100 Times Happier

Today, I can turn in every direction – past, present, and future – and see something unseen before.  Partly because savage summer now submits to humane autumn.  Particularly because infernal rain invites eternal sunshine.  Pleasantly because transitory impasse submits slowly to incremental improvement.  The reasons?  Out there, as ever.  As before, I stop, take notice.  Never before, did I think of companions and rain, freedom and weeds, as ends in themselves, let alone beginnings.  Happiness awaits.  She does not pursue you. Nor you her.  She waits for you to be…

Biting is good.  Eating poop is good.  Jumping on a  sleeping dog is good.  It’s all good if you are a two-month-old Akbash puppy relocating from Whirlaway Farms in Caldwell, Texas to Sawmyl Synders Farm in Magnolia, Texas.  Who could be happier?  Definitely Syndee, an eighteen-month-old Anatolian Shepherd livestock guardian dog.  She lost her charge when the May floods carried her boar goat buddies away on fast moving muddy water.  She wandered the abandoned Capra confines and broken fence line of former goat pasture.  She slept long and sullen afternoons until, suddenly Sydnee, the Akbash pup arrived bright eyed and – you know.  At first the towering, older Syndee growled.  She foamed.  Only later did we discover she had been stung or stuck.  Something swelled, a salivary gland, soaking everything, a viscous slobber spill.  Now canine Mutt & Jeff explore the wondrous goat shelter, fascinate the fence line, and snore long satisfying siestas (a trait Syndee picked up this summer).  The new pup purchase quickened the old resident guardian, she learns new tricks from the frisky female partner.  At first, the more mature Syndee, must have thought, “I’d rather be gored by a Boer, literally.  I’d prefer the wrath of a rooster, occasionally.  I’d accept the company of my master, reluctantly.  Anything but this pest.”   Now she’s feeling it.  “Now we be sisters.   Now we couldn’t ask for more.  Now we’re 100 times happier!”

May 26th, 2016 brought a good day to a bad end for Sawmyl Synders Farm.  In two hours of early evening, a freak storm raised the slumbering creek twenty feet and gathered human hopes into it’s new reach.  The little house on the pasture never saw it coming.  The smaller goat shelter surrendered its loved ones to the cruel invasion.  Seventy hens and roosters climbed and crowded up the seven foot roosts in their appointed coops where only twenty could be accommodated.  All of this rolled off the backs of the ducks and geese…  They were 100 times happier!  From muddy duck muck to rushing water – Splash Town!  Tide and torrent beating bills and quills – fowl heaven.  To bring a duck delight, spray it.  To give a goose glee, flood it.  The farmer in his pickup at the end of the driveway,  looked in the rear view mirror, watching the tragedy in reverse.  The dog in the seat along side, watched her master.  Outside, scattered light caught the current, barely communicating that the brown flow overtook the peak of the duck house.  The waterfowl wondered what great deed they had done to deserve this gift from heaven.  One man’s misery is a fowl’s fortune,  or so say the ducks and geese.  Their duck yard mates –  The turkeys – did not squabble.  While Sawmyl Synders Farm rues that day, for the water birds, that day rules.  Remembered with fowl bliss.  Happier.  Much.

Chickens don’t know much but they know what they like.  They don’t like being cooped up.  They don’t like a diet of dry pellets and wet piss-like water.  They don’t like that anytime bids bed time and everyday echoes the same.  But after the flood the surviving soaked hens forced some adjustments.  First, because of the flood waters, the captives still in the coops couldn’t leave.  The outcasts outside the coops couldn’t enter.  The guardian dog – gone.  The protective farmer – here – but only from crowing sun up to sinister sun down.  Predators – all present and preying at sundown.  Two-thirds of the birds were lost to the flood waters.  Next, the predators took advantage of coops damaged and blocked up by tree trunks to decimate the dwindled flock.  Depressed, lethargic and alone, the lone farmer sweated several days, chaining trees and removing debris, and securing sad coops.  Death suffocated continually the already stifling air.  More than a month moaned by before the farm fences stood relatively restored and the growling guardian dog reinstated.  The chickens remained restrained, restricted to their caged in run.  The grounds outside, soon overgrown, a future green feast for these prisoners of water.  The bountiful bugs, the multiplying maggots, the gutted garden created a cornucopia for these birds on the run and their wanton appetites.  Released into this mini-jungle, my hens foraged, 100 times happier.  What else could they want?  A rooster.   So they clucked incomplete…until two months later the yellow young devil moved in – Pac-Man.  A gift from a family that keeps chickens as pets.  Pets with names.  Pac-Man.  This Buff Orpington orphan found a home at Sawmyl Synders when it was discovered at a home in a restricted city sub-division.  He won twenty hens hearts – only after pinning the first three macho hens to the ground who challenged.    A foxy male in the hen house.  Now the girls cackle exponentially happier.

Life makes happiness.  The living make it continue.  A pile of poop, a fast flood, or the slow caress of a fawning beak – each with possibility.  Getting another guardian dog for a farm that had nothing left to guard? Could it make ME happier?  What other wonder hath God wrought?  The muddy duck yard grew verdant, with rich sediment infusing the fowl residence; a thick salad for summer’s feasting.  So where have the piles and deposits left me.  With apprehension abated.  With disaster at ease.  With calm on the creek.  I added forty fluffy pullet chicks to my rinsed off brooders.  Happiness has its moments and its seasons and its sorrows.  Moments have their lightening and their breadth.  Seasons infinitely cycle and influence our happiness quotient but they should never take complete control, no matter their power.  These animals ask for little but return great things.  The openness to being content, satisfied, and happy serves as the greatest gift.  Last May, a flood loomed not possible.  That flood created an opportunity in its pool.  Now, there lives more potential than before…to be happy.

The Parable of the Sower (Matthew 13:1-21, 22, 23)

The Parable of the Sower (Matthew 13:1-21, 22, 23)

  1. That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat beside the lake.
  2. Such great crowds gathered around him that he got into a boat and sat there, while the whole crowd stood on the beach.
  3. And he told them many things in parables, saying:
  4. Listen! A sower went out to sow.
  5. And as he sowed, some seeds fell on the path, and the birds came and ate them up.  Other seeds fell on rocky ground, where they did not have much soil, and they sprang up quickly, since they had no depth of soil.
  6. But when the sun rose, they were scorched; and since they had no root, they withered away.
  7. Other seeds fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked them.
  8. Other seeds fell on good soil and brought forth grain, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.
  9. Let anyone with ears listen!
  10. ’Then the disciples came and asked him, ‘Why do you speak to them in parables?’
  11. He answered, ‘To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.
  12. For to those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away.
    • What they HAVE is “spiritual wisdom”, those who have NOTHING have “no faith”.
  13. The reason I speak to them in parables is that “seeing they do not perceive, and hearing they do not listen, nor do they understand.”
    • This little verse may have at least three points to consider.  First, veiled truth is told to those who do not want to hear it.  Second, a powerful message goes forth but it does no harm if ignored.  Third, if it sets men thinking, it can bring them to faith.  Jesus must speak and move in veiled ways, much like many authors through the centuries wrote their fiction in the form of roman à clef in order to speak the truth in deadly times.
  14. With them indeed is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah that says:“You will indeed listen, but never understand, and you will indeed look, but never perceive.
    • Isaiah’s words are not a command but a prediction of what the people will do.
  15. For this people’s heart has grown dull, and their ears are hard of hearing, and they have shut their eyes; so that they might not look with their eyes, and listen with their ears, and understand with their heart and turn—and I would heal them.”
  16. But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear.
    • Those people in our lives who taken for granted, who exhibit trust and kindness and forgiveness, they are our eyes and our ears, but we don’t see or listen.  We believe that our selfish sense is what is important even as we descend from happiness and distance ourselves from humanity, civility.
  17. Truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, but did not see it, and to hear what you hear, but did not hear it.
  18. ‘Hear then the parable of the sower.
  19. When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what is sown in the heart; this is what was sown on the path.
    • The birds that came and ate the seed that was sown on the footpath represent the evil one who comes and snatches away what is sown in the heart?  Is the evil one the devil or anyone, including self, who steals from the heart for selfish reasons?
  20. As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy;
  21. yet such a person has no root, but endures only for a while, and when trouble or persecution arises on account of the word, that person immediately falls away.
    • The rocky ground represents the person who can hear and see and receives joy but has no depth of devotion.  The sun represents trouble or persecution that rises when wisdom is awakened.  Without depth of understanding, commitment to patience and wisdom, and strength to endure pain, even good news will rationalized and forgotten.
  22. WHAT WAS SOWN AMONG BRIERS IS THE MAN WHO HEARS THE MESSAGE BUT THEN WORLDLY ANXIETY AND THE LURE OF MONEY CHOKE IT OFF.  SUCH A ONE PRODUCES NO YIELD.
    • The company we keep or pursue can amount to briers that choke us of yield while giving us the impression of bounty.  The perils of this world and also its luxuries powerfully choke us of the ability to be a planting and a product of wonderful growth and harvest.
  23. BUT WHAT WAS SOWN ON GOOD SOIL IS THE MAN WHO HEARS THE MESSAGE AND TAKES IT IN.  HE IT IS WHO BEARS A YIELD OF A HUNDRED- OR SIXTY- OR THIRTY-FOLD.
    • It is a mature person, no matter the age, who recognizes the good seed landing in the good soil and then grows.  Life’s opportunities and natural potential are constantly availed to us and we need to recognize the shallow paths we may be walking, the tangled briers stalking us, the rocky ground we choose to tread, and the fertile deltas that we may pass.

This parable presents double meaning to me.  The seed here represents God’s message but to me the seed could represent many things.  In addition to God’s message, it could also represent, growth of both good and evil.  Winning and losing, life and death, marriage and divorce, benefit or crime.  All acts in life have within them and outside them opportunities, possibilities, and potential for moving forward on various paths.  Winning a game might justify an opportunity to rest.  Losing could inspire examination and strengthening one’s skill.  One’s life is a solid block of opportunity.  Another’s death might allow for sculpting an unfinished legacy.  A marriage might be a new beginning in happiness or the continuing of old family tradition of misery.  Every mutual financial endeavor potentially hold’s mutual benefit or individual crime.  Making the most of life’s fallen seeds depends on one’s outlook and another’s guidance.

China’s One Child Policy – Consequences

From Wikipedia:

The one-child policy, a part of the family planning policy, was a population planning policy of China. It was introduced between 1978 and 1980 and began to be formally phased out in 2015. The policy allowed many exceptions and ethnic minorities were exempt. In 2007, 36% of China’s population was subject to a strict one-child restriction, with an additional 53% being allowed to have a second child if the first child was a girl. Provincial governments imposed fines for violations, and the local and national governments created commissions to raise awareness and carry out registration and inspection work.

Syllogism:

  • Major Premise (general statement): China’s one-child policy allowed for exceptions.
  • Minor Premise1 (specific statement): Ethnic minorities were exempt
  • Minor Premise2 (specific statement): 53% of population was allowed to have a second child if the first child was a girl.
  • Conclusion: The majority of Chinese were not affected by the one-child policy.

From The Atlantic, : Six Consequences of One-Child Policy Reform (End of One-Child Policy)

China is finally dropping its one-child policy for around one-third of the population: couples that are urban and Han Chinese in which one parent is an only child. (Couples that are rural, non-Han, or where both parents were only children were already allowed to have two kids.) The policy will remain in force only for urban Han parents who were both the product of two-child homes—a fairly small proportion.

This 30-year-old social engineering experiment played an important, if contentious, role in China’s re-emergence as an economic powerhouse.  Here’s what the change might mean:

  1. A Larger Labor Force—Eventually The labor force is estimated to begin declining by as much as 10 million a year starting in 2025. Any population rebound will take decades.
  2. More Consumer Spending—At Least on Baby Formula Allowing more couples to have more children now should boost consumption almost right away for goods like infant formula, food and clothing, and education services.
  3. Happier People Perhaps the most important effect of changing the one-child policy is that it could end human-rights abuses like forced abortions and signal that the leadership is serious about reforms.
  4. A Smaller Gender Gap Removing the one-child policy won’t change the cultural preferences, but may ease the pressure on parents if their first child is a girl.
  5. A Healthier Housing Market—in Time The policy’s end should eventually forestall a housing market collapse trend—but it won’t come fully into effect for decades.
  6. Increased Strain on Natural Resources The extra 9.5 million people born each year will need food, water, and housing. That’s already a problem: per capita arable land in China is half of the global average and 40 percent of that  is considered “degraded,” meaning it is less economical or uneconomical to farm.

Syllogism:

  • Major Premise (general statement): Ending the one child policy impacts the future China greatly.
  • Minor Premise1 (specific statement): Happier Chinese because forced abortions will end.
  • Minor Premise2 (specific statement): Happier Chinese because less pressure on parents if their first child is a girl.
  • Conclusion: The end of the one child policy will make Chinese happier.

===

From Washington Times, November 2, 2015 : Birth of a catastrophe, China faces up to the consequences of its one couple, one child rule.

Introduced in 1979, this attempt to control population has prevented the birth of up to 400 million persons in the world’s most populous country.  A couple who has the forbidden second child must pay a fine of 40,000 yuan, the equivalent of $6,338.37, almost two-thirds of the average annual Chinese wage.  The government is dealing with the threat of rising social costs and a shrinking work force.  The upcoming census is expected to reveal a ratio of 122 boys born for every 100 girls, replacing the usual 106 boys for 100 girls.  It’s not clear whether the new regulations will cover so-called “illegal children,” those born in excess of one child per couple.  Untangling this Chinese puzzle would be a monumental task even if the 50 million bureaucrats — a bureaucrat for every 27 Chinese — wanted to untangle it.

Syllogism:

  • Major Premise (general statement): The goal of the Chinese one child policy has failed.
  • Minor Premise1 (specific statement): The population goal was not met.
  • Minor Premise2 (specific statement): The population now has illegal children.
  • Minor Premise3 (specific statement): The population now has too many boys, not enough girls.
  • Conclusion: Bureaucratic population control doesn’t work.

===

A Brief Guide to Writing Philosophical Questions

Each month I write the questions for Pub Theology.  Pub Theology promises important questions, good conversation, great beer.  It only guarantee’s great beer.  Without important questions the good conversation may go bad.

I want to improve my questions, even make them important.

I need to improve my questions, even make them understandable.

I must improve my questions, even make them philosophical.

I found an article on the net about philosophical writing and my review of summation of it follows.  I hope to extract the essentials for writing good philosophical questions.

The Harvard College Writing Center published a paper titled “A Brief Guide to Writing the Philosophy Paper”.  This seven page document is structured into the following parts:

  • The Challenges of Philosophical Writing
  • Structuring a Philosophical Paper
    • Begin by formulating your precise thesis
    • Define technical or ambiguous terms used in your thesis or your argument.
    • If necessary, motivate your thesis (i.e. explain to your reader why they should care about it)
    • Explain briefly how you will argue in favor of your thesis.
    • If necessary, explain the argument you will be critiquing.
    • Make an argument to support your thesis.
    • In order to strengthen your argument, anticipate and answer objections to it.
    • Briefly conclude by explaining what you think your argument has established.
  • Evidence
    • Example of a Reductio
      • Premise 1
      • Premise 2
      • Premise 3
      • Conclusion (from 2 and 3)
    • Example of a Question Begging Argument
      • Premise 1
      • Premise 2
      • Conclusion
  • Sources
  • Conventions
    • Avoid direct quotes
    • Use first person personal pronouns and possessive pronouns freely; signpost.
    • Say exactly what you mean, and no more than you need to say.
    • Be careful with specialized language.

Above find the outline of this article.  Below find my interpretation and the key elements I will need to apply to my Pub Theology questions.

The Challenges of Philosophical Writing

You expressing your personal opinion on controversial topics is not philosophy.  A method of first attaining a clear and exact question, then provide answers supported by clear, logically structured arguments, that is philosophy.

An ideal argument should lead from obviously true premises to an unobvious true conclusion.  A successful negative argument refutes the theory.  Positive arguments usually end up discussing other questions.

Structuring a Philosophy Paper

Assignments ask you to a thesis, which is a claim that may be true or false.  Explain it, support it, objection to it, defend it, evaluate it, discuss consequences, etc.  Structure thesis as follows:

Begin by formulating your precise thesis

Example: State argument clear and concise, avoid ambiguity (uncertainty or inexactness of meaning in language.)

Define technical or ambiguous terms used in your thesis or your argument.

Think of an imaginary reader whenever you need to decide how much you need to say to set up a discussion, or to judge the overall clarity of your work.

If necessary, motivate your thesis (i.e. explain to your reader why they should care about it).

Explain briefly how you will argue in favor of your thesis.

Take care to clearly indicate when you are speaking in your own voice, and when you are explicating someone else’s argument or point of view but not yourself advocating it.

If necessary, explain the argument you will be critiquing.

Explain the argument in your own words.

POOR WRITING EXAMPLE: In order to prove or disprove a thesis, one must engage with it.  Explain and analyze the argument rather than just reporting on it (a book report).  Make your view clear, not ambiguous.

Make an argument to support your thesis. 

Use a single compelling argument as opposed to using multiple weaker arguments.

In order to strengthen your argument, anticipate and answer objections to it.

You must always present a reasons for thinking an objection is true.

You should always raise and reply to the strongest
objections you can think.
GOOD WRITING EXAMPLE: Do not let objections rest on logical fallacies or implausible premises.

Briefly conclude by explaining what you think your argument has established.

HOW TO GET IT DONE

Don’t try to write a from scratch, from beginning to end: leave plenty of time.  Topic, possible thesis, rough argument in your head, sketches on paper, then begin master outline: thesis, argument, maximal logical clarity, one line for each argument logical step, potential objections and replies.  Try explaining your argument to someone else.  Read your paper out loud or have a friend read it to work out which parts of your argument might confuse or fail to persuade the reader and need more work.

Evidence

Evidence for a claim generally provides a better argument.  Philosophers avoid  empirical data, and confine their investigations to their armchairs.  If you
do use such evidence from elsewhere…explain exactly why it is relevant and exactly what we can conclude from it.  Show how two or more views cannot be held consistently with each other, or show that although two views are consistent with one another, they together entail an implausible third claim, known as a reductio ad absurdum.

EXAMPLE OF A REDUCTIO

If the argument is logically valid, show that the three premises of the argument can all be true. A further argument would be needed to show which of the three premises ought to be rejected.

Philosophical arguments are not always in the form of a
reducti.  Basic premises should generally be claims that any reasonable reader can be expected to agree with, and they might be drawn from common experience, or from our stronger intuitions.  Avoid the fallacy of begging the question – which is to say, using any premises that one would reasonably doubt if not for one’s prior acceptance of the conclusion the argument attempts
to establish.

EXAMPLE OF A QUESTION – BEGGING ARGUMENT

If the writer defined argument argument terms more carefully, its weakness would be clear. Ambiguous terms in philosophical arguments are a common problem, and can mask other weaknesses.

Examples can also help clarify the intended meaning of terms. Philosophers make great use of hypothetical examples in particular.

A GOOD USE OF EXAMPLES

Foreknown side-effect and aims are important points in arguments which involve clear moral institutions.

Do not argue that a claim is true, or is likely to be true, just because someone of
great authority believed it.  Do not argue from what the dictionary says about something.

Sources

Explain other philosopher’s arguments in your own words.  Read philosophy articles slow and careful.  Understand the steps of the argument.  When using another philosopher’s argument, put it in your own words and in the logical form that seems clearest to you, add improvements, offer or modify reason, defense.

Conventions

Avoid direct quotes

When you paraphrase: explain any ambiguous terms or technical
terms in the source, and aim to show that you’ve understood.

Use first person personal pronouns and possessive pronouns freely; signpost.

Give your reader a clear sense of where your argument is going at all times (i.e. I will argue…, I will now show…, My second objection is…)

Say exactly what you mean, and no more than you need to say.

Use simple prose and short, simple sentences.  Establish a modest point as clearly, carefully, and concisely as possible.

Be careful with specialized language

Philosophy reserves certain terms and phrases for special, narrow meanings that are peculiar to the subject.These include deduction, begs the question, valid, invalid, sound, and unsound (used to describe arguments), and vague (used to describe terms or concepts). You should understand the word use in philosophy before the word use in any of your writing.

Possibility, Potentiality, Opportunity, Expectation, Desire – In Everything?

  1. Whether parents realize it or not, every family has favorites.  Do parents realize they have a favorite? If or when a parent becomes aware of parental favoritism would or could anything change?  Can favoritism affect a child’s potential?
  2. The best living arrangement of all (with regard to substance abuse) includes three adults – typically, mom, dad, and a grandparent.  However, 59% of children will live in a single parent household at some point in their formative years.  Children of single mothers had substance abuse problems only 1% greater than the children of two biological parents.  Explore and explain.
  3. The one thing you can bet your paycheck on is the First Born Child and Second Born Child in any given family are going to be different.  If the second born is superior physically or intellectually, how does the first born cope?  Is the Second Born Child ever the favorite?
  4. Scientists at Cambridge University have found that arguments between brothers and sisters actually increase social skills, vocabulary and development.  Chinese children do worse in [social skills] tests than British and American children because of [China’s] “one-child” policy.  Can China’s future international relations and policies be predicted by its now relaxed family planning experiment (1978-2015)?  Is it apparent in today’s headlines?
  5. The First Born Child is a perfectionist, reliable, conscientious, a list maker, well organized, hard driving, a natural leader, critical, serious, scholarly, logical, doesn’t like surprises, a techie.  The Only Child is a super or extreme version of a First Born Child.  Are Only Child expectations positively extreme or morbidly excessive?

……………………………………………………..

The relationship of family to disease, addiction, sadness and happiness.

Birthing order and number of children.  Family situation both parents, one parent, divorce, widow, grandparents.

Family Favorites

Dr. Ellen Weber Libby, The Favorite Child,

Whether parents realize it or not, every family has favorites.

Does every family have favorites?  If children were parented equally would they turn out the same?

Do parents realize they have a favorite? If or when a parent becomes aware of parental favoritism would or could anything change?

Who fares better in the long run the favorite or the neglected?  Which is more difficult a family favorite who discovers the world doesn’t favor them or a neglected that the world seems to favor?

“If I were to be absolutely honest, my older son is my favorite.”

reductio ad absurdum

All families have favorites.

Family favorites do better.

Family neglected do worse.

Birthing Order

Dr. Kevin Leman, The Birth Order Book: Why You Are the Way You Are,

The one thing you can bet your paycheck on is the firstborn and second-born in any given family are going to be different.  If the second born is superior physically or intellectually, how does the first born cope?

Is birthing order significant?  Is the first born always superior?  Is the second born always striving?

German researchers found that birth order had no effect on five key personality traits: extroversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, conscientiousness and imagination.

Scientists at Cambridge University have found that arguments between brothers and sisters actually increase social skills, vocabulary and development.

First is the Worst, Second is the Best, Third is the one with the Hairy ChestÖ

First born is worst born.

Second born is different and best.

If birth order has no effect on key personality traits, how is second born best?

Which Traits Fit You Best?
======================
Which of the following sets of personality traits fits you the best? You don’t have to meet all the criteria in a certain list of traits. Just pick the list that has the most items that seem to describe you and your way of operating in life.

A. perfectionist, reliable, conscientious, a list maker, well organized, hard driving, a natural leader, critical, serious, scholarly, logical, doesn’t like surprises, a techie

B. mediator, compromising, diplomatic, avoids conflict, independent, loyal to peers, has many friends, a maverick, secretive, used to not having attention

C. manipulative, charming, blames others, attention seeker, tenacious, people person, natural salesperson, precocious, engaging, affectionate, loves surprises

D. little adult by age seven, very thorough, deliberate, high achiever, self-motivated, fearful, cautious, voracious reader, black-and-white thinker, talks in extremes, can’t bear to fail, has very high expectations for self, more comfortable with people who are older or younger

If you noted that this test seemed rather easy because A, B, and C listed traits of the oldest right on down to the youngest in the family, you’re right.

If you picked A, it’s a very good bet you’re a firstborn in your family.

If you chose B, chances are you are a middleborn child (secondborn of three children, or possibly thirdborn of four).

If C seemed to relate best to who you are, it’s likely you are the baby in the family and are not at all happy that this book has no pictures. (Just kidding–I like to have a little extra fun with lastborns because I’m one myself. More on that later.)

But what about D? It describes the only child, and I threw it in because in recent years I have been getting more and more questions from only children because families in general are having fewer children. These only children (also known as “lonely onlies”) know they are firstborns but want to know how they are different from people who have siblings.

Well, one way they are different is that the only child is a super or extreme version of a firstborn. They have many of the same characteristics of firstborns, but in many ways they’re in a class by themselves. More on that in chapter 7.

Notice that regarding each major birth order, I always qualify the characteristics by saying “good bet” or “chances are.” Not all characteristics fit every person in that birth order. In fact, a firstborn may have baby characteristics, a lastborn can sometimes act like a firstborn in certain areas, and middle children may seem to be firstborns. I’ve seen onlies who you would swear were youngest children. There are reasons for these inconsistencies, which I’ll explain as we go along.

=============================================

Middle children get a bad rap—they’re often stereotyped as the black sheep, overlooked by parents and overshadowed by older and younger siblings. But certain middle child personality traits give them special, badass hidden powers.

Broken Heart Syndrome

Dr. Nicholas Christakis, M.D., The Harvard Medical School study

Our study shows that people are connected in such a fashion that the health of one person is related to the health of another,

Broken heart syndrome most often takes place in older people who have been together for a long time.

Can one really die from a broken heart?

Is dying from a broken heart the best way to die?

You can die of a broken heart — it’s scientific fact —

Only Child

Granville Stanley Hall; in his 1896 study, Of Peculiar and Exceptional Children,

Being an only child is a disease in itself.  Is being an only child pure love or pure indulgence?

Is being an only child a disease?  Is being an only child a blessing?

Only Child myths include: an only child is lonely, and depressed, has imaginary friends to balance out their loneliness, violent and pushy, selfish, dependent, spoiled, does not have their own original ideas and views, lacks talent.

Being an only child is a disease.

Only child myths have been debunked.

Only children are no different than those with siblings.

…Chinese children do worse in [social skills] tests than British and American children because of [China’s] “one-child” policy.

Parenting
Bella DePaulo Ph.D., Children of Single Mothers: How Do They Really Fare?

The best living arrangement of all (with regard to substance abuse) included three adults – typically, mom, dad, and a grandparent.

Is a broken family always bad?  Is having a grandparent always good?

59% of children will live in a single parent household at some point in their formative years.

Having both parents and at least one grand parent is the best family living arrangement.

More than half of American children will live in a single parent household at some point in their formative years.

Do the best children come from households with three familial adults?  Do single parent families produce the worst kids.

Children of single mothers had substance problems only 1% greater than the children of two biological parents.

Children of single mothers had substance problems — 5.7% — and how similar the number was for the children of two biological parents — 4.5%. A difference of about one percentage point is not a very big return on twice the love, attention, and resources.

Bad Parents

It would actually be a lot easier to talk about “good dads” in the Bible, rather than the “bad dads,” because there were a LOT of bad dads, but very few good ones.

The Bible talks about bad dads.

Divorce

Humans tend to remember emotional events, so if your parents divorced, the emotional tumult will act as an anchor within your interior seascape.

Media

”Hollywood is significantly responsible for the infantilization of America,” says Leon Wieseltier, the cultural editor of The New Republic. ”Almost all those movies that are not suitable for children are irredeemably childish.”

The Bible and Family (Matthew 10:34-36)

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.  For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.  And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.

Parenting’s Most Important Role

Aristotle said that a parent’s primary duty should develop a child’s capacity to reason about, and to understand, what is right and what is wrong.  If a single parent has favorites but teaches each to reason right from wrong has that parented righted the wrong of favoritism?  Does good reasoning trump bad parenting?  Can abused children reason their way out of their past?

Family Roles

The Hero is usually the oldest child in the family and their role is to over achieve, to be over responsible.

Often the youngest child in the family assumes the role of Mascot.

The Scapegoat brings the family together in a perverse way, and can make them feel good about themselves by comparison.

The Lost Child goes unnoticed and can disappear for hours.

1. Enabler

The enabler means well but their efforts are counterproductive – for the addict and for themselves. This person is usually the closest to the addicted person, and their aim is to help the addict. But the reality is that they do things that allow the addicted person to continue their behavior without facing the consequences. For example, they might cover up or make excuses for the addict’s behavior at work or school or with friends. Or the enabler will take care of tasks that should be attended to by the addict, like paying bills, or work around the house, or getting the car serviced – or a hundred other things that the addict should be taking care of but is unable or unwilling to do. The enabler does all this because it is painful for them to confront the reality of their predicament and is desperate to protect themselves and their family. In the end, though, the enabler is left exhausted and angry – and the addict is no closer to getting better. In fact, the addict is getting the message that they don’t have to confront their drug problem because someone will always be there to save them.

 

2. Hero

This person is usually the oldest child in the family and their role is to over achieve, to be over responsible. They will typically be model students and, later, very career-oriented. In families wracked by shame and guilt over addiction in the home, here is a family member they can point to with pride. This child may take on the responsibilities of the addict father and become the family breadwinner at an early age. Or he may become the surrogate husband, giving his mother the emotional support she should be getting from her spouse. Heroes are seen as having it all together, as being mature and responsible. The price for putting all their energy into achieving, though, is that these heroes of the family rarely feel good inside. Instead of being in touch with who they are and what they require, they have sacrificed their emotional lives trying to preserve the family unit.

 

3. Scapegoat

In families made dysfunctional by addiction, one of the children will assume the role of the troublesome child. Here is someone whose bad behavior can be acknowledged by family members – unlike that of the addict. The scapegoat brings the family together in a perverse way, and can make them feel good about themselves by comparison. This child also provides family members with a focus that enables them to avoid facing their own problems. In a situation at the breaking point with stress over the addict’s behavior, the scapegoat becomes a means of releasing anger and frustration.

 

4. Lost Child

This role is assumed by the child who has decided that the best way of surviving in the home made unsafe by addiction is to keep a low profile. This child is often the one who has not received as much love and care as his siblings. The lost child goes unnoticed and can disappear for hours. They learn not to ask questions that might upset others, and they recognize that the best way to avoid attracting critical attention is to keep to themselves. Because they are “out of sight, they are also out of mind”, and usually feel unimportant.

 

5. Mascot

Often the youngest child in the family assumes this role. By the time this child comes along, the family dynamic has deteriorated to a serious state of dysfunction. This is the child who is coddled and kidded, who is a source of amusement for family members. The older siblings are well practiced in their various compensatory survival roles, and their tendency is to want to protect the youngest member. They may withhold information from this child and pretend for his sake that all is well. Yet despite all the efforts to protect this child from the truth, he cannot help but discover over time that something is drastically wrong with his family dynamic. Though he may not be able to name it as addiction, it affects him just the same.

 

 

Opportunity vs Potential

The Tao of Power by R.L.Wing

 

Tao

  1. …with expectation, one will always perceive the boundary
  2. Act without expectation
  3. Do not focus on desires, and people’s minds will not be confused.
  4. The Tao is empty and yet useful
  5. Evolved individuals are impartial; They regard all people as straw dogs
  6. Everlasting, endless, it appears to exist.
  7. Evolved individuals put themselves last and yet they are first…
  8. The value in water benefits all things and yet it does not contend…
  9. Holding to fullness is not as good as stopping in time.
  10. Produce but do not possess.  Act without expectation.
  11. …take advantage of what is there, by making use of what is not.
  12. Regard the center and not the eye.  Hence one discard’s one and receives the other.
  13. Those who love the world as self will be entrusted with the world.
  14. Control the current reality.
  15. Who can harmonize with muddy water, and gradually arrive at clarity?
  16. What is tolerant becomes impartial; What is impartial becomes powerful…
  17. Those who lack belief will not be believed.
  18. When the family has no harmony, piety and devotion appear.
  19. Perceive purity; Embrace simplicity; Reduce self-interest; Limit desires.
  20. How much difference is there between agreement and servility?
  21. The Tao acts through Natural Law; So formless, so intangible.
  22. To become whole, Turn within.
  23. Those who lack belief will not in turn be believed.
  24. Those who are on tiptoe cannot stand firm.
  25. Humans are modeled on the earth.
  26. Stillness is the master of agitation.
  27. A good person is the teacher of an inferior person; and an inferior person is the resoure of a good person.
  28. When simplicity is broken up, it is made into instruments.
  29. Evolved individuals avoid extremes, avoid extravagance, avoid excess.
  30. Where armies are positioned, thorny brambles are produced.
  31. Even when victorious, let there be no joy, for such joy leads to contentment with slaughter.
  32. To know when to stop is to be free of danger.
  33. Those who master themselves have strength.
  34. …one does not seek greatness, and in that way the great is achieved.
  35. We use the Tao and it is without end.
  36. Fish should not be taken from deep waters…
  37. …without desire there is harmony.

Te

  • 38. One who has propriety has the veneer of truth and yet is the leader of confusion.
  • 39. Mind without inspiration would probably sleep.
  • 40. …existence was produced from nonexistence.
  • 41. The greatest talents are slowly mastered.
  • 42. Those who are violent do not die naturally.
  • 43. The most yielding parts of the world overtake the most rigid parts of the world.
  • 44. Know what is enough; be without disgrace.  Know when to stop; be without danger.
  • 45. Clarity and stillness bring order to the world.
  • 46. There is no greater fault than desiring to acquire.
  • 47. One may travel very far, and know very little.
  • 48. Through nonaction nothing is left undone.
  • 49. To those who are good, I am good; To those who are not good, I am also good.
  • 50. As life goes out, death comes in.
  • 51. Produce but do not possess.  Act without expectation.
  • 52. To perceive the small is called insight.  To remain yielding is called strength.
  • 53. The great way is very even;  yet people love the byways.
  • 54. What is skillfully established will not be uprooted.
  • 55. Things overgrown must decline.
  • 56. Those who know do not speak.  Those who speak do not know.
  • 57. Too obvious a growth in laws and regulations, and too many criminals emerge.
  • 58. Misfortune! Good fortune supports it.  Good Fortune!  Misfortune hides within.
  • 59. In leading people and serving Nature, there is nothing better than moderation.
  • 60. Leading is like cooking a small fish.
  • 61. …one receives by becoming low;  another receives by being low.
  • 62. If some are not good, why waste them?
  • 63. Plan the difficult when it is easy; Handle the big where it is small.
  • 64. People often spoil their work at the point of its completion.  With care at the end as well as the beginning, no work will be spoiled.
  • 65. To lead without cleverness will benefit…
  • 66. Because evolved individuals do not compete, the world cannot compete with them.
  • 67. Nature aids its leaders by arming them with compassion.
  • 68. A skillful fighter does not feel anger.
  • 69. No misfortune is greater than underestimating resistance…
  • 70. My words are very easy to know, very easy to follow.  Yet the world is unable to know them, unable to follow them.
  • 71. To know that you do not know is best.
  • 72. Evolved individuals know themselves but do not display themselves.
  • 73. Nature decides which is evil, but who can know why?
  • 74. Whoever substitutes for the master carpenter in carving, rarely escapes injury to his hands.
  • 75. People are hungry.  Because those above consume too much in taxes, people are hungry.
  • 76. The position of the highly inflexible will descend; The position of the yielding and receptive will ascend.
  • 77. Evolved individuals act without expectation, succeed without taking credit and have no desire to display their excellence.
  • 78. The receptive triumphs over the inflexible;  The yielding triumphs over the rigid.
  • 79. Even when a great resentment is reconciled, some resentment must linger.
  • 80. Let the people value their lives and yet not move far away.
  • 81. Evolved individuals do not accumulate.  The more they do for others, the more they gain; The more they give to others, the more they possess.

Coincidence – Food for Paranoia, Contentment, and Abandonment

We returned from a trip to the country side with a new puppy, only to find our older dog foaming at the mouth.  Since the older dog acted fine when we left the day before and she behaved, except for the excessive foam, I attributed the foamy anomaly to over excitement because of the new puppy.  The facts of the days ahead proved me wrong.  Two simultaneous events do not a correlation make.  Simple solutions to disturbing symptoms should first lead one to serious consideration and not quick dismissal.  So it goes with a dog foaming at the mouth upon the return from a trip away from the animal.  The decision to “blow it off” could have been tragic.

I drove away from the Ford dealership after getting service and my tire low pressure warning light came on.  Here we go again, bad service by a lazy technician, or worse, intentional tampering in order to get a stingy customer (me) to pay for additional service.  I checked the tires and they seemed fine. I felt pretty sure.  After a service station checked them I thought it almost positive.  When the light suddenly went off by itself I suspected a ploy by Ford.  Then, later on a trip, it came on again and I ignored it.  I would not let this warning taking anymore of my life time away.  I would have the gauge looked at when I got back from my trip.  A trip that would require me to drip many miles at high speed and (as I would discover) at great risk.  When you don’t trust someone (the Ford oil change specialist) you create your own reality and possible demise.

After the flood, I asked my farmer friends to take my surviving chickens to help me out and he never responded, never helped, never showed up.  I felt like my situation deserved more attention than any other priority.  The urgency of getting stranded animals back in a safe environment should have meant something to someone who understood the criticality of chickens unprotected in a predatory world.  But nobody came.  Nobody seemed to care.  Nobody remembered the I helped them when they were in need.  Maybe it’s time to get some new friends.  When you’re in the crisis of your lifetime and feel abandoned, never believe you are in more pain than the person next to you.  Don’t abandon those who seem to be abandoning you.

I complained about certain members of a weekly discussion group to a confidant and later found those who I complained about not speaking to me.  After about a month, after shunning the ones who upset me, I noticed they were shunning me.  Even the bar maid at the pub where we met seemed cool towards me.  I decided to stop attending.  If this had become an event where no one cared for its purpose and only showed up to engage in simple socializing with a narrow clique of friends, then it held no value for me.  This guy made a joke of it.  That guy made a joke of me.  The other gal ignored the importance of our gathering.  Pub Theology turned into something mundane and not worth my time.

Sometimes coincidence leads to unwarranted ease.  Other times coincidence incites suspicion and contempt.  Occasionally coincidence causes long and deep relationships to dissolve in short order for shallow reasons.  Too often coincidence makes enemies where none exist.  The events described are examples of such.  Coincidences brought about logical but inaccurate conclusions which caused undue calm, stress, paranoia, and loss.

The presence of the new puppy excited my old puppy, but not that excited.  In the next two days, the slobbering dog got worse…slobbering that is.  She remained the same happy fun neurotic dog we loved but she drooled.  What started on a Sunday, became worse on Monday.  By Tuesday, the left side of her face grew enlarged and drooped.  I felt a gland under her lower jaw the size of a tennis ball.  Oh, yeah, Houston, we have a problem.  I read about it on the internet.  I described it to the receptionist at my dog’s Vet.  I related it to the Vet who owns the bar that we meet for discussion.  DO SOMETHING!  Wednesday young Syndee looked better.  Thursday the lump disappeared.  Hallelujah!   Too much calm in the face of too little information could have been the end of a dog.  How bad do I feel now?

After the trip home on Saturday in the Ford with the low pressure warning light on, I continued to drive around.  But Thursday, since I visited the area, I stopped at the tire dealer where I bought the tires and discovered there existed a legitimate problem.  Low pressure in the rear passenger tire.  A drywall screw, laying in the drive since the summer flood repairs to the house, made it leak – slow.  With that repair making me safe, I drove on.  To ignore a warning because of coincidence which includes paranoia is to invite disaster.  This time calm caused an indirect product of paranoia about someone I didn’t trust.  The distrusted could not be blamed for the tragedy that my wife, my new puppy and myself could have suffered.  Warning are there to be looked at and resolved.  Not to be relegated to a priority less than the paranoia that bought them on.

The coincidence of one person’s worst tragedy meeting head on another person’s worst nightmare is rare but not impossible.  When my flood brought crisis to my flock, a good will gesture brought my friend’s flock close to demise.  He accepted new chickens from a stranger for free and the free birds were diseased.  His chickens started to die.  The loss made him determined not to get any more off site birds.  My flood feathers counted in that number.

The meeting group members I complained about are not holding a grudge and neither is the wait staff.  My fear of retaliation for my strong comments brought on paranoia and my talking to someone I trust alleviated my fear and paranoia.  I’m back at it with a different attitude.

 

How statin drugs really… kill you one cell at a time – a review of a book review

“How statin drugs really lower cholesterol & kill you one cell at a time” is a book review by Dr. Zoe Harcombe, PH.D. found on http://www.zoeharcombe.com.  This is a review of a book written by James & Hannah Yoseph entitled by the same name.  My interest is in content and also technique.

Ms. Harcombe starts her introduction by stating three things: the importance of cholesterol to the body, the admonition to read this book BEFORE prescribing or taking statins, not after, and the three key contributions of this book (to be looked at later).  The main headings in this review are:

1) How statin drugs really lower cholesterol

     Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH)

2) What was known by whom and when as statins were pushed through to approval?

3) The conflicts of interest:

Conclusion

The Executive Summary:

Okay, now for the content and technique.  Zoe divided the review into three parts which makes easy to approach.  The titles of each part do not intimidate and do draw you in.  A conclusion and an Executive Summary give the reader some context or vitals as needed by each individual interested.

Back to the three key contributions of this book (as written by Ms Harcombe, italics mine):

1) She explains how statins work in the human body (and in animals where they have been used for drug testing).  Important here…how statins work in humans, how statins are tested in animals.

2) She documents medical journal articles detailing the precise mechanism statins work, proving  proponents knew the fallacy of statins.  How statins work has not been a mystery, how they harm should neither be a mystery.

3) She details the conflict of interest endemic in the pharmaceutical industry and approval processes, which deteriorated the human race. The book takes one drug company, Merck, and the American Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and a number of other related bodies (e.g. the National Cholesterol Education Program NCEP) and a handful of individuals and traces in incredible detail the role that each played in this scandal. And statins constitute a scandal.  The scandal of statins links back directly to conflict of interest.

Now in detail…the article:

1) How statin drugs really lower cholesterol

The Yosephs (authors of the book by the same title as this review) describe how cells work in simple language.  My summary is “Without …cholesterol…cells age and die.  When statins disrupt the pathway to cell replication – the cell cycle ends”.  A flow chart provides details and labels all the scientific names.  The next portion of this section describes how statins kill us one cell at a time.

Statins kill us one cell at a time.  Cells get the cholesterol they need by making it or taking it from the blood stream.  Statins inhibit cells from making cholesterol, so the cells take it from the blood stream, lowering the cholesterol in the blood stream.  Statin fed cells are dying but try to live by searching out vital cholesterol in the blood.  The protein LDL in the blood that carries cholesterol to and from the cells.  By the cell’s consumption of the LDL, it is lowered, and the dying cell attempts to save our life.

Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH)

The genetic condition FH renders the body unable to remove LDL from the bloodstream resulting in high LDL.  The condition results from cell LDL receptors not working well.  An FH sufferer can therefore have heart problems – because of too little LDL reaches the heart cells – not because of too much LDL!  Doctors call high LDL “bad” because people with heart disease have this characteristic, but the body’s inability to absorb LDL deserves to be labeled “bad”.  HDL carries lipids and cholesterol back to the liver.  Statins give nothing to carry back to the liver and makes HDL low (because LDL is not being consumed).  A medication for FH suffers to stimulate cholesterol production solves the problem – but none exists.

2) What was known by whom and when as statins were pushed through to approval?

In 1982, researchers knew statins caused cells to die.  Despite this, in 1984 the FDA approved lovastatin  in record time.  In 1985, the Nobel Committee awarded Brown and Goldstein the Nobel Prize! (these guys wrote the cells die paper in 1982).  B&G also wrote that statins both inhibited and stimulated the substance that poisoned cells in 1980.  In 1982, the FDA allowed Merck to give Lovastatin to humans in the first human trial even though, researchers knew statins were toxins.  They blocked the cell replication pathway, and that when statins block the pathway, it caused cell death.  Nothing could be added back to the body to prevent cell death and the toxic effect of statins.  Where is the disconnect?  How do we “know” these things?  Who are the “good” guys?  Who are the “bad” guys?

In 1982 Brown and Goldstein wrote…: “If reducatase cannot increase sufficiently to overcome the inhibition by compactin, the cells die.”  Good Guys.  Prior to that, in 1980, Sankyo (Japanese pharmaceutical)  cancelled clinical trials of their statin on humans after half their laboratory dogs died of cancer.  Good Guys.  In 1980, Endo (Japanese researcher) co-authored a paper, writing…nothing we could add back to the cell, to compensate for the damage we had done, could prevent the toxic effect (of statins).  Good Guy.

Also in 1980,  Brown and Goldstein co-authored papers…stating: statins convert the cells into …auxotrophs….an auxotroph loses the ability to synthesize certain substances needed for its growth and metabolism; statins block mevalonate formation… and cultured cells die.

In 1980, Brown and Goldstein wrote the following in The Journal of Lipid Research (we’ll see who’s behind this journal later): “When the regulator of reductase is identified, it may be possible to administer this compound to animals and perhaps to patients, preventing the compensatory rise in reductase…” Hence Brown and Goldstein knew by 1980 that statins both inhibited and stimulated reductase. Medicine must prevent the “compensatory rise in reductase”.

In 1980, Brown and Goldstein co-authored a paper in The Journal of Biological Chemistry stating: “CoA reductase is inhibited by compactin, mevalonate formation is blocked and cultured cells die.” (p14)

In 1980, Brown and Goldstein co-authored a paper in The Journal of Lipid Research stating: “Incubation of cultured cells with compactin blocks mevalonate production and converts the cells into mevalonate auxotrophs.” (p172) An auxotroph is something that has lost the ability to synthesize certain substances needed for its growth and metabolism.

3) The conflicts of interest:

Daniel Steinberg wrote the book Cholesterol Wars.  He founded and chaired journals and committees, including American Heart Association council.  A Merck scientific advisor and an FDA advisory speaker, he influenced AMA and FDA policy and approvals.  With scientific support, he stated abnormal cells are not cancer, compactin not toxic, and LDL cholesterol causes Coronary Vascular Disease (CVD).  Steinberg recommended that a National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) be adopted.

The NCEP lowers cholesterol targets and set the recommended age for cholesterol use at nine.  All guideline participants received payments or grant funds from drug companies.  Twenty drug companies contributed funds to guideline doctors. Doctors averaged 8 drug company contributors each among 8 doctors and the 20 drub companies.

Doctor Names Receiving funds or grants
# Pharmaceutical Scott Grundy Bairey Brewer Clark Hunninghake Pasternak Smith Stone Total
1 Abbott 1 1 1 3
2 Astra Zeneca 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
3 Bayer 1 1 2
4 BMS-Sanofi 1 1
5 Bristol-Myers Squibb 1 1 1 1 1 5
6 Esperion 1 1
7 Fournier 1 1
8 Glaxo SmithKline 1 1
9 Johnson & Johnson 1 1
10 Kos 1 1 1 1 1 5
11 Lipid Sciences 1 1
12 Merck 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8
13 Novartis 1 1 1 1 1 5
14 Pfizer 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
15 Procter & Gamble 1 1
16 Reliant 1 1
17 Sankyo 1 1 1 3
18 Takeda 1 1
19 Tularik 1 1
20 Wyeth 1 1
Doctor Totals 9 9 9 5 6 8 1 9 56

In 1987, when the FDA reviewed Merck’s lovastatin, Merck participants outnumbered FDA advisors 13-10.  A Merck toxicologist revealed short comings of the drug which went unquestioned. When put to meter it sounds like this:

Rabbits died a rapid death; Statins failed hamsters; It damaged dog liver cells; Cause cataracts? did not answer. Dr Richard Cenedella DID state that all of the hyper-lipidemic drugs induce cataracts in mice. Jonathan Tobert was Merck’s Clinical Director for all trials.  He contradicted himself by stating: no cataracts seen in humans taking lovastatin and co-authored a paper documenting an increase in lens opacities (i.e. cataracts) in 101 lovastatin consumers.

Conclusion

The Yoseph book describes how statins lower cholesterol and shows that statin dangers were known all along the approval process.  A few key players work with Merck and infiltrate the FDA, influence NIH establish the NCEP comprised of drug company funded representatives.  The statin scandal made billions by demonizing cholesterol and discovering and promoting a poison that causes disease and death in humans.  Rats adapt to statins rapid.  Rabbits die quick.  If humans died as quickly as rabbits, statins would be off the market.  Because of slow death, statins will be slow to be taken off the market.

The Executive Summary:

Cholesterol gives life to body cells.  The body must manufacture cholesterol because dietary cholesterol does not suffice.  If statins stopped 100% of cholesterol production there would be a 100% death rate.  Statins block the mevalonate pathway.  Cells cannot replicate or repair.  Blocking the mevalonate pathway means that every cell in the body dies…eventually.  Nothing can compensate for blocking the mevalonate pathway. This lowers blood cholesterol levels and ignorant doctors are happy.  There is a second way in which the body tries to save itself – it tries to increase the production of reductase, hoping that this may unblock the mevalonate pathway. It can’t. Hence reductase is both stimulated and inhibited at the same time.  LDL receptor activity and reductase activity increase in parallel.

The inventors of statins patented adding CoQ10 to their statins but then never bothered to add it.  Statins were only originally intended for the 1 in 500 people with Familial Hypercholesterolemia.  Ironically, the most serious form of Familial Hypercholesterolemia would receive no benefit from statins anyway.