Cats don't need saving

Today was the hottest day in the world. I was worried that the two cats I'm living with would die. I actually brought their water bowl downstairs, replaced the water in it with fresh, cold water - and then, after thinking about it for a few seconds, added some ice. I figured that if I'm feeling this hot, they must be boiling in their fur. I called them over, dipped my finger in the water bowl, tried to show them how nice and cool the water was.

And they got it. They understood this strange person was clearly excited about the water. More surprising, they were polite about it. They came over, sniffed the bowl, sniffed around it, stayed next to it for a little while - but didn't really drink. Ah well.

Me, the Psychologist

Today I finally I met the good people at the Center for Injury Research and Prevention, with whom I'm planning on doing lots of work in the few years to come. The Center is located about a 5 minute walk from where the RWJ building is on the U. Penn campus. How convenient.

I came in to meet Flaura and a bunch of other people, and discuss what I'll be doing over the summer (since Flaura generously agreed to employ me as a consultant until the RWJ position starts in a couple of months). My job right now is to learn as much as I can about the Young Driver Research Initiative, and then jump in and help. This is FUN, and I will be learning a lot. I even got my own cubicle (first time ever).

Everybody (and I mean everybody) is extremely nice. I'm looking forward to getting to know them better, and to really dive into the material.

---

Which reminds me: This Tuesday I started the clinical psychology classes with the U. Penn department of psychology, who have been very kind and very graciously welcomed me to join the clinical training program. I'm taking them with 4 other clinical psychology PhD students and the instructor. I'm having a blast. The material is interesting, the instructor is very committed and sharp, and my fellow students are welcoming and very talented. As usual, I feel a little behind on the material. As usual, that doesn't bother me too much - I'll just work to catch up. :-)

Doctors Rule

I'm currently staying with my friend Seth and his housemate Abigail. Both are medical residents - Seth does internal medicine, and Abby is an emergency room doctor. I was sitting at home (ha, I call it "home" already, that's so nice) and suddenly it occurred to me - today, and every day when they're working, they are saving lives. Literally, saving lives! While I, uh, find creative ways to spend tax money through research.

I chose, a few years ago, a path that may result in large-scale impact, rather than focus on inidvidual lives. It was a hard choice, and I never feel completely confident that it's the right choice. I usually feel that it is, for me. Although I try to be a positive influence on people I interact with throughout the day, I consider my work to be about large-scale impact. But to be confronted so directly, on a daily basis, with people who save lives for a living...

A few years back, I think it would've been very easy for me to spiral down into self-reproach and doubt - am I wasting my time? Am I wasting other people's resources? Should I drop it all and go to med school, or try to find some other way of having immediate, tangible, positive impact on the world around me?

But this self-doubt didn't really happen this time. I respect Seth and Abby a great deal for who they are and for the work that they do, and I feel that I am on the right track in my own work. They inspire me to remember not to waste my energy on the kind of self-gratifying research that I sometimes see around me--scientists doing research to impress other scientists, without improving anybody's life (well, I guess they're improving their own)--and still, I am glad to say that I feel good about the path that I'm on. I just hope it will prove to be more than just dreams and intellectualization, and result in true service and real benefit to others.

Hurrah, doctors. :-)

Magical Philadelphia

I hear people use all kinds of words when describing Philadelphia, but "magical" isn't usually one of them.

And yet, whenever I describe my experience here over the last few days, the word "magical" somehow appears every time. Everything is just lining up... magically. :-) It starts with the way I met my first Philadelphian friend, Seth, back during the interviews for this program. We didn't spend a lot of time together, but I liked him and hopefully he enjoyed my company too and, when it became clear that I'm coming to Philadelphia, he offered that I stay in his spare bedroom for as long as I needed.

As if that wasn't enough, he then connected me with a friend of his who lives in a totally different part of Philadelphia, who has a house and a dog - and needs somebody to house-sit and dog-sit for the 6 weeks he's away. Right up until August. Which is when I'm going to Israel.

So everything is lining up magically, as far as scheduling goes, and I have plenty of time to look for a place and plenty of opportunities to sample different neighborhoods at my leisure. I'm thinking about buying a duplex and renting out a half of it. I'll need to get on it pretty quickly, if I'm hoping to have a place to live in by the time I return from Israel. It's one of those things, like buying a car of finishing my dissertation: I analyze too much, freeze, become intimidated - and then, at some point, I decide I'm just going to go for it, and I do, and all of a suddent I'm rolling and it's done and it's good. So, time to start looking for a place.

I bought a digital camera yesterday. I did a bunch of research to decide which model I want, and decided to go with an "ultra-portable" camera rather than a super-fancy one - I like the idea of taking lots of pictures easily. I eventually decided on a specific model, and then went to check craigslist, to see if somebody was selling it in Philadelphia. There was one post from the previous day - great price, perfect condition, a bunch of accessories. I got in touch with the guy and we met the next day. He and his fiance were incredibly nice, we ended up talking for more than an hour, and plan on having dinner together soon. Camera, one offer, new friends. Magic.

It's been raining over the last couple of days - warm, humid, monsoon rain. I kind of like it. I kind of like Philadelphia, almost to my surprise. It's very... varied. It feels like a bunch of different towns strung together. There are very urban areas (downtown, upscale residential, slums), but also wide open green parts, a huge park, three different rivers, and of course a whole bunch of academic campuses.

Neat.

Road Trip and Dog Food

I arrived in Philadelphia a few days ago, after finishing a roadtrip from Stanford. The trip had a few interesting moments. The weather got progressively worse as I was leaving California (of course...) and for the next couple of days I was driving through a lot of rain and occasional hail. Later on, I read in the news that a couple of tornados had touched down where I passed, either just before or just after I passed there. Made me feel less bad about how hard the driving felt. Betty (my new car) was a trooper. I was very happy to be in it, rather than outside.

Rachel and I met in Denver, and continued the drive to the east after playing for a short while in the Rocky Mountain National Park. For the record: Colorado is gorgeous.

A few incidents from the trip stuck in my mind. On the first night, my friend Shay called me from Israel, and helped me find a place to stay for the night in Utah. I'm often amazed by technology, and phones in particular. It still seems strange to me that I can talk into a little box and somebody far away can hear me, and then I can hear THAT person from the same little box... I think that's amazing. But then, to talk with Shay and have him track my location using GoogleMaps, and then find a motel for me by looking ahead and reading reviews that other people left... that just blew me away.

The next morning, I went into the local supermarket to buy some food for the day. A store employee was friendly, and when he heard I'm on a roadtrip, he suggested I take cherries with me. I tasted one, and it was good. I got a bag. From that moment and until the end of the trip, there were always cherries in the car (I kepy buying and eating them). Now, for me, cherries are official roadtrip food. It's amazing, what an impact one person can have in one moment.

One morning in Nebraska, Rachel and I went into a supermarket to buy some groceries for the road. We got most of what we wanted, and I asked a guy in the store where I could find some hummus. "Some what?" he seemed confused. So I explained it's a dip made from chickpeas and his face cleared. "Oh yes," he said. "Try aisle 10." So off we go to aisle 10, and it's all dog food. I think he was playing a joke on the snooty strangers that were asking for the weird food. I thought it was a pretty good joke. :-)

The drive through the eastern half of the country was, for the most part, very beautiful. I'd never gone through this area before, and I guess spring is a good time of year to be anywhere. So green, so beautiful.

The rich get richer, the poor get hungrier

A nicely written, short-ish article titled "Understanding the Global Rice Crisis" from BusinessWeek.com pretty much delivers what it promises. The author doesn't try to display diverse opinions, which is a shame, but at the very least this one helped me put some facts into place.

General themes:

Rice prices are going up because people are growing less rice. Why? Because people prefer to grow corn and meat. Why? Because corn provides biofuel (ethanol) and meat is what rich people eat.

Another reason is that merchants and even whole countries are hoarding rice, for fear that there won't be enough, which causes an artificial shortage.

The result? Poor people can't afford the basic food they're used to relying on.

---

In the comments section, as usual, some interesting comments. This time not so informative about the content, as about the readers. The very first commentator worries that beer prices will go up, since beer is produced of rice.

Shoes bad, feet good

What an interesting article.

 

Money quote:

 

"Try this test: Take off your shoe, and put it on a tabletop. Chances are the toe tip on your shoes will bend slightly upward, so that it doesn't touch the table's surface. This is known as "toe spring," and it's a design feature built into nearly every shoe. Of course, your bare toes don't curl upward; in fact, they're built to grip the earth and help you balance. The purpose of toe spring, then, is to create a subtle rocker effect that allows your foot to roll into the next step. This is necessary because the shoe, by its nature, won't allow your foot to work in the way it wants to. Normally your foot would roll very flexibly through each step, from the heel through the outside of your foot, then through the arch, before your toes give you a powerful propulsive push forward into the next step. But shoes aren't designed to be very flexible. Sure, you can take a typical shoe in your hands and bend it in the middle, but that bend doesn't fall where your foot wants to bend; in fact, if you bent your foot in that same place, your foot would snap in half. So to compensate for this lack of flexibility, shoes are built with toe springs to help rock you forward. You only need this help, of course, because you're wearing shoes."

 

...and, as usual, I love reading the comments that people post. Here's one that sums up the support pretty well (the opposing ones are too easy to imagine, so I won't bother posting):

 

"I, too, have been primarily barefoot for the last 11 years.

It started with pain in my knees and back; I saw doctor after doctor with no help. Finally, an Indian doctor suggested the problem was that shoes made my hips pivot - this in turn changed my gait and caused increased stress on my back and knees. His suggestion worked.

At the time I lived in the central USA, and that is certainly not the friendliest of places to go barefoot. I now live on the West coast; they are a lot less concerned with such things out here.

My trips abroad - yes, barefoot there, too - revealed to me that this is a primarily a problem only in the States. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Belize, Japan - no one cared or they were outright supportive. Only in the USA have I had actual confrontations - a very small number of them bordering on physical hostility. Needless to say, I try to avoid such things as much as possible. Luckily this does not happen often - two such encounters in 11 years is hardly a trend.

What's more bothersome is the fact that wearing shoes causes me actual pain, but this is not enough to prevent someone from throwing you out just because they don't like how you are dressed. It's sad how closed-minded some people in the States can be.

On the upside a large number of people have been very supportive and welcoming when you mention the health benefits and the fact that there are no - zero - laws forbidding bare feet in establishments (restaurants included). The vast majority of people simply believe the urban legend that there is a law and act accordingly. Polite, respectful education on that matter is the key.

As mentioned in the article, for more information go to www.barefooters.org. Free your feet - your feet, knees and back will thank you."

 

 

Rogers and Rogers and me

I hope to make a contribution in two areas: (1) Supportive interactions, and (2) Self-control. Specifically, I want to help kids learn how to do those two things from a young age, because I think it can make a big difference.

For a while, I've been having a hard time figuring out how the two relate. I got some help from Rachel, who explained to me that it's all about help - people helping each other, and people helping themselves. That made sense to me. And now, a good friend (thanks, Chuck!) showed me the video footage of Mr. Rogers (not to be confused with Dr. Rogers, but apparently in the same camp) explaining to a hardened senator why his show should get funding.

I teared up twice during this short clip. Even the senator admits to "getting goose bumps." And Mr. Rogers just says those beautiful, simple words, that touch your heart and unlock it. So Beautiful.

Did You hear the joke about the rabbi who said the prime minister should be shot?

It's not a joke. It's a disgrace.

I don't remember a time when I was especially proud of having a Jewish background. Today, I am ashamed to be associated with somebody who would say something like that.

Way to go, Rabbi Herschel Schachter.

The dark (green) side of biofuel

In a previous post, I wrote about environmental organizations who oppose the rush for biofuel because of the environmental (not to mention social/economical) costs of planting lots more soy/corn/sugarcane. I now have a better understanding of these costs, and I thought I'd share.

(thanks to Efrat for sending these papers my way)

Before starting, let's just be clear about why biofuels are interesting in the first place. It's not that they burn any cleaner than fossil fuel - whether You put corn ethanol or gasoline in your car, it's still going to stink. The two benefits of biofuels are this:

(1) Biofuels regenerate, whereas fossil fuels will run out at some point (although there's always nearby stocks, like Saturn's moon Titan, right?..).

(2) The plants that we make the biofuel from aborsb the nasty gases from the atmosphere as part of their daily routine, and help offset their contribution to global warming and related evil.

---

Okay, now that we have this down, let's take another look at the challenges of generating more biofuel.

In two papers published in Science (here's one, here's the other), the authors explain that in order to convert land to grow soy/corn/sugarcane (sources of biofuel), the land has to be cleared and prepared for agriculture. The assumption is that these areas were not used for agriculture before, but were rainforest, or grasslands, etc.

In the process of preparing the area, the current occupants (trees, bushes, trees) are cut down and/or burned, and this causes enormous release of CO2 and other Green House Gases (GHG) - exactly the kind of stuff we're trying to avoid releasing from cars, for example.

The decaying plants and the ground itself continue to release these gases for quite some time (most of the gases are released over the first 50 years). So the clearing of the land made things worse, environmentally, by releasing all these gases.

Aha, but we now have biofuel to use, instead of fossil-based fuel, which means we're causing less pollution - and that more then compensates for the gases released by the ground clearing, right?

Well, almost. Eventually, the amoung of CO2 and GHG that we're not releasing into the air will compensate for the CO2 and GHG we released into the air when getting ready to grow the soy/corn/sugarcane - but this can take anywhere from 90-820 years, according to the one of the papers.

So preparing land to grow soy/corn/sugarcane would create an enormous carbon debt, that would take a long time to pay back - and in the meantime, lots more CO2 and GHG in the atmosphere. It would eventually be worth it - but that's a far away "eventually."

The authors aren't complete party-poopers, though. They say that it would make total sense to plant more soy/corn/sugarcane, if the planting was done in places that don't store so much CO2 and other GHG. In their words:

"[producing biofuel on] degraded cropland and from waste biomass degraded cropland and from waste biomass would minimize habitat destruction, competition with food production, and carbon debts, all of which are associated with direct and indirect land clearing for biofuel production. "

Personally, I wonder if there's a way that ground can be cleared without releasing so much CO2. Alternatively, what if we relied more on other alternative fuel sources (solar/wind/hydrogen/nuclear) and planted lots of plants especially for the purpose of absorbing atmospheric CO2 - "super absorbers" that could help clean the air?

Okay, time to bike off to buy me some shoes. :-)

Moo

Hallmark Meat Packing Co. was caught violating "humane treatment" of the cows they slaughter, as reported by BBC News:

"Operations at the plant had already been suspended after an undercover video shot by the Humane Society of America came to light.

The video appeared to show crippled and ill animals being prodded with the blades of a forklift truck, kicked, given electric shocks and sprayed with high-pressure water hoses by staff."

The "appeared" is a nice touch on BBC's part, I think. It "appeared" enough that the USDA decided to recall 143 MILLION pounds of cow meat. Now that's something to chew on.

But don't worry - the cows are safe now! After all, the last paragraph of the articles DOES mention that

"The company says it has now taken action to ensure all employees handle animals humanely."

Well, that's a relief. From now on, everything will be different.

---

You know, personally speaking, I'm not a big fan of killing in order to eat. Seems like we're past the point of it being a necessity, and the cruelty, pain, and death involved (not to mention the environmental costs) (and really not to mention the karmic costs, for those of us who swing that way) are totally inexcusable. At least in my opinion.

There are lots of arguments in favor of not making a big deal out of the way animals are handled. They seem to generally fall under the following headings:

1) It's natural - animals eat animals. And we're animals, so we eat other animals.

You know, it's amazing how many people seem to believe that they "behave naturally" or that "behaving naturally" is a free pass for doing anything. What happened to the naturalness of not washing our hands, or living without medication or surgery? What about how natural it is to live without air conditioning, or to have a high chance of dying at child birth? And how many animals use toilet paper, talk on the phone, or surf the Web? (Disney animals don't count)

If we were living naturally, we'd all be dying of some infectious disease when we were 27 - assuming we lived past giving birth (which we'd do much earlier, since we wouldn't use contraceptives).

Let's face it: When we like it, we pretend to behave like baboons. When we don't, we snap right out of this "natural" make-believe, and do whatever we feel like doing. Acting "naturally" isn't necessarily moral, or healthy, or nice. Stop using toilet paper and the medical system, and then we can start talking about acting "natural."

2) If I don't eat meat, I'll get sick and die.

Actually, You'll probably get healthier and live longer. Let's have that discussion. And please, enough with the "only meat has complete protein" line. Eat 5 different colors of veggies and fruits every day, chew on lots of nuts, drink your soymilk, and You're likely to get better, not worse.

Although to be perfectly honest, You're still probably going to die at some point.

3) The animals we eat are so dumb that they can't really experience suffering or pain.

Um, no. Lots of animals are plenty clever (remember the tool-making crow?) and pain is so basic to survival that it's unlikely that any living being in possession of a limbic system cannot experience pain (yes, that includes fish).

And let's not go down the "they're so big and strong, when You kick them they just feel a little pat" path. Watch this horse and tell me that she's insensitive and can't feel gentle pressure, and that the only way to communicate with a big beast like that is to kick it hard, or yank its head from side to side.

4) I like eating meat.

Hey, it's your choice.

While mom and dad are arguing, maybe we can get stuff done ourselves

I love it. A Time Magazine piece about Bloomberg and Schwarzenegger endorses, pretty enthusiastically, the fact that these two are doing things that, in all fairness, the federal government should've been doing a long time ago.

Now, nothing is as simple as it's presented to be, of course. While the article mentions that Schwarzenegger doesn't receive state salary, it fails to mention that Schwarzenegger allowed lots of people to simultaneously earn state and campaign salaries... But perhaps this is still a good example: After all, not many people would forego their salary, just to make a point.

I am really pretty amazed at the plans and actions that the article ascribes to Bloomberg and Schwarzenegger: California funds stem-cell research that the federal government would not, and Schwarzenegger intends to sue the federal government for failing to sign an environmental treaty; NY City is shooting for a 30% cut in greenhouse gases by 2030. Big moves, big action.

Cool. Bring on the change. :-)

(from the article) "Nature abhors a vacuum," says Bruce Katz, director of metropolitan policy at the Brookings Institution. "And the vacuum at the national level is immense."

Everybody wins

I was recently contacted by someone who's planning on writing a book about getting into ivy-league schools, who found me through my How I Got Into the Stanford Psychology Ph.D. Program website. He asked me for some thoughts for his book, and perhps I'll end up contributing a short piece. In the meantime, here's what came up when I was thinking about it - it's been on my mind for a couple of years now, and it's nice to get the opportunity to actually spell it out.

---

Everybody Wins

Where do You have a better chance of being accepted - in a top-tier, prestigious program, or in a mid-level, reasonably good program? Hint: You may be in for a surprise.

My sense is that fewer people apply to very prestigious programs than to less prestigious programs. Most people simply never apply to the big-name programs, having been intimidated by the name or the (imagined) prospects of succeeding. I almost didn't apply to Stanford, by far the most prestigious of the places I was looking at, simply because I thought I wouldn't stand a chance of being admitted. I remember one friend, who believed in me more than I ever believed in myself. When I wondered aloud if I should apply to Stanford, my friend looked at me with some sympathy and said "Eran, come on, be realistic" - the only time I can remember that this friend ever expressed any doubt in me.

Relatively few people have been applying to the PhD program in psychology at Stanford, at least while I've been there. The same is true for other prestigious awards and fellowships - the really big ones seem to receive fewer applications than others. To this day, when I apply to less prestigious programs, I often get cut on the first round, while the more prestigious awards or programs give me more consideration.

The bottom line is this: If You want to be absolutely certain that You won't get in, don't apply. Otherwise, give it a try. You have nothing to lose (if application fees are a problem, most universities will be willing to help You with those), and a lot to gain. The universities will also profit from receiving more applications from more diverse applicants, and not just the people who have gone through the cookie-cutter process (graduated from top schools with top grades, worked as research assistants, applied to graduate school, yaddah yaddah...). And last but not least, You'll probably be facing less competition.

Go ahead, aim high. Surprise someone.

Be Green or Be Sustainable?

This is very interesting. The EU, bless their enlightened hearts, are considering passing a law that would ensure that 10% of transport fuel should come by biofuel by the year 2020.

Sounds good. The resistance came from an unexpected side: Environmental activists and sustainability-minded organizations. They're thinking about the bigger picture, and I for one am impressed.

The claim: While biofuel is great, it has to come from someplace. More demand for biofuels means somebody will have to grow more corn (or soy, or what not), and that has social, economic, and environmental reprecussions, some of which can be negative. So, ironically, increasing the demand for biofuel without making sure that producers don't start planting it where other carbon-eliminating vegetation was can cause a net worsening of the situation, rather than an improvement.

At least, that's what the EU Observer says that Friends of the Earth and others are saying (which means that, by the time You're reading this here, it's pretty much a third-hand account).

Still, I'm impressed with the complexity of these questions, and really glad that some people out there are thinking about the big picture.

Morning games

Morning. Woke up after a night filled with strange, unpleasant dreams.

Hanging out in bed, letting my mind wonder. I become aware of the fact that I'm grimacing - scrounging up my face and biting down on my own teeth. Tension. The grey morning light is bright in my room, and maybe that's why I'm narrowing my eyes. But why the teeth?

I breathe and relax my face, lie back again, arms crossed behind my head, letting my mind wander. After a moment, I become aware of the fact that the big toes of my two feet are hooked together, holding on to one another. Tension. I breathe and relax my toes, my calves, my legs. They relax, but I can feel the internal protest. They want to be tense now.

This continues for a while: I'm lying in bed, letting my mind go where it may, and then become aware of the tension that creeped into my body, and relax it. My own version of playing hide-and-seek with myself. :-) And perhaps a friendly reminder from my body that there's just a little bit too much going on at once right now.

Actively procrastinating

These are two bizarre, amazing pieces.

 

Microsoft's online Santa started talking about oral sex.

 

A British guy invented a drug, and then got a bunch of celebrities and politicians to lecture the public about its dangers, including saying "This is a made up drug!"

 

Hysterical. Oh, I love procrastinating. :-)

Scrabulous under attack from the original Scrabble people

This is very, very interesting: The company that created the original Scrabble board game is going after the people who created Scrabulous , the Facebook application that LOTS of people like to play, and that rakes in a fair (although not mind-boggling) amount of money in advertisements.

 

As usual, my favorite part is the discussion that follows the news (the comments get good around #20 or so). Some people say that the company should just buy out Scrabulous, some say they should be grateful (since perhaps it's making Scrabble more popular), some are saying that intellectual property is not to be ignored (even on the Web) and that the Scrabble people are totally in the right.

Promising weight-loss drug

So, it looks like taranabant (sounds like a dinosaur's name, no?) is really doing well in FDA tests. People are less hungry, losing weight, increasing metabolism...

 

Makes me wonder. Let's pretend for a second that there are no downsides whatsoever - does it then seem appropriate to regulate our appetite by using medication? Is that different from regulating our appetite by using foods mindfully, eating complex carbohydrates at certain times of the day, etc.?

Cocaine blocker

People working on an antagonist to the active ingredient of cocaine, which would block the "high" that results from use - same idea as the "alcohol blocker" (disulfiram).

Of course, people would still have to take the drug in advance...

Incidentally, a list of various "blockers" and other interesting drug treatment facts can be found here.

Happy 2008! :-)

Signed and dated my first "08" today (at Safeway, of all places).

 

I remember that switching to the new year (when writing letters, or signing things, etc.) used to be harder in previous years. I'd still be writing the last year a few months into the new one, and would constantly get confused.

 

It's easier now. In fact, a couple of weeks ago I accidentally signed something "08" even before the year was out. I don't think this ever happened before.

 

I can think of two reasons for why the switching is getting easier:

 

1) I have more practice at switching years.

2) I'm living in the future more.

 

Can't really tell. But hey, whatever the reason:

 

Have a happy 2008. :-)