Chart Of The Day, Ctd

gun-chart

A reader close to the issue writes:

Clearly that chart was indirectly demonstrating that having a gun in one’s home is much more likely to be associated with suicide than with actually killing someone in self-defence. It is not by any means a definitive chart on “the overall impact of firearms on health.” Your reader remarked that the positives of guns include deterring an unknown number of murders and violent assaults. He disregards the fact that the negatives are massively underestimated, not overestimated, by the chart.

The negative health effects of guns are not just suicides but also the homicides (11,078 in 2010, according to the CDC), the accidental deaths of children and adults (554 in 2009 – see this excellent NYT piece), and the cost and long-term impact of non-fatal gun injuries (73,505 in 2010 per the CDC). It is estimated to cost over $2 billion per year to treat patients with firearms injuries. That does not count the losses in productivity and the chronic healthcare needs of these patients. As for suicides, 19,392 of the 38,364 suicides in the US in 2010 were from firearms. Using a firearm in a suicide attempt is lethal in 85% of patients, far more lethal than any other method.

I am an emergency physician and a medical toxicologist, so I’ve seen up close the costs of suicide.

I have taken care of many patients who have tried to kill themselves, including a 16-year-old boy who fatally shot himself in the head after his girlfriend broke up with him, as well as many who overdosed on medications but recovered. Guns are so lethal so quickly that even if the impulse to commit suicide is transient, the person is often successful. They don’t get a chance to change their minds. That’s why having access to a gun in the home is a risk factor for suicide. The data from an Army Times article back this up:

Troops overseas must abide by the restrictions of host nations, according to military policy. Accordingly, U.S. troops in South Korea, Germany, Italy and elsewhere are virtually without access to personal firearms. Suicides have been fewer among those troops.

Last year, there were three Army suicides among the 25,000 soldiers posted in Germany, one among 19,200 in South Korea and none in Italy, where 3,900 soldiers are based. Meanwhile, U.S. bases often see double-digit suicides each year. There were a dozen among the 30,000 GIs at Fort Campbell, Ky., last year; 17 at Fort Hood, Texas, which has 46,500 soldiers; and 10 among the 20,000 G.I.s at Fort Stewart, Ga., according to Army statistics.

“The takeaway message is we have to do everything we can to limit access to firearms by someone who is depressed, they’re suicidal, struggling with thoughts of self harm,” said Robert Gebbia, executive director of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. “It’s just good common sense.”

The NRA has blocked research on these issues because it is not in their interest for people to know the truth. We don’t have the data on gun deaths and gun injuries because they have blocked funding for the research.

I hope you will not leave your other reader’s comments as the only important points to be made about the chart and about the negative health impact of guns. It is time that our politicians developed some backbone and did what is right for the American people rather than for the gun industry. It is ridiculous that they would oppose Dr. Murthy because of his belief that guns are a public health issue. He would be a very poor physician indeed if he did not see the obvious health costs of guns to our society.

An Ipsum For Every Occasion

Spurred by Nick Richardson’s brief history of Lorem Ipsum, the enduring dummy text from the 16th century, Sal Robinson looks to variants in the Internet Age:

[T]here are Lorem Ipsum generators that combine dialogue from Downton Abbey and The IT Crowd and SpongeBob Squarepants; there are regional generators (the Mainer, the Newfie), and generators that mix and match language often considered to be babble anyway (the po-mo academic papercorporate-speak,inspirational quotes). As a nearly full-time text generator myself, I don’t see one for book jacket copy, though there is an excellent old school chart for assembling your own blurbs.

These generators are pretty satisfying for people who miss Maurice Moss or have to write academic papers, and give you plenty of useful dummy text, but they don’t often come close to the original’s level of lyricism. Maybe you’re only as good as the guys you steal from? For superior nonsense, it’s best to turn to Lewis Carroll, who, when Lorem Ipsumated, produces passages like this:

Alice laughed. ‘There’s a mile high and down
in an egg, Sir,’ Alice asked, handing her hand and drank some poetry repeated thoughtfully. ‘An
uncomfortable sort of old clothes
than anything else, you know, with some time the
poor Gnat went on growing older.’

‘ONE can’t, you know, with all alive, and thirsty!’

One has the feeling that Carroll would approve.

Ask Shane Bauer Anything: Shattered By Solitary

Here he emphasizes how terribly ineffective solitary confinement is as a method of rehabilitation:

And in our final video from Shane, he shares how he and his fellow hostages kept each other sane while imprisoned in Iran:

Shane, Sarah and Josh’s memoir based on their experience as political prisoners in Iran is called A Sliver Of Light. You can find a selection of excerpts from the book here, or read about what happened when Shane was able to break out of his cell for a night here. Bauer’s Mother Jones special report about solitary confinement in America is here. You can also support his further efforts to investigate the US prison system by contributing to his Beacon campaign. His previous Ask Anything answers are here.

(Archive)

Religious Belief And Bigotry, Ctd

I was away and missed Ross Douthat’s Q and A on marriage equality. Check out the last question from one Lewis Armen, from Oregon. Money quote from Ross’s response:

As a matter of public policy, I’m skeptical of same-sex marriage because I think it instantiates (or ratifies, since obviously we’ve been headed down this road for a while) a public meaning of marriage that’s too formless and open-ended to do the very specific job that the institution evolved to do: To bind and channel heterosexual desire in ways that are specific to the nature of procreation, and that aim to offer as many children as possible the opportunity to grow up in an intimate community with their mother and their father. But saying “we should maintain a distinctive public institution designed to specifically encourage lifelong heterosexual monogamy” — which is basically the traditional-marriage argument, in a phrase — doesn’t preclude making legal accommodations for same-sex relationships, and it certainly doesn’t require gay people to disappear back into the closet or all take vows of celibacy.

I think it’s possible, in other words, for the law to treat different kinds of relationships fairly without always treating them identically.

My problem with this argument is that it must make heterosexual civil marriage a superior contract than homosexual civil marriage, and require a different and necessarily inferior appellation. If the differnce is not all or nothing, then what is the difference? Does Ross support, for example, civil unions with all the rights of marriage? I suspect not. But if not, which civil marital rights would he exclude gays from? And why? That’s the practical answer that almost no one on the right has explicitly offered in the last three decades.

These questions become practical, while Ross is operating entirely within the abstract.

But my main point here is that Ross’ point, though I disagree, is nowhere near bigotry. Or does Mark Joseph Stern really believe that such a position is tantamount to “hate”?

The Ennui Of The End

Tom Jokinen ponders an afterlife of neither bliss nor torment, but unrelenting banality:

The 2004 French film Les Revenants (translated as They Came Back and since spun off into a Sundance TV series) imagines a world in which the dead neither ascend to heaven nor disappear to a black oblivion, but merely, as the title says, come back. To pick up where they left off. One day they emerge on the streets of a small French town in the same business-casual attire and over-coiffed funeral-home hairdos in which they were buried, seeming no worse for the wear. But they’ve changed. Emotionally flat and unreachable, it’s as if they’ve emerged from an unsatisfying, dreamless sleep and are caught in some vague, post-traumatic affective disorder which seems reasonable. Their attempts to re-integrate into society are fraught. Their families don’t know what to do with them. From here the director and co-writer Robin Campillo takes the ball and doesn’t so much run with it as amble into dark corners: this is a very quiet, very European zombie film.

For one thing, the return of the dead presents a social problem without precedent.

Do they get their old jobs back, given that they’re just not as bright or engaged as they used to be? Committees are struck, town meetings are held. Some families have moved on, spouses have remarried, so where will the dead sleep? Refugee-style facilities are considered. What about social programs? Are the dead still eligible for unclaimed pension benefits? Implications mount.

He goes on to compare the film to the “postmortem rom-com” Truly, Madly, Deeply:

[B]oth films have [a] thread in common: they present death as something less than spectacular, not unlike certain after-Modernist views on life itself—one dull thing after another. There are no zithers. We wear the same clothes. Cold air still chills us, we suffer from hangovers. It is a view of death for those who have outgrown grand narratives, where the afterlife is just more of the same. It is neither alluring nor transcendent: we will not come back as a flower or a frog or a potato, all of which at least promise a change of scenery. These films contemplate the plodding, uneventful banality of death: we’ve lost the comfort of the story with a happy ending.

(Video: Scenes from Les Revenants)

Michael Pollan Was Right

James Hamblin reviews new research on nutrition:

[David] Katz and Yale colleague Stephanie Meller published their findings in the current issue of the journal [Annual Review of Public Health] in a paper titled, “Can We Say What Diet Is Best for Health?” In it, they compare the major diets of the day: Low carb, low fat, low glycemic, Mediterranean, mixed/balanced (DASH), Paleolithic, vegan, and elements of other diets. Despite the pervasiveness of these diets in culture and media, Katz and Meller write, “There have been no rigorous, long-term studies comparing contenders for best diet laurels using methodology that precludes bias and confounding. For many reasons, such studies are unlikely.” They conclude that no diet is clearly best, but there are common elements across eating patterns that are proven to be beneficial to health. “A diet of minimally processed foods close to nature, predominantly plants, is decisively associated with health promotion and disease prevention.”

In a commentary, Katz slams low-fat junk food:

For years, the food industry has willfully misinterpreted prevailing dietary guidance into the most profitable of distortions. No nutrition expert ever said “eat low-fat, starchy, high-sugar, high-calorie cookies.” But when we were fixated on low-fat eating, that’s just what the food industry gave us. They have done much the same with every nutritional preoccupation to follow.

But that sort of thing can’t happen when we know where we are going. For those who understood that advice to eat “low fat” meant less meat and cheese, more vegetables and fruits, Snackwell cookies were never much of a temptation, and certainly never mistaken for a panacea. Similarly, for those inclined to seek the benefits of prudent low carb dieting, low-carb brownies cobbled together out of miscellaneous junk are not much of a temptation – but again, those looking at their feet and not clear on where they are going on vulnerable to the sales pitch for just such junk. Low-carb eating was intended to be about less starch and added sugar, more lean meats, nuts, seeds, and vegetables – not the reinvention of brownies and cupcakes.

He adds:

A basic knowledge of where we are going is required to avoid getting misdirected in the interests of someone else’s interests, and at the expense of our good health. We have that basic knowledge. We are not clueless about the basic care and feeding of Homo sapiens. …. Whether low-fat or high, low-carb or high, with or without grains, with or without meat, with or without dairy; Paleo or Asian or vegan; Michael Pollan really did pretty much nail it: eat food, not too much, mostly plants.

An All-Consuming Communion

Meg Favreau reflects on the centuries-old practice of “sin eating”:

The belief [hundreds of years ago] was that, by consuming food and drink that had been passed over the body of the deceased, sin-eaters could take on the sins of the dead. Generally, these sin-eaters were poor, paid a pittance for their work, and treated with disdain in a community. Sometimes, however, the sin-eating was performed by more prominent members of the community or even members of the funeral party. In 2010, BBC News reported on efforts to restore the grave of Richard Munslow, a prominent Ratlinghope farmer who was buried in 1906 and purported to be the “last-known sin eater.” And the 1894 edition of Bye-Gones: Relating to Wales and the Border Countries, includes a letter from woman named Gertrude Hope, who had this note about an 1892 funeral in Shropshire:

Directly the minister ended, the woman in charge of the arrangements poured out four glasses of wine and handed one to each bearer present across the coffin with a biscuit called a ‘funeral biscuit.’ One of the bearers being absent at the moment, the fourth glass of wine and biscuit were offered to the eldest son of the deceased woman, who however, refused to take them, and was not obliged to do so. The biscuits were ordinary sponge biscuits usually called ‘sponge fingers’ or ‘lady’s fingers.’ They are however also known in the shops of Market Drayton as ‘funeral biscuits.’ The minister, who had lately come from Pembrokeshire, remarked to my informant that he was sorry to see that pagan custom still observed.

While sin-eating might indeed have pagan origins, the sin-eating in this case was conducted as part of Christian funerals.

The Makings Of A Nuclear Disaster

The size of different nations’ highly enriched uranium (HEU) stockpiles:

Nuclear Stockpiles

Graham Allison is happy that, “in just the last five years, the number of states with nuclear-weapons material that could fuel a terrorist’s bomb has shrunk by more than one-third”:

In Europe, six nations—Austria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Serbia, and Ukraine—have become nuclear-weapons-material-free in the past five years. Belarus and Poland are the only countries preventing Eastern and Central Europe from becoming the second [nuclear-weapons-material-free zone (NWMFZ)]. In Africa, only one state, South Africa, continues to keep a cache of nuclear weapons material large enough to allow terrorists to build more than 20 nuclear bombs. South America could complement its status as the first NWFZ by becoming an NWMFZ—if it could persuade the single holdout, Argentina, to dispose of its 17 pounds of highly enriched uranium.

But, even if uranium supplies are further reduced, Douglas Birch illustrates the difficulties associated in getting nations to give up their plutonium stockpiles:

The call to restrict plutonium production — which applies to both military and civilian programs — is a departure and nettlesome to some countries.

Japan, India, and Russia, for example, plan to build new energy systems based on advanced plutonium-burning reactors. France and Great Britain have produced plutonium under contract for other countries. Separately, India, Pakistan, and Israel produce plutonium for weapons, according to a 2013 report by the International Panel on Fissile Materials.

As a result, while the global stocks of weapons-grade uranium have been shrinking after the Cold War, the stocks of plutonium have been growing. They are now estimated at 490 metric tons – enough, in theory, to fuel tens of thousands of weapons.

Affirmative Action Beyond Black And White

W. James Antle III wants Republicans to take note of Asian-American discomfort with the practice:

California lawmakers seemed poised to advance a constitutional amendment allowing the state’s universities to consider race in admissions. Senate Constitutional Amendment 5, which easily passed the Democratic-controlled Senate, would have exempted universities from Prop 209’s edict: “The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin.”

In the end, it was the Democrats – for the most part, the party that really matters in California state politics – who folded on SCA 5. And it was Chinese-Americans who were the pivotal group in the measure’s defeat. Olivia Liao, president of the Joint Chinese University Alumni Association, was quoted in the local press describing the initiative as racist. “[Legislators] feel like the Chinese-American community isn’t paying attention to politics,” Liao said, according to the Pasadena Star News. “We are concerned citizens. We need to stand up when things are not right; we need to be heard. We shouldn’t have any [exceptions] related to race. After all, America is a free country.”

Shikha Dalmia suggests affirmative action is “profoundly at odds with Asian-American interests”:

They form about 12 percent of the Golden State’s population, but in 2008, they constituted 40 percent of the student body at UCLA and 43 percent at UC Berkeley – California’s most selective public universities – as well as 50 percent at UC San Diego and 54 percent at UC Irvine. They have an admission rate of 73 percent compared to 63 percent of all in-state applicants. …

Yet, with each passing year, getting into top universities gets harder and harder. For example, between 1982 and 2004, the number of applicants to selective private four-year colleges increased 36 percent but enrollment increased 0.7 percent. Things are a bit, but not a whole lot, better in public universities.

Under such increasingly competitive circumstances, it’ll be a losing battle to ask Asians to conform to the mentality of white liberal guilt. They won’t apologize for their success or abandon their dreams – especially since they themselves have been repeatedly subjected to white discrimination.

But The Economist notes that Asian-Americans are far from united on the issue:

Asian-Americans, the country’s fastest-growing minority, are a notably diverse bunch, bundled together for convenience more than analytical accuracy. As Karthick Ramakrishnan, a political scientist at UC Riverside, points out, the SCA 5 campaign was dominated by Chinese-Americans. Indians did not play much of a role; south-east Asians, poorer and less likely to attend university, tend to back affirmative action. Even some Chinese-Americans declared support for SCA 5. California’s demographic changes have upended politics in new and curious ways; there are plenty more to come.