Space Hotel

Space hotel to give rich a thrill that's out of this world: Russian aerospace engineers join race to provide wealthy thrill-seekers with the ultimate holiday destination
(From The Guardian)

Mark's Hotel Review: 1/5 stars

When I saw this hotel advertised in the brochure it sounded wonderful: I could get away from the mundane life here and hang out with the stars! Well, after a long and arduous journey (public transport in the area is non-existant to say the least) I arrived. From the outside the hotel was clean. There was no graffiti, no mess on the streets, in fact, no streets! I felt a twinge of doubt about the lack of people in the area, it was somewhat creepy, the place was devoid of life!

The room I was staying in was comfortable, and I certainly felt a weight off my shoulders at having arrived and being away from the gravity of everyday life. The bedroom and facilities were remarkably clean, but that was hardly surprising: the cleaners would not have had much work to do as both rooms were tiny. Another negative was the décor. They had made the place to look like a space ship, so 1970's, so dated!

The view from the hotel was indeed stunning. Still, looks can be decieving. The surrounding area was inhospitable to say the least. When I asked the staff on duty if there were any cafés or museums around that they recommend they looked at me incredulously. Further, when I told them I was going outside to have a look around, I was told that I would not last long out there alive! Imagine being told that by the receptionist! Needless to say I was too scared to leave the building the entirety of my stay.

Resigning myself to my fate I decided to check out the resturant. Again, it was small, and the same weird space ship decoration was still in evidence there. The selection of drinks was particularly limited and (there is no polite way to put this) half the time it was as if I was drinking recycled urine! Also, the food was all reheated, as if even the staff didn't dare a trip out for fresh vegetables (perhaps even vegetables wouldn't last long around there and, thinking about it now, I don't remember seeing a single tree the whole time!).

Needless to say the hotel did not have a swimming pool, which is a great shame, as the weather was perfect all week. I was just glad to have bought enough to read: I had recently been getting into science fiction and had taken out several books from the library before I left. I do sometimes wonder what it would be like to be in space, quite fun I imagine, certainly better than that small hotel in the middle of nowhere! One out of five, a poor place for a holiday, stay away!

------oo------

So hope you enjoyed my review! Sorry for the long time between posts these days, but there is so much to be doing in the world! At some time I intend to put up some photos of my time in Romania, but it may be a while yet!
Regarding my actual views on space hotels, I am actually in great favour for. Not the hotel per se, but rather that technology is still developed in that direction.
I understand the argument that there are people not being fed enough down here to be wasting money up there. However, it doesn't work like that, it isn't that simple. The people doing this are not choosing between feeding the poor and going into space, they are choosing between building the worlds tallest building or such like and doing this. Besides, it is entirely possible to reduce world hunger and have an active space program.
And it is never just about space hotels, it is about learning how better to take stuff into space, how better to live and carry out experiments in space, about how to overcome huge technological feats. This technology all comes in useful. In a way this is a brilliant plan to save money. Instead of paying to build the rockets and the space centres, and paying the astronauts to go there, you get the astronauts to pay for project and to pay for the privilege of going!
Why do I think it is important to go into space? Well why is it important to explore new areas on the map, or to see how silicon conducts electricity? I think it is the same thing: because you might find something that changes life for the better such as new places to live, new ways to connect to others, new possibilities, things you cannot even imagine until you do the exploration.
There is another rather interesting thing to consider about space travel: for the majority of this planet's existence it has been uninhabitable, and not just at the start. Fairly often most of it is covered in ice, quite often masses of volcanoes trash the atmosphere and plant life all but vanishes. We just don't notice this because we are like mayflies, we live for a day, not even! Our stories that have been passed on for the longest still only tell us about what happened a week ago. Get some perspective - ask a mountain!

So long, and thanks for all the fish...
Mark

Consuming Adjectives

One thing I noticed when in Romania was that fruit and vegetables, as long as you didn't buy them from the new supermarkets that are springing up, tasted considerably better than that available here in our oh so wonderfully developed Britain! Even some vegetables I don't normally like were tasty. Interestingly, a UN or WHO report on Romania I read a while ago referred to its agriculture as being underdeveloped and in need of modernisation through the converting of land to large scale industrial farming. Maybe they mean everyone's food should be brightly coloured, shiny and made of plastic, but that doesn't make sense to me! But oh how stupid I am being, they weren't talking about quality in the report, and there was me thinking that they must have been, me with my mentally abnormal bias towards the health and happiness of individuals; they were talking about maximising outputs and profits. (In fairness they think that this will mean there will be more money available for treating illness, which is an interesting approach to take - reducing the healthiness of food to increase the money available for treating ill health).

Anyway, I rant! The point of this blog was an excellent quote from an article (Gazpacho and Coffee) in Resurgence magazine talking about food quality...

"In Armando’s view, his staff, earning £7 a day and growing their own vegetables amongst the coffee, ate better than most British people earning ten times as much. He went on to say, in a bemused way, that our food seemed to be more about consuming adjectives than quality, citing the packaging in supermarkets and the absurdly florid descriptions on restaurant menus"

'Consuming adjectives'! Yes that sums it up nicely! It is another part of the shared delusion we live under, where words, images and associations become more important than reality*. This is exemplified for me by the use of TV to advertise purfume - if you smell your TV while the advert is playing you will find it smells the same as when the advert is not playing (although if the world had a sense of justice the TV would smell more like excrement when the adverts are on)!

Have a nice day!
Mark

*The question of what do we class as reality is an interesting one. So much of what we take for real is clouded by our preconceptions, like if someone gives you a red sweet and tells you it is strawberry flavoured how you are more likely to taste strawberry, or if you expect a person not to be nice you will see the negatives more, or how you only see certain details of your environment when they have a relevance to you or you purposely open up to them (the sides of roads to me always used to look like green mess, now I see many different plants all with their own styles and uses). What I am suggesting here is that what we believe absolutely to be real contains much that is subjective (not objectively real), and this might have more and more increasing subtle levels to it, until you start to wonder what is true. If you think this is mere philisophical rambling and has no relation to living life then consider how much of your energy is spent chasing or fighting stuff that isn't real, and how much could be gained if we were to see a little bit more clearly, if we were to have a little more awareness.
A further thought on this is, if so much of our world is subjective, and we purposely shape and create this subjective (as is done in advertising), then are we creating a new reality and a new reality with with its own existence and worth? For example, if you buy perfume based on a stylish advert, others may see you as stylish, and you live in a world of style. However I think a new reality isn't created, rather an existing one is perverted. For instance, the basis for judging someone based on style is maybe linked to judging how well someone can look after themselves, which in itself could have worth. However, the world of style, I would suggest, has become divorced from these roots as image is picked up from mass media and is focused on at the exclusion of much else, and being able to fit in with that image may for some be dependent on credit cards or going along with the status quo, both of which right now seem unsustainable and therefore not necessarily the best way you can look after yourself. What do you think? I welcome a discussion on this, so feel free to leave a comment.

"fashion is the antithesis of sustainability"

Welcome to a new era in lazy blogging: I find a really good article, I post it!

The Tyranny of Trends by Charty Durrant

Of course I can't resist airing some views of my own on the subject! But really, read the article rather than my stuff, it is better, I just rant and point fingers!

Anyway, it appears to me that many people claim to not follow fashion, while still actually following fashion: buying new clothes every month or couple of months because other clothes are 'old', or because they have been worn too often, or because they 'just don't look good on me anymore', or for the ultimate ignorance 'because I haven't got anything to wear', is following fashion. For I have not met anyone who has said these things who hasn't got at least ten different outfits in their wardrobes that are the right size and are not falling apart. If you don't believe you are following fashion consider any other culture than the western one (even how our culture was not so very long ago) and see how they compare.

The argument that 'I don't buy fashionable clothing' doesn't hold water because there is a fashion in 'ordinary unfashionable clothes' and a fashion in alternative fashions. Styles change, people buy new clothes, it is the same thing. Marketing departments would not be doing a very good job if they only created sales out of those who willingly follow fashions, so they subtly create stuff for the rest of the market too: fashions for the conscientious, fashions for the unfashionable! Oh and buying organic and fairtrade clothing does not get you off the hook while you still have clothes that are in one piece and fit (and buying nothing is so much more environmentally friendly than buying anything).

Basically, the extremes some people go to make a lot of us look very moderate, but compare our moderation to that of other times and other places and you will see how extravagantly we are living

Also, the article makes a very good case for the benefits of weening yourself off fashion, "We may look good, but we feel bad.". But "Once we dismiss the illusion of glamour and wake up to the power and delight in having less stuff and more time, we can embrace being more human."

Finally, a quote from the article: "As the effects of the credit crunch begin to take hold, psychologists have coined a term for heavily addicted shoppers who eschew food in order to afford the clothing they crave: ‘fashionrexic’". Wow! Scary, but still wow! Who would have guessed what us humans are capable of!

Hmm, so much for lazy blogging!

Happy Valentine's day, or not! (It all depends where you get your gold)

"The production of one gold ring generates on average, 20 tons of mine waste. Gold mining has been linked to violent conflict, has displaced people off their lands and traditional livelihoods, and poisoned waterways with toxic chemicals" (Earthworks article)

But if you are a traditionalist (if indeed gold rings are traditional) all is not lost, because you can get responsibly sourced gold (the above site will probably tell you more)

Anyway, I now know why Mordor in the Lord of The Rings is so dark, why little grows and the inhabitants are angry and twisted - Sauron did not follow The Golden Rules set out by the No Dirty Gold campaign!

I can just imagine Sauron (or the Eye of Sauron) sat at his laptop in the depths of Mordor peering at the No Dirty Gold website reading "As an industry leader, you have a real opportunity to be at the leading edge of the jewelry industry when it comes assuring..."!

Medicine, Money, Malaria and You!

The production and supply of pharmaceutical products is an entirely commercial venture, or in other words, your medicine is supplied by those who have to put profit before social and environmental costs. In the words of the Director of Roche in Korea "We are not in business to save lives, but to make money. Saving lives is not our business."

I have discussed before the problem of pharmaceutical companies manipulating the medical profession in order to make money (see here), but in this post I will address the issue of the provision of health care, of who gets treatment and who doesn't, of who lives and who dies.

In an article in the Independent today it was stated that the weak value of the pound could lead to a shortage of drugs in the UK as imports become less profitable and exports more profitable (see article). Basically, you may not get the medicines you need on time because the money market dictated otherwise. This situation is, however, a very positive one compared to how it is in some other countries or how it could be here in the future.

I first became aware of this problem a few years back, about the time I was becoming interested in studying herbal medicine, when I went to a seminar on using natural medicines in the tropics. The seminar was run by an amazing charity call Anamed (www.anamed.net), whose basic aim is to educate people who may not have access to medicines, such as in parts of Africa, to be able to treat common conditions, such as malaria, effectively with herbs. It was when reading up on the information for this seminar that I found out about the problems concerning the provision of medical treatment and realised how they might apply to Western countries in the future.

In parts of Africa the reasons for the lack of medicines can be many, though mainly it comes down to money. Often drugs are simply not affordable. In some cases where a person can buy the drugs even simple medication may cost a month's wage. In other cases it is the problem of infrastructure that makes drugs inaccessible - health centers are too far away, roads are too poor, deliveries can't get through. So what is done? well, a lot do the only thing that can be done: die. They may die of a serious case of malaria, or they may just die of diarrhoea. So this is where Anamed comes in - teaching simple things like oral rehydration solution for diarrhoea, herbs for malaria (Artemisia annua) and other things.

The question of poverty in Africa is a topic for a different post, but I will look here at how it relates to a specific case, that of malaria. Artemesinin is (in combination with a few other medicines) the leading drug for the treatment of malaria and it is currently extracted from the plant Artemisia annua. It is grown in huge plantations in some African countries, is purchased by pharmaceutical companies at a very low price, it is shipped over to America or a European country, the artemesinin is extracted and then sold back to the African country at a price most people can't afford - so people die. Where the drug is purchased by those rich enough, the money goes back to the pharmaceutical company, meaning the African country gets poorer. The actual herb Artemisia annua can be drunk as a tea to treat malaria and is just as effective as the drug, though taking slightly longer to have its effect.

So anyway, drugs become scarce if a country becomes poor or the infrastructure breaks down, and pharmaceutical corporations follow where the money leads. Who is to say that our country will always stay rich and function smoothly? When you consider the far reaching effects of financial instability (which is likely to increase in the long term) and the looming problems of both the energy crisis and climate change it seems wishful to think that we are immune to these problems. Pharmaceutical companies are no more stable than other industries, such as the automotive industry, or the money grabbing industry. So as things can't or won't stay the same, and as millions are already dying due to the lack of health care, what needs to happen?

Take the money out of medicine

Pharmaceutical corporations should not be allowed to profit from what they do, health should not correlate with your pay packet, essential medicine should be freely available to all whether an individual has money or not. An option may be nationalising the pharmaceutical industry with the development and production of drugs being paid for by the government. This would be easily funded by the savings gained from the NHS not having to buy drugs from pharmaceutical companies and by the profits from the sale of non-essential over-the-counter drugs. Knowledge of how to manufacture the drugs could be freely shared between countries further increasing benefit. Or maybe there is some other scheme that would work, but however it is done it should not be a profit making business. If this was done it would also have the following benefits:

• Doctors would have less bias information on the effectiveness of drugs.
• Research showing harmful effects of drugs would not be hidden.
• More holistic drugs could be researched (pharmaceutical companies don't want people too healthy, it is bad for business).
• Drugs would be freely accessible to all.
• Drug supply would be more stable.
  
• Government money would provide more medicine instead of making a few rich.
• Effective alternative treatments would not be suppressed.
  

Increase the use of natural medicines

• They can be produced where ever in the world you are.
• They are cheap.
  
• They have been shown to be effective (Artemisia annua can effectively treat malaria, with treatment only lasting a couple more days than treatment with Artemisinin).
• People could easily treat themselves for minor complaints, therefore reducing the pressure on the NHS.
  
• They have limited side-effects and are generally more safe.
  
• They can help the local economy when produced and used locally.
• They are much more environmentally sustainable.
  
• Focusing on a more holistic approach to health would mean less people getting ill in the first place.

As always your comments are welcome.

Doctor good, pharma bad?

I know a fair few medical doctors (including four of my own relatives) and without exception all are very good people and very skilled: they are kind and caring, wish the best for others having dedicated their lives to serving others and have undergone extensive and difficult training. How then did they end up with such jerks as pharmaceutical companies? It is like a beautiful, caring, intelligent woman ending up in a relationship with an ugly, twisted, malicious monster!

I'm sure there are nice people working in pharmaceutical companies - in my more sceptical moments I think they just wondered in by mistake and couldn't find the exit, but I'm sure they are there, fervently trying to design a new drug to save the lives of those around them. BUT THEN THERE IS THIS:

"We are not in business to save lives, but to make money. Saving lives is not our business." (Director of Roche in Korea when challenged about providing AIDS drugs to those who couldn't afford them) (article)

"Disease mongering" - Pharmaceutical companies undertaking marketing to convince healthy people they are sick and to make people think mild diseases are more serious (BMJ article)

Pharmaceutical companies trying to bribe governments into allowing their products to be used - even if the science says they are no good (Guardian article)

Pharmaceutical companies ghost writing research to make it look unbiased (journal article) or forcing researchers not to mention harmful effects of drugs (article).

Adverse drug reactions killing over 100,000 people a year in the US (Lancet article) with serious side effects of drug affecting many many more.

Basically, when doctors get a large amount of their information about drugs from drug reps; when training or research centers can be under the pay of pharmaceutical companies; when research and clinical trials contain, for many different reasons, bias; when all other alternatives are suppressed; when pharmaceutical products can involve hidden (or overt) harms: where does that leave medicine?

On the plus side however, I really believe that if pharmaceutical companies' money making motives were removed, the doctor's art and the amazing advances of biomedicine that have been made would loose their tarnish and medicine would really shine again.

As always, your comments are welcome.

Ok, so here goes - death, destruction and rebirth

OK, so here is an issue that I have to address, but it is not an easy one. Those of you who know me will probably have heard me mention these things before because sometimes it just comes out! Still, they are not issues I like to address because it involves human suffering. Still, no harm in starting it off with a cartoon...!


Ok - so it will get positive towards the end, but first, a journey through hell...

So widespread job loss, devaluation of currency, people losing their homes, people going cold and hungry - bad yes? See, this is where it gets difficult, because from much reading, from listening to talks and having discussions I can't help but think that how ever bad that might be, it is possibly better than the main alternative. (There is a third option, a difficult one, but it is there, difficult, but possible). Let me explain.

Economic downturn is causing many problems, however it has some positives: CO2 emissions are set to drop as industry declines (Article - Slump Means EU Industry Carbon Caps No Longer Bite). It is essential that CO2 emissions drop as we are now reaching the point where climate change spirals out of control (Cartoon - Wake Up, Freak Out - then Get a Grip), however, industry is dragging its feet because making proper (real, effective) changes would in the short term damage profits. Is, therefore, a major recession the only way to make them change? I hope not, because who could? Who could wish mass job losses and mass homelessness - no one!

And yet if real changes aren't made - and we are talking big changes, major lifestyle, social, political changes - the alternative is so much worse. If climate change continues to worsen and ecosystems (including the soil which grows our food) continue to die humans die too. Estimates have been made as to how many people would survive, different estimates have been made, the most generous I have found is 1.7 billion people surviving, the worst is 100-300 million people surviving (Article - The Silence of the Greens). There are currently 6.8 billion people alive on this planet. If serious positive changes aren't made 3 out of every 4 people dead by the most generous estimates, 59 out of every 60 dead by the worst estimates. Of course all these people would not die instantaneously, I'm guessing it would be over the next 50 to 100 year. I can't even begin to imagine what that would be like, those are just numbers to me, but if I imagine what that means in terms of my family and friends - this is not a pleasant subject. This isn't something that will happen in the future, it has already started: global food supplies are very low and the number of malnourished people is just about to cross the 1 billion point (Article - Food Crisis Could Worsen Next Year).

So things are going to change and are going to do so with or without our will with either industry continuing and the environment dieing or industry dieing and the environment and people not dieing as much.

OR

The third option, thankfull a third option: we stop fighting (personally and globally), we stop dragging our feet, we get to know our neighbours and our local community, we create loving supportive relationships, we develop a joy in living that is independent of what we own, we help each other learn and develop, we learn how to live sustainably, we develop new skills to help ourselves do this and we share them, we reassess what we really need and stop using what we don't need, we buy local organic food, we leave jobs that cause environmental damage and create life-sustaining jobs, we use less energy, start living together in communities so as to use less energy as a whole, we stop buying stuff, we stop most driving and flying, and more. Only two things are needed to do this...

We have to want to change
and
realise that it is not a sacrifice but
that there is much joy in it.

Really - imagine what it would be like living surrounded by your best friends every day, living in beautiful surroundings, having stress free and worthwhile jobs, being safe in the knowledge that violence has all but ceased, to know you are doing right, to feel love more, to feel connected - it is ours if we want it!

Thank you for listening and please leave comments, I need both your support and disagreements in this! Mark

A quick note to the inhabitants of earth...

To those running businesses and corporations: agree to serious CO2 reductions and find new ways of continuing your business in a healthy way because, as many of you seem yet to have realised, YOU CAN'T MAKE MONEY IF YOU ARE DEAD AND THE WORLD AROUND YOU IS DEAD, YOU IDIOTS!

To those thinking corporations are to blame and politicians should step in: YOU BUY THIS SHIT THAT CORPORATIONS SPEW OUT, where do you think your iPod comes from; your car; your new laptop; your new speakers; your new clothes; the plane you flew abroad in; your new electric toothbrush; the servers that support all your online avatars; your new accessories; all that meat you are eating; your processed food and its packaging; that new clock that looks oh-so-good in your newly decorated kitchen; your new carpets and furniture; your updated appliances, because wouldn't life be easier if your iron heated up quicker and the kettle kept itself warm; your new mobile with new bouncing tv around the globe technology; the technology, factories and transport systems that support all the above. WAKE UP AND STOP KIDDING YOURSELF THAT BECAUSE YOU RECYCLE, HAVE BROUGHT AN ORGANIC TOP AND RESISTED HAVING TWO NEW PHONES A YEAR INSTEAD OF ONE THAT YOU ARE DOING YOUR BIT!

Ok, ok, so I am wrong to shout, it is most understandable that the majority of people have gone down this route, it was seen as the way to progress, the way to happiness, the way to health, the way to respect from your peers. I know me shouting is likely to polarise the alternate views even further, that views become more entrenched with people defensively protecting their views and ways of being, so I apologise and I ask you to recognised it is because of the frustration I feel and the threat I perceive to what I hold dear that arouses my anger.

Thank you for listening and I welcome your comments

Mark