 years of interrogation manuals, including the ones used at the controversial School of Americas. It also was the basis for the SERE (Survive Evade Resist Escape) program, which was designed to put military officers and special forces operators through intense simulations of Soviet/Communist capture and interrogation (read: torture). The SERE students underwent the techniques described in the KUBARK manual, which were based on the research from MKULTRA.
When we started capturing terrorists post-9/11, no one knew what to do with them (except the FBI, apparently, but everyone decided to ignore them and go the unethical route). So the CIA hired SERE trainer and director John Mitchell to interrogate prisoners. Hence waterboarding, hooding of prisoners, disorientation, "rap torture"....all the specific techniques we saw used in Guantanamo, secret prisons, and Abu Ghraib.
This is just dumb. I don't understand how anyone made the leap between "research to learn how to break someone down" to "effective interrogation technique." There is literally zero research on the effects of these methods on convincing a prisoner with a secret to betray it. There is no reason to believe that the disorientation, humiliation, and physical stress that are still a standard part of interrogation procedure (see John Yoo's memos for this) have any positive effect whatsoever on the gaining of actionable intelligence.
