At age 69 Geri Taylor realized that the little memory lapses were more than just the vagaries of aging when she could no longer recognize her own face in the mirror.
For most, the path of Alzheimer’s takes eight to ten years but for each the way is slightly different. But no matter how determined someone might be in the beginning, the disease will eventually have its way.
You’ve seen them on TV. In fact, if you watch more than a few minutes your odds of seeing one are pretty much 100%. What are they? Ads for prescription medications. They tout some science, a distressingly long list of side-effects and tell you to “ask your doctor”. Their ubiquity has created a situation where patients ask for a drug by name and far too often get it, regardless of whether or not they have the condition the drug claims to treat. Italics because in many cases these new, and often expensive drugs don’t necessarily offer improvements over existing ones. But they do offer increased revenue for the drug companies and contribute to the rising cost of healthcare.
Unlike “Dr.” Phil, Dr. Mehmet Oz is a real, practicing doctor (and surgeon). But that’s where the differences end. They both dispense a lot of questionable advice. How questionable? Less than one-third of it can be backed up by even modest medical evidence. Nearly 4 in 10 of the assertions made on the hit show appear to be made on the basis of no evidence at all.
So it’s not all bad, right? Well… Further fact-checking of Dr. Oz and his on-air guests found legitimate studies related to another 11% of the recommendations made on the show. Unfortunately, the show’s recommendations ran counter to the medical literature.
Netting it out: For recommendations in The Dr. Oz Show, evidence supported 46%, contradicted 15%, and was not found for 39%. It’s literally a crap shoot to follow his advice. Is that the kind of odds you want regarding your health?
We know the US government did a lot of testing of atomic bombs in the years after WWII and that many of these tests were done above ground. That these tests were pumping dangerous levels of fallout into the environment was less well-known, except to Eastman Kodak and other photographic film companies.
Kodak was first made aware of the fallout issue in 1946 when customers complained of fogged film. Investigation showed that Indiana corn husks used as packing materials were contaminated with the radioactive isotope iodine-131 (I-131). They told no one.
Then in January of 1951, following a test in Nevada, Kodak scientists detected spiked radiation levels in a snowfall that measured 25 times the norm (Kodak measured 10,000 counts per minute of radiation, compared to recent unaffected snowfalls that registered only 400). Note, this was 1,600 miles away from the test site. This time they quietly informed the Atomic Energy Commission and an industry group of their findings. The AEC did basically nothing until Kodak threatened to sue them, at which time they promised to keep Kodak and other photographic film companies aware of when they were testing along with sending meteorological information to help predict when fallout might reach them. The AEC told no one else.
The government’s statistics show that the mortality rate for whites between the ages of 45 and 54 with a high school education or less rose dramatically between 1999 and 2013, after falling even more sharply for two decades before that. But when researchers attempted to publish a study on it in the Journal of the AMA and the New England Journal of Medicine both of them rejected the study.
Yes, by its very nature this is potentially a political issue but to ignore it for that reason denies a significant part of the population the chance for help.
Like all comics, Dilbert has shown a marked decline in quality over its lifetime. Still, there are the occasional gems. Nano Robots Are The New Health Plan follows Adams’ usual method of exaggerating something to the point it becomes totally relatable but it’s perhaps not as far-fetched as you might think.
Nanotech might still be in its toddler phase but the ability of electronic devices to detect levels of chemicals in our bodies exists today. It’s not hard to imagine such sensors being scaled down to the point where we could have them inserted into us to monitor in realtime. When that happens, what will stop employers from mandating them?
Keep in mind many employers require you to have health insurance now. And those requirements often include mandatory yearly physicals. If these health monitors end up cheap enough they may be cost-effective compared to physicals. Why wouldn’t your company require you to have them? A violation of your personal liberty you say? The response to that is “you have the personal liberty to get a job somewhere else.”
Perhaps they’ll allow you to access some of the data on your phone (or watch). Then you’ll get messages like “Your stress level is elevated, stop drinking coffee” or “Blood pressure above maximum allowable level, 15 minute meditation required to continue”. Think of it as your company-sponsored personal trainer (who rats you out when you don’t follow orders).
Nothing gets “conservatives”* riled up more than government regulations on businesses and that’s done a lot to keep funding away from agencies like OSHA. Long-standing lack of funding has resulted in regulations of silica and other toxic substances being out of date and almost impossible to fix. So workers are dying thanks to 40 year-old limits that everyone knows are way too high.
Near the end of my father’s life a chest x-ray showed he had what appeared to be lesions on his lungs. The doctors wondered if he was a smoker. He was, but had quit some 40 years earlier (when my mom was diagnosed with lung cancer). The more likely culprit was exposure to hazards on the job as a telephone company worker, especially in one building that had burned extensively in a fire. A number of FDNY firefighters on that incident had developed cancers later and my dad was convinced it was from the arsenic they used to coat wires to keep the rats from gnawing on them. Between that and the construction dust kicked up during the recovery I can only imagine what he was exposed to.
*Should anyone be fighting for the right to kill workers because it’s cheaper than not killing them? Asking for a friend.