Voting for a Kennedy

In 1960 I was too young to vote for John F. Kennedy.

In 1968 I was hoping to vote for Robert F. Kennedy

It was not until November 8, 1994 that I voted for a Kennedy, and that was for Senator Edward M. Kennedy in his re-election campaign. I was among the first in my predominately Republican hill town to put out a Kennedy placard.

I was living in Williamsburg and my daughter and I, she at Hampshire College, me fighting the HIV cause in Springfield and Holyoke (MA), both had our first exposure to a paper ballot.

I remember the smiles on our faces when we put those ballots into an ancient box and walked into a sunny Autumn day.

Living and working in Massachusetts I learned and experienced both the positives and negatives of staunch progressivism. The negatives have nearly dissolved from my memory, but the positives shine on, and one of the highlights was working with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health.

Like the Senator, the MDPH offered a unique blend of landmark programs, reasoned compromise and demonstrated an acute awareness of the disparity in social justice.

In Boston, Springfield and its surroundings counties, the MDPH supported my idealism, permitted me liberties and succored me during the many losses I experienced as a care provider. When I requested a change in venue for HIV services to Roxbury from the Back Bay, they agreed. When I wanted to open a Living Center in Western Massachusetts for those infected and/or affected by HIV, they provided funding. When I wept at the loss of the many who fell to AIDS, they provided grief counseling.

Like the Senator, MDPH had and has vision.

And like the Senator, I endorse and fight for universal health care.

My wish is for TeddyCare now!

Don't Tick Me Off: Lyme Disease

It is a rare day that my eye does not take in a deer, and often those "dear deer" are on my property or on an adjoining neighbour's land.

These sensitive creatures are trying to survive on what little vegetation exists here in rocky land.

With no natural predators they multiple. And with their population growth comes more Lyme Disease.

Knowing that many of my neighbours have contracted the disease, and several who did not get diagnosed for ages, I find myself separated from my own desire to spread my wings or even sit in the grassy areas where the deer roam.

What I wonder can we do to alleviate the disease and protect the "dear" deer?

HIV Testing: possibly standardized

The issue of routine testing for HIV has been on the table at most health departments and at the CDC for at least ten years. This article seems to imply that Massachusetts, and its DPH, will move forward with such standardization.

If confidentiality is retained, and destigmatisation is moved forward, I am all for it. However, as each State has its own confidentiality law, some of the issues that have prevented the routine administration of a test with other blood work has always been prohibitive because of those laws.

It seems from the few statistics in this article, the number of new cases has not decreased in a decade, and the serious and warranted concern of transmission remains a severe challenge for health and social services without new testing procedures.

Massachusetts changes will most likely affect other health departments, and those changes if introduced with care might well prove efficacious in decreasing the number of people infected and potentially affected--providing prevention messages are retained and enforced.

Pregnancy Prevention

This young 18 year old knows better than anyone that it takes more than words to prevent pregnancy, and that the on and off use of condoms doesn't work.

So with first hand experience, Bristol Palin chooses an abstinence message rather than a multi-pronged prevention approach. I wonder why.

She says that if a young woman had a trial baby in her hands all day long, she'd restrain herself and not have sex.

Well, it don't work that way, Ms. Palin.

Abstinence only programs are an abysmal failure.

Robotic dolls have been used in teen programs for numerous years that cry, need diapers changed, and seem as real as a new born.

Planned Parenthood did an international study of teen pregnancies, perhaps 7 or so years ago, and I sat down with one of their study group leaders over coffee in the summer of '02 in Portland to discuss the findings.

European teens were less likely to get pregnant and more often delayed sex. A large percentage of American teens had sex as early as 14 years of age.

The study delved into the whys.

Several differences in philosophy came to light:

- abstinence only programs are not touted as the be-all, end-all in most Western European countries
- European teens appeared to set higher, long term personal goals
- planned pregnancy seemed more likely in some of the Western European countries
- sex was seen as normal and
- not having sex also appeared normal when in school or preparing for a future in at least 2 to 5 of those Western European countries observed (see 2 above)

With little attention paid to prevention of any kind is it any wonder we have so many unplanned pregnancies?

It has been demonstrated in repeated studies that espousing (and funding) unrealistic goals contributes to more unintended pregnancies than healthy, inclusive, prevention programs that offer the introduction of birth control practices.

Can we change our health care system to include more prevention programs, and a fully funded program for teen pregnancy, STDs/STIs, etc?

Pandemics: Ill informed speak foolishly

Illustration Ris & Colette via NRC

Killing pigs wasn't an answer.

Instituting extreme measures and laws ludicrous.

Guatemala's President Álvaro Colom Caballeros declares a state of emergency, and measures that threaten civil liberties, while in Massachusetts, Hilltowns reports the State's intent to issue martial law, but stating, and categorically, that a potential epidemic did not warrant pandemic ranking is foolhardy, ignorant and consequently unconscionable.

Having worked in infectious and tropical diseases in various capacities, and with numerous diseases, i.e., malaria, HIV, leprosy, etc., I know from epidemiology, public health and history, it is best to be prepared for a more serious outbreak than to ignore signs of potential widespread transmission.

And in public health lingo, pandemic terminology is warranted when a disease (flu, in this case) moves across borders. A frightening expression, perhaps, but apt in the case of H1N1 (swine flu).

Miquel Ekkelenkamp's view on the issue here at NRC.

And M.C.P. Braat's rebuttal here.