*

website statistics

Sunday, December 16, 2012

In 2008, every three hours a child or teen killed by gunfire

I haven't followed the Connecticut school shooting story. Too difficult. Too sad. And all too common. Yes common. The shooting of 20 children is almost a daily occurrence in the States. Reportedly, in 2008 it took only two and a half days on average for gunfire to kill 20 children and teens.

That's right: Every two and a half days there were 20 more children and teens murdered by guns. A total of 2947 died from gunfire in 2008 and another 2793 in 2009.

In 2008, 88 preschoolers were killed with guns and in 2009 another 85 died. These numbers are nearly double the number of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty in that time.

According to the Children's Defense Fund:

  • Recent data from 23 industrialized nations shows 87 percent of the children under 15 killed by guns in these nations lived in the United States. 
  • The gun homicide rate in the United States for teens and young adults ages 15 to 24 was 42.7 times higher than the combined rate for the other nations.
  • Of the 116,385 children and teens killed by a gun since 1979, when gun data by age were first collected, 44,038 were Black — even so, more White than Black children and teens have died from gun violence. 


What can be done? Banning weapons more suitable for war zones than American homes would be a start. Getting handguns out of circulation might be another. But a dialogue must be opened and answers must be found. 

Of course, it would help if the media would stop, do some research, and report the story, the arguments for and against gun ownership, with accuracy. Sadly accuracy is one of the first victims in a story like this. 

At first, it was reported that the school principal had buzzed Adam Lanza in (past school security) because she recognized him as the son of a colleague, Nancy Lanza, the shooter's mother, who worked at the school.

Later, we learned the gunman forced his way into the school by shooting through glass, breaching school's security system. The principal was shot, along with the school psychologist, trying to tackle the gunman and protect their students, according to later reports. And there was no connection between Adam Lanza’s mother and the school.

And what did the gunman use to kill the children. First reports said a rifle. Corrections then appeared, such as this one from The New York times claiming "the guns used in the school shooting were both handguns." Today the BBC is reporting, "The gunman shot all the victims at the school with a semiautomatic rifle . . . "

That facts surrounding this event should change, be corrected and then be corrected again, is not surprising. What is surprising is that the media have not learned this and learned to be more careful in their reporting. The media shows no restraint. In the end beating the competition is the biggest driving force behind the reporting of events such as this. Speed trumps all.

Consider the error-filled, fast-off-the-mark response of syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer:

"Think about the details of the crime, he (Adam Lanza) began by shooting his mother . . . and then destroying everything precious to her, her colleagues and her children, and then killing himself."

If I could advise my American friends how to approach this tragedy, I say approach this carefully, thoughtfully, try to find answers that are not steeped in ideology. Refuse to be rushed. Do not follow the path blazed by your media.

If you do step back, using reason and not emotion, you might (underlined) discover the truth surrounding gun control laws. You might, as a nation, shed light on a pressing global issue. You might discover how to prevent the senseless deaths of your young people who are dying a the rate of about one every three hours from gunfire.

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Alcohol based hand sanitizer: Good or bad?

I took a friend to the doctor today. On entering the medical office my friend immediately sanitized his hands. He rubbed both hands together for a few seconds with a squirt of an alcohol based hand sanitizer found on the counter at the reception area. I didn't follow his lead. I could see no need. My hands were, I believed, clean. A half hour before, my hands had been deep in hot, soapy dishwater.

My friend gently chastised me for not using the supplied sanitizer. He told me a story about being at a facility hard hit by the Norwalk virus and how he escaped coming down with the gastrointestinal illness by wiping his hands and arms frequently with hand sanitizer gel.

Maybe it was a good idea there and then but here and now? I wasn't convinced. He assured me that health departments promote the use of these gels and that one had to follow the guidance of the health officials. I still wasn't convinced.

The queasiness in my gut was not from a gastrointestinal illness but out of concern that sanitizer gels may be rather inefficient killers of bacteria. I was worried the wide spread use of these gels might be contributing to the development of another strain of super bugs. The result being increasing rather than decreasing the incidence of illness.

Turning to Google, I quickly learned the Norwalk virus exhibits strong resistance to alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS). A full minute of contact time with 70% ethanol is required to inactive a norovirus. If an 85% ethanol gel is used, stronger than that commonly available, the contact time need only be 30 seconds.

In some studies, twenty seconds spent washing the hands with soap and water has been found to be superior to ABHS. The use of an ABHS alone may increase the risk of infection during an outbreak.

While most soaps and sanitizers are considered antibacterial, Norwalk infection is caused by a virus. With soap and water, the infectious agent is rinsed off; With an ABHS, the microbes remain on the hands and are possibly spread over a greater area of skin.

On the positive side, my friend was correct. Many health professionals do advocate the use of ABHS gels — not as a replacement for soap and water but as a supplement when soap and water are not handy.

There are three important considerations when using an ABHS:
  • Is the concentration of alcohol greater than 60%? If it isn't, go wash your hands.
  • Are you applying enough?
  • Are you using it long enough?

So, how much gel should you use and for how long? According to The New York Times, one should vigorously rub all sides of one's hands with enough gel or foam to get them wet, and rub them together until they are dry. If one's hands are dry within 10 or 15 seconds, you haven't used enough.

One last thought, some hand gels/foams contain triclosan — and to be completely honest, so do some hand soaps. Many believe triclosan is contributing to the problem of antibiotic-resistance bacteria. If you'd like to read about superbugs, use this link to a CBC article.

Other sources: Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs

ReThink London must address urban myths

In early September my wife and I spent the better part of a week in Montreal, Quebec. Wonderful city. It is one of my favourites. I spent a lot of  time walking about the Côte des Neiges neighbourhood where my wife and I were staying with friends.

I have been following the oh-so-long London Free Press series examining London and I have been involved with ReThink London, a year-long review of the city's official master plan. The goal of ReThink is a new urban plan good for the next 20 years.

London is not Montreal. That said, there is a lot that London can learn from La Métropole. Let's begin.

Myth: Cars or people. One must make a choice.

Côte des Neiges is filled with people and cars. The area is alive.

All too often one reads stuff on how to make better people places. Add trees and flower beds while subtracting car traffic — is a good start, or so we often are told. Bunkum!

I've seen this done in Paris, France, too.
I was raised in a walkable neighbourhood. No car was needed but that did not mean there were no cars. It was the early '50s and every passing year brought more and more traffic. I lived near King's highway 39, a truck route through Windsor, Ontario, but even a busy highway did not hinder walking.

The Côte des Neiges neighbourhood continues that tradition. It is very walkable but filled with cars: cars on the roads, cars parked on both sides of surrounding side streets, and cars beside homes and even under them.

But, unlike the neighbourhood of my youth, Côte des Neiges has retained its rich mix of businesses. One reason might be the high residential density — approximately 20,000 residents per sq. km. There are lots of customers within walking distance and there is adequate parking for those who choose to drive.


What can London learn?


We must increase the density of our city. London has a published density of about 871 per sq. km. This number is probably low because a great amount of London is still undeveloped. Compared to Côte des Neiges we are very thinly populated.


Myth: London cares about increasing urban density

What's missing? Answer: Apartments above these box stores on Wonderland Rd.
London talks the talk but fails to deliver. When it comes to use of land, London is a pig. We come no where near maximizing our use of land. Increasing residential density is very important. It enables public transportation to become competitive and it makes the development of walkable commercial areas possible.

Not London: Note apartments above stores.
The planning committee rejected staff recommendations when they extended the "community enterprise corridor" on Wonderland Rd. The committee also loosened the grid patterns for residential development.

The Free Press reports that city planner John Fleming warned members the innovative nature of the original plan could be killed.
“You either have a plan or you don’t have a plan,” Fleming said.

What can London learn?

London has to spend some time looking at what other communities are doing to bring residents into commercial areas. The people making the decisions have to look to both older communities like Montreal and newer developments. Moving too fast may well saddle London with poor, low density developments that will be a blight to the community for years.

Myth: London has too many railroad level crossings

London does have a lot of streets intersected by railroad tracks. This is true. Still, everywhere there is a level crossing there is at least a crossing. The Montreal folk I talked to said they had too many cul-de-sacs, the result of street closures where a railroad cut through the neighbourhood.

Not the best example, an underpass is nearby, but the cul-de-sac results from tracks.
Depending on where you live in Montreal and how far you must walk or drive to get across a set of railroad tracks, you may think Londoners are lucky to have so many level crossings.

I worked for more thirty years as a news photographer for the local paper. I was inconvenienced by slow moving freight trains now and then but generally level crossings were not a huge problem. In fact, I saw them as a benefit.

Which is better: A street blocked by a passing train occasionally or a street blocked 24 hours a day by a fence-lined railroad track?

What can London learn?

There are some level crossings that should be eliminated. Let's focus on the problem spots, while taking pride in the fact that London has fewer cul-de-sacs thanks to our abundant use of level crossings. All level crossings should be controlled by gates with flashing warning lights.

Myth: Industrial areas in residential areas should be eliminated

Residential, commercial, industrial and religious uses mix on this Montreal St.
If the industry is loud, dirty, or smelly, it doesn't belong in the middle of a residential neighbourhood. But we should not be too quick to prevent industry and commercial areas from bordering on, or even mixing with, residential areas.

It was done with success in the past and is being done again in some large urban centres in the United States. London has an old, mixed use area in east London. Think of the abandoned McCormick's plant. McCormick Boulevard, behind the plant, has a number of manufacturing operations.

If the city has its way, the beautiful, historic terra cotta biscuit factory will be demolished and the land behind it redeveloped for housing. What a shame.

Why not allow the small industrial area to remain? If someone wants to walk to work, they can. Isn't that one of the goals of new urbanism?

The Montreal street shown is but a short walk from Côte des Neiges. It has residential units, commercial businesses and some industry.

It even has a rich mix of buildings devoted to religious activities. A resident assured me there is no move being made at this time to "clean up the area."

What can London learn?

Mixed use works in other communities. Maybe we can do it better in London. When I was a boy there numerous manufacturing plants in my neighbourhood. These businesses made an effort to blend in with the neighbourhood. I recall one plant that had a flower garden out front filled with colourful snap dragons. I used to see workers walking to work, a lunch bucket swinging at their side.

Myth: A simple grid pattern yields the greatest resident density

This just isn't true. It is easy to get from A to B when streets are arranged in a simple grid, but CMHC has devised a better approach when high density is the goal: The fused grid.

To learn more about the fused grid approach please read my blog: ReThink London: The answer is "fused grid".

What can London learn?

Having spoken with the city planning staff, I know that some planning officials in London are well aware of the fused grid. Yet, I went to a ReThink London meeting where city planning staff left mention of the fused grid out of an answer given a woman interested in knowing what urban street pattern was best at maximizing density.

London planners have to boldly step up and share their rich, urban planning knowledge with interested Londoners. ReThink London must be willing not only to be challenged but to do the challenging at times. London planners must not be timid when it comes to leading.
 

Myth: Cookie cutter homes unique to suburbia, especially '50s suburbs

 

A row of homes in North London.
Cookie cutter homes have been around literally forever. They are not unique to suburbia. The Côte des Neiges neighbourhood has a lot of houses of a similar design — mostly duplexes. But it is still an interesting area for a stroll.

Why is it interesting? The homes have nice touches. One home has a gorgeous wooden door in a beautiful stone enclosure. Another home has an interesting decorative treatment above a featured window.

Truth is that many of the duplexes in this Montreal neighbourhood seem to be little more than tract housing for the masses. Yet the years have been kind to the neighbourhood. Upkeep is important and many of these homes have been maintained with money, and more importantly, with respect.

What can London learn?

Insulting descriptions of neighbourhoods can often be the sign of a weak argument. When you hear the argument that a suburban neighbourhood is merely a collection of cookie cutter homes, feel free to ask: "And your point is?"

Add your own myths to my list.

There is a ReThink London meeting tonight and I want to get this posted. I encourage you to think about what you believe about cities, what you have been told, and to ask yourself, "Is this true?"

Think about the stories you may have read in The London Free Press about heritage buildings being demolished because they were impossible to save. The paper is often quite willing to simply report the words of those destroying the old structures; The paper rarely gives the other side of the argument.

Let me give an example from Montreal.

I understand this old home Victorian home was threatened with demolition. It was saved after the local community protested its planned destruction.

The home sits behind a Petro-Canada station. It appears to sit sideways on its lot — the front yard has been taken, or sold or something. Still the home has presence. It may be hidden but it cannot be missed. It may be white but it adds colour to the neighbourhood.

What can London learn?

Older neighbourhoods should be respected. And heritage buildings should be retained. If you want to create a people place, respect the history of the area.

I look forward to seeing many of you at the ReThink London meeting tonight.

Monday, December 10, 2012

File art has no place in news story

The London Free Press online teaser warned of freezing rain. The picture indicated, that for some Londoners, freezing was already here. Clearly, a Free Press photographer or reporter had shot a picture of an icy mirror.

As a former Free Press photographer, I spent a lot of time driving about the area on treacherous winter roads taking pictures for the paper. Freezing rain and ice slicked roads were my biggest fear.

According to Texas A&M, "Freezing rain is difficult to forecast because just one or two degrees in temperature difference can mean either rain or snow or freezing rain. Freezing rain is very dangerous because it tends to coat roads with ice first. If the surface it hits is 32 degrees or lower, it will quickly freeze on contact, and the resulting ice storms can shut down an entire city very quickly."

Warning readers of dangers in life, such as the possibility of freezing rain coating the area, is what online newspapers should do. The stuff can instantly render a road too slippery for walking let alone driving. No one should drive on the stuff.

When I used to be sent out to grab a picture showing London in the middle of a freezing ice storm, I used to wish there was another way to get an image — a way that did not involve me driving on wet, icy roads. Well, today there is!

Thanks to photography having gone digital, a reader living in an affected area can take a picture showing the ice with their cell phone and transmit it to the newsroom. I can recall the newsroom phoning readers in areas hit by something like an ice storms and gathering information for a story from the safety of the York Street building. Photographers didn't get off so lightly.

News photos are not simply shims for a page, although that is the way they were, and are, all too often used. Nor are news photos simply illustrations to enliven the visual appeal of a story. That is why editors usually insisted on fresh art for a story. The Free Press was a N-E-W-S-paper.

Many of the editors I had the good fortune to work with over the years would not have risked frightening readers with an image misrepresenting the news. The image of an ice encrusted driver's outside mirror would have had to show a moment from the day.

Look carefully at the image. There is no credit given. When I clicked on the image and went to the linked story, I noticed no credit appeared beneath the image running with the story. Odd.

I thought whoever took this picture was very, dare I say, lucky. You see, I spent the day driving about London doing Christmas shopping. I watched the temperature gauge on my dash very carefully. Sometimes it registered three full degrees Fahrenheit above freezing. At no point did I come across freezing rain.

At night I had to drive from southwest London to northwest London and by that time the temperature was rising. With the temperature well above freezing, the warning of freezing rain was lifted.

Still, hours after the warning was no longer in force, the local paper was still carrying the story on their website. Why had the picture and story not been taken down? Worse, the story had evolved. Freezing rain was now falling well to the east of London leaving highways dangerously slick. The was no mention of this.

A little sleuthing revealed that the image of an icy mirror also ran Sunday in the Sarnia Observer with an ice storm story.

There are indications the image is a file photo from the Sun Media archives. Maybe I am wrong about the source of the image, but I wait to be corrected.

Newspaper sales are down. No wonder. Newspapers are playing fast and loose with the news. Running an uncredited file picture with a news story is not journalism.

Sun Media and Quebecor need to hire more staff. They need more reporters and photographers, and editors too. Sadly, that won't happen until hell freezes over.

Addendum: This is not the only instance of the paper under Sun Media and Quebecor using questionable file art. Recently, a serious story on Canada's top court handling the appeal of a lower court 'bawdy house' ruling was accompanied with a silly piece of file filler.

And the very worst example of faux photojournalism that I have come across was the use of hired models to illustrate a story on going topless at the beach. The Ottawa Sun faked a number of images and then moved them to the Canadian Press. CP in turn moved them to the Associated Press.

Years later one of the images popped up in The New York Times as visual proof that women with breasts bare are commonly found on beaches near the Canadian capital.


Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Mr. Burns explains the fiscal cliff


Mr. Burns, the billionaire Scrooge in The Simpsons', makes a public service announcement explaining the fiscal cliff.

I believe the Rethugs are in control of the car. Is that house speaker John Boehner at the wheel?

Thursday, November 22, 2012

ReThink London limits discussion: Part One

A slide show was shown at a recent ReThink London event with those attending being asked to vote. That slide show is now online and we are again being asked to view the pictures and indicate our preferences. Unfortunately, we are not given the chance to answer: "None of the above."

Ideally this voting activity would have been, at a minimum, a two stage project. First, Londoners should have been encouraged to scour the Internet for images depicting an urban landscape they would like to see emulated here in London. The best images would have been presented for consideration and voting.

Click on the image below to enlarge it and see my improved "ballot."


As I recall image A and image B did not garner many votes. Clearly the audience  preferred the modern townhouses (C) and the apartments located above commercial space (D). Now that we know the preferences, let's give folk some better choices.

The image, second from bottom on left, is the Norwalk Town Center in Norwalk, Connecticut. This $200 million initiative looks rather grand for a town of only 86,000 where the estimated per capital annual income in 2009 was only $39, 695. Still, as best as I could determine, the plan is moving ahead.

The image to the immediate right is an artist's conception of a proposed new town centre in Clayton, Ohio. A new urbanist experiment in suburban planning, some of the proposed buildings have been built already. Below is map with inserted illustration of the development.

Clayton, Ohio
At the bottom left is an example what comes from using form-based code. This is a method of regulating development with the goal of achieving a specific urban look. Since the goal of this ReThink London project is to develop a new urban plan, maybe Londoners could take some inspiration from the Birmingham planning design guide released in late 2006 and available online.

Lastly, on the bottom right is the new apartment/commercial complex on Dundas Street in Old East London. How many votes do you think this image would attract?

Now, to move on to question two of the ReThink London ballot.




It is interesting to look at the apartment buildings shown and then consider the apartment buildings built recently in London. And then to give some thought to how other southern Ontario cities have approached apartment/condominium designs.

Think of Mississauga. Wanting to make a splash internationally, a development company, Fernbrook/Cityzen, sponsored an international design competition in 2005 for the condo towers it planned for the town centre.

The resulting skyscraper was called the “Marilyn Monroe” by locals for its voluptuous curves.

Read what The New York Times had to say about the Absolute Towers:
"People looking for the latest in twisting, gravity-defying architecture might start with the international cities of the Middle East or China, but you wouldn’t expect them to look here, in the suburbs outside Toronto.
. . . designed by the Chinese architect Ma Yansong, assisted by his partner, Qun Dang. Sales were so brisk in the 428-unit “Marilyn” tower that the developers asked the architect to deliver a second, 50-story high-rise with 433 units."
Like to know more? Watch the video. Mississauga and Fernbrook/Cityzen certainly generated buzz.

Monday, November 12, 2012

Successfully raising a grandchild

When I gushed over her art, Fiona told me firmly: "Gug-gah, I scribble."

A lot of psychologists have come out against praising children, or more accurately against heaping too much praise on children. According to these experts too much praise doesn't build self-esteem but diminishes it. It's a confidence killer.

Originally I had another title on this post and then I read The New York Times article. I immediately shifted gears and my post took off in a new direction. Madeline Levine wrote:

Dr. Carol Dweck, a social and developmental psychologist at Stanford University, takes young children into a room and asks them to solve a simple puzzle. Most do so with little difficulty. But then Dr. Dweck tells some, but not all, of the kids how very bright and capable they are. As it turns out, the children who are not told they’re smart are more motivated to tackle increasingly difficult puzzles. They also exhibit higher levels of confidence and show greater overall progress in puzzle-solving.

This may seem counter-intuitive, but praising children’s talents and abilities seems to rattle their confidence. Tackling more difficult puzzles carries the risk of losing one’s status as “smart” and deprives kids of the thrill of choosing to work simply for its own sake, regardless of outcomes. Dr. Dweck’s work aligns nicely with that of Dr. Baumrind, a clinical and developmental psychologist at the University of California, who also found that reasonably supporting a child’s autonomy and limiting interference results in better academic and emotional outcomes.

All my life I've been known as a tough critic. My nieces and nephews had to work to impress me, and work they did. Now, as a grandfather, I fear I have lost my harsh edge. I fear I've grown soft. I have turned into a push-over.

Praise, to be beneficial, should be genuine, focused on the child's good effort and hard work and not necessarily the outcome. I read numerous posts on the Web, all agreed the important word here is sincere. Children can sense insincerity. Artificial praise risks damaging trust.

Music playing, Fiona spins as she performs her little dance.
My granddaughter loves to make scribbles in pen and ink and then together we colour some of the open spaces. She picks the colours and the spaces, and I do the colouring. I have really liked some of the art we've created together.

I love the shapes she draws. I love the way she puts pen to page and the bold way she attacks the blank sheet of paper. I've tried emulating her approach; I can't. I over-think my scribbles.

The other day I was gushing over one of her sketches when she turned to me and stopped me dead by telling me firmly, "Gug-gah, I scribble."

Hmmm. Maybe it is time to dial down the praise a notch or two. It might make her a bolder child, willing to tackle the truly challenging stuff — like dance.