Blog

A watercolor painting of a snowman. The snowman is wearing a green scarf, and has a carrot nose. It is standing in a snowy field. The watercolor style gives the painting a soft, dreamlike quality.

Photo taken Dec 2019.

A watercolor painting of a banana peel with the words “STAY OUT!!” written in red capital letters above it. There is also smaller text that says, “Trespassers will be roasted by airborne reptillian.” The banana peel is brown and looks overripe. It is sitting on a white background.

A similar art piece titled “Comedian” by Italian artist Maurizio Cattelan is a real banana duct-taped to a white wall. There are a few key differences between the two works of art. First, this image is a painting, while the Banana Duct-Taped to a Wall is a sculpture. Second, this image has text on it, while the Banana Duct-Taped to a Wall does not. Third, the banana in the image is brown and overripe, while the “Comedian” banana is yellow and ripe.

A watercolor painting of a calico cat sleeping on a bed. The cat is curled up in a ball. Its fur is a mix of black, white, and orange. The background is light blue. The painting is done in a loose, expressive style, with washes of color and soft brushstrokes. The colors are bright and cheerful, and the overall mood of the painting is one of peace and tranquility.

A eulogy to my mom’s dog Mandy. May she rest in peace.

Drug regulation should not be a criminal matter, but addressed by health care providers. I urge the DEA to drop this attempt to schedule more substances.

1. Personal Liberty: At the heart of the decriminalization movement lies the principle of individual autonomy. Adults should have the right to choose what they put into their own bodies, as long as their actions don’t harm others. Criminalizing personal drug use infringes on this fundamental freedom, treating individuals as criminals for making private choices.

   ...

The Director of The Centers For Disease Control’s (CDC) Oral Health Division, Casey Hannan, fumbles during a deposition for the TSCA Fluoride Lawsuit when asked to provide documentation of the studies CDC relies on to support its claim that fluoride reduces tooth decay when ingested.

Also see:

A medical consensus of public health authorities around the world has considered water fluoridation at appropriate levels as a safe and effective means to prevent cavities on a community-wide scale. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention deemed the fluoridation of drinking water as one of the top ten public health achievements of the 20th century. There is little question that supplemental fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces decay, but at what cost?

...

Some feet. Original drawing is shown in upper left over Midjourney’s version.

The dangerous rift between open and classified research. #

By Kate Brown

In 1987, a year after the Chernobyl accident, the US Health Physics Society met in Columbia, Maryland. Health physicists are scientists who are responsible for radiological protection at nuclear power plants, nuclear weapons plants, and hospitals. They are called on in cases of nuclear accidents. The conference’s keynote speaker came from the Department of Energy (DOE); the title of his talk drew on a sports analogy: “Radiation: The Offense and the Defense.” Switching metaphors to geopolitics, the speaker announced to the hall of nuclear professionals that his talk amounted to “the party line.” The biggest threat to nuclear industries, he told the gathered professionals, was not more disasters like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island but lawsuits. After the address, lawyers from the Department of Justice (DOJ) met in break-out groups with the health physicists to prepare them to serve as “expert witnesses” against claimants suing the US government for alleged health problems due to exposure from radio­activity issued in the production and testing of nuclear weapons during the Cold War. That’s right: the DOE and the DOJ were preparing private citizens to defend the US government and its corporate contractors as they ostensi­bly served as “objective” scientific experts in US courts.

What is the debate? 🥊 #

According to epidemiological studies,¹ the threshold for BMI is 20–21 kg m^-2.

💥 yet 💥

We envision a world where BMI does not exist, and is not replaced with another size-based, anti-fat measure of health.²

What is the impulse behind movements like Health At Every Size² and Intuitive Eating³?

Shape of the motivating story 🎭 #

Suppose I have depression 😟. The only thing that fills that void in my heart is ice cream 🍨. If I don’t eat ice cream, I will kill myself 🪓. On the other hand, if I do eat ice cream, I might gain weight 🎈. Which option would you rather I pick? 🗳️

...

Introduction #

A complex array of motivations drives dishonesty. They include: financial gain, self-preservation, social approval, ethical dilemmas, cognitive biases, and fear of punishment. Men are often more dishonest than women.¹ Cultural and social factors also shape attitudes towards honesty.²

Dishonesty in a relationship creates several challenges:

• Erosion of trust: Trust is a fundamental building block of any healthy relationship. When one party in the relationship is dishonest, it erodes the trust that the relationship has amassed over time. Rebuilding trust can be a long and difficult process.
• Emotional toll: Being lied to or discovering dishonesty can be emotionally devastating. It can lead to feelings of betrayal, hurt, anger, and insecurity. Coping with these emotions can be exhausting and challenging, making it difficult to move forward in the relationship.
• Communication breakdown: Open and honest communication is essential in any relationship. When dishonesty is present, it disrupts communication because it is hard to know what to believe or how to address the issue.
• Questioning reality: When someone is consistently dishonest, it can make their partner question their own perception of reality. This gaslighting effect can be mentally and emotionally destabilizing.
• Fear of recurrence: Once dishonesty shatters trust, a lingering fear may remain that it will happen again. This fear can be a barrier to true emotional intimacy and can lead to ongoing stress and anxiety in the relationship.
• Decision-making dilemmas: When dishonesty comes to light, individuals in the relationship may face difficult decisions. They must consider whether they can forgive, rebuild trust, and move forward, or if it’s best to end the relationship altogether. These decisions can be complex and emotionally fraught.

To explore different ways to address dishonesty, imagine a fictional scenario. Suppose Alice and Bob are in a relationship. Alice got pregnant via Bob but tells Bob that she isn’t pregnant. Carlos is Alice’s platonic friend. There are a variety of ways that Bob and Carlos can address Alice’s dishonesty.