Why “Regular” is 6-9 grams

Proctor & Gamble's first tampon brand, Rely.

I like to read things when I am doing mundane life maintenance and hygiene tasks, as it quenches my constant desire for information and stimulation. While humdrummingly brushing my teeth in the bathroom one evening, I chanced upon the conveniently-located-at-eye-level side panel of my box of Tampax tampons in the bathroom cabinet. If you are female, you are probably familiar with the terms lite, regular, super, super plus, and ultra because, as I found out from the side panel, these are standardized, industry-wide absorbency terms that indicate the number of grams of liquid that each vaginal cotton bullet will hold.

I then wondered, “Why would all the tampon brands gather together and standardize an absorbency? Wouldn’t that require costly collaboration and reduce their ability to sway consumer beliefs about a particular brand’s effectiveness?”

I discovered that the Food and Drug Administration regulates tampons and defined the actual absorbency ranges for various sizes, and the terms used for each. For what reason would the FDA be involved in regulating such an item and how could the tampon legally fall under their purview? I considered the idea that standardization might be some sort of honesty-in-advertising issue, but the government regulation of the tampon has a much more complex history.  A Google search lead me to a fantastic research piece that contained everything I have or will ever want to know about the regulation of tampons in the U.S.

So, for your reading pleasure and enjoyment, I have taken a moment to highlight the key findings of my tampon interest research:

• Tampons didn’t exist in the U.S. until O.B. and Procter and Gamble started test-marketing them in 1974. They had been in Europe since the 30′s.

• Tampons are classified as a Class II Medical Device and regulated as such by the FDA. Other Class II devices include x-ray machinery, surgical needles, suturing materials and acupuncture needles. (lol – Class II, huh? I find this to be a ridiculous and overzealous definition for a glorified cotton ball that just happens to have a more noble cause than removing my nail polish.)

• Anyway, TSS (Toxic Shock Syndrome), is the reason the FDA even got involved in the tampon industry, starting in 1980. I will not go on to discuss TSS in detail because I’m not interested and have always assumed it to be one of those rare and pretend problems, but, in short, it is a syndrome caused by bacteria entering the vaginal canal as a result of tampon insertion, causing horrendous bodily rejection of toxic bacteria and can result in relatively sudden death. It can also happen if you get a cut or scrape anywhere.

• Because of the correlation between tampons and TSS, individuals and consumer groups like Public Citizen advocated and sued — calling for the regulation of tampons, further research and warning label requirements. Various legal battles ensued over these TSS health concerns, spanning decades and including countless FDA meetings, studies, requests for public comment, back and forth litigation, etc., and finally concluded with labeling terminology we know today, approved in 2001. Yes, the tampon labeling battle spanned over 20 years.

• To reduce the risk of TSS, you are supposed to select the lowest possible absorbency to meet your needs, and 8 hours is the maximum time you are supposed to wear a tampon without giving things a break, lol.

• Many U.S. hospitals will not provide a menstruating woman in their care with a tampon because of the associated health risks. Again, ridiculous. Hospitals serve up anesthetics, painkillers, dirty Hep C needles from unsavory staff, and drugs that can kill Michael Jackson, but believe the risk-benefit analysis of the tampon is unfavorable? K.

I thought it was fascinating that tampons were so relatively new to the U.S.. It does seem like an obvious and simple solution to a ubiquitous issue. What took so long?

Love of pencils = career choice

Most people make career decisions based on deeply thought-out, long term goals.

I confirmed for myself today, when I stopped dead in my tracks at the Back to School aisle of a popular discount retailer, that the reason I became a teacher is because I love… really truly love, crave, need… school supplies. There is no doubt about it. Markers, index cards, colored pencils, sharpeners, scissors, glue sticks, colorful mini calculators, pencil boxes, stickers, stamps, red pens and pouches are the keys to my heart.

I also didn’t want to use my degree repetitively, tediously pipetting stuff in some laboratory hundreds of times a day, but the major reason I entered education is definitely school supplies.

I only visited the store to purchase diet soda, but I left with 20 boxes of broad tip, bold color markers, 16 multi-colored plastic rulers and 12 Crystal Bic black pens and haven’t felt this good about a purchase since I cashed my first student loan reimbursement check circa “easy money 2002.”

Today’s WaPo Express

Neeee-aaaaat!

Desperate for the variable

I am a teacher in public education in the “inner city.” The kids are great — they like me and I like them, we work well together and even when we don’t, its never that bad. It gets figured out.  What I have not gotten used to, though, is the politics of inner city public education. There are so many eyes watching all the time, trying to analyze and dissect every moment in the classroom to see if they can pinpoint the reason for those bad student achievement and proficiency numbers: literal politicians both local and national and international, community watchdogs, think tanks, universities, the mainstream media, etc.

Sometimes I can tell that an adult researcher, consultant or administrator observing my school or my classroom almost wants me (or any teacher) to screw up or wrong a child in some way, so that at least they will have some tangible school-based (as opposed to home or community based) causation to report on that isn’t related to socioeconomics, culture, parenting or poverty. It’s not even with malice that they hunt for teacher failure or slip-up. Instead, they are desperate to turn in something to their bosses, desperate to have a legitimate thesis or new find in their papers, desperate for identifying some service variable that can be mediated or modulated to gain improvement. It’s laughable. I have only been teaching for three years and the routine of this is already tiring and annoying. The research is so unscientific, so self-fulfilling, that its hard to imagine any educational journal getting respect.

Right now, the popular cause to identify for student failure is the teacher. The teacher might not be certified or “highly qualified.” The teacher might be lazy or old or set in their ways. Even still, the teacher might be young and energetic but not have the right training or professional development. The teacher might not be working hard enough or might not have classroom management. The teacher doesn’t employ “culturally relevant” practices. The teacher doesn’t differentiate. The teacher isn’t inclusive. The teacher isn’t [fill in educational jargon/buzzword of your choice]. The teacher needs a mentor — lets hire some “expert” (a teacher who doesn’t want to teach anymore) to guide them on their path. Some haven’t been teaching long enough (inexperience) while others have been teaching too long (stagnation). There are a million reasons why the educator is the new “only variable” in the system.

Because of this “teacher is the major variable” mentality, I am forced to spend more time discussing how I do my job, meeting with other people that have the same job to talk about how we do our job and documenting that I really do my job, that actually getting around to the job itself is last. It’s not like this documentation and meeting is like some normal, annoying but necessary recording of events and sharing of information you see in the private sector. It takes up the major portion of your contracted time and you are judged more on this than on your actual teaching skills.  As an educator, you get 1-3 formal observations of your teaching per year, but you better turn in those meeting minutes you typed up and that long form, A1d263X46, showing you implemented standardized probes based on that skill weakness data you spent two hours graphing in Excel from the last benchmark assessment!

I am sure there are plenty of bad teachers out there teaching away (or not) in the inner city. Just like there are lots of inefffective government bureaucrats and union workers. It’s inherent in a union job that some will be skating by because of the lack of competition for their job, but is it moreso a problem in education? In the inner city? I think not. It doesn’t make sense that there would be an outlying surge of ineffective people in education as opposed to any similarly styled professional public service. I’ve met a few, but it has not been a pervasive problem in my experience with teachers.

And if it is the teacher that is the problem, why aren’t there similar problems in the suburban schools? Since there are so many ineffective teachers in place, why don’t these environments have the same problems? Think about this: if you were lazy and decided that the best profession to be lazy and still keep your job was to become a teacher — where would you choose to work? The inner city with all its politics, challenges, energy requirements and lack-of-achievement-stress, or the suburbs, where your clientele is involved, your students are well-fed and nurtured in the “value your education” doctrine of success and where meeting federal guidelines for achievement isn’t as much of a struggle? The choice for the ineffective and lazy teacher is clear!

If you really want to find mediocrity in teaching that still gets by, I suggest a study of an A+ school that blows federal achievement standards out of the water.

My point is that nobody has an exact answer as to why public education in America’s inner cities is not working out the way we would like. There are a plethora of correlations that can be analyzed and they all intermingle in a soup that is nearly impossible to deconstruct or “uncook.” All we can do is control for the variables we are able to manage, work hard, and hope for the best. The blame finger isn’t solving anything and nobody (really, nobody) has any new idea that will work across the board.

I do love the job when I am actually getting to do it. It’s fun, never boring, is challenging, requires constant flexibility and, best of all, kids are interesting and inspiring them (and even just trying to) is meaningful, fulfilling work. I’m also really good at it — by my own account and by the account of all those silly data measures that the watchful eyes employ. I mention this because my opinion is not based on being slighted or discouraged by negative feedback. I get consistent, overwhelmingly positive feedback regarding my performance from all the stakeholders and I am apparently exactly what everyone is looking for in the field (because of all those bad teachers they need to replace, lol).

Still, 12 of 105 students failed my class last year. The current educational mantra would have me believe that I failed them, instead. Is that accountability or desperate excuse?

Planet Earth doesn’t need to be saved

My opinion on climate change and its significance has changed a lot over the past two years. At this point, I am less concerned with who is right about anthropogenic climate change and more concerned with how silly the arguments on the “believe in climate change” side have become. In fact, they use outward, open lies to make their case.

Paul Krugman recently had an article on NYT.com talking about how the denial of climate change is “betraying the planet” and is “treason against the planet.” Intellectual dishonesty — fallacy — lies!  This planet existed long before humans arrived. What made the human species possible is multiple rounds of climate change in both directions (heat and cold) that caused mass extinctions, changes in the landscape on the Earth and the opening of the hegemonic niche we filled and exploded out of  to dominate the planet. We would not exist in our current form had climate changes of eras past not paved the way.

So, the idea that ignoring climate change is somehow “wronging the planet” is absurd on its face and any intellectually honest scientist from any field knows this to be true. It is for human’s sake that climate change is a concern. If we want the stability of knowing that we can stop the Earth’s constant, effervescent and beautiful change so that it may stay what we want it to be, then by all means we should fight climate change of any kind and of any source (natural or anthropogenic)

What killed the dinosaurs? The layperson might say it was an asteroid. No, stupid, the asteroid killed off some dinosaurs but the CLIMATE CHANGED because of the asteroid impact and the dinosaurs were no longer able to meet their needs — they were no longer best adapted to their environment — so they lost the game of evolution. Was this treason against the planet? Maybe Nancy Pelosi should get a bill passed outlawing asteroids.

The planet is a morally neutral thing — there is nothing that can be “good” or “bad” for it. There are things that are good and bad for the current climate status quo on this planet. But if maintaining the status quo on the planet is your goal, then what you are really saying is that you want to preserve the planet the way it works best for humans. The planet is still going to spin and life is still going to change and evolve when the climate changes. It just might not be us that dominates it. What about the life form that randomly evolves the ability to derive energy from plastics (plastic digestion)? It will rule the Earth until plastic runs out! So was it morally wrong for us to discard plastics? LOL, obviously not. (I am aware that the plastic discussion is a bit off topic, but its relevance to the “save the planet” rubbish is clear.)

The last 5 major mass extinctions on the planet are a result of climate change. Climate change happens for various reasons — asteroid impacts block sunlight, volcanoes emit gasses, humans have an industrial revolution, etc. This time, humans have a hand in it. Does that make it any different or any less natural of an occurrence? No — climate change is climate change and it is biological life’s stimulus on this planet. The ONLY reason any person on this planet needs to be concerned about climate change is for selfish, species-ist reasons. The systems we’ve built and the civilization we have created are based on stable climate and known landscapes. If and when those change, life is going to be more challenging and difficult for us. It may even make room for a new hegemonic species should we not have the evolutionary machinery to endure. Fantastic! That is real biodiversity.

At the end of the Permian, there was a mass extinction that wiped out over 90% of biodiversity on the planet. Then the dinosaurs happened. Then we happened. This fact alone demonstrates how absurd and masturbatory things like the Endangered Species Act and climate change politics truly are. I will elaborate on environmentalism, endangered species and biodiversity at a later time.

As long as the “climate change is real” people continue to blatantly lie about the motives of the movement (save the Earth! You can’t save the Earth — its doing just fine!!!), I will not subscribe or support it. It is not okay to lie with good intentions about the environment. Environmentalism is a biologially selfish cause for people who like to masturbate in public with ideas that feel good.

The Secret is There is No Secret

These girls haven't yet found out that they won't be finding out. Go ahead and unravel those little scrolls... ain't no secret answer there, baby.

I thought it was bad when I had discovered that the adults lied about the existence of Santa Claus. I mean, at that point I was well aware that God didn’t exist, but Old Saint Nick seemed somewhat plausible in comparison. At least Santa was human, right? Nevermind the tales of  inhuman speed and agility in the face of extreme, morbid obesity… Santa was legit. And then I found out he wasn’t, had some symptoms of childhood PTSD and moved on. Fine, I lived through it.

But when were these adults going to tell me that nobody was going to share with me the “secret” after college graduation? This whole time, I thought there was some secret to “satisfied living” or “achieving fulfillment and happiness” or “figuring out your life and who you are”  that adults knew about already and that would, logically and fairly, be passed down when the time was right. Clearly, that time would be after college when I would have to start surviving in the human civilization sans the “Pass Go” card of being written off as a dependent on someone else’s tax return. No such thing occurred.

With that gawdy regalia already returned to the monopoly-holding Oriental Trading Co. of Graduation, Herff-Jones,  and my overpriced degree and first job in hand, I waited for the elder to pass on The Knowledge. It never came.

Instead, it was revealed to me only through the prolonged silence of these adults that there really isn’t anybody (adult, elder, or supernatural) that has the answer. I have discovered that nobody knows what they are doing, really. All the adults are just making it up as they go along! Some suck at it, some fake it.  Those who “succeed” (what does that even mean?) at it  aren’t using any legit, universal, transferable formulas to get there, that’s for sure.

This would have been a nice wollop of information to prepare for prior to graduation, but I guess they didn’t want to spoil the excitement I was feeling about the prospects of the future. Currently, I have no idea who I am, what I want to do or can do with my life other than some vague notion of what I heard I should do. And I would be unable to define “happiness” in the same way more than 2 days in a row because what I think it might be changes with my mood. Yessss!

Japan had a “Lost Decade” of slow economic growth? How about I’m having a lost decade in my moral, social, financial and emotional security called “My Twenties.”

So I have decided this:

I am either 1) having one of those self-indulgent quarter-life crises of my generation,  2) am severely depressed and in need of heavy-duty SSRIs and an in-house prescribing nurse, 3) am too insightful and intuitive for my own good (“I just get it”) or I have some combination of all of these.

I bet it’s number 3.

In any case, here’s hoping I have garnered some satisfying life skill by 2014…