A superpowered way to save the world
Whoever wrote that ridiculous editorial
(24 March, p 3) in your otherwise
fantastic magazine is seriously deluded if they think that the “rest of the
world” is somehow so altruistic that it can “save the world” by itself, without
the help of the US.
Let’s talk about the pollution coming out of China and all its coal plants.
Do you fantasise that the Chinese are going to jeopardise their glorious
economic plans with anything other then lip service to the Kyoto agreement? Or
that the government of Russia is going to reverse the environmental devastation
it has unleashed on its own territory?
Europe might be making progress toward cleaning up its environment, but where
do you think France is going to store all that nuclear waste as it decommissions
its reactors?
The US has made great strides in cleaning up from the excesses of the
industrial age, and will continue to do even more. In fact, I will bet that when
push comes to shove, the next real energy source that runs the engine of our
modern society will come from the unfettered minds at our great American
universities.
Pain-free birth
I was disillusioned by your report linking painkillers used in childbirth
with impaired bonding between mother and child
(31 March, p 12).
For many women with significant diseases or abnormalities that affect their
physiological ability to cope with the stress of severe pain,
analgesia鈥攅specially epidural鈥攃an be life-saving. Moreover, many
births today are induced鈥攗p to 30 per cent in many British
hospitals鈥攁n intervention which increases contraction strength and
accompanying pain.
It is trite, too, to lump together all the drug methods of pain relief cited
in the report. The term “epidural” is an adjective, but is widely used as a noun
to denote any neuraxial method of administering pain relief or anaesthesia.
However, it is not a generic term because drugs and doses used vary widely. In
many maternity units today’s low-dose epidurals and other techniques of
neuraxial analgesia result in minuscule blood levels of drugs in mother and
fetus. These have neglible effects in newborns, even those born prematurely.
Pethidine, on the other hand, is an opioid, is not very effective against
severe pain and has well-proven adverse effects on all neonates.
Epidurals have played a big part in bringing maternal and perinatal
mortalities to an all-time low in some countries. Most of these mothers, so long
as their infants are born to term and are healthy, breastfeed their babies with
little if any difficulty.
Letter
John Kennell and Susan McGrath say in your article that the research
highlights “the importance of reducing or eliminating the use of [painkillers in
labour]”. Later in the piece you say, “But analgesics are big business and it
won’t be easy to convince hospitals to forgo painkillers, despite their
drawbacks.”
Isn’t it women who experience the pain of childbirth and who have need of the
painkillers? Or does a woman forgo any personal rights, for example, the right
to make informed choices, as soon as she becomes pregnant?
It is unrealistic to imply that the vast majority of women should be denied
access to pain-relieving drugs in labour, particularly during the birth of their
first child, no matter how noble the cause. The issue of bonding between mother
and child is an important one, but it has to be kept in perspective, given the
far-from-optimal society we live in.
Patent theft
K. S. Jayaraman claims to believe in patents but also believes that holding a
monopoly on something is wrong
(31 March, p 42).
A patent is a monopoly granted by the state for a specified period, in return
for disclosure of the invention. To produce a drug that is patented by another
company is theft, pure and simple.
Weedy healing
Your article on “doorstep” remedies
(24 March, p 18) reminds me of my own
experiences studying wild edible plants used by traditional farmers in southern
Ecuador. There, too, most plants were collected near houses and fields, leaving
me disappointed that forest patches supposedly rich in biodiversity don’t seem
to be used much for collecting useful plants.
One important consideration is definitely distance: why go far if you can
find the same plant nearby? But another reason, which your article didn’t
mention, is the fact that many so-called “wild” plants are really managed by
people. Farming societies have integrated many useful wild plants into their
agricultural systems.
This may mean that useful plants are tolerated as “weeds” in the fields or
are left when new fields are cleared, whereas other plants are removed. Or
interesting wild plants may be sown or transplanted into gardens or along fields
or roads. This may have happened in the distant past, making it difficult to
distinguish between truly wild plants and plants that people have modified in
some way.
So there tend to be more plants useful to people around farmland than in
wilderness.
Exploding bikes
I see many worn aluminium rims on bicycles, and all of the badly worn ones
either have a deep groove, or have a noticeable outward bulge鈥攂ut they do
not explode without warning
(24 March, p 25). Many rims now sport built-in
indicators鈥攁 thin channel filled with paint. When the paint disappears,
it’s time to change your rims.
More importantly, aluminium rims are fitted to bikes because they offer a
much better surface for the brake blocks to act on鈥攁nd the fact that
they’re lightweight is an extra benefit. Steel rims in wet weather can be very
dangerous: the chrome plating offers no resistance to wet rubber.
Bond's party gear
You say: “If there’s one thing James Bond didn’t have, it was some decent
amphibious clothing. Just think of all the times he clambered out of the water
clad in diving gear, only for the bad guys to get a head start while he
struggled to get into dry clothes”
(31 March, p 22).
I disagree. I clearly remember one scene (was it in Greece?) where Bond
climbs out of the water onto an island, unzips his wetsuit to reveal an
immaculate dinner suit complete with bow tie, and walks into a glitzy cocktail
party.
In my own words
Samuel Johnson famously defined lexicographers as “harmless drudges”, and
charity demands that we at least give these unfortunates credit when it’s due.
I’m grateful to Laurie John for his kind review of the Oxford Dictionary of
Psychology (24 March, p 52), but I wish
I had not been described as its editor.
At the risk of milking the sympathy vote, I must admit that I wrote every
single word of this Bible-sized dictionary.
It’s ironic that the dictionary entry on Pepper’s ghost, to which John
referred in his review, cites another case of credit cruelly denied. Pepper’s
ghost was, in fact, invented by the retired civil engineer and patent agent
Henry Dircks, and it should have been called
Dircks’s ghost.
Touchy topic
Feedback asks: “Why are smokers and premenstrual women considered to be so
touchy?”
(31 March)
Oh, come now. Have you ever been around us when we’ve just given up
cigarettes (again) or are in the grip of PMS?
Even dottier
Following Feedback’s article
(10 February) I decided to enter the
Wordsmith.org competition with my e-mail address.
Thanks to you I am now April’s winner of e-mail address of the month
award.