I saw the wife and small child of one of the nuclear power plant workers on the morning news today. I can only imagine the fears and anxiety associated with having a loved one in this situation. I am sure many share the same feelings I do in terms of the courage and bravery of these workers, who are daily putting their lives at risk to prevent even greater disaster than has already been experienced. Here is a link to the news story:
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/42207681#42207681
I imagine these workers have already been exposed to high levels of radioactivity while at work securing these plants. They are literally risking their lives for those in the area of the plant, as well as society at large.
I always find it disturbing when workers are put in harm's way to earn a paycheck. Regardless of the fact that they get paid and in some dangerous jobs they may earn extra pay due to the great risk involved, it seems hard to imagine that trade off. I often worry that decisions like this are made without full understanding of the risk.... Or perhaps without other options?
More disturbing is that this man-made industry is of course capable of catastrophic disaster. Despite systems of safety procedures developed and strict standards and requirements to protect the public. We only need to consider the 'disaster of the moment' to realize that despite the perception that we can control things with rules and requirements, things do go wrong...earthquakes and tsunami's are possible. Terrorist attacks (and yes, unfortunately on US soil) are possible. Terrible mistakes, accidents and weather events are possible.
We would like to think we are civilized and mostly in control of what happens. Yet we are every so often reminded of our own helplessness and vulnerability. As with risks of other rare events- we do not think about these risks in a regular way and often are struck by the possibility only when confronted by a one in a million event.
I think each of us identifies with those workers. We have all had the experience of loyalty or devotion to a job or role. Or a sense of duty or responsibility for getting a job done.
Do they continue today at work for the paycheck or the extra bonus due to the risk? I doubt that. I suspect they sacrifice their own safety for the others they protect outside of the plant walls... The wife and child I watched today, anxiously awaiting their safe return. I suspect the paycheck is low on their priorities now. I suspect their employer is also not high on their list either.
To those workers and to all workers who risk their own safety for the greater good... We are all indebted to you.
Most of us have the luxury of allowing work to be 'only a job'. We are never faced with such decisions. Hopefully those of us who don't risk our lives aren't part of the reason these workers may pay with their lives.
I consider the individuals reassuring us of safety when there are unanswered questions or they really are not sure. No one really can be sure of safety in all circumstances. Do business priorities sometimes encourage risks to be taken or safety standards or concerns to be overlooked? When faced with a tragedy like this I wonder why didn't we imagine the possibility of a situation like this? Why didn't we imagine the oil spilling into the gulf last year... Competing interests sometimes do not result in good decisions for society. A reason we have standards and oversight and why money or profit as a driver is not always a good thing.
I hope we all very carefully consider the responsibilities we carry out that do affect the health and safety of others. If only we could act as bravely and courageously in protecting society as those 50 workers are. I would like to believe they would not risk other's safety for profit.
Here is another view on the story...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8393018/Japan-nuclear-crisis-Fukushima-Fifty-cut-off-from-family.html
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Should we ban football and other sports with a high likelihood of injury?
Medpagetoday has a survey about football and whether or not it should be banned. Should it be banned? Here is the link: http://www.medpagetoday.com/Surveys/ Maybe you should register your vote.
I know there was an article in the paper in the past few weeks about a prominent medical examiner who suggested football be banned for those under 18 years. (Here is a link to the abc news report: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/chicago-bears-football-player-dave-duersons-suicide-renews/story?id=13003593 )
I’ve blogged before about the use of protection (mouthguards) and their role in prevention of injury (here is the link –it was a while ago…. http://mentalnotesbyjoanne.blogspot.com/2009/09/sports-and-risks-of-concussion.html --you will see some comments from one of my very knowledgeable and bright students as well). I am not clear however on the remaining risks despite use of much protective equipment.
Here is an interesting article –written in 1977 – by a chiropractor who suggested way back then that there should be a switch from football to soccer. He made the suggestion based on his experience treating up to 1/3 of those playing in his local football league… http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2378736/pdf/canfamphys00306-0030.pdf His rationale is based on not only the often serious spinal, ligament and muscular injuries he treated, but his belief that soccer is a better cardiovascular conditioning sport.
Some of the comments on the medpagesurvey also suggest that youth are encouraged to ‘bulk up’ for the team, potentially adding cardiovascular risk to the list of other health hazards.
I must admit, other than being an occasional football spectator, I know little about the sport and its culture. As an outsider it does seem to be one of the sports where brute strength and physical contact are the norm, and the crowds seem to love to see the physical contact and a great brawl… (although other sports also have these qualities).
There is also a culture in athletics today where children are involved in both school and recreational athletic programs. If a child has talent, they can belong to an ‘elite’ team. It is quite an industry today that I don’t think existed in the past. I think it is common also for parents to partially live out their own athletic dreams in the performance of their child. At what point is society going too far? At a recent athletic competition I was very aware of the wrist, ankle and other splints being worn by the athletes. I’ve watched children ‘shake off’ an injury and continue in competition… is this a good practice?
I think we have much better data today about the problem of injury and long term health consequences in sports. Here is a blog written by a neurologist, who speaks to the long term effects of hitting your head that does not result in a concussion. The result is Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) – previously known as dementia pugilistica. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/neuro-atheism/201102/ban-football As Dr. Weisman so aptly notes, we are not measuring the regular head blows that occur in this or any contact sport. So we underestimate exposure all the time! A positive currently is that we are much more focused on the identification and treatment of concussion– a step in the right direction, but one that does not necessarily resolve the problem.
As a scientist and a parent, I am concerned about sports injury. I am deeply disturbed that many children enter adulthood with chronic injuries that they will live with forever. In the case of head injury, my concerns are of course deepened. Football is not alone… many sports share very high risk of injury and athletes, parents, and coaches must consider and reconsider this dilemma.
I know there was an article in the paper in the past few weeks about a prominent medical examiner who suggested football be banned for those under 18 years. (Here is a link to the abc news report: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/chicago-bears-football-player-dave-duersons-suicide-renews/story?id=13003593 )
I’ve blogged before about the use of protection (mouthguards) and their role in prevention of injury (here is the link –it was a while ago…. http://mentalnotesbyjoanne.blogspot.com/2009/09/sports-and-risks-of-concussion.html --you will see some comments from one of my very knowledgeable and bright students as well). I am not clear however on the remaining risks despite use of much protective equipment.
Here is an interesting article –written in 1977 – by a chiropractor who suggested way back then that there should be a switch from football to soccer. He made the suggestion based on his experience treating up to 1/3 of those playing in his local football league… http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2378736/pdf/canfamphys00306-0030.pdf His rationale is based on not only the often serious spinal, ligament and muscular injuries he treated, but his belief that soccer is a better cardiovascular conditioning sport.
Some of the comments on the medpagesurvey also suggest that youth are encouraged to ‘bulk up’ for the team, potentially adding cardiovascular risk to the list of other health hazards.
I must admit, other than being an occasional football spectator, I know little about the sport and its culture. As an outsider it does seem to be one of the sports where brute strength and physical contact are the norm, and the crowds seem to love to see the physical contact and a great brawl… (although other sports also have these qualities).
There is also a culture in athletics today where children are involved in both school and recreational athletic programs. If a child has talent, they can belong to an ‘elite’ team. It is quite an industry today that I don’t think existed in the past. I think it is common also for parents to partially live out their own athletic dreams in the performance of their child. At what point is society going too far? At a recent athletic competition I was very aware of the wrist, ankle and other splints being worn by the athletes. I’ve watched children ‘shake off’ an injury and continue in competition… is this a good practice?
I think we have much better data today about the problem of injury and long term health consequences in sports. Here is a blog written by a neurologist, who speaks to the long term effects of hitting your head that does not result in a concussion. The result is Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) – previously known as dementia pugilistica. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/neuro-atheism/201102/ban-football As Dr. Weisman so aptly notes, we are not measuring the regular head blows that occur in this or any contact sport. So we underestimate exposure all the time! A positive currently is that we are much more focused on the identification and treatment of concussion– a step in the right direction, but one that does not necessarily resolve the problem.
As a scientist and a parent, I am concerned about sports injury. I am deeply disturbed that many children enter adulthood with chronic injuries that they will live with forever. In the case of head injury, my concerns are of course deepened. Football is not alone… many sports share very high risk of injury and athletes, parents, and coaches must consider and reconsider this dilemma.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Happiest Places to Live List! (or best and worst places to live?)
Gallup just reported on their "Gallup- Healthways Well-Being Index" from 2010. This was a telephone survey (yes think of the ramifications of that...) which measures 'well being'. Areas of well-being included self evaluation, emotional health, work environment, physical health, healthy behavior and basic access to care, exercise and community life. Here is a link to the story:
http://www.livescience.com/13100-happiest-states-gallup-survey.html
Hawaii came in first place! That sounds wonderful to me... I just heard they had a need for Psych APRN's there! Grab that job - the beaches, sunshine and everything else I imagine about Hawaii do sound wonderful! Other states that made the top 10: Wyoming - having visited there the past couple of summers, I do agree that it would be a very cool place to live. Alaska was number 4... Colorado 5.
As for the 'worst' (or as Jeanna Bryner, author tactfully identifies, The bottom 10 states) West Virginia and Kentucky were the first two.
It surprised me that Connecticut would be number 9 in the 10 best list... mainly because we really don't get very much sunshine here in CT... and I really do notice that... However maybe CT made it due to the kinds of access we have here, the number of folks with advanced education... and perhaps good jobs? I don't know... of course I would love to see that data!
http://www.livescience.com/13100-happiest-states-gallup-survey.html
Hawaii came in first place! That sounds wonderful to me... I just heard they had a need for Psych APRN's there! Grab that job - the beaches, sunshine and everything else I imagine about Hawaii do sound wonderful! Other states that made the top 10: Wyoming - having visited there the past couple of summers, I do agree that it would be a very cool place to live. Alaska was number 4... Colorado 5.
As for the 'worst' (or as Jeanna Bryner, author tactfully identifies, The bottom 10 states) West Virginia and Kentucky were the first two.
It surprised me that Connecticut would be number 9 in the 10 best list... mainly because we really don't get very much sunshine here in CT... and I really do notice that... However maybe CT made it due to the kinds of access we have here, the number of folks with advanced education... and perhaps good jobs? I don't know... of course I would love to see that data!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
