While running some errands this evening before COB, I was able to listen to quite a bit of NPR, with only brief interruptions and no competition from sweet little voices in the back seat asking me about going to the park or when it's going to snow or what animals eat what (Henry's latest interest, similar to his "Does it bite?" phase. All very important conversations to have in the car, to be sure. But since I rarely tune in around the house, the 5 min here and there during picking up and dropping off and going here or there amounts to 95% of my news intake.
So tonight, just as I was pulling into the driveway, this news headline made me laugh out loud to myself: Swine Flu and Santas, what many groups are doing to prevent further spread of the flu. The gloves are coming off. "We're going to make hand sanitizing part of the Santa Visit Ritual." Maybe it's been a long day, but that just seemed really weird to me.
Next was hearing listeners responses to a story I actually heard part of earlier in the week about breast cancer awareness/prevention/testing/detection. A lot of confusion stemmed from studies indicating that breast self-examinations shouldn't be taught or encouraged. I guess the reasoning is a high number of false-positives that can lead to more testing and that was bad, or something. Whereas simply focusing on "breast awareness" is just as effective. Much as you would be aware if there was a lump on your leg because you are aware of what is normal for your body. Also, "early detection" of breast cancer via self-discovery of a lump usually meant that at that point the cancer had already spread significantly enough that early detection was a mute point. In other words, early detection via self-exam may be a misnomer. I'm sure I got a lot of this wrong, but it's definitely something to be aware of. And, as with most new studies, it is controversial, especially amongst breast-cancer survivors and advocates. For those who are interested, read more here.
Third thing I thought sounded interesting, The Decade's Most Important Recordings. For the record, I'm not a music junkie. And I'm usually not big into Most Important/Top Whatever lists because there's always so much that isn't on it. Yes I own an iPod but my Top 25 Played in iTunes is most likely Children's Music, Audiobooks or Podcasts.
I'm woefully ignorant of a variety of genres and the significance of artists within those. If it wasn't for college roommates back in the day, and later on my husband, I would be even more woefully ignorant. Surprising to me as I reflect on it, the majority of those days were in the previous decade to this one. *sigh*. So it's only through various friends and their recommendations (mostly on their blog playlists) that I have any insight into the modern music world. And the random NPR story of course. But I would like to know more, to a certain extent.
So this list looks interesting, and the comments that inevitably go with it. If for anything to give me some glimpse into what's what. Of course this is subjective to what "they" think is significant. What I like to listen to and think of as good or significant is my own thing. IF I were into lists I'd probably make one of Music That's Significant To Me and paste it down below. But would it really mean anything to anyone else? Besides I've got at least a dozen other things on my to-do list (one kind of list that I DO find essential) that are more important. But most importantly, I have a 2yo climbing on my back who needs her bedtime stories read. So there you go.
7 comments:
Sounds like you and me are the same on music. I guess I got my fill of music in college from some other room mate. It's not that I don't like music. I enjoy it, but when things are loud, I can turn off the radio easier than I can turn off the kids.
I listen to NPR all the time. Welcome to the old woman's club.
Yay for the NPR love! :)
I'm so confused by the new recommendations about BSE and mammograms. I guess I think about 'breast awareness' as different than other parts of my body. I'm much more likely to touch the other parts of my body during an average day than my ta-tas. If I'm sitting talking with friends, I might be rubbing my arm, or itching my leg, or something like that, where I think I have a much better idea of what's 'normal' with those parts. I don't think I really touch my boobs outside of the shower or when I'm heaving them into that horrible man-invention called a bra. :) I guess it's a personal thing for me, because if my aunt hadn't been doing regular BSE she probably wouldn't have caught the small lump that upon follow-up testing proved to be cancer. She was 39. After chemo and radiation, and more regular screenings, more were found in her other breast, and she had a double mastectomy. At 40. If she hadn't done the BSE, the lumps were small enough that they most likely would have gone unnoticed, and with the new suggestions, she would theoretically not have even been eligible for a mammogram for several more years. She would not have made it that long.
I guess my thought is that if we have the ability and the knowledge, we should be doing every thing we potentially can to try to prevent or detect early this way-too-prevalent disease.
@morninglight mama: yes, I think that is what's most confusing and controversial. I'm sure the majority of women know of someone they're close to with a similar story of finding it and having more of a chance than they would have otherwise.
Hopefully these new studies and the conversation surrounding it will level out and a best-course of action will result.
I read a bit on the whole breast cancer and prostate cancer early screening thing. Part of the problem with early screening is that they may find lumps that are not actually cancerous or cancerous in the future. But they can't tell that "early". So, the woman goes through the stress and unnecessary medical procedures and expenses for no sure reason. Often when a woman comes in with full blown breast cancer, it's a rapidly growing cancer and despite an annual check, self exams etc., it wouldn't have appeared any earlier or later than it did. Does that make sense? I'll have to read more about it. I could be blowing hot air.
As a fellow NPR listener, I have a question for you. I've been accused of being brainwashed or at least unduly influenced by the liberalness of NPR. I know the programming varies from place to place but do you think NPR is liberal radio? Are your friends that listen to NPR more liberal or conservative? Do you think NPR has influenced your political views? Do you think NPR is an objective way to receive your news and information? Would the listenership change if Sean Hannity had a slot in the programming? JK:)
I am going through NPR withdrawl...I miss having easy access...podcasts just aren't the same for me...feeling pretty out of touch with the larger world these days so thank you for this post. Will check out the links.
@Heather T: Thanks for the explanation. I heard another little spot while waiting in the Kindergarten PU line that seemed to say more of what you just said.
re the NPR listener-ship, I don't think there is any completely un-biased source of media out there. Everything has it's slant. I'm not one who watches or listens to strictly conservative talk shows or programming. And I suppose there are some that think NPR is the polar opposite of the conservative voice. I don't think that's true.
I feel like NPR, and my local programming from The State of Jefferson, tries to be fairly balanced. I live in a very polarized rural region of both extreme liberal and conservative thought, I think you could safely say. While the message perhaps slants to the left a bit, I think it tries to be open to all opinions and thoughts. The guests they have on, the questions that are asked, etc.
Or maybe that's just what I want to believe and I really have been brainwashed!! ha ha. Really though, I've enjoyed listening to NPR since the summer I finished high school when I listened on my short commute to work and back that summer. I'm sure my viewpoints on a lot of issue are more liberal than they used to be, I still consider myself an fence-sitting moderate or something. Whether that's a product of my NPR listening or just me getting older and thinking about the world differently is hard to say.
I guess a good indicator is that there are plenty of times I'm listening to something and completely disagree with what they're saying OR I can easily think of the opposing thought on the issue. So that I think means I'm still using my own brain and not just drinking up whatever NPR throws at me, right?? It's just chummy feeling news and information that I enjoy. Very civil compared to what I occasionally scroll through on the networks or cable news shows.
Post a Comment