Sounds of Silence and Ice Packs for Tired Eyes

I finally have a break in my schedule to post something here.

So I've been busy. The Arizona Daily Wildcat was following the election and accidentally found itself in the middle of a controversy concerning a cartoon from Keith Knight, creator of The K Chronicles. We accidentally printed a two-week-old cartoon that contained a racial slur. Not the complete word, mind you, but it had enough that you can tell what it is.

For some people, this confirmed their suspicions of the Daily Wildcat as being racist, on top of being libertarian, right-wing, radically liberal, Republican, and an agent of censorship. Oh, and I can't forget the misogyny and misanthropy that seep into our articles. But that's a whole matter altogether. [Peruse the Opinions section and search for "libertarian," "liberal," "right-wing"...]

No, what happened was a production error and for that reason, the Daily Wildcat accepts full responsibility. The content was never up for discussion for print, so for anyone who believes otherwise, the paper has never made a stance of condoning or condemning the cartoon.

To me, the content of the cartoon points out the fact that issues of race and politics in the U.S. are never as black and white (uh, right) as some people may want to believe. Then again, I don't believe that we, as a nation, are in a "post-racial" state, especially when I consider the vehement reaction people in Arizona and around the nation have toward the issue of immigration.

Anyway, the controversy launched a storm of letters and articles and people were shouting without thinking clearly while multiple sides were drawn around the paper. Two local TV stations (NBC and Fox) covered the controversy, both of whom presented their own biases in their reportage.

As for me, it meant I had to double my efforts as copy chief in making sure that the people who wrote to the paper, often for the first time, and their message were presented in the best light possible. This meant taking out spelling errors, making sure their grammar and syntax were smoothed out, and modifying the letters to adhere to AP and Wildcat style. In the end, after all the readings and re-readings and edits, I'm certain I read approximately 12,000-16,000 words in the Opinions section every weeknight after the election. That comes out to be 36,000-48,000 words for Opinions, never mind the rest of the paper with the election coverage and a spectacular football season and the separate, weekly section for WildLife (i.e. Arts).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that's the equivalent of a paperback a sliver under 200 pages (based on 250 words per page).

Whenever my copy editors (or anyone else, actually) ask me how and why I do my job after telling them the above anecdotes and facts, I tell them, "I don't know. I just do it."

Tags: journalism, life, reading, writing, news, not-dead, comics

Powered by Qumana

The Great Soy Conspiracy and A Word on Accountability

So here's my analysis of the article I mentioned last time, of which this is excerpted and edited from the email:

I can see why you’re concerned about soy after reading the article. I read it and it lulled me into a false sense of objectivity before smacking me with its biased and inflammatory statements. It’s child abuse to give an infant soy formula? Seriously? (Breast milk is best for an infant, actually, and normally all he or she needs nutritionally.) The article is the antithesis of how I would like people to approach science and nutrition, especially when it comes to looking at primary research. Marc Leduc, the article’s author and creator of the website, presents an absolutely one-sided argument against soy. Here’s one of the many problems I have with what Leduc wrote:

Some sources claim that "soy has demonstrated powerful anticancer benefits...the Japanese, who eat 30 times as much soy as North Americans, have a lower incidence of cancers of the breast, uterus and prostate."(7)

Indeed they do. But the Japanese, and Asians in general, have much higher rates of other types of cancer, particularly cancer of the esophagus, stomach, liver and pancreas.(8) Asians throughout the world also have high rates of thyroid cancer.(9) The logic which links low rates of reproductive cancers to soy consumption requires attribution of high rates of thyroid and digestive cancers to the same foods, particularly as soy causes these types of cancers in laboratory rats. [Emphasis mine]

Why the sudden lack of citation(s) here? He doesn’t point to any studies that would support this last statement, and he doesn’t cite any research dated after 2002, the year the article was written, even though the website seems to have been last updated in 2006. There are also limitations with looking at rat studies and cancer that he doesn’t address. (Consider the amount of soy that would need to be given to rats and the fact that no one can ever conduct an intervention study on humans where they are fed possible carcinogens, at least, not without breaking several laws.) Speaking of citations, the fact that he only highlights links to other parts of his website is somewhat disconcerting. If those articles follow a similar standard as this one on soy, then I’m even more troubled.

Oh wait. Here’s something troubling. An article from the Complementary Alternative Medicine Association:

The second main "anti-nutrient" soybeans contain is phytic acid. Present to some degree in all types of beans, phytic acid blocks the uptake of important minerals, such as iron, magnesium, calcium and especially zinc. Soybeans have the highest phytic acid levels of any legume, and as such have an extraordinary ability to cause mineral deficiencies. Third World countries with diets high in grains and soy have the most profound deficiencies of these minerals. [http://www.camaweb.org/library/nutrition/soy_con.php]

From Leduc’s article:

Soybeans also reportedly contain an anti-nutrient called "phytic acid", which all beans do. However, soybeans have higher levels of phytic acid than any other legume. Phytic acid may block the absorption of certain minerals, including magnesium, calcium, iron and zinc. Epidemiological studies have shown that people in 3rd World Countries who have high consumption of grains and soy also commonly have deficiencies in these minerals. It must also be noted that this may be of particular concern with regard to babies who are using soy-based infant formulas. [Paragraph 5]

To me, the wording is a little too similar to go without a citation. (Plagiarism…) Also, notice that Leduc says phytic acid (or phytates) “may” interfere with some mineral absorption, but then when he restates this fact three paragraphs later, he declares that phytic acid does indeed block this absorption. (As a writer, he should have noticed that.) To be clear, phytates can hinder the overall absorption of the above minerals by binding to them, but most cooking and preparation methods can reduce the amount of phytates to varying levels. In the case of nonheme (plant) iron and phytates, simultaneously consuming vitamin C or a little meat with the phytates can counteract some of phytates’ binding effects.

When I wrote to you about soy, I didn’t cite any primary research articles to you for a few reasons. Unlike Leduc, for each study that presents a conclusion one way, there can be a handful or more of other studies that present the opposite conclusion. For example, here’s the link to a full text of a meta-analysis from a 2002 Journal of Nutrition issue that looks at data from studies on the possible effects of soy on premenopausal women and men: http://tinyurl.com/5qgd93. Here’s the abstract for a study from the most recent issue of Topics in Clinical Nutrition that looks at soy and postmenopausal women: http://tinyurl.com/5h9pa6. (Unfortunately, the full article is only available to subscribers or through database access to the journal.) I could keep going with similar citations and counterexamples, but then it would be inappropriate overkill here and counterproductive as well. Unless you want to know where my information comes from (lectures, nutritional science textbooks, journal databases, primary and secondary sources, and some computer searches) or you want to know the scientific details behind what I say, I see no reason to write that way to you. You’re a person asking my informed opinion about something related to food and nutrition, and that’s the context to which I’ll respond.

******

And this is how I see my site here. As I've mentioned before when I started developing this blog, I am learning nutrition as a student. There's no RD after my name nor do I claim to be offering any health advice in any capacity beyond that of another person on the street. What I will endeavor to do here, however, is to write responsibly, especially when it comes to nutrition.

Tags: writing, nutrition

Powered by Qumana

Here the Enemy Awaits

I just wrote a long email to someone dissecting this article about the dangers of soy. The person who wrote to me loves soy foods and is now freaked out about it because of that article, which is a shame. The problem with the article, and the website as a whole, is that the guy has good intentions with what he presents. He wants to share what he knows about good health. Then again, we all know the consequences of good intentions except this guy is carrying out his intentions in a confused way here. (I'll reprint my review of the article next time.) This sort of thing makes it difficult for anyone who is concerned about nutrition to discern the truth from lies and exaggerations. Leduc begins well and the article looks to be informative, objective and mostly balanced until you come across this sentence:

It is child abuse to feed a baby soy formula.

Wait, what? There may be ignorance or an overzealous approach to health or something else involved in feeding a child soy formula, but that decision may not be the same as child abuse. Soy-based formulas are not the ideal food for babies; that honor goes to breast milk. There are more problems with the article, but my reprinted letter will cover them next time.

The article is symptomatic of most Internet articles coming from personal websites or websites that put on airs of professionalism in that you can write whatever without accountability or strict standards. Even websites that claim to offer helpful and friendly advice (including mine) should be approached with some skepticism.

******

I encountered this sort of problem with my nutrition courses this semester, especially in my food science lab. The professor asked us to bring in recipes for assignments throughout the semester, so many students (myself included) would begin our searches on the Internet. Unlike other students, however, I have a modest library of general cookbooks on hand to consult as references and guidelines, and I usually use recipes from them rather than those from the Internet. As the professor mentioned on a few occasions, and as I have witnessed first-hand, many recipes online are unreliable. Even recipes from the Food Network can fail spectacularly.

The premise for one of the food science labs was that a coffee cafe owner wants to update old recipes and add new items to their menu. We are tasked with bringing in a scone, muffin, or quick bread recipe and testing it over two lab periods. Of course, most people brought in recipes they found online. One pair brought in a muffin recipe from the Food Network. This recipe had them placing dried cranberries at the bottom of each muffin cup before pouring in the batter and baking. Everyone went about making their respective recipe. We then had an informal taste test. After their muffins cooled, the partners using the Food Network recipe turned them upside down, as stated in the recipe. The dried cranberries had all burned black and were hard as rocks. What had happened was that the batter did not reach the bottom of each cup due to the layer of dried cranberries placed there (as per the recipe). So the cranberries had no buffer against the heat from the oven. Thankfully, the two mixed the cranberries into the batter for the following lab, and everyone who tasted it liked it.

So the moral from these stories is don't blindly trust everything on the Internet.

Tags: writing, nutrition

Powered by Qumana

A Word About Porn

(I can see the hits increasing already.)

I am prudish when it comes to the inner workings of relationships. But I am open-minded about ideas, which include ideas about sexuality, sex, gender, and porn. This doesn't mean I condone everything or even most of what's out there. And there is some weird stuff out there, which I get somewhat filtered via Warren Ellis's website. While he finds the often horrific extremities of porn and body modification as part of his research, Susannah Breslin finds these extremities in the business of porn and in the people who work in it. Her blog, The Reverse Cowgirl, is one of the best sites I've come across that looks at the porn and the sex industry shrewdly and from a perspective that doesn't stem from hysteria or a religious agenda. I've been following her writing for half a decade now and it is incisive and unrelenting. I mention her blog now because her recent book proposal fell through, which is a damn shame. I was looking forward to what she had to say about her time in Porn Valley. Thankfully, Breslin is working on her next projects, which can be found here and here, and she also continues The Reverse Cowgirl. If you want to track America's culture of porn and sex, Susannah Breslin is the person to read.

For Everyone in Internet Funfunland!

To My (Future) Friends and (Future) Colleagues,

Ah, privacy...I don’t need it because I do want everyone and their supporting businesses to know what brand of soap I use whenever I shower (Dove, btw), the type of floss I floss with (Crest is my buddy-for-life), and the toothbrush I abuse (come here Oral-B!)

I keep thinking about the idea of modern-day ghosts (or “spooks” in Gibson’s latest novel), people who have no online record of any sort - bills, purchases, journals, search engines, email accounts, photos, personal records - nothing. They are essentially invisible. This has become a difficult entity to be without assuming a false persona since government, business, and personal records are increasingly accessible online.

If privacy is such a big issue for you (and I know it can scare the hiccups out of people who are fully aware of the situation), then don’t go online. Ever. Then you would only have to deal with the physical records and computer records kept as a result of what you do out in the “real” world. Simple enough, yeah? Or alternately, hook up with some good hackers and computer security folks and learn how they secure themselves (or better yet, become one of *them*).

Of course, those are the two extremes. What’s the average schlemiel do? (I can say that because I’m part Jewish and I study the Torah every day and there’s a sub-mitzvot that states the conditions for the use of that word.)

You can start by not doing anything online on a personal computer. This means putting any factual info about your actual self on a computer you bought and own. Don’t put up anything you’re not willing to share with the entire world, which would include possible stalkers, serial murderers, high-school-bombing terrorists, cannibal lovers, your friendly national government, or Prozac-happy salesmen wanting to show you their “new product” in their “bag.” This would include your real name (e.g. Ezekiel Jeremiah Deadman), your phone number (666-CALLS-ME), your address (corner of Baka and Chyun) and what-have-you.

So what I am saying is this: think about what you’re putting on your Facebook/MySpace/LJ/weblog/Flickr/Google/skin scroll the next time you’re online. Someone will be able to find that information without much difficulty - well, that last one may pose some problems but that should be the least of your worries, eh? So be safe, know all the facts, and join me in my paranoia.

(I’d wear something better than this.)

My Quote of the Day

"...I could have convinced him Christianity sanctions Mass consumption of babies if I didn't have a class to attend."

Words to Be Used Sparingly or Not At All

Siren - see next.
Muse - this, along with the previous, is too much of a cliché, especially in music writing.
Genius - hard to define so why throw it around?
Curse words, in general - if I can't grind you down through a cascade of words, I have failed somehow...
Lyrical - my big flaw.
Nutshell - unless I'm talking about nuts.

More to follow...

Over a month since the last post...

And I still don't know what to do with this thing. Hmm...let's try this:

David Foster Wallace's opening essay (via Bookslut) is a sadly funny essay, a little bewildering to read at times. It seems to be a person who is confronted by Total Noise on a daily basis and is slowly resigned over how to deal with it. In many ways, I sympathize with Wallace. Here is someone who is almost twice as old as me and has spent 1/4 of his life with the Internet. I am almost a quarter century old and have spent almost half my life with the Internet (the first time our family connected was 1996/1997 with AOL before it became a megalith and then a slumbering giant). The amount of information available now is just unprecedented. Yet I wonder how much older stores of information is lost or shed from the physical world while new, virtual information comes into existence.

How do we cope with these worlds? How should we cope with these worlds? If we were to describe our current worlds to someone in the past, would it be any different than a shaman or elder describing their people's own cosmology to a curious tribe member? Taking religion, the spiritual, and the metaphysical out of the mix and dealing primarily with the secular, physical, scientific, technological, virtual matrices (worldspheres?) that we find ourselves enmeshed in, would the stories and descriptions we provide to others be any different?

I guess such questions are what draw me to a lot of writing that attempts to grapple with how to live in our strange, distressing, often beautiful world. Such questions have haunted me since I started having a conscious recollection of experiences (about 3 or 4 years old) and will continue to haunt me until I am finished with this life.

Currents:
The Habermas Reader edited by William Outhwaite
Nutritional science texts
Hungry Planet: What the World Eats by Peter Menzel, Faith D'Aluisio
Graduation - Kanye West
Imagine Our Love - Lavender Diamond
We Are The Pipettes - The Pipettes
The Two EPs - Smokey & Miho