The Fed Grasps At Straws (#economics, #theFed, #RateDebate)

Here is a really stupid headline and story summary from the WSJ, which I believe is worth saving for posterity as it is indicative of the times in so many ways:

Federal Officials Say No Thanks to Negative Rates
Fed officials don’t think negative rates are needed in the U.S. because the economy and job market are improving and they are hoping they will never have to use them in the future given their uncertainty about whether the policy works.

They claim they don’t “need” negative rates because things are improving, but they won’t raise rates, which is what typically happens when they’re done subsidizing with monetary policy.

But despite their present judgment, they’re simply “hoping” they wont have to use them in the future, which suggests they’re not confident about their present judgment.

Meanwhile, the reason they’re hoping they won’t have to use them is because they don’t know if they work. So, they’d be willing to try something that has some chance of making things worse, in order to see if it has a chance of making things better.

So this is the era we live in: the central bank refuses to return things to “normal” while insisting things are on the mend, is open to conducting monetary science experiments on the economy despite initial misgivings, and reporters write stories about this chicanery as if these are all serious and respectable ideas to entertain. Couldn’t a bunch of Fed chimpanzees at the trading consoles have a reasonably good chance at improving upon this model?

Saturday Morning with a Nutritionist (#pregnancy #health #diet #nutrition)

One of the required classes at the birth center is Nutrition 101. Now, readers who are family/friends of ours know that we have some “particular” opinions on what is optimal nutrition! We tend to eat a more traditional diet, and we have been eating this way for about five or six years now. Nutrition (and being more strict about it) has only increased in significance for us as we’ve prepared for conception and pregnancy. I went to this class with pretty low expectations because I’ve heard and read the basic guidelines about what to/not to eat during pregnancy, and they often do not parallel the research I’ve done on optimal nutrition. I was pleasantly surprised!

The nutritionist who came to speak to us introduced her philosophy as primarily “paleo,” and she included references to Weston A Price throughout her talk. She said that she used to be a fitness coach but also suffered pretty severe cases of acne and poor health, despite following all the recommended regimens in the fitness world and experimenting with vegetarianism. Both unfortunately and fortunately, she got into a car accident and needed to see a chiropractor, who introduced to her a different way of eating. He asked for her for a food journal, to which she boasted that she was super healthy, eating microwavable meals, whole grain bagels with low fat cream cheese, Starbucks with coconut milk, etc. She credits him with changing her life because he was the one who showed her that not all fats are bad, but all processed foods are! Oh, bonus, she was a really good and interesting speaker who kept me engaged throughout her two hour talk 🙂

The key points that I thought was interesting and that reinforced my own nutrition principles:

  • Eat organic and locally grown — The chemicals that are used to treat the soil and plants are toxic, avoid as much as possible. Eating local means you’ll likely eat what is in season and optimally nutritious at that time. Eating ripe fruit/veggies versus eating produce that has been picked long before they’re ready, flash-frozen, and transported across the country means less interference and less “processed”! I am very thankful we live in California where fresh, clean produce is valued and available to us!
  • Eat cooked AND raw foods — Eating foods in its natural state helps preserve its nutritious potency! Furthermore, overcooked and burnt foods are actually toxic.
  • 80/20 rule — If you are able to follow a nutrient-dense diet 80% of the time, then it’s okay to indulge once in awhile. It’s not worth it to be stressed about what you eat, and it’s almost impossible to eat 100% clean anyway. The nutritionist did emphasize that even treats should be of high quality. For example, whole-fat, creamy ice cream versus fake, man-made “skinny cow” ice cream bars. I follow more of a 90/10 (or 95/5, on a good week…) rule because… Why not eat cleaner if you can?
  • Eat a variety — Nutrients are everywhere in fruits, veggies, dairy, meats, so to ensure that we get all the good vitamins our bodies need, we need to eat a variety of foods! Additionally, many vitamins and nutrients need each other to be better absorbed by our bodies (e.g., protein, Vitamin C, and zinc all work together to build collagen, helping our skin to bounce back from stretching during pregnancy 😉
  • Water — Drink approximately half your body weight in ounces. Just as how standardized tests are lame, standardized water recommendations are also lame!
  • From dietary habits to lifestyle — As your dietary habits change to be more traditional, optimal, and “primal,” you may find yourself making other lifestyle changes to become more like Grok! 😀

Some other things I learned and found valuable from this Nutrition class:

  • Apple cider vinegar for acid reflux — 2 teaspoons of ACB with 1-2 cups of water to supplement the stomach acid in digestion. I also drink kombucha, which helps a lot too. The nutritionist recommends consuming ahead of time if you know you’re going to have a big indulgent meal.
  • Vitamin C binge before delivery — This helps strengthen veins and can be found in the white parts of citrus fruits.
  • Good sources of sulfuric veggies — …include broccoli, cauliflower, and kale.
  • RAW MILK — While she could not loudly proclaim her support for this (I’m assuming for legal/certification reasons…), she mentioned that if a woman is used to drinking raw milk and can find a reputable source, it is absolutely necessary and beneficial to consume for conception and during pregnancy (and for life, I imagine!).

EDIT:

Funny thing I noticed: The nutritionist had brought some snacks for us to munch on during the seminar because it was early in the morning, and I guess she figured pregnant women are always snacking. She brought in a box of Annie’s cheese crackers, a box of Cliff whole grain chocolate chip protein bars, and a container of pre-chopped veggies with a container of ranch dressing. And then later, she used her box of Annie’s crackers as an example of questionable organic choices (I guess not all ingredients in organic Annie’s cheese crackers are organic?), and she recommended against processed, whole grains (aka a box of granola bars…).  The nutritionist seemed have thought a lot of things through… But not everything yet, apparently! 😉

Review – Before The Dawn (#evolution, #genetics, #anthropology, #history, #books)

Before the Dawn: Recovering the Lost History of Our Ancestors

by Nicholas Wade, published 2006

Evolution and history are not two distinct processes, with one following another like the change between royal dynasties. Rather, evolution and history overlap, with the historical period being overlaid on a still continuing process of evolutionary change. (pg. 272)

Something I always used to wonder about when reading history was the recurring theme of barbarian invasions of “civilized” societies striking from the frontiers. Why were there separate civilized and barbarian populations? And where did all these barbarians keep coming from, given that the explanation invariably given for their invasion was that they themselves were being invaded/pressured by other barbarians on their frontier? (Was it barbarians all the way down?) I purchased Wade’s “Before the Dawn” to try to better understand the debate about “race” — which is one chapter of twelve in the book — and ended up with a much better understanding of this perennial personal historical quandary, the book having offered a framework for understanding early human history and migration patterns and the way evolution played the keyboard simultaneously.

The most descriptive word that comes to mind when I think of this book is “sweeping”, which is both its strength and its weakness. This is very much a strategic book examining large trends that took place over vast geographic expanses and long periods of time, rather than a tactical examination of the various microphenomena involved, although there’s some of that, too. Concerning itself with the evolutionary changes which led to the splitting of the human and chimpanzee genetic lines 5 million years ago, and then the ensuing genetic changes and speciation of the pre-modern human genetic lines between 5 million and 50,000 years ago and then finally sorting out the geographic expansion and social and likely genetic transformation of modern human beings from 50,000 years ago to the present, the author surveys key findings and scientific developments since Darwin’s writings that have helped to piece together the early history of humanity. And while it’s supposed to be an introduction written for the knowledgeable layman, Wade nonetheless covers so much ground, so many academic controversies, so many studies and theories and oddly-named regions and eras and behavioral developments — the world’s scientific community seems to have an unresolved dilemma when it comes to naming things — that it is sometimes hard to keep up and remain focused on the broad narrative of which these items are a part.

The book has 12 chapters, simply named, which serve as essential themes explored:

  1. Genetics & Genesis
  2. Metamorphosis
  3. First Words
  4. Eden
  5. Exodus
  6. Stasis
  7. Settlement
  8. Sociality
  9. Race
  10. Language
  11. History
  12. Evolution

It’s a testament to either the astounding volume of detail in this book, or the limits of my own cognitive abilities, or both, that having just finished this book last night after picking it up just over a week ago, I couldn’t reliably tell you which parts of the story fit in each section, so I won’t bother trying to summarize it all here. Instead, I thought I’d mention just a few pieces that I found especially interesting.

First, the “out of Africa” moment. I didn’t realize that this was not one moment, with one group of people. It happened many times with many different groups of people who, according to the historical record, went many different ways from there, some traveling around the coasts and then into the interior of Asia (and eventually outlying islands and over the land bridge to North America and South America), others migrating through Southern and Northern Europe. Wade argues that they were strong mariners due to the navigation and spread throughout the south Pacific archipelago, but why weren’t they navigating the coasts of North Africa and the Mediterranean and transiting out of Africa directly into Southern Europe? Meanwhile, numerous other pre-modern humans such as the Neanderthals (Europe) and Homo erectus (Asia) had already left Africa thousands of years before and fully populated the regions they were migrating into. But there was little discussion or exploration of how these other human species managed this, or why they might’ve been the firsts. Geologic history plays an important role here as well, and the multiple ice ages which occurred during these migration waves not only may have been drivers of evolutionary change which then led to social and migratory change, but they also dictated where various migrations could reasonably be achieved and increased the chance of tension and conflict between previous inhabitants and new arrivals in environs experiencing increased ecological scarcity.

Another important idea in the book, which for the present appears to be a hypothesis with a disputed body of evidence behind it, is that we might be able to peer deeper and more accurately into the historical record by means of the interplay between language and genetic diversification. The idea seems to be that every time a distinct genetic population splits off from an existing group, they tend to modify their language as well. Understanding where and how various language splits occurred might allow scientists to pinpoint new genetic branch timelines and vice versa, all the way back to the “original mother tongue” of the first “out of Africans”. One extremely speculative hope is that this original human language might even be reasonably reconstructed. Proto-Esperanto?

A third item I wanted to highlight isn’t interesting so much as it is entertaining, what I consider to be a bit of comical proledom. In a discussion of the relationship between last names and shared genealogy in Britain, Wade states,

Commoners acquired surnames between AD 1250 and 1350, apparently for the convenience of feudal record keepers who needed to differentiate between tenant farmers with the same first names. The surnames were not highly original. They tended to be a person’s profession (Smith, Butcher), or a patronymic (Johnson, Peterson), or derived from some landscape feature (Hill, Bush).

He goes on to give an example where it turned out that two Brits with the same last name, one a CEO and one an academic, actually did have a shared lineage originating to a common ancestor in a particular region of Northern England/Southern Scotland of whose geography the surname was descriptive, and who lived in that area according to official records. I got a chortle out of the way the elites of yore chose to humanize and differentiate amongst their tax cattle simply to aid their own tax farming, and that they didn’t bother to come up with anything more illustrious than tacking on terminology for slight changes in elevation on the land the peasants originated from, etc. It’s also interesting to think of how many people today have “commoner” last names (which group of ancestors, then, was reproductively more successful, the commoner or the elite?!) and how the market economy has allowed the sons of so many peasants to accumulate so much wealth!

A fourth item worth mentioning is the issue of “race”. It appears from this reading that “race” is a real and scientific phenomenon, though the implications of race are not well-know and are likely far different from what both “supporters” and “critics” of the concept currently think they can extrapolate from it. I’d like to learn more about race, and I think there will be more race-related scientific discoveries in the near future as this area of genetics is more thoroughly explored, but I would say I have less confidence in current race debates and their conclusions than I might have going into this book.

I’ll probably keep this one on the shelf and come back to some of the questions raised as I explore more books on the subject of genetics and evolution, pre-modern history, archaeology, economic history, etc. But I was less engaged with this book than I had hoped to be and I do hope there is a better organized, updated treatment of the subject I can read and discuss with my children in the future.

3/5

Our Philosophy of Parenting in 60 Seconds (#parenting, #RIE, #respect, #responsibility)

When I meet people who have small children or recently gave birth, I typically ask them the following question: “What is your philosophy of parenting?” I usually follow that up with, “Are there any specific methods, practices, approach or ‘-isms’ you subscribe to in raising your kids?” I mostly get puzzled looks, even from close friends who know me well and should have an idea of what I am getting at with my questions.

If someone were to ask me the same question, here is how I would explain our philosophy in approximately 60 seconds:

When we chose to conceive, we made a conscious decision to bring another life into the world which would be physically, emotionally, intellectually and financially dependent upon us at birth. This child did not have a choice in entering the world in such a state. As the child matures, it will develop the capability to transcend this condition of dependency. Our obligation as parents is to help our child gain physical, emotional, intellectual and financial independence as it progresses in its development, always being mindful and respectful of the limitations it has at any given “stage”, but also being cognizant of the great potential it has to go beyond it. We will seek to always treat the child with respect for its eventual independent personhood. If we can not only help our child to successfully achieve its independence, but also instill it with a desire for interdependence such that it sees value in voluntary relationships with us and other people in society, we will feel greatly rewarded. We hope we can be living examples to our child of the value of peacefully relating to others for mutual benefit, rather than seeing the world as a zero-sum game where our child gets trapped in the master-slave mentality.

If my conversation partner shows additional interest at this point, I might follow this up with an example of a specific methodology we plan to follow, which we have researched extensively and which we have observed the beneficial effects of with our own friends and their young families– RIE, or Resources For Infant Educarers. RIE is the first actionable link in a chain starting at infancy and extending to that moment of independence/interdependence which seeks to build a conscious, self-confident identity for the child in a relationship built on respect for differing needs and active communication.

These are examples of our “philosophy of parenting” and how we plan to practically execute it in raising our own children. It’s maybe worth exploring what our philosophy IS NOT, and the kinds of parental obligations we philosophically reject, but that is probably grist for another post.

The Thousand-Year Reich Fallacy (#economics, #politics, #InterestRates)

Nothing is more permanent than “temporary” arrangements, deficits, truces, and relationships; and nothing is more temporary than “permanent” ones.

~Nassim Taleb

The Nazi regime in Germany, which was early on referred to as the “Third Reich”, was also popularly referred to as the “Thousand-Year Reich”, the implication being that it was a regime which would stand the test of time and last over a period of many multiple generations.

An intellectual problem I’ve always had with this is that the seemingly ever-lasting circumstance has an explicit, definite end point. In the case of the Thousand-Year Reich, that end point is 1,000 years from the time it was established– and then what? More importantly, why only 1,000 years? If the Thousand-Year Reich represents some kind of political ideal, how would it be possible for the society underneath it to transcend these arrangements over any conceivable period of time? And what changes in circumstance would lead them to do so?

As an observer of financial markets and business cycles for going on a decade, I see the “Thousand-Year Reich Fallacy” with some frequency. For example, a market prognostication might be made in the following form: “Earnings growth is strong and sustainable, rather than seeing the S&P 500 tail off from current levels, I believe it will continue to rise and will be ten or fifteen years before we see a correction.”

Ignoring even the problematic metaphor of a “correction” in this context, I always find myself thinking in these circumstances– and then what? And what is it, 10 or 15 years from now, that finally precipitates this change in price?

The most obvious example of the Thousand-Year Reich Fallacy (which is really just a variant of the hot hand fallacy) lately is the specious reasoning we hear about about Zero-Interest Rate Policy (ZIRP), its longevity and the “new normal” economic paradigm it engenders. Many people, simpleton and sophisticate alike, have reasoned that central banks have painted themselves into a corner with their ZIRP attempts and having arrived at this corner, there is no way out that will not impose enormous social costs to exit, which they are beyond reluctant to effect as a result. The implication is that interest rates will not rise because they can not rise without grave disruption to economic activity.

The incentives of ZIRP and even NIRP (Negative-) are intuitively perverse. Under ZIRP, borrowers pay no costs and lenders earn no return for parting with their money, meaning lenders have become indifferent from the standpoint of time preference, preferring a dollar today equally to a dollar tomorrow. Under NIRP, borrowers are rewarded for borrowing and lenders are glad to pay them for their privilege, meaning that lenders prefer a fraction of their dollar tomorrow to their whole dollar today. Anyone who listens to this realizes that this is not a sustainable arrangement, ceteris paribus, and that studied in isolation they would not willingly behave that way as a lender.

So, the Thousand-Year Reich must come to an end. But when? And why? Here is where the fallacy rears its ugly head, as people will project an arbitrary time frame which seems sufficiently long to hedge against immediate uncertainty, ie, 20 years, 30 years, but they will not then reason about what changes must occur 20 years or 30 years from now that bring ZIRP/NIRP to an end.

For ZIRP/NIRP to truly be the “new normal”, there can not be any end point to it. But it is not anticipated to be the new normal, but only a Twenty-Year Reich. But what then? And why will it remain stable along the way?

The funny thing about the Thousand-Year Reich fallacy is how short of the initial timeline events end up, and how violently the trend unravels. In the case of Nazi Germany, a regime slated to last 1,000 years in fact lasted 12 years, from 1933 to 1945. Of course, it was a horrible 12 years, punctuated by a ghastly death toll, gross destruction of capital and property in Germany and abroad, and enormous political ramifications that reverberated outward from Berlin and into the present day. All the martial glory, all the eternal recognition and all the national greatness imagined at its inception was dashed to the rocks in just over a decade which, for those experiencing it, must’ve seemed like 1,000 plus forever years.

The ZIRP/NIRP paradigm is a similarly crowded trade from a social expectations standpoint. Anecdotally, I have seen that it is believed from shady, proletarian used car lot operators in Appalachian Tennessee, to educated, middle-aged professional bankers on the West Coast. Everyone knows it can’t go on forever, but they can’t see how it will end in the next five, ten or even fifteen years and certainly no one wants to try to imagine what it might be like. It will be truly unprecedented. But it will end, because it must end, and since it will end it’s worth thinking about what it is that will deliver the finishing blow, and why it could be a much shorter Reich than one could anticipate right this very moment.

Why I Chose Midwifery Care #midwife #pregnancy #childbirth #homebirth

I am five months pregnant and have not seen a doctor.

The Lion and I enjoy a primal lifestyle. Of course, we also enjoy a lot of what modern technology has to offer (including running water, electricity, and the internet!), but we also appreciate the more primitive aspects of being human, like being outside and getting sun, avoiding processed foods, sweating, sleeping with the sun cycle, and generally being introspective and in-tune with our mental and emotional needs. Along those lines, a birth that is heavily medicated, in an unfamiliar setting, with hospital lighting bearing down and the smell of chemicals and sterility surrounded by strangers watching me pee/poop/fart does not sound like an experience that I would enjoy (I mean, if I’m going to pee/poop/fart with an audience then it might as well be with people I feel relatively more comfortable with, right? :\ )!

My first exposure to midwifery care was through a book called Baby Catcher, recommended to me by a friend who had a homebirth with their son a few years ago in LA. The book is a collection of stories and experiences by the author, Peggy Vincent, a California midwife. Baby Catcher made me laugh out loud and cry, and it really opened my eyes to the possibility of giving birth naturally, at home, with someone you trust, and with as little intervention as needed. Thus, when I became pregnant, I decided to research more about midwifery care and what it entails to determine if it really was the right path for me.

When I saw what the midwifery model of care entailed, I was hooked:

The midwifery model of care is based on the fact that pregnancy and birth are normal life events. The midwifery model of care includes: monitoring the physical, psychological, and social well-being of the mother throughout the childbearing cycle; providing the mother with individualized education, counseling, and prenatal care, continuous hands-on assistance during labor and delivery, and postpartum support; minimizing technological interventions; and identifying and referring women who require obstetrical attention. The application of this woman-centered model has been proven to reduce the incidence of birth injury, trauma, and cesarean section. —The Midwifery Task Force

The first sentence in the midwifery model of care struck me as unusual because I had never heard or thought of birth and pregnancy as “normal life events,” but indeed, birth is a natural “instinctive act.” Our bodies have evolved through million of years to provide the best possible outcomes for mothers and babies, provided that we understand and care for our bodies the way that nature intended during this normal physiological process. As many of you probably know, women’s hormones are changing drastically during pregnancy, and that’s no different for during childbirth and afterwards too. The brain is producing hormones related to excitement (epinephrine/norepinehprine), love (oxytocin), mothering (prolactin), and pleasure (endorphins) during pregnancy, labor, and childbirth to elicit instinctive mothering behavior in humans. Oxytocin also causes the uterus to contract, adrenaline increases heart rate and makes us feel courageous, giving laboring women the “power” necessary for the final pushes, and endorphins rise and help block the reception of pain.Physically, the laboring mama is driven to move more, and sometimes, even to sing, grunt, groan, moan, or to shower/relax in a bath. Those options are not always available to women who choose to give birth in hospitals (as Vincent recalls in Baby Catcher). Women who are feeling afraid or self-conscious [in front of strangers] tend to secrete hormones that delay birth. In quiet, semidark, private conditions, the laboring mama can let down her guard and let her instincts take over. I knew that working with a midwife was a first step to accomplishing this, where I would be allowed to have the lights lowered, to stay in a comfortable place (my home), to move about freely as needed, and to be with loved and trusted ones as I begin one of the most challenging times of my life.

I also knew that I wanted the individualized care of a midwife (or in the case of the birth center I’m working with, three midwives!), hands-on care, and postpartum support. I am a unique person who has had a unique health history and will have a unique pregnancy and birthing story, so why shouldn’t my care be tailored to me? My most recent experiences with doctors in the dental industry were not pleasant; my dentist told me that nutrition is unrelated to teeth health, that I shouldn’t believe everything on the internet (I read books, not webpages), and did not ask a single question about my dental history. The endodontists I visited seemed impatient with my questions and complimented me on being a “biochemical major” when I asked questions. One of the endodontists I visited had even started pulling out her tools, ready to perform the “routine root canal procedure” the day of my consultation! So, this was certainly not the type of experience and attitude I wanted throughout my pregnancy or at the birth of our first child. When I go to my prenatal appointments, I wait no more than 10 minutes in the waiting room. The staff at the birth center know me by name and face. They know The Lion by name and face. The midwives ask me how I’m feeling, they listen and commiserate, they host picnics and events for everyone to interact (the midwives, the parents, the doulas, the birth assistants, the staff), and they ask for my health and nutrition history. I get the feeling that they are mother- and baby-centric; I trust that when I go into labor, I can call them for help or advice, even if it isn’t during office hours. I trust that I have a choice and won’t be pressured to make a biased one. This is the kind of help and promise that I want and appreciate as a newbie mom. When I interviewed the head midwife of my birth center, I asked her what she expects of her clients. She responded, “I expect them to stay healthy, educated, and relaxed.” This is exactly the kind of pregnancy and childbirth that I want to have!!

As for minimizing technological intervention but also encouraging women who need obstetrical attention to seek it, this is a big point that I think many people have missed of midwifery. When I first told my family that I plan to birth with a midwife, they immediately became concerned of the risks of birthing out of hospital. Luckily, the midwives aren’t above asking for help when they (or the laboring mama) need it! The Lion and I live very close to a hospital, and we have discussed what will happen should I need to be transferred to the hospital. Furthermore, the midwives at my birth center are certified nurse midwives. In other words, they know and can perform the same duties as a doctor, except surgery. I hope to have an “undisturbed birth.” As described above with the hormonal processes, birth is a very complex physiological process, and it is extremely sensitive to outside influences. Many techniques that are used in hospitals to monitor a laboring woman is painful or uncomfortable and usually involve strangers overstepping personal/bodily boundaries. In addition to the distrust of a woman’s birthing ability and their body’s natural processes, these are ingredients for a difficult birth. This is not to say I will have a solitary or isolated birth. I believe that once I am in labor, I will need all the help and support (physical, mental, emotional) I can get to cope with the pain! But a midwife’s method to coping with pain is not to medicate, but rather to understand where the sensation originates from and whether a change of position, attitude, atmosphere in the birth room, or another factor can help mitigate this discomfort.

My main concern with this pregnancy and birth experience is NOT to avoid pain at all costs, but rather to have a healthy baby in the most natural, healthy, accepting way possible. I am so excited to have these midwives be my advocates and guardians during childbirth!!

(I don’t cover the risks of cesarean surgery, epidurals, opiate painkillers, synthetic oxytocin and other synthetic hormones, ultrasounds, early clamping, and inductions here because they require their own blog post and more astute meta-analysis. Buckley’s book (link below) provides a much more in-depth analysis of these and other common interventions of birth. I hope to write a review/summary of her book at a later date.)

Video – The Corrupt Origins of Central Banking in America (@mises, #history, #economics, #CentralBanking)

I thoroughly enjoyed this video recently. It’s a short talk given at the Mises Institute’s Mises University 2016 event. The speaker has researched and written extensively about Alexander Hamilton and the early efforts at establishing a central bank in the United States during the “American System” period through the 1830s.

Notes – Real Food for Mother and Baby (#FERTILITY, #NUTRITION, #BOOKS, #PREGNANCY, #REVIEW)

Real Food for Mother and Baby

by Nina Planck, published 2016

This was one of the first books I read on fertility/pregnancy because we already had it in our library (see The Lion’s review of it).  Planck’s book dispelled some commonly held beliefs on what pregnant can/cannot consume and further confirmed that the way I eat currently is optimal to maintaining good health. Some interesting/important points I found throughout her book:

  • Exercising during pregnancy is good for mother and baby. Walking, running, swimming, dancing, cycling, rowing, hiking–but never to the point of fatigue. Listen to your body and rest as needed.
  • In the second trimester, the growing baby needs protein and calcium to build bone and muscle, so take cod liver oil, eat protein and saturated fats, and drink milk and eat sour cream and cheeses. Raw is better than pasteurized, and supplements are not as effective. Drink the best milk you can afford.
  • Swelling in the hands and feet is a sign of protein deficiency, so try to eat 100g daily of meat/poultry (skin + bones), fish, eggs, and milk.
  • Salt your food freely (with unrefined sea salt) because blood and amniotic fluid are briny! And eat plenty of fresh produce for potassium
  • Keep up the calcium intake even though the baby’s skeleton has formed by six months because the bones are still bulking up. Eat oysters and beef for zinc, and eat protein (meat, dairy, eggs) to prevent swelling and prematurity. Obviously, drink lots of water and eat tons of fish to aid in baby’s brain development!
  • “Don’t avoid fish, just methylmercury.” No shark, swordfish, King mackerel, or tilefish. Two to three times per week, consume anchovy, common mackerel, salmon, catfish, trout, tilapia (wild caught and fresh) and be generous with the butter and cream (creamy clam chowder for days, yum…).
  • On Birth Day: the atmosphere should be dark, private, and quiet. After birth, hold the baby naked against your skin and ask to delay bathing and weighing. Let the baby look at you, smell you. Newborns aren’t dirty, but if bathing is necessary, do so gently without removing the white stuff (vernix). Try not to cut the cord until the placenta is delivered.
  • The mama’s hormones are working on realigning after birth, so emotions may still be up and down. Continue the diet of red meat, fish, and liver to prevent worsening the baby blues.
  • Get lots of help on practical matters so you can gently surrender to your baby’s needs, unpredictable as they are.
  • Breastfeed [exclusively] if possible (and for as long as possible! At least for 6-12 mos) because breastmilk contains probiotics, antibodies, amylase, and boosts immunity for the newborn. Keep eating well.
  • From four to ten months (once they can sit up), babies can try real food, as long as theres not vomiting or diarrhea. At seven months, the baby can eat seafood, pork and dairy. At one year, time for the baby to start his/her cod liver oil supplements!
  • Let the baby choose what he/she wants to eat, don’t micromanage/point/stare/direct. Do less, RELAX.
  • Surrender your old life temporarily to be the mother that nature intended. Ask for help (cooking, cleaning, grocery shopping), and nurse on cue (aka when the baby asks).
  • Watch the baby, not the clock! There is no schedule for breastfeeding.
  • Bread and chocolate (grains and sugar) are inevitable, so try to find ones with good, clean ingredients. Let your child know over time why you favor certain foods over others. Try not to let the child fill up on bread before fats and protein.

TL;DR Avoid trans fats and pesticides. Buy organics and avoid hydrogenated vegetable oils, margarine, vegetable shortening, and cheap fried foods.

TL;DR2 Breast feed your baby. Nurse after the baby starts eating. Delay or skip vaccinations. Spend time on farms and outside in the dirt. Touch animals. Drink raw milk.

How “Rigged” Is The Major Media? (#media, #economics, #politics, #journalism, #fraud)

By way of the Articles of Style blog comes an anecdote on more media rigging, this time of a commercial nature:

The thing about magazines is that they are full of paid advertisements. Not just the pages and pages of “ads”, I mean the articles and editorials themselves. I have a colleague who works for a major magazine (both of which will remain nameless) who was in LA about a month ago for a celebrity interview in Hollywood. As we usually do, we had a long dinner and drinking session where we shared our thoughts and practices on all things regarding the business of editorial and publishing.

Over some fire grilled fish tacos he basically tells me that (at the major menswear magazine) they don’t begin a story until they have a paid sponsor. “We have a list of high-level editorial ideas, lined with fitting potential sponsors, and the sales team hits the phones to see who’s willing to pay the most for the product placement or mention. Once the money is there and we the product from the brand is confirmed…then we hire the stylist, model, writer, etc. to bring the story to life”.

This reminds me of a similar anecdote shared with me by a friend in the financial industry. He was explaining to me the relationship between PR firms and the financial news media. He explained that much of the “news” we consume in publications like the WSJ, NYT, etc., are actually drafted by PR firms who do the research and assemble the voices in the articles, most or all of whom are their paid clients. When the media need coverage of some event or recent development, they turn to the PR firms for ready-made stories complete with expert testimony strewn throughout. The media company will edit the article where necessary and then slap its journalist’s by-line on the article. Oftentimes, they don’t even edit the stories and publish them as provided.

The media outlets like this because they’re trying to reduce their costs and keep up with the 24-hour news cycle. The PR firms serve special, niche interests (their paid customers) and so can “be everywhere” news is happening, whereas it isn’t economically scalable to have paid journalists complete with intelligent source-networks all around the world where news might be happening. Meanwhile, the PR firms like this because it gets their clients exposure as an “expert” in a major public forum. Not only does it add credibility to a resume and generate search interest in the client mentioned, it could also subtly sway the agenda on the topic du jour which might be desirable for the client to have readers thinking a certain way.

If it really works the way it’s mentioned in the AoS blog post, and as my friend related to me (and I think it does), it puts the “news” in new light and certainly complicates the gatekeeper role of the media and the idea of an informed electorate. At least, it complicates it for statists who believe in this fantasy system and the way it supposedly functions. It doesn’t complicate anything for me.

What I Remember From Journalism Classes (#education, #college, #politics, #RiggedSystem, #media)

One of the Trump mantras in the current US presidential election cycle is that the system is “rigged.” Part of what Trump includes in the rigging allegation is the behavior of the US media in being bitterly, but not openly, partisan. The reputation of the media in American political theory is that it is a non-governmental check on official political scheming which serves the vaunted public interest in educating Americans on fact and fraud alike. Through the media, the American people, especially as an electorate, can make an informed decision as they exercise their democratic muscle.

A problem with this theory is that the “gatekeeper” role for the media introduces the same risk of regulatory capture that faces an official government agency. If X is the watchdog of Y, then Y has an incentive to exercise influence on X, up to and including implicit or covert control of X, to ensure Y has the maximum opportunity to pursue its own interest without restraint. If journalists are the watchdog of politicians, or of government and the political process as a whole, than people interested in exercising power without restraint via the political process have a strong incentive to try to control journalists.

There’s plenty of evidence, scandal and recent revelations of such influence and control that has come to light recently, mostly via alternative media “institutions” such as bloggers and not-for-profits like WikiLeaks, such that anyone interested in evaluating claims of a “rigged” system can run a simple search and make up their own mind. I don’t really want to go there with this post. Instead, I want to share some brief reflections and anecdotes from my undergraduate education, which included substantial coursework in journalism.

When I went to college, I initially thought I wanted to be a professional journalist. I later came to the conclusion that the system I would be participating in was “rigged”, and that I couldn’t find any heroes to emulate and that it’d be very unlikely for me to profitably, and safely, practice the kind of truth-telling journalism I was interested in, so I decided to abandon that ambition after completing most of the coursework necessary (I did end up completing the degree). Part of my disillusionment came through my experience in my journalism classes.

The very first class I took was an “ethics of journalism” class, which explored this very issue of the role of journalists in a free society, and the special status as gatekeeper assigned to the profession in American political theory. Unfortunately, most of my classes were disrupted that semester because the graduate assistants in the journalism department were on strike and my professor decided not to hold our classes on campus to avoid crossing the picket lines, a decision she made out of perceived solidarity with their plight. On one occasion, class was cancelled entirely because she decided to participate in a protest. While I doubt all journalism graduate students are on strike all the time at all universities in the US, I also would imagine this experience was not entirely unique, and certainly the ethical or political predilections of my professor at the time were not unusual. If this is the mindset and behavior of people teaching introductory ethics courses to aspiring journalists, what do you think might be the impact on journalism as a system in this country?

Another class I remember taking was something like “topics in media criticism”. I think what I imagined the course would be was something like studying news reporting and investigative journalism pieces and looking at how members of the media critically covered certain issues and people, and also how they responded to criticism from those they targeted. Instead, we ended up writing essays about pop culture media through the lenses of things like Marxism, feminism and sexuality.

Things I found memorable and descriptive about the majority of my classmates: few, if any, were double majoring in or had pursued an independent course of study in economics, so they were unfamiliar with even the most watered-down official market-lite basic instruction on the topic, thus making them unfit to cover 95% of what is newsworthy; while they weren’t ascetics, they seemed to accept that they were unlikely to have lucrative careers and seemed suspicious of people who had higher income-earning potential than they; they were definitely not the sharpest, most ambitious students in the school and were closer to being art students than business school students if you could set those things up as two opposite characteristic poles; they were animated by “social justice” issues and assignments, rather than questioning their premises or the validity of that approach; for those who had double majors, they were typically in subjects such as political science, sociology, psychology and occasionally history (ie, philosophically wishy-washy, non-concrete and dominated by Marxist leftover academics); in physical appearance they were often sickly or weak looking, had more body piercings than average and were often disheveled looking, as if they didn’t much care about how they looked to other people; few if any came from true poverty backgrounds, and few came from any wealth, they all seemed “securely” lower-middle class in background.

Putting these three pieces together, a picture emerges. These journalism students were being instructed on their special ethical status and duties while learning from the example of a person whose behavior and loyalties were compromised; they were receiving explicit ideological instruction in their coursework under the guise of some kind of creative criticism curriculum; finally, their personal backgrounds, interest, capabilities and knowledge probably made them unsuitable, on average, for thinking very deeply about key “public interest” issues and their personal circumstances made it potentially easy to tempt or incentivize them in various ways.

Under conditions like these, is it difficult to imagine how journalism, as a profession, might cater to the kind of people who could willfully do the bidding of special interests in a “rigged” system and either not realize how they were being manipulated, or else be eager to take part in such capers?

Of course, it didn’t work on me, but then I decided not to become a journalist!