Making Change Making More Change Bit by Bit

One pathway of exploration that this blog has taken me is global health delivery. It was initially an interest in how business management systems could improve the efficiencies of social beneficial delivery systems such as global health. It has been a fairly frequent topic of contemplation both here and at Milestones for a New Millennium. Over time I have become interested in participating, first by blogging about the Millennium Development Goals, participating in collective actions such as BlogAction Day Against Poverty and BloggersUnite for Refugees and World AIDs Day, and now by participating with Change.org and creating a fundraising page for FightAIDSTuberculosisMalaria. There is still the internal conflict of having so much to do with the "Real World/Day Job" and not relegating one's self to mere slacktivist mode. Below is the more or less official pitch.

Hello,

I am raising money for FightAIDSTuberculosisMalaria.

Please take a moment to visit my online fundraising page and make a donation. It's really easy - you can donate by credit card and receive an immediate tax receipt for your donation.

Thanks and best wishes,
Brian

Here's my page:

http://www.change.org/myfundraising/FightAIDSTuberculosisMalaria

News from AAAS Chicago meeting: In-Depth Reporting From Scientific American:

This blog features links to both the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and to Scientific America in the right hand column under Science & SciAm Magazines. Scientific American Newsletters recently sent me an update combining both of these resources. The main link is provided below along with links to some of the articles of interest to this blog and my other blog Milestones for a New Millennium. Starting off though is the video blog from Science News. I especially enjoyed the insights regarding Digg.

In-Depth Report: News from AAAS

• At AAAS, Al Gore urges scientists to get involved in climate change debate
  "Keep your day jobs, but get involved in the debate," the former vice president said
• Climate Change Erodes Marine Reserves
  Shifting species may mean less protection for imperiled fisheries
• Rise in Malaria Rates, Drug Resistance Tied to Climate
  At AAAS, a researcher describes how treating more people for the mosquito-borne parasite could lead to more resistance to drugs
• Massive effort underway to save endangered seeds
  In many cases, only a handful of seeds remain from rare varieties of barley, rice and wheat whose history can be traced back to the Neolithic era
• Global warming seen worse than predicted
  IPCC member Chris Field says "the actual trajectory of climate change is more serious" than any of the climate predictions in the IPCC's fourth assessment report

It has been a while since I have explored these resources for new ideas and that has been a detriment for me. While it is not blind faith, I still have a great deal of confidence in addressing many of the problems we face today through technology and science, more on that in the future.

If Money Doesn't Buy Happiness But Happiness Gets Money What Do You Use The Money For?

Mind Hacks looks at the relationship between money and happiness "The relationship between money and happiness:Newsweek has a brief article on what research has told us about the link between money and happiness. Essentially, more money makes you happier until you're comfortable, and then, it really doesn't do much good. "

Another blog post from Fast Company puts the optimal point of money with happiness at, $1.5 million. Googling "'money and happiness' on the FC website. According to this 2003 article, $1.5 million net worth is the magic figure where people's feelings of happiness go from nowhere to nirvana in nanoseconds."

Even more helpful, since getting $1.5 million any time soon is unlikely, is some good advice as to what to avoid being:

Uncomfortably challenged = stress and an untimely death.
Comfortably unchallenged = numb and stagnant; has a strange habit of morphing into uncomfortably unchallenged over time.

The post goes on to discuss finding happiness by following the different drummer in your career. This according to another Fast Company article means happiness comes from figuring out "How to Get the Job of Your Dreams"

"There's heaps of research out there that shows that the quality of your work affects your well-being and mental health. This has spillover effects for your life outside of work," says Professor Sharon Parker, Director of the Institute of Work Psychology at the University of Sheffield. She emphasizes that money is not usually the sole motivating factor behind why people choose to stay in a particular job; more important is whether it's challenging, exciting and stimulating."

Dan Gilbert provides insights into why we are happy and why we are not happy.

It is however Matthieu Ricard: Monk, author, photographer who provides us the habits of happiness.

Fast Funds from the Fat

Professor Tyler Cowen's thoughts have been reflected upon within this site a few times. For the non-economist he is a good mix of technical knowledge and natural narrative. He is "classically liberal" enough to appeal to certain philosophical assumptions of mine and, as a libertarian with a conservative bent, to challenge others. His latest book Discover Your Inner Economist was the inspiration of a Fast Company article Entrepreneurship: Making Money On The Obese.

Here are my thoughts on the article. The link from Fast Company to Marginal Revolution in the article was wrong. The writing was an exercise. What is in truth the third incarnation hopefully has fewer mistakes.

First off its one study and not a particularly extensive one. Second the better question is why does money even small amounts induce people to loose weight while health and social acceptance does not. I doubt its the ability to get a couple extra videos for rent. The answer to the question in the article does anyone dare is obvious - plenty Jenny Craig, Weight Watchers etc. etc. Third the two scenarios are quite different. Professor Cowen's version is negatively re-enforced. Even if it works for a few, the repeat or referred business will drop off fast. The study scenario is positively re-enforced for the participants. The company is the one paying there is no participant contribution. It is the Fast Company version that raises the questionable ethics. Under it, one it has too presume that most don't lose weight so in turn do lose money. It in fact presumes that the study is false and money does not make a significant difference. Finally, because there is now an investment to protect in a group interaction, which was not true of either Professor Cowen's version (no group) or the study version (no investment), there is the potential for sabotage because if others fail I could get more, thereby bringing in the questionable ethics and practical failing of the system. The ethical gray area of making a profit on people's negative self image. I think that's called the fashion industry. Actually the most interesting point raised is by Professor Cowen, an economist who argues, Money isn't always a useful tool in altering human behavior; anyone who's offered financial rewards to their children for doing chores can tell you that the results are mixed. Both costs and benefits it would seem are in the eyes of the beholder.