Blue Marble

Trophy Wives Beware: Sugar Daddy's Dipstick May Be Defective

| Mon Apr. 6, 2009 5:08 PM EDT

According to Lisa Belkin, "Researchers at the University of Queensland found that children born to older fathers have, on average, lower scores on tests of intelligence than those born to younger dads. Data they analyzed from more than 33,000 American children showed that the older the man when a child is conceived, the lower a child's score is likely to be on tests of concentration, memory, reasoning and reading skills, at least through age 7."

It gets worse: higher risk of autism, bi-polar disorder and schizophrenia. Not good news, but it does sort of even the cultural score in which past-their-prime women are understood to be the greatest risk to the children they bear 'late' in life. Damaged goods. Darwin makes them chase younger women to bear their healthy children, not mid-life crises. But what if younger women start looking at that "distinguished" guy driving the red 'vette and thinking like Belkin?

The push and pull between timetables and dreams, between our bodies and our babies, is at the core of many women's worldview, which also means it is at the core of relationships between the sexes. This tension feeds the stereotype of woman as eager to settle down and men as reluctant, and it's the crux of why we see women as "old" and men as "distinguished."
If those underlying assumptions were to change, would all that follows from them change as well? A world in which each man heard his clock tick even a fraction as urgently as each woman could be a very different world indeed. All those silver-haired sex symbols, and balding sugar daddies, and average-Joe divorced guys who are on their second families because they can be while their exes are raising their first set of kids—what if all of them became, in women's eyes, too darned old?
What if 30-year-old women started looking at 50-year-old men as damaged goods, what with their washed-up sperm, meaning those 50-year-olds might actually have to date (gasp!) women their own age? What if men, as the years passed, began to look with new eyes at Ms. Almost Right? Would men of all ages come to understand—firsthand, not just from the sidelines—the fear that the very passage of time will put your not-yet-conceived baby at risk?
Welcome to the club boys.

Advertise on

Empire State Building Cutting Energy Use by 40 Percent

| Mon Apr. 6, 2009 12:28 PM EDT | Scheduled to publish Mon Apr. 6, 2009 12:28 PM EDT

The owners of the Empire State Building announced Monday they will invest $20 million in the 80-year-old skyscraper as part of a plan to cut the building's overall energy use by 40 percent.

Projections from the Clinton Climate Initiative, Johnson Controls, Inc., and the Rocky Mountain Institute showed the building will save $4.4 million a year—and qualify the building for a LEED Gold certification—after the project is complete in a few years.

The thing I like most about this project is how they're going to save that energy and cut their carbon output: They'll be retrofitting windows and radiators, and installing new lighting and ventilation systems—all in the name of efficiency.

The Rocky Mountain Institute and its founder, Amory Lovins, have been promoting energy efficiency for more than two decades now. As Lovins told Mother Jones last May, it's one of the cheapest and best ways to save money and cut carbon.

MJ: If you had $1 million to invest in the energy sector, where would you put it?

AL: Efficient use. I want to do the cheapest things first to get the most climate protection and other benefits per dollar. Buying micropower and “negawatts” [Lovins' term for efficiency measures] instead of nuclear gives you about 2 to 11 times more carbon reduction per dollar, and you get it much faster.

In other words, owners of older buildings don't have to wait around for cleaner energy—and a smart grid to supply it—to proliferate before they can cut carbon output and energy use. And Lovins thinks the this project in particular could "help inform and inspire [similar] initiatives." In a building so iconic, the project certainly sets an example. If the cost-saving projections hold, it should turn into a trend.

Friday Cocktail: Dash the Wolves, Splash of Dolphins, Jigger the Straw Bale House, Shake Over Ice

| Fri Apr. 3, 2009 8:31 PM EDT
As Oscar Wilde said: Work is the curse of the drinking class.

Round 1: In Your Eye. The US Fish & Wildlife Service basically threw up its hands (again) on the issue of gray wolves and tossed their fate back into the temperamental ballcourt of the states of the West. Except for the state of Wyoming. Apparently Wyoming's thirst for wolf blood turns even the stomach of rancher and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. Wyoming managed to slaughter wolves so fast after 2006's aborted delisting that they lost the privilege to kill any more under their own terms. Just yet.

I mean, seriously, Team Obama... Sarah Palin could hardly have shot a better bull's-eye from her Alaskan helicopter. The final rule removing federal protections for wolves was published yesterday in the Federal Register and will go into effect on May 4 when state wolf management laws take effect. So, run, Wolves, run. Meanwhile lawsuit engines are revving, including those of the Humane Society of the United States.

Round 2: ¡Salud!
A federal judge just kept alive a lawsuit that might just keep the Mexican wolf alive. US District Judge David Bury buried a motion by the US Fish and Wildlife Service to throw out a lawsuit regarding the reintroduction of the Mexican wolf—the subspecies of gray wolf exterminated in the Southwest since the 1930s. The feds reintroduced them in Arizona-New Mexico in 1998 and biologists hoped to have at least 100 in the wild by now and 18 breeding pairs. Instead we've got just 52 and only two breeding pairs. Why? Because ranchers keep killing them and even worse the frakkin USFWS trapped and shot 19 wolves in 2007. That's nearly three times the number of suspicious wolf deaths in 2008. Team Obama? Wake up.

The lawsuit by Defenders of Wildlife, the Center for Biological Diversity, and many others claims the USFWS is sitting on their lazy asses and relinquishing their powers to others. The lawsuit also challenges a perverted 3-strikes rule that calls for wolves to be permanently removed from the wild (huh?) or killed (oh…) if they prey on livestock three or more times within one year. Judge Bury is saying: Hang on there, pardner. Let's try this in court. Buy that man a drink.

Round 3: Sláinte! Researchers from the Wildlife Conservation Society announced the discovery of 6,000 rare Irrawaddy dolphins in Bangladesh. Prior to this announcement, dolphin populations in the area were feared to number in only the low 100s. In neighboring Burma, these dolphins fish cooperatively with humans, herding schools of fish toward boats and then benefiting from the relationship by easily preying on the fish cornered in the nets and from those falling out of the nets when the fishermen pull them from the water. I'll drink to that.

Round 4: Stirred but not shaken!
A greater than 7.6 magnitude simulated temblor did not knock down Darcey Donovan's straw bale house at the University Of Nevada Reno. The full-scale, 14-by-14-foot straw house, complete with gravel foundation and clay plaster walls—just the way she builds them in Pakistan—was subjected to 200 percent more acceleration and shaking than was recorded at the 1994 Northridge CA earthquake: the largest measured ground acceleration in the world. The straw house also survived the equivalent of the 2005 Kashmir temblor that killed 100,000 people and left 3.3 million homeless or living in tents. Buy that woman a drink.

Round 5: Here's to Hell, where the snowballs are melting. The European Space Agency reports that the Wilkins Ice Shelf is leaving its home base on the Antarctic Peninsula as the ice bridge connecting it to Charcot and Latady Islands looks set to collapse. The beginning of the demise of the ice bridge began this week when new rifts resulted in a large block of ice breaking away. Bye-bye iceberg.

Round 6: Sotally tobering.

MIT Teams Up With the Flu to Make Batteries

| Fri Apr. 3, 2009 7:16 PM EDT

You may have heard of oil-eating microbes, or microbes turning weeds into biofuels. Now, there are battery-making microbes.

A few MIT whizzes recently discovered a way to make genetically modified flu viruses help construct the anode and cathode (negative and positive) ends of re-chargeable lithium batteries.

The research team, led by MIT professors Angela Belcher, Paula Hammond, and Yet-Ming Chiang, made the virus self-assemble a host of carbon nanotubes (each one-tenth the width of a human hair) and tiny particles of iron phosphate and silver (for the cathode) or cobalt oxide and gold (for the anode) to create a network of charged nanowires, which act as active battery material.

Although the batteries are very small, they have an above average energy density, and the method could conceivably be developed to make larger batteries used in everything from portable chargers to electric cars. Belcher says that just 10 grams of the viral battery material could power an iPod for 40 hours.

Rocket Fuel Found in Infant Formula

| Thu Apr. 2, 2009 11:40 PM EDT

A scary new under-the-radar CDC study has found that 15 infant formulas sold in the US are contaminated with the rocket fuel additive perchlorate—which is even worse than it sounds, because so is the tap water parents mix formula with.

From the Environmental Working Group:

Researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have reported that 15 brands of powdered infant formula are contaminated with perchlorate, a rocket fuel component detected in drinking water in 28 states and territories.
The two most contaminated brands, made from cow’s milk, accounted for 87 percent of the U.S. powdered formula market in 2000, the scientists said.
The CDC scientists did not identify the formula brands they tested.
The little-noticed CDC findings, published in the March 2009 edition of the Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, raise new concerns about perchlorate pollution, a legacy of Cold War rocket and missile tests. Studies have established that the chemical is a potent thyroid toxin that may interfere with fetal and infant brain development (Kirk 2006).

Read the full EWG report, or learn more about perchlorate in this Mother Jones investigation by David Corn.

Update: Don't miss ProPublica's story on perc problems.

Senate Introduces Mining Reform Bill

| Thu Apr. 2, 2009 3:30 PM EDT
Senator Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico has just introduced a mining reform bill in the Senate, bringing Congress one step closer to updating the nation's most outdated public lands law, the General Mining Law of 1872. A similar bill from House stalled in the Senate last year, where Majority leader Harry Reid, the son of a gold miner, has been a powerful ally of the hard rock minerals industry. Mining companies are still allowed to remove minerals from public lands without paying a cent in federal royalties. As I reported in a recent profile of Reid, Nevada remains an anachronism in a region that is becoming much less tolerant of the America's most polluting industry.

Bingaman's bill is less progressive than a similar House measure, but might win key support from Reid and moderate Republicans. According to Velma Smith, the manager of the Pew Campaign for Responsible Mining, the bill proposes reducing the House's proposed 8 percent royalty to something between 2 and 5 percent, to be set at the discretion of the Department of Interior. It would also impose a reclamation fee of .3 to 1 percent.

In what's been a keen interest of Bingaman's, the bill also asks the National Academy of Sciences to perform a study on uranium mining. Smith says uranium, which is the only energy mineral overseen by the mining law, may be moved to a leasing system. Environmentalists have been concerned that mining on any one of 1,200 uranium mining claims along the Colorado River could pollute the water supply for Las Vegas and Southern California.

In other important respects, the Senate and House bills are the same. Both call for stricter environmental permitting of mines, better ways for lands to be set off-limits to mining, and more financial assurances that mining companies will clean up after themselves. The cost of cleaning up abandoned mines in the U.S. is now estimated to be at least $32 billion.

Will Reid support the bill? "I really don’t know," Smith says. "My sense was that Senator Bingaman's office took a long time vetting this with a lot of people. I don’t see this as an extreme bill by any means. So I think there’s a chance for the industry and environmentalists to come together."

Advertise on

The Catholic Church, AIDS, Condoms, and Specious Arguments

| Thu Apr. 2, 2009 2:08 PM EDT

In a post Ross Douthaut called The AIDS Libel, he employs some dubious rhetoric in defense of the church's insistence on abstinence, vice condoms, in the face of an African epidemic. First he demands proof that African Catholics have higher infection rates. OK, to save time, I'll give him that one. But not this one:

...consider that Benedict XVI is the head of an international institution that does as much to fight disease and poverty as any NGO in the world. The Church runs hospitals, clinics, and schools; it channels hundred of millions of dollars in donations from the developed world to the wretched of the earth; it supports thousands upon thousands of priests, nuns and laypeople who work in some of the most difficult and dangerous conditions in the world. And it does so based on the same premises—an attempt to be faithful to the commandments of Jesus Christ—that undergird the Pope's insistence on preaching chastity, rather than promoting prophylactics. There are many other NGOs working in Africa that proceed from different premises, and take a different attitude toward matters sexual as a result, and if David Rothkopf prefers their approach that's perfectly understandable. But unless he's willing to tell the Catholic Church that it should fold up its charitable operations in the developing world and go home, I'd prefer to be spared the lectures on how the Pope is responsible for "massive death and suffering" among populations for whom Catholic institutions have provided lifelines beyond counting over the years, just because he isn't willing to to use his pulpit to preach the importance of playing it as safe as possible, health-wise, while you're committing what the Church considers mortal sin.

Let's begin with this: Where does the church get the bazillions it dispenses as largesse around the world? From individuals and from the incredible wealth it's amassed over time based on its influence. It didn't earn that money; it was given that money. And that bankroll rightly belongs to the world and should be spent there.

When the Pope gives up his mansions and jewel encrusted hand towels, I'll be impressed with his munificence. The church has a duty to the world to do the good it does. That's why we give it money (tax exemption, anyone?). To make the world better.

Next: Because the Catholic Church conducts large scale charity, it cannot be criticized?

Scientists Name New Syndrome: Limbaughtosis

| Wed Apr. 1, 2009 7:31 PM EDT
It's like halitosis, only it's bad breadth not breath. In other words, a case of severely overweighted self worth notable for its rush onset, sweatiness, febrile humor, heavy breathing, spitting, and verbosity. There's no known trigger though some speculate on electromagnetic waves. There's also no known treatment. Time-release drug formulas seem to exacerbate the symptoms.

Patient X, who does not wish to be identified, says his affliction with Limbaugh Syndrome is a living hell. He describes obsessive demons of righteousness and a compulsion to fight for individual rights—except those that fail to appease his obsessive demons of righteousness. The conflict exhausts him.

He can't sleep. There's insomnia over phantom governments. There are nightmares of unchanging ideals. He is forever tripping over his own unapologetic rules. Faith blindsides him.

It's also intensely emotionally lonely, says Patient X. He feels like a lone voice in an answerless universe. He expects a God-given natural right to be free yet imagines himself irretrievably trapped inside a small soundproof room amid billowing clouds of smoke.

Patient X secretly hopes for help from stem cell therapy. But he doesn't want to rush for a cure either. He can't envision life without his disease.

Hayfever? Just Blow Your… Knob

| Tue Mar. 31, 2009 9:22 PM EDT
Health alert: Spring and hayfever go together like, well, sex and sneezes. All those flowers. All that green grass. Kachew.

But, guys, you get a break on this one. A neurologist from Tabriz Medical University in Iran proposes that a well-timed ejaculation will clear your bunged nose. Too.

The logic goes like this: the nose and genitals are both connected to the sympathetic nervous system that controls certain reflexes. A blocked nose is caused by swollen and inflamed nasal blood vessels irritated by an infection or by pollen in the air. But during ejaculation the sympathetic nervous system constricts blood vessels across the body. That should soothe the swollen nasal blood vessels, freeing the airway for deep, er, that is, normal breathing.

Sina Zarrintan, the neurologist, says he hasn't actually tested this yet. Right, and the pope doesn't have wet dreams.

But if it works, whacking off could offer many advantages over decongestant drugs, which can cause hypertension and make congestion worse over the course of a few days, writes Zarrintan in Medical Hypotheses.

He suggests masturbating or having sex whenever the symptoms are bad enough to warrant another ejaculation. And when aren't they? The patient can adjust the number of intercourses or masturbations depending on the severity of the symptoms, he says. It's the best scrip of all: Take as needed.

Work this in with a little sneeze fetishism and it gets downright fun to be miserable in the spring—if you're a guy, that is. Global warming gets some much-needed kink.

Millions Of Americans Travel Abroad For Health Care

| Tue Mar. 31, 2009 12:38 PM EDT

Remember when we were the gold standard? Now, there's an entire niche industry springing up to help Americans get good health care they can afford.

From CNN:

Sandra Giustina is a 61-year-old uninsured American. For three years she saved her money in hopes of affording heart surgery to correct her atrial fibrillation. "They [US hospitals] told me it would be about $175,000, and there was just no way could I come up with that," Giustina said.
So, with a little digging online, she found several high quality hospitals vying for her business.... Within a month, she was on a plane from her home in Las Vegas, Nevada, to New Delhi, India. Surgeons at Max Hospital fixed her heart for "under $10,000 total, including travel."
How do they do it? With wacky ideas like these one: "Max neurosurgeon Dr. Ajaya Jha said the hospital can provide high-quality care at low prices because the staff work hard to cut waste. 
"I've seen hospitals in the US where they open up something costing $10,000 and say, 'Oh it's not working. OK, give me another one.' We would never do that here. Even for 100 rupees (about $2) -- we would say, "Do we need to open this suture? Do we need to open this gauze?' We are very conscious of cost."
The salary of a US surgeon is five times that of a surgeon in India. "We [surgeons in India] want to make a profit, but we don't want to profiteer. We don't want squeeze people and I think American industries should also think that way," Jha said.

Profit, not profiteering. What a concept.