Bumping Uglies with Shoppers

Usually the shrill squeals, grunts, and rattles of highly-used shopping carts can be heard an aisle away. As hundreds of reluctant wheels struggle against the floor, they can even be heard  over the screaming tot putting on his best performance for Frosted Flakes...

Until you don't hear one:

Well, I did NOT hear this buggy approaching, neither did I see the maybe 4-foot-10 person willing it along.

Folks,
I made a slight collision with a Walmart shopper. Thankfully the actual impact belied our speed, as we both seemed to be moving with a sense of urgency. (It was just a few ticks past noon--seemingly national lunch hour, which is basically a rush hour.)

Clearly she was a patron; I was only there for the restroom. Not sure why I felt the need to share that last bit, but it's true. Since the guys took an unusually long lunch, and I needed only to have a go at the restroom--I brought my lunch today!--I made an adventure out of finding the perfect place. Walmart it was. I drank lots of Powerade today, ok?

In all actuality I only nudged the front of her cart, causing it to veer an innocuous five centimetres to my left, her right. Perspective is important, right? At most our combined energy may have 'ruffled' a bag of Lay' s. But even that is a stretch, as we all know those bags are 70 percent air.

Pardon my digression. I've had minimal coffee.

...Anyhow, we collided, and upon our very slight impact, all of my preconceptions about the typical Walmart shopper surfaced--so I braced for it: the mumbles, creative insults, a drunken fist, maybe even a prison shank? Don't judge me, because A), memes, and B), television. Milliseconds after impact I visualise Michelle's number (my lawyer), which is silly because she's not a defense attorney. :)

Fight or Flight? Neither, civility instead:

Because my limbic system, at this time, chose to commandeer the rest of my brain, an apology on my behalf was severely delayed. Though, when I did think to say sorry for our little bodily fender bender, she had beat me to it. Looking up from her receipt, (distraction, the reason we crashed), she said, 'Lo siento papito.' I replied, 'No problem ma'am, I'm sorry about that.'

Because I'm an idiot, I didn't realise that she announced her apology in Spanish until after I had expressed my own sorrow. So, with my caveman Spanish (use your imagination), I made light-hearted jokes, at which she laughed, and wished me well in an earnest, and grandmotherly fashion.

She was a kind lady. Gently aged, I saw that time had put wrinkles around her honest smile and warm eyes. Apparently she has been wearing them both for a long time, and she wore them pridefully.

Lesson to myself and anyone who accepts it: Chin-up and put your best self forward; you never know who you're going to 'run into'.

Cheers and love you meme it,
Derrick

Not to Envy

In a paradoxical way, I am jealous of the ignorant, the passionless, and robotic.

Perhaps ignorance is bliss after all. For, how can you suffer if you're comfortably snuggled up to the blind warmth of oblivion? How can one truly grieve failure if one doesn't know his unhindered potential?

I envy that their hearts are impregnable to the mite-sized seeds of love that could be sowed from the mere interaction with a stranger. Seeds that would germinate and test the material and capacity of their tenderness--the mind's heart.

Only sometimes I wish I were like the passionless: the ones who lack the ability to be awestruck at the predictive powers of physics, and at how DNA sequencing illustrates a beautiful, ordered hierarchy from mankind to plant life. (Science champions the notion and reality of interconnectedness. Ideological barriers are man-made.) Imagine never having known of the beautiful journey of making love to witnessing the birth of it. You'd never have to suffer it's loss.

Imagine not knowing that you are allowed to think freely. You wouldn't be subjected to the wrath of the robots for doing so. You wouldn't be castigated for having dissenting ideas in a mini-world of radical conformists.

But that's a life I don't want. I'd rather feel. I'm a being. I'm sentient. I'd rather make love than lose it. I'd rather laugh, learn, and live; allow my heart to be riddled with emotions. Easily, I choose to remain hyper-aware, cognizant of the fact that I'll witness the details of pain as well as the beautiful things. Without a doubt, I'll trade no tangible thing for my imagination--and as of this sentence, I'm sure that the aforementioned jealousy was just a fleeting figment of just that--my imagination Because I do NOT envy them.

Have a good one lads and lovelies,
Derrick

Depression isn't invincible.

All jokes aside, at least some of them:

 I've recently learnt that an acquaintance of mine took her own life. This person, unbeknownst to me, was afflicted with severe depression, and ultimately never regained herself.

 Irrespective of who you are, you are subjected to the elements of life on a daily basis, for an indeterminable amount of time. These elements can sometimes penetrate even the thickest layers of armour that we try to employ.

The more aware you are, and the keener your senses, it seems the more likely you are to be affected. The world--or universe--isn't like us. It doesn't shield itself with makeup; it doesn't clothe it's realities and laws. It isn't as forgiving as our loved ones.

These realities can make us emotionally rigid. Well it is known in engineering and to the average bloke, that rigid, inflexible things break. The mind is no different. Depression afflicts a solemn abundance of people.

I've personally grappled with it.

 Resilience, creativity, and inspiration is key in ridding such an ailment. What I mean by being resilient here, is merely focusing on the present, taking it for what it is, and flowing through it to the next moment. Don't settle in a negative moment when life doesn't settle--time is progressive. Move with it in awareness.

 Exercise your inner creativity; exploit it.
One of the best things is that your personal world is malleable. With diligence and determination you can mould it, over time, into what you fancy it to be. In essence, you are one hundred percent free to CREATE your reality. To a degree, you can 'think' things into existence.

 The mind is trainable. You can, if you aren't careful set it in a pattern of always seeing the worst in things. There's no way everything on this 6.6 sextillion ton earth (yeah earth's a fatty) is bad for you, nor is everyone as malicious as they seem (except some politicians). With a careful eye and properly tuned mind, you can learn to see the good in things.

 Inspiration is wisdom. It is that clarity you seek when tears cloud your vision. It comes in various forms. For me it's reading, writing, and conversing with people whom I look up to--or at least reading about them--at Starbucks. Love that place.

 There is nothing like that one line you randomly read that speaks profoundly to the most bruised parts of your heart and mind. Nothing compares to that one person who offers a sturdy shoulder when life offsets your equilibrium. And if you are an artist, how great a pleasure it is to brush your emotions on that canvas? How cathartic it is to allow your pen to sob lyrics between naked lines?

 Depression isn't invincible. You are. If you choose fight and learn each day, you will mentally grow each day. It's not about your body armour; it's very much so about your resilience.

 Depression dies without you. It needs your mind to live in, and just as cancer can metastasize, this ailment possesses the ability to spread as well. From your mind it controls your job, ability to love, and ability to focus on the now; and that's toxic to your well being.

 Be brave; be honest; and be determined to be the victor. If you are struggling with depression of any kind, understand that you CAN do something about it. Please do something about it. Talk to someone (a professional or someone who loves you). If it might save a life, or kindle a spark of hope, I will talk to ANYONE personally.

 It needs YOU. Show it that it is unwelcome, always and forever. 

Cheers

The Character of An Intellectual, Mr. C. Wright Mills

The ability to be inspired is one of the grandest attributes that a person can possess. C. Wright Mills had precisely that quality. And his works provide a plethora of evidence, and serve as respectable illustrations of how he was influenced. Noticeable echoes of Marxism, Weberian Sociology, and the Pragmatism of George Heber Mead live within the pages of his writings.

Consequently and fortunately, my reading over biographical books and articles of Mills has increased my awareness of my own capacity to be inspired. Keeping the mind vacant to the brilliance of others is essential to the luminosity of one's own mind, I would opine.

Who is C. Wright Mills?
Charles Wright Mills greeted Waco Texas on the 28th day of August, in 1916. He would mature to be a notable sociologist, professor, and writer.

As young Mills matured, he experienced the severing of several relationships he had formed over the years, due to the frequent movement of his family. This subjected the young scholar to a good deal of seclusion.

Mills continued his education to a plausible extent; moving on after high school (Dallas Technical High School) to embark on collegiate scholarship at Texas  A&M University. However, his tenure at A&M  ended prematurely; instead, he graduated in 1939 from the University of Texas at Austin.
An undergraduate degree didn't suffice for the eager Mills. He received a doctorate in sociology in 1941, through the academic programme of the University of Wisconsin--Madison.

An Amourous man
While his neurons fired away, as they should with any man of thought, his heart proved to be just as fiery. In fact, it was indeed his studies that led him to meet the woman that he would marry.
Dorothy Helen Smith too studied at Texas--a place that seemingly taught the two to fall in love with one another. The duo married; and Mrs. Wright swiftly began to demontrate her suport for Mills.

She is responsible for an appreciable amount of work to financially support herelf and her newly-wed mate, as he mentally muscled through the demands of graduate studies. Further, she lent a typist's and editor's hand to Mills' jottings. For him such assistance would prove professionally helpful--very helpful.

For whatever reason, Charles Mills didn't find himself sated by having experienced marriage only once thus far, he went on, later in life to propose marriage to two other women--both accepted--but I needn't elaborate on the other two lovely ladies. If you wish to read further into romance, 50 Shades of Grey may be able to provide your poison. Or, you could wait until my pen feels naughty. I'm dying of digression here.

Rolling Stone
Just as was commonplace during his more tender youth, Mills moved. It could be quite the struggle for one to harness their growing potential while sedentary; being idle was something that he would never master.

Formal education credentials are considered commendable, widely. But to turn training into honest labour augments credibility. With this new move--to the University of Maryland--Mills begins his journey to establish credibilty.

He was made professor of sociology, but he only held the position for four years. I suppose his ambitiousness overcame him.From there Mills left to accept a position where he would be a research associate at Columbia Univesity's Bureau of Applied Social Reasearch. He excelled on to be deemed assistant professor of the sociology department.

Confidence and Independence
Mills was very much so the autonomous man. In my opinion, one of the most outstanding things Mills ever articulated is that he is a "Wobbly". His words were: " It's a kind of spiritual condition...Wobbly is not only a man who takes orders from himself. He's also a man who's often in the situation where there are no regulations to fall back upon, which he hasn't made up himself. He doesn't like bosses, capitalistic or communistic, they're all the same to him. He wants to be, and wants everyone else to be, his own boss at all times under all conditions and for any purposes they may want to follow up. This kind of freedom is Wobbly freedom."

I welcome such freedom, and can admire the person who could fancy such an idea. I interpret this as having healthy understanding of one's self and one's society. It requires the confidence to have and unshakeable belief in one's self, with the courage and love to believe in others.

His Influences:

Marxism
While Mills never claimed himself to be Marxist, he openly expressed his appreciation for Marx, saying: "I believe Karl Marx one of the most astute students of society modern civilisation  has ever produced; his work is now essential equipment of any adequately trained social scientist as well as any properly educated person."

He didnt mean that Marxism was the definitive rule of sociology, clearly; he was merely demonstrating Marxism's importance. He respected the tradition of the science of it.

The premise for Marxism is a materialist understanding of how society develops. Born in the near centre of the 19th century, it combines an organised interpretation of history, philosophical anthropology and socio-political programmes.

Weberian Sociology
Max Weber was a bit more of an influence on Mill's sociology. The German born sociologist has a system that is composed of the kinship of institutional orders. Mills understanding of Weber's structure is that it's capitalistic. Well, considerable volumes of his work were indeed of capitalism. Regarding the matter, Weber contended that strong capitalism requires specific institutions, economic and non-economic.Though he warned that capitalism will crumble if something else isn't provided--insert it if you know it.

The Pragmatism of George Heber Mead
He wasn't solely a sociologist. Mead boasted the title of American philosopher and psychologist. Philosophers who lean towards pragmatism, direct attention to the development of the self and the objectivity of the world within social parameters that "the individual mind can exist only in relation to other minds with shared meanings."(Mead)

Indigenous to the United States, Pragmatism began circa 1870. The central point of Pragmatism involves analysing conjectures, or more precisely, hypotheses by tracing their "practical consequences." It is the pursuit of a predicted truth--a truth that must be substantiated by way of practical models and means.

George Mead was instrumental to the work of Mills, who explicitly bows to Mead in his book Character and Social Structure. He expressed how he'd like to marry the pholosophical schools of thought of Mead and  Freud, so that he could " arrive at a convergence of the social and psychological bases of personality."

Died as a Great
Mills went on to have a number of works published. Before leaving this life peacefully, in a gentle sleep, he applied the final touchces to the Marxist. His tenacity, passion, and assertiveness is remembered through his journals, books and other contributions to social science. He was known to stand firmly for what he knew to be true, a quality we all could benefit from utilising. Today, his words stand firmly on the pages that many sociologists and other intellectuals look to in respect.

-sreehc, Derrick Antonio

Short(lexically) and sweet(southern iced tea) social deformity

Silence and humility minimizes mystery. 

We are all essentially the same. We are nobodies; but collectively, we are as we should be: perfect, dynamic, strong. Independently, we are a fallible people. It's part of the design. The atoms which compose us aren't human alone. It is requisite that there be enough of them, and other factors for them to create the imperfect flesh that we see as human. 

If we were to visualise a single person as being a single atom, it should be easy to put in perspective the importance of the billions of people that populate the world today. (Deem me crazy if you like. I assure you that's not a unique opinion.) 

It seems as if there exist some natural  intent of humanly oneness. The separation of these atoms facilitates the separation of life, as we know it--or do we know it? 

But this understanding is contrary to  what we want. I shouldn't be elaborating on the cohesion of humanity. We don't want to converse about atoms, we much rather fancy how we could atomically bomb--socially. And we appear to be somewhat at work at it. 

As an individual, I can admit that I like a good fight. Sometimes I might prefer to watch a bout from the comfort of my couch (or bar stool. Cheers to that), and at seldom times I like to go a few rounds myself.  

However, my individual and minute quarrelsome nature isn't our problem. We don't spar as a whole--we war, and there are no handshakes involved. Well we handshake politically, but its bullshit. 

As I've asserted, we are nonetheless the same in our nothingness. But such a humble idea isn't soluble in some of the acidic ideals many of have in our heads. We find it necessary to sequester ourselves. We form perforations where none are needed--and those who aren't malleable are targets. 

 The nonverbal communication of the "in crowd" is almost deafening; and if we were to tune down the volume, what we would hear is infantile mockery.  We cringe at the non-elitist, the independents--independence--one of our ever so esteemed tenets of America. 

One of the most popular(and loosely used) adages is "ignorance is bliss". Most of us are ignorant of faults of our own. Some of us disguise our transgressions by illuminating the troubles of others. I find bliss in being thought ignorant; it's those times especially that people unintentionally shower me with information, saving me effort. 

What if ordinary  nobodies were required to have a Juris Doctor degree before they could judge ordinary nobodies? With proper illumination, dirt is evident on anyone, but that's not law or anything. 

-sreehc, DeRrIcK aNtOnIo

I Think I Can--nabis

We live in a chemical world, in this pharmaceutical day and age. Many of these chemicals can have deleterious effects on health, while others are as harmless as some of the endogenous chemicals of the body, such as our endorphins.

The pharmaceutical that I have chosen to expound upon requires no formal introduction, as it is ubiquitously known. Whether we like it or not, cannabis is a household name. Or perhaps one might be a mite more familiar with its less Latin  name --WEED.

What's my position? I'd delight in telling you. I hope to, through the presentation of objective information, and humoured opinion, demonstrate that Mary Jane isn't as evil as people mention her to be. I am not implying her innocence, as much as I'm alluding to the undue derision she faces. Should one be qualified to judge? Well, I'd venture to say hell yes (no pun intended on the devil's lettuce). If someone  wishes to offer opinions opposing its medicinal and/or recreational use, I'd at least like for them to have invested time in research. I will concede in advance, that requiring someone to have had used marijuana before they are qualified to opine against it, hints at bias. Therefore, research and conversation shall suffice. Telling someone not to do something because it is bad, is a very impoverished reason not to do something. Some things necessitate a bit of elaboration.

What is marijuana?
As mentioned in past lines, marijuana is known in the botanical world as Cannabis Sativa and Cannabis Indica. It is possible to hybridize the said two to produce a multitude of other strains. These two seem to be the main bunch.

Sativas are known to grow much taller than Indicas, reaching just over four metres. Indicas are the denser, bushier of the two, and reportedly cause a different euphoria than Sativa. This is due to it having different concentrations of the cannabinoid CBD --one of the chemicals that will be an instrumental part of the coming lines.

What causes the high (euphoria)?
Behind the scenes and smoke screen, there are a few things known as cannabinoids that induce that psychoactive effects on the brain. THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) is likely the most familiar cannabinoid to persons who use marijuana, and to those who enforce legislation against it; THC is the main psychoactive cannabinoid in the plant. When THC is derived from plants, its deemed a phytocannabinoid, and is to be called delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol. I mention this because there's a form of cannabinoid in another well known place -- the human body. They are called endocannabinoids, produced endogenously by us and other animals (yes you are an animal, get over it, Go Darwin!).

Another cannabinoid contributing psychoactively is Cannabidiol, often writen shorthandedly as CBD. It comes second in being the most plentiful cannabinoid in marijuana. CBD has slightly different influences, in that it is psychoactive, but not quite intoxicating. Yes that is possible. When seeking marijuana for medicinal use, such a characteristic might be attractive to persons looking to mitigate their medical woes without experiencing a high. Speaking of medicinal use, cannabis offers a sincere promise, in respect to it being a treatment for an array of ailments.

Medical Application:
Researchers at the University of California Center for Medicinal cannabis Research have been diligently at work studying the notorious plant. And as you may suspect, or perhaps not, the "buzz" is actually true--that cannabis indeed proves itself in the field of medicine.

Regarding pain, cannabis demonstrated not only that it can quell pain, but also augment the effects of prescription medication. A doctor at UC San Francsco (Dr. Donald Abrams), and one from UC San Diego (Dr. Ronald Ellis), found this to be true when marijuna was administered to HIV and AIDS patients. The subjects reported a significant decrease in pain--pain that could be brought about by the simplest of stimuli.

In another blog post, I spoke of a handful of unfortunate truths tethered to cancer. I then attempted to elevate spirits by bringing the news of the latest scientific research aimed at eradicating cancer, to the eye of the everyday person--my two readers. Stem cells were the good news then.

As of now, it is cannabinoids. In numerous studies, they showed remarkable  ability to restore appetite in terminal cancer battling patients. One particular study, led by Dr. Wendy Wismer of the University of Alberta, provides an appreciable illustration. In her study, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, and a placebo was administered to a 21 person group. Intuitive to many of us, the ones who were treated with THC experiened a heightened appreciation of food. For those who lack the desire to nourish themselves,  due to cancer, or the powerful medicines used to treat it, this is a wonderful thing.

Scientists have discovered that CBD alone has tons of rewarding properties and uses, remember--we cannot point the scolding finger at its use as an excuse to get stoned; CBD differs from THC in a notable way. It's much less intoxicating. Some even use such language as "non intoxicating".

Cannabidiol has been found to have anxiolytic (anti-anxiety), anti-inflammatory, anti-pain, and anti-spasm properties. Its anti-spasm properties has earned the attention of many doctors who believe that it could treat epilepsy. It does. However, the government doesn't see it this way.

What the GOVERNMENT say:
It is as simple as this: the government has their arms folded like a tot coming down off a temper tantrum. Cannabis is illegal in almost every state in the U.S. Whitehouse.gov maintains that marijuana is a harmful, schedule 1 drug. By definition, a schedule 1 drug has high potential for abuse, and hasn't any currently accepted medical use in the united states. Well, most politicians aren't scientists, science advocates, or doctors. It isn't requisite that they are. But it would be appreciated if some of them didn't keep their minds so debilitatingly closed.

The website goes on to explain how heavy, "chronic" use of the drug can be problematic, with regards to health. From what orifice are they speaking? Researchers and decent persons of sound minds, aren't endorsing massive, "chronic" use. If you understand that your bottle of Centrum helps to promote good health, and you ingst the entire contents of the bottle, then you are an imbecile.

I urge the government, on a federal level, to go a step farther than legislation. They should take huge leaps in educating themselves in the groundbreaking advancements in science, and find the key that they seemed to have misplaced, the moment they closed their minds. Maybe then they could be more qualified in disseminating mandates, and general information to the American people. We need to know more than what we are forbidden to do.

Now, guess who is a perfect candidate for a urinalysis now--this guy. Oh well, I've gone to the loo in court before. And I did it pro se.
-sreehc, Derrick Antonio

Nasty Cancer and The Grand Potential of Stem Cells

It is with ease that I revere our foot soldiers who have been summoned to battle. I especially lend unwavering empathy to those combating an inextinguishable, mental, and emotional flame that painfully burns within their memory, complicating life. 

However, with my rather peculiar way of thinking, the above thought led me to think of another very real war, one that has existed for as long a time as we have--this is none other than the gruesome war on disease. 

We often neglect to adequately appreciate the scientists, physicians, and persons whose bodies are reluctantly the host to these dreadful illnesses.  They are inarguably the most courageous of all. 

Herein, I will shed light light on the darkness of cancer. And speak to the promising research of stem cells, which may be microscopic, but are nonetheless huge due their potential to revolutionize medicine. 

MORTALITY: 

This year alone, more than 1.4 million people have battled cancer to their last literal breath. Too add to the gloom, the World Health Organization has projected that an estimated 9 million people will perish in 2015, due to this pathological beast. 

HOW DOES CANCER PROVE LETHAL?:

Malignant growth not only compromises the health of the particular organ that it parasitises, but it could metastasize (spread to other areas of the body). Just as we require sustenance to power our biological machines, each cell of our body independently has the same taste for nutrients. And any amount of nutrients requisite to facilitate angiogenesis is utterly gluttonous; these antagonistic cells deserve to feed on no one. 

Because cancer cells cannot grow very large alone, they rob nearby blood vessels. They do so by delivering signals that cause the neighbouring vessels to sprout toward them, thereby establishing a direct source of nourishment. 

If said cells were on a vital organ, it should be conceivable how such a stealing of its nutrients could jeopardize the organ. Moreover, as cancerous tumours grow,  they could physically obstruct necessary processes by their size alone. Visualise cancer in the digestive system, for example. If it is largely the function of the digestive system to allow the body to absorb nutrients, and there's a malignant growth in part of the intestine, it's quite clear how this could be life threatening. If one cannot properly absorb sustenance, then life would be difficult to sustain. 

MODERN SCIENCE:

While I am a huge advocate of antioxidants and healthy eating habits (irrespective of my fat kid snacks), which are too proven to lessen to a degree, one's chances at cancer--via round house kicking free radicals--recent research have taken it medically to another level. This is partly through the study of stem cells. 

Firstly, what are these stem cell thingamajigs I speak of? Stem cells are cells (duh) that haven't specialised to form a specific tissue of the body--differentiated cells. 

There are a few select methods of obtaining these undifferentiated cells: Through a process, namely pheresis, stem cells can be extracted from the blood of a donor.  --This isn't quite hemophobe  friendly; my condolences. Another rather invasive method of extraction is harvesting. This involves the drilling into bone to extract the cellular nectar. And then there's the god forbidden embryonic stem cells. As some of you may know, this is the most controversial of the methods of extraction that are practiced. It poses ethical questions that are difficult to reach agreement on. The Catholic Church are known for their strong opposition to embryonic stem cell research, and according to whom you speak with, they are opposed to stem cell research as a whole. 

STEM CELLS FIGHTING CANCER!!

In Japan, researchers have brilliantly demonstrated that it is indeed possible to make cancer specific immune system cells. These disease fighting cells were engineered from induced pluripotent stem cells. Generally these sort of cells originate from an adult somatic cell--a non-pluripotent cell. It might also be worth it to add that induced pluripotent cells are artificially derived, hence the "induced"? 

THE BRAINS:

Shinya Yamanaka, and British scientist John B.  Gurdon, were awarded the 2012 Nobel prize for physiology or medicine, for discovering that they can reprogram mature cells to become pluripotent stem cells. 

Researchers were able to create cancer-specific T lymphocytes from induced pluripotent stem cells. This is bad news (FoxNews) for some cancer. 

Yamanaka found that with utilising four pieces of DNA--known now as Yamanaka factors--adult skin cells could be induced to revert back to a pluripotent state, in which state they can become any cell in the body! This is medically beautiful. 

I hope that we can dramatically reduce the number of tears lost due to mourning the loss of loved ones to cancer world wide. As science grows and tumours progressively shrink, resulting from the progression of science, I have sufficient reason to be optimistic. 

-sreehc

Derrick Antonio