Nutraceuticals vs. pharmaceuticals:  there's a place for both in modern medicine
posted 7-2-2014 - 10:34 pm

 
(Note: this is a shorter version of an op-ed piece that was originally posted to my op-ed blog, PoliticalEye, and addressed mainly to health care professionals; however, the subject is of interest to patients and their families, too. This post is longer than usual because a few paragraphs wouldn’t adequately tell the story, so hang in there to the end and you'll see what I mean. Thanks.)


You never know how good your hospital really is until you need it. Mine’s very good, based on objective criteria. But even an excellent hospital that does all the right things 99.9 percent of the time can still have blinders on about certain ways in which it practices medicine. It’s a question of medical mindset.

My own recent hospitalization is a good case in point. Having covered health care and health policy in the business press for most of the last 30+ years, I’m a picky customer on criteria that matter (hint: they’re not ‘housekeeping’ issues like whether the food tastes good, or the nurses are polite, or the parking’s convenient). I also didn’t choose this hospital because it was the closest one: convenience isn’t an issue when it comes to my health, and people who rank that factor highly either have the wrong priorities or are without reliable transportation. I’m lucky that this place is only 15 minutes away from my house and that I have a car – but I’d travel an hour to get there if I had to.

Michael Reese Park: A better spot for the Lucas Museum in Chicago
posted 6-30-2014 - 6:36 pm

 
Last week, the Chicago Tribune ran an article announcing the site selection for a new museum that director and producer George Lucas is hoping to build. It could have been in San Francisco, but that city blew its chance. That, the fact that we get more than double the annual number of tourists that San Francisco gets, and the fact that Lucas recently married a Chicagoan (Ariel Investments president Mellody Hobson) and lives here part time now gave the nod to us. The museum, which is obviously still in the planning stage, will shortly be renamed the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art; the tentative name had been the Lucas Cultural Arts Museum.

The name change is a minor thing. The thing that does concern me and a lot of other Chicagoans is that Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who vigorously courted the project and supposedly has a Site Selection Task Force, seems willing to let Lucas break a time-honored rule about not building on the lakefront: the proposed museum as presently imagined would tear up the existing parking lots between Soldier Field and McCormick Place. Great idea, bad location; it’s not that those lots shouldn’t be torn up and put underground anyway to create more park space – they should. But the building doesn’t belong there. I hope the Chicago Plan Commission, which has to approve the site, insists on an alternative — and I have one in mind that’s only a few blocks further south.

On naming and identities
posted 0-0-2014 - 11:23 pm

 
Some years ago at a local radio station in Chicago, there was a young intern named Mylanta. No, that’s not the beginning of a joke, and yes, it was Mylanta – I kid you not: spelled just like the trademarked antacid. (Never mind the fact that the station had a ‘smooth jazz’ format, a musical analgesic for daily life not unlike modern Muzak; let’s just set that aside as a fascinating irony.)

It wasn’t the drug that was named after a human being but the other way around. It’s not a ‘real’ name that people give to their children, like David or Jennifer or Gyorgi or Uhura, but one invented by a pharmaceutical firm for a patented product.

What happened there? How did that poor girl end up with a drug name that was sure to provoke smirks? Was that merely the first thing that her befuddled mother saw once she came out of anesthetized labor, and she decided on that without ever once considering the consequences for the girl?

Ray Bradbury: The last of the sci-fi ABCs departs
posted 6-8-2012 - 8:16 pm

 
There is a scene in the middle of The Martian Chronicles wherein a human and a Martian accidentally meet. Each has left his settlement, distracted, and wandered out in search of solitude, quiet, a chance to think. In a strip of Martian desert, past boulders in a narrow place where no one should be, a thin veil separating two realities dissolves, and they suddenly see each other. The thing is, the Martian civilization has been gone for thousands of years. Dead. To the human, the Martian is a ghost of the planet’s past; to the Martian, who is quite alive, the human is a ghost of its future. Surprised, they encounter one another, connect. And marvel.

Whenever I think of The Martian Chronicles, the first thing I remember is that scene: two intelligent beings confronting The Other in the vastness of space. It was breathtaking to me then, and still is. I thought of it again last week when I heard that Ray Bradbury had died.

I grew up reading the ABCs of science fiction: Asimov, Bradbury and Clarke. Isaac, Ray and Arthur C. I encountered them by accident at a time when I was first being introduced to real science in school, and the space race was on television for everyone to see. It was all of a piece to me then: I watched the Mercury and Gemini launches on television before I got on the bus to school. I read science in class in SRA reading supplements (one of IBM’s projects) whenever I got my classwork or homework done half an hour before everyone else did, which was daily, and ran out of other things to do. In truth, I hurried to finish my own work so that I could read the SRA materials: I’d quickly run out of things to read in the school library, which was geared to babies, I thought (even in first grade, I was way past the appalling Dick and Jane, which I’d concluded was written for idiots).

The Twilight series: Parsing images in the arts
When providing politically correct criticism really doesn’t help
posted 11-19-2011 - 7:45 pm CST

 
I got an e-mail yesterday from the Women’s Media Center. I’m on their list for a reason: they have a program called Progressive Women’s Voices that spends decent money to train women like me to be op-ed writers and opinion shapers and gives them the necessary connections. E-mail from the WMC is one of the very few ways to learn when the next class term will be scheduled so that I can apply. So when I get an e-mail from them, I usually glance at it right away.

This one arrived the very same day that the Twilight film franchise’s latest installment, “Breaking Dawn, Part 1,” debuted at movie theaters nationally. The digital missive came with a link and a provocative headline: “Exclusive: Breaking Bella – When Love Equals Violence.” That raised an eyebrow.

Like many other women, I’ve read the books, and that wasn’t exactly the impression I got from reading them. Yeah, they have some serious flaws, but they’re not dangerous or evil. The premise of that headline struck me as too simple minded and not a little blindly PC, but I reminded myself that headlines can be misleading. So I figured I ought to read the column before drawing conclusions.

Eliot Porter, Big Sur, and iconic images:
At what point does a copy of a famous image become visual plagiarism? Or does it?
posted 6-25-2011 - 6:45 pm

 
There are some images that make such a deep impression on us that they stay with us for the rest of our lives. Often, that persistent image may be of a historical event or where we were and what we saw at that moment. If you’re old enough, you probably remember where you were when you learned that JFK or Martin Luther King was shot, when Nixon resigned, when men walked on the moon, when the twin towers came crashing down in New York, or when the Challenger or Columbia space shuttles exploded. In every one of those instances, I have a specific image of the place that I was in and what my surroundings were like – a Policywonk's-eye view, if you will – and when I recall one of those events, it’s always the same image that comes to my mind’s eye first, unbidden.

An image can also become fixed in the mind because of the meaning it has to you personally. But sometimes, an image sticks with you simply because it so accurately sums up precisely what it represents that it becomes the definitive image for thousands, if not millions or billions, of people.

So it is for me with a photo of the Big Sur coastline by the late Eliot Porter: Mist on Coast, Big Sur, California, September 25, 1975. It is a view of the ragged, stepped coastline iced with layers of fog, looking south, as if pulled out of time, and it has become the definitive image of Big Sur, iconic because it sums up in a way that words fail the very essence of the place. From the very first moment I saw it, I fell in love with that image, both stark and soft, with its power and its subtlety, and with the place it represented. It conveyed meaning in ways that I cannot define and became indelible in my mind. There was something about it that simply pulled at me. It continues to do so even today.

Architecture: the face of a city
In Chicago, everybody has an opinion about which buildings matter
posted 9-17-2010 - 11:25 pm

 
It was inevitable that architecture would matter to me. I am the daughter of an architect (my mother) and the goddaughter of an architect (my mother's best friend). My father and nearly all my uncles were engineers; many of my parents' friends were architects or engineers. I grew up surrounded by art and architecture books: H.W. Janson's History of Art and the remarkable, now out-of-print book series on the Masters of Modern Architecture by publisher George Braziller were my wish books. Out-of-date Sweet's catalogs and spec samples were my playthings. I've been to more architecture lectures and tours than some people have movies.

I prefer Architectural Record (professional) to Architectural Digest (pretentious). I redesign rooms in my head all the time and have a project box full of floor plans and ideas for changing the place where I dwell, if ever I get the funds. And I have lived virtually all my life in Chicago, the city where modern architecture got its start and where the residents take a more than customary interest in buildings both modern and historic, and in how their city looks.

So of course, when Chicago magazine published its list of the top 40 buildings in Chicago, I had to read it. And formed opinions almost immediately, which led to comment. Unlike most people, however, I talk (and think) in paragraphs – so my comments are usually more than the customary few lines. That might bother me if I thought online editors should cater to readers with short attention spans, but I don't. I remain one of those people who still thinks the Internet is there to give you more context and background that you'd get in a newspaper's or magazine's tight news hole, not less. After all, if you decide you don't want that much, you're free to ignore it; but if you do want that much and the writer skimps instead, you're out of luck. Occasionally, it strikes me that there's no reason a longer comment of mine should go to waste by languishing at the end of someone else's article. And it is my comment, so I ought to be able to reproduce it here. Which I've done.

To Jolie, Or Not To Jolie:
The perils of bringing Patricia Cornwell’s Kay Scarpetta to the screen
posted 8-12-2010 - 12:50 am

 
I love a good mystery. Always have. My affair with Agatha Christie novels began in sixth grade, right around the same time that I discovered Stan Getz records and James Bond films. Christie made Earle Stanley Gardner’s Perry Mason look simple and Mickey Spillane look rude and dumb. I favored Hercule Poirot over Miss Marple, but not by much.

It wasn’t long before I discovered Raymond Chandler, Dashiell Hammett, and British mysteries on public television. It was all downhill from there; I became a mystery reader for life. In time, I ran across crime novelist Patricia Cornwell’s work and became an avid reader of that, too. And a fan of her character Kay Scarpetta, the fictional chief medical examiner of Virginia. It wasn’t hard to identify with her: when I began in journalism, I, too, was the rare woman in a man’s profession and just about as welcome (meaning: not very).

So when it was announced last February that Scarpetta might finally be brought to life on the big screen, naturally, I was interested. Until I learned that Angelina Jolie would probably get the role.

2010 Emmy slots: Just another beauty contest
posted 8-5-2010 - 11:23 pm

 
So: are we surprised and disappointed again this year by the nominations? Yup. You bet. And there will be much carping about who made it and who didn’t, and about the voting system itself. Again. And no effort made to fix and of the voting system’s flaws. Surprise.

I’m talking about the prime-time Emmy nominations (I don’t watch soap opera, so I couldn’t care less about the daytime awards. Sue me). Truly, if there’s a difference here between the Emmys and the Miss America pageant, it’s not much.

Yes, The Pacific leads in the number of nominations – congrats to powerhouse HBO yet again – yet all of The Pacific’s actors were snubbed. How the hell did THAT happen?? The actors and the writers are what made this ambitious, well executed miniseries fly. Partly at fault here is the fact that whereas the Emmy voting system has separate categories for best film and best miniseries, it lumps the two formats together when it comes to best actors/actresses and best supporting categories. Very unfair: the actors in a miniseries have to sustain a character over several episodes, whereas those in a film have to do it for an hour and a half to two hours. It's a different kettle of fish.

Live blogging the Oscars ... or not
posted 3-7-2010 - 11:23 pm

 
Wow. Never done this before (the live blogging, that is, except it's not quite: I'm writing in real time, but this will get posted the moment the show's over). Oh, well, we do what we can.

I've skipped Barbara Walters and most of the red carpet show on E! (just too much).

Here goes ...

Shows we hope to love:  FlashForward gets reduced to Hollywood's lowest common denominator
posted 7-22-2009 - 8:11 pm

 
I dread the premiere of this show (relax, no spoilers here: you can learn this much just by watching the ABC trailers). Yet I was prepared to love it, based on my reaction to the book. The show hasn't even debuted yet, and already people are wondering: can this show be saved from its developers' mistakes? Disclosure: I am an aficionada of sci-fi author Robert J. Sawyer's work and have just recently reread the novel on which this new TV series is presumably based (except that it isn't, really). Given how much I liked the book, I was looking forward to the show's premiere, until I actually learned something about the show. Talk about disappointing.

It's not new for Hollywood to botch something from the get-go, but I keep hoping at least a few people in the TV and film business will learn from Hollywood's mistakes. That hope isn't usually rewarded, but I comment here just in case there's still time to influence the show's developers. To that end, I left a lengthy comment on one of the industry sites earlier today, then decided I should at least post that much on my own blog; therefore, I'm going to repeat here most of what I've already posted there. When you're the author, you get to do this. But back to Sawyer and FlashForward.

I hesitate to say that I'm a Sawyer fan because fan is short for 'fanatic,' and I'm not a fanatic about anything (except, possibly, the correct use of the English language, which is an occupational hazard for all good writers and editors anyway). But I've enjoyed and been challenged by Sawyer's novel and his books Calculating God and Factoring Humanity. The Neanderthal series, not so much: I've never liked alternative histories and am much more interested in speculations about the present and future. Earlier this summer, I read Sawyer's latest, WWW.Wake, and loved that. So when I heard about the spin-off show, I reread (and again enjoyed) FlashForward.

Shows we love:  exit Kings? Not necessarily
posted 7-22-2009 - 8:11 pm

 
Kings is the kind of program that NBC hasn’t had in years, at least not since The West Wing ended: a pure, grown-up drama that isn’t in the cops-and-doctors genre. Inspired by the biblical chapters about David and Goliath, King Saul, and Saul’s son Jonathan, the show draws parallels with those parables while going well beyond the original tales to examine timeless issues of ethics, war, politics, and human character. In that respect, it is very like The West Wing and the marvelously reinvented Battlestar Galactica as well as the best episodes of the Star Trek franchise. It's also marvelously well cast

What’s most remarkable is that despite everything it had going for it, Kings got canceled after 12 episodes that almost nobody knew about. If more people had known, they’d have seen it and been glad. Splendidly reimagined in modern terms, Kings is set in the ersatz contemporary coastal kingdom of Gilboa, for which you can substitute New York, Washington, London, Beijing, several central African regimes, or pretty much any modern capital located in an industrialized nation.

Gilboa is led by King Silas Benjamin, a former general who dethroned and imprisoned his former monarch and dragged his nation into the 21st century, both modernizing it drastically and enmeshing it in costly warfare with less than impressed neighbors. The young David in this case is Captain David Shepherd, who serves his king and country loyally despite grave misgivings and in the process becomes a hero uncomfortable in the limelight, providing a very public contrast to the less than scrupulous monarch. And from there, the conflicts and combatants multiply, even (most pointedly) within the royal family. Nearly everyone but David is ambitious and maneuvering for something.

Movies we love:  the new Star Trek film —
He said, she said, but nobody said the right things
posted 5-9-2009 - 1:23 am

 
This isn't a review of the film: I'll get to that in another post. Rather, this is more of an observation regarding other reviews of the film. Other than Roger Ebert's, of course; I always like his comments, whether or not I agree with them.

Now that the new Star Trek has previewed here this weekend, I’ve been perusing some of the reviews here and there. Accordingly, I ran across the He Said, She Said commentary in The Scorecard Review online ... and after reading it and others on the Web, I began to wonder just exactly how many of the younger film critics are familiar enough with the Star Trek universe. If they’ve seen the films but never watched the original series, they’re really not qualified to say much of consequence about the new film.

As expected, He (Nick Allen) and She (Morrow McLaughlin) did their thing, parsing the movie’s action and wow factor, comparing it to the less favorably received X-Men outing, X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Yet I found their comments off target, surprisingly. Not that I expected them to be anywhere near as lucid as Roger Ebert, but hey, somebody’s gonna have to pick up his baton and run with it one of these days. It would help if that person or persons were good at being on point.

Well, at least they like the best of us ...
posted 3-3-2008 - 3:05 am

Not everybody hates print journalism or considers it obsolete yet. Or at least, not everyone in business hates newspapers and magazines.

Fortune's annual series of articles on the World's Most Admired Companies is just out. The Top 50 list frankly gives me pause. After all, it has Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, and Bank of America on it — and I can't see why any company that's received or is asking for a bailout should be on that list. Then again, this survey must have been taken before the bailouts really began; it's the only thing I can think of that would make sense of those rankings.

Shows I love: Battlestar Galactica season 5, so far
posted 1-31-2009 - 4:37 pm

So: Felix Gaeda has deteriorated into a bad guy. He's not the fifth Cylon, Ellen Tigh is; but he is a mutineer and a traitor, demoralized by having come this far for nothing and blaming everything on the Cylons, including rebel Cylons. And this requires a lot of rationalization, but there's a lot of that going around now in the fleet as morale descends into near nothing and order into chaos.

I'm wondering, on this morning after the third episode, why neither Tigh nor Adama anticipates the rebels tossing in a grenade once they crack the door and isn't in place to immediately toss it right back, where it could explode on the other side. I was thinking about that even as it happened. They did have just enough time to prepare, after all. But I digress.

Shows I love: awaiting Battlestar Galactica
posted 1-16-2009 - 7:27 pm

In less than an hour, Battlestar Galactica returns after months of absence. Its fans have been alternately hopeful, pissed, confused, exasperated, and excited. Same here, but I've been mostly pissed -- at the lousy ending of the last episode that aired, at the fact that the timeline was so drastically condensed in the last 15 minutes of that episode, and that it was done in such a not-at-all credible, nonsensical fashion.

I'll get to more about that later, perhaps after I've seen the new episode of this final half-season. For now, let me indulge in what has preoccupied most fans for months: the identity of the final secret Cylon. That will be revealed in tonight's episode anyway, so the wait is nearly ended by now.

Much ado about the swan that didn't die
posted 1-15-2009 - 6:30 am

I hate artistic revisionism. At least in ballet. And I blame the post-Walt-Disney Disney Company for it.

What started this rant, you ask? I attended a performance last Sunday of the Russian National Ballet Theater, and they performed Swan Lake. Theirs is a relatively new company, having been founded during the late 1980s, and, by the caliber of dancing that I saw, clearly second tier: fine, but certainly no threat to either the Bolshoi or the Kirov. I wouldn't put them on the same level as the New York City Ballet or the American Ballet Theater, either, but those two are also world class, so no surprise there. But I love Swan Lake and Tchaikovsky's score, so I really didn't mind.

Despite some lack of precision now and then among the corps de ballet, I was enjoying the production, for the most part. Particularly the performance of the prima ballerina portraying Odette/Odile, whose performance was clearly on a higher level than the rest of the company but whose name I don't know because the program listed four names for that role (this is a traveling company, and this role is obviously rotated, as are several others). In fact, I eagerly anticipated watching that particular Odette do the dying swan scene.

Ranting for academics
posted 1-10-2009 - 2:56 am

 
I have friends whose kids are visiting high schools and colleges now, in anticipation of attending those same come autumn, and I've noticed something: they're increasingly feeling a very specific kind of rage, one fed by the harsh realities of ever higher tuition rates and a snotty streak of anti-intellectualism in this country that glorifies sport at the expense of academics.

It is a very normal and rational reaction to an absurd status quo, one that has to change, though you know the sports fans will go down fighting. Well, on second thought, perhaps that gets more complicated if the sports fans in question are also parents whose happily geeky kids turn out to be more interested in field theory than field goals. I hope so.

The backdrop for this, of course, is the worst economic recession since the Great Depression and the worst unemployment statistics in the last 16 years, courtesy of the December 2008 numbers released earlier today. These campus-visiting parents are bloody well pissed off, and justifiably so: not just about tuition costs in this economy, but about the indefensible favoritism shown to boys' athletic programs while math, science and engineering students (not to mention girls' athletics) go begging for scholarships and loans. Just who do the sports nuts think is going to pull us out of this economic disaster — football players?? Of course not!

Shedding light on dark matters
posted 1-9-2009 - 7:33 am

 
I started my day yesterday by reading through my usual selection of news sources, then skipped over to check my e-mail, where I was presented with yet more headlines, and ran across a science story in Time magazine that piqued my interest. I ended up pissed off at the reporter, the Nobel prize committee, and academia in general. And thus, a rant developed, but not without cause.

Let me back up a bit here and give you the name of the article first:

The Milky Way: Bigger, Faster, Better Understood
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1870049,00.html

The first thing that struck me was the rather middling handling the reporter gave the story; nothing grossly wrong, just not much in the way of putting this item in perspective so that I know why it's important for me to know any of this. Besides, I've read far better science reporting than this mediocre little bit. The second thing that struck me was that Mark Reid, the Harvard astronomer she interviewed, is really just tweaking the kind of work Vera Rubin has been doing for more than 40 years — and without half as much fanfare and very little public credit.

Who's Vera Rubin, you ask? Ahhhhhhhhhh, here we come to it.

Guillotining the press
posted 12-4-2008 - 10:50 pm

 
[Editor's note: this item was written just days before the Tribune Company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection (reorganization, not liquidation; but given Mr. Zell's ineptitude, it could yet convert to the latter; one hopes for the sake of the employees and readers that it doesn't). Moreover, Conde Nast's Portfolio magazine, cited below, is now itself in a financial bind and may only survive as an online-only publication.]

So today we read about yet another round of firings — what else can you call them? Not layoffs, because those laid off are presumably rehired in time — at the Chicago Tribune. I ran across this bit of news while simultaneously looking at something else on Huffington Post and perusing my e-mail. The mail included the daily post from Gorkana.com, which lets journalists know where their colleagues have taken new positions. We use it to keep tabs on each other; but lately, it's become less a source of information than an exercise in envy and permanently diminished expectations for what David Brooks recently called "The Formerly Middle Class."