RHONDASWAN.COM

Tiger, most athletes and celebrities are not role models

2009-12-16T17:16:00Z

Tom Brady and Gisele Bundchen had a baby boy.

And Bridget Moynahan, the mother of his other child handled it with grace.

Tareq and Michaele Salahi stiffed a Washington, D.C., hotel bartender as an encore to crashing the White House state dinner.

Paris Hilton has for months been missing from the red carpet.

Sarah Palin said … something stupid.

And there's all the news that's not fit to print about Tiger Woods and his harem.

Google calls these Top Stories. The news everyone is reading.

I call them the dumbing down of America.

Is it any wonder that we can't compete with China and India?

There probably are more people who can name the number of women who shamelessly have admitted to bedding Tiger than can name the number of amendments to the U.S. Constitution (27), the number of representatives in the U.S. House (435), or the number of the health care reform bill (HR 3590) the Senate is debating.

I get that these numbers aren't sexy, but they represent things that have a hell of a lot more meaning to our daily lives.

Last week, I received an e-mail from a reader in response to a column in which I said that I could not care less about the private life of Tiger Woods.

"If we, as a society, are increasingly apathetic as to how responsible adults should act, what does that say?" the writer asked. "What do we tell young children who have looked at Tiger as a role model? Your article's theme would suggest we simply dismiss this as just another insignificant moral blip. You should be a little more bothered."

I am bothered — not by someone else's sex life but by our obsession with it and all things celebrity.

I would tell the children who have looked to Tiger as a role model to use him as model for how to play golf, not how to live their lives. I would tell the children that athletes are to be admired for their skills but are not always good examples off the course, the court or the field. That they should choose role models who have characteristics that inspire them to become the best person they can be. And that, more often than not, they won't find those people on a TV or movie screen.

Whenever the media talk of role models, it's always about someone famous and usually an athlete. They are role models by default because everyone knows their name.

My role models were my mother and grandmother, who taught me about love and the importance of family and loyalty. I'm a writer because of a fifth-grade teacher who told me that it was my gift and that I should pursue it as a career. I can't remember her name, but I've always remembered her advice and the special attention she gave me.

The people who really make a difference in the world — parents, grandparents, teachers, coaches, mentors, volunteers and social workers, for example — rarely get the spotligh

I would tell children that just because the media don't find such people interesting isn't a reason for them not to. That "Where in the world is Paris Hilton?" will not be a question on any test they will ever get in school. Nor will, "How many children does Tom Brady have and by how many women?" Or "How do you pronounce Tareq and Michaele Salahi?"

I'd tell them that if they want a good job and want to do their country a favor, they should go to college and major in math or science. The demand for scientists and engineers is expected to grow four times faster than all other professions in the next decade, but only 5 percent of our college students graduate with degrees in those fields compared with 42 percent of China's.

I'd tell them to turn off the TV and read a book.

And I'd tell them that most of what really matters, they're more likely to learn in school and at home than on Google.

Sen. Reid Don't Apologize to GOP

2009-12-08T18:28:00Z

GOP leader Michael Steele is asking Sen. Harry Reid to apologize for comparing Republican lawmakers who are dragging their feet and/or outright trying to block health care reform with Congressmen who who also tried to stall and/or block women’s rights and civil rights.

Sen. Reid should ignore him.

First, as I’ve opined before, an apology is worthless if you have to ask for it.
Second, Sen. Reid is right, and there was nothing offensive about what he said.

It’s not like he called his colleagues in Congress racists.

“Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is, ’slow down, stop everything, let’s start over.’ If you think you’ve heard these same excuses before, you’re right,” Reid said Monday. “When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said ’slow down, it’s too early, things aren’t bad enough.’”

He continued: “When women spoke up for the right to speak up, they wanted to vote, some insisted they simply, slow down, there will be a better day to do that, today isn’t quite right. When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today.”

It’s real clear by his comments that Sen. Reid is simply saying that the Party of No is trying to stop progress just like those who tried to quash women’s rights and civil rights. There is nothing about his statements that “offends the sensibilities of the American people” as Steele told CBS News today. Nor is Sen. Reid playing the race card as Steele put it.

In fact, Steele himself is playing that card by bringing race into the conversation.

Anyone who has been paying attention to the so-called “debate” on Capitol Hill can clearly see that the Republicans don’t want this country to move forward on health care. They want to keep the status quo. So did those who opposed women’s rights and civil rights. It really is that simple.

Apologies aren’t required for telling the truth.

Gardasil: Not For My Child

2009-10-01T19:23:00Z

Take three shots and sue us in the morning.

That’s essentially what Uncle Sam is telling a Florida Panhandle teen who doesn’t want to take Gardasil. The vaccine supposedly prevents the two strains of the sexually transmitted human papillomavirus (HPV) that cause 70 percent of cervical cancers. Simone Davis, 17, of Port St. Joe said she doesn’t need Gardasil because she has no plans to become sexually active. The U.S. government has said, Get the shots or go back to England.

Female immigrants between 11 and 26 must get Gardasil vaccinations to become citizens. Simone, who is seeking citizenship, moved to Florida from England when she was 3, adopted by her grandmother, who had married an American. Their request for a waiver on moral and religious grounds was denied.

“I kind of feel like they may be experimenting with immigrants to see how we will react, and then give the vaccine to citizens,” Simone said. “If it is such a great vaccine, why isn’t it mandatory for everyone?”

A better question: Why is it mandatory for anyone?

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says Gardasil is safe for females between 11 and 26. There’s no proof, however, that the vaccine protects against HPV longer than five years. So we’re keeping 11-year-olds safe from a sexually transmitted virus until they’re 16. How about we just try and keep them virgins instead?

Even a lead researcher for Gardasil’s manufacturer, pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co., now has doubts. “The benefit to public health is nothing,” said Dr. Diane Harper, who helped design and carry out studies to get Gardasil approved. “There is no reduction in cervical cancers; they are just postponed, unless the protection lasts for at least 15 years, and over 70 percent of all sexually active females of all ages are vaccinated.”

Then there are the side effects. As of Sept. 1, the CDC had received 15,037 reports of “adverse events” from the more than 26 million doses of Gardasil distributed. Forty-four of those “events” were deaths. Other serious reactions include paralysis, blood clots and cases of a rare disorder that causes muscle weakness.

There’s no proof that Gardasil caused these “adverse events.” There’s also no proof that the drug did not.

Officials in the United Kingdom are resuming mandatory shots of Cervarix, a similar vaccine manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, after an autopsy showed that a 14-year-old girl who died hours after being vaccinated had a malignant tumor in her chest. GlaxoSmithKiline is trying to get Food and Drug Administration approval for Cervarix here.

The agency put off its decision after news about the British teen’s death. The FDA should have put off approving Gardasil. There have been no long-term studies about the drug’s effects. Instead, the FDA fast-tracked approval, and the government added it to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. So claims by victims of side-effects are paid out of taxpayers’ pockets, and Merck is off the hook.

My pediatrician looked at me sideways when I refused two years ago to let her give Gardasil to my daughter. Merck’s multi-million dollar, award-winning marketing campaign didn’t impress me the way it did our government or the Florida legislators who tried and failed in 2007 to make Gardasil vaccinations a requirement for 11- and 12-year-old girls attending public and private school. Then again, maybe our legislators were impressed with the money Merck and its employees has given to state campaigns across the country — nearly $5 million from 2000 to 2006, the year the FDA approved Gardasil. Florida candidates and political parties, says the Institute on Money in State Politics, got $256,000.

With the drug priced at $360 for a three-dose regimen, Merck stands to make billions off government forcing Gardasil on our children. All of us, even immigrants, should have the right to say, Thanks, but no thanks.

Rhonda Swan is an editorial writer for The Palm Beach Post. Her e-mail address is rhonda_swan@pbpost.com