Balancing Act: drug innovation's FDA-dependence

Pharmaceutical science is nothing new. It's existed for ages, if we are to count all those hocus-pocus witchy brews made in antiquity. But the issues faced in pharmaceutical science as we know it today-- drug innovation-- began in the 20th century, in-step with booms in biomedical sciences. With the growth in drug possibilities, it became necessary to have a check-point to ensure the safety and regular marketing of drugs. Enter: the FDA. Beginning in 1906, new drugs needed to pass through an FDA-approval process before becoming available to the general public.

Indeed, this process has been totally integral to public well-being. The FDA-approval process eliminates guesswork on behalf of consumers by instituting investigations of drug safety by professionals.

But During 1980’s, America faced a serious “drug lag” where, due to a lack of resources at the FDA, the drug-approval process was too slow to keep up with demand. As a result, congress passed legislation which made pharmaceutical companies pay a “user fee” with each new drug application. So while the FDA is a government entity, these private funds play a large role in mitigating the cost of approval. The benefits have been ample, such that in 2012 congress passed renewed this act for the fifth time! However, some claim that industry funds in the drug approval process has led to questionable and hasty marketing of unsafe drugs. Furthermore, these “contributions” may have led to a decrease in drug efficacy and design ingenuity. Others say, however, that these payments are actually quite penalizing for pharmaceutical companies. An undercover relationship between pharmaceutical companies and the FDA makes for a juicy story, but in reality, each face the painful balancing act between getting life-saving treatments to sick patients and ensuring drug safety.

In the 1980's, U.S. drug approval lagged behind other modern countries.

The relationship between the private sector and a large government agency like the FDA clearly reminds me of the Gilded Age. During this period, the hand of government in regulating business ventures was practically nonexistent. Later, congress passed laws to control monopolies and questionable market ethics. However, the relationship was (and since has been) a very touchy one, filled with corruption and political blight. Could this be happening with the FDA and “big pharma”?

Pharmaceutical research and development also opens up “brave new worlds” metaphorically as explorers in the 15th and 16th centuries did literally. In both cases, the “explorers” (scientists or sailors) relied on venture capital to proceed with potentially amazing adventures. And in both cases, they often worked with the government to achieve a common goal. However, one must ask whether the FDA’s increasingly tight regulations stifle meaningful drug innovations and work against the “common good”.

Happy Birthday to a New World

About a week ago, He Jiankui announced to the world, the birth of identical twin baby girls. This, however, was not your average birthday. In many ways, it was the birth of an entirely new era. These baby girls are the first genetically modified humans ever born, and the implications to humankind are massive.

The technology Jiankui used has been around for about 40 years. Basically it is a genetic copy and paste tool. Using the system allows scientist to insert and delete portions of DNA, altering structures and functions of cells.

This technique was utilized in 1982 to make bacteria produce insulin, which dropped the price of the drug for Diabetes patients. Even before that, scientists were already seeing the possible direction of this science, towards the editing of the human genome. Conferences were called and the consensus was that if that were to be attempted, it should wait.

Soon after, in 1996, the first genetically modified produce hit the markets. The applications soon expanded beyond foods and led to the first cancer gene therapy drugs to be approved in 2017.

Now, we have on our little Earth two genetically modified little girls. Their genome has been altered to offer them immunity from HIV. The effectiveness of this is still being debated. It could put them more at risk for other diseases.

Regardless, a door has been opened, or rather a wall demolished. Whether for health, or beauty, or strength, or intelligence, the possibility for GMO humans is now very real and at our doorstep.

It is as if we have stepped off our world of random genetic phenomena and into a world of predictability and perfection. The voyages of discovery in the Renaissance revealed more of what was already around us but out of sight. These scientific voyages are truly venturing into the unknown.

What drives this science? Desire for human greatness? Mastery over Mother Nature? Ever since man realized who he was and what he was capable of, he has been striving to become more. Genetic engineering of humans is the perfect way to do this.

And when creating the essence of ones being becomes an art, we will truly be able to say "What a piece of work is man".

Advertising and Social Issues

Advertising has developed a great deal since it first began. Originally ads were were informative and focused on the product. There wasn't competition, strategy or big agencies hired to create campaigns. It was just a paper with what was being sold. Then advertisements began to be more emotional. The product had an emotional benefit and companies and agencies strove to sell that emotion to the consumer. As communication channels developed, advertising developed. Advertising began to be more focused on the brand and the brand voice. It became more about what the company represents and what they stand for. People choose brands that align with their values because it's a way of identifying yourself. Good branding means you are consistent in what you stay you stand for. People can identify your brand and they know what it means to buy something from Nike versus Adidas, and believe it or not there are political implications based on what kind of basketball shoes you buy. A couple of my favorite campaigns that have focused on social issues that have gone viral are:

Always 'Fight Like A Girl'

Dove 'True Beauty'

Both of these campaigns are similar in the studio setting and the setup, female empowerment and social expectations. Both of these campaigns are very powerful because the brands are aligning themselves with values shared by their viewers. In both ads there is no talk about soaps or face wash or tampons. But knowing that the brands both stand for female empowerment shot sales and google searches through the roof. It's an interesting concept that the most effective form of advertising, isn't really even advertising at all.

Its Getting Hot in Here

               The study of climate goes back much further than most would expect. As early as 1896 Arrhenius published data suggesting that CO2 emissions from the industrial revolution were causing an increase in global temperatures. As science and technology improved and energy became cheap, more and more data suggested a link between CO2 and a rise in global temperatures. This rise however was not largely thought to be concerning until the 1960's. In the 1960's scientists realized that in the past, the climate had changed incredibly quickly.

The fact that the climate could change on human timescales scared many people. NASA began to shift in the late 70's away from planetary study, and more towards the study of earth. With more funding, climate research began to put together a clearer picture of a climate linked to greenhouse gases among other factors. Despite the long history of research, the issue of global warming is more polarizing today than ever. Intelligent professors on both sides interpret the same study differently. Talk show hosts, pundits and presidents all use inflammatory rhetoric to argue against straw men.

our world

 This is where the debate connects to our study. We need another "ad fontes" movement. Scientific journals are more accessible than ever before. The general people need to stop listening to only people who agree with them, and actually read the studies, in order to decide for themselves. Simply trusting the authority is as bad as trusting the Catholic church for Protestants. The Protestants who went back to the Bible found differences in what was said, and what was actually in the Bible.

 Most people who either believe or don't believe in global warming have never actually read a study. It is interesting that with the changing frames of reference, many people in the 17th and 18th century began to believe more in the epistemology of science. They began to trust the results and publish journals of interesting scientific innovations. Today, with more people are simply listening to you-tubers and new disruptive medias, rather than trusting themselves to read the science and learn directly.

Image: Fire earth digital art: free from pixabay, no artist attributed

The Internet: A Battleground of Human Rights and Freedoms

When the internet was invented, our perception of available knowledge was revolutionized. Not only could data be transferred faster and on a larger scale than ever before, more of it now remains in the public sphere than ever before. While this was beneficial in many ways, especially in an economic sense, it caused several problems. 

One such problem is that of restricting said knowledge. In the early years of the printing press, governments were faced with a pressing issue. When knowledge can be produced quickly and en masse, it can also be distributed on a large scale with little effort. As well, once books are sent out in the thousands, it's virtually impossible to get them all back. 

No longer could governments mediate philosophies and political ideologies in the same manner. Similarly, the internet is notoriously hard to regulate. Data can be stored in the most obscure of (virtual) places, but still be accessible to anyone in the world, and suddenly people can easily steal copyrighted products or learn things that the government would rather not have them know.

But even if people begin to view the internet in a negative light, there are several obstacles in the way of trying to restrict it. One of these is unique to the internet and reflects the changes that have happened in the wake of Globalism in the 20th century. 

Internationalism has allowed for global markets and better political cooperation, but the internet is a special beast to deal with, for it transcends even designated political boundaries. In a way, to truly restrict the internet the world would need to become even more globalist; to control an international entity, countries must first agree on how to deal with it. 

It is questions like these that accompany the wonderful benefits we get from the internet, and sometimes the internet itself seems to me just a slippery fish in wet hands. It might just take a whole world of unified countries to truly begin moderating the power it is. 

ESA: Hopeless, or our last hope?

The passenger pigeon was once the most abundant bird in North America, at about 3 to 5 billion individuals. Accounts from settlers to the continent note that when the pigeons would pass overhead in their huge flocks, the sky would go completely dark. Yet, in 1914, the bird went extinct. People hunted them until the population was so small they couldn't reproduce. There were no kill limits (or those that were finally enacted were not well enforced), and no conservation efforts until it was too late.

We may never see a cloud of passenger pigeons again, but their extinction did lead to something beneficial: an awareness of the importance of conservation and a boom in environmentalism. After that point, countries began to pass acts that would help to conserve species from the same fate. In 1973, the United States passed the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which increased the level and scope of protection given to animals and plants considered endangered or threatened.

The passenger pigeon serves as a testament to humans' effects
 on nature and the need for conservation efforts

Since 1973, the ESA has seen multiple successes, some of the most famous being the recoveries of the bald eagle and the peregrine falcon. However, increasingly more species need attention as human population, pollution, and habitat destruction increase. The ESA does not have the funding to save every organism in danger of extinction.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries recently proposed changes to the ESA. Those changes include reducing spaces reserved for endangered species recovery and reducing the protection for threatened species. Some big businesses in this capitalist society would welcome fewer regulations on land use. It could also open up room for the ESA to even out their species focus.

The open platforms of the internet have allowed for myriad opinions to be shared on the proposition. Some think these changes will allow funding to be better distributed and focus on species with high potential for recovery. Others think these changes would leave regulations too open and, at best, slow the ESA's progress.

What most Americans seem to agree on (about 90%, actually, across both parties) is that we need an act like the ESA to keep our environment safe from ourselves. But is the current ESA, flawed as it may be, our best option? Will changing it further endanger our endangered species, repeating the tragedy of the passenger pigeon? Or do we need to alter our strategy to better prioritize conservation funds?

Image source

Soirées, Symposiums, and Sessions

I believe we need to spend time as often as possible discussing our individual human experience and we need to find a good way to do that. I do have a bias. I am in the college of humanities. But, I don’t think my bias is a bad thing. Or unfounded. I hope that more than a few centuries of soirées and symposiums can support that line of thought.

But, as far as discussing our individual human experience goes, symposiums and soirées can be a little difficult to pull off. Historically, these were gatherings of intellectuals (or attempted intellectuals) having direct and open conversations about theology, philosophy, art, and politics. In my experience (and yes, I’ve tried), It just isn’t easy to pull a group like that together.

Unless of course, you’re playing some Dungeons and Dragons. Then it comes easy.

Role-playing games spontaneously, but subtly, create discussions that mirror the discourse of a soirée, but through a different medium. Rather than words, RPGs use actions. The decisions of the players create shared-world experiences, filled and populated by the ideologies and beliefs of each of the players. As they act and react to each other and the shifting storyline, they get an uninhibited look into the souls of the people around them.

Want to understand your friends on a deeper level? See what they do when you toss them into strange or conflicting situations. Do they kill the deadly baby dragon before it can grow up to be a threat? Or do they try and raise it to be a force for good?

Ever heard of Gary Gygax? He invented DnD. He is also known for creating and upholding a brutal and even punitive style of game management that was designed to hurt his players as much as possible. If something is Gygaxian, it is stereotypically, unrealistically harsh. But, not everyone holds that point of view. DnD was invented in the 1970’s and many of its first players had seen action in Vietnam or even WWII. After violent experiences like those, are Gygaxian nighttime ambushes or surprise physical hazards a realistic or gratuitous look at life’s hardship? And, because we’re in college, why?

In our day and age of entertainment, I would submit role-playing games as a new kind of symposium. A way for us to come to an understanding of each other on a deeper level.

Image credit to Wizards of the Coast media resources.

Will Our Children Ever See an Elephant?

Most of us have probably  heard at some point in our lives about the poaching crisis that is going on in numerous countries around the world that is causing populations of many animals to drop to levels so low that they may not be able to make a comeback. Two of these species are African Elephants and Rhinos. In the past 100 years, the population of African Elephants has decreased by 97%. While the rate of poaching has slowed, we are still on pace to lose 50% of the existing population in the next 10 years. Journals from explorers of the African continent talk about finding a rhinoceros behind every bush. Now there are an estimated 5,000 Black Rhinos in the wild, making them alarmingly close to becoming the next of many species that humans have destroyed.

Confiscated ivory being burned so it cannot
enter Chinese markets

In recent years, most of the world has supported Africa in an effort to save these animals. The greatest problem facing these animals is the trade of ivory in China. There is a massive market of illegal ivory in China that is bought off of African poachers. As these animals come closer to extinction and ivory is less abundant, prices only go up, making it more profitable for poachers. On October 29, 2018, China reversed a ban on the trade and sale of tiger "parts" and ivory from rhinos and elephants for the development of new medical treatments. At a time when the world is coming together to save these animals that are critical to the ecologic success of the African savannah and the stability of African tourism, the Chinese government has given greater incentive and revoked punishments to those who use these products for capital gain.

History is so important study because we can learn from it and not make mistakes that have been made in the past. What has history taught us about sacrificing good for capital gain. One great example can be found in protest and piety. In the Reformation period, the Catholic church sought the sacrifice what was right for capital gain. This started a religious revolution. In our day, we must learn that we must seek to do what is right and elect leaders who will do the same. There is no end to the destruction that comes if we don't.

Unionizing the Educators

     Teacher's Unions have been around now for over a hundred years, with the first official union having been founded way back in 1916 in Chicago, Illinois. This union, The American Federation of Teachers, accomplished many helpful things for teachers as a whole, such as helping raise salaries and making sure female teachers were treated fairly in a time when sexism was rampant in the public and private sector.
     Other unions would emerge, strikes would take place, laws were passed to raise wages, and the educators across America benefited greatly. This emergence follows very closely the theme of challenging traditional systems that we would see come forth in the Digital Age, and in many instances mirrors some of the ideas about protest so common in the Reformation. Teachers were going on strike in states and areas where wages were not high enough in an active protest against unfair payment for their work. This new way of challenging the way things were done was prolific, and it's still going on today.
      Unions today have similar strategies as those of the 20th century: negotiate wages, organize strikes, and protect the rights of hard working teachers across America. However, contemporary unions also focus more on political movements and supporting political candidates that will help their interests more than before. Other developments such as tenure would make their way into unions as the time passed, and thus unions had changed to some degree from what their original ideas were.
     Some states today support unions wholeheartedly, while other states make laws that push against the power of the unions in an effort to retain some control over the ever changing field of education. States that allow more room for unions generally have better wages for teachers and less strikes occur because of this. It seems that unions and education might be better handled at a federal level, that way the quality of life for educators can be consistently better across the board.

Photo Source:
http://www.alternet.org/files/styles/story_image/public/story_images/shutterstock_80227045.jpg

The ancient beginnings of public relations

West facade of the Parthenon, Athens, 5th century BCE

When you hear the words public relations, what comes to your mind?  For many people, they know what it is in a general sense, but can’t quite find the words to define it.  I saw this firsthand when I told others that I was accepted into the public relations program.  At first, they were very excited for me, but then I would watch as a puzzled look came over their faces where they would then ask me, “now what exactly is public relations?”  

Literary Scripture

     The Canonical Question is one that plagues fans, scholars, and theologians alike. We all really want to know what 'counts'. For some, it's as simple as questions such as, Do we count the new Star Wars movies as canon, and how does that replace the original canon? When we stop liking a television show, can we just pretend that the final seasons didn't happen to maintain the integrity of the story?

      Scholars find themselves tasked with creating a literary canon. While we don't like to prize one work of art over another, let's be honest. We have to acknowledge what really 'counts' as a judgment call to what we teach and discuss in schools. This question has historically accepted older books as having 'stood the test of time' and therefore worthy of our scrutiny both as primary documents of a bygone society and a literary work. More recently, however, modernists don't see why we should discredit all recently published books from being considered 'real' literature. Communications specialists notice an ongoing trend that people consistently value traditional methods over new ones. Are we willing to not be a part of literature history by ignoring our own era's masterpieces?

      You can see this trend throughout the ages. Shakespeare's plays were for the common folk, but are now the epitome of literary art. Consider the 1800s as well, when the 'novel' was considered the new method of entertainment and therefore not worth careful study. Nowadays, 1800s literature is considered high class, cerebral work. It would hardly be surprising to find movie scripts intensely studied in English classes soon.

      You can see the same question crop up in the Reformation. Sola Scriptura was the watch cry. A major difference between denominations of religion is what they consider canon- just Genesis (Muslims), just the Old Testament (Jews), just the Gospels (non-Pauline Christians), the Bible (most Christians), or the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, the Doctrine and Covenants, and anything that comes up in Conference or Official Statements (yeah, we kind of broke the whole canon thing...)? By deciding what counts, we determine what we value

Image credit:https://www.123rf.com/photo_15136937_old-books-open-on-a-wooden-table.html

Literature: By the Books?

Does this even count as a book?

The definition of what we call "Literature" has been quite contentious in this past century. Thanks to (relatively) recent innovations in printing, coloring and digital downloading, new mediums to tell a story have cropped up like dandelions. In the past, the only three ways to tell a story were through oral tradition, books and the theater, and for over a millennia this is how it was. The invention of the newspaper changed that, however, as now stories could be printed piecemeal each week to get readers hooked onto an ongoing saga. After that came radio, movies, comics, and the face of Literature was forever destabilized as chaos took hold of it's image. This "Disruptive Innovation" broke all of the previous rules established in favor of finding stories in unlikely places.

These inventions have forced people in recent years to reevaluate what we consider to be "Literature", and though most agree that it only covers "Written Works" as defined by the Encyclopedia Britannica (see here for more details), that only really eliminates Radio, Movies and television broadcasts, as well as videos online. Comics are still considered a written work after all, the same with Manga, "visual novels", and even that topic that people are ever wary of: Fan Fiction. How are we supposed to take those things into account, how do we change our frame of reference, to include these different styles under the same umbrella that books or perhaps plays fall under?

You could liken the situation to the "Age of Exploration" from years past, but I disagree in that regard. In my view, the issue isn't that these new mediums haven't been explored to their full capacity, they have, it's just a matter of whether they count at all for the title. Just because a man discovers a new location in the sea does not make it a continent, it could easily be island that is all on it's lonesome.

Image Credit: "Amazon Kindle Fire" obtained via Wikimedia Commons

The Threats to Minority Public Broadcasting

Portrait of Sioux Indian in 1908

The current issue with the Trump Administration budget cuts of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) and the National Endowment for the Arts will affect culturally diverse broadcasting. Such public broadcasting stations include Native American radio and television channels that are used for cultural events like tribal meetings.

The argument regarding this hot spot is split two ways: the budget given to CPB helps spread cultural and other diverse media that otherwise would not receive substantial funding. It is also a preservation method for important Native American traditions and history. However, others argue that the government should not be involved in public broadcasting to the extent that it now is.

Ideologies in Tension

In a historical perspective, these opposing viewpoints mirror the ideologies in tension of the 18^th and 19^th centuries, specifically the implications of liberalism vs. conservatism.

Liberalism

From an 18^th century liberalism view, funding for Native American media is part of universal human rights, that the Native Americans have a right to receive funding for reasons of cultural media sharing. 

Utilitarianism 

However, in the 19^th century viewpoint of liberalism, a utilitarian society would deem that funding for Native American broadcasting does not benefit the majority, solely the minority group of Native Americans, and therefore funding should be pulled.

Conservatism 

Conservatism of the same time period would argue that if the Native Americans were part of the lower social hierarchy as Social Darwinism advocates, then they would be “naturally selected” out of the funding for their broadcasting; this would be their failure of social survival and therefore it would be unnecessary to provide them funding.

Digital Culture Sharing

In a digital civilization, the importance of connectivity in ethnic cultures is incredibly important. Where imperialism essentially separated the Native Americans from their home lands, the digital age allows for the connection of Native American culture and increases their sphere of influence. Almost all political, ethic, or religious groups thrive on the media that they produce and the Native American groups who receive federal funding for public broadcasting are no different.

Image Credit: Portrait of Red Bird (Public Domain Image via Wikimedia Commons)

Accounting: Past, Present,...but Future?

The first records of accounting were taxes recorded on clay tablets in Egypt and Mesopotamia.  As the economy adopted a monetary system years later, accounting was also used to record transactions.  One of the most significant events in the history of accounting is the development of the double-entry method in 1458 which consists of recording transactions with both a debit and credit value.

Evolution of Accountants

An Italian mathematician named Luca Pacioli published this idea using the Gutenberg press in 1494, and because his twenty-seven page lecture on double-entry bookkeeping was accessible to many, Pacioli’s book was a frequent reference for accounting for several hundred years.

The industrial revolution created a greater need for more efficient and accurate bookkeeping.  As companies grew and became more competitive, they needed to communicate who were the shareholders in the corporation.  During the information age, many accounting organizations were created to create general principles that would establish constituency across the board regarding how values were to be reported on financial statements.

And the digital age would change it even more.  The rapid progress of technology has enabled the invention of computerized accounting systems that contain the transactions of a business—they even comply with the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) required by the US Securities and Exchange Commission.  So if the computers can run the numbers, then what’s our job?  While accounting is clearly useful and necessary, do we still need the accountants? 

Image Credit: Evolution of Accountants (via i Edu Note)

“Tell each student to turn in their homework.”

                               https://pixabay.com/en/board-school-blackboard-chalk-font-64269/

The lack of a gender-neutral third person singular pronoun is a problem that has existed since Middle English: “And whoso fyndeth hym out of swich blame, They wol come up…Chaucer, ‘The Pardoner’s Prologue’ ca. 1395 (in Jespersen)” (Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage, 1994, p. 901).

The use of the traditional pronoun he, his, him, goes back to the 18th century grammarians who boxed themselves into the position by first deciding that the indefinite pronouns must always be singular. They then had to decide between the masculine and feminine singular pronouns for use in reference to the indefinites, and they chose the masculine (they were, of course, all men) (Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage, 1994, p. 902).

Great writers from the past used they as a singular pronoun.

[It was] a normal pattern in English that was established four centuries before the 18^th- century grammarians invented the solecism. The plural pronoun is one solution devised by native speakers of English to a grammatical problem inherent in that language––and it is by no means the worst solution (Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage, 1994, p. 902).

The following examples date as far back as the 14th century.

“The righteous man … that taketh not their life in vain––Pearl, ca. 1380 (spelling modernized)

There’s not a man I meet…As if I were their well-acquainted friend––Shakespeare, The Comedy of Errors, 1593” (Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage, 1994, p. 902).

This linguistic problem could be considered one of “ad fontes” where linguists are going back to the sources to prove that the lack of a gender-neutral singular pronoun is not an issue brought to light only because of the feminist movement of the ‘70s.

The problems surrounding the invention of the printing press are analogous to our present-day problem with using they, their, and them as singular pronouns. The English-speaking world doesn’t seem to have a problem with using they when it speaks, but as soon as it goes to print, it goes “prescriptivist” and starts spouting off what the grammarians insisted on in the 18th century.

According to linguist John McWhorter(1998), “The only thing keeping us from taking advantage of it [singular they] has been the power of the prescriptivist hoax, starting with Lowth and Murray’s inevitable whacks at it back in the 1700s” (p. 124).

A Brief History of Poorly Written Agreements

Contract disputes (whether between artists and streaming services, artists and record labels, etc.) are not limited to the music industry, or even to the modern day. Throughout history people have drafted all sorts of agreements, contracts, and treaties to be more beneficial to one party at the expense of another. Sometimes this stems from greed, much like the problematic artist contracts of Spotify, or from some desire for justice after being wronged.

The latter was the case for the Treaty of Versailles, the document that ended World War I, and unintentionally started WWII. The Treaty of Versailles, specifically the Way Guilt Clause found within, was worded in such a way so as to basically punish Germany for the role that they played in the war, forcing them to pay costly reparations, give up some of their land they had gained, and restrict their military power, among other things. These conditions were extremely harsh and Germany tried to negotiate them after some time, but they were hardly given any breathing room by the other countries they were paying. As such, they started the Second World War in an effort to get their punishment repealed.


Thankfully, contract disputes in the present day aren't causing any global-scale wars. However, when people get the short end of the stick from a contract they were hesitant to sign in the first place, especially well-known celebrity musicians, odds are that they will try to fight against it. Thankfully, with the help of their fans, they are often able to make the positive changes that are needed or at least makes changes happen that will eventually lead to their goal. Hopefully, we will actually make sure to read contracts ahead of time and hopefully will get to a point as people where we do not use contracts as a means of personal gain alone.

Image Credit: https://www.iamexpat.nl/career/employment-news/new-dutch-labour-laws-conversion-of-contract-from-fixed-term-to-permanent Public Domain

The History of Climate Science: As Old as Thought

It's human nature to consider the world around us. In ancient Greece, Theophrastus, a pupil of Aristotle, conjectured that draining marshlands made those areas more susceptible to freezing, and that deforestation would result in those areas getting warmer. Vitruvius could be considered one of the first to draft an environmental impact report in the first century B.C. when he wrote about climate in relation to architecture and where to build new cities.

Glacial Ice

People's understanding of climate and the way it changes has been developing for years. In the Enlightenment era, people began to understand how ancient climate systems could have effected modern conditions, including the idea that glaciers could have existed previously where they currently didn't. Geologists discovered evidence of different geological ages, and evidence was accepted that there had been "Ice Ages".

In the late 19th century, around the time of industrialization, scientists began to suspect that human actions had some impact on the environment around them. Evidence accumulated for decades until finally, in the 1950's, better instrumentation allowed for more conclusive data that indicated that CO2 emissions were, in fact, causing an increase in the amount of infrared radiation reflected by the atmosphere. In other words, the world was getting warmer, and we were a factor in that.

This history is important to me. Climate science is not a new invention. It's not a scare tactic fabricated by scientists in order to get themselves more funding. It's a discipline that has been growing and evolving for literal centuries. Just as all science does, it has changed. The cutting edge and major concerns of the field have shifted. It's become more prominent as the discoveries and findings have become more dramatic, but the climate science we see today is just the latest version of an age old tradition.

Communication in the Workplace

History:
Although there have been offices in some form throughout the ages the history of the modern office is often traced back to the East India Company and the large purpose-built office that was constructed in 1792. Over time the office, like the rest of the world, was changed and shaped by new technology that came during the 19th century, such as electric lighting, typewriters, the elevator and steel frame construction all contributed to the skyscrapers we now work in today. This led to the rapid development of the office space during the 20th century as companies were able to utilize larger workforces. With this came the Taylorist offices which attempted to increase efficiency by imitating the factory assembly line, giving repetitive and relatively simple tasks to people while also cramming more people into a single area. The first real break-away from the Taylor model was in the 1950s when Eberhard and Wolfgang Schnell proposed the Bürolandschaft model. It attempted to get rid of the rigidness that had permeated the Taylor model and instead focused on free and open plans of furniture scattered in large and spaces that had no clear division between different environments.

The original Action office 

In reaction to this in the 1960s Herman Miller introduced the Action Office. It was based off the idea that the mental effort required in work required a suitable working environment However due to its high cost Action Office II was introduced as a flexible space that allowed employees some measure of privacy by providing three-sided divisions between each employee while still allowing for open communication between workers, This idea was taken and abused in the 80s in what came to be known as "Cubicle Farms." Although designed to free workers from the dull and mechanical nature of the Taylorist offices, managers were more interested in profits and focused on cramming as many people as possible in as small a space as possible. In the 90s the rise of Dot Com companies once again challenged the status quo by embracing a quirky and brightly colored design with a more casual feel and a return to a more open office plan. The casual office continued in popularity especially among tech companies into the 21st century.

Themes:
The history of the office workplace reflects changes in people's understanding of humanity and one's purpose as well as the changing needs of society. There is a clear reflection of several themes, such as man's search for order. Offices came from the need for order in a sea of information that required hundreds of people sifting through it and reacting to it in order to run large companies such as the East India Trading Company. There is also an important connection to both the idea of industrialization as it was upon the ideas of industry that the office was originally based. However the changing nature of society in the 21st century has forced companies to re-evaluate those industrial values as the universality of technology and its affects on the way we live has greatly changed what is needed from human workers and our computer or robotic counterparts.

CLICK HERE - WEIGHT LOSS WONDER - CLICK HERE

Dieting has become a common practice in our society.

During the 20th century, with the rise of the entertainment industry, namely movies and television, physical image began to become a huge fixation for our society. Magazines showing off models and actors and actresses at every checkout stand showed the public the "perfect" figure. We have been told what we should aspire to look like and it has become ingrained in us. To achieve this, many people began to create extreme eating plans or diets which would help people to lose weight and create their own "perfect" body. The problem with this is many were created not by scientists who understand how the body works, but by people trying to make money. Diets plans have made people extremely rich over the years. The consumers of these diets buy into it hoping they get the same results they see on the commercials where people have lost incredible amounts of weight. Often times these diets have very negative side affects to them if people are not careful.

Two themes from the reformation that apply to this fad are sola fide and sola scriptura. Sola fide refers to the ideology that faith is all that is required to achieve salvation. Sola Scriptura refers to the ideology that the scriptures contain the keys to salvation. In the reformation these were competing ideologies. In this situation they still compete. I would apply the idea of sola fide to the followers of fad dieting. They believe the diet works and trust that if they keep at it they will achieve the results they want. If they believe in it, it will work. I would apply sola scriptura to scientists who understand how the body works and how these diets can affect it. They believe in the "book" or science which gives us an understanding of how diets can harm, or help the body. Those who are in the sola fide camp so often don't research and look into the science behind the diets and don't understand possible dangers lurking behind the hope of weight loss.

Many diets do work and can help us become healthier, but the obsession of looking perfect and losing weight can lead people to blindly follow diets and ignore potential dangers.

Failed Institutions and the Mayhem that Follows

Gangs were originally formed to help communities, not individuals. They were not involved in drug trafficking but were created to protect certain communities and provide services that the government neglected. As we are aware now, gangs are largely involved in drug trade and other illegal activity. Gangs have formed an entire economic system similar to any other business, except the activity is illicit. They provide several services to the community that the government neglects in their neighborhoods which in turn creates a community that is reliant on them.

This subject strongly resonates with the Search For Order theme present during the enlightenment period. I see many instances where a need for organization is filled by the gang. There is a demand for government in these projects, and the gang provides this structure. It isn't always the way the people want it but it is better than nothing. These problems are perpetuated by poverty that a highly segregated community engenders.

Housing Projects in Harlem

Another theme that applies to gang activity is the conflict and collapse motif of the Modernism period. While not quite as dramatic as a world conflict or the collapse of the empire, it does reflect a small-scale collapse of government institutions based off of race conflicts. These institutions quite literally fail the people they are meant to serve. Pseudo-governments commonly referred to as gangs, fill the gaps that the collapse of institutions fails to accomplish. Housing, protection, basic needs, law and order, and much more are the responsibility of the gangs. While gangs do benefit some people, it is at a steep price to the people that these needs are fulfilled. 

Image: Harlem Projects by ArtisticOperations, licensed by CC through Pixaby 2.0