A Curious Statistical Anomaly

Wow, I sat glued to my seat for these first three episodes of Children of Earth. We’d been catching up with Torchwood via Netflix and though things started a bit rough in season one they’ve improved steadily as the cast found their footing. I was really upset when one of the characters got killed but I cheered when one of the others finally, finally, died for keeps. So, I was looking forward to the next season.

We’d been spacing them out one disk of the show and a couple of movies between then back again to another disk. I’d forgotten just how intense British drama can be. The tension built steadily from the first to the second and now the third and ends on a shocking cliffhanger. It’s times like these that I wish we had one of the multiple disk plans but, no. Ordinarily, I’m very happy with our one disk at a time unlimited plan — but now I have to wait to send out this disk and then wait for the next one to come.

If you’ve seen the ending of Season 3 don’t spoil it for me. There are very few US TV dramas that are as nakedly brutal as some of the British shows. I’m not talking so much the story lines as their delving into the really human issues. In this case children. What kind of government would turn over 12 children to an alien race as a gift? In the setup, 12 children from an orphanage were given as a gift to an alien race 456. Now it’s the present and the aliens are back. You can guess what the first thing the government tries to do–I’m sure you got it in one. Hide the evidence of what they did in 1965.

I find myself thinking that as awful as that was — after what was done by this country under our previous government that I’m not really surprised that a government would do such a thing. I think over the last few decades I’ve seen things done by various governments that have put the bar for base and horrible acts pretty low. I’ve lost faith that government actually works for the good of the people they represent. Maybe that’s why I find Torchwood, a show about a secret government sort-of agency that works without oversight to be so absorbing. Fighting aliens and stuff — not so much. But lying to the citizens and covering up their mistakes — that, unfortunately, I don’t have trouble believing in.

Wonder what the popularity of these shows says about us — people/humans/citizens of Earth? Don’t know but I wonder if we actually learn from them and keep a closer eye on our representatives? Those who speak for us without asking us what we think about things. I know I tend to be a bit more concerned about what my leaders are saying about “us” to others and most of the time it’s attitudes that I certainly don’t want to be associated with. But then that’s me. Maybe other people really don’t care or agree with what’s going on in the world of government whatever.

When the cellphone craze first started many, many years ago. I looked into getting one and looked at the prices and walked away.

Years later, I was living in Maryland and traveling in the DC area, and often wouldn’t be able to make it to appointments on time due to traffic. I figured having a phone with me would be great to let people know I was going to be late. It was only the polite thing to do. What I wanted was a phone that I could use in an emergency and I didn’t want a contract. I wanted a pay as you go phone. I asked at those kiosks in the mall and got laughed at and regaled with the refrain, “what planet do you live on?” But I kept my eye out and checked the cellphone areas of stores and found the Virgin phones. Perfect. Buy the phone and get a card of minutes. Activate and you’re all set until your minutes run out and you buy more. That worked for years. The coverage wasn’t great but it worked in major cities so it was also good when we went to conventions.

Now years later we have cellphones and a plan. We don’t use them much and only with other people on our plan — ’cause the minutes are then free — and for emergencies. Why? Because I see no reason to pay for an incoming call when the caller is paying for the call — that’s called double billing and as far as I’m concerned should be illegal (it’s a way to scam customers and bilk them of money). I don’t like it. But when I try to talk to people about the unfairness of this you’d think I grew a second head or something — a reaction similar to the one I got when I looked for a pay-as-you-go phone (and now just about all the carriers have a version of this).

But today, I found an article in the New York Times by DAVID POGUE entitled, “The Irksome Cellphone Industry“. Evidently, I’m not the only one that thinks there’s something wrong with the way cellphone carriers treat their customers. He also doesn’t like the double billing for calls and text messages.

He also has this to say about the exorbitant rates for overseas calls:

INTERNATIONAL CALLING Dear cellphone-carriers: Using Skype or iChat or Google Voice, I can place a crystal-clear computer-to-computer overseas call for nothing. Chat with China, or gab with Greenland, for hours, for free.

Or if I want to call phone to phone (instead of computer to computer), I can sign up for Google Voice or Skype Out, where I’ll pay 2 cents a minute to call China.

Why, then, am I still billed an astonishing $1.50 to $5 a minute to call these countries from my cellphone?

Surely the zero-cost technology that’s available to Skype and Google is also available to the world’s cell carriers. In other words, there’s no practical reason that cell carriers (ours and the overseas ones) should charge so much — only a greedy reason.

I use Skype when talking to our UK editor and our Canadian editor. Crystal clear communications and no charge for computer to computer other than the special headset I had to buy because I have an older model laptop. The drawback is I have to be at the laptop to get or make a call and I can’t just walk away to get coffee or a drink. But hey, the price is right for the call. Why can’t cellphone companies manage the same technology? Calls overseas on my cell should be the regular minutes for the call just as it is for local and long distance.

But, what brings this to my notice right now is that Congress, you know those elected officials that are supposed to be doing what’s best for the country and its citizens instead of what’s best for their election or pocketbooks, are debating what to do about the cellphone exclusivity agreements. It’s the reason you can’t have an iphone unless you get a contract with AT&T. That’s pretty much it. I agree with Progue, it’s mostly an “Why can’t I get an iphone with Verizon or Sprint” debate. As much as I might like an iphone, I can deal with my disappointment (and believe me my disappointment is really severe, no joke).

What we really need is Congress to investigate and do something about the other problems that consumers have with cellphone agreements and companies. Shouldn’t they be looking out for us once in a while — and I mean the guys to elect them to office. If the people are happy and treated decently and fairly the companies will do okay anyway. I thought that the American way was to be fair, honest, and provide the best product or service at the best price. Some days, I feel that it’s not the best product or service at the best price it’s whatever the company can get from you because you can’t fight back and take or leave it.

Something needs to be done about the injustices and greed in business. Making the terms of service fair and honest and understandable would be a great start. Meanwhile, I can live with my disappointment in not being able to have an iphone.

What about you? Are you happy with your service? Content? Or just living with it?

I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen a crew member exposed to lethal radiation in science fiction stories and the doc just loads up the anti-radiation serum and gives them a shot and everything is looking good. In movies and TV, I’m sure you’ve seen it. Just the other night we were watching a Battlestar Galactica DVD and the planet had high radiation levels and Starbuck, Helo, and Boomer just dosed themselves with the anti-radiation serum at regular intervals.

Now it looks like science has caught up with fiction. Ynet News has a story on Cure for radiation sickness found? by Ronen Bergman. The medication developed by Professor Andrei Gudkov – Chief Scientific Officer at Cleveland BioLabs has immediate real life implications for people who have or need to be exposed to high levels of radiation. From the article:

Gudkov’s discovery may also have immense implications for cancer patients by enabling doctors to better protect patients against radiation. Should the new medication enable cancer patients to be treated with more powerful radiation, our ability to fight the disease could greatly improve.

How the discovery came about is one of those lucky ideas that sometimes happen when the right conditions come together.

The process that led up to the medical innovation dates back to 2003, when Professor Gudkov came up with the idea of using protein produced in bacteria found in the intestine to protect cells from radiation.

Tests so far on mice and monkeys look like this is the “real deal”. If approved after being moved to the fast track, this would be a preventative medication not a cure but it would be safe and easily injected. The possible uses could be a miracle for cancer patients, workers in the nuclear industry, astronauts and space workers, and many others such as governments who wish to stockpile medications — just in case the worst case scenario of MAD comes knocking.

In fact, if this drug manages to hold up to its promise, it could mean that space flight and/or long-term habitation of space stations and on ships heading to Mars (for example) would have less of a problem with radiation that would other wise limit our chances of success. It opens up a lot of possibilities that were previously unavailable to us because of the radiation exposure the crews would face.

What are your thoughts? And please read the original article before commenting?

It was 40 years ago today that man landed on the Moon.  We did it.  We wanted to get there before the Russians and put all the energy and enthusiasm into getting a man on the moon first our priority.  I remember that day, watching TV and holding my breath as the craft began its decent.  It was a momentous event.  One that would make the history books.

Ernest Lilley, Sr. Editor for TechRevu.com, also remembers that exciting day and he’s written a prose poem commemorating his memories called “Moonfall“.

Google is celebrating this occasion with the release of an update to Google Earth allowing us to take our own trip to the Moon. You can download Google Moon for free here.

To learn more about Google Moon, take a look at this video:

Now if only NASA can get itself to get fired up about exploring space with the same dedication and attention to getting the job done as it did when we decided to go to the moon. I vote for men living on Mars. It’s the most likely planet to support human life and it’s about time we started thinking about getting some of our eggs out of this very fragile basket.

Okay, I admit it. I’m overweight. I’m working on adding a lot more exercise into my daily life, well as much as I can with chronic pain and fibromyalgia. I do between 15-45 minutes on the Wii Fit each day. Lately, I’ve been also walking down to the mailbox (1/4 miles from the house) and a few times a week, depending on the temperature, Hyperion and I have been taking about a 1.5 to 2 mile walk in the early evening. So, I’m not a slouch with the exercise and I eat healthy and lite — mostly.

But I’m fairly comfortable with myself though if I lose some weight my knees would probably throw a big party with carrots and celery. But then I get the confusing messages from the “world”. Airlines want to charge extra for heavy people to fly because it bothers people to sit next to a fat person. You know what bothers me — people who douse themselves with perfume and fly, people who put their seats all the way back without even thinking about the person behind them who just lost 1/3 of their space and most likely can’t read unless they rest the book on the reclining person’s head, people who feel they must tell you their life story even when you get your book our and open it. Heck, I’ve sat next to skinny people who spread themselves all out over half my seat and their own and half the one next to them as they take off their shoes and pull their legs up into their seat with their knees on my seat arm and in my lap. No, I don’t think overweight people are the problem — I think seats designed for a 1920’s butt that hasn’t been updated since is the problem, but then there would be fewer seats per plane, flying would be more relaxing, and flight attendants would have an easier time dealing with passengers — hmmm….

But mostly, people in the news and in advertising seem to think heavy people are lazy and don’t do anything. Most of the people I know are overweight. Of course they also work 12-14 hours per day and are on call the rest of the day doing IT work of one sort or another. Add the long days to long commutes and there’s not a lot of time to eat responsibly — you grab meals when you can and take what you can get. Most run on caffeine and sugar — that’s the problem for most Americans. We work long hours with long commutes and very little free time. Of course, I work at home but I still work long hours and have health issues so ….

But, I found this gem of an article in the New York Times, Excess Pounds, but Not Too Many, May Lead to Longer Life.  Evidently, skinny people and very heavy people may have health problems from weight issues but moderately heavy and normal (whatever that means) people live longer. There was a similar article about the study, Can A Little Extra Weight Protect People From Early Death? Underweight, Extremely Obese Die Earlier Than People Of Normal Weight in Science Daily. Yeah, for this new study.

I’ve known some skinny people with really bad health problems and some normal people and some heavy people. I may agree that carrying added weight can put some strain on the organs, but then so can a lot of other factors. You just can’t generalize about people on simply one factor and expect it to be taken seriously. I doubt if there is a single factor you could use that starts with “All whatever people are ____” and have it be true for every case. It isn’t true when you use race as that whatever and it certainly isn’t true when you use eye color, hair color, weight, or religion. People are too diverse and unique to use sweeping statements like that.

But I like this study because it found evidence that goes totally against what people have been saying for ages and seems to have some numbers to back it up. We need more studies to see just what being overweight does effect and these studies will hopefully be devoid of blame and accusations.

Today when I opened my online news source, I was greeted with an article about the FDA wanting to pull many of the prescribed painkillers containing acetaminophen off the market. Philly.com has this article Painkillers at a crossroads as FDA decision looms. The Globe and Mail had this article, U.S. FDA recommends pulling some painkillers off the market. There was an article with an opposing view that was rather mild in my opinion.

In the Globe and Mail article, it said:

Despite years of educational campaigns and other federal actions, acetaminophen remains the leading cause of liver failure in the U.S., according to the FDA.

Panelists cited FDA data indicating 60 per cent of acetaminophen-related deaths are related to prescription products. Acetaminophen is also found in popular over-the-counter medications like Tylenol and Excedrin.

Those of you who read my blog know that I suffer from chronic pain. I found this bit about “years of educational campaigns and other federal actions” to be laughable. At one point, before my arthritis was diagnosed, the family practice doc I was seeing didn’t want to do anything about it because I was simply fat and needed to lose weight. The pain had gotten so bad that I was scaring myself with the number of Tylenol that I was taking just to manage to walk with a cane. I made an appointment and told her how much Tylenol I was taking and that I was concerned with liver damage. She laughed told me I could double or triple the dose and to just lose weight.

At the time, I was well below liver damage’s (LD 50) but that level has been lowered twice since and now I’d be just a bit below. I was so angry. I left the doctor’s office and went to see my chiropractor without an appointment. They took a look at my swollen knee and referred me to a specialist (at the time I couldn’t see another doctor without a referral). After seeing the specialist, I was diagnosed as having arthritis in both knees and later the added bonus of it was aggravating my fibromyalgia — a double whammy.

The point is that I knew more about the drugs I was taking than the malpractice-suit-waiting-to-happen doctor that I’d been seeing. Needless to say, I also changed doctors that day.

The second point is that most doctors, though they write the scripts, are not experts in drugs, drug interactions, and doses — most of the time they rely on the pharmacist to flag if something they prescribe is going to conflict with something you already have, or needs special information or training for the patient. Remember, there is a reason that so many pharmacies ask that you keep ALL you Rxs with them. It’s also the same reason they staple those informational notes to the Rx’s bag and ask if you have any questions.

If you take prescriptions be sure you understand how to take them and how often and whether you need to keep taking them if you feel better or should quit. Always ask questions if you don’t understand or feel confused. It’s your body and your life — you are the best person to take responsibility for keeping yourself healthy and safe.

Doctors have years of schooling, internship, and practice under their belts but, at heart, they are people. They know more about their fields that we ever will, but when you have a chronic condition, it’s worth your while to learn about it and ask questions, because no doctor can be an expert in every condition and disease that will walk through their office door. Mistakes and accidents happen.

My story about the doctor that suggested I take a near lethal dose of a Tylenol is a case in point. If I hadn’t read about the dangers of Tylenol/acetaminophen and liver damage, I just might have followed her suggestions. Luckily, I didn’t.

Do I think these painkillers with acetaminophen should be pulled from the market? NO. A resounding NO! Here in America many people live with pain — chronic, near crippling pain. Most people who deal with pain are under medicated and ignored. They need help. If these drugs are pulled, there are other that can be used, but we don’t have access to them in the US. Unless the FDA is going to allow alternatives they should consider leaving these on the market with strongly worded cautions and plainly worded Dosage Limits.

Even more important — the FDA should make sure that pharmacists, doctors, and the public have access to this education and training that they THINK they have done over the years. I’ve heard more stories similar to my “ignorant” doctor (used with the meaning that it can be cured) than I have of the other kind. I think information on drugs should be easier to find online, with easy to understand material explaining doses, uses, and contra-indications. Most dosage info online is convoluted or needs a chemical degree to figure out what’s too much and what’s safe — we need better resources for patients and doctors.

Mostly, we need better pain management. I have my good days and my bad.  And I do it mostly without painkillers.  But today, I slipped and fell, landing full force on my knee — it sure would be nice to take something, but I can’t, because I might need it more later on and I can’t waste the few painkillers I have. (I’m not the only chronic pain sufferer who has to balance need this way, and the sad part is none of us should have to.)

I read the reports about how awful piracy is for the the artists who create the intellectual properties that are downloaded or copied.  Then there’s the “Don’t steal our property” commercials and the lawsuits by RIAA and MPAA and similar or related international agencies.  However, I’ve long suspected the numbers that these groups float around regarding the loss of monies due to downloading.  This article in the Guardian by Ben Goldacre (Friday 5 June 2009), actually tracked down the genesis of one of those sets of numbers. He found that the numbers referred to were actually from a one page press release and not from a scientific study as was implied in their presentation.

I’m not surprised. I’m sure piracy goes on and that movies and music are being ripped off, but this is usually by big businesses who stamp out thousands of copies and sell them very cheaply. In fact, we don’t go after them or actually prosecute — or at least not to the degree that the various governments go after college students and individuals. I suspect the reason is because money changes hands and monies are paid into coffers somewhere that make it worth while to look the other way.

Okay, I’ll admit to being a cynic with regards to this topic. I’ve read enough of the online copies of testimony and trials to believe that lawyers and judges seldom know what they’re talking about. Expert witness (usually on the side of the victim in the suit — the college student or individual being sued by the corporation) are indeed experts and put forth their finding clearly, succinctly and with examples and statistical analysis backing them up. On the other hand the expert witness put forth by the corporation bringing the suit are almost exclusively NOT experts. By their own testimony they don’t do the research themselves, can’t explain the results, and bluster when pressed for details. What this country (USA) needs is expert witnesses who work for the judges to explain to them the merits of the testimony of expert1 vs expert2 vs known research in the field. Sometimes the cases, from reading transcripts, are truly cut and dried and the judgment is — surprise — totally opposite of what one would expect.

The point is that people have an inherent concept  of intellectual property and actual most respect it, and have no intention of stealing an electronic version of a work. The problems arise when common sense and law doesn’t agree. People (and I’m using this generic term because it’s a collective term) believe that when they buy a music CD, video tape, or DVD, that they own it. Thus they feel that they can watch it on any machine they want to. They also feel that since they own, say a music CD, that they should be able to rip the songs off it and play them on their MP3 player while they’re away from their CD player since they own it and they can’t listen to both at the same time — so that it’s okay to do this.

MPAA and RIAA, for example, believe that you don’t own the CD, DVD, or whatever.  They claim that you just bought a license to use it in the manner that they deem appropriate. As you can see this is the basis of the problem. If what a person buys doesn’t belong to them and they can’t use it as they see fit why bother to buy it; or sell it for that matter.

If I rent a movie, I expect to return it without making any copy because I didn’t buy it and I don’t own it. I believe from conversations with many people that most, if not all, people feel the same. It’s not ours, we just borrowed it — like a library copy so we return it to the owner– the person we rented it from.   It makes sense.  But if you go to the store and buy a DVD or CD, you would expect that, the media being in many cases breakable, making a copy of the CD or DVD to put aside in case the purchased copy is destroyed or broken is okay. Unfortunately, the courts seem to say “No”, at least under the new (now old) Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Since you don’t own what you bought, even though you have a sales receipt — you can’t make copies or move it to another medium for ease of use. That’s counter-intuitive for many people and thus more and more people acting on common sense are actually committing crimes against intellectual property.

[Hyperion: If RIAA/MPAA didn’t act in such a counter-intuitive and heavy handed fashion, they might actually have people on their side.  Instead their flagrant violations of common sense and real world custom cause the people who understand the technology and culture to turn against them.  As someone (I forget who) said: What kind of sane business model consists of suing your best customers?]

Somehow it seems that when things go from hard copies to digital, the courts and the law don’t see them as being equivalent.  Somehow being digital makes them all nervous and scared. Then they start talking about things like digital crowbars, forgetting completely that crowbars are not illegal to own in the real world. Just because a criminal sometimes uses a crowbar to commit a crime doesn’t make everyone who owns one a criminal but the digital crowbar argument says if you own a digital crowbar you are in fact a criminal — even if you never use it to commit a crime. I have yet to hear of a lawyer bringing that point up against the digital crowbar scare tactic — though maybe I missed it somewhere.

My belief is that people are basically law abiding and that they use internalized morals to determine their behavior. I think the courts have been bamboozled into believing that piracy, intellectual property theft, and loss of revenues is far larger than it really is, because they have been lied to or mislead by agencies who cheated by not doing the research they purport to have done or who have knowingly supplied incorrect numbers and statistics to bolster their arguments.

In most documented cases, a person downloading a copy of a movie from a site, wasn’t going to buy it anyway. If you look at who is being taken to court, they’re usually low income persons who can’t fight back. I’ve yet to see them go after the big pirates — no they have money, lawyers and can fight back. (Cynicism again, yeah big time.)

In most of the cases (found and investigated by real researchers), it’s found that people who downloaded something illegally either then bought the movie or CD or got rid of it because they didn’t like it. Net result is that it wouldn’t have been a sale anyway (or there was actually a sale). I would imagine that most of the people who have a NetFlix subscription or belong to one of the movie rental places do so for the same reason. Why buy something you haven’t seen and don’t know if you’d want to see it over and over again.

In fact most reports show that RIAA’s bottom line has gone up since file sharing sites started having musical downloads. Why?  Because more people bought the music that they heard. There is a reason why music stores have those earphones and places where you can hear snippets of the music you are thinking of buying.

Instead of changing their business model to take into account the way people actually purchase and use media, these corporations are trying to use the legal route to force everyone to do things as they were done before the advent of digital media. (Of course it doesn’t help that many artists who couldn’t get the time of day from these big corporations, are now, because of the internet, able to develop a following and sell their material directly to their listeners/fans.

[Hyperion: When RIAA isn’t demanding that the music be taken down, despite having no authority to represent these artist’s interests and, in fact, acting completely in opposition to said interests.  But then it isn’t about the artists … it’s about the control.  Yeah, Gayle isn’t the only cynical one in the family.   But that doesn’t mean we’re wrong.]

I still think if I buy something I own it — too bad the big corps don’t feel the same way.

My father was in the Army during WWII. My grandfather was in the Navy. One of my uncles was in the Marines and I think the other was in the Army but he didn’t live in the same state and I hardly know him, so I’m not sure. When I lived in Mexico, Maine we’d go to the cemetery on Memorial Day or the day before to make sure there were flowers and a flag on my father’s grave, and later also on my grandfather’s. I spoke with my mother yesterday and she put a wreath on each of the graves of our family members.

Memorial Day was once called Decoration Day and it was a time to reflect on those who had been lost with an emphasis on those who’d lost their lives protecting their country — a day to remember Veterans. Time passes and now it seems with hardly anyone staying in one place anymore that the graveside laying of wreaths and flowers and leaving a flag have past. My mother was complaining that when she was at the cemetery that there were hardly any flowers on any of the graves. I reminded her that most of the youth have had to move away for jobs, and graves are now handled by the groundskeepers.

I’m in Maryland and my son is in Rhode Island. When my mother moves down here, in the sometime future, there will be little family left in the town I was born in — an aunt,  a niece,  a nephew, a sister-in-law once removed, and their families. The graves will probably then just get the usual groundskeeping and maybe a veterans group will remember to place a flag by the headstones of veterans.

Memorial Day has changed. It seems to me now that it’s a celebration of family. The living — with picnics and bbqs. And, as is usual at family gatherings, remembrances of those who are no longer with us except in our memories and our stories. The newspapers are filled with stories about how the holiday has lost its significance. I don’t think so, I think it has broadened its scope to include remembrances of all the fallen no matter how or when they past from present tense to loving memory.

Each of us, whether a veteran of a war (current or past), must do our part to preserve our nation’s heritage and now to restore our country to one that is looked up to as a beacon of hope and freedom — from oppression, from tyranny, from the misuse of power, and from torture and the abuse of human rights. Over the last few years, those “froms” have becomes “fors” and we, as a nation, need to stand up and put our country back on track. We’ve lost, as a nation, credibility in the eyes of the world and each of us must do our part to see that we never lose sight of the rights and freedoms guaranteed for all in our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. Those documents have always applied to all citizens of this country and anyone under its jurisdiction and we need to reaffirm our commitment to the principles that our founding fathers saw as the underpinning for our government.

In this fight to regain our status and credibility, we may not all risk our lives but we all have a duty to do our part to watch our elected officials and stay informed of their actions on our behalf and to make sure that we once again become a “shining beacon of freedom” for the world.

Those that gave their lives to defend this country did so because they held that freedom and those principles to be more important than their own lives.  When we remember them on this one day of the year, shouldn’t we also think of the kind of country that held such meaning for them?  Doing the right thing can be hard.  It’s far easier to just let things go and say that there was nothing that you could do.  I think the generations of Americans who have fought to the death against those that would currupt our country deserve a little more.  They gave their lives … is a letter or e-mail to your congress critter really that much of an inconvience?