But do we really have a population problem?

In a report from the Cato Institute a few years ago (May 9, 1999) and echoed by some others in the time since, the claim is made that quote 'there is no population problem. Population growth is the result of the plunging death rate and increasing life expectancy worldwide. That is progress.'end of quote

These nonbelievers in a population problem say that population numbers will correct themselves and nothing needs to be done.

Most everyone looking at population numbers seems to agree that the growth will stop -- that is, a correction will occur one way or another. So the big question is not whether a correction will occur, but what happens as population correction occurs.

Links:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5457

Why the lack of discussion about world population?

My response to this question represents personal opinion. I don’t have ten reasons like David Letterman, but I have two reasons for explaining this to myself.

First is an avoidance of awkward discussions. The anxious human mind converts thoughts about world population into thinking about personal family even though they are not the same.

It’s like converting thoughts about saving an ocean into thinking about a glass of water. They are not the same.

A discussion about world population is a discussion at risk of falling into an emotional debate over family planning or bringing children into the world or maintaining future generations of the family, or defending deep-felt religious beliefs. So people avoid the subject.

A second reason has to do with feelings of powerlessness, such as ‘Anything I do won’t make a difference in the size of the world population.’ -- So people don’t bother with the subject.

Population: Elephant in the Living Room

‘Elephant in the living room’ is a figure of speech referring to an obvious truth that is not being addressed. If someone had an elephant in their living room, they would certainly see it; but if they ignore the elephant, they are likely talking about other matters of lesser importance.

When environment, energy and social issues are discussed, the elephant has too often been in the room. That elephant is the growing world population. The subject of world population is too often ignored, even when it is profoundly affecting other important matters under discussion.

We are experiencing a world human population that is over 6.5 billion. 6.5 billion -- It’s almost craziness to think about what that number means. It’s like trying to think about the dollar numbers for deficits and expenditures of the U.S. government or the equivalent by other governments.

Many people have the personal opinion that the current and growing size of the world’s human population on the earth is a serious problem for the future, but as with any complex topic, all should recognize that world population is a subject for further debate and discussion.

Links:
http://www.populationelephant.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant_in_the_room

Collapse of the Population Bubble

We are not yet done with world-wide collapsing bubbles, such as seen in the housing and financial arenas. The warning signs are up about a not-too-distant collapse of the population bubble. This bubble has been apparent in the soaring world population. If the housing bubble and the financial bubble were seismic shocks, the collapse of the population bubble may be an earthquake to rock the world.

The fallout from bursting of the housing and financial bubbles has had major consequences almost everywhere in the world. The insidious nature of these bubbles is that the root causes are difficult to recognize and sort out, even when efforts are taken. Moreover, the timing of collapse is very unpredictable. No one can say for sure what the outcome would have been with the housing and financial collapses if more efforts had been taken to understand and ameliorate the bubbles before the collapse, but in hindsight it seems as though more trying would have been worth the effort.

Of course, not everyone has ignored the population bubble. A little over 20 years ago, (1985) 40 countries gave the United Nations a signed document which said:

"We believe that the time has come now to recognize the worldwide necessity to stop population growth within the near future and for each country to adopt the necessary policies and programs to do so'--provided that those programs are "voluntary' and "maintain individual human rights and beliefs.' The document was from parliamentary heads of state of countries representing more than half of the world's population, including the People's Republic of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, South Korea, Morocco and Kenya. The United States did not sign the statement and neither did the majority of developed nations."(*)

Population has continued to increase since this 1985 document, but no one knows when a worldwide population collapse might occur. Tomorrow? 20 years? 40 years? Huge numbers of human lives are at stake in this new bubble, not just homes and livelihood. As with the other bubbles, many people remain in denial. Too many say nothing can be done. Ignoring and denying the problem are the themes of the day in some quarters, with consequences remaining to be reaped.

On the face of it, the population bubble is more complicated than previous bubbles, and resolution after collapse will take much longer than with other bubbles. Resolution will involve the numbers of people living out their life and dying , and numbers of babies being born. Resolution means returning to an earth-sustainable population level. How long before a collapse we don't know. Tomorrow? Decades? A century?

After collapse of a bubble, 'hand-wringing' is customary, and with the current financial collapse is probably appropriate. For example, the following is a quote from Jim Wallis about the financial situation:

"If we learn nothing from this crisis, then all the pain and suffering it is causing will be in vain. But if we can learn new habits of the heart, perhaps that suffering can even turn out to be redemptive."(**)

He is on-point here with what is needed, namely an attitude adjustment to the extent humans may be capable of doing so. This attitude adjustment needs to extend beyond financial and housing concerns to encompass the situation with the population bubble.

Surely humans have the intelligence and the capacity to do something, if their attention can be brought to bear broadly enough. Even so, humans may not have the requisite ability to accomplish any substantive changes before the population bubble collapses. Nevertheless, if enough is said now and parallels with other bubbles are understood, perhaps fewer people will again be able to say 'I didn't believe,' or 'I didn't know,' or 'There was nothing I could do.' Maybe, just maybe, some steps will be taken on a global scale to moderate or reverse population growth before a collapse takes place.

Quotation sources:
(*) http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_v128/ai_4009821 (Science News)
(**) Jim Wallis, 01.29.2009; Founder of Sojourners, speaker, author, activist; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-wallis/the-wrong-question_b_162397.html

The Earth is a Giant Clown Car

Science tells us that the land area on the earth is today 58 million square miles. Over 6.5 billion of us live there. If we have these numbers correct, on average a little over 100 humans live on a square mile of the earth's land.

Humans are almost everywhere. They are remarkably adaptable, living in a wide range of climates from freezing artic to tropics, from deserts to jungles, from lowlands to mountains, and from elegant to humble. This capability to make any place a home is contained in the verse from 150 years ago by John Howard Payne, "Be it ever so humble, there's no place like home."

Humans now have a challenge that is an outgrowth of their success at abundantly increasing in numbers. They must cope with being constrained to the finite size of the planet earth. Seeing how many people can fit on the earth is the planet equivalent of seeing how many people can fit into a phone booth or into a car. A clown car in the circus surprises us to see how many people can be contained. Nevertheless there are limits.

References:

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/DanielChen.shtml

http://www.convertworld.com/en/area/

Humans are not the population problem!

Humans are not the population problem, it is the overwhelming NUMBERS of humans in the world that is the population problem.

Overpopulation and increasing population are difficult subjects that involve complicated issues. Issues of family values, social norms and cultural norms modulate individual attitudes. Additionally, attempting to comprehend a picture of human population within the whole world is only possible as an abstraction. Never mind that all these issues change with time, most human attitudes are in the context of here and now.

Humans have adapted remarkably to change in their environment and circumstance. At the same time, a fear lurks in the background that humans in general lack the mental capacity to come to grips with population issues. Too many abstractions are involved with comprehension. And also, humans tend to put on blinders with anything that may limit sexual activity and reproduction. This disposition has served well for the success of humans, but is a disadvantage when humans are at risk of overpopulating the earth.

Reducing the numbers of humans strikes home to each person in a personal way, and can be an inflammatory subject of discussion. It is easier to talk about less controversial subjects for 'saving the earth' such as increased recycling or reduced waste or a green environment.

Consider the problem of population size on a personal scale. If you are a family of four, you might possibly not be happy to increase your family to eight people living there in your home. Or if you have eight in your family, you might not be happy with sixteen showing up at home.

Doubling the number of people in your home is a major adjustment. In the same way doubling the number of people on earth is a major adjustment. As population continues to increase in the future, the adjustments could become impossible. If not impossible, then unbearable, or if not unbearable, then unpleasant.

Image source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/trojanguy/2527429724/

Population increase: Is it human progress or human failure?

Some are convinced that continuing increases in world population are a human failing that will have disastrous consequences for the future. They believe that major destruction of global life and society will occur. They foresee an apocalypse. You know those movie scenes set in a murky and almost deserted city. Or a barren desert wasteland with occasional life-support oases overrun by despotic criminals preying on the helpless.

At the other extreme, some don't believe there is a problem with overpopulation and don't believe it will lead on to a diminishing quality of life on earth. In a report from the Cato Institute(*) a few years ago, the lead comment was that there 'is no population problem. Population growth is the result of the plunging death rate and increasing life expectancy worldwide. That is progress.' Perhaps the writer was trying to be polemic. Whatever the case, nonbelievers say the problem of population increases will self-correct.

These are two quite different scenarios for the decades ahead -- progress to self-correction or sinking into disaster. Which scenario do you think will take over for life on earth? Notice that even now isolated pockets can be found around the earth for each scenario; that is, areas of population self-correction and also of apocalyptic disaster.

Even if self-correction eventually is the outcome, there are many paths to this outcome? The correction may result through disaster rather than through progress. For example the population might reduce as part of apocalyptic events.

Population correction can be reached by good means and by bad means. A likely bad way is to ignore the population problem and seek no adjustments in human behavior. To use an analogy, do we ignore hungry people because either they will find food or they will go away? Do we say that there is no need to worry about a hurricane, because eventually it will pass?

We should all try to be on a good path to population correction. We should all try to be part of a good solution and not just part of the problem. Our job is to find a good path.

(*)Reference: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5457 (May 9, 1999)

The Problem with Success in Reducing the Human Carbon Footprint

Suppose that 6.5 billion people on the planet did as they were asked and reduced their carbon production. The claim is that human CO2 production is contributing to disastrous global warming.

Let's suppose that each individual person's contribution to the earth's CO2 is cut in half on average. That is excellent! It sounds almost impossible, but suppose anyway.

And now suppose that the number of people living on earth doubles to 13 billion. -- Half the carbon footprint on average per person, but twice as many people. Unfortunately, we are then right back where we started with the same amount of carbon loading to the earth by humans.

According to the United Nations, we could actually be at double the present population in eighty years, although leveling off at 7 or 9 billion are seen as possible alternative scenarios. Success will require that the population numbers come in on the lower side. We can hope!

Reference: http://www.carbonrationing.org.uk/file/images/act-on-co2-logo

Did Martin Luther King say this about overpopulation?

Here is a quote from Martin Luther King that might come as a surprise.

Unlike plagues of the dark ages or contemporary diseases we do not understand, the modern plague of overpopulation is soluble by means we have discovered and with resources we possess.

What is lacking is not sufficient knowledge of the solution but universal consciousness of the gravity of the problem and education of the billions who are its victim. (-Martin Luther King, Jr.,1929-1968)

Unsourced References:
Overpopulation - Wikiquote; Population Paraphenalia - World Population Awareness

Martin Luther King electrified people with his 'I have a Dream' speech, but the essence of what he said about overpopulation is perhaps less well known.

World population is over 6.5 billion and still growing.

Source: U.S. and World Population Clocks - POPClocks

The Wrong Prescription

Not one but two mistakes on the same prescription! The pharmacy erroneously cut the prescribed dose in half. The pills in the bottle did not match the label and reduced the dose to one-forth of that prescribed. Furthermore, I had to sign three times for this one prescription (authorization to pick up, waiver of further information, and credit card). What is the purpose of all the checks and balances in the prescription system? Caveat emptor -- consumer beware!
(This is a shorter version of a posting in 2003.)

An Imperfect Medical System

Every medical system depends on imperfect people, which means medical care is not perfect. Here are some examples of quirky personal experience.

1. I found myself in a power struggle between a primary care physician and a colorectal surgeon because each wanted to do the colonoscopy. After reading a medical research study on the subject and realizing that I had low risk factors, I decided to disappoint both. Medical errors in the procedure remain a significant risk to the patient that must be weighed against benefit. To illustrate the point, a colonoscopy probe got stuck in a friend of mine for over an hour until they figured out how to remove it.

2. My medical records have disappeared on two occasions when a physician ended practice. In the second such instance, when I called asking for the records, I was referred to the physician's lawyer. He had a bit of a legal problem. In some localities at least, it appears that patient records need to be retained for only six years.

3. One time, I found that an unusual medical lab test result had not been reported to me. It took multiple requests for the test results to be given to me. The physician had not told me about an out of range result. I searched the Internet and found out a possible cause and treatment, which was ultimately successful in giving an in-range test result.

References:

Patient's Rights - New York State Department of Health (021014)
http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/hospital/english1.htm
Slocum-Dickson Medical Group
http://slocum.trainor.com/admin_services/medical.shtml
Title 22 - §1711. Patient access to hospital medical records
http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/22/title22sec1711.html
FindLaw
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/nycodes/c30/a124.html

(This is a shorter version of a post from 2003.)

Helping Men Live Longer

The average man is doomed to a shorter life simply by being male. Recommendations to improve men's health such as more vitamins, more exercise, and better behavior have not changed this. Do women know something that men don't that allows women to live longer? It should be noted that married men live longer than single men, so whatever women do for themselves must rub off on their mates.

If one looks at mortality tables, men have a higher death rate from most causes. Men have an extremely higher death rate in the cardiovascular area. This suggests that it is time to redouble efforts at cutting out the dietary fats, cake and cookies! Time for more cardiovascular exercise: open the jar of mayonaise for your wife, take out the trash, go to the store! Another area of higher risk for men is their dramatically higher suicide rate as compared with women. Women might help by cheering up their men and keeping them happier. Given that women on average live five years longer, they might spend a bit of their time improving quality of life for their shorter-lived men. On the other hand, I suppose if a man is making life into hell for a women, then her goal will be to have a breather in the last five years after the man dies.

Information Sources:
Wired News: A Few Ways to Win Mortality War http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,56476,00.html
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/
Table 2.15-- CAUSE OF DEATH, BY SEX: 2000 http://www.state.hi.us/dbedt/db01/02/021501.pdf
NCHS - FASTATS - Life Expectancy http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lifexpec.htm

(This is a shorter version of an original post from 2003)

When Anonymity Interferes with Community

I received a holiday wish list for a child whose care is managed through a social services program. My assignment was to obtain gifts that matched items on a list. Apart from the list, I received a first name for the child (Kevin W.), the name of a 'case worker', and a brief description of the child: age 8, shirt and pants size 8; shoes size 12. In this preceding description, I even altered the first name to further shield the vaguely described child -- an example of anonymity engendered by caution.

As I gathered gifts for this boy, I reflected on the meaning of the transaction. The parties in this relationship are nameless and faceless to each other. They are shadows with details left to the imagination. Anonymity of this type, and privacy which is another face of anonymity, have become central to our society. Many reasons pop to mind as justification including the avoidance of unpleasant interference, unwarranted intrusion, loss of dignity, undesired social entanglements, and embarassment. These seem all to be different manifestations of fear having to do with potential harm, real or imagined.

But what about the down side? How does anonymity affect the concept of a community as a collection of individuals who support each other and including the children? It seems to me that in the present situation, anonymity means that all interactions with the child become focused on the case worker. This gives the case worker more control, which can be a blessing in managing the case. More control is also a curse because it means more demands on the case worker who has to maintain some personal distance (translate this as coldness) in order to avoid being overwhelmed by the 'case load'. In an alternative community model, the role of supporting the child is distributed so that no one person has a large load. Anonymity has other disadvantages. The anonymity may embolden an independence of the case handlers leading to behaviors different from community norms. It may sew seeds of distrust. It can reduce accountability due to lack of transparency in actions taken. It weakens the opportunity for transition away from the case worker into other support models such as direct community support.

Truely, many if not most case handlers, use their authority wisely. Also, anonymity has essential roles in our society. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly reinforced the right to anonymous free speech as protected by the First Amendment. The right to privacy in voting is commonly accepted and arguably necessary given the differences in power that individuals may have over each other influenced by their vote.

One could argue that the transparency (i.e, freedom from anonymity) should be considered a right just as anonymity and privacy are rights under other circumstances. The U.S. Freedom of Information Act supports transparency in a wide range of circumstances related to government actions. However, individual privacy or anonymity is generally considered to trump freedom of information. It wouldn't hurt to similarly recognize individual transparency as a right under limited and well thought out circumstances when privacy claims may be abused. An analogy exists with patient rights that are now posted prominently in most medical facilities. Transparency rights could well deserve to be posted prominently where the potential exists for abuses in claims of individual privacy.

News Update: Our earth is really a giant fishbowl

In the long gone past, everyone who bothered to think about the shape of the earth would tell you it was flat. They would say that it you went far enough, you could fall off the edge. Anyone who spoke otherwise at the time was kooky, or worse, was a heretic.

Then some people, who thought they were smart, made the claim that the earth was a round globe. They argued their point until most people believed it, and they pointed to the images of the earth seen from space. The flat earth types thought the images were fake but were then labeled the kooky ones.

Now we are being told that the global earth view is wrong. Some people, who think they are smart, tell us that the earth is really a giant round fishbowl. In their view, the fish are being crowded out and humans are being crowded in so much as to threaten all life in the fishbowl. Who would have believed it!

Image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wwworks/2222548359/sizes/s/

OSTP and A Sustainable World

The following message was entered at www.change.gov.

Office of Science & Technology Policy: Population increase is testimony to human success but I also would point to the very serious risks of rapid growth in world population. The current growth rate is a harbinger of future failure in responding to global and U.S. ills such as environmental deterioration, poverty, and hunger. My wish for change would be that the OSTP or associated groups encourage leadership and provide focus for the fundamental issue of a sustainable world population. For lack of attention, we increase the likelihood of a sudden global livability meltdown, that would rival or exceed the consequences of the current global financial meltdown.

Who is the decider? The deck of cards analogy

Prof. Philip Heymann of Harvard Law gave a talk that fleshed out for me the uneasy story concerning the U.S. treatment of those labeled enemy combatants. He described in a dispassionate way the tension among different government agencies as each proceeded to implement, or not, new policies that were being promulgated in the aftermath of 9/11. Different decisions won out for different agencies. The policies originated particularly from the top of the federal administration.

After further thought, an analogy with card games occurred to me in which the winning outcome is a decision. I had a sense of the different 'trump' cards that came into play and dominated in the outcome. These cards included the Constitution and Bill of Rights, public (and individual) sense of morality, federal law, international law, appeal to authority, paranoia, fear of liability, and covert subterfuge. I suppose that public complacency could have been a card, but did not seem to be played. The subterfuge card, was the wild card in the pack that some thought could beat out the rest in a winning decision. Others argued, as would I, that subterfuge should not have been in the deck.

The rules of the game continue to develop. A useful rule would include that the trump cards not all be in the hands of one person or one group or one branch of government. Some felt that too many cards moved into the wrong hands.

Why are people celebrating after the election?

The barber giving me a haircut today had heard Obama's speech last night right after the win and asked me, "Why were all those people celebrating? Barack Obama hasn't done anything yet?" I know he had been rooting for the other side. I told him that people who had been feeling hopeless before were now excited because they had some hope for change. He said, "Okay I understand." That made me feel good to think I had an influence in resolving his perplexity. His next question was, Why is it that Hamas and Hezbollah wanted Obama to win? I said that the reasons are complicated, This answer seemed not to satisfy him. But I added, Al Quaida apparently wanted McCain to win. I said this is another complex situation and maybe Al Quaida wanted McCain as a person who could be more easily identified as an enemy to their supporters. I think the barber may have understood my point, but am not sure. I told him I thought both the McCain and Obama speeches last night were excellent. He had not heard McCain's concession speech, which I think would have been helpful to him. He said that the outcome of the presidential election didn't affect him either way, because people still need haircuts. I didn't say any more. I wasn't about to get into too passionate a discussion with him while he was working with scissors in hand, but anyway I was happy to share a different point of view with him.

An Unexpected Peril in House Hunting

Recently, we saw a house for sale and wanted to check it out. The realty company that listed the place was called, and a friendly agent gave us a tour. The agent took pains to point out defects in the place, an approach that seemed a little unusual for someone trying to promote the sale of a property -- but maybe it was just a matter of being friendly and honest. At the end of the tour, we were told about new state regulations requiring paperwork to be signed, so as to protect the interests of a potential buyer. I wanted to be done with this paperwork intrusion, and I could have perfunctorily signed. Instead I quickly scanned the form handed to me, and as I read, alarm bells went off in my mind. The paperwork was a blanket agreement for this friendly agent to become our buyer's agent for any property we might purchase. The seller's agent had morphed into a buyer's agent before our eyes. I said we weren't comfortable with the paperwork, and that was the end of it. Thank goodness I took the time to read. The experience is another reminder to avoid automatically signing a piece of paper before reading it.

High Efficiency Home Heating: It's Cool

A new high efficiency hot water heating system was installed at our home recently to replace an old rusting gas-guzzling bucket of a heating system. The 'boiler' of the new system hangs on the basement wall and a small pipe sticks through to the outside for the exhaust and also for air intake. We went from one to three temperature-controlled heating zones, each with its own circulator displayed on a mounting board next to the boiler. The setup looks awesome.

The quoted cost for the different high efficiency systems were all about the same -- expensive. Hopefully ours will pay for itself through reduced use of fuel and low maintenance. We chose Viessmann after getting estimates. Interestingly enough, we were steered away from Viessmann in a couple of cases. Our best guess is that they were afraid of installing the high-end tech.

Among the features in the new system are a 'modulated' boiler temperature that adjusts to outside temperature. The furnace room controller for the unit seems complicated but still can be fiddled with to adjust the system according to time of day and other conditions. We are finding that the three zones is a wonderful improvement in terms of both living comfort and keeping down the use of heat. We are looking forward to find out where we end up on fuel costs this winter -- hopefully a lot less.

Corn: Too Much of a Good Thing?

I can think of a few times in my life when I have had a sudden and permanent attitude-altering experience. In this case, the source of the alteration was very simple, I watched the documentary film King Corn, a story about the role of corn in the U.S. One image in the film especially caught my eye. It was the corn fed cattle. I am talking about the bulked up, hefty, cattle that go into hamburgers. As I listened to the film, my mind wandered fleetingly to see all the bulked up people in the U.S. -- you can see them everywhere. I would not embarass them or me by telling them so directly, but some of these people look bulked up just like the cows. As pointed out in the film, all of us depend heavily on corn for calories, both directly eating corn products and also eating corn-fed livestock and their products. Getting too bulked up has become an obesity problem accounting for an epidemic of deteriorating health for those of all ages. I realized that I too could be bulking up, because of my own intake of corn -- especially when I looked in the mirror, and no, I am not anorexic.

The reliance on corn in U.S. diets was a brilliant initiative that began in the 1970s with Earl Butz, the Secretary of Agriculture under President Nixon. The emphasis on corn was in many respects a very good thing, because it led to an abundance of calories at low cost. The problem today is that corn has become a ubiquitous part of the food chain for the food on our tables, and is not infrequently present in quantities that reduce the nutritional quality of our diet.

Take a look at how many grocery store items contain high fructose corn syrup. When I go to the grocery store these days, I try to find products without high fructose corn syrup. There are not many on the shelves without these sweeteners. For good measure, I cast aside also the products that contain sugar, or cane syrup or other processed sugars. I also exclude milk products which may come from corn-fed animals. I have worked hard to find a nutritional, enjoyable and satisfying combination of foods without the corn and other sweeteners. Leaving aside the sweeteners was difficult for a person that grew up enjoying sweets with gusto. But artificial sweeteners have become my friends, and keep me happy. My dietary approach is probably more drastic than necessary, but on reflection I am especially happy with the nutritional content that has resulted. And now after a couple of months, in my mind's eye at least, I look a little less like those corn-fed cattle.

For futher information about the film:

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/kingcorn/

http://theslowcook.blogspot.com/2007/10/king-korn-or-how-earl-butz-changed-way.html

http://www.culinate.com/articles/opinion/meeting_king_corn

image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sadeog/1135662941/sizes/s/