Measuring Well-Being: A New Happines Index Aims to Quantify Your Inner Life

--body + mind + spirit--

Feeling happy today ? Loving life ? Well, according to researchers you are in good company - that is, if you see the glass half full versus half empty.

According to a new massive survey half of Americans are actually happy and fulfilled. The survey was conducted as an attempt to measure the nation's general welfare. The researchers behind the survey wanted to design an index much like the Dow Jones Average - except instead of portraying the health of the stock market...it would portray the health of the "emotional market."

The Index actually has a name, "The Gallup Healthways Well-Being Index" and is based thus far on over 100,000 people. Researchers imagine that their findings, which can be broken down by occupation, commute time and exercise habits, will help employers better understand what they can do to create happier and healthier workers. Another application they suggest is that the data could even be used to compare health and happiness by ZIP code, creating a sort of "measuring stick" for future generations of politicians. So how does a study work that is meant to be used by everyone from employers to politician to hopefully make us happier ? What is the sophisticated technology behind this new index? Well, apparently its a bunch of questions.

Pollsters asked people to imagine where they would put themselves on a ladder with 10 steps. Those said they were on step seven or above are listed as thriving. Those at four or below are suffering. In between are the strugglers. I wonder about this study though...I mean ask any given person that you know really well how happy they are one day to the next, and for many the answer greatly varies. A squabble with a spouse, a teething infant up all night, an unreasonable employer, a shift in monthly hormones, really bad weather, or a particularly bad traffic jam can shift one's perception, if even for a short time - on the general state of their happiness. 100,000 people is a whole lot of people, but I wonder if they watched everything from how much caffeine, sugar and sleep they had, or inquired on the experience they had with their kids or lovers that morning.

Besides the questionable methodology and results of the study, I ask why do we need the study at all ? Our TV viewing habits are watched by Nielsen, our web surfing behavior is monitored by countless software, our subway riding patterns are monitored on our metro-cards, our purchasing behavior is monitored by our credit cards, and so on, and so on, and so on. But with all this data on what we do, when we do it, and how we do it - are business and political leaders actually able to provide us with a more efficient, easy or pleasant daily experience ? Some claim that this data mining is there to protect us, but from what? In all the years I have been monitored - what scare have I really evaded thanks to the data that I provided to the forces that be? I don't buy it. But I think someone else does. Information is a commodity - even if its true value only exists in perception.

One scientist, a Princeton University professor named Kahneman, commented on the new happiness index,

"You're getting details about what it's like to live in this country. What is the experience of the weekend? What is the experience of the weekday for someone who is sick and has to go to work in the morning? We are going to learn a great deal about what are the determinants of actual happiness."

Great, I say - and then what? Happiness is not something delivered like an egg roll to your front door. It's a daily and even momentary pursuit. Nothing that industry will try to sell you will bring you happiness, and no policy no matter how much it will improve that standing of your life will guarantee happiness either. There are happy and sad sick, healthy, rich, poor, fat, thin etc etc people. It's not what they have in their life that defines their happiness - its how they define what they have in their life that defines their happiness.

Index or no index, happiness is up to you - to define, to cultivate and ultimately to measure for yourself.

Making Earth Day Matter...Beyond the Hype

--.Op-Ed--

Earth Day is upon us today and with literally millions of celebrations of all scales happening worldwide, one can certainly find an event to "plug into." But for many, the special day has gone from hope to hype, and in an effort to "keep it real" many opt for simpler means to honor our planet. Less of an occasion for concerts, Earth day is a call for mindfulness and awareness of our relationship to our planet. But beyond a one day remembrance lets have Earth Day serve as a day of resolutions for the year to come - on living more in sync, in honor, and in commitment to our planet. Beyond the hype - let's make a difference ...one small change at a time. Here are a few ideas on how to get started.

1-Look outside your door. Go for a walk. Then do it again, and again, and again.
Take a few minutes today and go for a walk - not to get anywhere in particular, but to enjoy the process of simply being outdoors. Relish the experience and be present to the environment. Observe how much of our natural world is left, wherever it is that you may be. Are you encased by skyscrapers with little patches of green breaking up the concrete, or are you surrounded by the wild ? Truly take in the environment that is yours, become aware of the state of what surrounds you.

2-Look inside your refrigerator. Buy local and organic today. Then do it again, and again, and again.
How much of what you buy actually preserves the planet ? How much is organic and local ? How much of what nourishes you, actually replenishes or starves the planet ? Truly take inventory. That which feeds you must be preserved...what nourishment do you invest in?

3-Look inside your family. Go outside and play. Then do it again, and again, and again...
How much time do you actually spend outdoors appreciating and engaging with the natural environment ? Are you kids nature nourished or nature depleted ? How have you cultivated a love for the natural world in your home? Before we can raise children who will help preserve the future of our planet - they need to have an intuitive relationship to the planet. Get your kids outside today, and let them feel the pleasure of simpler, and yet more abundant, play in the great outdoors.

4-Look inside your wallet. Spend less, use what you have, donate what you don't need. Then do it again, and again, and again.
Consumption might fuel economy but it also fuels a value system that feeds excess and waste. Western culture makes money to spend money, on stuff that most often ends up in land fills as waste. We need to learn to use what we have and demand that products be made better to last longer for our use. Instead of throwing away what you no longer need, donate it. The world has more people in need, then people in want. Keep that in mind, next time you don't want something.

5-Look inside your soul. Find a cause that inspires it while helping the planet, and get behind it with energy and money. Then do it again, and again and again.
There are tens of thousands of organizations working to solve our broken relationship with the natural world, weather through resource conservation, climate research, programs reconnecting kids to nature and literally thousands of others. Find a cause that you believe in - just one, and get behind it. Nothing ignites the spirit like the act of generosity and contribution.

As this day will close for you, what will you take from it ? As this day will close, what will you contribute to it? Make a choice, make a change, then do it again.

French Parliment's "Body Image Battle" With The Fashion World

--.op-Ed--

French fashion insiders are in an uproar over recent news of the French parliament's lower house decision to adopt a groundbreaking bill that would make it illegal for anyone - including fashion magazines, advertisers and Web sites - to publicly incite extreme thinness.

The National Assembly approved the bill in a series of votes after the legislation won unanimous support from the ruling conservative UMP party. It goes to the Senate in the coming weeks.. The decision has caused a rift in Paris between an industry banking on a particular vision of beauty to sell millions in clothes and a government that is concerned by the growing number of anorexics in France, now estimated between 30,000-40,000 French women (French Health Ministry).

Conservative lawmaker Valery Boyer, author of the law, argued that encouraging anorexia or severe weight loss should be punishable in court. In an Associated Press interview just before the parliamentary session, Boyer said "It would give judges the power to imprison and fine offenders up to $47,000 if found guilty of "inciting others to deprive themselves of food" to an "excessive" degree." But fashion insiders pushed back.

Didier Grumbach, president of the influential French Federation of Couture, replied to the decision, "Never will we accept in our profession that a judge decides if a young girl is skinny or not skinny," he said. "That doesn't exist in the world, and it will certainly not exist in France."

But is the problem really the clothes, the models or the industry, or the consumer who buys into it hook, bait and sinker? I mean American late night TV tries to sell us on overnight millionaire schemes as McDonalds tempts us with hormone laden Big Macs - isn't it up to us to decide if buy into either proposition ? Fashion insiders would certainly like us to believe that.

But let's get real, shall we. The issue of selling beauty and sex appeal is unfortunately far more complex and entangled in issues of power, self worth and social status. No one feels more valuable eating a a burger and fries. Size zero eighteen year olds are selling more than underpants, they are selling you on a dream of a perfect life that starts with a perfect bust line. It is the promise of "making it, "being it, " and "having it" all. The mainstream has so bought into the idea of appearance as social currency that it has become globally bankable; causing industry uproars and parliamentary decisions. They sell the dream that we buy into, even if it realistically lets us down every time. We know we will never be or have that girl on the billboard, but buying a piece of whatever she represents, brings us that much closer to the dream. We sip from this "kool aid" in pretty crystal champagne glasses revelling in the delusion. Yes, we are very much to blame.

But beyond the issue of the consumer, consumer psychology or the obvious consumer responsibility in the matter, is the question of weather there needs to be any regulation in terms of what images and ideas we sell to the public. The question is, does government have a right to regulate what is an acceptable message to send to the public ? The answer to that is simply - yes. In the U.S we can't advertise guns, we can't advertise cigarettes on TV (and need to include health risks in all other advertising), and as of late we can't advertise sugary cereals to kids. The government, in cases with serious risks to the population, steps in and weighs in. The fashion industry's claim that "too skinny" is a subjective idea, makes as much sense as the subjectivity of something having too much sugar or not - - yes, if need be, we can actually measure both in grams.

Here's the thing Mr. Grumbach, the world actually does decide if a girl is too skinny or not. Millions of girls actually even decide for themselves - even those that are a size zero who still decide they are too fat. They, like millions of others who may not fall prey to illness as a result, fill their inner "personal value void" with aspirations to what you are selling. No you as an industry are not blame for our spiritual vacancies that allow for this to happen, but you are to blame as the "dealer" of this "fix." And yes, a judge can decide if a girl is skinny or not, I personally think they have had far more complex matters to resolve than the subjectivity of a waist line.

Good going France...another reason to love you, beyond the good cheese and wine !

How Not To Buy Into Being Too Fat, Too Thin, Too Old, Too Bald or Too Anything Anymore

--.op-Ed--

This week the FDA announced a couple of recalls that sparked attention. First there was a seizure of more than $100,000 worth of unapproved drugs marketed as "natural supplements" under the names "Shangai Regular""Shangai Ultra" "Super Shangai""naturale Super Plus, and Lady Shangai." These little magic pills were designed to apparently treat erectile disfunction, impotency and to provide sexual "enhancement." But according to the FDA these products offered more in terms of dangerous side effects, then potency effects. Earlier in the week the FDA also seized nearly $1.3 Million of illeagal dietary supplements that were marketed and distributed on-line and in retail stores under the names "Methyl 1-D," "Methyl 1-D XL," and "Formadrol Extreme XL." This particular potent brew was sold to body builders. It got me wondering how did our culture that also spends a whopping $1.7 Billion on Viagra and over $50 million a day on weight loss products, get so dissatisfied with ourselves, and when did this become the stuff of pop culture?

What stuck out for me about the recalls was not so much that the drugs were unapproved but that there was a significant market to buy them. On the one hand we are never thin enough, muscular enough, virile enough or young enough, while on the other - there is always some perceived ideal, that is always "out there" - conveniently within reach of a new product that's for sale. The message is - you can buy peace of mind in a bottle, a pill or a surgical procedure. I mean, what would happen to countless industries if we just gave ourselves some peace; came to terms with our less than trim thighs, and receding hairlines, and developing "character line?" What if we looked at our shifting hormones and our changing libidos as evolutions instead of inadequacies in our super-sexed society ? What would happen if we just...well...gave ourselves a break?

A lot seems to be blamed on media. Skinny celebrities in tabloids, and waifish models in fashion mags supposedly dictating what we come to believe about ourselves. Frankly, I'm not so sure about that. Its easy to point fingers and offer blame. We blame that we get fat as a country because of processed foods, and our kids are stressed because of the violence on T.V, and our girls are dying of eating disorders because of the fashion industry, but in truth - its our values, and those we instill in our kids, that dictate what we choose to buy in principal and in reality. Call me the unrelenting optimist but I believe in free will, human intelligence, and our ability to differentiate right from wrong. Video game manufacturers serve a demand, just as much as tabloid publications, and "sexual enhancement" supplement manufacturers. We are the demand. Maybe the problem is less with how we are marketed to, but in how willing we are to be active in the process of discerning the messages being marketed. Maybe we are not so much dumb and easy to influence, as lazy and complacent.

I'm all for self development and feeling and looking your best. But true growth and vitality is the stuff of process, both internal and external...neither of which, ultimately can be delivered in a pill. Next time you look in your mirror and don't celebrate what you see, or head into your wallet to buy into the fountain of youth and perfection...take a break, go easy, give yourself some peace..and save a buck or two in the process. Ask yourself what idea you are buying into and does that idea celebrate who you are, or condemn who you are ? Be less critical of yourself and more critical of the criticism. Perhaps you are not "too anything"...other than..too willing to be too tough on yourself.

New Research Tries To Sell Violent Video Games as a Healthy Activity

--.op-Ed--

Well, it seems the tests are in - playing video's that kill and dismember is good for you. At least that's the "Brooklyn Bridge" that Develop Magazine and a group of psychologists at Middlesex University are trying to sell us this week.

Game Pro picked up the story and commented "we at GamePro believe the questionnaire will also help weed out blatant media-hungry opportunists who have used the relatively young video game genre as a platform for blatant self-promotion." At the risk of coming off as a blatant media hungry opportunist, I'll go forth and as a very scientific question...who is drinking the kool aid folks ?

The study sampled 292 World of Warcraft players, ages 12-83 years, who were asked to complete a questionnaire on anger, aggression and personality and then played the game for two hours. After this time they were they were asked to complete the test again. The psychologists found overall the gamers were more likely to feel calm or tired after playing– but there were differences depending on sex, age and personality. So let me just get this straight folks - a group of video game players were asked to play an aggressive video game for two hours straight and afterwards they were tired or calm, based on a questionnaire? Just a thought here, but how about if we take that same sampling and put them into a congested New York City subway in the dead of summer for two hours and then let them out and ask them how they feel. My guess would be tired and calm. Let's try sticking them on a roller coaster for two hours, then getting them off and asking the same question - let me go out on a limb here...I am guessing - still, tired and calm. Generally speaking, after any high stress activity we feel "spent."

Our adrenaline comes to a halt and the release from a high stress situation seems almost cathartic. Ask any mother of young kinds what the moments, following the mad morning rush of getting kids to school, feel like...yes...you guessed it, tired and calm. I especially appreciate that they included an 83 year old in the sampling...my guess, as the child of a parent in their seventies, is that they might feel tired after two hours of Donkey Kong (for those old enough to remember that). And its a good thing they asked those twelve year olds to answer a questionnaire on the personality and states of aggression, because God knows a twelve year old can certainly identify sources and scales of their aggression and why they become calm. Anyone raising an adolescent or teen will find this type of claim towards such profound self examination somewhat, well...questionable.

More so than the question of the study or the findings, I am curious about the objective. Was the study to assess the value of delivering interactive experience of gross violence ? What is the next step - assessing if actual decapitation and animal cruelty versus perceived is also a stress reducer ? And who is funding these studies anyway (and why) ? I mean do we really need a study to tell us that images and interactive experiences of stabbings, shootings, beatings and murder are probably in a very best case scenario the stuff of "thin ice" as far as human conditioning.

In a world where 854 million people go hungry (and 10 million children under age 5 die of starvation), 1 in 6 people go without safe drinking water, a climate crises on our hands that is creating more poverty and illness every day - we need to ask ourselves, what are we conditioning our youth to handle, and who are the parents funding this epidemic ? Where are the video games inspiring activism, compassion and collaboration? And better yet, let's ask ourselves (and those psychologists at Middlesex) why are so many engaging in the virtual world - at the expense of engaging in the real one?


(To see the original article in Develop Magazine - go HERE)

Science Versus Intuition - Who Wins?

--.op-Ed-

A new study came out that claims to have debunked the benefits of water. Good thing, as probably millions of people are afraid to drink it since the news of pharmaceutical and now the recent salmonella contamination warnings. I think many of us would feel safer collecting rain water and boiling it than trusting our own faucets...but enough on the rant.

According to Dr. Stanley Goldfarb and Dr. Dan Negoianu of University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, folks in hot, dry climates and athletes have a need for increased fluid intake - while average people don't. They cite "four major myths" that state that increased water consumption leads to more toxin excretion, improves skin tone, makes one less hungry and reduces headaches, are just that myths.

"Our bottom line was that there was no real good science -- or much science at all -- behind these claims, that they represent probably folklore," Goldfarb said.

Their scientific review, published in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, is the latest to undercut the recommendations advanced by some experts to drink eight glasses of 8 ounces (225 ml) of water a day.

Well this news might help me cut down on my rain collection efforts, but heck, at the same time I swear that drinking more water always makes me feel and look better, has helped get rid of headaches, and heck even makes me less hungry during the day. I find that scientific study announcements leave a whole lot of the population second guessing themselves-we are left with more questions then answers.

For a very different example of this, some 4900 claims are currently part of a single case being brought before the vaccine court by parents citing links between vaccinations and autism. Science keeps telling those families, and thousands of other parents like them, that there is no link between autism and vaccines. But thousands of parents say they saw a series of clear events and reactions in their kids following vaccinations (most of the cases coincidentally sounding identical in the progress of events) that told them that there was a connection...their intuition spoke loud and clear.

For years scientific studies have shown no link between anti-depressant use in kids and violence in years following (even as countless cases showed otherwise). Thousands of parents saw correlations between the medications given to their kids and future impacts on their behavior. Now dozens of studies studies have disproved the earlier finding.

For decades child health experts cited that there was no significant health benefits to breast milk versus children's formula, while millions of moms listened to their instinct and continued to breast feed because it felt like the healthier option, even during decades where breastfeeding was bordering on a socially unacceptable behavior. Coincidentally, during that same time, health experts found no major health risks with cigarette smoking while millions of smokers died of various lung diseases, knowing intuitively why it was happening.

All of these varied examples are only meant to raise one point - science seems to refuse to allow for people to trust themselves, their gut, their intuition. Science worships at the alter of evidence as it is revealed, yet studies get dis-proven daily. We are asked to follow information that is often found to be as malleable as pizza dough. So where are we left with? Who do we trust?

Science helps solve puzzles of life - but let's be clear here...these are pretty big puzzles...ultimately too vast and too complex to ever fully "put together." While science offers many great answers and possible solutions to life's challenges and mysteries, it can't replace the inner compass that lives in all of us that is called our instinct and intuition...designed specifically for our own preservation. Keep in mind - that "gut feeling" is not the stuff of fuzzy mysticism, but is actually hard wiring that is there to help you protect yourself and assure for your survival. Science can't replace this - perhaps, at best it can supplement it. As you read headlines touting expert opinions...put it through your "intuitive radar," before blindly buying into the supposed "facts" of the day.

Cleaning Up The Murky Politics (and Economics) of Mind-Body

--.op-Ed--

Yesterday The New York Times ran an interesting story in their Week in Review section, that begged comment. The piece, by Sarah Kershaw, was titled “The Murky Politics of Mind-Body” and focused on the shifting attitudes of mental health and how they have impacted a controversial new House bill . The bill would demand that insurance companies provide mental insurance “parity” - meaning that insurance companies could no longer set lower limits on coverage of mental health problems than on physical problems (including doctor and hospital visits, without higher co-payments).

The new bill has brought both insurance companies and the Senate up in arms. The Senate passed its own bill last fall (support by George W. himself ) that provided limited coverage. The real issue is the $3.8 Billion that the House bill would cost the government over the next ten years (even though the bill did include ways to off-set those costs). The NY Times article provides some very important points on the issue (you can read it HERE.)

How exactly did we bring the mind/body connection to a matter of “fine print ?” For example in the the article it asks, “Is an ailment a legitimate disease, if you can’t test for it?” This is sort of odd in a nation where ADD, ADHD, Bi-Polar Disorders, Panic and Anxiety Disorders, and Post Partum Depression (to list just a few) regularly get diagnosed and medicated – it’s just out of the consumers pocket. The FDA allows for medications to treat these types of “mental diseases/disorders” even though there are no diagnostics available in the strictest definition. The mind/body question disappears as long as we are paying for it.

Critics say that anything that would not show up in an autopsy as in depression or agoraphobia, cannot be equated to a physical illness – so should not be covered. Yet Erectile Dis-function diagnosis (which would have a hard time showing up in an autopsy…excuse the pun) is covered by most insurance companies, as are a limited quantities of the actual pills to “treat” the problem. I’m confused – its seems we are diagnosing and treating the "mentally ill" already (and those with other more "murky" and hard to definitively diagnose"dis-functions").

Mental health seems have been amputated from the human wellness model in the western world. Even though mentally ill cost this nation hundreds of millions of dollars by fueling the national homeless problem, the drug abuse epidemic, and crime. Mentally ill lose jobs, lose families and lose homes. Mentally ill self medicate using & misusing both prescription and street drugs, as well as alcohol. Mentally ill commit everything from petty crimes to the most gruesome criminal acts. None of these problems remain theirs – as we all pick up the tab on the ramifications of their illness, as does the federal government. Simply put, these costs are incurred because of the stigma and the cost barrier to diagnosis and treatment. Where is the financial savings Mr. Senator?

The other big problem is that mental illness is often a symptom of a physical ailment. Depression can be linked to anything from diabetes to low testosterone. Hallucinations can be linked to any number of neurological problems. Symptoms resembling Manic and/ or Panic Disorders can be linked to anything from Thyroid to heart conditions. If we tell consumers, through our attitude towards treatment and coverage, that mental health is not as serious of a problem as a straight forward medical condition – how many of those seemingly straight forward medical conditions are we missing, just because the patient isn’t going to get diagnosed ?

Another question we need to ask is how closely are our mental health practitioners working with the other slate of specialists and general MD’s ? How often does a patient coming in to see a Psychiatrist with heart palpitations and shortness of breath, claiming panic disorders get sent by a Psychiatrist back to their general MD (or heart specialist) for testing of heart problems - versus getting a prescription of Xanax ? How often do hallucinations get anti-psychotic medication instead of a full work up to see if there is a Neurological problem at work ? Yet if a person goes to see their general practitioner because of repeated numbness in their arm, chances are they will get sent to see a heart specialist. It seems psychiatry and mental health has long held such a massive stigma that there seems to be a significant division from other specialization in the medical field. Who ultimately suffers from this ? How often are we misdiagnosing because the Mind/Body practitioners have a distorted (or non-existent) process for collaboration?

The Mind/Body politic might be murky – only for those who stand to profit or lose profit. For the rest of us, those that know someone who is mentally ill, those of us who have passed a mentally ill person on the street, those of us who been either victim to or witness of a crime committed by a mentally ill person (in person, on TV, on paper), those of us who have some form of mental illness - -in other words…all of us (in one form or another), know that mental health is no less and no more important than the health of the remainder of our bodies. Somehow this big murky question seems answered in most of the rest of the world. In Canada and in most parts of Europe – there is nothing murky in mental health (everyone gets covered). Human beings individually, and for the greater wellness of society, deserve to get full coverage to be of healthy body AND mind. Hopefully this will be just one more step towards pulling mental health out of the shadows in which it has long existed.

And so it begs to question…who really needs their "head checked" in this scenario (in the "murky politics of mind/body")?

Pre Historic Evidence for a Collaborative World

--.op-Ed--

Reuters reported today that human fossils were found in Western Europe that date back 1.2 million years (in Northern Spain). Archaelogists have previously found remains in other parts of Europe including France and Italy (clearly a nice spot of the world to travel to, even apparently back then). What’s truly incredible is that the oldest evidence of human life came from the country of Georgia, in Asia, and dates back 1.7 million years. What amazes me about these figures is how much we have both changed and yet remained the same, over this vast time span.

We have become incredibly organized animals, functioning in networks of work, family and community groups. We have created technologies that ultimately rely on man made networks that comprise of systems all their own. We have created laws that are meant to protect us as individuals and us as a group. We have established understanding as to why and how (at least in part) we get ill, die, and are born. We have come to understand how little of a speck each of us are, in the context of the universe (and the countless other universes in that vast outer space), and yet at the same we have grown immeasurably to see the value of each life as sacred, and the mysteries of our own "inner space." We have developed machinery that processes and delivers our food, built machines that fly us in the air and propels us over oceans and vast lands. In short, we have been an incredibly busy and productive bunch. Yet, at the same time, many things, have remained surprisingly utterly unchanged.

All those things that have ultimately assured for our survival persist. The fight for dominance, the competition for resources, the impulse to protect your self and your “own.” Our wiring, matched with our evolved intelligence, is ultimately what produced much of our history and the progress around us; the creation of government (to protect, defend, and yes – dominate), the creation of technology (to protect, compete and yes – dominate), even the creation of medicine (protect, compete and yes – dominate). All advents ultimately served the purpose of assuring our survival by either protecting, competing or dominating the opposition (weather it’s a person, an idea, or a virus).

What’s interesting is that in our quest for a more “civilized” and collaborative world that can overcome so many of the modern challenges we face, we fail to realize that what we are ultimately battling is not the “evil foe” but a million + years of programming that has proven successful…after all, we are here…we made it ! Finding a collaborative world and a new way of engaging with each other and our planet will only “stick,” if we evolve into a realization that collaboration and compassion helps us protect, compete and dominate some force that assures for our very preservation. I think we are heading there – in rapid order, as we have come to realize that our own individual mortality is not what is ultimately at risk anymore – but rather the mortality of us as a species. This idea is a wholly novel one arrived at by the collision of two expanding bodies of evidence over the last century; 1) Evidence that other species have become (and continue to become) extinct and 2) evidence of factors that can lead to our own extinction.

I believe that there is a swell of change coming. It’s coming from within the human wiring. We are not trying to heal our planet because of a feel good rationale (or some man made moral code) but rather, I believe, something far more instinctual…something utterly prehistoric; the need to survive.

The Evolution of Good and the Purpose of Human Tragedy

--.op-Ed--

Today I read a piece, by Alex Steffen, on the usually amazing Worldchanging blog, that put me ill at ease. The first paragraph read as follows:

One of the Worldchanging slogans is "We've inherited a broken future." That is to say, mainly, that the direction in which we're headed leads right over a cliff. But it might be read a different way: that many of the biggest legacies left humanity by our parents, grandparents and more distant ancestors are broken systems, ruined places, vanished species, antique climates. Much of our inheritance is destruction.

I worry when I read these doomsday articles. I feel like they hype one part of the human story to push an otherwise worthwhile cause – our existence and its wellbeing. There is always some tone that smells almost of propaganda and hate mongering – of the worst kind; our own collective history.

The legacy of our parents and grandparents (and the countless generations that came before) was in fact filled with broken systems, and vanished species, but truth be told systems need to be broken and species need to vanish for progress to happen. The nature of evolution is about the disappearance of one species for the emergence of another. It is a highly unromantic idea that death, dying, disease, despair, is part of the structure of our vast universe - but it is. Stars die every day, galaxies “grow extinct,” viruses are born daily, humans perish by the millions every week, and non of this is ultimately happening because of our grandparents legacy.

Humans have indeed made many questionable decisions fueled by half baked ideas that are often fed by ego rather than the soul of our humanity. Each generation, much like each individual life, is driven by a core instinct to assure for its own survival. The fight for a bigger piece of meat to feed your clan (often at the expense of someone else starving to death) in prehistoric time is no different than what has happened in countless moments of history where humans took as much as they could for themselves at the price of someone else’s life and well being. Weather this was land, resources, or the very culture of other people – dominance is more driven by instinct than intellect. So where does this leave us? And does this justify the ugliness of episodes like the Trail of Tears, the horrors inflicted by the Third Reich, the brutality of Rawanda, the travesty of the ravaged environment ?

Destruction, corruption and the “evil quality" of the doings of man are a call to those who can see past the “wiring” of the systems of our universe and its brutality, to the possibility beyond. These tragic moments in our world are a call to action for those who can provide new insight and direction and systems and process that help in our very evolution; not just physically but also emotionally, intellectually and ultimately spiritually. When a system becomes outdated, when a thinking stops serving a generation, it breaks down and distorts, much like our physiology. The results are what we see and endure as the ugliest episodes of our history, like historical cancer, graphically marking the coming death of an outdated idea or system.

I agree with Worldchanging, in that we have endured thousands of years of destruction – but I believe we have not inherited it – instead we have inherited the fruits of it. We have inherited the ideals of democracy in this country through the blood shed of American Revolution, the Civil War and the fight for often brutal civil rights just a few short decades ago. We inherited new religions, and ultimately new spiritual perspectives, through the revolutionary ideals of extraordinary individuals throughout time (many who died for those ideas). We have invented new technologies and treatments that have wiped out deadly viruses, because of the tragedy and death of millions who created a call for such treatments. And in some cases, our lessons have indeed been slow to learn.

Governments remain in many ways corrupt, industry still fails to serve the people first, the notions of “family” remain both narrowly defined and yet too broadly defined in terms of the purpose of family, intolerance persists on varying scales across all cultures. We are, in every way, still an evolving species. Our work is not done yet.

In the grand scheme of life, in all forms, throughout all time, there is a method to what we call the madness. Perhaps our purpose is not to make it all “right” – for our purpose ultimately is to not live in utopia – but to hear, feel, smell, and see the moments of opportunity (through the noise and darkness of our own moment in history) where one life can birth one idea to help move our cause as humanity, one step further up the evolutionary ladder.

Labeling for Survival - Consumer Interests Past the Eco-Friendly Tag's

--trends + business + politics--

I just saw a great post of more "good green news" on Environmental Leader. It appears that retailer JC Penny has joined the green label brigade by offering a "Simply Green" tag on private brand merchandise.

From panties to toasters, "Simply Green" is meant to give conscious consumers reason to spend spend spend, guilt free. To make Eco-friendly shopping easier our friends at JC Penny will be placing green merchandise in "Simply Green" zones throughout the stores. Consumers can count on getting organic products (made with at least 70% organic...think organic cotton), renewable products (made with at least 25% renewable materials..think bamboo), and recycled products (made with at least 25% recycled materials...think recycled glass).

I like this simplification for shoppers like me. I get my own "zone" and am assured that I am buying at least more earth friendly products than those unmentionables in the "other zones." But I wonder, why are we so focused on labeling earth friendly products green, instead of labeling earth destroying products in their code colors...say yellow (caution), red (stop, don't do it) and black (lights out - totally deadly stuff here). Why not create labels that tell us "this product is made from conventional cotton, that contaminated X miles of land, sprayed workers with cancerous chemicals shortening their life span by half, and polluting the earth for say the next 200 years."

I think we need to let everyone know what they are buying...and not only selling the good news. The problem of our time does not call for segregating do-gooders, from evil doer's in their own "zones" at a store near you - but educating the masses on the realities of their choices...in bold print, for starters. Why does all the ugliness of conventional business get hidden behind pretty ad's ? I say we ask for the same labels on our hormone contaminated meat, and genetically modified grains that warn of us of health risks, much like the warning on a pack of Marlboro's. How do we splice and dice health risks, making one more urgent than the next?

Next time you look at a label, that doesn't sell you on it's good green appeal, ask yourself...what are they actually not telling you.

The Big Business of Selling You Disease: Inside The Ugly $25 Billion Pharmaceutical Marketing Industry

--trends + business + politics--

Just as we are trying to scramble for answers on what to do with the pharmaceutical contamination of our water, news breaks out that illuminates as to one of the reasons why we got into the contamination mess in the first place; the systemic pharmaceutical overdose of our mass culture, fed by the multi billion dollar pharmaceutical marketing industry.

John Lechleiter, a top company exec at pharma giant Eli Lilly (who is set to take the number one spot as CEO on April 1) has been caught in a very high profile "foot in mouth" crises. Apparently the exec issued an email in 2003 that made a specific reference to the use of Zyprexa by children and teenagers, although it is only approved for adults with Schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Lechner wrote in his email that there is an "opportunity to expand the company's work with Zyprexa, olanzapine."

Eli Lilly asserts that the email referred directly to clinical development already underway and not promotional activity. The information broke in a trial against Eli Lilly (State of Alaska v. Ely Lilly) involving marketing and side effects of the drug, including higher risk of diabetes, weight gain and heart problems. Simultaneously, the state of Connecticut has filed suit accusing the drug maker of promoting the Zyprexa for anxiety, depression and attention deficit disorder in children despite it not receiving FDA approval for those uses. It faces similar accusations in the case in Alaska. This all raises on question-why are pharmaceutical companies allowed to market to consumer at all?

Turn on a television on any given day and you will find a million dollar ad for depression. But how is a consumer to determine if they have the described mood disorder that requires medicating, or perhaps, one of many underlying possible physiological conditions that show symptoms of depression (e.g. diabetes, menopause, low tetosterone levels etc.)? We require doctors to attend a dozen years of education to be able to diagnose and treat our ailments, yet television commercials make us believe that in thirty seconds we might diagnose why we feel the way we do - and even offer a treatment plan. This type of approach preys on the publics ignorance and thirst for quick fixes, and does little to actually educate a consumer on health.

In the case of psychiatric conditions, there are no real quantitative tests and the medical profession relies on a patients perception of their symptoms and condition. Drugs get prescribed often based on what a patient asks for rather than what a doctor suggests, often swayed by what the patient is led to believe they have based on a million dollar ad spot. Why are we not advertising other treatments (equally as invasive as altering your physiology with heavy doses of chemicals), say surgery. How about a 30 second spot on the benefits of a triple bypass, or a gallbladder removal? Or a paid for TV infomercial on the joys of hysterectomies.

According to a 2004 report by University of Washington $25 Billion per year is spent on promoting new drugs and distributing free samples to doctors. Direct to physician activities accounted for a bulk of the spending with a $5.3 billion spent on "detailing," a practice marketing to physicians, by live visits, by pharmaceutical sales representatives in order to promote their firms drugs. Free drug samples during such visit were valued at $16.4 billion. Who is picking up these astronomical costs you might wonder?

"As the cost of prescription drugs continues to escalate, increased attention is being focused on the role of pharmaceutical marketing practices as a cause of higher drug prices," said Robert Jacobson, professor of marketing at the University of Washington Business School and co-author of the paper.

The report when on to cite a study where researchers analyzed data for three widely prescribed drugs issued by some 74,000 physicians over a two-year period to investigate the effect of pharmaceutical sales representatives on physician prescribing behavior. For each of the drugs in the study, Jacobson and Natalie Mizik, assistant professor of marketing at Columbia University, assessed the effects of changes in the numbers of sales calls and free samples on the number of new prescriptions the physician issued. The results indicated that it would take approximately 3 additional visits by a pharmaceutical sales representative to induce one new prescription. It would take 26 additional free samples to induce one new prescription. In short, the study points to a clear example of the pharma industries deliberate intention to not only sway the public, but the medical profession in to "pushing" certain medications.

There is a significant problem in marketing products to consumers for conditions they are not qualified to diagnose. Symptoms can look and feel the same across many illness, and it is for an unbiased medical professional to ascertain the possible causes of the symptoms. The problem is, how unbiased has our medical community actually become?

Drugs have become benign in our culture - we pop pills like expensive designer tic-tacs. We don't seem to be getting so much healthier as a population than playing musical chairs with our condition - trading impotence for heart disease, or depression for diabetes. We overlook the small print, because there is an overwhelming amount of it written in medical language most people do not understand while the benefits are touted in catchy colorful ads.

There needs to be an overhaul of the entire process of how pharmaceutical companies are allowed to interface with the public in general. Educational interface is different than a sales opportunity. We don't sell guns on TV because of potential dangers, yet we sell smoking guns in pill forms that have shown (in millions of consumers) severe adverse reaction and even death. Marketing to the medical profession needs to be tightly regulated, where doctors are not offered free lunches by pharma reps to carry the new drug of choice. And doctors shouldn't be given free samples of drugs, promoting easy distribution to patients. There needs to be a difference between how buyers at department stores are treated by manufacturers, and how doctors are treated by the pharmaceutical industry.

We need to ask ourselves - when did our health become bankable...and why are we letting it happen?

41 Million Set To Be Effected By Drug Contamination of U.S Water System - How We Are To Blame

-- trends + business + politics--

This mornings headlines from the Associated Press (AP) on the pharmaceuticals contamination in the water systems that is estimated to effect a minimum of 41 million people (so far), is hopefully rattling the nerves of at least that many people nationwide.

Somehow news of contaminated waters (and the dozens of fish that we can no longer safely eat) was easy "to swallow" (excuse the pun). The deteriorating air quality is something we seem to have learned to live with (even as asthma and other respiratory diseases are climbing at escalated rates). Hormones injected into our athletes veins to increase endurance seem to cause more of an uproar than the hormones injected into our children's food supplies on a daily basis. We know to blame various industries for these crimes - but who do we blame for the complacency of society to nothing less than its own slow and quiet destruction. At best, for most, this mornings headlines will make for good water cooler discussion to be quickly forgotten after tomorrow's headlines break. How did this happen? How did so many of us "numb down?"

Here are the facts we know so far, on the water contamination issue alone:

• Officials in Philadelphia said testing there discovered 56 pharmaceuticals or byproducts in treated drinking water, including medicines for pain, infection, high cholesterol, asthma, epilepsy, mental illness and heart problems. Sixty-three pharmaceuticals or byproducts were found in the city's watersheds.

• Anti-epileptic and anti-anxiety medications were detected in a portion of the treated drinking water for 18.5 million people in Southern California.

• Researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey analyzed a Passaic Valley Water Commission drinking water treatment plant, which serves 850,000 people in Northern New Jersey, and found a metabolized angina medicine and the mood-stabilizing carbamazepine in drinking water.

• A sex hormone was detected in San Francisco's drinking water.

• The drinking water for Washington, D.C., and surrounding areas tested positive for six pharmaceuticals.

• Three medications, including an antibiotic, were found in drinking water supplied to Tucson, Ariz.

Officials claim that the massive growth in the number of people using medication (both prescription and over-the-counter) is the culprit. From simply dumping medications down the toilet, to medication that is passed through the system being flushed away - these remnants are landing back in our tap water, as most water treatment plants do not remove all drug residue. Although officials claim that these residual amounts are "far below medical dose" they still do not know of the exact effects of small dosages over many years. One can safely assume that convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones (some of the found drugs) even in small doses, over many years, do not go without health implications.

The AP findings are from a short five month survey of a few water dozen water systems nationwide. Interesting to note is the fact that the federal government doesn't actually require any testing and hasn't set safety limits for drugs in water. According the Associated Press report, of the 62 major water providers contacted, the drinking water for only 28 was tested. Among the 34 that haven't: Houston, Chicago, Miami, Baltimore, Phoenix, Boston and New York City's Department of Environmental Protection, which delivers water to 9 million people. In a time where millions are spent to market research the effectiveness of an ad campaign for a new prescription drug, we are investing less in testing how those same drugs are assimilated into our water systems.

The facts are simple, regardless of the product (medication, fish or that mass produced plastic toy), nothing one buys ends its life cycle in your home (or in your body). Weather it is the chemicals polluting our earth to produce that cheap T-Shirt you're wearing, or that pill your popping for a minor inconvenient headache or a mild case of blues that inevitably will land back in the toilet (one way or another). We can not expect industry to change if the demand for instant feel good, cheap products continues to grow.

More than being "green" or even "earth conscious" we need to be "reality conscious" and look at the end to end life cycle or what we put in our homes, in our bodies and in our lives. We need to become diligent about what we buy, and who we buy it from. We need to do it not to be cool, to be good, or to be "smart" - we need to do it simply to survive. We need to stop numbing down and start waking up - and fast. We need to stop just blaming industry and start looking at who is funding those industries - us. Our dollars speak louder than our voices and a million petitions will not accomplish as much as a million consumers making hard line decision about how they spend, or don't spend, their money.

For now we wait, again, on yet more results of yet another form of pollution we have caused, jointly - hand in hand with big business. Asthma, ADD, Autism, Cancer complications...what awaits us? Hopefully we will not too numbed down to demand the answers.



To contact the AP National Investigative Team for more information, send an email to investigate (at) ap.org

Recycling for Survival, Sustainability in the Rest of the World

--WEEKEND FEATURE ARCHIVE: .Op-Ed--

Before the term recycling existed - "hand me down's," or "making do with what you got" was the term of use. I remember listening to my grandmother, hailing from Siberia, talking about making dolls from old pillowcases and using cans to construct music makers. Nothing was truly ever thrown out. Kids always wore hand me downs, and in my grandma's case, as the youngest of ten kids, she felt she had the biggest wardrobe and was most lucky. Water was never thrown out - instead reused, kid after kid generally, bath after bath. Perhaps not hygienic by modern day standards, but with water to boil for every bath (as hot water was a luxury), it was simply the only reasonable solution. Furniture was never thrown out, instead inherited (how do you think you got the antiques you might have, or know someone who has). And scraps of food, fish, meats, veggies all went used - created into ethnic recipes of stews and soups that are now common place.

We think our generation created the idea of recycling, when in reality maybe we just remembered it. The last fifty years have seen such a mass production of every known item, and the increase of wealth in the west has caused such wide spread consumerism, that the need to be thrifty and smart and resource focused had all but disappeared. We lost the need to think about resources, because we had so many. We were numbed down, to actually how things always worked. Today, if you look at less wealthy places in the world (meaning most of the planet), recycling and being resourceful is a way of life.

The Associated Press recently ran a story on Egypt's "repair culture," that fixes old electronics instead of disposing and buying a new. They mentioned a street in downtown Cairo (El-Attar) which is the most well known repair area in this city of nearly 20 million people. The two-block street is crammed with workers fixing almost everything — from blenders to boom boxes, cell phones, video game players, and even antique phones and radios. Such repair vendors and shops are actually not unique to Cairo — they are commonplace throughout Africa, Asia and anywhere where people cannot afford to buy new electronics devices every time something breaks down. But the reality is, that none of them are repairing the old instead of buying the new, because of an environment concern (trying not to clog up more landfills), their business is all about survival=making a living. Recycling is simply a new term for an old behavior, one driven by the need to sustain the individual, rather than the planet.

Perhaps what we need to remember is a very obvious fact of how very rich we are...if you are reading this, you have a computer, probably a light and a desk and a house with electricity. You have free time, or a white collar job that allows for you to sit and read things that further your mind; an extremely decadent state to be in, by global standards. As we all struggle to find small ways to make a difference, let's just remember that for many - the idea of figuring out what to do with all that left over food, all those clothes that fill up you closet that you need to clear out, all those plastic containers once filled with food is a very blessed problem. We need to be real that recycling all our excess in the west - is a rich mans problem - and one that has now become the poor man's burden as well.

Perhaps our reasons to reuse, recycle, re purpose are more cerebral and philosophical and filled with concern for the state of the future, than those who do those same things to survive in the present. But regardless, one thing we share in common, is we all need to figure out how be mindful with what we have, or don't have, for some it is an option - for others it 's just a the way of life.




(image above, courtesy of Associated Press)

On Measuring Happiness

-- Op-Ed--

I just read an article that said that according to a recent Pew Research Poll, 85% of Americans polled said they were very happy or at least “pretty happy.” That figure seemed high to me. If I look at all the TV shows that look at people trying to lose weight, get face lifts and get rich – supposedly to get happy, I would imagine that 85% would actually be unhappy. I wonder about the millions of folks on Zoloft of Xanax or any number of other mood effecting medications – were they polled too? Are the growing rates of divorce making us happier or our expanding waist lines? I am not trying to come off as a cynic – but rather as a skeptic of how are we actually defining happiness and who are we really asking.

I am guessing a five year old would be happy with a good sweet and a fun game of hide and seek – wouldn’t all five year olds? Perhaps. But a five year old in an American suburb with a stay at home mom and a warm bed at night might have different definition from an inner city kid in a single family home with a working parent and frightening environment out the front door. Happiness for the aging depends on weather they can afford their medication, if they have housing they can rely on, and if they have loved ones by their side. Immigrants are happy if they don’t have to worry about deportation and if they have enough money to build the life they came to build. Happiness is far more complex than a yes and no answer. It is perhaps a seemingly infinite and perpetually fluctuating scale, both individually and socially.

Guru’s will say that happiness is not dependent on circumstance – or at least it should not be. But life’s paths flavor our spirits and color our memory, and for some the result inspires pursuit of happiness, while for others pursuit of basic survival becomes the more likely option. It’s hard to be happy with a hungry belly, an unhealthy body or a terrified state of mind-as much as we would like to believe its not. So much of the planet lacks the sheer luxury to worry about happiness..instead worrying about basic survival. And yet in those places happiness is no less and no more important - much like air..we all need it just the same.

Joy perhaps is the most important part of life. That is why we revel in the sound of a child’s laughter, marvel at the splendor of the setting sun, and revel in the bliss of new love. That is our optimal state, perhaps even our purpose. But happiness is both universal (in that we know we all want it, and at some point have had a taste of it)and at the same time utterly personal – dependent in most ways on intricacies of the private inner world of each person. And in that complex emotional chemistry we are left with one simple fact – that happiness is perhaps attainable but as much as researchers would like to believe it is, never truly measurable…by anyone but ourselves, for ourselves.



-Editor-in-Chief

.Op-Ed:Welcome to the "r-Evolution" or Why the World is Actually Getting Better

What in God's name is happening to this world, when car companies are turning into healthy lifestyle curators, (Lexus Hybrid Lifestyle) and soda companies are infusing vitamins into tin cans (Diet Coke PLUS) ? Whatever happened to the days where we longed to be like that lone cowboy on the Marlboro ads or the latter day version of the urban honcho driving a hummer ? My my how a few years can turn things around.

Celebrities have become the voice of living green and living clean - lifestyle that is. The message from Hollywood is clear in every (non Lyndsey or Britney) feature story - grab your bottled water folks (which hopefully you recycle) and head in to town for a little bit of Bikram Yoga. Steam those flawless cheeks with aromatherapy infusions or better yet get some facial acupuncture for the healthy alternative lift. We laugh at Paris Hilton attempts to become a humanitarian as we praise Brad and Angie for saving the worlds orphans and making the world a little greener (in New Orleans). We have become expert "sniffers" of false altruism. Our hippest celeb's arrive in Prius' to awards shows as we sit in our living rooms actually wanting one.

Fast food joints plaster caloric counts side by side to the pictorial temptations, and potato chips specify the healthier oils that saturate every tasty bite. A walk through the supermarket aisle in middle America now promises more whole grain nutrition and low sugar options than any "good ole boy" could ever dream of (or want). And long gone are the days of Birkenstock 's being the symbols of environmentalism as the stiletto set has infiltrated the green scene with a booming Eco-Fashion biz that is infiltrating runways in all major cities, and creating a few of their own.

Even our pets can now eat organic, get detoxed with a little Milk Thistle, or get acupuncture treatment from chronic conditions. Holistic and integrative wellness is not just for the two legged anymore. How did the insurance companies start covering acupuncture and daily meditation sessions become a perk at large corporations? How did shows like "Biggest Loser" promoting a healthier lifestyle make it to Prime Time or Super Nanny for that matter pitching more Mindful Parenting ?

I look around and feel like I am in the midst of nothing short of a culture revolution - minus the "r" ...that's right an evolution. How could so many industries, across so many products decide to step up and simply "do the right thing." It is false to believe that evolution (assuming you buy the theory) only happens on the flesh, it happens in the mind and spirit. We have evolved for centuries to assure for our survival. We have become simply - better.

I look around and I feel as if I am bearing witness to a great unfolding - of the evolution of the consciousness of the time. It did not begin now, but it seems to have gained velocity at the moment. Industries and humans, as distant and different as the mind can grasp are aligning (some faster than others) towards a more "enlightened" approach to existence - simple ideas of sustaining our well being, creating connections with others, honoring the natural environment, getting connected to our spirits. It is a big idea that has nothing new to say. Times are a 'changing and I believe for the best.

Next time that you find yourself harping on the harsh realities of the world and swimming in your sea of cynicism...look around and take note, the world is changing. Are you?


Julia Z.Fenster
Editor-in-Chief

.Op-Ed:Creating Life Transforming New Years Resolutions

I love celebrating New Years Eve. Even as a child, it held more excitement for me than any other holiday. I remember when I was little feeling filled to the rim with glee on New Years day, waiting to begin… to somehow write life anew. I still feel that way. There is something magical to the idea of beginning a new chapter, which the New Year promises. I always get sad when I hear people say “oh it really no big deal for us at all,” like a kid being told there is no Santa – I want to pout and kick my feet and protest. “It is a big deal!”

Maybe if we all got into the habit of realizing that every day is actually a new chapter, or for that matter, like all the great spiritual masters would correct me – in every moment there is actually a new chapter – perhaps New Years would be less momentous. But finding that clean slate in an average day seems to slip the psyche. We seem to spend a whole lot of our life assuring that the patterns of our life are upheld to perfection, day in and day out, rather than inventing something new. I believe in many lives this becomes increasingly the case especially as people age – patterns become more ingrained and the idea of creating anything truly new is left to the realms of fantasy. Our life, in large, becomes a replay of our patterns.

New Years is an annual celebration that reminds us that we can make resolutions for small changes that we will give ourselves a whole year to resolve. Perhaps the reason that most people fail at getting great results from their resolutions is that the resolutions are not “great” in character. We are not inspired by the very things we set as resolutions. Losing 10 lbs might make you feel more attractive, but how much does it actually improve the overall quality of your life? Getting a “higher paying job” could create help you pay your bills, but a salary increase is not a soul igniting concept. I believe soul igniting is what we actually all need.

I think all those folks who want to lose ten pounds should go for broke. Change your resolution - go for 10 less pounds with extraordinary physical health and incredible stamina. Envision more than that smaller size jeans cradling your waist, envision running that marathon that you thought you would never do. Forget just asking for the year to bring you a higher paying job, and ask for complete financial freedom. Don’t hope for just making all your bill payments, but envision taking a month off to vacation in another part of the planet, worry free.

I believe that if our lives are to inspire us, our resolution are the first place to start. Throw away being reasonable, and be outrageous, be expansive, be GREAT. Great lives, begin with great thoughts. Ask yourself this New Years, what are you creating in your thinking for 2008? Go for broke…let 08’ be the year that you lived the great life you were destined to live. Make it happen. At 12:01 AM – your clean slate will be waiting to be written. What will you write?

Happy New Year. Much Peace, Joy, and Abundance to All.

Julia Z.Fenster
Editor-in-Chief

.Op-Ed:The Perfection Myth and Freeing Yourself From It

I am a reformed perfectionist. I used to spend nearly every other minute of my day sizing up my reality against how close or how far it was from some perceived ideal. Clearly this approach resulted in only one conclusion – it was always at some relative distance from perfection, only to be measured by my proportionate dis-satisfaction. As I got older, somewhat wiser, and “awake at the wheel” of life, I realized several things about this idea of perfectionism.

1-Being perfectionistic is more about psychological control than quality control. It is about maneuvering situations and feeling fulfilled on the idea of this accomplishment.

2-Being perfectionistic is entirely ego driven. Things can only be perfect if they fit into your individual design of perfection. This leaves no room for nature, or the ideas of others to truly contribute to anything.

3- Perfectionism undermines the idea of life as a process. Once something is perfect, it is complete and done. In reality, life is never done – it is all a process, far beyond and bigger than yourself or any situation you are involved with. Perfection is a make believe world much like Emerald City.

4- Perfectionism is a goal oriented frame of mind that steals from the focus from the here and now. It disconnects one from where they are at, instead focusing them on where they want to be or where they want any situation to be. It creates a dis-ease and dissatisfaction, which is a debilitating state that is not a powerful place to create anything from.

5- Life is actually perfect already. Like nature, existing in a yin/yang state, its life/death cycles, it’s ultimate design grounded in the concept of the very idea of balance of opposites – things must be “imperfect” to ever be perfect.

So how do we actually create our visions without getting caught up in this idea of perfection?

Well, one way is to realize that ultimately all we do and all we are is for the service of others. It really is not about you.

Second , is the understanding that nothing you “do” ultimately defines who you are. How you do it, does. Who you are in the process of doing whatever you do, is what lives with other humans and yourself. Being the “best lawyer,” “best doctor” or “best mom” is only worthwhile if you and your client, your patient, and your children actually know that you find joy and peace in what you do. Misery is never a private affair – it is ultimately ones second skin. Perfectionism is a joy robber – and what you are left with is that experience of yourself, and the experience others have of you.

Last, enjoy the process of life, and realize that good enough is sometimes truly good enough. We often run the rat race to “better” others. This idea is based on competition and some “survival of fittest” mentality. It is a scarcity mind set. The reality is, that there is no one to “better” there is only contribution or there lack of.

Living to see your potential is different than competing. Seeing your possibility and the realization of it, is about self expression. But until that self expression is plugged into the idea of service to others, it always has a sense of struggle because it is an unnatural state of being.

Perfectionism is never healthy. Be clear that there is a much bigger game going on than yours, that your joy is the mark of all you do, and realize that finding your potential and being fully self expressed is more natural and intuitive when done in the context of the contribution you make to others.

Have fun with it, and remember the only thing perfect in natural is the balance of it – let that be your role model.



J.Z. Fenster
Editor-in-Chief

.Op-Ed:A Thanksgiving Day Editors Note

Happy Thanksgiving Day to all.

I love this holiday, for the namesake and the tradition that it has come to embody; getting the family together, sharing a meal, getting the home ready for company. It involves no secular worship, nor any frivolous gift giving, it does not celebrate any single individual, nor honor any war or conquest (as many holidays do). Its morally questionable historical context has nearly been lost in the memory of the masses. It is a feel good day for most of us...especially those of us with a roof over our head, and food to serve our family, or for that matter - those of us who are blessed enough to even have a family. I like this day very much because in principle what it asks you to do is stand in gratitude.

What a wonderful idea it is to dedicate a day to this important principle, even though gratitude is something we should practice daily, moment to moment. I wish we had a "Judgement-Free Day" and a "Generosity Day" or how about an "Empathy Day." Holidays that celebrate the best of who we are at our core, or who we can become, are far more meaningful than say holidays celebrating dead presidents and the labor force (neither of which, anyone truly "celebrates.").

Today I will spend the day with my famil