Sunday, September 13, 2009
SPARK!
Monday, August 17, 2009
Lady-Stache
I did not plan to have my eyebrows waxed today, but they were getting really bushy and I have a meeting tonight where I will get to know several new people who will likely not judge me by the stray-ness of my eyebrow hair, but still; first impressions are important, right?
So between other errands, I popped into one of our local Asian-lady hangouts for a quick fix, with my girls in tow. To their credit, they stood quietly in the room, exactly where I asked them to, and only once did I hear a whisper from my eldest, "I wonder what that thing does?" I don't know what that thing was, or what it did either as my eyes were closed, and I've never felt that sensation before while being professionally waxed.
The lady who performed the deed sat me back in a chair, placed a towel on my chest (theoretically to catch all of those stray hairs that would be falling), and queried, "Uppa leep"?
Those of you who know me, will have to tell me sometime if my upper lip needs a wax. Honestly, given I have pretty fair hair, what is growing on my upper lip is blond, and probably shimmers happily in direct sunlight if you're looking. But I have no dark hair there, don't feel much like a man yet, so have never considered waxing my upper lip. I replied, "No thanks." And then closed my eyes, thinking that my eye-waxing lady had quite a nerve. Her tip shrunk in my head.
Half-way through my spreading, smearing, ripping, plucking, brushing, clipping, and whatever-that-mysterious-contraption-thing-is-for-ing, she's asked, "Pedicure too?"
Now, to the lady's credit, my feet are in bad shape. My lip is innocent, but my feet deserve some attention. It's not just the cracking, dry skin on my heels, it's also the red polish, which I applied last month that has grown mostly out, so most of my toes look like I only painted the top half. This lady (despite the brain cells she's surely lost to all those fumes) is aware that, rather than artistic painting, I'm really in need of some remover and a re-polish.
"No, thanks!" I say, while trying to keep my face still so she doesn't accidentally pluck one of my lip hairs instead.
Then I start wondering, if next she'll offer a salad, and a good work-out regimen for me, since she's probably noticed the extra pounds I could stand to lose.
Her tip shrinks once again. Because, really? I know my toes need some work, and I don't need you to point it out for me. I came to feel better about the state of my physical appearance, and now I'm trying to figure out how I'll get my grocery trip done while simultaneously sucking my upper lip into my mouth, and walking, toes tucked under my feet in my flip flops- or so fast that my feet are just one big blur. But that will cause bigger problems, because my kids will be left near the frozen bread, while I've already made my way to the self-checkout station.
She stands back proudly to admire her work, and hands me a smeary mirror to check for myself. Did all previous patrons lick the thing because they were treated with the same lack of respect as I? Her work looks acceptable, and I hand back the mirror, and she looks me in the eye, and she kills her tip. "Shoowa, uppa leep?"
"Yes, I'm sure" I respond, and gather the girls to go pay.
They lady who checks me out, asks if I want a manicure/pedicure. Seriously?? What is it with this place?
She says, "Seven dolla" and I hand her my card. I figure I'll get to add my meager tip when she prints out the receipt (honestly not clearly thinking because I'm still stunned by my new team of personal fixer-uppers).
She hands me my receipt which has no place for a tip, and tells me that the same lady who did my wax does the mani/pedi for when I come back.
Oh good. Because she's the first person I would request for my next waxing experience. Truly, the wax is torture enough.
I have no cash with me, and they can't run my card again unless it's over $10, so the lady gets no tip at all. And while I feel bad about this, I'll get over it, around the time the skin around my eyebrows is no longer red.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Book Review
Our family has been watching the show about the Duggar family for several months now, and our kids love it. They can watch without wondering if we will change channels because of inappropriate clothing, language, or behavior. We watched one episode of John and Kate Plus 8, and that was the last episode for us. I don't care for my children to get any ideas from a very loud bunch of kids. The contrast between the two families, especially given that the Duggars have twice as many children, is astounding. Yeah, yeah, Kate's family's kids are younger as a bunch, and the older Duggar kids do a great deal to help out, but their little ones are so well behaved.
Picking up the book was a good move, and was encouraged by a friend who had already read it. I finished in a couple evenings, and my life has changed overnight because of a new way of prodding my girls to get things done! Michelle Duggar issues check marks on a chart when her kids complete various tasks, and the children get money for each mark.
I was giving out coins before, but would see days fly by without any initiative on my kids' parts to complete any tasks. Their banks, which have sections shaped like buildings for "Church", "Bank", and "Shopping" were very lonely without any deposits, and the dolls I bought for them to earn were beginning to give up all hope of being claimed by my girls any time before high school graduation.
Now, there's a chart for each girl, where they get to write a check mark each time they answer, "Yes ma'am" and cheerfully run off to complete a task I have given them. I think this works better for a few reasons:
- They like being able to write their own check mark. It brings some instant gratification and pride in their work.
- They know that each mark is worth five cents, whereas before they may have been given a whole quarter for the same chore. Because they're focused on the check mark instead of the amount of money, they don't seem to be calculating in their heads whether or not it's worth doing the task for the amount they're getting. That, and I've told them, that they'll be required to complete the request, whether they are pleasant about it or not. The manners are what earns the money; that, and obeying right away, without taking pit-stops.
- They are competing. This is one of many reasons why I LOVE having two children close together in age. They can see their charts side by side, and don't want to lag behind the other, so they run up and ASK if there is anything that I need them to do.
- I don't have to carry around a big jar of change. At the end of the week, I'll count the marks, hi-light the ones that have been redeemed, and give them a lump-sum.
I love Michelle Duggar!!! My kids folded and put away laundry today, cleaned their playroom, cleaned hallways, cleared dishes, sorted dirty laundry, cleaned a closet, and ran other minor errands up and down the stairs for me. Happily. With smiles. Who took my girls???!
If only for that one tip, I would have paid twice what I did for the Duggar's book. But there was so much more on their financial philosophy (no debt), homeschooling information for those of us who homeschool, or for others who might, as well as the reasons they have chosen to have a large family. My girls have asked me to read much of the book to them, and I love knowing they are hearing about a family that seeks God's will for their lives, and goes against the mainstream sometimes to rear faithful children.
Although we will not be rearing a bus load of kids, we eat a substantially different diet (I don't think any of the book's recipes would be useful to us), and I'm no more likely to circumcise a potential son than either of my daughters, I LOVE the Duggar family. They are really so precious, and such a breath of fresh air in a mostly musty world.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Health Care (Government)
She is one of the only people I know who sides with Obama on this one. Most of my friends and family members want government to stay far, far away from their medical care. To them, government and health care go about as well together as carpet and red wine. I am inclined to agree.
To me, forced charity is no charity at all. And that is what socialism is. Charity should be given freely, and I believe our country's attempt to meddle in charitable giving has created much more of a problem than there otherwise might have been.
If American Idol can raise millions for those in need, can't we trust Americans enough to bring food to a shelter or soup kitchen if only they couldn't rest in the false assumption that, "if they really needed help, they could get food stamps, etc." If there were no safety net other than funds and supplies given by neighbors to neighbors in need, I truly believe that my fellow citizens would rise to the occasion and dig deep in their wallets to share. But many of us are apathetic because we trust that our government will step in.
It feels good to share. Paying taxes feels like sandpaper rubbed on sensitive body parts.
Not only that, but we taxpayers would have more to share, if government weren't always dipping into our pocketbooks asking for more. Further, because of the efficiency of private charitable organizations, each dollar would go further (think World Vision, and Habitat for Humanity). They don't spend half of their income in administrative costs, the way our government does. They have nearly ALL of our hard earned money ear-marked for those who will benefit the most from it.
Also note how small, private charitable organizations can hold those who receive aid accountable. If our family were able to donate money to local residents directly, instead of to worthy groups, such as ACORN, we would be able to cease our donations once we realized that, instead of buying healthy food for their children, our neighbors-in-need were taking delivery of their second flat-screen television, and registering homeless people for elections in other states in their spare time.
Fraud in the Medicaid program alone is estimated at 30 BILLION a year! Can you imagine what private clinics, like a local one called Hands of Hope, could do for those in need, with that kind of revenue? Those are our tax dollars folks. That's our money that is being stolen, and our current government wants to add more (to the tune of one trillion dollars) to the pot. How much will we lose in fraud then? Should we be adding programs when the government can't get a handle on what they already have running?
This is not to say that our system isn't a mess. Doctors pay exorbitant costs for malpractice insurance, which, of course we pay in the end in higher medical bills. Why aren't doctors and nurses held accountable with their very careers, instead of being able to return to work after they pay off the latest unhappy patient? My husband (an air traffic controller) is watched more closely at work than Al Gore keeps track of his thermometer. Every word he says, or key stroke he makes is recorded. And if he makes a mistake, all of those recordings are reviewed. If he makes mistakes, he pays a price; ultimately losing his job if he makes more than a few during a given period of time. We're not talking about actual mid-air collision-type mistakes. If two of his aircraft get closer than a certain number of miles to each other, he faces disciplinary action.
If doctors were held to a standard this high, and to this kind of monitoring, and then dealt with their mistakes by being forced out of work temporarily (or permanently if too many mistakes were made over time), I think most patients would come to understand that they could expect good care from their doctors, that they would pay with their careers if they were not very careful with the lives and well-being of their patients, and that they would not win the lottery if a mistake were made.
With frivolous law-suits set aside, costs should go down a good amount.
I have read recently, that 80% if disease can be directly linked to poor habits. Smoking and poor nutrition choices are right at the top of the "poor habit" list.
Has anyone thought of giving a rebate to Medicare/Medicaid recipients who maintain a healthy weight and who refrain from smoking? How about taxing the heck out of junk food? I know this raises some concerns about who decides what qualifies as junk food, but just as safe drivers get a break on their auto insurance, can't we figure out a way to reward those who take care of their bodies?
The big question is really as simple as how big of a role should government have in our lives? If they got out of the way, I imagine we could figure out how to care for those in need and create local clinics that were efficient. Do we have to run the same experiment on health care that has failed in Massachusetts and Hawaii? Canada? Are we really that stupid? I certainly hope not.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Udderly Interesting
Pictured here is my first gallon of raw cow milk. I was careful not to jostle the jug so you would be able to see what it looks like prior to shaking. See all of that cream/fat on top?
My husband has been looking at me skeptically as I buy and then drink raw milk. I even gave my kids some of the raw goat's milk, gasp!
He, like most of us, has been very carefully taught not to eat raw dairy and meats, and as I've done my research on this controversy I have come to find that there are very strong opinions on both sides; it reminds me of the battle over vaccinations.
Not wanting to put my beloved children, or myself for that matter, at risk, I have sorted through the information that floats around cyberspace to come to what I consider the best educated guess I can at this time. Take what you want, and leave the rest, and by all means, do you own sorting before you drink any type of milk!
I stumbled upon information about raw milk a while ago, and was NOT impressed. In fact, as a family, we avoided cow products across the board, pasteurized or not. Here is a link to the site I studied, with direct mention of raw milk. The entire site http://www.notmilk.com/ focuses on the author's distaste for dairy, along with his reasons for becoming a strict vegan.
One thing that stands out to me, is the statement that, "many bacteria are not killed by pasteurization. Rod-shaped bacteria form a "spore" at the first sign of heat (spore is the Greek word for seed). When milk cools, the spore re-emerges into its original form."
Two questions came to mind after I read that. One, if bacteria are going to survive pasteurization anyway, why go through the trouble? And two, are the bacteria really a problem at all?
Raw milk advocates address both questions by choosing a milk in which all bacteria are left alone. The theory here is that pasteurization kills off the good bacteria that keep the bad bacteria in check. I think of our guts and what happens when we get a dose of an antibiotic. All bacteria gets killed off in our systems; the good with the bad. Then yeast grows out of control (formerly kept at healthy levels by our good bacteria). We, and many along with us, take daily probiotics to ADD back good bacteria lost to the chlorine in our drinking water, among other things. Mass marketers have caught on, and now sell everything from granola bars to cereal with added probiotics. My guess is that this is nothing more than savvy marketing, and that the levels and types of probiotics used probably never survive long enough to get anywhere near our digestive tracts.
I look to human breast milk for a comparison. Experts tell us not to microwave or heat (aside from a brief warming) breast milk because the heat will destroy the componants in the milk that strengthen our babies' immune sytems. Breast milk can be left at room temperatures for hours without risk of spoilage because of the 'living' nature of the milk that is naturally anti-bacterial. I imagine "cooked" or pasteurized breast milk would not have this same protection. So, wouldn't it stand to reason that milk made by other mammals would be similarly protected prior to pasteurization?
Raw milk proponents site numerous reasons for consuming milk in its natural state. Among them are that pasteurization, "destroys enzymes, diminishes vitamin content, denatures fragile milk proteins, destroys vitamins C, B12 and B6, kills beneficial bacteria, promotes pathogens and is associated with allergies, increased tooth decay, colic in infants, growth problem in children, osteoporosis, arthritis, heart disease and cancer. Calves fed pasteurized milk do poorly and many die before maturity. Raw milk sours naturally, but pasteurized milk turns putrid; processors must remove slime and pus from pasteurized milk by a process of centrifugal clarification. Inspection of dairy herds for disease is not required for pasteurized milk. Pasteurization was instituted in the 1920s to combat TB, infant diarrhea, undulant fever and other diseases caused by poor animal nutrition and dirty production methods. But times have changed and modern stainless steel tanks, milking machines, refrigerated trucks and inspection methods make pasteurization absolutely unnecessary for public protection. And pasteurization does not always kill the bacteria for Johne's disease suspected of causing Crohn's disease in humans with which most confinement cows are now infected...." From http://www.realmilk.com/
Although I am able to get my hands on cow's milk that is raw and comes from cows that are healthy, are grass fed, and are milked in a sanitary manner (my source also has grass fed beef, and free range eggs here in GA- if you're local, go to http://www.countrygardensfarm.com/ ) I still opt to feed only goat's milk to my children.
My reasons are that I have actually seen the goats, watched them being cleaned before and after they are milked, know what they eat, and have a sense that the owners are knowledgeable and careful about how the goats and their milk are handled. Goat's milk is also much more similar to human milk in protein and fat levels, and is much more easily digested (raw!). From what I have read, a goat makes milk that most other mammals could thrive by drinking.
I would never drink or give milk to my children from an animal that was:
- Confined to a stall
- Fed grains only, and not allowed to ruminate on vegetation most of the year
- Bred only for milking capacity (as most dairy cows today are) rather than for all-around health and quality
- Given hormones to increase milk production
- Mass-milked by workers who are out of touch with safe-handling procedures
Keep in mind that even most commercial Organic dairy products are produced by cows who are grain-fed and confined. Check your sources, and take advantage of small farms that are local!
Yes, there are dangers in eating raw. The next spinach salad you eat could be laced with e. coli (the most common food for e. coli contamination, by the way). Your raw cow's milk might give you a stomach ache and diarrhea; but the pasteurized variety might do the same. Because of those dangers, there are foods I would not offer to an immune suppressed individual or take if I were pregnant.
To find your local source for raw cow or goat milk, visit http://www.realmilk.com/And for those of you who are hesitant to give goat's milk a try because of its flavor, fear not! The pasteurized version does taste 'goaty' or musky, but the raw milk tastes remarkably similar to 2% cow's milk (whole goat milk is much lower in fat than whole cow milk). I've had it on my cereal and out of a glass, and despite my aversion to the commercial/pasteurized form, I have nothing but positive things to say about the taste and smell.
Also, because laws in most states prohibit the sale of unpasteurized milks, most farms will advertise that the milk is "for pets". If you get to know the animals and their caretakers, and are comfortable with the entire picture, you may find that the milk for your pets is good enough for you too.
Friday, May 8, 2009
The Big, Bad, Mini-Plague!
If you prioritize utility, safety and refinement, then your next vehicle purchase could very well be the 2007 Honda Odyssey.