Fear Obesity before Terror

Two items crossed my desk this morning that deserve a moment of thought. The first is the battle between Congress and the White House over SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance Program). I can understand the White House's reluctance to "increase" spending on anything. After all, there is not a lot of money left after their last request for Iraq spending, but in this case, the funds seem to be self-generating (as much as any can be) in the form of a sin tax on cigarettes. Of course, here in the United States, the idea of the sin tax is not as well documented as it is in Canada, but they are starting to catch on. Heck, I would be willing to pay an increased alcohol tax as well if it went to keeping children healthy.

It is the part about keeping children healthy that I am most in favor of. After all, a healthy child will eventually become a healthy adult and a healthy adult will not need as much in the way of medical coverage and costs. This is a key issue and one that is lost on a number of people (but not the drug or insurance industries). Bill Maher, on his HBO program the other night, commented on a Duke study that showed regular exercise and proper diet was as effective in battling depression as Paxil and Zoloft (two highly proscribed anti-depression drugs). Now, I am not belittling depression in and of itself, even though I have a note pad that says something to the effect of "Prozac? Haven't they ever heard of a martini?" I am sure there are some forms of depression that can only be treated medically, but I have to wonder how many of those people currently taking depression medications really need them.

This is a similar argument about ADD and other childhood "diseases" that practically did not exist even a dozen years ago. The reasons for this are pretty easy to document. First, children, generally, received routine, in depth physicals and the doctors that saw them knew their patients. Secondly, the children got a lot more exercise than they do today. Even elementary school students today are coddled to the extent that you would think they were made of fine china. Yet their parents grew up in a age where bicycles were ridden without helmets, playground equipment was often mounted over asphalt and dodge ball, tag and other "socially demeaning" games were routine. Yet we now feel we need to put our children in protective gear to be bused across the street where they are supposed to wait quietly in rows, inside, for school to start. And when was the last time you saw six kids playing a pick up game of any sort? Certainly not in most communities where you need a permit from the jurisdiction to even be on the fields.

We are doing ourselves and the next generation a disservice. We are over medicating, under exercising and generally coddling away any self-esteem or desire to succeed in these kids. Further, we are showing them that, as adults, reacting to irrational fears is perfectly acceptable behavior.

Which brings me to my next point. Tom Toles, the OpEd cartoonist for the Washington Post, had this cartoon in his corner yesterday. At what point are we, the voter, going to actually stop being afraid of our shadow and the shadow of September 11 and get on with our life? In a number of posts around the Internet, those of us that hold the view that being afraid is no way to live are shouted down by the lame argument that "you wouldn't say that if you lost a loved one." Well, frankly, yes, I would. And I tell you this because I have a very pragmatic outlook on life. If it is your time, then there is not a thing you can do about it. This is not to say I do not take the necessary precautions. I lock my doors, I drive defensively and I avoid dark places at night when I am alone. But I have also walked at night in New York, Los Angeles, London, Paris and a dozen other cities and not felt the least bit scared.

If terrorists want to blow up a building, they will find a way to do it. Ironically, terrorism is all about terror (go figure) and the more press they get about the plots they do not execute, the more effective the campaign is. But I really am not about to surrender my liberties and freedoms just to prevent them from blowing up a building or bringing down an airliner. As Americans, we seem to be able to do a pretty good job of that ourselves just through general neglect, yet that does not generate the same degree of fear that a guy with explosives in his shoe does (which would do little more than punch a hole in the plane and force a rapid decent by the way). In some ways, I could almost support the argument of every person carries a gun onto the plane. Almost. I would be more worried about the drunk in 8D shooting me than I am about some nut job hijacking us to Cuba, or Aruba or the White House lawn.

I am not immortal or invulnerable. However, I am not afraid of my shadow or of the boogie man, whoever he might be. When my ticket is punched, that is it, game over. As the comic once said, if I die in debt, I win!