Still Singing

April 9, 2020April 7, 2020Michael 2 Comments

A, B, C, D, E, F, G…

Happy birthday to me,

Happy birthday to me, …

Karma, karma, karma chameleon…

If I were a rich man,

Daidle deedle daidle
Daidle daidle deedle daidle dumb.

All day long I’d biddy-biddy-bum,

If I were a wealthy man.

Are you still singing while you wash your hands? Are you still washing your hands? It’s a valid question. Mankind in general is not known for neither patience nor perseverance and washing your hands for a full 20 seconds every time you go to the sink takes both in quantities not many of us have. And it’s only been a few weeks. You should get used to it. Even in the absence of a pandemic you should get used to it but I’m thinking we are probably in for a longer ride than just a few weeks. Or even months.

Do you realize this isn’t the first pandemic to hit the world in the first quarter of a century? Let’s review:

20th century, 1918-1920, Spanish Flu, 50 million dead
19th century, 1817-1824, Cholera, 25 million dead
18th century, 1710, Smallpox, 8 million dead
17th century, 1603-1685. Plague, 3 million dead
16th century, 1520, Smallpox, 56 million dead
15th century (Quiet, but there weren’t that many people left.)
14th century, Plague, 1330 – 1353, 200 million dead!

Okay, so I cheated on the 14th century but I bet the Black Death as it is so famously known had its actual beginnings before 1325. You don’t just wipe out 60% of the population without a running start. And there were others...

Except for the two smallpox outbreaks do you notice something. None look like they were over in just a few weeks. You can tell by the way they stretch over years. One over an almost entire century. I don’t know how much a factor it will be in minimizing our duration, but sticking to those 20 second handwashings along with the social distancing and otherwise minimizing contact will be a positive factor. I’m just not sure if we can call it a possible factor. Like I said, patience and perseverance aren’t our strong suits.

Look at the most recent respiratory pandemics, all post 1950 so they are all within some of our lifetimes and all within the ages of mass communication, modern medicine, and soap. The Asian Flu pandemic of 1957-1958 killed 1.1 million people worldwide. The Hong Kong Flu of 1968-1970 was responsible for 1 million deaths. The Swine Flu pandemic hit from 2009-2010 and killed approximately 250,000 people. (As of April 7 COVID-19 deaths worldwide total about 75,000. COVID-19 was first reported in December 2019, noted a worldwide public health emergency by the World Health Organization on 30 January 2020 and then declared a pandemic on 11 March.) All of these stretched over at least 2 years. Viruses are sneaky little devils and they hide out well.

I would like to say at least the death totals are going down but the latest numbers have COVID-19 responsible for a third of the number of deaths of the Swine Flu in less than 4 months.

Next week I’ll post another more lighthearted take on something happening around me but for now, let’s get back to singing those songs, staying in, and, particularly now when every worldwide religion is celebrating some holiday, praying if you got them.

Alright, altogether now:

Wash, wash, wash your hands.

Scrub them in the stream

Vigorously, vigorously, vigorously, vigorously.

Ain’t life just a dream?

(Repeat)

Sun, Sun, Sunny Days

June 14, 2018Michael 5 Comments

We are having some sunny, sunny, sunny days. Days meant for the liberal use of SPF 50. Or higher even?

Controversy of controversies, people are arguing about sun screen! Fifty years ago if we wanted sunscreen we wore hats and long sleeve shirts outdoors. Did you think those baseball uniforms were just a fashion statement? If you slathered anything on your skin it was most likely a splash of Coppertone or Sea & Ski hoping for a deep, dark tan rather than hoping to not get skin cancer.

Today, everybody knows of the dangers of overexposure to the sun and the significant health consequences that go beyond cosmetic considerations. But still people question. For some reason, all countries don’t use the same rating system for sunscreens but most people recognize the SPF ratings even if they all don’t know what those numbers mean. Like nutrition and politics, many people are content to get their skin protection news and information from late night TV and underemployed comedians.

It’s been established that SPF 15 blocks 93% of UF-A rays, those rays that are responsible for skin damage including melanoma. Does SPF 30 protect the skin from twice as many sun rays? Yes and no. The companies that don’t make products with higher SPF ratings will tell you that you can’t block more than 100% of anything. And darned if they aren’t true. And they continued to be true until they came up with their own SPF 30 which blocks 97% of those rays or an SPF 50 product blocking 98%. Let’s review. A jump in 15 SPFs increases the protection by 4% then the next 20 of those SPFs got us just another 1%. So where does that leave the new SPF 100 with its mammoth leap of 50 SPF thingies?

Instead, let’s look at what those SPF numbers are. Although you can quantify how much blockage they impart, that number on your sunscreen bottle isn’t a reflection of sun blocking. It’s actually the Sun Protection Factor or an estimation of how long you can stay exposed to the sun. An SPF 15 sunscreen means you can be in the sun for 15 minutes before you experience the damage unprotected skin experiences in one minute. SPF 30 gives you 30 minutes of exposure before seeing that damage, and so on.

You don’t double the amount of sun blocked by doubling the SPF but you double the time you can be in the sun without incurring the amount of damage your skin will experience. Or before having to reapply to extend that time.

Coppertone Oh, another thing about sunscreens. Those SPF numbers were calculated based on exposure to UV-A rays, the ones that cause potential skin cancers and other damage. Old fashioned sun burn is caused by UV-B rays. Not to worry though. Find a sunscreen that says it is “broad spectrum” and protects against both.

Umm, until you get wet. Then, you probably want to reapply regardless if how long it’s been since you last slathered.

We now return you to your regular program. Or to the sun porch.

Smile, You’re Protected From Candid Camera

April 21, 2014Michael Leave a comment

Before we begin please let us assure you that we are all for the presumption of innocence, civil rights, and the protection of privacy. But every now and then something comes up that makes us go more than hmm. Something that we’re certain Tom, John, Ben, and the gang in Philadelphia in 1776 really hadn’t had in mind.

Somewhere in Pennsylvania there is a young high school sophomore who has been the target of bullying. The school district in which he is currently a sophomore claims it takes all manner of precautions and discipline to provide a safe environment for its students, including protection from physical, verbal, and psychological abuse dealt by bullies, not unlike the rest of the country.

This young man had claimed to be the victim of a bully since the school year began. He brought his concerns to his mother who in turn brought them to the school per the district policy. Yet the bullying continued. The young man’s mother couldn’t even confirm if her concerns were ever addressed with the “alleged” bully and/or the “alleged” parents of said “alleged” bully. The district claimed that would be an infringement on the “alleged” bully’s “alleged” privacy if they were to disclose if they spoke with him or his parents about the “alleged” conduct.

Let’s fast forward to this spring. Young man has had enough of the bully and not having any positive response form the school decides the best way to convince them that he is being victimized is to show them the victimization. And so, with his cell phone, he records the bully bullying him. He takes this recording to his mother who takes it to the school who promptly has the young man arrested and charged with wiretapping for recording the “alleged” bully without his consent. About a week later the young victim is actually convicted under the wiretapping statutes of Pennsylvania and ordered to pay a fine and court costs, hopefully unlike the rest of the country. At least he didn’t get jail time.

Fast forward again a few weeks. There is discussion over this. The district attorney’s office gets involved and decides that perhaps this wasn’t the best outcome and asks for the conviction to be vacated. However, it will stay on his record until he requests, and pays the attending court and legal costs, to have his record expunged. The school district is not in any hurry to apologize and actually stands by its decision to have the young man charged since it wants to provide a safe environment for its students including the expectation of the right to privacy, apparently the “alleged” privacy of the “alleged” bully. And public opinion is pretty much split 50/50 on who is right and who is righter.

So we suppose the next time you’re walking through a store, or a parking lot, or used car establishment, or perhaps a bank or post office and you see the sign, “Smile, You’re on Camera,” you have the right to say, “No, I’m not.” Of all his inventions, it’s a shame the camera wasn’t one of Ben Franklin’s. Then we’d know for sure.

Now, that’s what we think. Really. How ‘bout you?