Unhealthy Relationships Bad For Health. Better To Be Alone

As the saying goes about some relationships, "It is better to have loved and lost." (Mr. Wisdom Heehee.)

[From article]
It's been the punchline of many a best man's speech over the years but now it's official.
Experts say it is better to be single than be involved in a poor-quality relationship.
A study found that being trapped in an unhappy partnership is so damaging to a person's health, they would be better off alone.
What's more, it gets worse the longer you are together, the researchers concluded.
Happily, they found that the reverse is also true – that being in a high-quality relationship benefits your physical and mental health.
The research team from the University of Buffalo in New York studied the relationships of young people from rural Iowa.
The subjects were from two-parent, married families, but the majority were not married.
With growing numbers of people now choosing to put off marriage in favour of more casual relationships, the scientists wanted to look at the impact this had on their health.
They asked the participants about the quality of their relationships, questioning how committed they were, how they dealt with criticism, and the support and affection they gave and received.
The team also asked how the partners behaved outside of the relationship – including whether they engage in risky behaviour.
Ashley Barr, assistant professor in the university's department of sociology, said the research showed that the longer people are in high-quality relationships – or, alternatively, the faster they got out of low-quality partnerships – the better their health.
'Health benefits begin to accrue relatively quickly with high-quality relationships and supportive contexts,' she said.
'And then we see detrimental effects from low-quality relationships - particularly, those low-quality relationships that last a long time.'
Professor Barr added: 'The findings suggest that it's better for health to be single than to be in a low-quality relationship.
'It's not being in a relationship that matters; it's being in a long-term, high-quality relationship that's beneficial.
'Low-quality relationships are detrimental to health. The findings suggest that it's better for health to be single than to be in a low-quality relationship.'
Dr Barr said relationships tended to change the older people became.
'It's rare today for young adults to enter a romantic relationship and stay in that relationship without ever changing partners or relationship characteristics.
'We now have two studies that found similar patterns and similar implications for those changes.'
The study was published in the Journal of Family Psychology.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3662028/Good-news-singletons-s-better-health-trapped-unhappy-relationship.html

Good news for singletons! It's better for your health to be alone than trapped in an unhappy relationship
Study looked at young people from two-parent families in America
Found poor relationships negatively affected physical and mental health
Scientists say quality of a relationship is what is important not act itself
By KATE PICKLES FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 06:29 EST, 27 June 2016 | UPDATED: 07:26 EST, 27 June 2016

Connecticut Researcher Says LED Lighting May Be Harmful To Humans

While governments are adopting the low-energy lighting in an effort to reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions, there are concerns some lights may be too bright and may even be emitting the wrong type of light.

[From article]
The warm yellow glow of street lamps are being replaced by the cold white light of LEDs throughout the world in an attempt to save energy.
But this comes at a cost, with doctors warning they could be damaging our health by impacting our sleep and vision.
The American Medical Association this month adopted new guidance which aims to reduce the potentially harmful health effects from ‘improper’ LED lighting.
The guidance aims to help local governments across the US choose LED street lighting which minimises harm to the environment and human health.
‘Despite the energy efficiency benefits, some LED lights are harmful when used as street lighting,’ said Dr Maya Babu, an AMA board member, in a statement.
Medical experts believe that white LEDs may be emitting too much blue light, which may have impacts on vision and sleep.
According to the AMA, blue-rich LED lighting may disrupt sleep by suppressing melatonin, interfering with the body’s circadian rhythm – the body’s natural 24-hour cycle – which can disrupt sleep.
The association claims the impact of white LED lamps may be five times that of conventional street lamps.
Writing for The Conversation, Professor Richard Stevens from the University of Connecticut, said the new guidance mainly affected lighting at night and affected the ‘colour temperature’ – a measure of the blue, green, yellow and red in a light source – of no more than 3,000 Kelvin.
Higher ratings indicate more blue light and a brighter white light.
Professor Stevens wrote: ‘A white LED at CT 4,000K or 5,000K contains a high level of short-wavelength blue light; this has been the choice for a number of cities that have recently retrofitted their street lighting such as Seattle and New York.’
These values are far higher than compared with an incandescent bulb, which may have a colour temperature of 2,400K.
The AMA has also highlighted the potential of LED street lamps to cause glare and recommend reducing the blue wavelengths.
Regions across the UK are rolling out LED street lighting in a bid to cut energy consumption.
The rollout has already begun with hundreds of thousands of street lamps starting the conversion to LED.

[. . .]
Trials of LED street lamps by Transport for London reported a largely positive response, but also recorded instances of people being dazzled by lights.
MailOnline contacted the British Medical Association for comment, but the organisation said it currently had no official policy position on LED lighting and no immediate plans to issue guidance.
Professor Stevens said: 'There is almost never a completely satisfactory solution to a complex problem.
'We must have lighting at night, not only in our homes and businesses, but also outdoors on our streets.
'The need for energy efficiency is serious, but so too is minimizing human risk from bad lighting, both due to glare and to circadian disruption.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3654275/Are-LED-street-lights-damaging-health-Doctors-warn-bright-lamps-cause-sleep-problems.html

Are LED street lights damaging YOUR health? Doctors warn the bright lamps could cause sleep problems
LED lighting is being adopted in the US and UK to reduce energy
There are concerns LEDs may be too bright or emit the wrong type of light
Medical experts believe that white LEDs may be emitting too much blue light, which may have impacts on vision and sleep
By RYAN O'HARE FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 07:58 EST, 22 June 2016 | UPDATED: 08:06 EST, 22 June 2016

Harvard University Medical School Teaching Hospital Fires Respected Tenured Urologist For Speaking About Unhealthy Behavior

Dr. Paul Church

Here's a legal remedy. In Massachusetts where the hospital is, state law, MGL Chapter 265, Section 37, the civil rights statute, makes it a felony to intimidate a person in the free exercise of a constitutionally protected right. It applies to public officials and private individuals. The US Congress is considering a new law to protect speech in online comments about goods and services by customers. Currently some vendors punish, actually impose fines under their conditions of service for people who disparage the goods or services. There is a good discussion of this issue broadcast on C-Span at this link. JANUARY 15, 2016 Consumer Freedom of Expression Online. This proposed law may apply to Dr. Church too.  Panelists talked about gag clauses that prevent consumers from posting negative reviews of businesses. US Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) appears after the panel as a audience member. It is about an hour long. 

http://www.c-span.org/video/?403256-1/discussion-consumer-reviews

[From article]
A well-loved and respected doctor with a background in sexual-risk behaviors has been expelled from one of the United States’ most prestigious and top-ranked medical centers after he raised evidence-based health risk concerns over the center’s decision to endorse and celebrate the homosexual lifestyle.



Urologist Dr. Paul Church, a 65-year-old grandfather of 6, was expelled from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Boston, Massachusetts, in March on the grounds that he had violated BIDMC’s “established standards of professional conduct” by using the center’s electronic information system “to communicate your unsolicited views about homosexuality that were offensive to BIDMC staff.”
“The MEC [Medical Executive Committee] has recommended imposition of disciplinary action, in the form of revocation of your appointment to the Medical Staff,” the March 30 letter of expulsion singed by BIDMC President and Chief Executive Officer Dr. Kevin Tab stated.
Church called the medical center “so indoctrinated with a worldview” supportive of the LGBTQ agenda that it sees this movement as “beyond reproach,” even to the extent of viewing someone as a bigot and culpable of misconduct charges for raising legitimate criticism about the center’s promotion of this movement and its activities.
[. . .]


Dr. Paul Church with a young girl who he operated on while on a medical mission trip in Mexico.
Courtesy of Dr. Paul Church
Dr. Church, a member of the Harvard Medical School faculty, has worked as a urologist at the center for nearly 30 years, conducting research on prostate and bladder cancer. He has also offered his medical talents to the poor on numerous occasions during volunteer missions to Mexico and Africa.
It was 11 years ago that Church began to experience censorship and suppression from BIDMC officials, reported Mass Resistance. At this time, Church and other like-minded colleagues repeatedly raised concern with officials over the center’s decision to not only endorse the homosexual lifestyle by hosting an annual “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Achievement Award ceremony,” but to involve staff in LGBTQ events including participation in Boston’s annual “Gay Pride Week.”
[. . .]
“The evidence is irrefutable that behaviors common within the homosexual community are unhealthy and high risk for a host of serious medical consequences, including STD's, HIV and AIDS, anal cancer, hepatitis, parasitic intestinal infections, and psychiatric disorders,” Church submitted to officials via the center’s communication system after receiving an LGBT-related communication.
[. . .]
Church called it “all together inappropriate” for BIDMC to “endorse, affirm, or encourage the behaviors ‘celebrated’ by Gay Pride Week.”
“This action again jeopardizes the credibility of BIDMC as a healthcare institution and dishonors a large proportion of its community who continue to hold to the conviction that homosexuality is unnatural and immoral,” he wrote.
When Church realized his submissions were being systemically ignored by officials, he would occasionally post them on the center’s internal electronic messaging board.
[. . .]
In 2007, when Church once again responded to the center’s invitation to attend an LGBTQ-themed event, instead of addressing his concerns, the center’s president at the time, Paul Levy, posted excerpts of the complaint — with no names attached — on his own personal blog.
[. . .]
Levy felt compelled to point out in a response to one comment that Church’s “personal beliefs are not transmitted to patients and do not affect his treatment of patients who come to see him. I felt I should respect his statement, and, indeed, we have received no complaints that would indicate otherwise.”
[. . .]
Church found himself being investigated by the head of his department, Chief of Surgery Dr. Eliot Chaikof, on “harassment” charges on account of his offer to appear in the center’s LGBTQ promo video. Church was told he had “crossed a line” and was either facing suspension or having his staff privileges entirely revoked. He was given the option to voluntarily resign.
[. . .]
“This investigation is also not about whether you agree with my worldview or convictions. What it is about is a fundamental freedom of expression of dissenting ideologies and even more than that, it is about an illogical, inappropriate policy decision on the part of the medical institution that flies in the face of our greater mission of promoting healthy behaviors and lifestyles.”
[. . .]
But instead of siding with Church’s evidence-based concerns, the committee reprimanded him for violating the center’s policy against “harassment and discrimination in the workplace” and for sending what it called “inappropriate content” through the center’s internal electronic messaging board.
“Your opposition to diversity training and to BIDMC’s support for the annual Gay Pride Week events has been expressed in offensive terms and, at times, in a discourteous manner,” the committee stated in its November 2011 letter to Church.
[. . .]
The committee attempted to muzzle Church, warning him that if he did not immediately cease communicating in the workplace his “opinion about sexual orientation, homosexuality or other protected status” his staff privileges would be revoked.
In April 2012, Church requested that BIDMC’s communications department not send him further notices regarding LGBTQ activities. His request was ignored. Between 2013-14 Church continued to receive an ever-increasing number of emails and notices affirmative of the LGBTQ lifestyle.
To one such communication received in 2013 he responded: “Celebrating sexual perversions is highly inappropriate, especially in the context of a medical center that should be aware of the negative health consequences of high risk behaviors. It also ignores and dishonors the religious convictions and moral objections that many members of the hospital community share who are opposed to these behaviors.”
[. . .]
“The data comes from credible sources like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and shows that [skyrocketing rates of sexually transmitted diseases] is primarily a result of men who have sex with men and those who engage in anal intercourse. The latest statistics that CDC has is that men who have sex with men account for two-thirds of new infection of HIV and that they are the only group where syphilis is on the increase.”
“The point is that [homosexual practices and behaviors] are not harmless. There are considerable negative medical consequences [when engaging in these practices],” he said.
[. . .]
“When a hospital tells somebody that you can’t tell the truth about serious health issues because it might hurt somebody’s feelings or that it’s not politically correct, that’s terribly frightening.”
“Health driven by ideology puts people at risk because we’re no longer talking about what is truly healthy, we’re talking about pushing a position that could be totally contrary to good health practices,” he said.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/leading-boston-hospital-fires-doctor-for-raising-concerns-about-health-risk

Thu Jun 25, 2015 - 12:17 pm EST
Leading U.S. hospital fires doctor for raising concerns about health risks of gay sex
Pete Baklinski

https://youtu.be/LbUSAML_U7E

New Midtown IRT No. 7 Station, But Still Worst Subway Line

[From article]
The No. 7 train just opened its 22nd subway station this week in the Hudson Yards at West 34th Street and 11th Avenue in Manhattan.
But while the station was hailed for its design and sweeping mosaics, the line’s 52nd Street station in Queens takes the cake for being the worst station in the entire system, with a whopping 79 percent of its structural components in bad shape, the study found.
“This is one of the most neglected stations in the area,” said straphanger Michelle Vasquez of Woodside, Queens.
[. . .]
By contrast, the No. 6 line received the best reviews, with only 15 percent of structural components across its 38 stations requiring attention.
The study also projected that, based on the MTA’s current spending, New York’s subway lines would not be up to snuff until 2067.
[. . .]
A recent report by the same group found that 24 percent of all structural elements across New York’s 467 subway stations are in disrepair.

http://nypost.com/2015/09/15/the-7-is-still-the-worst-subway-line-despite-new-34th-street-station/

The 7 is still the worst subway line despite new 34th Street station

By Emily Saul
New York Post
September 15, 2015 | 6:01pm

Green Buildings May Be Unhealthy

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/08/green-buildings-hazardous-to-health-report-cites-risks-weatherization/#content

Green Buildings Hazardous to Health? Report Cites Risks of Weatherization
Published June 08, 2011
FoxNews.com

Dangerous Popcorn

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/queens/popcorn_ruined_my_lungs_suit_BfXktys91T7Rl8l76H69FM

Popcorn ruined my lungs: suit

By WILLIAM J. GORTA

New York Post

Last Updated: 7:48 AM, May 8, 2010

Posted: 1:35 AM, May 8, 2010