Monday 30 April 2012

The Book is Born!

My baby is here!


She was born a few days ago and is now ready to come to your house!

The pre-sales have all been shipped and should be in your hands around May 8th.

If you haven't ordered a copy yet you can buy one here NOW. If you order it soon it should get here in time for Mother's Day-- which would be the PERFECT gift. Tell your husbands ;)

If you don't have the money to buy a copy now go to your library and beg them to order a copy. Though trust me this is a book that you will want to have your own copy of.

But then again I am biased. Just a little. 

If you want to read excerpts from the book, to tide you over till you get the real thing, go here.

Oh, I love birth days!

Friday 27 April 2012

Obama’s Nixonian Enemies List

From the Wall Street Journal:
Try this thought experiment: You decide to donate money to Mitt Romney. You want change in the Oval Office, so you engage in your democratic right to send a check.

Several days later, President Barack Obama, the most powerful man on the planet, singles you out by name. His campaign brands you a Romney donor, shames you for “betting against America,” and accuses you of having a “less-than-reputable” record. The message from the man who controls the Justice Department (which can indict you), the SEC (which can fine you), and the IRS (which can audit you), is clear: You made a mistake donating that money.

Are you worried?

Richard Nixon’s “enemies list” appalled the country for the simple reason that presidents hold a unique trust. Unlike senators or congressmen, presidents alone represent all Americans. Their powers—to jail, to fine, to bankrupt—are also so vast as to require restraint. Any president who targets a private citizen for his politics is de facto engaged in government intimidation and threats. This is why presidents since Nixon have carefully avoided the practice.

Save Mr. Obama, who acknowledges no rules. This past week, one of his campaign websites posted an item entitled “Behind the curtain: A brief history of Romney’s donors.” In the post, the Obama campaign named and shamed eight private citizens who had donated to his opponent. Describing the givers as all having “less-than-reputable records,” the post went on to make the extraordinary accusations that “quite a few” have also been “on the wrong side of the law” and profiting at “the expense of so many Americans.”

These are people like Paul Schorr and Sam and Jeffrey Fox, investors who the site outed for the crime of having “outsourced” jobs. T. Martin Fiorentino is scored for his work for a firm that forecloses on homes. Louis Bacon (a hedge-fund manager), Kent Burton (a “lobbyist”) and Thomas O’Malley (an energy CEO) stand accused of profiting from oil. Frank VanderSloot, the CEO of a home-products firm, is slimed as a “bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”

These are wealthy individuals, to be sure, but private citizens nonetheless. Not one holds elected office. Not one is a criminal. Not one has the barest fraction of the position or the power of the U.S. leader who is publicly assaulting them.

“We don’t tolerate presidents or people of high power to do these things,” says Theodore Olson, the former U.S. solicitor general. “When you have the power of the presidency—the power of the IRS, the INS, the Justice Department, the DEA, the SEC—what you have effectively done is put these guys’ names up on ‘Wanted’ posters in government offices.” Mr. Olson knows these tactics, having demanded that the 44th president cease publicly targeting Charles and David Koch of Koch Industries, which he represents. He’s been ignored.

The real crime of the men, as the website tacitly acknowledges, is that they have given money to Mr. Romney. This fundraiser of a president has shown an acute appreciation for the power of money to win elections, and a cutthroat approach to intimidating those who might give to his opponents.

He’s targeted insurers, oil firms and Wall Street—letting it be known that those who oppose his policies might face political or legislative retribution. He lectured the Supreme Court for giving companies more free speech and (falsely) accused the Chamber of Commerce of using foreign money to bankroll U.S. elections. The White House even ginned up an executive order (yet to be released) to require companies to list political donations as a condition of bidding for government contracts. Companies could bid but lose out for donating to Republicans. Or they could quit donating to the GOP—Mr. Obama’s real aim.

The White House has couched its attacks in the language of “disclosure” and the argument that corporations should not have the same speech rights as individuals. But now, says Rory Cooper of the Heritage Foundation, “he’s doing the same at the individual level, for anyone who opposes his policies.” Any giver, at any level, risks reprisal from the president of the United States.

It’s gdtting worse because the money game is not going as Team Obama wants. Super PACs are helping the GOP to level the playing field against Democratic super-spenders. Prominent financial players are backing Mr. Romney. The White House’s new strategy is thus to delegitimize Mr. Romney (by attacking his donors) as it seeks to frighten others out of giving.

The Obama campaign has justified any action on the grounds that it has a right to “hold the eventual Republican nominee accountable,” but this is a dodge. Politics is rough, but a president has obligations that transcend those of a candidate. He swore an oath to protect and defend a Constitution that gives every American the right to partake in democracy, free of fear of government intimidation or disfavored treatment. If Mr. Obama isn’t going to act like a president, he bolsters the argument that he doesn’t deserve to be one.
One could always argue the old cliché that politics is a full contact sport, and Romney supporters should shut up and quit whining.

The problem with that argument is that it’s different being attacked by a president that has the power of the Federal government behind his fulminations. If Sean Hannity attacks Obama for his association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, that’s not the same as being attacked by somebody whose subordinates in the bureaucracy can destroy your business.

Then there is the fact that Obama ran as the candidate of “hope and change.” As it becomes increasingly obvious that he’s just another bare-knuckle pol, willing to demonize his adversaries, play dirty to keep office and take the low road, the country becomes increasingly conscious of the fact that it was sold a bill of goods in November, 2008.

Five Things for Friday, 39th Edition

-1-

For the last few months Jon and I have bden teasing each other about whose "baby" was going to be "born" first-- his thesis or my book. It looks like mine made its emergence (in print) first!

Felice got the very first copy of our book 'The Gift of Giving Life: Rediscovering the Divine Nature of Pregnancy and Birth" in her hands on Wednesday night.


She sent us all a picture of her holding it and a video.

I nearly cried when I saw it.

I just can't believe it is really real. In many ways the process of writing this book has been so similar to a real birth-- we've gestated (almost two years), been in active labor (editing, and boy that hurt!), and for the last few months have been trying our hardest to push this baby out. A few weeks ago we decided we were crowing, last week we could feel the baby's head, and now the shoulders out and she has an APGAR score-- I'm giving her a 10!

Nerdy I know, but what else do you expect from girls who have been writing a birth book for three years?

I have put so much of my heart and soul into creating this book that I am both thrilled and terrified for it to come out-- sort of like birth, right? Mostly I am thrilled and can't wait to hold this little baby in my arms. I am pretty sure I might just snuggle with it on the couch for a day.

If you have ordered a copy of my baby you should be getting it really soon!

She is beautiful, so beautiful.


-2-

Rose has been saying the cutest things lately. Her vocabulary is really expanding and sometimes what she says is just too cute.

Just three examples:

A few days ago she got a blister on her foot from wearing her church shoes without socks all day (she wouldn't wear any other shoes because they weren't princess shoes). That night, after I put a Bandaid on it, she kept asking me if I would kiss "her bliss". So I did. How could I refuse that?

The other cute thing she has been saying is calling Ritz crackers "bubble crackies". I never buy Ritz crackers but I caved in and got a box a few weeks ago. Last week they were on sale and I bought two extra boxes, just because I love to hear her ask me for "the bubble crackies".

Yesterday I went to help her get dressed and I picked out a cute pair of pink pants and tried to put them on her. She emphatically told me that she wasn't going to wear those pants and so I picked another pair of cute blue pants. When I tried to put them on her she refused and LOUDLY told me, "Mom, Princesses don't wear pants." So there you have it... right from the princess herself.


-3-

Our house selling adventure is going well, though I can't wait for it to be over. It appears like the contract with our house is going to go through and that we should be closing around the middle or end of May. The frustrating thing now is trying to figure out where we should move to. The problem is that we really don't want to leave where we are now, we love it. Yet we know that we aren't suppose to stay here, and that was an answer that neither one of us were happy with. While I have faith that God will guide us where we need to be, it is still really stressing me out. I just keep praying that God will lead us to 1) where we can be of service in His kingdom and 2) where we will be able to get what our family needs to thrive. I know that He will guide us, but I am finding that stepping out into the darkness never gets any easier--- no matter how many times you do it.

-4-

Two of my favorite professors (and my little sister's favorite professor) in the world just published an incredible book. 
 

When I worked at the Women's Research Institute at BYU Bonnie Ballif-Spanvill and Valerie Hudson were just getting the WomenStats Database under way in full swing. The database documents of women's rights and women's social, political and family situations in every country in the world. With the data base they were hoping that they would be able to show that the economic and political stability and growth of a country was directly related to how well women were treated and valued, which is exactly what they found. The implications of their findings is enormous and I can't wait to see what else comes out of this, hopefully towards creating a better world for women and one in which the perpetuation of life (and those who create it) is more highly valued.

This is another baby I can't wait to snuggle up with on the couch, even if it isn't mine :)

Oh, and don't be scared away by the title, it is referring to "sex" as in "gender" :) 

-5-

Have you seen the Kid History videos yet? We watched all of them a few nights ago as a family and all of us were busting a gut laughing. It is such a cute idea. I would love to be able to capture my kids telling a story and do something similar, maybe for a present for grandparents?

This one is my favorite.



Have a great weekend!

If you want to link to your own "Five Things for Friday" post you can use the tool below to add your link. 1) Please link to the URL of your blog post and not your main blog and 2) Please include a link back here. 

 






Wednesday 25 April 2012

George Zimmerman

From Reuters, a piece of excellent journalism about George Zimmerman, the fellow changed with killing Trayvon Martin in a racially charged incident.

Some conclusions:

1.) Zimmerman doesn’t look the least bit like a racist, given his own multi-racial background, and his associations with black people.

2.) Zimmerman has a history of being a bit of a hothead.

3.) Zimmerman’s neighborhood had indeed been victimized by a number of burglaries by black males

The article says nothing about what actually transpired between Zimmerman and Martin on the night of the shooting, and that is what should determine whether Zimmerman is guilty of murder.

Tuesday 24 April 2012

Midwifery; a David and Goliath Tale

The following article was written by Jennifer Stover, current president and founding member of the Birth and Baby Resource Network, for the Women's Press.  The original online published version can be found here.  The history of American midwifery is a long one.  Please take a moment to read on, and learn a little about the road our midwives have traveled.

Midwifery; a David and Goliath Tale
By Jennifer Stover

The story of midwifery in America is a classic power struggle for women’s rights, respect and choice; a tale of the clash of women’s culture and values with the male dominated spheres of science, medicine and finance. It is an ugly story laced with racism and class war fare. This struggle continues to walk the halls of political power and sits in insurance industry board rooms today.

It began as the eighteenth century was drawing to a close and the science of medicine was on the rise. Men for the first time began to move deeply into the privacy of the birth room, a place that in most cultures around the world is traditionally populated almost exclusively by women. This slow and determined encroachment into what had previously always been a woman’s world began the battle.

Before men became involved American midwives had always held a place of respect within their communities. Their skill at helping women during the birth process was of vital importance to all in the community. Women were encouraged to stay mobile as long as possible during the birth, the pain of the process was recognized but not believed to be insurmountable, the passage of time was noted but there were no standardized graphs labors had to abide by, and women utilized up-right physiologically sound positions for pushing a baby out.

When male doctors took over this all changed. Pain relieving drugs were used as an inducement to have doctors attend women’s births. These medications changed the balance of power forever; stripping the woman’s innate abilities. She became an object to practice medicine upon; someone who needed her baby delivered to her like a pizza instead of using her own physical power to bring her baby forth. Soon untested scientific “theories” blended with necessities created by using pain medications and women were routinely being cut and babies were being pulled out with forceps.

As the prestige of the medical profession rose, so did their power. In the end it came down to dollars and cents. In order to corner the market doctors began a campaign to stamp out midwifery. First they created a belief that birth was a medical event which could only be safe if attended by a physician. Doctors traveled in the upper circles of society. They convinced bankers, lawyers and other prominent society men to avail themselves of the best that the science of modern medicine could offer for their wives by using a physician. Men controlled the medical schools and women were not allowed to attend so female care providers slowly began to die out. In the early twentieth century not satisfied yet, they convinced the government to begin a propaganda campaign slandering midwives as dirty, illiterate, and ignorant. Eventually only poor women or newly arrived immigrants were still turning to midwives for care.

Meanwhile another huge shift in health care in our country was taking place. Hospitals were on the rise, with their bureaucracies, standardizations, schedules and sanitization of birth. Women were told it was best when labor began to leave their homes, where they had some control, and travel to a hospital, where they had no control.  Hospitals lead to the immediate separation of the newborn from its mother and scheduled feedings. These disruptions in the process along with the drugs created babies who could not suck effectively, needing to be force fed from bottles. Soon the women of America thought their bodies were so defective they couldn’t even breastfeed their own children. Meanwhile the practice of midwifery was outlawed in most states.

But it’s hard to hold good women down. It is hard to stop women from answering the call to serve women; especially women in need. In the 1920’s nurses began to step forward to get additional training in the skills required to help low income women, the rural and urban poor. These were women who couldn’t pay doctors and hospitals, therefore providing them care did not threaten the medical establishment’s monopoly. They eventually founded specialized nurse midwifery schools and associations. From this branch was born the certified nurse midwife. In the 1960’s couples living on communes had turned their backs on many forms of the “establishment”. These female rebels began to birth their babies at home with the help of other women in their communities. The daring women who answered this call eventually became highly trained homebirth midwives. It took courage to be a midwife, to practice midwifery without a license. Not only could you lose everything, your home and your practice, you could be thrown in jail. In our county one traditional midwife was brought up on charges of second degree murder in 1978. Over time this branch of midwifery also adopted standards for training, created associations and worked hard to become legal once again. In California the legal battle culminated in 1993 in the creation of a system to license out of hospital midwives but it took 4 more years for the first group of midwives to be licensed by the state medical board.

All midwives are still fighting for the right to work as autonomous, respected members of the birth provider community. Whether they are CNMs who have made the choice to work in a doctor’s practice under his supervision because even if they could find a company willing to cover them medical malpractice insurance is prohibitive, or the LMs who can’t get insurance company’s to reimburse their clients for basic care the struggle continues. The California Medical Board is currently reviewing whether to change the language in the regulations governing LMs to allow them to order the life saving medications and tools they need to attend birthing women. And so the struggle continues.

This year on May 5th,the International Day of the Midwife, the women and their families who have been cared for so well for so many years by our community’s midwives will gather in Mission Plaza to honor 41 courageous, tireless, and caring professional women. The Birth & Baby Resource Network along with the co-sponsors of this year’s Birth & Baby Fair wish to invite you to join us at 10:30 for this historic event in the annuls of San Luis Obispo women’s rights.


To learn more about the history of midwifery:

A Midwife’s Tale; Martha Ballard her Diary by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

Motherwit: an Alabama Midwife’s Story by Onnie Lee Logan

Listen to Me Good: the Life Story of an Alabama Midwife by Margaret Charles Smith

Birth Matters: a Midwife’s Manifesta by Ina May Gaskin

A Short History of Midwifery: http://midwifeinfo.com/articles/a-short-history-of-midwifery.

I am a Midwife, a movie by the Midwives Alliance of North America: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIl6VnjQjJ8

Did You Miss Our Radio Interview?



The interview went famously!

If you missed the show on radio you can go here to listen to the podcast!

Monday 23 April 2012

Blood or Milk?


Friday and Saturday I performed with the modern dance group I dance with. Everything went really well and it was so much fun to be on stage with my little boy. He did great. One of the pieces that the adult company performed (we are all mothers) was  entitled "Milk" . It was  a beautiful statement about motherhood-- the generational learning, the ups, the downs, the sacrifices, the chaos, the joy,  and the choices that have to be made. It may just be one of my all time favorite dances I've ever danced in. It really spoke to my heart, in so many ways.
I asked the choreographer if, when we get the video back, I can share it here and she said yes. So hopefully sometime in the next few weeks I will figure out how to post the video. Yet in the meantime I just wanted to share the poem that inspired the piece, and to which one of our dancers danced a solo to at the end (and just in case you are wondering, you CAN dance to a poem :). It is called "Blood and Milk" and is by Sharlee Mullins Glenn and was published in the Fall 2005 issue of Segullah.

***

Blood and Milk

by Sharlee Mullins Glenn

I dreamed of Oxford . . .
(spires, a thousand spires, endless lectures, musty halls
a solitary self in a Bodleian expanse
A good life my dear Wormwood. An orderly life.)

then awakened to laundry
and things to be wiped
countertops, noses, bottoms)

How did this happen? And when, exactly?

Time flows, it flows, it flows
and there are choices to be made:

left or right?
paper or plastic?
blood or milk?

There's freedom in the bleeding;
bondage in the milk—do not be deceived.

Ah, but it's an empty freedom; a holy bondage,
A sweet and holy bondage.

Five times I chose the chains, those tender chains,
(though once will bind you just as well!)
and checked the crimson flow.
Suckled while dreaming of Trinity Term
but awakened, always awakened, to the laundry
and to that small and cherished captor at my breast.

***

Isn't that beautiful? I've heard it at least five dozen times in the last few months and every time I hear it it gives me something new to think about.

Friday 20 April 2012

Five Things for Friday, Big Head Edition

This might be the most heather-centric Five Things for Friday ever written. This week has been CRAZY wild and I feel like I've been in the public (aka, anyone else besides my husband and kids) eye non-stop this week. Jon told me I am in danger of getting a big head and so I thought that since my head is already swelling I might as well just get it all out now!

-1-

I was interviewed for the Mormon Women Project and they posted my interview "Celebrating the Unseen Woman" on Wednesday! It was a lot of fun to be interviewed but also a little strange. The whole time I was talking I kept wondering if anything I was sharing would be of interest to anyone. It was so fun to see the whole interview put together and to get people's feedback and realize that what I said actually made a little bit of sense! Also, I am excited because it saves me a lot of work because I've decided that for my "About Me" page (which has been SO HARD for me to write) I am just going to link to this interview. Poof! Done. Yippee!.

-2-

If you happen to live in Northern Utah and like dance you are personally invited to come see me (and Asher) dance with the Valley Dance Ensemble tonight and tomorrow night at 7PM at the Ellen Eccles Theater.


I am in two of the pieces (I'll be the one wearing the pink apron;) and Asher is dancing in the big children's piece (he is the Venus flytrap). It will be pretty fantastic and has a wide range of dance styles. If you come on Saturday there will be a reception afterwards and I'd love to meet you. You can get more details or order tickets here.

-3-

Jon defended his thesis on Tuesday and he did such a good job. I was so proud of him I nearly burst. He has worked so hard the last few years and school isn't his favorite pastime (unlike me) and he really had to endure to the end.

The most handsome thesis defender in the world... in my opinion at least :)

Also Jon told me to mention that if any of you are interested in learning more about duckweed (way more than you ever really wanted to know) that he has a blog. He found that it was easier for him to write his thesis if he posted pictures about his research and then wrote about it in a blog format before he formalized it. So, all his research (with pictures) is here in case any of you are super nerdy and are interested!

-4-

Tuesday evening, after Jon defended his thesis, we participated in a youth activity for the teenagers in our ward. The Young Women's president organized a program for the youth to help inspire them to read the Book of Mormon. She asked about a dozen of the men in our ward to dress up like prophets and prominent characters from the Book of Mormon and share that person's history, message, and testimony with the youth. She asked Jon and I to be Joseph and Emma Smith (since we have the costumes I made from the re-enactment).

I found the brown wig last year at a Halloween shop and since it was cheap I figured it would be handy to have in case I ever got to dress up like Emma again. I think it turned out good, though I've decided that I will definitely never dye my hair dark. I don't have the right complexion for it at all!


The program was incredible and the spirit was so strong. I think it will be a night our youth won't forget. One of these days I will have to share what I had Emma say, it went over really well. I was sad though that I was the only woman included in the program. They didn't include any of the women from the Book of Mormon. It made me realize how really important it is that I keep writing this blog. These women need to be talked about and shared, especially with our youth.

None of you would ever leave out the the women, right?

-5-

Angela shared this photo she put together and pinned on Pinterest, inspired by the post I wrote about how our family limits Internet and media time.

I was really impressed with how cute she made it look. It pretty much looks just like the group of Popsicle sticks I have sitting in mason jars on my fridge! Though I really like her additions and the idea of a blue "bonus ticket". I am going to make a few of those to stick in my jars and hand out as rewards. I figure that saying " Please sweetheart would you... and I'll give you a bonus ticket" might go over better than " Stop it! You better listen to me right now or else you'll loose a ticket and you'll sit in your room until dinner!" Not like I've ever said that or anything.... at least not today :)

Okay, and now I'll go find a pin and try to let a little air out of my big head! Or maybe I just need to remember this advice from Elder Uchtdorf:
"When I was called as a General Authority, I was blessed to be tutored by many of the senior Brethren in the Church. One day I had the opportunity to drive President LinkJames E. Faust to a stake conference. During the hours we spent in the car, President Faust took the time to teach me some important principles about my assignment. He explained also how gracious the members of the Church are, especially to General Authorities. He said, “They will treat you very kindly. They will say nice things about you.” He laughed a little and then said, “Dieter, be thankful for this. But don’t you ever inhale it.”
I am grateful and trying not to inhale ;) Have a great weekend and come see me dance if you can!

If you want to link to your own "Five Things for Friday" post you can use the tool below to add your link. 1) Please link to the URL of your blog post and not your main blog and 2) Please include a link back here.




Wednesday 18 April 2012

Remembering an Environmental Hoax

If anybody was the mother of the modern environmental movement, it was Rachel Carson, whose book Silent Spring was largely responsible for getting DDT banned. But in reality, her writing was sloppy, and indeed downright dishonest.

This is something to remember when hearing current environmentalists fuss and fume about the latest environmental threat.

The details are here:
In 1962, when Rachel Carson published her book Silent Spring, I was delighted. I belonged to several environmental-type organizations, had no feelings of respect for industry or big business, had one of my own books published by the Sierra Club, and I had written articles for The Indiana Waltonian, Audubon Magazine, and other environmental magazines.

At the time, I had been engaged in field work at the University of Wyoming research station in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, for three summers and I worked as biological coordinator for the National Park Service in Glacier National Park. I eagerly read the condensed version of Silent Spring in the New Yorker magazine and bought a copy of the book as soon as I could find it in the stores. As I read the first several chapters I noticed many statements that I realized were false; however, one can overlook such things when they are produced by one’s cohorts, and I did just that.

As I neared the middle of the book, the feeling grew in my mind that Rachel Carson was really playing loose with the facts and was also deliberately wording many sentences in such a way as to make them imply certain things without actually saying them. She was carefully omitting everything that failed to support her thesis that pesticides were bad, that industry was bad, and that any scientists who did not support her views were bad.

Dedication: A Lie

Birds Vs. Human Deaths

I then took notice of her bibliography and realized that it was filled with references from very unscientific sources. Also, each reference was cited separately each time it appeared in the book, thus producing an impressive array of “references” even though not many different sources were actually cited. I began to lose confidence in Rachel Carson, even though I thought that as an environmentalist I really should continue to support her.

I next looked up some of the references that Carson cited and quickly found that they did not support her contentions about the harm caused by pesticides. When leading scientists began to publish harsh criticisms of her methods and her allegations, it slowly dawned on me that Rachel Carson was not interested in the truth about those topics, and that I really was being duped, along with millions of other Americans.

As a result, I went back to the beginning of the book and read it all again, but this time my eyes were open and I was not lulled into believing that her motives were noble and that her statements could be supported by logic and by scientific fact. I wrote my comments down in rough draft style, and gathered together the scientific articles that refuted what Carson had reported the articles indicated. It was a most frustrating experience.

Finally, I began to join the detractors of Silent Spring, and when hearings were held to determine the fate of DDT in various states of this nation, I paid my own way to some of them so that I could testify against the efforts to ban that life-saving insecticide. It was gratifying to find that great numbers of scientists and health officials whom I had always held in high esteem were also testifying at those hearings, in defense of DDT and in opposition to the rising tide of antipesticide propaganda in environmental publications and in the media.

In testifying and speaking in public, I frequently exposed the misleading references Rachel Carson had cited in her book, presenting her statements from Silent Spring and then reading the truth from the actual publications she was purporting to characterize. This revealed to the audiences just how untruthful and misleading the allegations of Silent Spring really were.

Now, nearly 30 years later, the controversy is still boiling about how truthful Rachel Carson was. I recently learned that a movie honoring Rachel Carson and Silent Spring is being made for television. Because I believe such a movie would further misinform the public, the media, and our legislators, I decided to type up my original rough notes from 1962-1963 and make them available. Here they are, page by page, starting with her dedication.

Dedication: A Lie

Dedication. In the front of the book, Carson dedicates Silent Spring as follows: “To Albert Schweitzer who said ‘Man has lost the capacity to foresee and to forestall. He will end by destroying the Earth.’”

This appears to indicate that the great man opposed the use of insecticides. However, in his autobiography Schweitzer writes, on page 262: “How much labor and waste of time these wicked insects do cause us ... but a ray of hope, in the use of DDT, is now held out to us.” Upon reading his book, it is clear that Schweitzer was worried about nuclear warfare, not about the hazards from DDT!

Page 16. Carson says that before World War II, while developing agents of chemical warfare, it was found that some of the chemicals created in the laboratory were lethal to insects. “The discovery did not come by chance: insects were widely used to test chemicals as agents of death for man.” Carson thus seeks to tie insecticides to chemical warfare. However, DDT was never tested as an “agent of death for man.” It was always known to be nonhazardous to humans! Her implication is despicable.

Page 16. Carson says the pre-war insecticides were simple inorganic insecticides but her examples include pyrethrum and rotenone, which are complex organic chemicals.

Page 17. Carson says arsenic is a carcinogen (identified from chimney soot) and mentions a great many horrible ways in which it is violently poisonous to vertebrates. She then says (page 18): “Modern insecticides are still more deadly,” and she makes a special mention of DDT as an example.

This implication that DDT is horribly deadly is completely false. Human volunteers have ingested as much as 35 milligrams of it a day for nearly two years and suffered no adverse affects. Millions of people have lived with DDT intimately during the mosquito spray programs and nobody even got sick as a result. The National Academy of Sciences concluded in 1965 that “in a little more than two decades, DDT has prevented 500 million [human] deaths that would otherwise have been inevitable.” The World Health Organization stated that DDT had “killed more insects and saved more people than any other substance.” A leading British scientist pointed out that “If the pressure groups had succeeded, if there had been a world ban on DDT, then Rachel Carson and Silent Spring would now be killing more people in a single year than Hitler killed in his whole holocaust.”

It is a travesty, therefore, if Rachel Carson’s all-out attack on DDT results in any programs lauding her efforts to ban DDT and other life-saving chemicals!

Page 18. Referring to chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides (like DDT) and organophosphates (like malathion), Carson says they are all “built on a basis of carbon atoms, which are also the indispensable building blocks of the living world, and thus classed as ‘organic.’ To understand them we must see how they are made, and how they lend themselves to the modifications which make them agents of death.”

Surely it is unfair of Carson to imply that all insecticides are “agents of death” for animals other than insects.

Page 21. After referring to untruthful allegations that persons ingesting as little as one tenth of a part per million (ppm) of DDT will then store “about 10 to 15 ppm,” Carson states that “such substances are so potent that a minute quantity can bring about vast changes in the body.” (She does not consider the metabolism and breakdown of DDT in humans and other vertebrates, and their excretion in urine, and so on, which prevents the alleged “biological magnification” up food chains from actually occurring.) Carson then states: “In animal experiments, 3 parts per million [of DDT] has been found to inhibit an essential enzyme in heart muscle; only 5 parts per million has brought about necrosis or disintegration of liver cells. ...” This implies that considerable harm to one’s health might result from traces of DDT in the diet, but there has been no medical indication that her statements are true.

On page 22, Carson adds, “... we know that the average person is storing potentially*harmful amounts.” This is totally false!

Page 23. Carson says, “the Food and Drug Administration forbids the presence of insecticide residues in milk shipped in interstate commerce.” This is not true, either! The permissible level was 0.5 ppm in milk being shipped interstate.

Page 24. Carson says: “One victim who accidentally spilled a 25 percent industrial solution [of chlordane] on the skin developed symptoms of poisoning within 40 minutes and died before medical help could be obtained. No reliance can be placed on receiving advance warning which might allow treatment to be had in time.”

The actual details regarding this accident were readily available at the time, but Carson evidently chose to distort them. The accident occurred in 1949 in the chemical formulation plant, when a worker spilled a large quantity down the front of her body. The liquid contained 25 pounds of chlordane, 39 pounds of solvent, and 10 pounds of emulsifier (Journal of the American Medical Association, Aug. 13, 1955). Carson’s reference to this as a “25 percent solution” spilled on the skin certainly underplays the severity of that drenching, which was the only account known of such a deadly contamination during the history of chlordane formulation.
The article goes on and on with examples of distortion and sloppy pseudo-science.

But it told the New Moralists in the environmental movement what they wanted to hear, and gave them the first (in the modern era) of many bogey men.

Tuesday 17 April 2012

BBRN on the Radio!!!!

A couple of us at the BBRN will be on local station KCBX to talk about Midwifery and our Day of the Midwife project!

We will be speaking during their "Issues and Ideas" segment which airs at 4:00PM TOMORROW!

The show will air on station 90.1 FM in San Luis Obispo.

 Here are the other stations it airs on by location:

89.5 Santa Barbara
91.7 Paso Robles to Salinas
90.9 Santa Ynez, Avila Beach, Cambria
91.1 Cayucos
95.1 Lompoc

Check back here soon for un update on how the show went!

Don't forget to tune in tomorrow, 4/18/2012, at 4:00PM on your local KCBX station!!!!

Monday 16 April 2012

UPDATE: Audience Fragmentation and Media Content: Understanding Appeal in the New Media Environment

This past weekend, I was invited to give a short presentation at the 2012 Southern States Communication Association conference on a line of research looking at the role of morality in understanding the appeal of media entertainment to different audience segments. Much of this research should be credited to my contemporaries Dr. Ron Tamborini (Michigan State U) and Dr. Dana Mastro (U of Arizona) as well as my eternal co-authors Dr. Allison Eden (Frije University of Amsterdam) and Dr. Sven Joeckel (Universitat Erfurt - Germany).

The lecture notes might lose a bit of their context without having the dialogue - in fact, our panel was incredibly interactive (Ed. Note: panelist and lovable Dr. Bryce McNeil, Georgia State University, is working to load a podcast of our discussion soon) - but the abstract and slides below should provide a cursory context for the discussion. All emerging concepts, but I'm eager to engage more discussion!

Abstract (from SSCA 2012 program):Popular entertainment media is often lambasted by some for its portrayal of anti-social and immoral content, yet the typical Hollywood blockbuster often serves to reinforce rather than violate social mores (cf. Klapper, 1960). For better or worse, popular tends to serve as a mirror of the culture from which it stems, and producers craft message to appease the needs and tastes of that culture (Gans, 1954; Straabhaur, 1991). Indeed, newer theorizing on media production (Tamborini, 2011) has suggested that aggregate audience moral foundations can influence the production process, and early research has found morally-based content differences between content designed for specific cultures (Mastro et al., 2011). At the same time, if we consider the increased fragmentation of today’s media audience in which media content is produced to appeal to smaller, more well-defined fan bases, we wonder about the portability of this media to other audiences. In short, can increasingly-niche media be expected to survive out of its niche, or will it be seen as at least distasteful or at most immoral?

UPDATE: Dr. McNeil uploaded an audio file from the presentation: http://brycejmcneil.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/ssca-2012-full-panel1.mp3
Immoral, or distasteful?: Audience fragmentation and media content
View more presentations from West Virginia University - Department of Communication Studies

Friday 13 April 2012

Find Your Midwife!

On the left side bar of this blog...

<----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

there is a list of the midwives that practice in our area today and in the past.  Please find your midwife on the list, and if she isn't on there, let us know!

You can leave a comment below with her name, or email us at dayofthemidwife@gmail.com.

All midwives are fabulous, however, please remember that we are focusing on midwives from our county and local area only.

Monday 9 April 2012

Conservative Student Conference in Milwaukee


Students who are interested can apply to attend here. In fact, there is plenty of capacity, and all who apply will be accomodated.

Saturday 7 April 2012

Born Into Gentle Hands: Colt Adams



Colt Adams

Born into the hands of Tanya Parson, CPM, LM at home in 2012.


Please take a moment to submit your own children's names to our our participatory art project that will be displayed at this years Birth and Baby Fair, by clicking here.


Born Into Gentle Hands: Joe Stover



Joe Stover

Born into the hands of Nora Lewis, CNM at Sierra Vista Hospital in 1990.


Please take a moment to submit your own children's names to our our participatory art project that will be displayed at this years Birth and Baby Fair, by clicking here.

Monday 2 April 2012

The Ugly Face of Atheism

Warning: Extremely Offensive Language



From the “Reason Rally” (read: atheist rally): one of the performers, apparently allowed to perform by the event organizers. In other words, not a street performer at the fringe of the event.

This, of course, is not your typical atheist, nor your median atheist. But the crowd seems pretty enthusiastic.

But it is a reminder that atheists have their own equivalents of the Westboro Baptist Church. But then that merrie band of bigots would not be given any official place in any Christian event organized by anybody but themselves.

And the reader might go to YouTube to see appreciative comments from secularists.