A short digression on soccer...

My beloved Spurs seemed to phone it in today in the second half against Newcastle, which results in an unhappy me and an elated Toon army. 4-1 is no way to go out at home, especially in a game where Tottenham controlled most of the play in the first half. Granted, Newcastle upped the tempo and really took advantage of Tottenham's poor play so they deserved the victory, but I hate to see a team that can beat Arsenal 5-1, beat Chelsea 2-1 in the Carling Cup, and later tie them 4-4 in a great game last week turn in a performance like this. There is really nothing to play for, so I can see them not being up for the game, but come on lads! A little pride out there!

Your Inner Fish

I recently read a book by Neil Shubin called "Your Inner Fish", which is a wonderfully written treatise on the evolution of our body and how we owe many of our features (and problems) to fish, tadpoles, and other distantly related organisms. The book contains many interesting tidbits, such as the idea that hiccups are probably a relic of the reflexive breathing method used by tadpoles - a short breath in, followed by a closing of the glottis (flap of tissue that covers the windpipe). Stupid tadpoles.

I bring this up because I casually tossed the phrase "inner fish" into discussion the other day while talking about mammal evolution in my freshman biology class and it generated quite the response. Many students had never heard that we had had fish parts in us and were fascinated by the idea. We don't really have fish parts in us, but we do have parts that evolved from various fish structures. For example, your inner ear bones which allow you to hear such a wide range of sounds are modifications of the gill arches of bony fish. Some of the students had heard vague stories about how humans might have evolved from monkeys or something, which while technically incorrect (we evolved from apes), is still more than most knew. But the juxtaposition of the words "fish" and "you" seemed to do what other methods of teaching evolution had failed to do, namely elicit an interested response complete with a battery of questions and interesting discussion. At the end of the process, most were asking questions beginning with "so when we were fish..." or "so when our ancestors were reptiles..." rather than questions that begin with "My pastor says...". It was a great experience, and I think I'll probably throw that phrase around a little more often in class from now on.

He was in your WHAT?

The other day, Jen went out shopping with her mother, which left me home with the two boys. This is fine because I am a fairly capable father in that when it comes to Ethan, the 6 month old, I know where the diapers are, what body parts they are supposed to cover, and what to do with them when they become full and/or smelly. Plus, I can put food into his mouth in either bottle OR cereal form. I am that good. I am also more than able to handle Ryan, who can be a bit of a turd sometimes, but more often than not is a great kid.

On this night of nights, when the boys are out on the town hitting hot spots like Bed Bath and Beyond (holy crap are their humidifiers expensive!), Target, and Noodles and Company, the conversation flows like wine. Ryan asks questions, I answer, and Ethan drools. Scintillating. So during dinner in which Ryan had buttered noodles, sat on a booster seat without complaining for the first time in his young life, and, in general, was fairly adventurous food-wise, he looks out the window and notices a large castle next door. This castle is another restaurant whose name escapes me at the moment, and I had been in there exactly one time since we moved out here.

”What is that?” he asks.

“That’s the (insert name here – I could read it at the time, I just don’t know it now). It is actually one of the last places mommy and I ate before you were born.”

“Oh,” says Ryan, unimpressed. “Ethan was in mommy’s uterus.”

“Yes, he was. Now try not to be so loud about that, people don’t always want to hear about internal organs while they are eating.”

“Is a uterus an internal organ,” he asks, louder this time. “What is an internal organ?”

“Internal organs are the bits of you that are inside your tummy,” I say, sensing another science lesson coming on. “They are often squishy and gooey, but they help turn your buttered noodles into energy for you.”

“And poop!” he says laughing.

“Yes. And they turn your buttered noodles into poop.”

He looks at his bowl for a second, then back at me. “I don’t want poop noodles anymore.”

“They aren’t poop now, in the bowl, but they will be later after you have digested them.”

“Ok. Can we still get milkshakes?

“Sure,” I say, thankful that we have moved onto a topic more suited for public discussion.

Later that night, while we are brushing our teeth getting him ready for bed, Ryan tosses out another of his famous non sequiturs. “When I was older, Ethan was in my uterus and he grew to be big and then he is now in his crib.”

What? How are you, as a parent, supposed to handle comments like that? Clearly the kid is high. I opt to start with the part I am most sure of.

“Ethan was never in your uterus,” I say confidently.

“Yes he was. He is my little brother and he was in my uterus for 42 days,” he says, equally confident.

“No, he wasn’t. You want to know how I know this?”

“No. He was.”

“You don’t have a uterus. You are a boy. Boys don’t have uteruses.” I wasn’t even about to get into the whole “uteruses/uteri” discussion with him. If he doesn’t know that he doesn’t have a uterus, enlightening him on latin plurals would be a wasted effort.

“I don’t have a uterus?”

“No.”

“Do you have a uterus?”

“No. I don’t have one. I checked. Only girls have a uterus.”

“Oh. Mommy has a uterus?”

“Yes.”

“Daisy has a uterus too, cuz she is a girl. And a tetrapod. 4 feet. 1-2-3-4.”

“You are amazing, you know that?” He is still a step above some of my AP Bio kids with that tetrapod thing.

“Papa and uncle Justin don’t have a uterus,” he states.

“Nope. Now you are getting it.”

“Ok. Can I have pudding for last call?” Last call is our way of making sure he knows that this is the last food he gets for the night. He became quite adept at staying up WAY past his bedtime by telling us he was hungry and needed food. Now we don’t have that problem.

“Sure,” I say.

I really gotta be more careful what I say around him. He is like a little defective sponge, absorbing everything and then leaking it all back at the wrong time.

If life is this interesting with only one that can walk and talk, imagine what it will be like when Ryan is telling Ethan everything he knows.

Daylight Saving Time already?

Jen and I got rid of our TV again. Just to clarify, that doesn’t mean that we got rid of the actual box that shows moving pictures – that we kept. We got rid of our subscription to DirecTV, which around here is essentially the same thing as getting rid of the box. With no satellite or cable service, the box on the TV stand is essentially a large paperweight due to the fact that it is in our basement and, even more important, I have a total lack of desire to put up any kind of aerial antenna. So no signal can reach the little magic box, which means that that while we can still pass away the hours staring at the tube, we will be basically staring at fuzz. This might interest those who are avid EVP fans (which has something to do with electromagnetic waves and dead people – it is clearly ridiculous and I can’t be bothered with it) but for the average person, fuzz is fuzz, and it isn’t even the good kind of fuzz we used to get when I was younger where there was always the potential of seeing an exposed boob flashing up from the Playboy channel or Skinemax.

So we have no TV. We did this once before when we were first married and went without for about a year. It was a great year in which we spent way more time talking and reading and basically doing things we wouldn’t have done had we still owned a working TV. Even then we didn’t get rid of the box – I love movies too much and we would occasionally rent DVD’s to satiate the hunger for flicks. Eventually we picked up a powered aerial antenna which gave us access to the local channels, and shortly thereafter we decided that a few bucks a month on satellite service wouldn’t be all that bad if we could watch “Alias” on a clear signal. Jennifer Garner in skimpy outfits REQUIRES a clear signal. Can I get an AMEN, brothers?

Unfortunately, that few bucks a month eventually turned into something on the order of $70 a month due to purchases of sports packages and regular increases in rates. The price was too much to pay for the little that we watched. We’d check out a few shows weekly, and I dug having Fox Soccer Channel for weekend soccer matches, but we didn’t think we could justify the cost on a monthly basis. In all honesty, DirecTV was wonderful and their service had nothing to do with our decision – they were even willing to cut the price we were paying in half for an entire year so we would stay as customers. (So note to anyone reading: call your service and tell them you want out to see what they are willing to do for you, price-wise.)

But we still love to watch certain things like “Lost”, “Battlestar Gallactica”, and a few others, so we weren’t really thrilled with giving those up completely. So here is what we did, and you can too if you have the desire and a high speed DSL or cable internet connection. We got a cheap VGA to TV converter box for the computer which cost around $35, and a long RCA cable that would reach from the computer to the TV’s video in port (ours is an old school non-HD set with only a RCA video input). We had the stereo receiver downstairs along with the computer and TV so we hooked up the sound to run through that instead of the speakers that came with the computer. You could easily use the computer speakers instead, but this seemed to work out well for us. So now we have the video signal from our computer sent to the TV and the monitor, and the sound running through the stereo. All of this cost around $75 to set up, including the extra speaker wire needed to place the speakers around the room, and about one afternoon of work.

The beauty of this whole thing is that with the exception of one or two, all of the shows we like to watch are available free through streaming video on the networks websites on a single day delay. Additionally, shows that are not available for free are on iTunes for a low fee. Soccer matches are available sometimes through streaming video on various websites, and other times they can be found on a pay per view basis. The ultimate in a la carte entertainment.

The video quality is as good as what we were getting from the satellite service, although on some movies it is a tad on the dark side, and the sound is actually better due to the fact that we have it running through our stereo receiver.

Anyway, this has worked out wonderfully for us and I recommend it to anyone who has a computer near the TV, some time, and the desire to eliminate one of your monthly bills.

So there are obvious upsides to doing this. One of the downsides is that you are much less likely to learn things like the fact that daylight saving time starts tomorrow, which I just found out about 10 minutes ago. Also, since we can’t watch the evening news, we miss out on all kinds of things. For example, I had no idea that just last week, someone was killed in Chicago, or that gas prices are high, OR that it sure is snowy outside. Valuable information is lost.

So we have to go through alternative sources to get news, like the internet, which does have, if you can effectively sift through the approximately 87 billion sites hosting videos like “2 girls, 1 cup”, a few sites that contain actual information, like, for example, that daylight saving time starts tomorrow. That was a long sentence. Sorry.

Unfortunately, now when I get my weather information I don’t get to see a dumbass weather reporter standing in a blizzard or tornado.

That I miss.

So I says to the guy...

My son Ryan. Smart, athletic, good looking, and only 3 1/2 years old.

I have a second little boy, but he is only 6 months old and not that interesting yet. Oh, sure, he does the occasional rolling over, almost crawling thing, and he smiles whenever he sees me, and he farts and makes Ryan and I laugh on a regular basis, but since he is not talking yet it is difficult to relate to the world how cool he is. To give you an idea of how cool he is, after a brief struggle in which he cried for a while to be picked up, he proceeded to sleep through the night last night, which is pretty much the last major hurdle we have until he decides to get married.

My firstborn, Ryan, is another story. When he was about 2 and learning to talk, I tried to teach him my favorite joke, which goes as follows: "So I says to the guy, that's not even my duck!" Not much of a joke per se, but it always makes me laugh, so I thought it would be cute coming from a little dude. And it would have been, if he could have ever gotten it right. After much trial and error, the best I could get out of him was "So I say to the duck...", or "I want a duck!", or "I was talking to a guy about a duck", or "So I says to the guy, hey, lets play TRAINS!" Basically all epic failures.

Well, it has been a long time since we worked on the delivery of that joke - almost 2 years - and the other evening, after a particularly long day of teaching, we were eating dinner together as a family and we have the following conversation.

"Daddy," says Ryan, "want to hear a joke?"

"Sure," I say. I love when he tells jokes. Most of them suck, but there is something about hearing them from my kid that make them funny.

"Knock, Knock." Great. A knock-knock joke. The lowest form of joke.

"Who's there?" I ask, on cue.

"Boo."

"Boo, who?"

"So I says to the guy, thats not even my duck!"

On the one hand, another epic failure, considering that the punch line is supposed to be "Boo-hoo? Don't cry!". On the other hand, however, he finally got the duck joke right, which is all a father ever wants from his sons.

So as I am laughing hysterically, he starts to laugh. "What's funny Daddy?" he asks.

I gave him a big hug. "You are. That was the best joke I have ever heard."

He still screws it up from time to time, but that is ok. He'll learn.

Vaccines and Autism

I just finished reading an article in which John McCain has jumped on the "vaccines cause autism" bandwagon, and I now have yet another reason to think that he is unfit to be president. Not that I needed another reason, it just helps in arguments with people who think it would be nice to have a republican in office for the next 4 years, despite the state our country is in after 8 years of republican control.

Anyway, as everyone knows, if you are a parent, the most precious things in your life are your children. You would quite literally lay down your life to ensure that these little tykes are never seriously harmed. A little semi-serious harm is probably going to happen sometime in their lives: broken bones, broken hearts, etc. These you can deal with.

It is slightly more difficult to deal with a child that has come down with a potentially life threatening disease. Measles, polio, hepatitis, chicken pox – these are all diseases that are avoidable if you take the time to simply allow your doctor to do something that he/she is probably going to do anyway: vaccinate your children.

For those who don’t know, a vaccine is a solution administered either through injection or orally which contains bits and pieces of viruses. A little example of how infections work might be in order.

If a virus tries to get into your body, a variety of things happen. First, your body notices that something is wrong and attempts to rectify the situation by destroying the invader. This will take a while because your body’s defenses – antibodies and white cells – have just learned of this invasion, and with no prior warnings, it does what it can to cope. It begins by churning out antibodies and white cells specifically designed to hunt and kill that particular invader. This process can take several days, during which time you get sick. Once enough of the antibody/white cells have been produced, your body can fight the infection properly and you will begin to feel better. The nice thing is that if you survive this attack, you will probably not get sick from that virus again. It works this way for most viruses and bacteria.

Fortunately, for many viral infections we don’t have to go through this initial attack/sickness phase. Edward Jenner is often credited with the invention of the term “vaccination” because in 1796 he created one of the world’s first vaccines against smallpox. In this process of vaccination, bits and pieces of viruses are administered which act to stimulate your immune systems production of antibodies. You can think of the “bits o’virus” as “Wanted” posters which alert your body’s defenses to the possibility of infection. Once your body is made aware of the possibility of infection by these microscopic terrorists, it will ready its police force (antibodies) to be on the lookout for these infectious agents. This way, when your body actually comes in contact with the hepatitis virus, it already has a plan for how to deal with it. The execution of this plan goes almost unnoticed by you, but the results are amazing in that you don’t get sick.

Today vaccinations exist for many of the worst viruses, including polio, which was all but wiped out when Jonas Salk developed the vaccine against it in 1952. Based on the success of the vaccination program, it would seem that a person would have to be something of a loony to determine that they don’t want to vaccinate their children. (“Protect my child from deadly disease? I think not!”) However, there is an increasingly vocal group of people who not only want to stop vaccinating their own children, they want to stop you from vaccinating yours.

These people are affectionately termed “Anti-vaccination nut jobs” and they are becoming increasingly vocal due to the alleged link between childhood vaccinations and autism. Jenny McCarthy has written a book and went on the Oprah show to help spread this lunacy to as many people as she could. These groups take out full page ads in newspapers listing the allegedly toxic ingredients in the vaccines we administer to our children. They have convinced thousands of people to stop vaccinating. Cases of measles have been on the rise since these anti-vax wingnuts have become more vocal, and England had 971 cases in 2007, up from 740 in 2006.

Considering their case is based almost entirely on distortions, lies, and half-truths, one might imagine that the shelf life of an anti-vaccination group might be fairly short. One also might assume that once these distortions, lies and half-truths are exposed for what they are, these anti-vaccinationists would stop their bitching and go away. Unfortunately, one might just as easily assume that monkeys will fly out of my butt sometime in the next 20 to 30 seconds. We can wait around to see if that happens.

Nope. No flying monkeys.

So why is their message so well received? As I mentioned in an earlier post, this country (and others) suffers from a raging case of scientific illiteracy for which there appears to be no vaccination. Throw the words “vaccines”, “cause”, and “autism” in a sentence, and you get a few peoples attention. Get a pseudo-celebrity to go on Oprah to talk about those three words and you get the attention of millions of people.

So do vaccines cause autism?

In a word – “no”.

In several words, the answer is still the same, but the explanation is a little more detailed. Basically the anti-vax argument goes something like this:

1. Mercury poisoning is bad. So is Autism.
2. Vaccines contain mercury in the form of preservatives like Thimerosol.
3. Vaccines are injected into my baby
4. Too much mercury causes mercury poisoning.
5. Mercury poisoning causes Autism.
6. Repeat A-E again, only louder.

Simple, direct, and to the point. Not correct, but catchy nonetheless. Several problems with this argument jump out immediately.

The main problem is the assumption that vaccines contain mercury. As of 2002, almost all the vaccines used in the United States contain no Thimerosol. Additionally, recent studies have shown that even when Thimerosol was present in the vaccines, the small amount of mercury injected is removed from the body very rapidly (less than 24 hours for most people.)

So given that there is little to no mercury present in vaccines, it seems unlikely that any of the other steps in the argument for “Vaccines = Autism” will hold up, and indeed it is the case. No mercury in the vaccines means no mercury poisoning. Ergo, mercury poisoning is not the cause of Autism.

This seems like a really simple thing, and yet anti-vaccinationists still repeat the same tired argument over and over like the act of repetition will make it true. They then suggest that it is the vaccines themselves that are the cause of Autism, not just the mercury in them. No study to date links any vaccination schedule with the onset of any of the autism spectrum disorders.

So why are diagnoses of Autism on the rise? While there is no one good answer to this, it appears to be linked to special education laws and potentially to the funding of special education programs. A study done by Paul Shattuck in 2006 sheds some light on this phenomenon. . Orac does a great job of summarizing this article and is, in general, a fountain of knowledge on the subject if you are interested in keeping up to date. Autism became a certified diagnostic category for special education in 1990 with the reauthorization of IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). Prior to 1990, autism was not a recognized category of learning disability. So prior to 1990, there is no good data on how many autistic children there were in the education system. From 1994 to 2003 the rates of autism rose from 0.6 to 3.1 per 1000 students, while those labeled mentally retarded declined, which indicates that the “increase” in autism rates might be nothing more than a relabeling of students. Those that had been mislabeled “mentally retarded” were now being properly labeled “autistic”. As an example of how this can affect the numbers, we can look to Wisconsin. In 1992, only 18 children in the entire state were listed as being autistic, but in 2002, the number had risen to 2,739. Again, this jump is most likely due to placing children into different categories, not an actual increase in autism rates.

So why don’t they simply accept the fact that vaccines are not harming our children and have, in fact, been responsible for removing several of the greatest threats found in childhood? I think it is that they need a reason for what has happened to their children, and what better reason than vaccines? They are ubiquitous, and chock full of “toxins” according to anti-vaccinationists. It doesn’t matter that these “toxins” are not toxic at the levels they are being administered at. (At the proper concentration, anything is toxic.)

This brings us back to the concept of scientific illiteracy. The more scientifically illiterate a person is, the more likely that they will buy into one of the many fallacious arguments foisted upon the public by the anti-vax crowd. The more they buy into these arguments, the more likely it is that they will push not to have their children vaccinated. Not only that, but some of these groups are out to stop EVERY child from being vaccinated, which could have huge consequences for the health of everyone.