Graduate School and Mental Health

I am one day late posting my blog this week, and for good reason. I spent most of Friday, Saturday, and Sunday engaged in family activities (and traveling back home). There has been increased talk at USC about the state of graduate school life and mental health and how current students can improve their quality of life while undergoing an incredibly stressful program of work. During my years on the Graduate Student Government, I worked for 15+ hours as Community Service Director, took three courses which was 9+ hours of in-class time plus reading and homework, worked as a Teaching and Research Assistant for faculty for 20+ hours a week, all while expecting to be doing personal projects, attending conferences, and publishing papers. Now that classes are over, I've passed my qualifying exam, and I am no longer a member of GSG, my time is mostly dominated by working on the dissertation. This is a no less stressful but more flexible academic assignment. I list these responsibilities not to brag about my own accomplishments. Instead, it helps me to reflect on the immense pressure I experience, when I am a graduate student who is not also supporting a family on $30,000 a year, dealing with health issues, or serving as a member of a prolific research team.

Retrieved from this site.

No matter our responsibilities, there is a great amount of pressure of students to succeed in public and suffer in private. It is very uncommon for people to discuss their workloads and admit failure or shortcomings. Instead, they turn into perverse competitions where we compare our workloads to others (I'm guilty of participating in this). When all we are told is "publish or perish," it is difficult to not have some sadness behind congratulatory statements or to take rejections from conferences lightly. To admit failure is to lose the game of PhD life and to express that openly is frowned upon. Research indicates that 60% of graduate students feel hopeless and depressed nearly all the time and 1 in 10 have contemplated suicide. But, there are few, well known resources for these feelings.

Retrieved from this site.

I took up this blog post in response to amazing statements made by my colleagues, Ritesh Mehta and Cynthia Wang, who reflected upon their time at USC. Ritesh made a profound and poignant statement at his dissertation defense about how students should not have to suffer in silence and be afraid to reach out to one another. Although the program is 100+ students in size, it can be quite lonely work staring at a computer screen all day. Cynthia posted similar sentiments on Facebook about sharing failures and talked about being rejected from a journal. I am proud of both of their statements and wanted to make one myself: I recently was rejected from a journal. Although the comments were quite positive, there was a sinking feeling that there was something else back on my plate that was simply unbearable. There was no room to fit it back into the growing list of tasks, assignments, and responsibilities.

Retrieved from PhDComics

I don't think that any of our problems are the result of USC. I would encourage any potential graduate students to consider this amazing and supportive program. I think the problems are deeper, within the PhD experience, and the academic community at large that engages in competitive mentalities and focuses on output instead of the process. Similar to ongoing debates about the requirements placed on medical residents, I think more conversation should begin about the mental well-being of graduate students. Reducing the stigma of sharing is something that I hope will get better as more students create a culture of support rather than judgment. This is something that will ebb and flow with time and does nothing to address institutional expectations. Indeed, when we think about the contributions that we will have as graduate students, it pales in comparison to what we will do as faculty members. Perhaps we need to treat graduate school more as training for academia than a full blown toss into the deep end of academic publishing and stress. This article provides some other potential solutions including increased acknowledgement, specialized training, and more resources.

Retrieved from PhDComics

I took this weekend off, postponed my blog post, and had a friend cover the class that I'm teaching over the summer. I felt guilty for a while for this decision I made, but I think that more of us should be okay with taking more breaks, more mental days off, and enjoying ourselves with family and friends. The computer (and that R&R) will still be there tomorrow.

Intergenerational Arguments about Climate Change

The consequences of climate change have become more prominent, but many of the harsher, more extreme consequences will not be felt by this generation. Part of the difficulty in crafting persuasive climate change arguments is about "jumping" the inter-generational gap. An intergenerational argument encourages people to act not in their own interest, but in the interest of future generations. Though most of us alive today will likely avoid most of the harshest effects of climate change, our children and certainly our grandchildren, will not be as lucky. People tend to be fickle, however. They are many things vying for our attention, pulling us in different directions, so anything further off than right NOW seems too far off to be worthy of our time. As Burke noted in Permanence and Change: “A philosopher, if he has a toothache, is more likely to be interested in dentistry than in mathematical symbolism. Communication cannot be satisfactory unless the matter discussed bears in some notable respect upon the interests of the auditor” (p. 37).

Retrieved from this site

How do we get people to care for youth? For animals? For anyone but ourselves? It is not simply a matter of narcissism or selfishness; it is just far easier for people to react based on their immediate surroundings. Thinking ahead requires much more energy than simple observation, putting oneself in a different mindset is difficult, and there can be other, conflicting loyalties that stop one from accepting long-term arguments. One of these arguments is economic: short-term business and profits may suffer when making long-term environmentally friendly decisions. Another complicating factor may be religious beliefs about human's dominion over the earth. Or, it might simply be a political affiliation that often denies science and climate arguments in deliberative spaces (Gauchat, 2012).

Author and activist Zadie Smith. Retrieved from this site

One of the ways to spread intergenerational messages is online. When public spaces may be held to standards of balance or may receive denialist backlash, the internet can serve as a location for the expression of information. A recent article by author Zadie Smith called, "Elegy for a Country's Seasons" addresses the current apathy in the climate change debate and how she might explain our inaction to her granddaughter. This excerpt from the piece is particularly important as the excuses given seem to pale in comparison to the burden that we will leave this young girl and all children as we bicker over money and politics.

"This will no doubt look very peculiar to my seven-year-old granddaughter. I don’t expect she will forgive me, but it might be useful for her to get a glimpse into the mindset, if only for the purposes of comprehension. What shall I tell her? Her teachers will already have explained that what was happening to the weather, in 2014, was an inconvenient truth, financially, politically—but that’s perfectly obvious, even now. A global movement of the people might have forced it onto the political agenda, no matter the cost. What she will want to know is why this movement took so long to materialize. So I might say to her, look: the thing you have to appreciate is that we’d just been through a century of relativism and deconstruction, in which we were informed that most of our fondest-held principles were either uncertain or simple wishful thinking, and in many areas of our lives we had already been asked to accept that nothing is essential and everything changes—and this had taken the fight out of us somewhat" Smith, para. 11.

Written articles may take time to read through and may not offer direct and easy consumption of information (however beautiful and engaging Smith's article is). Another potential solution is to create videos that craft intergenerational arguments. This video is from the Australian Coal Mining Company that has a unique intergenerational plan for halting the effects of climate change.

This humorous video has an important point. It mirrors the argument by Smith about passing the buck onto future generations when we could have done something about it. When we stand back and look at the potential consequences, what are our excuses? Is it really enough to look at dollar signs or listen to denialists when we are faced with the guilt of harming all future life? Dramatic? Maybe. Accurate? Certainly. These arguments are not always successful, but people should try to become more attuned to them. Focusing on the current effects now can be an entryway in to discussing how it will only get worse, and our children will suffer for it.

Faith in Humanity: Will it be Restored?

Doing research on the intersection of religion/politics and religion/science have brought forth some interesting, shocking, and saddening examples of what happens when these collisions occur.

Some things that I have read have made me echo the immortal words of Professor Farnsworth on Futurama:

This bill in Tennessee would place those who have had an abortion on an information-sharing list similar to sex-offenders.

The passage of this law in Idaho questions women's abilities to understand if they have been raped and requires them to view an ultrasound of the fetus before obtaining an abortion.

A doctor in Kansas is being stripped of her medical license for agreeing to provide an abortion to a 10 year-old rape victim carrying her uncle's child.

Protesters at Gay Day in Michigan threatened to rape and kill participants in the event, quoting and relying on biblical verses to justify the attack.

Representative Andy Gipson (R - MS) stated and then confirmed his opinion that it is people's duty to follow the word of God by having members of the LGBTQ community put to death.

Doctors in South Dakota are now required (as upheld by a recent ruling) to advise women seeking an abortion that there is a psychological link between having an abortion and depression and suicide.

Republican politicians confirm the active disenfranchisement techniques of Republicans towards African American and Latino voters.

Massachusetts judge approves a sex change operation for an inmate and sparks outrageous comments about the rights of prisoners, sex change operations, and tax allocation.

Stories like these ones above are not always bad, however. They remind me that there are still issues in the world that need to be addressed and corrected. We as people, part of humanity, cannot be satisfied with partial victories, segmented success, or the fracturing of freedom and equality.

Other news stories, however, help me to strike my best Freddie Mercury pose and exclaim:

The passage of the Affordable Care Act allow for equal coverage for women and access to preventative measures so they can be in more control of their health care.

Obama's statements on gay marriage and the Democratic Party supporting the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, though a small step, is an important first political gesture to inclusive marriage equality.

The repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell ended the prevention against open homosexuals from serving in the military and allowed for people to be open and honest about their identities.

The election of the first openly gay Senator and the passage of marriage equality in Maine and Maryland.

I hope that in the future, I will see more progress towards the acceptance, tolerance, and inclusion of all of humanity through equal treatment and opportunities. These are goals that we all can strive for and as scholars, voters, and communicators, we can strive for change together.

Climate Change and Health: Carnegie Mellon Panel

I had the opportunity to attend a panel at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) over the summer while interning at the City Council's office. The panel topic was specifically about climate change and its consequences that directly impact the health of humankind. Though some panelists extended the topic to more than just physical health and discussed general well-being, this focus was a fascinating addition to previous research I've done on the consequences of climate change as economic, political, and environmental.

The first speaker was Terry Collins, a professor at CMU. His presentation linked climate change and environmental protection with moral and ethical obligations. Noting that everyone is responsibility for the future of the environment, he encouraged everyone to engage in "transgenerational justice". Not only are present concerns important (e.g., the economy and war), but also the future environment for our human successors. His term of choice was "Sustainability Knights" which harnesses the ethical actions of medieval knights and the long-term vocabulary of sustainability. Though he only mentioned religion briefly, I find connection with his arguments and my current research on the relationship between religious rhetoric and climate change. Appealing to morality and ethics are values associated with religion, as they are persuasive according to biblical and religious hierarchy and authority. Religious members are traditionally associated with anti-environmental in accordance with White's 1967 theory of "dominion". From biblical passages, humankind is given dominion and power over the environment, undermining preservation and sustainable importance. Currently, there has been a slow but steady movement of religious groups and organizations that have begun to support the Evangelical Climate Initiative. This changes are only in their infancy, but I agree with Collins that this religious appeal to morality and values are an important part of the solution to mitigating climate change.

The next speaker was Gary Cohen, a representative of Healthcare without Harm. His arguments were incredibly fascinating and discussed the personal, current effects already being linked to climate change. 150,000 deaths have been attributed to climate change, most of them directly related to the rise in daily temperatures causing heat stroke. Vulnerable populations such as children and elderly are most susceptible to the changes, but as they become more severe, average people will also be affected. Cohen imagined a world, though perhaps only a distant reality, where the environment is destroyed, animals are becoming extinct, and all forms of food are coveted and expensive a la Soylent Green.

The final speaker with Noe Copley-Woods who worked at McGee Hospital in Pittsburgh. She documented a practical change that could be implemented to combat climate change. In the presentation, she showed the audience photographs of the waste produced by one birth. The trash bags were filled with hundreds of pieces of gauze, dozens of disposable medical tools, towels, bed sheets, and various other paper waste. For one child, over 30 pounds of waste was produced that became hospital trash. Worries about infection stop many hospitals from re-using and sterilizing equipment. Estimates place annual hospital waste at 50,000 pounds which Noe says contributes heavily to the pollution of our environment. Personal tips and changes are important, but making changes to larger institutions is a more effective and meaningful way to address pollution and environmental damage.

One of the largest takeaways from the panel was how to make these effects and consequences of climate change meaningful for the general public. Cohen's and Copley Woods's presentations in particular showed me how persuasive personal and drastic images can be for motivating action and interest. Although some of the more extreme and severe consequences are farther in the future, there are enough present day examples that can serve to incite progress and response. The danger in entering this conversation, however, is inviting similar persuasive tactics by those who argue for current examples as counterarguments to global warming. 

Zombie Apocalypse, Religion, and Psychosis

As much as I would want to put all of my Left 4 Dead training to practice on a real zombie apocalypse, the CDC reports that the recent zombie-like behaviors nationwide have no discernible cause. In other words: there is no zombie apocalypse, there are no walking dead, just people acting out currently inexplicable cannibalistic urges. But where do these urges come from? What spurs and incites people to commit such actions? I cannot help but recall St. Augustine's infamous words, "Whence evil?" Furthermore, where does the fascination with the walking dead come from? What do their recent re-emergence in popular culture (possible replacing or undermining the vampire trend) symbolize for the current generation?

The solutions to these questions can be found in the psychology and philosophy that form the base of human action. Although there cannot always be a single answer to all questions, neither do all questions have unique answers. In finding the roots of the zombie rumors, I'd like to explore the news articles covering the events and then propose Freud's neurosis theory as an interesting intersection between religion and madness.

The first news story broke in May 2012 when a naked man, later identified as Rudy Eugene, attacked a homeless man and began to eat his face. Only after being shot by police officers did the attack end with reports of him snarling and acting like an animal in his attack and consumption. The culprit was drugs, hallucinogens such as LSD and "bath salts" can raise body temperatures and cause intense delirium. Drug-induced psychosis, then, is to blame for this zombie-like attack, where a human acts distinctively inhuman and consumes flesh. Traditionally, zombies are considered the "living dead", a person resurrected in a type of half-life after death. The mythology of the zombie has been altered in film, particularly. Whereas traditional representations (Shaun of the Dead, Night of the Living Dead, Zombieland) are still made, there are more plausible (used loosely) variations that are becoming more common. Virus-induced zombie-like behavior is showcased in 28 Days Later and I Am Legend, where people are still alive and human but a disease that alters behavior and attitude. These types of interpretations make the drug-induced actions in Miami a relevant and palpable occurrence of zombies. At least, zombies in the modern interpretation, where anger and disease plague the mind, not the results of re-animation.

Later in that same week, a news story broke about a student at Morgan State University, Alexander Kinyua, who had murdered his roommate and had eaten his brains and heart. The scapegoat in this case was insanity, as documented on the student's Facebook page. Not only did he mention murder and killing in the time before and after the murder, but he was often referring to himself as a warrior and marking himself with war paint. Insanity is thus the culprit for his actions, driving his consumption of the roommate. Information about his past are still unknown, but perhaps inquiry will reveal past trauma or rationale for his obsession with murder that drove him to kill.

Another zombie news story shocked the nation not a week later, where a San Antonio woman, Otty Sanchez, killed her infant son, eating his brains and a few of his toes. Probably the most disturbing part of this story was the report that her actions were taken at the devil's behest. Motivated perhaps from fear, loyalty, confusion, or paranoia, her belief in the devil and his power killed her son by guiding her actions.

The "boy who cried zombie" aspect of these news stories is not the only aspect that links them. Freud would argue that they are all linked by an even stronger, guiding force: repression. Freud argued that underlying, repressed trauma and urges linked from sexual frustration (the stereotypical "Oedipus Complex") causes all forms of neurosis and abnormal behavior in humans. All actions, including religious convictions, are all aberrational behaviors caused by insanity and mental distress. The third story surely supports this case, as her request from the devil was a form of hallucination or psychosis to imagine spiritual callings to commit a heinous act. Instead of religion, the first and second stories were motivated by drugs and perhaps mental instability and obsession with death. Freud would categorize all of these actions (taking drugs, mental distress, and belief in religion) as the same problem: psychotic behaviors. This psychosis spurred these individuals to action because of past trauma and events that encouraged them to engage in abnormal behaviors. The results, a similar urge to cannibalism, are justifiably  linked because of irrational, obsessional neurosis.*

Without the link between them, as argued by Freud, these three events look dangerously dissimilar. Different parts of the country (Miami, Baltimore, San Antonio), different ages (22-33), and different races (2 black and 1 Latina) made up the current zombie/cannibal line-up. The great disparity places different faces and people on the same problem; it is possible for it to happen to anyone, so who could be next? The speculation online and in the general public was so severe that the CDC had to release a report denying the existence of re-animating the dead or a disease that could cause such behaviors. The attention paid to these attacks by the CDC glorifies and recognizes the events, their link, and provides support for speculators.

If zombie-like events continue to occur, the CDC might receive pressure to investigate more intensely, however absurd the idea of it may seem. One thing is for certain, though. If these events happened to multiple people across the nation, from different backgrounds, and different ages, then the link between them is simply humanity. From humanity we have Freud's psychoanalytic approach to the human mind and the relationship between psychotic actions and mental trauma that explains these occurrences. Is the zombie potential within all of us, then?

*I urge anyone interested in learning more about Freud's opinions on religion and mental distress to turn to Daniel L. Pals's "Eight Theories of Religion" (2006). 2nd Edition, Oxford University Press where the above insights were gleaned.

Against Innovation: Got Milk?

The latest set of advertisements from "Got Milk?" denigrate average Americans, scientists, and innovators who attempt to improve upon the world's health and well-being. The underlying narrative that underscores this new wave of advertisements is that the current definition of milk as cow's milk is good enough, why bother creating anything new? The two examples below clearly outline this theme of negativity.

The first commercial places a fat cat businessman on the "Board of Unnecessary" with literally money-to-burn who is looking for a way to waste his billions. With other ideas being "too practical" and "too easy", he finally decides to research how to make milk out of "beans and nuts" as a ludicrous and unnecessary endeavor. Not only does this frame the creators and manufacturers of non-cow milk products such as soy milk, almond milk, and coconut milk as evil, rich, and with bad intentions, but it also insults Americans who are foolish enough to purchase these "non-milk" products.

The caveman commercial mimics the first style of the unnecessary, but is perhaps more insulting. Instead of comparing non-milk product creators to businessmen, those who produce and purchase them are compared to primitive cavemen. Specifically, those of us who do not purchase milk are "Gary", the slow caveman who is ridiculed and scoffed at by his higher-intellect friends who cannot understand why Gary would want to make milk from a nut. I would call Gary an innovator, someone who is not just accepting what is told, but tries to create something better. Perhaps nuts are easier to come by than cows, perhaps using nuts reduces ethical concerns for the mistreatment of animals, and perhaps growing nuts does not waste gallons of water and acres of farmland. Gary, though portrayed negatively in this advertisement, has stumbled upon a healthier, more ethical, and environmentally friendly method of creating a cow's milk substitute. And we should fault him for such creativity? What other ideas would have never come to fruition if every idea was given as much scorn as the "Got Milk?" campaign treats non-milk products?

Obviously, the "Got Milk?" campaign is using these tactics to increase the purchase of cow's milk after their market has been invaded by companies such as Silk, 8th Continent, Almond Breeze, and others. The market is getting crowded and there is one thing that the other milks have in common: they do not come from cows. From a marketing standpoint, this position and isolation of other products makes sense, but I shudder to think at the consequences for consumers and the country if the ideals of milk is the only milk that should be consumed (especially if that means drinking whole milk) and that innovation against standards (the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality) is cause for criticism.

The final aspect of this new campaign that I would like to address is the new "Got Milk?" homepage entitled "many imitations, still no equal" that is an interactive game where viewers must find the "real milk", all the while being confronted with facts and ingredients about other types of milk that lie in wait on the page. Coconut milk is described as "spooky how real this looks, huh?" mocking the preservatives and gelling components of the beverage as attributing to coconut milk's fake quality, despite the ingredients being listed serving as milk's pasteurization process. Additionally, many non-milk products have a longer shelf-life due to those additives. Hazelnut milk is treated no better with the tagline "what's that stuff on the bottom? yikes" referring to the sediment that can arise in hazelnut milk (and other bean milks like soy milk), which is why they often contain the label "shake well before use". Almond milk is degraded for its color, "pretty funky color" despite its appearance as light gray on the screen, one of the closest to white. Lastly, soy milk is described as "this came from a cow? please" even though soy milk has never claimed to be from a cow. I can only surmise that this claim comes from soy milk's appropriation of the term "milk" for its product. And although it may not be milk as in the traditional definition (which specifically mentions being produced by a mammal), these products use the word milk as an indicator for how their product should be used: as a milk substitute.

Innovation is constructed by the new set of advertisements as something unnecessary, burdensome, and ultimately detrimental. A society without innovation, without progress or advancement would leave us without current technology, knowledge, and success in the world. Is this really the message that the "Got Milk?" campaign really wants to send to youth and parents who will be consuming this advertising and making choices at the supermarket? Milk, especially non-skim milk options, are full of sugar and fat with as many calories as a 12 oz Coca-Cola (around 140 calories) with as much as half of those calories from fat (in the case of whole milk). If "Got Milk?" is advertising the status quo in terms of milk consumption, perhaps there can be a suggestion to prefer skim over whole? Simply allowing for consumption of food products to stay the same downplays underscores larger issues of weight and obesity in America that it is not enough of a problem to pursue or give credence to healthier alternatives.

For more information about these advertisements in terms of the history of alternative milk products, please refer to http://skepticalvegan.wordpress.com/