Obama's victory: The triumph of science over opinion

We all value our own opinions, however haphazardly they are formed. Most of us defer to someone we know who has training in a field, and has a right to have an opinion in that field based on years of education and experience. I have an undergraduate degree in economics and political science. I have experience in accounting and policy research. I was in the military.

I hesitate to comment on global warming or nuclear issues, as I don't have experience in those areas, and anything I say would be an uninformed comment.

But there are many people who defer to their own haphazardly formed opinions, which is called "common sense" in the everyday parlance. It is not always common sense. My grandmother told me it was common sense that sex caused babies, and one could not expect otherwise. She died shortly after I announced that I was pregnant for the third time, so I never got a chance to disabuse her of the notion that I believed that nonsense. ( I had no subsequent children.)

When it comes to science, there has been a disdain for science in the US and even in Canada in the last few years. It comes with the Conservative dogma. That dogma has waned in the United States with the decline of Bush and the catastrophic market and economic crash that ensued because of the decline of regulation. Science was pooh-poohed in favour of dogma, with other catastrophic repercussions around the world, especially in countries in Africa, Asia and South America. Again, birth control is an example, as well as the use of condoms to reduce AIDS transmission.

Science must always be used to combat ignorance and superstition. Mr. Obama has served notice that science is on the upswing as the basis for decision making again. Where dogma once prevailed, as in the mantra of deregulation, the science of limited regulation will once again prevail.

We're coming back from the dark ages again.

Mr. Obama

Even Harvard guys like low carb

It's refreshing to read and hear that Harvard, Duke and other high quality universities are finally on the low carb track.

Most of the foods that we should eat are low carb. For example, beets, cabbage, swiss chard (I don't like it and my mom tries to get me to eat some fresh from her garden every fall), cinnamon, plums/prunes, pumpkin, sardines, blueberries....

Convenience foods aren't good for us. They are just convenient. We need more biochemistry, nutrition, physiology discussions on the blog sphere, so that people get the facts.

We've only been cultivating grains for about 7000 years, folks. They are not part of our nutritional history long enough that our body knows what to do with them other than to turn them to glucose, which of course is bad news.

Gary Taubes explains it so well

Watched his lecture at Berkeley again.

At the hour point, he cuts to the chase. Fat storage happens because of alpha glycerol phosphate, which is needed to bin fatty acids into triglycerides. AGP (my abbrev.) comes from burning glucose and nore is available to store fat when insulin levels are high. Want to store less fat? Keep insulin levels in the blood low. Take in less glucose.

Yalow and Berson in 1965 say "Insulin is the principal regulator of fat metabolism". Gary talks about how emaciated type I diabetics can be, as they no longer produce their own insulin. They have nothing to drive fat accumulation with. When treated with insulin therapy, Dr. Best (yes, that Dr. Best) describes how they develop adipose deposits in the stomach where the insulin is injected.

My husband and I started the South Beach Diet in late September 08. My husband has lost 25 pounds and his blood profile has improved so much his doctor is ecstatic. My husband's triglycerides are WAY down from where they were. The doctor had recommended South Beach. I have lost 17 pounds. Don't you hate men who always win in the weight loss game? My profile is improving as well. LDL and HDL levels close to normal.

It's the insulin, stupid.

Weight of the Evidence: Glycemic Index Doesn't Matter Much in Overall High-Carb Diet

Weight of the Evidence: Glycemic Index Doesn't Matter Much in Overall High-Carb Diet

Saw Twilight again! Yikes.

Don't know whether it was 5 or 6. Doesn't matter anymore. For my age group (40+) I'll bet I would win the prize. I just keep agreeing to go with any one of my friends who wants to go. The girls are laughing. And I'm not really a Twilight Mom, as my girls are in their 20s, and one will not go see the movie till its on DVD. (Doesn't like theatres....)

There are some universal reactions from all my friends. All have said how handsome Edward Cullen is. Not sure that translates directly to Rob Pattinson, as he looks different in person. (The hair.....)(the youth...as I have said before, he is younger than my youngest..) Everyone likes that the action is not too intense, no swearing, they like the "sexual" undertone (that one is hard to quantify, isn't it?) They like Bella. Most identify gaps in the story line that leave them a bit out in left field...but you cannot in 2 hours take hundreds of pages and cram them into a story line. People universally like the shots in the forest and in the meadow. Also the bedroom scene.....(we are all married women, some for several decades, and it brings back that memory of hot passion of the first romance/liaison...)

So this is a great love story. Hope the new director gets it right when they start on New Moon, which promises to be interesting. I'm wondering how they'll do the Italian portion, how they'll explain the Volturi -- it's a leap. That movie will have modern vampires, ancient vampires and the Quileute wolves to deal with. Hmmmm.

But many of my friends, all over 40, have bought New Moon. Will New Moon earn Summit another big bag of cash?

Personally, I liked Midnight Sun a lot, and think it could or should be finished (Go Stephenie) and either could have scenes cut into upcoming movies or done on its own, if she did finish it. Give her the money, someone. And release the DVD, Summit. Good Christmas present for us.

Rob Pattinson and Heath Ledger

I worry about Rob Pattinson, in a motherly way. He's younger than my youngest child. He's handsome, creative, musical, and by his own account, anxious. He describes getting sweaty palms when he thinks about the crowds he's facing in his new found fame and adoration. There is already a cult behind him. He's also a Brit in the American movie machine and in Los Angeles, where the ghosts of Marilyn Monroe, John Belushi, River Phoenix and countless others lurk. There are also many walking wounded, as Robert Downey, Jr., Kiefer Sutherland, Brittney Spears and Amy Winehouse attest to us every day on the covers of magazines. I worry about new-found fame and wealth, and what bad things will happen to Rob, because I remember Heath Ledger well. They seem to have the same intensity and hyperfocus. I saw a column somewhere that asked, "Is Rob Pattinson the new Heath Ledger?" Let's hope not. Heath was chewing on anti=anxiety drugs, oxycontin, oxycodone and other things in an effort to medicate himself against something. What was it? Anxiety that he wouldn't perform to the standard he wanted to? Against expectations of the industry of hangers-on who are dependent on the continuing light of the stars? Against his own personal demons in addition to all this? I hope Rob Pattinson has a good head on his shoulders and careful advisors. It would be heartbreaking to see it all go wrong, as it has so many times before.

Who is at fault here?

Re the Detroit automakers. Are the problems facing the industry caused by the workers or management, or a combination of both? If workers can only make the cars that come down the line, than those who made the production decisions are at fault for causing cars to be built that went unsold, or those who got into complicated and nonsensical financing schemes to keep a failing industry going. The autoworkers, while they should make decisions knowing that some may end their jobs, shouldn't be forced to give up their hard won protections. They need protection from the bad decisions of management, especially now.

Are people going to continue to buy cars? Without a doubt. For north american auto makers, they need to be different cars than the pickups, hummers and big SUVs that have gone before. Just as we have moved from the huge monster cars with big engines, we now need to move to fuel efficient cars. Detroit has to belatedly get with the program.

Labour costs are high, but it is a tedious job and labour is all most people have to sell. Automakers and all other manufacturers want to have people who can afford to buy the products they build, as Henry Ford knew well. Trying to steal their job security and buying power under the guise of financial crisis will only serve to prolong and exacerbate the same.