Predicting the future.

We live in an age of reason--sort of.  We don't follow prophets, but we do worry about profits.  We know that the fortune cookie is just for fun.  We read our horoscope, but only consider whether it might be meaningful after the day has ended.  We only spend money on palm reading at fairs and faires and affairs.

We believe in science--mostly. We know about research, making predictions, understanding that relationships are not the same as cause and effect;  realizing that just because somethings works sometimes, doesn't make it dependable, or safe, or cost-effective.  We understand the difference between chance-probability and just plain luck.

But in the news, in the guise of scientific predictions and statistical analysis, we make plans for a future world as if it is set in stone.

Frequently those predictions are off, slower to arrive, faster to arrive, never to arrive.  And when that happens, we treat them the same way as the horoscope that wasn't true. We laugh and go on.  But frequently, the great engine of the world has already spent years working on the predicted event.  Things like space travel for money, controlling the weather, and more commonly, immigration patterns, voting patterns, economic changes.  The stuff that consumes the dreams and nightmares of the power people. The act of predicting a thing changes everything. 

Once a prediction is made, we begin to plan for it, or we start to make the change occur.  Its sort of like a self-fulfilling prophecy only on a grande scale.  We rarely ask what could we do to make this never happen and we don't ask ourselves if maybe the future change might just be a good thing.  We just dig in and start building a dam for the oncoming flood.

Looking at two events, one, a prediction made in the late 1970's---"by 2000, everyone up to our latitude would have to speak spanish to be employable".  The end of any prediction like this is unspoken, but becomes the focus, "if we don't do something now"  We have now spent 35 years trying to "do something now" and it is still a huge political issue and poor people that were born here are still in fear of losing their jobs to those spanish-speaking immigrants. 

Most of us still don't speak spanish.

But what did that prediction cause us to focus on?  Did anyone say "why are people coming up here from Central and South America when they know they are going to face a language barrier?  Did anyone try to help those countries with the problems that were making their own citizens run? 

NO!

We focused on two goals, teaching our own public school children in spanish immersion programs (novel and not a negative bone in its body,  but we never had the number of teachers needed to do this for many places) and targeting "illegals", "undocumenteds" and anyone that has a trace of a spanish accent or that has an hispanic last name.  (I even heard one woman, brunette with the first name Maria, be asked how she learned such good English, she was speechless, but I had been raised near her and knew her roots were Irish, German, English, and Wales.  She qualified for the DAR, old poor families love to brag about that.) 

We don't really seem to know our own history in this country.  Florida, Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, , in fact, everything west of the Mississippi was at one time claimed by Spain.  We should be expecting Hispanic surnames in our own citizens that have roots here as old as the oldest settlers to the U.S.A.   

All the original prediction proved, was that when faced with a change, we are mostly bad neighbors, and snobs about our roots and language.

The second event was not a prediction, but a lack of a prediction.  The Ebola scare that is filling the news and the political speeches for purposes of getting a vote was never predicted except perhaps by a few B-movies.  We did nothing to prepare.  The Western African Gorilla population wass nearing extinction from this virus just ten years ago.  If we had treated this information as important, we might now have a cure or a vaccine already.  But they are gorillas so who cares.

The first recognition of Ebola was in 1976.  In Africa,(
 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/04/ebola-zaire-peter-piot-outbreak
 )  the virus was discovered in a Belgian Nun working in Zaire, translate as first civilized person known to die of this so let's find out what it is, and the virus was identified. It has continued to rear its head, with thoughts that it is contracted from the remains of infected animals.  The eating of primates by humans is not unheard of, although to most of us it is as disturbing as putting chicken remains in chicken feed and cattle remains in cattle feed, there are those that were raised on primate meat, not a preference but an availability issue.  It also lives in bats in the area. 

It is a class 4 infective agent, think anthrax, think SARS, think high mortality and no way to prevent it if there is an actual exposure.  It is not airborne, although Bubonic plague has two ways to be spread, and the airborne is worse, so the fear with any virus is that mutation will eventually go there.  Diseases in horror stories frequently mimic the worst-looking symptoms and take full advantage of the way that humans panic. 

But we didn't predict this, and we assumed that because all the people that went to nursing school and medical school new what was needed to contain a class 4 infective agent.  And they have heard about it, but
1) most places don't have the expensive equipment available to use in case something that has never happened before shows up at their door, 2) don't necessarily remember anything about a thing they heard about in school but never thought they would need to use, 3) and never prepared for because hearing about a thing is not the same as doing it. 

So what does that mean to us?  It means that we have an election in a few weeks and for those politicians that want something better than immigration to beat their dead horse with, they can complain about Ebola, like it is a political issue, like it is new, like it is someone's fault--and obviously not theirs.

Watch those predictions, they are made frequently after scientific research is published, but the populist version is always aimed at creating panic and anxiety in the masses.  Learn to read the actual research.  Or make sure to not get just one version of what it means.  Be wary of predictions passed on by religious leaders, politicians, and rich folks with agendas.  We are all capable of making intelligent predictions based on information and don't need someone else to tell us what to believe.

Think for yourself.

Petty distractions herding us along.

There is nothing I hate more than when someone refers to regular people as "sheeple".
It's derogatory.  It implies that the speaker is more aware than the masses.  It is like saying we all deserve to be where we are because we are:

• too trusting of the system
• eager to believe that someone in power cares about the well-being of everyone
• denying that anyone would ever manipulate things;  the news, the economy, politics, for a personal gain that was not good for the majority of individuals
• stupid

So I hate the word.  And am reminded of that great movie in which the craggyfaced older reminds the younger that "a person is smart, people are .....(read as---sheeple).

We are weeks from an election.  And we are deep in a time of a polarized nation, a time many of us thought was done.  We thought we had moved on from racial tension, from misogyny, from class warfare, from fixed elections, voter manipulation, propaganda usage, and all that stuff from history class that happened a long time ago.

We have a new activism going now.  And I can't argue with it.  But are the activists sheeple?  Or is that term reserved for those people so immersed in their own little worlds, with going to work and coming home, paying their bills, feeding their kids, going to church and complaining with friends, relatives, and neighbors about what is wrong with the world.  You know, most of us, most of the time. 

Anyone ever notice, that while activists want change, the people going about their routine want everything to stay the same?  Some of them are even dreaming of an earlier, rosier time--the 1950's is the most idealized, although I have seen it done with the 1800's, the 1920's, the depression (those particular individuals were farmers, and their families lost nothing in the depression, but they loved watching the Waltons) the 1940's--what is not to love about a nation that pulls together for a common enemy and then wins.

The people that loved the 60's were kids during the 60's, they loved the music, they loved the TV, they loved dads at work and moms at home when you got out of school, and they were white kids, middle-class, running on the momentum of the 50's and with parents that tried to keep them from hearing about race wars and communes and drugs and all those things that were going on at commie campuses and San Francisco and Watts.  The kids knew about TV shows like 'Lost in Space" and "Lassie" and "Flipper".  The kids knew about Barbies and transistor radios and bell bottom pants.

The 1960's may have more in common with this decade than any other time.  We have a Vietnam-like war action going on eternally, and it is doing things to the minds of our young men and women that frankly made for some truly dramatic books and movies and some horrifying homelessness and addictions.   We have a very liberal president that scares the crap out of those happy, 60's-like parents (and no, those original 60's parents weren't into that liberal stuff either, but assassination does make people think hard about talking bad about you,. We have activism---and racism, and feminism and sexism and bigotry and repression and propaganda and just plain crookedness in high places. And Activism. 

But remember, the 1960's were scarey.  Kids heard tidbits on the news, heard backyard gossip not meant for their ears, continued to have drills to keep from being nuked ("get under your desk"  really?) while no one really explained anything about that.  We knew the world was full of danger; there were people like Manson, there were commie spies everywhere trying to take over our wonderful country and they would take all the children to schools that trained them to turn in their parents and neighbors, there was satanic music,  and of course, we were all waiting on the Rapture and Apocalypse.

So are we mostly herd animals?  Do we not think for ourselves?  Are we so reactionary that if someone yells "fire" we all run off the cliff en masse?

Maybe.  I don't know.  I just know that we currently have an election coming up and that in our state, the most climate change denying, oil supporting old codger is now running on his daughter's decision to adopt an African Child, and the time he spent talking to soldiers "like a regular guy".  Do I think the first Ad about this bit of news, where the child is now about grown and its the first I've heard of her, is related to the Ebola scare and the anti-immigration work done in my fine state (or at least an attempt to lessen the negative appearance of those?  Do I think his daughter's decision has anything to do with anything at all? Of course not.  And the stories about visiting with soldiers, that reeks of a belief that we are idiots, drooling fools that fall for any bit of kindness from on high.  I would think that the people that sent our young people to other countries to risk their lives would talk to them with great respect and honor.  Only a politician that thought he was someone very special and better-than would endorse such an advertisement.

Yet three different coworkers have suddenly started supporting him--again.  Because?  I have no idea.  I really don't understand politics at all.  Maybe it really is just a form of sheep herding.

I'm still going to vote. I really do want to believe that we can have a government that is a democracy--and yes, I know its just a republic.  We are all deniers I guess.

I really would like to see us be a herd of a democratic, equal opportunity  species.

humanity's greatest gift

Listening to a songwriter and her song, in which she told the story of a life ended by drug abuse, and yet didn't tell it--- at least not like a news story or a melodram--- it dawned on me that while we are surrounded by panicky news stories and horrible economic predictions, a failing infrastructure and ongoing global mistreatment of those without power, we are daily surrounded by the translation of life, both beautiful and poignant, surreal and comedic, by artists.

Those artists, working in their medium of choice, and there is a lot of choice out there, show us what to look for, how to see beyond the hype of the style-makers and opinion creators.  They help us find the beauty in the saddest situations, and the awesomeness of the most simple.

I do not consider religion our greatest gift, although that feeling, that indescribable exaltation and wordless understanding that mystics and artists seem to give us glimpses of, is what most religions started with.  The dogma, rules, and endless studying of holy writings obviously did not come from that feeling.  (that is a whole, different obsession by a whole different personality type).

I do consider that artists, real artists, are much more common than the news and museums and classrooms would have us believe.  I think maybe we are all artists at heart and have only to let go and reconnect with that part of ourselves.  I have seen essays by 7th grade students that were art, I have seen million dollar sculptures sold to citiies that had nothing to say, although the name of the pieces frequently have amazing imagery.  I have tasted desserts that were art, and smelled perfume that was art.  I have seen quilts that amazed me to the point of speechlessness, ceramic pots glazed into a wonder of the galaxy, and photo's taken by simple people with simple cameras that made my heart melt--not from sappy sentimentality but from their identification of a scene of such intense contrasts, dramatic lighting, and simplicity that it made me want to go there, to be there and see through the  eyes of the photographer.

I have heard chants that lifted me to other realms with no identifiable words.  I have heard poems that left me understanding the feelings of people that I shared almost no life experiences with, and in that understanding I had no choice but to love them. I have seen dances that changed my mood and paintings that filled my soul with questions about my own place in the universe.

There are connoisseurs of almost everything that could be considered art.  But we can all learn to appreciate art.  The first step is to slow down.  The next is to stop worrying about what someone else, what society, what our religion, what our friends would think about that art, and experience it for ourselves.

And while all art is beautiful, much that is art is not pretty or sweet or nice.  William Blake's "flea" is far from pretty, but his poem "tyger,tyger" is one of the most powerful glimpses into that same mind that can be experienced.  That same mind.

People are complicated.  Few people are all prettiness, sweetness, and  nicety.  They are complicated.  Like a good Cabernet, like an amazing orchestra-piece. like a wonderful pie, like a Van Gogh painting. Sometimes complicated like graffiti or like the sound of rain with a violin and piano.  So slowing down, savoring the nuances of a sight, a sound, a taste, a smell, can be the difference between recognizing something life-changing and just having another ordinary day.

I guess that means art requires two people, at least two people to be art, at least one to create it and at least one to perceive it.  The creating only changes the person doing the creating, and it does change that person.  The act of making something beautiful and meaningful and new leaves a mark on the soul of the person  that is creating.  The perceiving, though, can leave a mark on an endless number of people.  And each person will perceive through their own eyes, ears, nose, taste, and even touch.  Our senses may allow us to interact with the world, but our minds, our pasts, our beliefs, allow us to interpret those perceptions.

I have seen people that hate all classical music, that can't stand the smell of  hay but love the smell of car exhaust, that will eat chocolate only unsweetened, others are more ecclectic, enjoying music from all times and places, exploring music like it is a great mystery, trying chocolate covered insects and raw puffer fish like it is an experiment in living.  There are stories for each of those choices.  There are connections within each of us to various artforms that have become friends to us, rituals, omens, connections to our roots and symbols of our hopes and dreams. 

Therefore, art, the greatest gift from humanity--to humanity.  Keep making what you imagine, real.  Keep creating.  Share your art.

spreading it around--germs not wealth

We are currently hearing a lot about Ebola, which is a scary disease that had previously featured in thriller movies and semi-realistic horror books. It has been spreading in West Africa, a part of the continent with high poverty, political unrest, and low education levels.  The problems with containing the virus is caused by those things, fear(read distrust of authority figures)among people about vaccines and medicine, lack of access to healthcare and treatment, crowding, and denial that the disease is real (as opposed to government propaganda).
 
We recently had our first case (other than those that came here for treatment after exposure and immediately went to secured health care facilities) of Ebola show up in Dallas.  A man from Liberia got on a plane, went to Dallas, went to the ER, told them he thought he had been exposed to Ebola while in Liberia, was reassured that was ridiculous and sent home with a prescription for antibiotics.  Several days later he was admitted for (drumroll please) Ebola and is being treated in the ICU.  How many people did he contaminate in the time between going to the ER and returning later?  If he was like me, everyone is safe except for 3 cats that like to steal food while it is being eaten.  Unfortunately, he did not live alone in isolation, and there are already people being tracked for signs of illness.

I get why the places in West Africa are having a hard time with this.  Poverty  and war and corruption and superstition are easy to connect to poor public health control of the spread of a virus.  But are we going to die in the USA of our own arrogance?  For all our fancy equipment and highly trained infection control personnel, it all boils down to whether or not the possibility of the disease is recognized.

"when you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras" is to med school what "doing the same thing over and over expecting different results is the definition of crazy" is to Narcotics Anonymous.  

Ebola in Texas is definitely a Zebra, and they treated a horse. 

But the world is big, the numbers are big, international travel is common,   We have all now heard of Dr.'s without Borders, but does anyone really think there are any disease causing agents that recognize borders?
While horses are the most common, if there are a couple of million people in a city, there will be any number of zebras found.  If there are only 1 in a million cases of something, you should not be deny that one will appear, you should be expecting a least a couple.  The chances of getting most illnesses is much better than winning our lottery, but we have lottery winners.  So why aren't we expecting the diseases with lower numbers?  Why wasn't the ER in Texas prepared?    Why aren't we doing more to screen people traveling out of the countries with this Ebola outbreak before they get on a plane?  Or off a plane?

Flu vaccines start this month.  Doctors will be screening patient's in the ER for the Flu if they say they have been exposed or have any flu-like symptoms.  Most of them won't have it.  But Influenza is a horse we all expect.  Get you flu shot if that is what you do,wash your hands, avoid touching vomit, sputum, saliva, blood, feces, open wounds, tears, exposed organs; don't hug strangers with red eyes or body-fluid covered clothing, and if someone says they think they were exposed to ebola, don't kiss them.

Use some sense, cover your cough, wash your hands, clean up after yourself or your kids, and consider some nice homebody hobbies.

Perhaps all the creepy, end-of-the-world tv shows are just making us a little paranoid---or maybe they aren't.  

Key facts from WHO

• Ebola virus disease (EVD), formerly known as Ebola haemorrhagic fever, is a severe, often fatal illness in humans.
• The virus is transmitted to people from wild animals and spreads in the human population through human-to-human transmission.
• The average EVD case fatality rate is around 50%. Case fatality rates have varied from 25% to 90% in past outbreaks.
• The first EVD outbreaks occurred in remote villages in Central Africa, near tropical rainforests, but the most recent outbreak in west Africa has involved major urban as well as rural areas.
• Community engagement is key to successfully controlling outbreaks. Good outbreak control relies on applying a package of interventions, namely case management, surveillance and contact tracing, a good laboratory service, safe burials and social mobilisation.
• Early supportive care with rehydration, symptomatic treatment improves survival. There is as yet no licensed treatment proven to neutralise the virus but a range of blood, immunological and drug therapies are under development.
• There are currently no licensed Ebola vaccines but 2 potential candidates are undergoing evaluation.

---

Transmission It is thought that fruit bats of the Pteropodidae family are natural Ebola virus hosts. Ebola is introduced into the human population through close contact with the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of infected animals such as chimpanzees, gorillas, fruit bats, monkeys, forest antelope and porcupines found ill or dead or in the rainforest.
Ebola then spreads through human-to-human transmission via direct contact (through broken skin or mucous membranes) with the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of infected people, and with surfaces and materials (e.g. bedding, clothing) contaminated with these fluids.
Health-care workers have frequently been infected while treating patients with suspected or confirmed EVD. This has occurred through close contact with patients when infection control precautions are not strictly practiced.
Burial ceremonies in which mourners have direct contact with the body of the deceased person can also play a role in the transmission of Ebola.
People remain infectious as long as their blood and body fluids, including semen and breast milk, contain the virus. Men who have recovered from the disease can still transmit the virus through their semen for up to 7 weeks after recovery from illness.