Salt may increase risk of stomach cancer by 40%, study suggests

Groan! Another witless attack on salt below. The journal article is here:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10120-024-01502-9

I have written previously on the salt phobia here:

http://jonjayray.com/short/salt.html

And here:

http://jonjayray.com/short/salt2.html

And here:

http://jonjayray.com/saltsum.html

And for what it is worth, I have always been a keen salt user but I had a gastroscopy recently which showed my stomach to be completely notmal, which is pretty good for an 80-year-old guy.

OK. On to the latest bit of nonsense. Once again it was an extreme-groups analysis in which they had to throw away half of their data to find something to talk about. So it seems probable that there was in fact NO significant linear relationship between illness and salt consupption.

And it's almost amusing that they found the association only with REPORTS of salt usage not with an estimate of actual salt usage. Bleah!

The one undisputable finding of salt research is that LOW salt can kill you. There is even a name for that: Hyponatremia

A new study might make you think twice before reaching for the salt shaker at your next meal.

Nutritionists from the Center for Public Health at the University of Vienna discovered that people from the UK who added salt to most of their meals were 41 percent more likely to develop stomach cancer than those who used the topping sparingly.

Previous studies in China, Japan and Korea have linked a salty diet to stomach cancer - but this is one of the first to show the link in Westerners.

Though the Austrian study was merely observational, older studies have suggested that excess salt might erode the protective coating on the stomach, causing damage to the tissue there and leading to cancerous mutations.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13401167/additive-increase-risk-stomach-cancer-salty-salt.html

Not in my name or His: The wilful damage all in the name of faith

This is an old, old fallacy:  Judging Christiaity by people who DON'T follow it.  We all "fake good" to some extent and in our society that often takes the form of of a pretense to Christianity.  In Japan alleged followers of the peaceful Buddha committed atrocities during WWII.  And despite the very first  chapter  of the Bhagavad Gita, Hindus often attack Muslims. 

Yarra Valley Grammar School students suspended over disturbing list rating female classmates

This is hysteria over nothing. We all evalute other people's appearance all the time. Why not discuss it? The behaviour described is not uncommon. It is simply adolescents enlisting their friends in at attempt to get an understanding of females, a common puzzle for males of all ages. And the sense of humour in it has been missed. There is nothing abnormal or dangerous about it.

Four boys from a Melbourne private school have been suspended after a list was posted to social media rating their female classmates.

The shocking list was posted by Year 11 students from Yarra Valley Grammar School in Ringwood onto the platform Discord and was discovered by the school last Wednesday.

It featured photos of female students and ranked them from best to worst as 'wifeys', 'cuties', 'mid', 'object', 'get out' and 'unrapeable'.

The students were suspended on Friday pending further investigation, Nine reports.

Yarra Valley Grammar principal Dr Mark Merry spoke to Nine on Sunday and described the post as 'disgraceful'.

'Respect for each other is in the DNA of this school, and so this was a shock not only to us … but it was a shock to the year level and the boys in the year level that see this as way, way out of line,' he said.

He said he was offended by the final category, and has since reported the matter to police to ensure the list wasn't linked to any criminal offence.

'As a father, I find it absolutely outrageous, disgraceful, offensive. As a principal, I need to make some decisions [about] what we do about all of this,' he said.

'My first impulse and concern is about the wellbeing of the girls concerned. I want to make sure they feel assured and supported by the school.'

'We are going to be consulting the police because the language used could be an inferred threat.'

'I don't think it was, but we need to get further advice on that…I'm hoping it was an appalling lapse in judgment.'

It costs around $30,000 a year to send a student to the elite Ringwood private school, and Dr Merry said the school prides itself on teaching 'respectful relationships'.

'We are well aware of the broader issues in relation to respecting women…we need to really do our best to ensure that young men understand their responsibilities and their boundaries of how they should behave,' he said.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13385557/Yarra-Valley-Grammar-School-ranking-list.html

***************************************************

The causes and cures of lethal male domestic violence

Ms Van Badham below recognizes that lethal male domestic violence has increased in recent years but has only vague generalizations and a call for more talking about it to offer as a solution.

She ignores the fact that the broadly feminist value-set that she promotes has never been more widespread and accepted than it is now . To put it crudely, more feminism has been accompanied by more domestic violence. That is the correlation that is being ignored. Correlation is not always causation but correlation is always a feature of causation, as David Hume long ago pointed out.

So it should be a working hypothesis that the increased dominance of feminist values is at least partly to blame for the increase in DV.

And why that night be so is not hard to see. Waleed Aly rightly sees that the major influence on DV is a feeling among men that they are being shamed: "the desire to hurt women actually comes from attackers feeling shamed and humiliated"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13377481/waleed-aly-domestic-violence-crisis-Australia.html

Aly is talking about men being shamed and humiliated by their women partners but being shamed by their culture is an obvious extension of that. Being shamed and humiliated in general is likely to be resented.

And there is a huge theme in public discussions to the effect that men and masculinity is "toxic". How are men expected to feel about such a drumbeat of abuse aimed at them? That part of the response might be rage is pretty obvious and that an outlet for that rage might be one of the supposedly superior beings in their presence is hardly surprising

So the supposed remedy for DV -- more feminist values -- might in fact be part of its cause. That possibilty will not be confronted any time soon -- sadly for endangered women. But a broad recognition that extreme feminism is "toxic" would help


In the wake of more, more, more reports of lethal male violence against women in Australia – and the protests demanding actions that have followed them – Michael Salter’s analysis of the problem is refreshingly clear. “Education and public awareness are important but they are not, in themselves, a cure,” the academic wrote last week. “We need a strategic, coordinated, practical approach that integrates many different responses and listens closely to frontline workers and community members.”

Australia’s public conversation about male violence has never been so loud. We’ve arrived at a moment when the community is screaming for action. Even Sky News reports that Australians “want immediate change to combat the domestic violence crisis”.

It’s a long way from 1953’s reader suggestions published in the Adelaide papers: “I’ve found if I take a strap to my wife occasionally, she’s all the better for it. She admits I’ve been a good husband to her.” Back then, papers framed “Can wife beating ever be justified?” as an open question.

That these attitudes remain in the memory of living generations, is, of course, one of the reasons that perpetrators still exist. Research 10 years ago explained that male sex offenders are “more likely to commit sexual violence in communities where sexual violence goes unpunished” and the influence of sexist traditions informs a male rapist’s worldview. Yet decades of public grief, horror and condemnation – as well as feminist activism delivering legal and institutional reform – have upended this traditional majority sanction of male violence and transformed public values. The 30% rise in the rate of Australian women murdered by intimate partners in the last year after three decades of a downwards trend comes, therefore, as a shock.

A bleak national realisation is dawning: while politics does flow downstream from culture, politics still has to solve the problem that culture identifies. Government works most efficiently when reform can be broad-based and structural – and Salter’s point is that the problem is messy and difficult, with unstable patterns, individual cases and no universal solutions. Ending violence against women requires not just sentiment but government, and other institutions, as well every kind of community – from cultural groups to sporting teams to the family – addressing different, variable and changing circumstances and responsibilities.

This week the Albanese government summoned the national cabinet to announce a $925m investment in counter-violence strategies. These include support payments for women fleeing violent relationships, increased funding for services to help those women and resources for action against deepfake pornography and other kinds of online abuse. The prime minister is not making the impossible promise that the policy suite is an immediate end to violence, but “a further step forward”.

The package is couched in terms of pilots and trials and monitoring because what will and won’t work is up against a community of perpetrators relentless in their cruel creativity. The challenges are complex when everything from urban planning to superannuation to care relationship settings can pose risks to women’s safety. I have survived a violent relationship, harassment, stalking and a hospitalisation from sexual assault … yet even I was stunned at the revelation of men using smart fridges to threaten women. Effective responses meet conflicts and contradictions. Note, for example, demands from anti-violence campaigners to revoke reforms to bail laws in Victoria … that were introduced to redress harms imposed by them on Indigenous communities, young people and people with disabilities.

The frustration of handing the policy response over to politicians is, perhaps, that it feels like an admission of powerlessness. But while government pilots start and public resources shift, there remain open fronts for cultural action that we may finally be ready to face.

Incest and other family violence survivors will remind you that the family home remains the most dangerous place for women and children, while 51% of children from abusive homes are abused as adults. In a world that still insists to women and girls that romantic partnership and family should dominate their aspirations and trajectories, the narrative we can, should, must lead is for genuinely empowering alternatives; economic interdependence, sisterhood, friendship, community – especially in the context of a resurgent western far right so active in promoting tradwives and reproductive unfreedom.

Not as culture war for culture war’s sake – but for survival.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/05/as-australia-screams-for-action-against-lethal-male-violence-this-is-a-culture-war-for-survival

****************************************************

Understanding the empathy deficit

The article below by VIRGINIA TAPSCOTT is a long one but overlooks an important issue: Lack of care for the feelings of others is a feature of both autism and psychopathy. But the two syndromes are very different in other ways and the difference is important. I have argued that the difference is that the psychopath is aware of other people's feelings but doesn't care about them whereas the autistic is simply unaware of other peoples feelings. There may be more than one reason for an apparent "empathy deficit"

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com/2024/04/do-autism-and-psychopathy-overlap.html

And muddling those two very different syndromes, as she appears to do below, renders her conclusions very dubious. She needs to re-work her thinking from the beginning, I suspect.

But taking the research she presents into account does suggest that she is talking about psychopaths only, not autistics. Prof. Simon Baron-Cohen's submission that we should stop talking about autism and refer instead to the syndrome as "non-neurotypical" has generally been enthusiastically embraced both by the people concerned and by health professionals.

https://acamh.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcpp.12703

But the implication of that view is that non-neurotypical people are born that way. And there are certain features of such people that support that conclusion. An unusually large cerebral cortex, for instance. I hear that autistics tend to take big hats!

Ms TAPSCOTT, in contrast, is talking about an acquired condition, not an inborn one.

But do the findings she describes even fit psychopaths? Her implication is that non-empathetics are both unaware of how other people work psychologically and uncaring about any hardships that they inflict on others. But psychopaths are often very clever people manipulators. To be good at that they surely have to have a very good awareness of how other people work psychologically. So we are left with the claim that psychopaths are not empathetic but are nonetheless somehow very good at understanding and manipulating other people's feelings! That is probably not impossible but seems very unlikely.

So who is Ms Tapcott talking about? It seems that the non-empathetic people she describes don't fit neatly into any established psychiatric category. They are a new category of persons all of its own. A best fit to what she describes would probably be to say that egregious harm to others can emanate from more than one person type -- the non-empathic people she describes and classical psychopaths

An additional level of complexity may follow from my previous article on the subject referenced above. I am clearly a high functioning autistic but I noted that I have very little emotional response to reports of suffering in others. But as I have recently also pointed out, I have a not-insubstantial claim to being a philanthropist!

https://memoirsjr.blogspot.com/2024/05/am-i-philanthropist.html

So, in autistics a non-empathic response can even go with pro-social behaviour! Autistics are confused and shut out but are not malevolent. Who said that people have to be simple?


Rapists, murderers, religious extremists and even your garden variety nasty colleague have one thing in common: an empathy deficit. The part of their brain that imagines how others think and feel is anywhere from stunted to easily ignored. This allows them to dehumanise others to varying extents and prioritise their own gratification or agenda above all else, regardless of the pain this may cause those around them. They can be all charm one minute and conveniently deaf and blind to the suffering of another the next.

We all exist somewhere along the empathy spectrum from slightly selfish to complete psychopath. Harmful belief systems about women embedded in our culture can be tempered by healthy empathy function or become unbridled by an empathy deficit.

Empathy isn’t some vague feel-good notion of kindness; it is a specific part of our brain architecture. Neuroscientists understand in detail its place in our emotional brain circuits, how we come to develop empathy and to what extent.

A review of neurobiological research published in The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences in 2016 traced the emergence of empathy deficits in detail from birth right up to violent adult offending, specifically intimate partner violence. The authors describe how empathy development starts at birth, when newborns will do whatever it takes to engage a caregiver. They mimic movements, search for faces, reach for skin and cry as a last resort. They have mirror neurons that enable them to tune into caregivers’ behaviours as early as 72 hours old.

A baby’s earliest attempts to engage another normally elicits a positive response from the caregiver that results in the baby being held or fed and flooded with relaxing, feel-good hormones. The baby repeats the process of engaging a carer, building increasingly complex and well-trodden empathic neural pathways. It is from this biochemistry and brain architecture that they develop pro-social behaviours, emotional regulation and an intuitive understanding of how to relate to another.

Where things go wrong is if an infant’s attempts to engage are not rewarded and empathic neural pathways become underdeveloped. If your parents or carers don’t love you or have difficulty showing it you will have a hard time developing empathic abilities.

The neurobiology review analysed almost 200 of the most significant sources establishing a link between empathy deficit or dysfunction and violence. The authors argued the empathy patterns in offen­ders explained why far fewer women, with neurobiology that predisposes them to increased empathy, were perpetrators of viol­ence.

Research in empathy development surged in 2001 when Yale University researchers worked out how to scan healthy infants and toddlers in magnetic resonance imaging machines that required them to be still. Instead of using sedation, which blunted brain activity and posed ethical problems, researchers scanned babies in natural sleep and flung open the doors on a whole field of unexplored territory.

While researchers had been using neuroimaging for decades to unravel the mysteries of adult brains, it is only in recent years that infant brains have come under the microscope and only since the 2000s that we began studying longitudinal cohorts. Perhaps the most striking finding has been that the emotional brain circuitry of infants is far more advanced and sensitive than initially thought.

“We know that brain circuits for mood, depression, anxiety, addiction and resilience are all built between conception and age three and last for life,” Canadian neuroscientist Greer Kirshenbaum writes in her book The Nurture Revolution. “After three years of age the most frequently used brain circuits are covered in protective cells and the circuits that were not used frequently are eliminated by pruning.”

As neuroimaging was applied in the fields of neurobiology, genetics and behavioural science, the lasting effects of early life stress became undeniable. While our emotional brain is influenced by genetics and continues to develop into early adulthood, the foundations of emotional health are laid by our earliest experiences and relationships. We know in chronic states of prenatal and infancy stress the brain develops abnormally. In 2019, researchers from the Infant Brain Imaging Study Network demonstrated that the amygdala, the part of the brain that identifies threats and controls emotional processes, had started to overgrow at six months of age in children who later would be diagnosed with neurodevelopmental disorders. It has been shown that environmental stress combined with a genetic vulnerability to stress can increase the risk of developing autism.

While we have not yet discovered genes for any specific mental illness, in the 1990s researchers began uncovering the relationship between genes that determine our dopamine receptivity, how much of the feel-good hormone we can access, and children characterised as ultrasensitive or resilient.

University of California, San Francisco pediatrics and psychiatry professor Thomas Boyce brought into the mainstream the theory that about four-fifths of all children were born “dandelions” with genes that increased dopamine receptivity and made them more resilient to stress.

Boyce found the remaining children carried a gene morphism that rendered them less receptive to dopamine and categorised them as “orchids” for their ultrasensitivity to growing conditions. Orchids can flourish in ideal conditions or be affected by poor conditions.

High-quality care and reliable early relationships have been found to mitigate the orchid and dandelion effect. Kirshenbaum explains nurturing care as a crucial way of “turning the volume down” on genes less favourable to psychological resilience. Nonetheless, orchid children are more sensitive to stress in infancy and face a greater likelihood of their brain being hypersensitive to stress later in life.

Stress is at the seat of the development of all mental illnesses because it interferes with normal brain development and the naturally resilient emotional circuits that come with it. If stress is shaping the brain from infancy, the makings of a narcissist, schizophrenic, addict or psychopath are well under way in the cradle.

Unthinkable acts such as those we have witnessed in recent weeks are undeniably rooted in terrible brain architecture and resulting poor moral formation. Emotional deficits impede moral formation, which usually develops through an intuitive understanding of our actions in relation to others. Being able to share or imagine the feelings of another is a deterrent for treating them horribly. A brain imaging study in The Netherlands in 2013 found psychopathic criminals lacked automatic empathic processes. The line between right and wrong becomes blurred if we lack an intuitive sense of how another may feel or to share the feeling.

In this way, empathy is a crucial moderator of our behaviour in real time but also shapes our humanity. It is a kind of panacea to societal ills. External moderators of behaviour such as judicial and governance guardrails can get us only so far before internal motivation to do the right thing must take over.

Empathic dysfunction is the breeding ground for a raft of mental disorders because our ability to connect with others is our lifelong emotional mooring. Without empathy and the relationships that spring from it the world becomes disorienting and meaningless. Without a web of healthy connection around us, people who can act as a sounding board or offer different perspectives, we also become more vulnerable to radicalisation and conspiracy theories. We fill the void created by lack of interpersonal relations with consumerism, extreme interpretations of religion and political outrage.

Empathy deficits are clearly an enabler when it comes to men being able to dehumanise women and subjecting them to shocking violence. We cannot hope to reduce violence against women without interrogating the formative experiences of perpetrators. This is not an excuse for the behaviour, this is cut-and-dried science. We must go back to the beginning.

The good news is empathy deficits are preventable. If we are raised in nurturing and responsive environments where empathy is modelled to us we are likely to develop healthy levels of empathy. Known inhibitors of empathy development include reduced face-to-face human interaction, care­givers who lack empathy and toxic stress. We have to feel safe and connected most of the time to be able to adopt empathic behaviours.

The bad news is empathy is difficult to teach later in life and deficits are difficult to reverse. We can train our empathy “muscles” later in life, but it is far less effective than having it in the first place. It may never be automatic or intuitive. It is unclear whether former prime minister Scott Morrison’s empathy consultant employed in 2019 had any lasting influence.

The availability of empathy training courses has accelerated in response to a well-documented decline in empathy levels across the board. A study of American students published in the Personality and Social Psychology Review found levels of empathy fell by 48 per cent between 1979 and 2009. It seems unlikely a one-hour online minicourse in empathy will do much to counter the broader trend.

Short-term emergency responses to public outcries about violence is warranted, but we are also missing the point. Prevention is much more effective. Our outrage should be equally, if not more so, directed at the way we deny children the basic conditions for healthy emotional development: social interaction, proper food and the presence of invested, loving and consistent caregivers.

Parents are often time poor and stressed, which means they lack the emotional resources to respond to their children. They increasingly rely on screens to regulate themselves and their children. You don’t have to be a behavioural scientist to see this is a chronically stressful arrangement.

Adult mental illness and resulting behaviours become a complex question when we consider that as a baby that offender was exposed to conditions they had no control over. We don’t get to choose our parents or circumstances. Our individual responsibility is to come to understand our emotional circuitry and manage it, but we will continue to contend with limitations posed by the brain circuitry laid in our earliest years. Some will be more disadvantaged by this than others. Some will be rendered incapable of helping themselves.

Without a complete overhaul in our cultural and policy approach to the early years we cannot hope to address mental illness effectively. If more people understood the significance of support to ensure the healthy development of babies and children we could transform society as we know it. We underestimate the importance of this at our peril.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/understanding-the-empathy-deficit/news-story/532a3abee4b6d5dad55ab5ab46644361

**************************************************

Man, 28, sparks fierce debate after revealing he has been cheating on his wife who has REFUSED to have sex in two years - and instead urged him to 'go get it elsewhere'

I have no sympathy with the unhappy woman in this matter. I was in a similar position to her. I no longer wanted sex with my beloved. It was a case of my ‘resting libido’ – the amount of sex we want in a relationship a year or so in -- being very low in my case. So I told her that what she did when she was out of my sight was her business, not mine -- as long as I did not have to hear about it. And she did go on to have a number of affairs. It was not ideal but our love for one another endures to this day -- 18 years after we first met

A 28-year-old man has sparked fierce debate after revealing he slept with another woman after his wife told him to 'go get it elsewhere.'

The unnamed lothario took to Reddit's popular AITAH - Am I The A**hole - thread to ask whether he was in the wrong for straying from his marriage because his wife 'didn't want to have sex any more.'

He said that his spouse had told him to 'go get it elsewhere because you are not getting it from me' - which is exactly what he did.

In the post, which was shared earlier this week, the man began: 'Basically my wife has decided unilaterally that we are done having sex.

'She found out that she cannot have kids due to a choice she made before we met. And kids, apparently, are the only reason she was willing to have sex.

'I love my wife and I enjoy being intimate with her. But it was making our marriage untenable after two years of this.'

He admitted that he had tried to talk to his wife and had even started going for counseling - but was still running into difficulties.

'No matter how I approached her about our situation she would not try and see it from my point of view. Every discussion would end with her crying and screaming in my face that I am trying to emotionally manipulate her.

'I then wrote her a letter outlining my feelings and asking her to come with me for counseling, to seek it for herself, perhaps to go see a doctor. I was kind and loving in the letter.

'The last thing I wanted to do was set her off. I worked on the wording with my counselor to make sure I wasn't saying anything aggressive that could be misinterpreted.'

The man said that his spouse read the letter but 'scrawled across it with her red Sharpie, "go get it elsewhere because you are not getting it from me."'

He explained: 'Then she walked out. I sat there for about an hour doing nothing. Then I told myself that was what I was going to do.

'We are both fairly successful in our jobs, I'm not super attractive but I'm fit and a good talker. It took a while but I met someone. We started out as just friends but it became physical. I made sure she knew I was married. She is not interested in a relationship so I guess I am a safe option for her.

'My wife found out because I did not try and hide it. She was crying when I got home one night. When I came in she asked if I was going to leave her. I said no.

'She asked if I was cheating on her and I said I was getting sex elsewhere. She said that was cheating and I did not disagree. I asked her what she wanted to do. She said I had to stop. I asked her if we were going to start having sex. She said I was an irrational a**hole if I thought that she would have sex with me after I cheated.

'I went to my desk and pulled out a photocopy of the letter I wrote with her answer in it.'

The exasperated husband continued: 'I went to have a shower and go to my room to sleep. When I woke up she was sitting on the couch waiting to talk.

'She said that she reread the letter and that she realized she had not before. She assumed it was just a letter begging for sex. She said she would go for counseling alone and with me. All I had to do was stop having sex elsewhere.

'I said I would be willing to pause my friendship until we saw a counselor. And that if I saw progress in our relationship I would break it off. She said she would not agree to counseling without me leaving the other woman.

'It almost turned into a fight so I just went for my run. Before I left I asked her what would compel her to go to counseling if I stopped having sex elsewhere. When I got back she still did not have an answer. She couldn't even say that our relationship was worth saving.'

He concluded: 'I don't want a divorce. But I am willing to leave over this. I am 28 I am not going the rest of my life without sex. She refuses to see my side.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-13368525/man-sleeps-woman-wife-told-elsewhere.html

********************************************

Australian Greens want free IVF, label Liberals policy 'conservative and exclusionary'

This is a step in the right direction, given the falling birthrate.  To support an ageing population, Australia needs all the babies it can get.  And we know that IVF babies will be well treated and so fulfil their potential.  It is however odd that the Greens support the idea.  They used to be in favour of population reduction

The ACT Greens want assisted reproductive services to be free, condemning the Canberra Liberals policy as "conservative and exclusionary".

The Liberals announced this week they would pay up to $2000 towards IVF and certain fertility treatments for those who are deemed medically infertile.

The territory government has already fired back and said they are working on their own policy, after promising to explore options in late 2022. Labor is also expected to reveal a policy as part of its health commitments in the election campaign.

The Greens say they believe assisted reproductive services should be included in the public health system and it should be free.

"Assisted reproductive healthcare is expensive. Whether you have fertility issues, have a disability, are in an LGBTQIA+ relationship or no relationship at all, everyone should have choice and free access to start a family," ACT Greens health spokeswoman Emma Davidson said.

"The ACT Greens want a fairer public health system - where assisted reproductive services are available to everyone, for free, without the emotion toll that comes from fitting into an exclusionary definition of infertility."

Under the Liberals scheme, same-sex couples and individuals will only be able to access the rebates if they are medically infertile.

However, Ms Davidson said this would mean a person would be put through a distressing process and treatments such as IVF should be available to everyone.

"The ACT Liberals policy relies on a conservative and exclusionary view of what a family is. Canberra is incredibly diverse, and we need initiatives that reflect this to create a truly inclusive and fair community," she said.

"Not everyone can fall pregnant and it's not always because they are medically infertile. Under the Liberals policy, people will still need to go through a costly and lengthy process to be considered medically infertile which can be distressing on the individual, their partners and family."

The proposed rebates from the Liberals will cover out-of-pocket expenses of up to $2000 when undergoing IVF or certain assisted reproductive technology and up to $1000 for intra uterine insemination. The party says they are not considering a public service as part of their pitch to voters.

Opposition health spokeswoman Leanne Castley said the party had chosen to only open the scheme to those who were medically infertile as it was the biggest cohort in need of assistance.

"This is open for all Canberran families that have fertility challenges," she said this week.

"We hear from families who are struggling with infertility and believe that's the biggest cohort who do need assistance and it's just a small way we can help those families who are struggling with infertility."

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8605888/act-greens-say-assisted-reproductive-services-should-be-free/

***********************************************

'Progressivism': The Modern Zeitgeist

As noted below, it is true that Leftists now rule the "Zeitgeist". They have comprehensively completed their long march though the institutions. But there is cause for hope. This has happened before. "Progressive" ideas and assumptions totally dominated public thinkig in the late 19th century and the first half of the 20th century. But that did become unwound after WWII when the rise to prominence of the ghastly Soviets forced a new fear and a new realism on people. And starting from Ike and his narrow view of the role of government a new era of American prosperity began. But once the Soviets fell, fear of Leftism evaporated.

The results of that were perverse. Once Leftism was no longer something to fear, it became more readily accepted and its old hatreds once again gradually became fashionable. Leftist whining was taken increasingly seriously. And the constant Leftist discoveries of new "humanitarian" causes -- from "affirmative action" to transgendererism -- has given them a continuing voice and respectability in public affairs.

It is a disturbing thought but maybe we need another war to divert attention from the foolish to more serious matters. With the containment of Russia in Ukraine, however, that possibility has thankfully retreated to an extent. Russia has now been revealed as a paper tiger. So while China remains restrained we can at the moment continue to be frivolous about what matters. On past precedent, however, that frivolity may not be permanent. Taiwan may uproot our calm


To fully understand current events, it is critical to comprehend that every human is a product of their times, their present culture, their “zeitgeist”—the term I will use in this column. The word “zeitgeist” means “the spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the generally accepted ideas and beliefs of the time.” In every period of history, a certain model of thinking dominates the age, and everyone, to a greater or lesser degree, is influenced by it. It's impossible to totally separate ourselves from our “zeitgeist” because we are surrounded by it every day, we grow up learning it and absorbing it, it is the inescapable environment universally acknowledged and rarely questioned—even if it’s wrong. Here are a couple of examples of historical “zeitgeist” to illustrate what I mean.

Christopher Columbus and his “age” was certainly different from ours. We don’t approve of many things they did (they wouldn’t approve of much of what we do, either), and the Left is especially vociferous in their condemnation of Columbus and the early European explorers. But their “zeitgeist” was completely different from ours. They saw no dichotomy between converting the heathen and looting them of their gold. Such a dichotomy is abhorrent to us, but we didn’t grow up in their “zeitgeist.” Reading modern viewpoints and opinions back into history is not an acceptable way to judge and interpret previous generations.

Certainly, the people of Columbus’s age “sinned” and knew they were doing so, just as we do (or should). But to understand them, we must understand their “zeitgeist.” The Aztecs whom the Spaniards conquered were hardly exemplary. We should learn from, but not blanketly condemn them when their culture, education, and surroundings were totally unlike ours. Failing to even attempt to comprehend previous people’s thoughts is most unjust. The Left are masters at it.

Another example. I quote: "I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races...I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

Those words were spoken by Abraham Lincoln in 1858. While obviously repulsive to Americans today, it was the “zeitgeist” of Lincoln’s time. Indeed, Harvard University had done a study of human skull sizes and discovered that the average skull size of a black person was smaller than that of a white person’s. And, in Lincoln’s day (and even into the early 20th century), it was accepted that the bigger your brain, the smarter you were. Whites are superior to blacks because they have larger brains! “Science” proves it! Now today, we know that brain size has nothing to do with intelligence, but that was the “science” of Lincoln’s day, and he would have been “unscientific” to reject it. How can we condemn him if we truly understand the “zeitgeist” of his age? We can’t, and we shouldn’t. What we should do is try to understand and learn from it.

Rising above our “zeitgeist” is a most challenging accomplishment, and not even historians can do it perfectly. If we had lived in Columbus’s Spain (or Italy) in 1492, or Lincoln’s Illinois (a Northern state, mind you) in 1858, we would surely have believed the exact same things they did. Some people are occasionally able to “think outside the box” and see truth from an eternal, fixed perspective, but that is a very rare commodity among humans. By and large, we accept the “zeitgeist” of our age.

“Zeitgeist” arises out of history, of course. It’s a process, not an event, and usually takes time to develop. Columbus and Cortez did not invent the dichotomy they lived in regarding converting the heathen and stealing their gold. If you think Lincoln’s words were bad, read his debate opponent, Stephen Douglas’s (a Democrat), sometime.

We haven’t arrived at our present “zeitgeist” in America overnight, either. Currently, most Americans’ thinking has become dominated by “progressive” ideology, and interestingly, a hypocrisy inherent in that thinking is to condemn anyone who lived before who might foil their political agenda—Columbus, America’s Founding Fathers, though rarely Lincoln, for rather obvious reasons.

Naturally, different cultures had/have different “zeitgeists”. Human or child sacrifice was an acceptable “zeitgeist” among the Aztecs and many other ancient “civilizations,” as was slavery, polygamy, war, and a few other currently frowned-upon customs. Our Leftist-driven “zeitgeist” has “progressed” from those practices to abortion on demand (no sense in waiting for the child to be born to sacrifice it), transgenderism, child mutilation, and, in China—the Left’s great model—mass murder, forced organ harvesting, and re-education camps.

Human inequality and racism are “zeitgeists” of nearly every culture in history and are evident today in the Left’s DEI program. Columbus’s (and Lincoln’s) “zeitgeist” accepted Jesus as God and Savior, and a world created by God, something our modern Leftist “zeitgeist” rejects in favor of Darwinian-based atheistic naturalism. Modern communication has shrunk the world, thus, much of Leftism is virtually universal now. Middle Eastern Muslims reject most of it, but they are barbarians, right?

Rising above our “zeitgeist” to see eternal truths is extremely challenging. Nobody does it perfectly. After all, doesn’t everybody have their own “truth” nowadays, as a recent modern “progressive” DEI-hire informed us?

https://townhall.com/columnists/marklewis/2024/04/29/progressivism-the-modern-zeitgeist-n2638406

**************************************************

Hormesis: An Overview of the Pubmed Literature

Hormesis is when some things that are bad for you in high doses are actually good for you in low to medium doses -- including radioactivity -- which upsets Greenie scares about leaks of radioactivity.

On balance, it's probable that the Chernobyl meltdown did more good than harm, even to life in the surrounding area. Life is certainly flourishing there better than ever these days. Pesky!

Dr. Ronald N. Kostoff

OVERVIEW

The purpose of this Op-ed is to provide a broad overview of the Pubmed literature in Hormesis (a biphasic dose-response phenomenon characterized by a low-dose stimulation and a high-dose inhibition). A unique query was developed to retrieve this literature, and many Hormetins (any stress condition that is able to induce Hormesis) were identified. Hormesis has been a controversial topic because of its potential for modifying exposure limit regulations. Critical articles addressing both sides of this issue are also presented in the next section.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

“Hormesis is a biphasic dose-response phenomenon characterized by a low-dose stimulation and a high-dose inhibition”. “Specific aspects of this general nonlinearity phenomenon have been described using various terms mainly addressing the shape of the dose-response curve, as biphasic, bimodal, bitonic, U shaped, inverted U-shaped, J-shaped, nonmonotonic, functional metabolism and stimulatory inhibitory, among others…..

Furthermore, terms such as adaptive response, preconditioning, autoprotection, heteroprotection, paradoxical and others have also been used to describe the shape of the dose-response patterns”. “Hormesis is a special type of biphasic dose-response relationship that has well-defined, quantitative features, including the magnitude and the width of the stimulatory zone and the relationship of the stimulatory zone to the traditional toxicological threshold (no-observed-adverse-effect level)…..

The hormetic dose response also must be seen within a temporal context–that is, as a dose-time-response relationship. The reason for incorporating a temporal feature in hormesis is that it also may be described as a modest over-compensation response following an initial disruption in homeostasis…..The hormetic dose response therefore represents the effects of a reparative process that slightly or modestly overshoots the original homeostatic set point, resulting in the low-dose stimulatory response…..The assessment of the dose response therefore is a dynamic process. Whereas harmful agents may induce toxicity in affected biological systems, the organism or biological system is not a passive entity but, rather, will respond to damage signals with a coordinated series of temporally mediated repair processes. This dynamic aspect of toxicological assessment requires the inclusion of not only a broad range of doses but also a series of temporal evaluations (i.e., repeat measures). Only by assessing the dose-response process over time can an accurate assessment of the dose-response relationship be determined, within which the hormetic dose response is best revealed.” .......

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Hormesis is a biphasic dose-response phenomenon characterized by a low-dose stimulation and a high-dose inhibition. Hormetins are substances that produce Hormesis. The present Op-ed identified many hundreds of candidate Hormetins, and provided arguments that showed many more candidate Hormetins could be identified with a well-resourced study. Fifty candidate Hormetins were evaluated, and 45 of the fifty were validated as Hormetins, a 90% success rate. Each of the 45 Hormetins was briefly addressed, in describing the evidence that linked the substance to Hormesis.

The main categories of Hormetins (candidate and validated), based on numbers of studies published, appear to be ionizing radiation, agrochemicals, soil pollutants, water pollutants, air pollutants, medications, food pollutants, heavy metals, industrial chemicals, foods, physical activities, etc. From my perspective, the main limitations are the criteria the authors use for Hormetins, and the spatiotemporal omissions of most studies reported. Typically, the authors will select a few biomarkers, examine changes in their magnitude and direction related to the application of the candidate Hormetin, and if the changes go in a specific direction, conclude that the substance resulted in Hormesis. This is very limited.

If the results of these studies are to be used in health policy-making, as some leaders in the field have suggested, then the spatiotemporal boundaries need to be expanded significantly to ensure safety. More biomarkers need to be selected to ensure global maxima of benefits are obtained rather than local maxima (e.g., short-term, single stressor). For heterogeneous populations, one would expect a distribution of susceptibility to these stressors, where some members could experience positive Hormetic effects and other members might experience negative impacts. In other words, generalizability to whole populations needs to be established. More studies need to be done including combinations of candidate Hormetins, and combinations of candidate Hormetins with real-world substances operating at toxic levels. Additionally, they need to be performed over the long-term, not limited to short-term, as many of the studies reviewed here are. Most of all, because of the limited applicability of animal studies to humans, long-term studies on humans would be required for these myriad combinations. This would require many decades of well-controlled studies on humans, to ensure longevity is not impacted adversely and diseases of old age are not enhanced.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/hormesis-an-overview-of-the-pubmed-literature-5eb72af0

******************************************************

Meet the UCLA medical school 'fat pride' staffer whose compulsory lectures warn trainee doctors that using the word obesity is 'violence'

Fat pride is rubbish.  Why would anyone be proud of being fat when it is both physically and socially disabling?  The whole idea is simply a defence mechanism by fatties who are unwilling to admit that they eat too much for comfort.  

The surprising sexual kink that is most likely to result in orgasm, new study suggests

Well, what do you know?  I had forgotten this. For a couple of years I had a relationship with Carol W., an exceptionally good-looking woman with whom I also had an exceptionally good sexual relationship.  I am not normally a great sexpot so that is surprising. 

‘Climate denial’ ad pulled from "The Australian" after being labelled ‘deceptive’

Coverage of this bit of censorship appears to have been censored.  I can find no mention of it other than in the article below from the Green/Left "Guardian", sometimes derisively known as the "Grauniad". Censoring censorship is of course truly troubling.  

Suicide of 10-year-old Aboriginal boy in the care of Aboriginal relatives described as 'unimaginable'

The "stolen generation" myth put about by Leftist historians means that social workers trying to help a neglected Aboriginal child are obliged to rehouse the child with other Aborigines, who are often as feckless as the neglectful families.  

How we became 'Plastic People': Startling new documentary tracks global spread of toxic microplastics from the bottom of oceans to inside the human brain

"Toxic"?  More scaremongerng that totally misrepresents the fact that these particles are inert.  They have to be in order to be used as freely as they are.  So evidence that they can do anything is what is needed but is very unlikely to be found.  Many of the things that we routinely eat -- such as most meat -- have greater potential for harm

A new film, called 'Plastic People,' has tracked the particle problem to the 1950s when the plastic industry convinced the public to abandon their thrift and frugality in favor of disposable products more beneficial to their bottom line.

The documentary team zeroed in on a 1955 LIFE magazine feature with the oddly euphoric title 'Throwaway Living' that celebrated a 'modern lifestyle' of single-use paper and plastic goods.

The article came with a photo spread of a happy family tossing all their single-use plates, cups and silverware up into the air like confetti.

The LIFE article positioned the plastic revolution as easing the burden on housewives by letting them toss dishes, cups and utensils in the trash and forgo hours of scrubbing and rinsing. 

By the 1960’s, plastic had replaced other materials in the home like wood, metal, and glass. 

Families began stocking cupboards with plastic tableware as companies produced them in an array of colors and at an affordable price. 

The societal shift also saw people begin to furnish their homes with plastic-finished items like tables and couches. 

Advertisements began to fill newspapers and magazines proclaiming plastic as the material of future that lets consumers create any shape with ease. 

Then in the 1970s and 1980s, the world was introduced to bottled water, which was touted as a healthier solution to tap water.

Humans have continued to path of plastics to today - producing over 440 million tons of plastic waste each year.

And as the waste sits in landfills, it breaks down into microplastics, which are smaller than five millimeters in length.

'The first fact about microplastics is that they're everywhere,' said Addelman. 'You're breathing them in right now. There's nowhere on Earth you can avoid them.'

Microplastics enter our bodies through plastic packaging, certain food, tap water and even the air we breathe.

From there they enter our bloodstream and cause untold harm. In just recent years the tiny particles have been found in semen, the heart, breast milk, placentas, kidneys, livers and lungs.

The particles have been linked to the development of cancer, heart disease and dementia, as well as fertility problems.

Addelman noted that making Plastic People posed a unique challenge: how to illustrate a microscopic but pervasive problem.

'As far as a film goes, it's a tough subject,' Addelman said. 'It's an invisible and kind of literally 'hard to grasp' subject.'

Studies have estimated microplastics exposure cost the US healthcare system $289 billion in 2018 alone, in part because plastics do not decay back into natural organic molecules, instead retaining their synthetic chemical make-up as they get smaller.

And worse, thousands of hazardous chemical additives and precursors, including many of the now infamous cancer-causing 'forever chemicals,' come embedded in these microplastics as they seep deeper into humans and other living things.

Co-director Ziya Tong, Addelman and their film team traveled across the world — from Adana, Turkey to Portland, Texas; from Rome in Italy to Rochester, New York — interviewing scientists who investigate microplastics and shadowing their field work. 

One researcher, Dr. Sedat Gündoğdu at Cukurova University in Turkey, walked filmmakers across beaches were fine grains of microplastics intermingle with Mediterranean sand and farmland where plastics absorb into crops as they grow.

Dr. Gündoğdu, whose work as a marine ecologist studying fisheries got him into tracking microplastics, showed Tong some of the first-ever evidence of microplastics crossing the blood-brain barrier in humans.

Tiny blue pigment from PVC piping had gotten past the barrier, a membrane that ordinarily helps keep any toxins in the blood from entering or harming the brain.   

'If plastic can transfer from blood to brain, it can transfer from everywhere to everywhere,' Dr. Gündoğdu told Tong. 'It's really scary, but it's not surprising.'

While animal studies have previously shown that microplastics have been able to migrate into the brains of mice, the 15 samples obtained by Dr. Gündoğdu and his colleague, neurosurgeon Dr. Emrah Çeltikçi, appear to be the first in humans.

Tong said that more micoplastics were actually found in the brain samples than scientists could identify.  'It's one of the things that we don't talk about in the film,' Tong said. 

'Because of the lack of transparency [from the plastics industry], there's a whole bunch where we don't know what the chemical cocktail actually is.'

'So he [Dr. Gündoğdu] was able to find these particles, but he's not able to identify them,' she explained, 'because they're not in the database.' 

This week, the international Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastic Treaty will attempt to persuade UN member states convening in Ottawa, Canada to compel the plastics industry into reporting on what they produce for these public databases.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13329269/How-Plastic-People-Startling-new-documentary-tracks-global-spread-toxic-microplastics-bottom-oceans-inside-human-brain-started-1950s-throwaway-living-idea.html

*************************************************

Looking for Flynn effects in a recent online U.S. adult sample: Examining shifts within the SAPA Project

This is an heroic study. It tackles a very difficult question: Are average IQ levels rising or falling?

IQ is under heavy genetic influence so, given the slow rate of human evolution, we should not expect to see much change over the last 100 years or so. And for a long time that was assumed. WHEN scores were collected was not much attended to. Jim Flynn, however upset the applecart by noting that average IQ levels seemed to be rising. So: Are we really getting smarter on average?

There has now been a lot of research and discussion on that question, ably summarized in the article below. It is a strongly held view among many researchers that the gains are artifactual -- i.e. not real. In particular it is well accepted that performance on paper and pencil tests is influenced to some extent by non-genetic influences -- education in particulr.

IQ scores increase markedly in line with better educational performance so improved education might be what is showing up in improved IQ scores. Levels of education have increased markedly over the years. Jobs that once needed an apprenticeship only now need an university degree -- e.g. primary school teaching.

I must say that I have noted that in my own family. My grandfather never went to school; my father got only as far as 6th grade while I have a doctorate. So generational differences in education are certainly available as an explanation of education-linked effects.

So the rises in average IQ scores observed by Flynn need no complex explanation. And their recent levelling off could well indicate that the maximum effect of education on IQ scores has now been reached

The article below does however put the cat amomng the pigeons. It says that average levels of IQ are now FALLING

I don't find that surprising. The Leftist influence on education is now strong. And it is in many cases a very negative influence. So we now have the politics of mathematics for example, which is as nutty as you get. And university graduates who can barely read and write are now a thing. And there is even suggestion that learning or not learning cursive handwriting has an effect on IQ

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13273363/handwriting-extinction-IQs-begin-fall.html

So the Leftist destruction of traditional education could well be reflectd in recent IQ scores. Education giveth and education taketh away.

We have to restrain our enthusiasm about the study below, however. It is a study of responses from internet volunteers. And it is perfectly clear that the sample is not a representative one. Just the gender imbalance noted shows that.

Such samples are now widely used in survey reseach and the imbalances in them can theoretically be corrected for statistically -- but how do you correct for enthuiasm/boredom and the many other influences that motivate the answering of internet questionnaires? It cannot be done. There is no substitute for actual random sampling of a specified population.

There is in fact no completely randown sample of any human population. I have tried many methods so the failings are well-known to me. Even compelled responding -- as with army recruits -- is imperfect. Some respondents will resent the task and not give useful answers. I have looked with sorrow at patterns of zig-ag and all-agree responses to my questionnaires from military recruits.

So the best we can hope for is COMPARABLE sampling and it is clear that internet sampling is not comparable to the pencil and paper responses in school-rooms that is most of the data on IQ scores from the past


Elizabeth M. Dworak et al.

Abstract

Compared to European countries, research is limited regarding if the Flynn effect, or its reversal, is a current phenomenon in the United States. Though recent research on the United States suggests that a Flynn effect could still be present, or partially present, among child and adolescent samples, few studies have explored differences of cognitive ability scores among US adults. Thirteen years of cross-sectional data from a subsample of adults (n = 394,378) were obtained from the Synthetic Aperture Personality Assessment Project (SAPA Project) to examine if cognitive ability scores changed within the United States from 2006 to 2018. Responses to an overlapping set of 35 (collected 2006–2018) and 60 (collected 2011–2018) items from the open-source multiple choice intelligence assessment International Cognitive Ability Resource (ICAR) were used to examine the trends in standardized average composite cognitive ability scores and domain scores of matrix reasoning, letter and number series, verbal reasoning, and three-dimensional rotation. Composite ability scores from 35 items and domain scores (matrix reasoning; letter and number series) showed a pattern consistent with a reversed Flynn effect from 2006 to 2018 when stratified across age, education, or gender. Slopes for verbal reasoning scores, however, failed to meet or exceed an annual threshold of |0.02| SD. A reversed Flynn effect was also present from 2011 to 2018 for composite ability scores from 60 items across age, education, and gender. Despite declining scores across age and demographics in other domains of cognitive ability, three-dimensional rotation scores showed evidence of a Flynn effect with the largest slopes occurring across age stratified regressions.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289623000156?via%3Dihub

**********************************************************

Christian Bishop Wants Video of His Stabbing to Remain Online

This will put the cat among the pigeons. It will make the authoritarians of Left and Right who want to censor us explain WHY they want to ban this video. To my simple mind I cannot see any intelligent rationale for the ban. It happened so let us show it. People need to know what is going on, Not have it covered up. Bravo for the bishop The Assyrian Christian bishop who was attacked during a live-streamed sermon has said he does not want footage of the incident removed from the internet. The video of the multiple stabbing attack, is at the heart of an ongoing war of words and a legal battle between Australian authorities and X owner Elon Musk. On April 22, lawyers for the eSafety Commission applied to the Federal Court for an injunction to compel the social media platform to block all videos of the incident across IPs globally—a request, X says, extends far beyond the jurisdiction of local authorities. On April 24, during a case management hearing, X representative, Marcus Hoyne, provided an affidavit from injured Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel who said the video should not be censored. “There’s recently been an affidavit … from the bishop, the victim of the attack, stating that he’s strongly of the view that the material should be available,” Mr. Hoyne said. Mr. Hoyne also said the attempts by Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant to implement a global ban on the spread of the video was “exorbitant.” He further said the footage was now subject to the “Streisand effect”—the unintended consequence of attempting to hide, remove, or censor information—and instead, resulting in even more publicity. Any move to remove the video would now be pointless because it had spread beyond the few dozen URLs initially identified by the eSafety commissioner. The judge ordered the matter to be heard again on May 10 when X could supply more detailed arguments. The attack occurred in the Western Sydney suburb of Wakeley with footage showing a 16-year-old walking up to the bishop during a live-streamed sermon, before the young man began repeatedly striking the church leader with a flick knife, which appeared to malfunction. The incident occurred barely two days after a knife attack spree in the east of Sydney, at the sprawling Westfield Bondi Junction shopping centre, that resulted in six deaths. Both incidents have spurred authorities to crackdown on “misinformation” and related videos on social media. https://www.theepochtimes.com/world/christian-bishop-wants-video-of-his-stabbing-to-remain-online-5636050 ***********************************************

ANZAC DAY

ANZAC DAY is the High Holy Day for the entire Australian people. The Left try to portray it as a celebration of militarism. All the troops marching through the streets can give that impression. But they overlook that on this day we actually celebrate a military DEFEAT. Pretty poor militarism. Two typical ANZAC day scenes below. Note the big crowd turnout.

ANZAC commemorations are stlll widely embraced in Australia. To the undoubted chagrin of the Left, there are marches in most of our cities and crowds turn out to watch them and applaud.

What we are really doing on ANZAC day is remembering and thanking our war dead. And as demographer Berard Salt rightly notes, No family was untouched by the two world wars. Some of my relatives were among the dead.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/weekend-australian-magazine/no-family-was-untouched-by-the-two-world-wars/news-story/0ae3f2585b8b1cd47208f6830849cd27

The deaths among the ANZACS at Gallipoli were among the more insane of the military engagements of that war so we rightly praise the grit and endurance of those who participated.

I personally see war as the greatest of human follies. To have men marching into gunfire seems barely sane. Yet it happened and still is happening in Ukraine. Chapter 1 of the Bhagavad Gita makes most sense to me of any writing on the matter.

Yet I am not a pacifist I volunteered for service in tha Australian Army and reached the rank of Sergeant. I served in both the CMF and the ARA back in the 60s. I can see why some wars probably have to be fought, WWII, particularly. But WWI can be understood in the context of its times

http://jonjayray.com/short/ww1.html

I exist, however because both my grandfather and father never went to war. My grandfather was excused because he provided a highly skilled essential service. He was a bullocky. And transport is in huge demand during a war. My father volunteered but was rejected on medical grounds. He had a slight limp. I volunteered for the Vietnam war but failed to get a posting there. So here I am still kicking at age 80.

I think it is worth noting that the Gallipoli engagement was greatly marred by the cowardice of the British generals involved. The first landings were unopposed. The Turks were taken by surprise. But instead of charging to take advantage of surprise as any German general would gave done, they decided to wait in place for reinforcements to arrive. The Turks used that warning well. If only the British generals had studied Vom Kriege in their staff colleges
JR

**********************************************

A study found that chemicals produced when eating junk food raised cancer risk

See below for a less sensationalist report of the research

The 20 questions every woman MUST ask to see if she's compatible with a man - by a woman who says she's found the perfect formula for love

There are a lot of articles online of this kind and Julie Silver's list (below) is pretty idosyncratic. I would meet a lot of her criteria but my liking for hamburgers would rule me out. It would rule a lot of men out. So she is good at reducing her options, which is rarely wise. She actually seems rather nutty to me. No wonder she is single

But the whole assumption underlying her ideas is false. You can find many tales of people who have large incompatibilities but who nonetheless get on well. "Shopping-lists" for a partner are simply foolish. I am a psychologist and I know well the broad outlines of successfil matches but broad outlines are all that you can reliably find. I am sorry to be corny but Cupid's arrow strikes where it will. "Good" matches will often not work and "bad" matches sometimes will.

In my last 60 years I have had many relationships, including 4 marriages, and there have been many differences between the ladies concerned.

And my current relationship is an extreme example of that. She has many autistic characteristics and our incompatibilities are huge. For instance, I am an orthodox scientist but she thinks the earth is flat! And yet the arrow has struck. We have a laughter-filled relationship that gives every signs of being "until death do us part". It is in some ways the worst relationship I have ever had but in other ways the best. But I am very glad of it. We are in our third year together and have certainly had storms between us but there is a glue that keeps us together despite that.

I have always worked on a very simple assumption. If the lady is very intelligent and likes classical music that is enough. My present lady scores on those two things. Beyond that, I think all differences can be negotiated. But that is just me. It is no guide to anyone else.

I am not alone in being skeptical of "red flags" There is an article below by Hannah Vanderheide, a much wiser woman, who is MARRIED and loves her husband despite his imperfections

https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/should-i-have-married-my-husband-red-flag-culture-would-say-no-20240418-p5fkq4.html

But on to a lady of the lists:


By Julie Silver

You may imagine the perfect first date should include flowers, candles and perhaps some sultry background music to set the mood.

My first date must-have, however, is something rather different: a list of 20 questions for any potential suitor, enabling me efficiently to weed out any dating duds, and easily identify those precious ‘keepers’.

Among other things, my dating questionnaire allows me to discover whether my potential Mr Right likes quinoa or chips, is in bed by 9.30pm, like myself, and, vitally, whether he speaks kindly of his mother.

On a deeper level, it helps me quickly establish a picture of the heart and soul of the man, whether he is trustworthy and if we might be compatible. Time is of the essence when you get to 54 and are still single, after all!

Clearly, I am very fussy when it comes to dating. But why shouldn’t we women of a certain age be fussy? After all, I’ve been dating for nearly half my life, now, and simply haven’t the time or patience to leave much to chance any more. That’s why I wholly agree with TV presenter Trisha Goddard who — with two divorces, and 64 years on the clock — said last month that she gave a questionnaire to the man who is now her fiance in order to ‘cut the c***’. She said her questionnaire meant she didn’t waste time dating someone who would ultimately not be the right fit for her.

Some might think this approach is unromantic, or impatient — but to me, it just sounds like good sense.

Because there are some definite romantic red lines for me that instantly rule out potential Romeos. For example, as a nutrition and wellness consultant, it’s important any partner of mine doesn’t mistreat their body or drink too much. I also prefer to sleep with my head on an incline — raised higher than my feet — as studies have shown it can be good for your health. So if a man couldn’t get comfy in my specially adapted bed, that would be something of a deal-breaker for me.

Aside from this, I’d love someone with whom I can enjoy day trips and holidays. Someone to laugh with. Looks? I admit I prefer dark features, but they must have a friendly, smiley disposition. And if a man remembered my favourite flowers are freesias, then that would mean the world to me.

In my 20s, I told my father about the kind of qualities I wanted in a man and he replied, ‘Julie, enjoy spinsterhood!’ But the reality is, like so many middle-aged women, I’m at the stage of life when looks just aren’t enough of a pull any more

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-13323015/The-20-questions-woman-ask-shes-compatible-man-woman-says-shes-perfect-formula-love.html

*************************************************************

What to do with a queer Iranian illegal immigrant?

He is right to think he would be hanged if he returned to Iran but the "refoulement" regulation says you cannot send him to any other place where he might be persecuted. That rules out the Muslim world and Africa.  So where do you send him?  Who else would want a queer Iranian?