See the whole picture

[e-Male]

Have you ever stopped to ponder how narrowly people focus on problems? While the solution might seem at first glance to be adequate, it's seldom truly well thought out.

This isn't about unintended consequences. This is about being appropriate within the fuller context.

Consider something as simple as your home appliances. The oven is designed to produce heat, but its excess wasted heat has to be vented away. And the oven is usually close to another heat engine: the refrigerator. More wasted heat that could at the very least be added to the oven to cook with less total power consumption. Then there is the kitchen sink and dishwasher. Both needing hot water, which is heated in a tank in another room with more heat wasted going from the tank to the outlet.

All solutions to individual problems. Each effective but only to a limited extent in that they aren't sharing in the heat exchanges desired. And each being a little wasteful totalling to a lot wasted.

Now, this isn't about designing eco-friendly homes either.

This is just about excessively narrow focus.

Consider some of the societal problems we face. Rising health costs tied to national obesity problems. Fuel dependencies on foreign sources. We've got short-sighted leaders doing their best to appear to be addressing such problems.

New York's Gov Patterson has proposed an outrageous 18 percent "Obesity Tax" on non-diet sodas to address the obesity issue by punishing consumers for their free choices.

California is prosecuting a plastic surgeon for converting liposuctioned fat into biofuel.

Now it seems to me that here we have two issues begging for a better solution encompassing both. So...

Let's encourage fat-producing foods, and allow people the rights to sell their fat for extraction and conversion to biodiesel.

Then we'd be sitting on our own renewable fuel reserves.

;D
/e

[Caligastia Lanonandek]

A knowledge of history provides a practical list of everything that shouldn't be done.

[joefarar]

E-male,

As a person who has a B.S. and about to complete an M.S. next semester in Nutrition/Dietetics and Food Science, I just felt a need to comment on this:

New York's Gov Patterson has proposed an outrageous 18 percent "Obesity Tax" on non-diet sodas to address the obesity issue by punishing consumers for their free choices.

It's probably not that smart of a policy. You might as well tax diet soda too with the same logic (unless diet soda sales are virtually null in the state). I've read a ton of research on soda consumption from adolescents to adults of various backgrounds (New York is culturally diverse) and while there are correlations between soda consumption and obesity, most studies show (at least the ones I've looked at locally) are that it is better to provide healthy alternatives to elementary and highschool students (prevention) over restriction (get em when they're young basically - also, good parenting is a plus, but I think that's lacking these days so we delegate babysitting to the schools now). It's shown to be more cost-effective, actually (get this), generated more revenue for the schools, showed correlations in improved academic performance (these were a few pilot studies done in charter schools in LA if I remember correctly since they implemented new Los Angeles Nutrition Network and new nutritional guidelines for schools, other states have been following on other states that have similar models with some success as well "I hear."). It's also been shown to be more cost-effective for health insurance to get on the ball by focusing on prevention (the studies I looked at across various state studies continually show how preventative programs and coverage save insurance companies a lot of money and many just aren't willing to cover this yet - Washington is starting to take notice - ironically, expanding coverage for higher risk populations actually saves taxpayer money as well.

Case in point, most research I looked at showed prevention is more cost-effective than treatment; even though a lot of people think it is fiscally unsound to pay for prevention because it sounds like you are offering a "handout," but even so, it still saves a lot of money on overall healthcare costs. There still need to be more studies done though, I think.

As for the soda bit: Diet soda can be equally as bad as regular soda. Most tend to be high in phosphoric acid (usually calcium depleting, low in nutritional value, affect vitamin/mineral absorption; additionally, there are a ton of studies on artificial sweeteners link to increased food intake in humans and animals (controlled for BMI - hence, more fat folks tend to drink more diet soda but it has been shown that the diet soda is more likely to result in increased food intake). You can trick your taste buds, but rarely can you trick your body (however, in fairness, the research I evaluated was dated probably back till 2004-05, I haven't looked at any recent studies on this).

I won't judge this guy's logic, I don't have all the facts on his state, but off-bat, it sounds ridiculous and furthermore, irresponsible to punish the soda companies and consumers who enjoy soda (responsibly). Preventing a nanny state is better than having a nanny state I think.

[e-Male]

Joe,

My post was written with my tongue planted firmly in my cheek.

Both news items, while real, are simply bizarre on their faces (albeit for different reasons). I just thought I'd combine the two for a little cognitive dissonance whimsy. But with a moral thrown in about narrow perspectives.

/e

[joefarar]

I understand. Part of your post was related to my field of study, I simply found an avenue to contribute which I felt could be to some benefit to PHQ readers'.

Speaking of the diet soda stuff (if you're interested):
Found this on the front page of Yahoo.com
health.yahoo.com/experts/eatthis/22630/the-truth-about-diet-soda/
(not that I consider yahoo a reliable source for nutrition data, but hey, it's for the people and by the people. Consider it a simple addendum to my previous comments, I agree with their assessment for the most part).

[e-Male]

Joe,

Given your background and interests, I'm sure you are aware that one needs to be very careful of not only regular sugar-laden sodas, but even diet soda. Both contain dihydrous monoxide, aka DHMO (link to petition to ban DHMO). It's a colorless, odorless chemical. It's not only an almost universal solvent, but it can cause severe or even fatal respiratory problems if inhaled even in minute amounts. Much more dangerous than the trivial amounts of phosphoric acid in the sodas.

Dec 24, 2008 17:58:03 GMT -5 e-Male said:

Have you ever stopped to ponder how narrowly people focus on problems? While the solution might seem at first glance to be adequate, it's seldom truly well thought out.
...
This isn't about unintended consequences. This is about being appropriate within the fuller context.
...
This is just about excessively narrow focus.

When someone locks onto one aspect of an issue, instantly the context of the problem is lost from focus and consideration. The context is invariably more significant than the observed symptom. Addressing a problem as if it existed in isolation solves nothing. It won't even necessarily relieve the symptom, although it may mask it or transform it.

Focusing in on soda is losing sight of the whole picture, even if your picture is expanded to encompass "obesity" or even generic "healthcare".

Your closing comment on preventing a nanny state is closer to relevance to my original post. But why do you feel the need to qualify your comment to "consumers who enjoy soda (responsibly)"? Why not prevent a nanny state that interferes even with self-abusers? Is your free-will superior to their free-will?

/e

[tish]

"What is education but a conditioning of the mind to a society and a way of life? There are many kinds of education, and often education closes as many dorrs as it opens, for to believe implies disbelief. One accepts one kind of belief but closes the mind to all that is, or seems to be contradictory."

"Re-examine all you have been told...Dismiss what insults your Soul" Walt Whitman


These two sayings are hanging above my desk and I use them when ever it seems to fit. Hope you find it fits.