Study links sleep deprivation with cardiovascular disease

People who struggle with sleep might be at greater risk of developing cardiovascular problems, according to Prof Hugh Markus, of Cambridge University.  Those (including the author of this posting) who are genetically predisposed to insomnia have a greater risk of heart failure and coronary heart disease.

I think I must have personally tried every drug and sleep aid available, and nonetheless can have frequent strings of four or five sleepless nights in succession.  Much time has been spent visiting puzzled sleep doctors. 

Latterly, I have developed two cocktails of fairly reliable sleep aids, one I use for about three weeks in succession, then, when it is feeling less effective, change for about a week to a second mixture.  Despite assaulting myself with weird blends of pharmaceutical, my heart is as strong as an oxen. So the problem of sleep- deprivation is similar to that of diet, that is, we are all different physiologically, and the answers can only come with determined experimentation, hopefully with safe drugs.  This is a do-it-yourself industry; sleep doctors focus mainly on sleep apnea, which they know how to treat.

How to win an argument

  • Many arguments are made with minimal understanding, or are based on false premises. Simply asking for more detail and forcing someone to take you through their thinking step by step can expose this.
  • It’s not enough just to give evidence that something is false. To convince the other party, provide an alternative explanation to fill the gap (lawyers do this when they point to an alternative suspect in a trial).
  • If you attack someone’s entire ideology in one discussion, their defences go up. Try to disentangle their various beliefs, or show how changing one might support others.
  • In general, people are much more rational and willing to own up to the limits of their knowledge if they are treated with respect and kindness in an argument.
  • Encourage your opponent to view the argument from another’s perspective – a stranger, or a person from another country, if the argument is political. This can make them more receptive to the facts.

The British crisis: MPs discover they have spines

In 1689 the Act of Settlement decreed that sovereignty lay with the King in Parliament.  By the turn of the last century the King had become a figurehead and Parliament reigned supreme.  Supreme over the executive as well.  More recently the executive has grown in power.  Why is that?  Because Parliament has allowed it to happen. In modern times, as long as MPs keep their jobs they have more or less voted according to Party, and if the Prime Minister disapproves of them their constituency party has fired them. By avoiding rocking any boats, the MPs collectively have empowered the Executive and diminished their own power.

Yesterday, MPs finally stood up to the government (that is, Boris).  The Commons voted 328 – 301 to take control of business for an anti-no-deal bill.  Even before that, one Conservative MP, Phillip Lee, quit the Tory party of his own accord, actually during Johnson’s speech, and joined the Liberal Democrats.  Clearly, principle is emerging, blinking in the light, from the thicket of inertia and amateurism. Corbyn, Labour leader, insisted: “There is no consent in this house to leave the European Union without a deal. There is no majority for no deal in the country … Get the bill through first in order to take no deal off the table”.  For the UK this looks like an overdue rebellion .

His authority temporarily shredded, the prime minister said he would hold a general election on October 15th, This will be a fraught affair.  It is quite possible that Johnson will get a bigger majority and will thereby be able to preside over the misery and chaos he dismisses as Project Fear. Prior to the referendum, neither he nor his Brexiteer friends ever had the foresight, thoroughness or intelligence to investigate and confront all the difficulties surrounding Brexit for the umpteen years the right wing was up in arms about the dastardly EU.  They just used emotion and shameless lies about it.  Now, many people “just want it over”. Contrary to some opinion the Brits are not a universally wise, educated and thoughtful lot (!).  Rather, put them down as gamblers, who don’t much like detail or having to think things through; they just want to concentrate on their own lives (and maybe avoid a Corbyn government).   My guess is that the Tories will increase in numbers in the House of Commons and that the British will have the excitement of a crash out of the EU, blaming the EU for being stubborn, of course.  Spoiled boys never take responsibility.

There.  I have done my reporting job.  Now I would like a nice, calm Epicurean day, without anxiety and without having to think about it.  I just want it over.

 

 

Apathy: a follow-on from yesterday’s posting

From the Daily Telegraph

“These days, all of us are engaged in politics. Fanatically engaged. Furiously engaged. Twenty years ago, when I was in my teens, apathy was all the rage. In the newspapers, practically every political column was about the lack of interest in politics. Anxious MPs thought apathy was a bad thing. They assumed it meant people felt powerless to change anything. Certainly that was true, for some. But maybe the rest didn’t actually want to change anything – nothing big anyway. Maybe they took no interest in politics because on the whole, they thought life wasn’t too bad. A lesson for the future. Mass engagement is a sign things are going wrong. In a healthy democracy, no one would vote at all.    (Michael Deacon in The Daily Telegraph)

Last night there was a live television debate between  Brexiteers and Remainers, an event that threw me personally into a  profound few hours of utter misery.  How, I thought, could anyone do this (potentially wreck the country, manfully doing the work for a delighted Putin in Moscow)? How could we have arrived at this position where a group of lazy-minded, irresponsible politicians  can impose this disaster upon the country, without ahead of time doing even a single morning’s work on the snags, the pitfalls and downsides – often known as “planning” – of what they were doing, nil, nada. That is, break up the United Kingdom, and, quite possibly, the EU itself?  Does no one know any European history?  No one has asked the British people if they want their country to become world No.1 tax haven, the Panama of Europe, welcoming every sleazy crook in the world, each a business opportunity for politicians obsessed with money; and meanwhile, reversing regulations on health, safety, job security, housing and help for the poor.  In the old days we executed those who did this much harm; now we install them in No. 10, Downing Street.

Yesterday, I suggested that one should try to remain optimistic when all around you are in despair, rationing the intake of depressing news. Whatever helps one achieve ataraxia.  Clearly, the writer is wrestling mightily to restore that magic moment!  Understatement of the morning.

 

 

 

 

Optimism

Being optimistic has been linked to a longer life, with those who see the glass as half full having a better chance of reaching 85 or older. Optimists also have a longer life in general, according to Boston University medical researchers who analysed data from two previous long-term research projects. They found the most optimistic women had a lifespan almost 15% longer than the least, while for men the difference was 11%. Previous research has suggested people who are more optimistic might lead a healthier lifestyle – once that was taken into account, the most optimistic men and women still had a 9-10% longer lifespan.  (The Guardian, 27 Aug 2019)

Common sense, really.  The problem is to remain optimistic when all around you are in despair.  Maybe the trick is not to follow the (increasingly depressing) news, or to look at a week’s news in one big session once a week and read a book for the rest of the time.  Whatever helps you achieve ataraxia.

Should CERN build an even more expensive collider?

There is a problem with the current physics .  We have quantum theory for very small particles, relativity for the big stuff, and the Standard Model, which includes all the weird particles discovered by physicists all over the world.  All seem true individually, but relativity and quantum theory contradict one another and the Standard Model doesn’t seem to work- if you plugged it into the universe  the universe would apparently vanish.  Physicists can only study approximately 4% of a vast universe, the rest being dark energy and dark matter, and we don’t know yet what exactly these two phenomena are.  All in all we are still in a state of stupendous ignorance.

The current plan is to build the Future Circular Collider, 60 miles liong under Lake Geneva and costing 20 billion pounds.  When we are faced with huge problems of climate, population movements, water shortages etc should we be concerning ourselves about physics?

My answer is an unequivocal “yes”. The reason is that politicians and the voting public are simply not going to solve or ameliorate the problems of Planet Earth. There is too much money at stake and too little will-power.  If anything is to improve it will improve through advances in science that  help everyone, from the young to the old, from the poor peasant to the fat cats, the rich, and the selfish.  Just as long as the science isn’t politicized, because the nationalists and self-styled “strong men” politicize everything for their benefit, if they can.

Ignore the ignorant and self-obsessed and let us gather as much knowledge of the universe as we can, trusting that the scientists can repeat their successes, such as creation of the internet.

The moral self-image

Would you return a lost wallet lying in the street?  Of course!

Researchers left 17,000 wallets in 355 cities around the world (wow! big spenders!), some containing money, small or large amounts.  They found that, when cash was found the finders tended to return it to the owners.  If the wallets contained small amounts, say £10, the rate of returns was 51%., but at £75 the rate rose to 72%.  Clearly, most people see themselves as honest, as having a conscience, and would be shocked to be regarded as thieves.  Researchers concluded that, for most people, a moral self-image is important, and that they get quiet satisfaction from being seen to do the right thing.

Supporters of Epicurus would suggest that simple things like returning lost money to its owner are part and parcel of living a life peace of mind and contentment.  Do nothing that tends to increase anxiety or fear or is in conflict with your conscience.

Borrowing like there is no tomorrow

The US federal government will rack up $12.2 trillion in deficits through 2029, according to a new projection from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), an $809 billion increase from its last projection in May.

CBO, Congress’s official budgeting scorekeeper, said that the deficits would average 4.7 percent of GDP through the next decade, a significant increase from the 2.9 percent average over the past 50 years. This huge debt has to be serviced, which means that you have to cut other expenditures to service it. We have had a long run with full employment, thanks to Obama.  Usually, when the economy is healthy, the debt comes down; it needs to so that there is borrowing capacity to tide the country over the next (inevitable) slowdown.  Only under a Republican regime does the debt nowadays go up.

In the old days it was the Democrats who spent, spent, spent.  Now it is the Republicans, formerly “fiscally responsible”, who are blithely trying to get Trump re- elected – at any price..  Of course, it will be the poorer people in the boondocks, who vote Republican, whose services will be cut.

The Britain we knew is gone forever

The following is based partly on an article in the Financial Times:

On July 20th Martin Wolf, wrote in the Financial Times:  “No one knows what kind of Britain will emerge from the “Brexit earthquake”, but my increasingly clear conviction is that the outcome will be ugly and the damage long-term. “The UK that “the world thought it knew – stable, pragmatic and respected – is gone, probably forever. Failing to agree a smooth Brexit due to fears over the Irish backstop is a national folly – since that backstop only prevents Britain from making trade deals that are either “less important than maintaining good relations with the EU”, “probably unavailable” (China and India) or “abusive” (the US)”.

My comment: We now face the prospect of an un-thought-out, no-deal Brexit, multiple constitutional crises, the suspension of Parliament for a record five weeks (preventing Parliament from taking action to avoid crashing out of the EU), and the probable break-up of the UK. We also we have the prospect of the most divisive general election ever,  a choice between the irresponsible fantasist, Boris Johnson,  and Jeremy Corbyn, arguably the worst Labour Party leader ever.  As Martin Wolf comments: “Can Britain really be this lost, dithering between Ayn Rand and Leon Trotsky? What’s happening is not worthy of a serious country. The conclusion? We no longer are one”.

P.S  The Queen agreed to a five week suspension of Parliament.  One assumes she took the best advice and had no choice but to agree.  If so, the rules need a big change.  This executive coup makes a mockery of Parliamentary government, and is reminiscent of the treatment King Charles I dealt out to Parliament in the 17th Century, a disaster at the time, leading to civil war.  But the long- term effect was to reduce the power of the monarchy and make Parliament supreme.  When did the Constitution change, allowing this unelected bighead with dictatorial leanings, to steal the power from the elected parliament?  Britain needs to return power to elected representatives.  Pronto!

Ataraxia! Where are you now we need you more than ever?

“Let us bring in the workers we need to succeed”

The London “Evening Standard” is hardly a left-wing publication.  On most issues it backs the Tory views.  However, back on July 17th they publicised a plea to the government to “let us bring in the workers we need to succeed”.  It was issued by a consortium of business groups representing thousands of companies.  They are worried that skilled foreign workers will return home after Brexit.

As it is, there is a serious shortage of specialist workers.  What the companies want is the extension of temporary visas to 2 years, reforms to let firms sponsor more overseas recruits, and 2 year visas for new international graduates.  At the moment you can only bring in foreign workers if they are paid £30,000 or more.  The retail sector alone relies on 170,000 EU nationals, presumably most earning less than £30,000.  These people could be sent home after Brexit, the result being chaos.

But wait a moment –  the Brexiteers want to dispense with the services of all East Europeans, skilled or not.   Brits are no longer taught electrics, carpentry, plumbing, bricklaying or any other essential manual skills in what used to be called “technical colleges”.  These colleges renamed themselves universities and their technical expertise seems to have declined.  So we now absolutely rely on East Europeans to keep our houses upright and the rain out.  Wait till the rich brexiteer Tories cannot get anyone capable of repairing their houses, let alone serving in high street shops!  Many poorer people will rejoice at the new vacant job opportunities, but the mood of customers will sour when the rain comes through the roof.  Be careful what you wish for!

 

Killing wild animals

The Trump administration last week reauthorised the use of controversial poison-filled traps to kill wild animals, such as coyotes and foxes, that prey on livestock, despite strong opposition from environmentalists. The spring-loaded devices, dubbed “cyanide bombs”, eject a capsule containing sodium cyanide. The Wildlife Services’ use of the traps, which last year killed 6,500 animals, more than 200 of which were unintended targets, was being reassessed after a teenage boy was injured and his pet dog killed by one in 2017.

On Monday, in a move lauded by industry, the government also announced changes to the way the Endangered Species Act is implemented, weakening protections for threatened species and allowing, for the first time, “economic impact” of factors such as lost revenue when deciding if a species warrants protection.(The Week, 18 Aug 2019).

The concept of sharing seems to be alien to the current regime in Washington DC.  We share the planet with a host of other creatures, most of whom, if they are not already on the endangered list, soon will be. They all play their part in the ecology of the Earth, and pose very little risk, if any,  to humans.  We are, or should be, custodians of this corner of the universe.  But no, anything that affects the ability of business to make increased profits is being scrapped.  Which is curious, because I always thought conservative government was about creating a level playing field and ensuring a fair deal for all living creatures.  But that was the old Republican party, which was cautiously conservative, but, as I saw it at the time, cooperative and honorable, Nixon apart.  Now we have people in power for whom money is god, and who care for nothing except the magical bank balance. What empty people they must be!

Evangelicals for Trump

For ten years of my early life I went to compulsory chapel every day of the week while at school.  This is what I learned about Christianity, as preached buy the moderate Church of England:

Christianity means love your neighbour, forgive your enemies, help the old, the hurt and the sick, be unkind to no one, be loyal to your family and friends; do not be greedy; do not tell lies, be thankful to those who provide for you; never betray your friends or your country; treat people of different backgrounds, colours and faiths as equals; support the rights of women and minorities  to live the way they want to, undirected by anyone else. Be polite and thoughtful of others  Oh… and do no harm. (have I missed anything?)

The British evangelicals I know are very good people who would probably agree with my above list, but add evangelising.   Why is it that we hear no mention of the above Christian teachings from American evangelicals? They seem to be preoccupied with sex (don’t do it), politics (divisive), immigration( ban it) and getting to heaven (really?). The question is: Do they understand christianity at all?

Evangelical leaders and anti-abortion groups are now ramping up their efforts to reelect President Trump.  The Faith and Freedom Coalition (FFC) will spend tens of millions of dollars on a voter mobilization effort that aims to register 1 million Christians in key battleground states and reach 30 million people nationwide.

American evangelicals are told to attract people to Christ, to convince them, to witness to them, to speak the truth in a way that invites strangers in, welcomes them, makes them feel loved.  But what are they welcoming newcomers into?  A caring, loving social movement, devoted to caring for all Americans and righting wrongs?  Or are they in reality a political party- cum-lobbying group that is very white and very resentful, and whose resentment has been caused by the very right- wing national policies they support.  Baffling, isn’t it?

 

Ideologies of the extreme Right

 

White replacement theory is said to be the driver behind much of the gun violence in America. It claims that white people will be systematically replaced by black and brown migrants, and comprises two sub-conspiracies:

  • the so-called “great replacement theory”, originating in France: western identity is under siege by massive waves of immigration, mainly from the Middle East and Africa, which is going to alter the culture and demographics of the West forever.  Followers believe racial mixing weakens the fabric of society and is an imminent threat to the stability of majority-white , western nations.   Others in this belief system believe in a shadowy Jewish group that aims to rule the world and wants a homogenous society they can control.
  • “the white genocide conspiracy” comes from the US and originated in the Reconstruction era, after the abolition of slavery. It claimed that the US was on the brink of a “race war” in which the former slaves would rise up and kill their former masters.  Strange though this now seems to us, this theory is merging with the “great replacement“ theory online, and focuses these days on migrants from south of the border,  purporting to be a call to arms to protect the white race.  Many of the 250 mass shootings in 2019 were rooted in this idea, mainly espoused by young, white men.  (synopsis of an article in Guardian Weekly, 9 August 2019)

With climate change you can be sure that the migrations will gather pace, along with sympathy for the white replacement theory. At the moment it attracts people of low IQ, poor, badly educated and often unable to find work.  Trump, an expert in resentment politics is making it sound “respectable”. Apparently, no amount of harassment and cruelty towards innocent Latino children crossing the border, for instance, is enough for his base.

Global wealth

Imagine lining up all the riches in the world and distributing them evenly to adults across the globe. Every adult on Earth would end up with $63,100, according to the 2018 Global Wealth Report from the Swiss bank Credit Suisse. The figure puts global adult average wealth at a record high.

But, of course, our world’s riches aren’t distributed evenly. The boom in global wealth over recent years has lined the pockets of the already rich, particularly those with fortunes worth at least $50 million. The ranks of these “ultra-high net worth” individuals have quadrupled since our new millennium began.  (Chuck Collins, for the Institute for Policy Studies Inequality.org team).

Climate change is already causing political upheaval and mass migration.  Massive amounts of public money will be needed to help the hungry and displaced, if violence is not to grow.  The super-rich have fixed the system so that they pay minimal tax, but do “contribute “ to the expenses of politicians everywhere, and thus have huge political power.  We can expect them to continue to shrug their shoulders.  Anyone who has studied history knows that this is unsustainable and will end in tears.  Stupid? yes.

 

Alexander McCall Smith on teachers and the taught

“Below are comments from the writer, Alexander McCall Smith, in his article in the June 2015 edition of “Prospect” magazine, the British magazine designed for those who think and who have a sense of humour, under the title “If I ruled the World”.

“Teachers too would have their authority returned to them. Children would be taught grammar, and in particular encouraged to use the accusative properly and to put verbs in their sentences, where possible. They would be told what a verb is. They would be taught not to use the word “like” every 10 seconds. They would be taught not to run alltheirwordstogether. This would mean that when they got jobs announcing flights at airports people would be able to understand what they were saying.

“Epicurus would probably agree that the “What the hell – let them speak the language any way they like” gang who have dominated education in the English-speaking world since baby-boomers were invented, should, like, be pensioned off and our language restored to what it used to be – the universally understood and agreed way of communicating and which created a vibrant community.”

The above post first appeared on the blog in 2015, and is the most visited posting in five years. It clearly resonated with the readership, who have difficulty, for instance, following actors who gabble, like, on the stage and TV and mangle English, and particularly Shakespeare – one of many modern challenges.  Mind you, the people who are really into philosophy are often no better.  Why is it that in trying to communicate philosophical ideas they have to use inaccessible language and come across so humourless?   I suppose they think it adds something, a je ne sais qua, to their reputation. Well, no, actually.  What is the point of philosophy if it is written in bad English and is not easily understood?  “Get thee gone, varmint!” (from somewhere in Shakespeare.  I’ve forgotten).