Eye health, sunlight and computer screens

Gizmodo (see below) has posted the article which links to research coming out of Australian's university QUT (Queensland University of Technology. They're finding that greater exposure to sunlight (at least an hour) prevents a heightened risk factor for myopia, and progression in those already with it.

Of course, too much sun has it's dangers, but I think the benefits exposure to sunlight has are becoming severely under appreciated. The benefits range from assisting with sleep cycles to being the absolute best source of Vitamin D which is crucial for building strong bones, stabilising sufficient energy levels, mood and perhaps ironically, healthy skin and cancer prevention.

Inspiration http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2016/04/australian-scientists-discover-lack-of-sunlight-not-computer-screens-causes-eyesight-problems/

#primalblueprint #health #nutrition #fitness

Request to the Townsville Bulletin, please report on Aurizon job cuts for Townsville and Rockhampton

Dear editorial staff at the Townsville Bulletin

Please report on the future job cuts recently announced by Aurizon. On 7 Oct, 2015 ABC Online, and various other major regional  news media outlets ran stories explaining that rail group Aurizon will be cutting 74 jobs from its Rockhampton and Townsville maintenance facilities - 34 of them coming from Townsville. Consultation is to begin by the end of the month with the actual job cuts being processed over the next three years. Verifying with a search on the Bulletin website has confirmed that no story has been published and this is a concern.

A search on the Bulletin website for "Aurizon" did not yield any of the grim, but absolutely important, job-cut news broken by other news outlets. 

The reason for the job cuts have to do with a “touch economic environment for Aurizon’s customers…The changes are part of the Company's ongoing transformation program, announced in mid-2013, to reduce costs, improve operational efficiency and to focus for customers on the core business of rail freight.” Beyond Townsville and Rockhampton, Sydney Morning Herald reports that Aurizon is cutting more than 800 jobs across all divisions as part of $380m in savings needed to curb slumping resources demand world wide.

As the leading source for journalism in the Townsville region, your publication has a responsibility to the people of Townsville to provide important information they need to better assist and run their daily lives. The reality that Aurizon, a rail group integral to the Townsville’s economic strength historically, is facing tough economic times and are responding with cost-savings in the form of job cuts is news the local community needs to be made aware of - especially those involved in rail, shipping and resources industries.

This news is especially significant given that there may be confusion around the performance of Aurizon as well as Townsville as a whole economically. Recently, the Bulletin reported on the $40m Aurizon rail allocation to from the CBD to Stuart, describing the story as a positive boost for Townsville. While there is little argument against the positive outlook this move has for the city, without also reporting Aurizon’s announced job cuts in the local community, there could be confusion over the job security for Aurizon workers.

As a duty to keep your audience adequately informed about issue that are important to them, if steps are not already taken, please begin producing content on this information for Bulletin readers. The people need to know, or be reminded, that on balance, the resources sector is in decline and is expected to be for quite some time, and that a major employer in Townsville is responding by letting workers go.

Thank you

Coal and oil companies hate renewable energy

How widely known is it that ExxonMobil has spent billions over the last 30 years to deliberately discredit the impacts of fossil fuel burning has on global temperatures?  I feel like not enough people are aware of how much coal, oil and gas companies invest in arguing against human influence on climate change. The biggest competitor to these industries are renewable energies and while there are definitely some levels of embrace and innovation within them, a greater portion of corporate muscle goes to suppressing new, cleaner technologies from advancement. In other words, rather than adapt and adopt renewable energy as a new source of capital, older energy companies have chosen to fight.

It has been reported that Exxon was warned about the harm it was doing to the environment and the social and economic ramifications for decades. Source: InsideClimate News

Pulitzer Prize winning publication Insideclimate News has been following litigation related to ExxonMobil's efforts to suppress academic research since the 1980s. Click above for the details, but the short of it is that in the 1970s, Exxon (not Mobil yet) commissioned scientists to look into the impact the burning of fossil fuels had on the environment. Not only did the studies indicate what we know now about human caused CO2 emissions influencing global temperatures, but their own researchers warned them to diversify their energy sources (into renewables) and begin to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels. The benefits would be not just to diversify and future-proof their business models, but to avoid contributing to the catastrophic climate related problems of today (drought, food shortages, rising sea levels, water quality and all of the political, social and economic challenges that are occurring as a result). Jumping back into present day and, becoming well known around academic circles, and hopefully becoming more mainstream, is the reality that in the face of sound economic advice and urgent scientific warnings, Exxon chose to confuse the issue in order to defend itself against competition alternatives.

The good news is that they're losing this battle, the bad news is that it's taking so long. Surprise, ripping coal and oil out of the ground and burning it for energy is doing irreversible damage to the environment and are resulting in catastrophic events that are beginning to show themselves in very real, practical way.

Still, with most of the academic and cultural world in agreement on this, there seems to be a new obstacles in the way of focusing resources to the growth and permeation of renewable energy into contemporary society. The new debate centres around the efficiency of renewable energy generation as a whole. There's a strong platform of those that view solar, water and wind power generation to be not as economically viable as fossil fuels. While this may be a valid question - economics and scientific research is currently looking into this - it is still unreasonable for this argument to be use to justify pulling resources away from renewables. Industries built on solar and wind power, not being able to generate as much as coal, or as cheaply as oil, should be viewed as a reason to push more investment behind them rather than less. Economies of scale have not yet been reached for the renewable energy industry which means that future investment will only serve to increase the sector’s efficiency.

The world is trending in the right direction. Recent measures are starting to point to renewables surpassing fossil fuels when it comes to gigawatts produced by new power plants in the United States as noted in the previous link. In Europe, electricity generated by renewable sources has grown by 84% from 2003 to 2013, with the same positive data trends emerging from Asia & Oceania.

The key is to make sure our governments don't let up. The debate has turned from environmental to economic with the argument no longer being against climate change but against "costly" renewable energy in favour of cheaper fossil fuels. As government budgets continue to be tightened and public concerns about costs of living increase,  it's crucial to remember that renewable energy is in its infancy and that gains will be made in increasing scale, rather than stunting investment in favour of old technologies. It's good economics to lead the rush in clean technology from the ground up.

Brooks PureGrit 3 Shoe Review

Over the last few years there seems to have developed a dichotomy within running shoes. There are traditionals and minimalists. Without getting too much into the debate, there are generally two, sometimes awkwardly heated, schools of thought. Those in favour of minimalist shoes believe in the the promotion of the more natural and efficient running form that being barefoot would promote. Lines like the New Balance Minimus and the cultist Vibram Fivefingers, encourage proper form by forcing more mid-forefoot striking and by allowing greater flex and movement. Running barefoot is thought to be the best way to learn how to run properly and thus move smoother, faster and with less injuries.

Traditional running shoes, such as the Asics Kayano or Brooks Adrenaline ranges, are founded upon reducing shock and stabilising the foot in optimal positions. While flexibility and reducing weight iare important factors, the reality is that all of the foams, glues, fabrics, rubbers and plastics make traditional shoes heavier, stiffer and, generally more cumbersome for runners. Another main aspect of traditionals is the large drop, which is the difference in thickness of the midsole from heel to toe. Generally, the midsole under the heel is much thicker than that of the toe - usually 10-14mm thicker, to allow for minimal shock when the heel strikes the ground. Of course, without the plush padding and support that traditional shoes offer, there’s a lot more impact on the feet, bones and joints. Reality is that for those that are overweight, or are unable to (learn how to) run with proper form, minimalist shoes can lead to a lot of damage and pain.

So, again, the Pure project addresses this by finding an optimal balance between the two by being softer and more supporting than true barefoot runners, but lighter, more flexible and with a lower drop, allowing for a more natural foot strike than the traditional. The Pure Project consists of several models, depending on where you are on the minimalist scale. Starting at the “barely there” side is the PureDrift, the lightest, most flexible of the bunch. At the other end is my favourite running shoe for the last 2 years is the PureCadence, these fill all the criteria for a minimalist shoe (light, flexible, low drop) but still with a good amount of cushioning and support. The idea is that anything beyond this is a traditional Brooks runner. Then, there’s the PureGrit. Another Pure Project entry, but tailored for those that love the harsh, uneven, rocky, dirty and potentially wet trails. I’ve had them for about a month now and after a about 30 kms worth of off-road workouts, here’s how they’ve been going. This is my review of the Brooks PureGrit 3s.

Key Features

1. BioMogo DNA midsole providing adaptive cushioning
2. 4mm heel-toe drop to encourage midfoot striking and proper form
3. Ideal Heel, rounded heel cradle for better alignment and transition
4. Ballistic Rock Shield protecting feet from trail hazards
5. Nav-band to wrap midfoot securely
6. Aggressive 3D Hex lugs for maximum tread
7. Weighs 280 grams (9.9 ounces)
8. Suited for neutral pronators with medium to high arches

Test Conditions

• About 4 separate sessions in a month ranging from 4 to 8 km
• Rocks, timber steps, dirt road, bouldered trails
• 100m elevation change per km
• Grass running track for mile test
• Very dry and dusty, no mud or wet work.
• 2 years and over 1000km in the Brooks PureCadence

The first thing I noticed about the PureGrits were how much more solid and less plush they feel compared to the PureCadence. The lugs under the very rugged outsole are noticeable upon first wear -- at least for someone who hasn’t worn a trailrunner before. There is also a Rock Shield under the forefoot, which is new to these 3rd editions. The aggressive outsole, hexl lugs and Rock Shield make for an incredibly solid and convincingly protective feeling shoe. They hold up very well up on the trails. My local routes involve steep, rocky climbs combined with timber or demolished boulder steps. On impact I could feel enough to establish a sure footing with solid traction, but still was able to maintain a smooth ride with minimal shock.

One thing that I noticed wasn’t as prominent relative to the PureCadence was the heel-toe drop. Although it’s listed as a 4mm drop, the “Ideal Heel” contour isn’t as dramatic as the PureCadence, which means that the compared to the Cadence, the Grits have my heels sitting noticeably higher than my forefoot. I’m not sure if this is objectively good or bad, but I definitely feel more inclined to strike more forward in my foot in the Cadence than in the Grits. On flatter terrain, I have to be a bit more conscious not to heel-strike than I would like. That being said, there’s still plenty of that springy nature because of the encouraged midfoot landing that minimal running shoes are known for.

Speaking of bounce,  BioMogo midsole remains as a very substantial, yet middle of the range cushioning system. They’re soft, but not too soft, and focus mostly on absorbing impact and offering a smooth ride rather than being plush or bouncy. It always comes down to personal fit, but I have always scored Nike’s Zoom or Lunar systems (i.e., Pegasus, Structure, Lunargildes, etc) as too soft or bouncy to the point of feeling as my feet were wobbling on impact. BioMogo was always a bit firmer than these, but not nearly as firm as Mizuno’s Wave (i.e., Rider).

Of course, when talking about trail shoes, tread is an important factor. The 3D hex lugs, are very aggressive, though are not cut sharply like most trail treads are. Their shape is symmetrical in all directions (hexagonal) which means they do not seem to be geared toward any specific direction - forward in particular. The rubber is also very tactile indicate excellent grip. The result is a very confident landing on trails, as the lugs dig into any surface securely and with good balance. However, compared to the more traditional teeth-like treads on other runners, these don’t necessarily grab the trail and launch you forward. Perhaps this is another deliberate move to encourage proper form and more natural movement.

The upper scores well in terms of fit. I haven’t experienced any friction hot spots, and foot feels very securely wrapped and helps within the show and above the midsole as it should. Ventilation is excellent as well. I was weary of how the bottom of my feet would feel. I live in a very hot, dry-tropical climate so heat is a big concerned. This morning’s 90 minute session was in 33C or 90F, which made for a pretty exhausting hill climb, but I’m happy to say that neither breathability, moisture or temperature posed problems. I’m not entirely sold on the Nav-band however. I’m skeptical of how much a one inch strip of elastic can help lock things in place, and with the PureGrits, the band is a bit too long and bunches when I lace up. Still, the upper fits very comfortably, at worst, this band may be inaffectual.

There is one issue with the upper which I consider more significant, and that is the tongue stitching. The majority of running shoes structure the tongue of the shoe with either a centre-loop on the centre for the crossing of laces to fit through, or have the sides of the tongue attached to the upper. The purpose of either of these is to ensure the tongue stays where it should, above the centre of the foot. The PureGrit3’s don’t have this. The tongue is only attached at its base which means that it’s rather easy for the tongue to slip down to either side of the foot and shoe. For me, they slip to the lateral sides. It doesn’t seem to happen often so it’s not that big of a deal. But once or twice on each of my runs I had to stop to pull the tongue up. It’s not a major drama as it doesn’t cause pain of any kind, the materials are so soft that the foot stays securely and snugly wrapped. It doesn’t cause any pain or anything, It’s just really annoying.

One of the reasons I’ve gone so long without giving trail running a go is because I haven’t been able to find a shoe I felt comfortable with. I have always had a hard time purchasing runners that would only really be useful for the trails, and then still needing a road pair. Traditional runners have always felt too heavy, firm or stiff to make for a good road run. I never liked the idea of having shoes for trails and different shoes for roads. I’m not a competitor - I love running because of how simple it is and  how little is needed. That being said, taking the leap with a trail shoe from the Pure Project left me pleasantly surprised. I’m confident in these not just as a trail shoe, but as a road runner as well. They’re light enough and soft enough for the roads but strong enough for the woods.

At the end of the day, the PureGrit 3s make an excellent trail runner - minimalist or otherwise. In fact I would recommend these as an all-purpose general training runner rather than just for off-road trekking. They’re light enough. soft enough and offer plenty of support for road sessions, with the added bonus of protection and traction for harsh terrains full of dirt, rocks, mud and hills. If you’re in the market for one shoe that are smooth and fast enough for the roads but rugged enough for the rocks, the PureGrit 3s might be just what you’re looking for.

Over 15,000 Flood Victims Displaced in Zimbabwe - Shelterbox Disaster Relief

Earlier this year, Zimbabwe was hit with devastating flooding in the districts of Chivi, Masvingo and Tsholotsho (see Figure 1). In January and February, 850 mm of rain hit the Masvingo and Matabeleland North provinces. This is nearly twice the average these regions receive annually. Fears of the Tokwe-Mukosi Dam not withstanding the volume of water were dissipated and on 11 Feb, the Zimbabwean Government launched an international plea for $20 million in assistance to help the approximately 15,000 people displaced (OHCA, 28 Feb 2014)

Figure 1: Map of Zimbabwe showing Masvingo (Southeast) and Matabeleland North (West) Provinces. Source: NationsOnline.org

Although it withstood the pressure, water levels came within 5 metres of surpassing capacity of the Tokwe-Mukosi Dam. Because of this, Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe  declared the situation in the basin a state of national disaster. Communities downstream from the dam were instructed to  take necessary precautions to avoid danger. Over 3,000 households were moved to the Chingwizi Resettlement Camp. Official estimates point that over 700 tons of potential harvest will be lost compromising food security until the next harvest season which isn't until 2015. This is due to over 1,000 hectares of inundated food crops. Thankfully, the UN Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) has made generous contributions allowing the World Food Program to begin providing food for the next four months. There is great difficulty in rationing nutrition for over an estimated 15,625 displaced people. (Reliefweb.int, 1 Aug 2014)

Figure 2: 600 stranded during floods in Zimbabwe Source: voazimbabwe.com

Although the disaster declaration expired on 9 May, humanitarian assistance continues three months after the onset of the emergency. There are still over 15,000 people displaced people living at Chingwizi and new issues are developing such as the need for recovery and supporting the community to rely less on aid as they resume their lives. 

One organisation providing such disaster relief is Shelterbox International. Shelterbox provides emergency shelter and vital supplies to support communities around the world overwhelmed by disaster and humanitarian crisis. It is a Rotary Club partner and as such it is dedicated to providing humanitarian services, encouraging high ethical standards and building goodwill and peace throughout the world regardless of race, religion, creed, colour, gender or political preference. 

Shelterboxes are exactly what they sound like by name. They are emergency packs designed to provide essentials for security to those most in need of shelter. Here is an excerpt from their About Us page:

We deliver the essentials people need to begin rebuilding their lives in the aftermath of a disaster. When we send boxes, each one is tailored to a disaster but typically contains a disaster relief tent for a family, thermal blankets and groundsheets, water storage and purification equipment, solar lamps, cooking utensils, a basic tool kit, mosquito nets and a children’s activity pack. 

For colder countries, we can deliver winterised aid that includes more blankets and groundsheets and a thermal liner that fits between the inner and outer layers of the tent retaining more heat.

Sometimes our aid is not packed in boxes but sent in bulk. It is essential that we always support the needs of those who have survived disasters and this can vary enormously based on the type and scale of a disaster. We also do this to maximise donors’ money ensuring that we only send what is really needed and appropriate for the situation and culture.

Figure 3: An example of a Shelterbox. Source: jetsongreen.com

What stands out about their mission is the intention to create tailored packs depending on the nature of the disaster, location and circumstances of those seeking relief. One of the more admirable aspects of their work is shown when they send thank you letters for donations. These explain that it may be be some time until they are able to indicate where the box is going. The idea is that as an organisation, rather than highlighting a specific group of people or location -- or even a purpose, they are most concerned in the most efficient means of using funding to provide the most substantial aid as possible. This reflects the truly chaotic situations many people around the world are in and rather than dedicate assistance to favoured groups, the help goes to where it is needed most given the circumstances of the victims of that particular time. Once a box is created and dispatched, notification is sent of where it went and why it was so crucial that this specific box went there. The basis of charity and humanitarian aid being decided upon based on who needs it most rather than any other personal, cultural or political criteria is top priority and rightfully so . 

Below is the background and latest updates from volunteers in Zimbabwe. For more information on the work Shelterbox is doing, or to contribute to one yourself, please visit http://www.shelterbox.org/.

Paper made from stone - Seriously, it's paper, made from stone.

A few weeks ago I found myself in a very strange conversation with a co-worker about the paper production process. Long story short, this gentleman explained to me how making paper from trees was one of the worst ideas of the industrial age. His point was that the process of extracting wood by way of destroying trees is a terribly inefficient use of resources given how ubiquitous and disposable paper needs to be. In other words, chopping down trees, grinding them up, turning them into mush and then spinning this mush into dry paper incurs many more costs than is necessary -- air quality, wildlife habitat, energy usage in the process, dedicated transport and required infrastructure. This is especially so since paper is needed in such large amounts (despite technology creating a paper-less world), and the associated necessity of it all being of low cost to the consumer. For those that may not be in the know, below is a simple diagram explaining the paper process, minus the first step -- cutting down a lot of trees.

I love good diagrams, and this is the cleanest and simplest one I could find. Kuda Bengi Gencer (courtesy of a Google Image Search and Flickr page I could not access)

If you were to ask me, I would like to think that I have a pretty conscious and deliberate ethical focus on living sustainably and the conservation of natural resources. However, this is the very first time I have ever thought to question whether or not it makes sense to use trees to make paper. After some discussion and a few hours of reading I have to say I agree with my coworker. Using wood for paper doesn't make much sense outside of it being of historic industry similar to coal power or corn syrup. I don't think wood is an efficient resource for making paper. Agriculture, building materials,  and land-clearing for certain types of development  all seem like much more substantial societal moves and thus, I think, are more worth while causes for destroying the acres of forestry necessary compared to simply making paper. And such was the gist of the conversation. How about that. 

Coincidentally enough, a few days later I was picking up some supplied from the local stationery store and in the notebooks aisle found this:

The store only has A5 in both flip-top and normal side bound varieties, and the tiny pocket sized sets. There are no full A4 or letter sized products, though they do exist online. 

On the lower shelves there had these "Nu:World" branded "Tough Paper" books available in various sizes. I was immediately drawn by the very tradesmen (which I am not) inspired design so I picked it up to have a look. How could a notebook be especially made to be tougher? Water, oil and tear resistant? How? Paper made from stone? What?

Nu: World Stone Paper

Above you can see the information page which bullets through the main features of Nu World Stone Paper. Here is a link to Nuco-International website for the full breakdown. In short, this is a notebook with special paper. The paper isn't made from wood, but instead, a combination of ground limestone and polyethylene (a type of plastic). Because of this, the main benefits are:

- 100% water proof

- Tear resistant

- Tree Free

- Less energy consumptive

- Recyclable

- Water is not needed in production

- Feels awesome. 

Overall, as weird as it is to talk so highly, and so much, about paper, I have to say that all of this is very true. It feels really smooth to write with. Pens glide across the pages as oppose to scratch and there's much less chance of indentation. The need for less pressure is quite obvious, so those with a tendency to press hard with their pens may actually feel the paper is too soft.

Stone paper is definitely much more difficult to tear. You can see the paper stretch (like plastic) before it actually tears, and when when it does it's more of split than a tear. I don't imagine frayed edges or accidentally ripped corners would be a problem here. 

The most impressive characteristic for me is that it actually is water proof. I would be lying if I said I wasn't excited to test this feature and am happy to say it's true. I was able to wipe the paper clean and write immediately after. The paper wasn't soaked through at all. I don't think I've ever found myself writing in wet conditions, so it's not really applicable to my life, but it's still pretty handy. Realistically I could imagine plenty of workers that have to take write notes in wet environments and how frustrating that might be. Below are a few photos of my experiment. 

If this happened by accident when I was actually working, I, like most anyone, would be fairly upset.  

Obviously, you can't forget that the ink isn't waterproof. 

Again, I know it's just paper, but I've found myself talking about this product for weeks. I'm just so fascinated by the concept. That being said, discussion has lead to a decent amount of reservation regarding the "environmentally friendly" side of the marketing campaign Nuco is pushing. For the record, Nuco seems to be focused on notebooks and papers of various uses and sorts. There are leather bound professional notebooks and bright-coloured variations geared to younger students, all with normal paper. Stone paper is just one of these products, so it is not as if Nuco has a specific environmental focus behind their business model. In any case, With any new product or idea, especially one which claims to be a solution to serious large scale problems (like the environment), it's important to do the due diligence and examine all aspects of the issue. 

First, limestone comes from mines, and mining does a terrible amount of damage to a lot of things. The danger it puts the workers in aside, mining is as responsible for habitat loss and air pollution as anything can be. Now, the "calcium carbonate-chalk" stone paper is made from may be "the world's 4th most plentiful material" (if my understanding of science is accurate, silicon, aluminium and iron are the top 3), but it's still a product of mining which means natural materials are being dug up and ripped out of the ground in gigantic amounts. To it's benefit, the limestone is taken as a by-product from quarries, which means mines aren't specifically opened for it, but it's taken from the pile of refuse. Either way, I'm sure you would have a hard time finding someone specialising in environmental conservation happy with anything having to do with mining. 

Also, it's made from plastic and although plastic can be treated to be made biodegradable, it doesn't really break down by nature. What this means is that waste which is not recycled build up more than regular paper would, and what to do with high deposits of non-degradable plastic waste is another issue altogether. I have tried burning it. It burns similar to normal paper but a bit more slowly and with less smoke. I still needed to run it under the tap to stop it. I'm not sure why this is relevant, I suppose I was hoping it would melt and change shape like a plastic grocery bag. Oh well. This is why there is no photo. I don't think a burnt corner of a piece of paper would be that interesting. 

I wouldn't mind a different, non-tradie design. I can't say I'm a fan. I am currently deciding if a care enough to customise this with some fabric or paint. 

At the end of the day, paper made from stone seems like it's the real deal. I definitely love the material and have told anyone whenever the opportunity arose. The reality is that although it may not be the solution mother Earth has been waiting for, it absolutely has it's benefits. No trees will be killed for it's sake and plenty of water and electricity will be saved, yet landfills may be at further risk. Either way, given these books fit well within the market standards for notebooks (definitely not the cheapest at $4 per, but much more affordable than premium leather-bound varieties), I'm a definite fan. At the very least, it will give you some pretty interesting, albeit very nerdy, conversations to have about the environment, technology and industrial creativity.