Happy Birthday!

pedram, 30 August 2013

Well Being Not a Priority

Working overtime may cost you your health, according to a Kansas State University doctoral researcher.

Sarah Asebedo, doctoral student in personal financial planning and conflict resolution, Edina, Minn., conducted a study using the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979. She and her colleagues -- Sonya Britt, assistant professor of family studies and human services and director of the university's personal financial planning program, and Jamie Blue, doctoral student in personal financial planning, Tallahassee, Fla. -- found a preliminary link between workaholics and reduced physical and mental well-being. The study, "Workaholism and Well-Being," will appear in Financial Services Review, a journal of individual financial management.

"We looked at the association between workaholism and physical and mental well-being," Asebedo said. "We found workaholics -- defined by those working more than 50 hours per week -- were more likely to have reduced physical well-being, measured by skipped meals. Also, we found that workaholism was associated with reduced mental well-being as measured by a self-reported depression score."

The link between workaholism and well-being has been assumed for years; however, there was a lack of research supporting the link until this study, Asebedo said. To understand why people work overtime even when they know it is not good for their well-being, the researchers used Gary S. Becker's Theory of the Allocation of Time, a mathematical analysis for choice measuring the cost of time.

"It looks at the cost of time as if it were a market good," Asebedo said. "This theory suggests that the more money you make, the more likely you are to work more. If you are not engaged in work-related activities, then there is a cost to the alternative way in which time is spent. Even if you understand the negative consequences to workaholism, you may still be likely to continue working because the cost of not doing so becomes greater."

According to Asebedo, Becker's theory suggests that not only can working more make a person wealthier but it also creates less leisure time to spend money. As income increases a person may be more likely to work more and create an unhealthy habit.

As a full-time wealth manager for Accredited Investors in Edina, Asebedo has found the research useful in counseling clients. She advises workaholics to be aware of the effect excessive work has on their physical and mental well-being and to be prepared for what they can do to mitigate or counteract the effects during busy work periods.

"From a financial planning and counseling perspective, it's good to be aware of workaholism," Asebedo said. "It helps me understand what can be the cause of my clients' stress. It's just a reminder that you may want to dig a bit deeper into clients' work lives. Sometimes you might find that they don't like what they are doing and they want to make a change, yet financially, they don't know how they can accomplish that."

Asebedo received her bachelor's and master's degrees from Kansas State University. She returned to the university to get her doctorate in personal financial planning through the Division of Continuing Education distance program because she was interested researching the role conflict resolution plays in financial planning.

Data for the study was taken from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 cohort, a nationally representative sample of 12,686 young men and women who were interviewed on an annual basis from 1979 through 1994 and are currently interviewed on a biennial basis.

Source: Kansas State University

Morphia

This air of silence,

Breathes through the sullen mist.

Transparent winds,

Ease these age-old wounds.

As stale thoughts disappear,

Through Morpheus pathways.

I am in wake but dreaming.

This warmth annuls,

As time drew slowly upon this wretch of life.

Weary sighs of condolence never did urge with zest,

The fire within hands made to rest.

Swallow me within sin,

This blood flows free through my veins.

Procure my will through lascivious rite.

Delving subliminal realms,

As lust invites me to stay,

Engulfed within flesh.

Casting gaze at the puppets,

Acting out their play.

Their slightly wooden frames,

Stretched and splintered by their masters.

Crawling beneath their minds' eye.

Those whom follow, reflect,

And do not become.

Not to be...Not to be...

Their words waste my time here,

With their fragrantless tones.

A veil to distract those whom wouldst live.

To create, 

Not to serve.

I walk amongst the shadows of the dead,

Thoughts bleeding into the ether.

Into endless night.

Lyrics: Esoteric

به برادران کاشف ژن قره باغ رحیم

نتیجه ی فضاحت معدودی دوستان بیسیک ساینس در کپی-پیست کردن دستاوردهای علمی، آحاد جامعه ی علمی کشور را   

. مستفیض کرده 

  در دو مقطع با این جماعت دوست داشتنی همکاری داشتم و البته هر دو هم به اصطکاک های زیاد منجرشدند.این موضع حق بجانب،غیر علمی و کاسب مسلکانه از پی اچ دی های وطنی به یادم می ماند.ان شا الله مقاله چاپ کنند،مریض ببینند!، دیتا جمع آوری کنند یا اگر کم آوردند دیتا سنتزکنند...گوارای ایشان باشد. اما من عاشق روحیه ی علمی آن دانشجوی بی پشتوانه ای هستم که صبح تا شبش با فکر پژوهش و علم سپری شد.آن که علم شد روش زندگیش. آن که فردیتش همیشه عامل ثانویه بود و البته جزایش را هم پرداخت.

Snow Cold Visions

Here I am, in saturated white,

Carrying my burden of life

Through the crimson streetlights,

An entity rarely seen

Or noticed.

Lyrics: Station Dysthymia

Archaic

My nerves

Entangled in distress,

Impulses invade

Seamlessly!

Godspeed

Red spots!

Godspeed!

Cold insight!

Pedram, 5August 2013

Pic: Oleg Yankovskiy, Nostalghia (1983)

G.

Wake up!

Drink up!

It was only a dream!

A bad dream!

Pedram, August2013

Publication Ethics: Unintended consequences of sanctions

The latest changes to US sanctions on Iran, designed to discourage the country from developing nuclear weapons, seem to have caused confusion, leading to some journal editors effectively boycotting research from Iranian medical practitioners and academics.

Regulations set out by the US Office of Foreign Assets Control state that US citizens are authorised to engage in ordinary transactions related to written publications as long as the parties to the transactions are not employed by the Iranian government. Most Iranian universities, hospitals, and research centers are government owned but the regulations specify that the sanctions do not apply to any academic and research institutions or their staff.

Nevertheless, Iranian doctors have told the BMJ that several papers have been refused by journals in the US and Australia in recent months because of the sanctions.

The editor of the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (JACI), which is owned by Elsevier, explained in an email to an assistant professor in the department of paediatrics at Tehran University of Medical Sciences that the journal could not accept his paper because “US owned journals are unable to handle scientific manuscripts which are authored by Iranian scientists, employed by the Government of Iran.”

Papers from Iranians are also known to have been turned down by the American Journal of Cardiology (also published by Elsevier), the Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics (published in the US by Marie Ann Liebert), and the Australian journal Ophthalmic Epidemiology (published by Informa Healthcare in the UK), all of whom explained that US sanctions prevented them from considering the research.

Dove Medical Press (an open access online publisher whose headquarters are in the UK and editorial office is in New Zealand) turned down a paper saying that “international sanctions currently in place against Iran mean that Dove Medical Press is no longer able to process manuscripts received from Iranian authors.”

“We do not make this decision lightly and have consulted with the authorities both here in New Zealand and in the United Kingdom before making our decision,” said Jeanette Pearce, Dove’s New Zealand based operations manager.

“It is not ethical to treat Iranian researchers this way,” Behrooz Astaneh, acting editor of the Iranian Journal of Medical Science, told the BMJ. “These people want to disseminate data they have obtained in very difficult circumstances because of the sanctions. Research publication should be on merit and have nothing to do with politics.”

Protecting editors

According to a report from Science magazine, Elsevier advised its US editors in April against handling any papers authored by employees of the government of Iran and in an email shown to the BMJ, the editor of JACI explained, “our publisher precludes taking any articles from authors based at Iranian institutions or hospitals.” Yet, Elsevier says it believes in the “free flow of ideas and information as a principle for science and for society” and chief lawyer, Mark Seeley, told the BMJ that the company continues to publish papers from Iranian academics and researchers affiliated with academic or medical institutions. Elsevier decided it was necessary to make “narrowly crafted exceptions” because of the potential for personal liability on the part of its US editors.

Asked if some US editors had possibly misunderstood the publisher’s guidance on this, Seeley responded that the problem was over “the exact definition of ‘government employees’ other than academics and practitioners. Seeley said the company was seeking greater clarity but had not yet received it.

John Sullivan of the US Treasury told the BMJ that “The focus of our sanctions is the Iranian regime and its support for terrorism and its illicit nuclear programme. Our sanctions do not target academic or informational materials.”

A different view

Other American health publications, including the two leading journals the New England Journal of Medicine and Journal of the American Medical Association, said they were continuing to publish Iranian submissions on merit.

“Different journals have adopted very different strategies on this,” Elaheh Malakan Rad, associate professor of paediatric interventional cardiology at the Children’s Medical Centre in Tehran, told the BMJ. “There needs to be clear guidance on the ethical issue here.”

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which advises editors on handling ethically sensitive issues, discussed problems surrounding Iranian authors in a June meeting and affirmed the need, already previously agreed because of other concerns, that clearer guidance is needed. COPE is planning to add a paragraph to its code of conduct stating that, “Editorial decisions should not be affected by the origins of the manuscript, including the nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, or religion of the authors. Decisions to edit and publish should not be determined by the policies of governments or other agencies outside of the journal itself.”

The United Kingdom government has also changed its sanctions recently and continually updates a list of banned authors and institutions thought to be involved in Iran’s nuclear programme. However, the BMJ continues to take papers on merit and has chosen in some instances to waive the usual author fee charged for open access publication of research because of regulations over bank transactions with Iran.

“The BMJ is against academic boycotts and has no restrictions on publishing articles from authors in Iran,” the BMJ’s editor, Fiona Godlee, said in a statement posted on bmj.com. “We have noted the UK’s restrictions on trading with Iran and are also aware of the new US restrictions. These may have implications for whether we can levy an author fee from an author in Iran. We will decide this on a case by case basis.”

Richard Horton, the editor of the Lancet (which is owned by Elsevier) said: “TheLancet welcomes and encourages research from scientists in all countries, including Iran. Indeed, we are currently working to strengthen our links with Iranian medical and public health scientists.”

by: Sophie Arie

@BMJ