Should parents take a more active role in designing their children's immunization schedule?
Absolutely! Children are dealing with more regulations at school period, most of it is designed for the mind...testing, testing, testing. But, what about their bodies? Granted, children now deal with pressures that we didn't have to growing up. Perhaps, that's due to evolution and the fact that babying our children proves nothing, other than the fact that we don't think they're as intelligent as they really are...our fault! However, children are still children. I think it's crucial for parents to utilize every tool necessary to protect their children's health. I'm not totally against immunization, especially in public schools; it comes with the territory, if you ask me. Granted, I do believe that parents should regulate and a great way to do it is to spread out their immunizations to ensure that they're children's bodies are best equipped to handle the immunizations.
Would you support making the vaccination programs "cumpulsory"?
No, I don't believe that people should do anything they think will not benefit their bodies and I think that this is a great example. I don't think that most parents will choose not to immunize their children, so I don't think that it's much of an issue to begin with. What if we didn't know about those parents who chose not to immunize their children? Would we notice more outbreaks? Would there be more outbreaks? Could just believing that shot will prevent an outbreak be enough? What about placebo immunizations? It would be unethical, but I'm interested on seeing what the effect of just feeling like you're protected in these situations would be.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Which Way Forward?
If you had access to all resources, how would you deal with "the global crisis in diet"?
Wow! That's a good question, especially because it's directed towards me. I would definitely start by hiring some of the top leaders in the food and health industry, but they would limited access to the "big wigs" in politics. I want people to feed the people, locally. I would look into eliminating processed foods and coming up with better solutions for those who can't afford proper diets. Obviously, I'm not an expert on the subject, so I would also start with education and make it mandatory that schools help support families into learning about nutrition, especially the first time around. Once that happens, it's bound to lead to success in our communities. People aren't completely ignorant, they just don't know...haha.
Would you expect "carbon offsets" to work effectively?
I don't think that this will be handled effectively for quite some time, not to sound pessimistic. I think this will take a while to come up with the most effective solution; however, just like the "global crisis in diet", it starts with people acknowledging the problem and setting standards and plans to help, no matter how "little" of a step it is, it's still a step. I know that these steps will have to not only come from regular citizens that stay home most of the time, but with those who are constantly on the move. I wouldn't be against taxing those people more for their traveling expenses; however, I do have a problem with taxing the everyday Joe for something like that; it's hard enough to get out as it is.
Wow! That's a good question, especially because it's directed towards me. I would definitely start by hiring some of the top leaders in the food and health industry, but they would limited access to the "big wigs" in politics. I want people to feed the people, locally. I would look into eliminating processed foods and coming up with better solutions for those who can't afford proper diets. Obviously, I'm not an expert on the subject, so I would also start with education and make it mandatory that schools help support families into learning about nutrition, especially the first time around. Once that happens, it's bound to lead to success in our communities. People aren't completely ignorant, they just don't know...haha.
Would you expect "carbon offsets" to work effectively?
I don't think that this will be handled effectively for quite some time, not to sound pessimistic. I think this will take a while to come up with the most effective solution; however, just like the "global crisis in diet", it starts with people acknowledging the problem and setting standards and plans to help, no matter how "little" of a step it is, it's still a step. I know that these steps will have to not only come from regular citizens that stay home most of the time, but with those who are constantly on the move. I wouldn't be against taxing those people more for their traveling expenses; however, I do have a problem with taxing the everyday Joe for something like that; it's hard enough to get out as it is.
Do you agree that "Laughter really is the best medicine"?
Abso-freakin-lutely!!! "I love to laugh...ha, ha, ha, ha. Loud and long and clear! " "Laughter is the best medicine." Laughing is the best way to get over yourself, too. How many times have we done something in public we thought was absolutely mortifying, but then we stop, think it's not so bad and bust out laughing? It's the best. Laughing reminds us that we're all human. Some of the best philosophers are comedians. They know what's up! It's all about making each other laugh! If we're having a bad day, it's nice to call up that friend we know could cheer us up if we need a little help. It's usually the most humbled and funny friend that we have, somebody who makes us laugh, as well as lend an open ear.
Abso-freakin-lutely!!! "I love to laugh...ha, ha, ha, ha. Loud and long and clear! " "Laughter is the best medicine." Laughing is the best way to get over yourself, too. How many times have we done something in public we thought was absolutely mortifying, but then we stop, think it's not so bad and bust out laughing? It's the best. Laughing reminds us that we're all human. Some of the best philosophers are comedians. They know what's up! It's all about making each other laugh! If we're having a bad day, it's nice to call up that friend we know could cheer us up if we need a little help. It's usually the most humbled and funny friend that we have, somebody who makes us laugh, as well as lend an open ear.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Ecosystems & Deep Ecology
1) What do you think about the "eight-point Deep Ecology Platform"?
The 8-point Deep Ecology Platform takes a more scientific approach to looking at humans and how they interact with the ecosystem. It refers to humans as if they were part of the ecosystem and not above it. I'm not too familiar with ecology, but the system seems like another way for humans who need that scientific perspective to better understand that we are responsible for the outcome of the holistic world around us as a part of us. I'm not sure that I whole-heartedly agree with the approach, but that's only because I don't need a well-written scientific approach to make me understand the issues at hand. It should be common knowledge!
2) Can you explain why "Ecoysystems are both strong and fragile"?
Ecosystems are made of many fragile elements, which makes it strong. Like anything and everything, strength and fragility are involved; it's a balance and a very healthy one. Anything strong can break and anything that breaks can be made strong again. A rock can be split open by water. The water was once softened by heat, but then hardened by coldness. Eventually,the once solid rock will turn into sand.
3) How would you assess the "end goals" of Social Ecology?
The end goals of Social Ecology is to determine the best ways for humans to live in their environment, socially, politically, personally and ethically. I don't think that there is a beneficial way to determine that for us right now. I think we have a lot of work to do since we've created a paradox for us to live in when it comes to how we use "our" natural resources and continue to destroy them. I/We would have to redefine Social Ecology to live in peace with our surroundings and to assess the end goal because I don't think that we have a solid one in place right now.
The 8-point Deep Ecology Platform takes a more scientific approach to looking at humans and how they interact with the ecosystem. It refers to humans as if they were part of the ecosystem and not above it. I'm not too familiar with ecology, but the system seems like another way for humans who need that scientific perspective to better understand that we are responsible for the outcome of the holistic world around us as a part of us. I'm not sure that I whole-heartedly agree with the approach, but that's only because I don't need a well-written scientific approach to make me understand the issues at hand. It should be common knowledge!
2) Can you explain why "Ecoysystems are both strong and fragile"?
Ecosystems are made of many fragile elements, which makes it strong. Like anything and everything, strength and fragility are involved; it's a balance and a very healthy one. Anything strong can break and anything that breaks can be made strong again. A rock can be split open by water. The water was once softened by heat, but then hardened by coldness. Eventually,the once solid rock will turn into sand.
3) How would you assess the "end goals" of Social Ecology?
The end goals of Social Ecology is to determine the best ways for humans to live in their environment, socially, politically, personally and ethically. I don't think that there is a beneficial way to determine that for us right now. I think we have a lot of work to do since we've created a paradox for us to live in when it comes to how we use "our" natural resources and continue to destroy them. I/We would have to redefine Social Ecology to live in peace with our surroundings and to assess the end goal because I don't think that we have a solid one in place right now.
Restoring the American Bison to its Rightful Range
1) How would you prioritize the reintroduction of the American Bison?
Education would be the first priority. It's already in place for the Lakota to reintroduce their first language and culture, so I think this would be included in their priorities. I think it would be highly effective for Natives like Lakota, as well as anybody interested, to take those lessons to the rest of the nation.
I understand that the American Bison are no longer considered endangered, but places like Montana should recognize that this animal is sacred to the land. Obviously, not every state is as dedicated to this cause as some are, but that needs to change and that comes with education.
On top of this, I think it's funny that states have their own symbolic flower and that it's illegal to pick most of them. Why is it so hard to understand that animals are just as important, if not more, to the country, not just the "silly" little state? Our priorities are waaaaaay way backward!!!
2) How would you assess the "New pill promises to reduce breast cancer risk"?
How I feel about pills in general has a negative opinion from me about the pill in general. Women tricking their bodies into thinking they're pregnant isn't my idea of healthy. Now, men doing it?
Imagine this - "Hey baby, don't worry about it. I've been taking this pill so you don't have to worry about getting pregnant." Yeah right! Who would trust that guy? Not me!
These pills haven't only promised to reduce breast cancer, cramps, spotting, 7-day periods and babies, but they also can't promise that they won't cause blood clots, prevent STIs, wreckless behavior or babies (only 97% if taken properly). So, how bout that? A pill to help reduce breast cancer? Forget our diets and the fact that breast cancer may just run in the family. I guess I'm S.O.L! This pill doesn't exist to me; it's not an option. The best I can do is eat healthy, exercise and have fun, period (no pun intended).
Education would be the first priority. It's already in place for the Lakota to reintroduce their first language and culture, so I think this would be included in their priorities. I think it would be highly effective for Natives like Lakota, as well as anybody interested, to take those lessons to the rest of the nation.
I understand that the American Bison are no longer considered endangered, but places like Montana should recognize that this animal is sacred to the land. Obviously, not every state is as dedicated to this cause as some are, but that needs to change and that comes with education.
On top of this, I think it's funny that states have their own symbolic flower and that it's illegal to pick most of them. Why is it so hard to understand that animals are just as important, if not more, to the country, not just the "silly" little state? Our priorities are waaaaaay way backward!!!
2) How would you assess the "New pill promises to reduce breast cancer risk"?
How I feel about pills in general has a negative opinion from me about the pill in general. Women tricking their bodies into thinking they're pregnant isn't my idea of healthy. Now, men doing it?
Imagine this - "Hey baby, don't worry about it. I've been taking this pill so you don't have to worry about getting pregnant." Yeah right! Who would trust that guy? Not me!
These pills haven't only promised to reduce breast cancer, cramps, spotting, 7-day periods and babies, but they also can't promise that they won't cause blood clots, prevent STIs, wreckless behavior or babies (only 97% if taken properly). So, how bout that? A pill to help reduce breast cancer? Forget our diets and the fact that breast cancer may just run in the family. I guess I'm S.O.L! This pill doesn't exist to me; it's not an option. The best I can do is eat healthy, exercise and have fun, period (no pun intended).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
