Celebrity hypochondria – Brontë, Proust, Darwin, Warhol – all suffered from the affliction that goes to the heart of the mind-body problem
In fact, only the two most recent case studies – Andy Warhol and Glenn Gould – exhibit unambiguous “hypochondria” as the term is most commonly understood today, in the sense of imagining dangers to health when in reality there are none. The reclusive pianist Gould threatened to sue his record company, believing that he had been seriously injured after one of its employees gently placed a hand on his shoulder; Warhol’s fear of catching Aids was such that he couldn’t eat a sandwich prepared by a café worker who appeared camp.
I can’t say I have too much sympathy for Warhol – hypochondria is small payback for his exploitation of people and that he manged to convince so many people his shallow highly derivative artistic visions were genuinely innovative art. Passing Warhol fans have no fear his stuff still auctions in the millions.
For the Greeks, hypochondria had been an unambiguous disease, located in the “hypochondrium” region of the abdomen. The gastric element was retained in Robert Burton’s late Renaissance “Windy Hypochondriacal Melancholy”, whose symptoms included “sharp belchings” and “fulsome crudities” as well as grief and fear. The affliction continued to reside in the stomach for Victorian sufferers of “hypochondriachal dyspepsia”, such as Thomas Huxley and his fellow scientist Charles Darwin, who was plagued by his irritable bowels and kept meticulous records of his flatulence. It is Darwin’s attention to detail as a diarist of his own health which makes him such an appealing subject for Dillon.
I tend to agree with the reviewer, in general Darwin’s symptoms were a way for him to avoid certain social situations. At the same time, especially as he got older, those symptoms he had in his younger days probably turned into the real thing. Especially after the deaths of two of his children, his tendency to melancholy was a strain on his health.
Across the country, 12.1 percent of kids questioned in the BJS survey said that they’d been sexually abused at their current facility during the preceding year. That’s nearly one in eight, or approximately 3,220, out of the 26,550 who were eligible to participate. The survey, however, was only given at large facilities that held young people who had been “adjudicated”…
[ ]…The biggest risk factor found in the study was prior abuse. Some 65 percent of kids who had been sexually assaulted at another corrections facility were also assaulted at their current one. In prison culture, even in juvenile detention, after an inmate is raped for the first time he is considered “turned out,” and fair game for further abuse. Eighty-one percent of juveniles sexually abused by other inmates were victimized more than once, and 32 percent more than ten times. Forty-two percent were assaulted by more than one person. Of those victimized by staff, 88 percent had been abused repeatedly, 27 percent more than ten times, and 33 percent by more than one facility employee.
While there is a good percentage of aquiline inmate on inmate physical and sexual abuse, most sexual abuse (including rape) is done by facility employees on inmates.
Advocates have long known that victims of sexual abuse in detention tend to be those perceived as unable to defend themselves, and the jail study confirms this. Women were more likely to report abuse than men. Younger inmates are more likely to be abused than older ones, gay inmates much more than straight ones, and people who had been abused at a previous facility most of all. (See Table 3 for more detail.) Those targeted for abuse are also likely to be vulnerable in ways the BJS did not address in this report. Often they have mental disabilities or mental illness, they are disproportionately likely to be first-time and nonviolent offenders, and most simply, they are likely to be small.
Confused Karl Rove Falsely Accuses Obama Of Having ‘A Little Bit Of Confusion’ About Stimulus Jobs Numbers. Maybe Karl skipped his math classes at George Mason University ( his Wikipedia entry is unclear about whether he ever graduated – more meritocracy at work). Judging Stimulus by Job Data Reveals Success
Just look at the outside evaluations of the stimulus. Perhaps the best-known economic research firms are IHS Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers and Moody’s Economy.com. They all estimate that the bill has added 1.6 million to 1.8 million jobs so far and that its ultimate impact will be roughly 2.5 million jobs. The Congressional Budget Office, an independent agency, considers these estimates to be conservative.
If Obama had made the stimulus package larger and the tax cuts smaller we’d probably be looking at even better job numbers. But thanks for playing the Conservative Propaganda Game Unka Karl, better luck next time.
“There is no possibility of thinking of anything at all in the world, or even out of it, which can be regarded as good without qualification, except a good will.” Kant