September 2008
The Enemy of My Enemy is a Hippie Ice Cream Maker
Breast Milk Ice Cream? Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream was asked by PETA to make its creamy delight from women's breast milk, rather than cow's, to bring attention to the fact that they believe that the milking of cows is cruel.
Now, I agree with B&J that they can be applauded for their creativity for bringing attention to this issue--but let's put attention on WOMEN where it really matters. For example, in the International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics Lyerly, Little, and Faden say to include pregnant women in research rather than exclude them because they unfairly never receive the benefits of research because none is ever done on them.
I say leave lactating women out of my ice cream and let's put pregnant women in research. Everyone will be better off.
Summer Johnson, PhD
When No Means No: Caplan on Force Feeding Starving Inmates
Art Caplan says in the Hartford Courant that it is unethical to force feed inmates on a hunger strike. His claim is that it is a prisoner's right to refuse food as a form of protest against their incarceration or conviction. Similar to refusing medical treatment, competent prisoners can say no to jailbird gruel on moral grounds and be in the right.
I agree with this and with Caplan's claim that doctors should not participate in the force feeding. Let prisoners make their statement and starve. It's perhaps one of the last free choices they can make.
Maybe Sarah Palin Could Talk about Healthcare...
As Ezekiel Emanuel laments in his NYT commentary, the national debate over health care has all but disappeared in the 2008 presidential election.
Amidst all the talk about Sarah Palin, a floundering economy and Wall Street bailouts, and whether to pull out of Iraq, debates over the feasibility and desirability of either candidate's plan has been left out of the political discourse.
While McCain and Obama are trading barbs over who is more "naive" in their debates, both have avoided any real substantive talk about health care. Emanuel is right; health care is no longer number one. It was long eclipsed by Palin and her various -gates and gaffes, then the belly-up economy.
It's a shame. The first real chance for health reform since 1994 appears to be drown out by the noise of unfortunate and unnecessary debates on other issues that we can ill-afford as a nation.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Please Hold Still. Your HMO Will Only Pay For a 5 Minute Massage
It turns out that there actually is something called "healing touch". Researchers at Brigham Young University have found that a kind touch between persons reduces stress and lowers blood pressure, says USA Today. These findings were particularly true for a 30-minute massage in men for whom it caused the release of oxytocin, the hormone known to increase calm and reduce stress.
So, perhaps the best medicine is a little rubdown the next time you see your physician. If you are feeling stressed, skipp the antianxiety meds and go for the masseuse's table.
Free Med School!
It turns out that a wealthy alum of the University of Rochester Medical School has donated $2 million dollars into a matching scholarship fund in the hopes of someday making medical school there free for all students says a Rochester NY paper, the Democrat and Chronicle.
This presents a revolutionary idea--with all the moderately to obscenely wealthy medical school alumni around the country and the world that graduate from medical schools, donations from alumni could make undergraduate medical education in the United States free. Entirely.
Doctors Flee from Epidemic
In the latest issue of the American Journal of Bioethics, Malm et al. address the question of whether physicians have a duty to treat during a public health emergency or whether the duty to heal ends where the epidemic beings.
However, if people began to have the RFID tags implanted into them as discussed by Foster and Jaeger perhaps AWOL physicians would be a bit easier to find?
Lastly, Sharp et al. discuss "who's buying bioethics research". Is it industry? Is it the government? Foundations? Is anyone REALLY buying? And if so, does that mean that all bioethicists are just bought out? You'll have to read Issue 8:8 to find out.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Good Morning, Sunshine?
Some companies in the pharmaceutical industry are patting itself on the back for its self-mandated reporting of speaker fees and consultancies to docs. Eli Lilly led the charge, followed by Merck, according to the NYT. With certainty, the other pharma titans will jump on the bandwagon in no time.
My question: will these lists be posted on docsforsale.com? Or perhaps VH1 will make a new show hosted by Robin Leach called "The Fabulous Life of Pharma Industry Docs" and the rest of us can watch as those lucky enough to get those gigs are flown around the world to Maui and Hong Kong, and Grand Cayman to talk for an hour and "attend a conference for 3 days." That's a show I would watch. Those clinical oncology conferences can get wild!
Disclosure is the first step for sure--but without any kind of metric to assess how much money is too much, how far on a private jet is too far--simple disclosure will not move us toward the real moral goal: reigning in out-of-control industry spending on consultancy and speaker fees for physicians and other health professionals who run the trials and promote the drugs coming to market and who are biased by the perks they receive.
Even if the Sunshine Act, a bi-partisan bill designed to require a nationwide registry for all pharma companies, comes to pass, a registry cannot have the teeth to really make the kind of change we really need in the industry. Sunshine may be the first step, but it cannot be the last.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Gridiron Ganglia Gifts
It's time we made donating bodies to science cool again. So when former NFL players and a women's soccer player announce that they are going to donate their battered brains to science, one stops to think: "That's pretty cool."
Mary Roach's "Stiff" almost got us there--but a few celebrity athletes going on to be crash test dummies or med school cadavers and giving up bodies after death will be the "it" thing for Fall 2008.
When we leave our mortal coil, what good are they doing in the ground or an urn or scattered to the four winds? Religious traditions aside (those are worth heeding in my view), there are numerous good arguments for donating bodies to research. Particularly for the kind of research being done in Boston, studying brains that have experienced multiple concussions--something that could not be done in an experimental research study. Post-mortem brain donation is the only way to study the effects of head-butting.
These footballers (of both kinds) are giving a noble gift. Let them be exemplars for the rest of us. Medical students could never get through gross anatomy without their beloved cadaver, automobile companies need once living drivers in the seats to ensure us living road warriors will be safe. And as long as no money changes hands, procuring cadavers for research seems like an okay business to me.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Who Should Advise the Next President?
Who should McCain or Obama listen to on matters of science and technology policy? The National Academies have given it a lot of thought.
According to Science Daily, NAS, NAE and IOM released a report issuing recommendation for the next Presidential administration for how to conduct the appointment of new science and technology policy advisors beginning with the appointment of a confidential S&T czar, for lack of a better term, who will guide the appointment of over 80 high-level appointees.
They also recommend getting Congress and the Office of Government Ethics in on the act to reduce the conflicts of interest that have been rife in the appointments in recent presidential administrations.
Why? Scientific advice should be neutral, based on the best scientific data available at the time--not the result of partisanship, political agendas, or campaign contributions. Let's take at least some of the politics out of science and technology advice and at least try to make sure the next president has some of the very best giving him their very best information and advice they have to offer.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Are You a Helicopter?
Do you hover? Ever felt entitled to question a coach, teacher, doctor or therapist? Think your child should never be corrected, is perfect, or is the second coming? Spend almost as much time at school as your child does? You may be a "helicopter parent", says University of Saint Louis School of Medicine study.
So where's the ethics here? Without raising awareness of this new phenomenon in the family, parents may be raising a new generation of children who are, according to HealthExperiment.com, unassertive, without a role for themselves in the world, immature, and without self-reliance.
When I was growing up in a less PC era, we called these kids "sissies" and "mama's boys and girls".
The implicit argument is that parents have a moral responsibility to butt their noses out when it comes to their children's lives as to allow them to develop into mature human beings on their own--not to smother or coddle them or over-determine their lives.
Oddly I'm hearing Willie Nelson in the background, "Mamas, don't let your babies grow up to be...." Wait, maybe in the 21st century the song should be sung, "Copters, don't let your babies grow up to be sissies..."
How times have changed.
Summer Johnson, PhD.
Warnock: Dementia Patients A Waste
Some Brits are shocked at Baroness Mary Warnock's latest quote regarding the significant burden placed on Alzheimer's caregivers and her call for euthanasia for the demented.
The St. Louis Examiner reported that she said, "Elderly people with dementia are 'wasting' the lives of those who have to care for them."
Not only are they wasting lives, says Warnock, but they are also wasting resources. Not exactly warm fuzzies from the Baroness. Yet, in a socialized health care system every dollar spent on one person is a dollar not spent on another. Thus, years spent in a demented state means that tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on a demented patient are not spent on essential preventive and life-saving services for children, young adults, and the middle-aged who have a chance of leading longer, healthy, fulfilling lives.
Thought about that way Warnock's argument doesn't seem so harsh. Is Baroness Warnock's position cold-hearted? No. It's practical.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Say Goodbye to Tobacco
What's the way to save the world? Luckily you can keep driving your car, eating fatty foods and even going out in the sunshine--as long as you stop lighting up.
According to Michael Bloomberg, America's public health mayor (so much so that they've named a School of Public Health after him) in this week's Newsweek, the epidemic killing more people than TB, malaria and AIDS combined is--yep--tobacco. Put that in your pipe and smoke it--or don't, as it were.
Bloomberg has been the the anti-tobbacky crusader since NYC banned smoking in the workplace in 2002. And according to him, he's been a trendsetter--while he's given millions to anti-smoking campaigns so have other philanthropists.
And who cares about the rights of smokers to put tar in their lungs and nicotine in their bodies not in public places where it can inflict harms on innocent secondhand smoke inhalers and not while their healthcare costs are inflicted upon other nonsmokers. Public health ethics says that almost any measures are okay to get smokers addicted to nicotine to kick the habit to stop inflicting harm on themselves and others.
Bloomberg says "a billion lives hang in the balance" so do whatever you can. Get tobacco out of our societies. Ban it, tax it, kill it off if we have to. It might seem draconian, but I think he might just be right.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Getting Off Easy
According to a study published in the journal Pain Medicine as reported in the NYT, approximately 0.1 percent of pain physicians ever face punishment or sanction for prescribing narcotics. To boot, just 3% of these actually specialized in pain control.
What to conclude from this? According to Myra Christopher, president of the Center for Practical Bioethics, how to separate the "facts from the folklore" regarding patient care, pain management, and prosecutions.
It would seem for all the examples of "Dr. Feelscared" aside that the problem of doctors too scared to give out narcotics to their patients, whether the drugs are necessary or unnecessary, would seem to be unjustified.
Summer Johnson, PhD
CancerZoom.com?
Seen Robert Shapiro hawking LegalZoom.com? Well, according to the WSJ Health Blog on Thursday, soon the same kind of templates used to give you a quickie will or corporation could give you a cancer clinical trial.
Yes, clinical trials may soon be churned out template-style by some legal eagles, industry leaders, and corporate heads including AstraZeneca, Lilly, Pfizer, and Wyeth. Thanks to similar language used in between 75% to 80% of protocols now most trials can just be the same old language--but the real problem is that they are all the more likely to be rubber stamped.
Why wouldn't they? They contain the same basic language, the same ethics sections for IRB purposes, and differ only in regard to the technical details of their protocols, why wouldn't all these cancer clinical trials be all the more likely as their templates get more and more honed to sail through both scientific and ethics review? The answer is--they would.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Google Guy Has Parkinson's....Mutation
On Friday, Sergey Brin, one of the famous masterminds behind Google's takeover of the world, announced that he has one of the genetic mutations associated with Parkinson's. As Ned Potter reported, his wife, Anne Wojcicki, who owns 23andMe does precisely this kind of predictive genetic testing and allows people to be connected on the web into a genetic disease community for just $399. 
This Facebook for genes may help to destigmatize a wide range of genetic mutations and conditions especially if people as famous as the Google guys come out to say "Yeah, I have that genetic mutation." Yet, we must all remember that having a given mutation doesn't mean that one will necessarily ever have a disease.
Will 23andMe make genetic testing cool and mainstream? Anne Wojcicki hopes so--but time will only tell.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Put Down that E-Cigarette
It turns out that no nicotine delivery device is good for you, even if it's electronic. The World Health Organization has said that so-called "electronic cigarettes" are not effective and may even be poisonous, as reported in US News.
Sold around the world and masquerading as WHO-endorsed products, these fake "cancer sticks" are supposed to deliver a fine nicotine mist to those who need a fix but instead deliver a noxious mix of toxic chemical additives. No charismatic pitch from "Thank You for Smoking" can save these little gizmos--they are not for cessation, they are not nicotine alternatives, they are just plain dangerous.
At least these aren't as dangerous as candy cigarettes. No kid is going to pick this up at a corner store to try to impress his or her friends. A battery powered mechanical cigarette with an orange LED doesn't really send off that Joe Cool vibe. Now we just have to make sure that adults just say no, too.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Flatliners: Coming to a Hospital Near You
From Secondhand Smoke, Wesley Smith reports that researchers are attempting to understand near death experiences by studying what happens to heart attack patients after the heart stops or brain waves cease.
What is the big white light? Are reported out of body experiences real? Can we find clues to what happens on our way out? At 9 hospitals in the UK and the US, these researchers are about to find out, says the Telegraph.
One obvious methodological flaw here is that just because something cannot yet be observed and measured doesn't negate its existence. I'm not holding my breath either, Wesley, but for a different reason. If consciousness exists after death, I'm thinking a more sophisticated method than placing pictures on shelves only visible from the ceiling might be required.
Summer Johnson, PhD
New Yorker Ridicules DTC Genetic Testing
Anyone catch the piece "Double Helix Dept: Ptooey!" in the Talk of the Town section of the New Yorker (Sept 22, 2008)? 'Tis yet another take on 23andMe, the direct-to-consumer genetic testing company. Well-written and pithy, of course, it was nonetheless too lightweight to be of much practical use, except for a reference to deep-vein thrombosis and flying, and excess caffeine and heart attack. And presenting genetic testing as entertainment is dangerous.
Much of the short article was spit jokes. The other traits cataloged were: ear wax, peanut allergy, sprinting, freckles, sneezing in the sun, tongue rolling, an asparagus-like essence in pee, and alcohol-flush reaction. Of course anyone could have looked these up in OMIM, aka Mendelian Inheritance in Man, at any time over the last half-century or so.
The piece of fluff ends with an anecdote about a man lamenting a fate of being follicularly challenged. "It was observed that his father still had a full head of hair." Anyone who's taken Bio 101 or watched Seinfeld (hello George Costanza) should know that male pattern baldness is X-linked - inherited from a carrier mom, not a hairy dad.
When the Today Show covered 23andme last spring, at least they steered the flippant discussion of ear wax and such to a more serious note - the problems of DTC genetic testing in the absence of genetic counseling. The New Yorker turned the whole topic into a joke.
Genetics isn't funny. People can be hurt by making decisions based on the info from these companies/websites delivered without benefit of genetic counseling. Making light of it is, at best, irresponsible.
Ricki Lewis is the author of Human Genetics: Concepts and Applications (McGraw-Hill Higher Education), now in its eighth edition, which has covered all of the above-mentioned traits for many years. She is also author of the novel Stem Cell Symphony and a fellow of the Alden March Bioethics Institute.
Accessible Science=Unethical Science?
So what's so dangerous about coming home and finding PCR on the counter? According to David Rejeski from the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies in Wednesday's Boston Globe, making biology too accessible of a science can lead to ethical problems, risks to human health, and more. In the Globe's Monday article, do-it-yourself scientific experimentation is heralded as the democratization of science and no more dangerous than birders dabbling in ornithology.
It would seem that the right position is probably somewhere in the middle. Rather than focusing on the ethical dangers associated with being able to tinker with DNA in the kitchen, has anyone considered the advantages of making science comprehensible, fun, and easy to do for the average person? While Americans lag behind in scientific test scores and our nation is losing its research edge to other nations, what could be so bad with promoting the idea that understanding and doing biology is possible for everyone?
Yes, biohacking may occur--but this negative externality is simply a byproduct of democratization. Give people the power and they may use it for evil just as well as good. But just as the computer industry has learned how to combat computer hackers--biohackers can be thwarted too through regulation and the promotion of responsible DIY science.
So rather than keeping biology and other sciences in the ivory tower--let's bring it to the people. It may actually result in a more science-savvy public, making science an important thing to do again, and yield great companies and discoveries. Right from the kitchen sink.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Meet the Flintstones
National Geographic unveiled its first photo of an ancient DNA-based face of a Neanderthal woman named Wilma. 
Wilma, named after Mrs. Flintstone, is based on 43,000-year-old DNA that has helped scientists create a model that embodies the newest genetic discoveries about our ancient ancestors. Wilma has red hair, pale skin and freckles--all genetic clues from the DNA harvested from tens of thousands of year old bones.
Wilma (Flintstone) is looking good for being more than 40 thousand plus....yabba dabba do!
Summer Johnson, PhD
Fat-burning Waffles
Who would have thought that one of the major ingredients in your breakfast cereal would be, of all things, fish oil? Adding key nutrients to everyday or less-than-nutritious foods would appear to be the next wave in food production, says the NYT. These "nutraceuticals" may radically change how we think about the nutritional value of common foods.
Forget that daily multivitamin--in the future, our foods will be suped up with nutriceuticles to ensure that even those who don't like fish will get those essential omega-3s or women get calcium from multiple sources beyond the dairy aisle.
But these additives would seem to raise two important questions. First, how will these modifications effect food safety? Can they be made to both ensure the nutritional content they promise without compromising food quality and public safety? Second, will nutraceuticals simply justify eating unhealthy foods for which some of their less healthy qualities are masked or ignored by those who tout their engineered health benefits?
As soon as they create ice cream with omega-3s and a wide range of vitamins justifications for why ice cream is good for you will abound from dairy manufacturers and ice cream lovers alike. But would the inclusion of some key vitamins and minerals justify ignoring the saturated fat, refined sugar, and other less than appealing aspects of something as delicious as ice cream? Who wouldn't want "fat-burning waffles" or ketchup for your french fries that helps regulate digestion?
It would seem that new ways of thinking about enhanced foods, how they are promoted, and labeled would be required to ensure that we aren't just kidding ourselves that the ketchup with our fries makes downing them good for our health.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Beware! Food Allergens WIthin!
The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that the FDA is considering changing food labeling for products that may contain allergens such as nuts, wheat, and others. Advocates say that there are just too many ways to say that your favorite candy bar was made in a factory containing nuts or that some products contain eggs or wheat.
How the FDA will propose to make consumers aware of food allergens on packaging remains unclear. It just doesn't seem like words will do it. I'd like to register my recommendations. How about a "no nut zone" symbol to let those with allergies know the foods are safe to eat? Or replacing the skull and crossbones from the poison symbol with the skull and wheat stalks? 
In all seriousness, visual images work better for communicating messages of danger or warning. This could be particularly effective especially for teenagers who are the most likely to suffer fatal food allergies according to the Post. Consistency of language is also important as the advocates suggest--but perhaps the FDA should consider compelling visual images to warn us about what is in our food. But perhaps stronger language to warn those who suffer from allergies is in order: Beware! Warning! Eggs lurk within!
Let's not leave it to those who suffer from serious allergies like that of nuts or eggs to read the fine print. Clear images and strong, universal language ought to do a better job of protecting those vulnerable to food allergens.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Pre-Meds Rejoice!
On the Wall Street Journal health blog, they report that the backlash on the part of select universities against the dreaded organic chemistry for pre-meds continues. New England Journal started this crazy suggestion first by publishing an article that suggested that requiring organic chemistry for a year may be overkill for the biochemistry medical students need to learn. Now, reports WSJ, AAMC and Howard Hughes Medical Institute are also pondering orgo's utility.
But hold on to your seats future doctors--nothing has been decided yet. There's still the somewhat convincing argument that how one performs as an undergrad organic student predicts 1st year medical school performance. Hence, med school admissions committees might still want to see that they've braved big bad organic--at least for a semester or more.
Personally, it would seem to me that soon-to-be docs would be better served by studying genetics, biochemistry, or some other more applied science that one might actually encounter and use in one's medical career. As long as those classes are rigorous, the future physicians are likely to be just as qualified as those who slogged through a year's worth of organic.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Similar on Science: Obama and McCain
Finally, both presidential candidates have answered questions about the hot science policy issues from the Science Debate 2008. As the NYT reports. As far as bioethics topics are concerned the two don't differ all that much in regard: they both support embryonic stem cell research, think genetic advances present opportunities and ethical challenges (McCain fears the GMOs, Obama genetic discrimination), and promote greater scientific integrity in practice and in policy advice.
But I agree with Janet Raloff of ScienceNews who says that it's too bad that these answers don't really constitute real debate. Having policy advisors write well-polished answers is hardly forcing the candidates to delve into the heart of difficult, but important science policy questions.
So don't take these pithy, slick answers from the candidates on their face. There's more to science policy than easy to remember one-liners or pre-written responses. One of these men will have to face tough science and technology policy questions during his presidency--it would be a shame to think we'd let them off the hook with a few canned answers trying to pass for real debate.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Catwalk Docs
In anticipation of the upcoming London Fashion Week, where the world's best designers will put salad bowls and tissue paper on size zero women and say "Here's modern fashion!", the British Fashion Council suggested investigation and care of the health problems of models, says Sky. But evidently, it's just too time consuming and expensive to ensure that the most waif-like among us aren't suffering from health problems associated with being the size of a walking toothpick.
It would seem that the Brits have realized that it's time to shine a light on the health problems of models--but that the cost and time was just too great. It's a shame--the British Fashion Council was on the right track. Models should have access to health care just like any other persons--even if their line of work does not promote or permit the most healthy of lifestyles.
Put some doctors on the catwalk--it may just make the modeling industry a healthier place for young women to work. Maybe it will promote that some of the most beautiful people in the world look just as good on the inside as they do on the outside.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Whose DNA Would You Send into Space?
Stephen Colbert's DNA is going to be sent to the International Space Station where it will rest for perpetuity come this October, says the AP. His DNA will travel with video game designer, Richard Garriott, who is collecting a range of specimens to take with him into space.
Why? To save the planet from the extinction of the human race? No, to promote his new video game. Pfft.
Personally, if I wanted the Earth's genetic fate to rest with just a few specimens of DNA, no matter how much I enjoy watching The Report, I have to say I must "wag my finger" at Garriott and Colbert. I'm just not sure he'd be in my top 100 choices for continuation of the species, but then whose DNA would I choose to hurl out into zero gravity?
Send me a comment with some picks for whose genetic material you'd like to see preserved in space. I'll post an update with some of the most interesting and/or funniest selections.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Palin and Her Salmon
Jon Rowley of Gourmet Magazine is telling us that salmon in our restaurants may have tapeworms lurking inside. Frozen salmon is okay, but raw salmon (sorry tartare lovers!) is right out. Especially, according to Rowley, if you are dining on wild Alaskan salmon where Diphyllobothrium latum (the tapeworm in question) is "fairly common".
Yet, up there in AK, Sarah Palin spoke out publicly against the Clean Water Initiative, says Barry Estabrook also of Gourmet, making the fate of Alaskan salon more than dubious.
In something he calls, Salmongate, Estabrook explains how food politics has reared its head again and in this case showed that Alaskans, thanks to Palin, cared more about mineral mining than clean water for one of its most precious natural resources and assets for its economy--those yummy salmon, of course!.
How do these two problems with Palin and her salmon relate? Even though you can freeze your wild Alaskan salmon to make it safe, you'd better not count on there being as much in years to come anyway --not if Sarah Palin has anything to do with it.
Summer Johnson, PhD
(Thanks to Glenn McGee for pointing out this story.)
Washingtonian Irrelevance
Well, the President's Council on Bioethics is going to be back at it again this week.
Staying on their breakneck pace of "one month on, two months off" for meetings, the PCB will convene on Thursday and Friday in Arlington, VA, a well-known hot spot for democratic deliberation, to discuss the novel topics of health care reform....conscience in health professions....and medical futility! (Thanks to Medical Futility for the full announcement.)
Iraqi Medical Brain Drain
In the Houston Chronicle, Karen Laub discusses the slow return of Iraqi doctors following the rapid exile and brain drain of medical expertise in that war-torn nation. One has to wonder what it will take to get the physicians who left for the safety of Britain or other nations to return to a country still in turmoil and lacking resources. 
Does the US have an obligation to help the Iraqis get either its own nationals or physicians from other nations to come to heal the literal wounds of this ravaged nation? I think so. Healthcare is just one part of any nation's infrastructure, and key to its getting back on its feet. So if Iraqis won't come back on their own (and who could blame them?), it may be the obligation of other nations to come to their aid to ensure enough doctors are there to care for the Iraqi people.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Paying More for the Same Healthcare
The Associated Press just reported that in 2009 almost 60% of employers plan to pass on the effect of rising healthcare costs--greater premiums, increased co-pays, and other out-of-pocket costs--to their employees. With healthcare costs in 2009 expected to go up almost 6% this means, you guessed it a nice healthy increase to the cost of those doctor visits for your kids' coughs and sniffles and a bigger slice taken out of your bi-weekly paycheck.
There's no real way around it, I suppose. Employers have tried to incentivize lower premiums for employees who are within healthy BMIs or weight or who complete smoking cessation programs. Another option, of course, as some have unethically tried, is not to hire those who smoke or engage in other unhealthy behaviors, thus keeping premiums low.
In any case, buckle your seat belts, folks: absent healthcare reform, we are headed for a wild ride in search of affordable medical care in this country.
Summer Johnson, PhD
AJOB Issue 8:7 is Hot Off the Presses!
Today on bioethics.net, the latest issue of the American Journal of Bioethics is posted. For those of you interested in reproductive ethics or ethical issues at the beginning of life, this is an issue for you. 
Toby Ord writes about how natural embryo loss presents logical problems for those who believe that embryos have the same moral value as a person from the moment of conception. Oops, forgot about that loophole!
McCullough and Chervenak argue that "unborn child" as a phrase with descriptive and normative value should be replaced with a new concept, "fetus as patient". This conjures up images of in utero humans with newly formed limbs with tiny hospital ID bands on them doesn't it?
Lastly, Miller and Truog argue for a Socratic bioethics that challenges we bioethicists' conventional wisdom. Could that mean that bioethicist really would become Socrates with a beeper?
Click these links or visit the website to find out.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Zimmer on "Spore"
In today's Times, Carl Zimmer writes about the upcoming release of the Sims-gone-evolutionary-biology-style. Ditch the 2.1 kids and the built community--it's time to create a herd of rapidly evolving creatures and to test your evolutionary adaptations against the environment.
Wait--let me explain. As Carl explains, scientists of all kinds for many years have used computers to test models of evolutionary biology and their theories. Everyone from the Duke researcher who used Facebook or the countless of other scientists who have built other software, Spore now brings evolution mainstream.
Who cares if the science isn't accurate? I mean, a super-long neck combined with kangaroo legs? But then, who wouldn't want to create an animal with a prehensile tail to help pick things up without having to bend over or wings? Or "DNA points"? Personally, I'm digging Santana's (yes, THE Santana) Spore creation. The evolutionary adaptation? I bet that dragon can play some mean guitar with all those extra arms. 
Want to read more? Check out Carl's blog, The Loom, to see an interview with the creators of spore. Meanwhile, I'm counting the minutes until I can get my DNA points and evolve into something even wilder than Santana's wild thing.
Summer Johnson, PhD
Will We Ever Learn in New Orleans?
According to reports on CNN News this morning, the most critical of patients in New Orleans area hospitals remain there with fingers crossed that the generators hold out long enough for Hurricane Gustav to pass. 
For the most critical of patients, they probably don't have many options to be moved, but when more than 100 patients remain in one hospital alone--one has to wonder whether some of the less criticals could have been moved out of harm's way.
We all wait with bated breath to see what happens to New Orleans and we can only hope that those sickest of the sick will have a chance to get well, that the lights stay on, and that Gustav gets out of New Orleans--FAST.
Summer Johnson, PhD
