Child Development

Smarter Babies when Mothers Eat More Salmon

Costco Canned Salmon Filet

Costco Canned Salmon Filet

… and less vegetable oil. Another correlation study, but it fits a pattern of such studies showing how important omega-3 fats are in building and protecting brains (see “Fish and Fish Oil for Better Brain Health.”) In this case, mothers who ate a diet rich in omega-3s (from oily coldwater fish and some nuts) had higher levels of omega-3s in the breast milk they fed their children, and their children were notably smarter.

Researchers at UCSB and U Pittsburgh have released a study (written up by Science Daily here):

In a paper published in the early online edition of the journal Prostaglandins, Leukotrienes and Essential Fatty Acids, the researchers compared the fatty acid profiles of breast milk from women in over two dozen countries with how well children from those same countries performed on academic tests.

Their findings show that the amount of omega-3 docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) in a mother’s milk — fats found primarily in certain fish, nuts and seeds — is the strongest predictor of test performance. It outweighs national income and the number of dollars spent per pupil in schools. DHA alone accounted for about 20 percent of the differences in test scores among countries, the researchers found.

On the other hand, the amount of omega-6 fat in mother’s milk–fats that come from vegetable oils such as corn and soybean–predict lower test scores. When the amount of DHA and linoleic acid (LA)–the most common omega-6 fat–were considered together, they explained nearly half of the differences in test scores. In countries where mother’s diets contain more omega-6, the beneficial effects of DHA seem to be reduced.

“Human intelligence has a physical basis in the huge size of our brains — some seven times larger than would be expected for a mammal with our body size,” said Steven Gaulin, UCSB professor of anthropology and co-author of the paper. “Since there is never a free lunch, those big brains need lots of extra building materials–most importantly, they need omega-3 fatty acids, especially DHA. Omega-6 fats, however, undermine the effects of DHA and seem to be bad for brains.”

Both kinds of omega fat must be obtained through diet. But because diets vary from place to place, for their study Gaulin and his co-author, William D. Lassek, M.D., a professor at the University of Pittsburgh’s Graduate School of Public Health and a retired assistant surgeon general, estimated the DHA and LA content — the good fat and the bad fat — in diets in 50 countries by examining published studies of the fatty acid profiles of women’s breast milk.

The profiles are a useful measure for two reasons, according to Gaulin. First, because various kinds of fats interfere with one another in the body, breast milk DHA shows how much of this brain-essential fat survives competition with omega-6. Second, children receive their brain-building fats from their mothers. Breast milk profiles indicate the amount of DHA children in each region receive in the womb, through breastfeeding, and from the local diet available to their mothers and to them after they are weaned…. “Considering the benefits of omega-3 and the detriment of omega-6, we can get pretty darn close to explaining half the difference in scores between countries,” he added. When DHA and LA are considered together, he added, they are twice as effective at predicting test scores as either is alone, Gaulin said.

Gaulin and Lassek considered two economic factors as well: per capita gross domestic product (a measure of average wealth in each nation) and per student expenditures on education. “Each of these factors helps explain some of the differences between nations in test scores, but the fatty acid profile of the average mother’s milk in a given country is a better predictor of the average cognitive performance in that country than is either of the conventional socioeconomic measures people use,” said Gaulin.

From their analysis, the researchers conclude that both economic wellbeing and diet make a difference in cognitive test performance, and children are best off when they have both factors in their favor. “But if you had to choose one, you should choose the better diet rather than the better economy,” Gaulin said….

Their results are particularly interesting in 21st-century North America, Gaulin noted, because our current agribusiness-based diets provide very low levels of DHA — among the lowest in the world. Thanks to two heavily government-subsidized crops — corn and soybeans — the average U.S. diet is heavy in the bad omega-6 fatty acids and far too light on the good omega-3s, Gaulin said.

“Back in the 1960s, in the middle of the cardiovascular disease epidemic, people got the idea that saturated fats were bad and polyunsaturated fats were good,” he explained. “That’s one reason margarine became so popular. But the polyunsaturated fats that were increased were the ones with omega-6, not omega-3. So our message is that not only is it advisable to increase omega 3 intake, it’s highly advisable to decrease omega-6 — the very fats that in the 1960s and ’70s we were told we should be eating more of.”

Gaulin added that mayonnaise is, in general, the most omega-6-laden food in the average person’s refrigerator. “If you have too much of one — omega-6 — and too little of the other — omega 3 — you’re going to end up paying a price cognitively,” he said.

The issue is a huge concern for women, Gaulin noted, because “that’s where kids’ brains come from. But it’s important for men as well because they have to take care of the brains their moms gave them.

So not only did the US government’s agricultural subsidies support growing more corn and soybean oils which are negative for brain growth, they recommended diets heavy in carbs, starches, and high-omega-6 vegetable oils that made the population one of the fattest in the world.

Reference:

W.D. Lassek, S.J.C. Gaulin. Linoleic and docosahexaenoic acids in human milk have opposite relationships with cognitive test performance in a sample of 28 countries. Prostaglandins, Leukotrienes and Essential Fatty Acids (PLEFA), 2014; DOI: 10.1016/j.plefa.2014.07.017

Reading “50 Shades of Grey” Gives You Anorexia and an Abusive Partner!

Fifty Shades of Grey cover

“Fifty Shades of Grey” cover

Not really.

Echoing the previous post, we have here a “study” that tells us that young women who have certain tendencies are more likely to have read 50 Shades of Grey. The study authors (as reported in Science Daily) try very hard to make it sound like reading the book causes anorexia and abuse [my annotations in brackets]:

Young adult women who read “Fifty Shades of Grey” are more likely than nonreaders to exhibit signs of eating disorders and have a verbally abusive partner, finds a new study led by a Michigan State University researcher. Further, women who read all three books in the blockbuster “Fifty Shades” erotic romance series are at increased risk of engaging in binge drinking and having multiple sex partners. All are known risks associated with being in an abusive relationship, much like the lead character, Anastasia, is in “Fifty Shades,” said Amy Bonomi, the study’s lead investigator. And while the study did not distinguish whether women experienced the health behaviors before or after reading the books, it’s a potential problem either way, she said. [Ed. note: By “problem” she means “pay me to study bad literature and develop a censorship agenda.”]

“If women experienced adverse health behaviors such as disordered eating first, reading ‘Fifty Shades’ might reaffirm those experiences and potentially aggravate related trauma,” said Bonomi, chairperson and professor in MSU’s Department of Human Development and Family Studies.

“Likewise, if they read ‘Fifty Shades’ before experiencing the health behaviors seen in our study, it’s possible the books influenced the onset of these behaviors.” [Possible but unlikely.]

The study, which appears in the Journal of Women’s Health, [which apparently has very low standards] is one of the first to investigate the relationship between health risks and reading popular fiction depicting violence against women. [Pioneers in finding problems that don’t exist.] Past [ideology-driven] research has tied watching violent television programs to real-life violence and antisocial behaviors, as well as reading glamour magazines to being obsessed with body image.

The researchers studied more than 650 women aged 18-24, a prime period for exploring greater sexual intimacy in relationships, Bonomi said. Compared to participants who didn’t read the book, those who read the first “Fifty Shades” novel were 25 percent more likely to have a partner who yelled or swore at them; 34 percent more likely to have a partner who demonstrated stalking tendencies; and more than 75 percent more likely to have used diet aids or fasted for more than 24 hours.

Those who read all three books in the series were 65 percent more likely than nonreaders to binge drink — or drink five or more drinks on a single occasion on six or more days per month — and 63 percent more likely to have five or more intercourse partners during their lifetime. [This is some evil book! The public health consequences are so severe, we must consider censoring all popular entertainment that might hurt young women.]

Bonomi, who has a doctoral degree in health services and a master’s in public health, said she is not suggesting the book be banned or that women should not be free to read whatever books they wish or to have a love life. However, it’s important women understand that the health behaviors assessed in the study are known risk factors for being in a violent relationship. Toward that end, Bonomi said parents and educators should engage kids in constructive conversations about sexuality, body image and gender role expectations — and that these conversations start as early as grade school. [Nobody’s been talking about any of those things with kids. Uh-huh.]

A previous study led by Bonomi found that “Fifty Shades” perpetuated the problem of violence against women. [Another unsupported conclusion which will now be cited as fact by feminist “scholars” — “studies show….”]


For more on pop culture:

“Game of Thrones” and the Problem of PowerThe Lessons of Walter White
“Blue Valentine”
“Mad Men”
The Morality of Glamour
“Mockingjay” Propaganda Posters
“Big Bang Theory” — Aspergers and Emotional/Social Intelligence
Real-Life “Hunger Games”: Soft Oppression Destroys the Poor
YA Dystopias vs Heinlein et al: Social Justice Warriors Strike Again
“Raising Arizona” — Dream of a Family

Public Schools in Poor Districts: For Control Not Education

Primary Classroom

Primary Classroom

This fascinating report from Third Way’s Social Policy and Politics Program on new teachers sets out the problem (teaching is seen as a career for not very bright people, and so enrollees in teacher training schools come from the bottom third of their undergraduate classes) and suggest some systemic solutions that would upgrade the quality of teaching graduates and thus of public school teaching.

If the country is doing poorly, a big part of it is mediocrity or worse in public elementary schools. And it’s not a matter of insufficient spending, but the reduced status and intellect of teachers due to a widespread (and correct) perception that they have little autonomy and are paid regardless of competence. (I of course have teacher friends who are uniformly brilliant, but we’re talking averages!) This report has some obvious suggestions for change, but entrenched interests wouldn’t allow anything so sensible. Right now the best teachers gravitate to the most favored schools, while the worst end up teaching in poor inner-city schools.

Students entering schools of education in the US are generally from the bottom third of undergraduates. There are many reasons why primary school teaching especially now has a reputation of being a place for lesser achievers, but one primary one is image — public schools have a reputation for being bureaucratic and not rewarding excellence, which tends to repel those who want to excel.

As we saw in the recent California case which decided teacher tenure as practiced there is inherently damaging to poor children, most locales have a recruiting and transfer system that allows the higher-quality teachers to migrate to high-quality schools in wealthier areas. The sorting by wealth and class in neighborhoods extends to sorting by school quality — wealthier areas have good schools where well-brought-up students don’t require all of a teacher’s time just to maintain order, and so public schools are reasonably good in better neighborhoods. Who wouldn’t transfer out of dysfunctional inner-city schools, given a chance? The poor quality of schools in poor inner-city neighborhoods only accelerates segregation by class, with motivated parents doing everything they can to qualify their children for residence in towns with better schools.

Young students need the stimulation of a professional, highly-intelligent adult to make the most of their young brains. Children who are already short-changed by poor family situations and less stimulating parents have even less chance to make up for it in public schools in their neighborhoods.

And remember that a graduating class of primary school teachers that averages 500 on the SAT means half of that class is below that (not so hot) level, some at 400 and below. Those teachers end up teaching the underprivileged kids who need exposure to excellence the most.

Average people do not control what their government does; in areas like education, it is a permanent bureaucracy (teacher’s colleges, unions, state and federal education funding) that does. Excellence is seen as threatening and equality elevated, and the value system taught is not at all what most parents would want if they were given much say in the matter.

Inquisitive children do not have to be “beaten down” to be neglected. Rewards for approved social behavior and conformity over individual achievement tend to discourage the less socially-adept boys. The smart ones learn to control their behavior to conform, but they don’t get exposed to role models doing cool intellectual work. Being separated out from larger society and penned in female-dominated schools which in many cases act as if their role as free day care is more important, many boys naturally want nothing further to do with schools. As always, wealthy areas have a robust commitment to achievement and bourgeois values that sustains healthy civilization despite the extended state support for barbarism, so boys there do better — accomplished dads make up for a lot. But as dysfunction creeps into middle and upper class lives, expect more political support for reform.

One reform that would greatly improve choice and reward excellence, and be especially helpful to poor parents in poor neighborhoods: give each child a voucher for the amount currently spent on their schooling, and let the parents and child choose from competing schools. Any school which met the qualifications would be able to compete for students, and the bureaucracies (administrators, education schools, and state and federal education departments) would have to value what parents want far more than they do now. Pilot programs are a step in the right direction and have been shown to increase student achievement, though as a complex system it would take many more years to have the expected benefits.

Recommended further reading: a long but excellent piece in the Atlantic written by Florina Rodov, an idealistic young teacher experiencing New York’s urban school environment. In the end, the bureaucracy won.


Death by HR: How Affirmative Action Cripples OrganizationsDeath by HR: How Affirmative Action Cripples Organizations

[From Death by HR: How Affirmative Action Cripples Organizations,  available now in Kindle and trade paperback.]

The first review is in: by Elmer T. Jones, author of The Employment Game. Here’s the condensed version; view the entire review here.

Corporate HR Scrambles to Halt Publication of “Death by HR”

Nobody gets a job through HR. The purpose of HR is to protect their parent organization against lawsuits for running afoul of the government’s diversity extortion bureaus. HR kills companies by blanketing industry with onerous gender and race labor compliance rules and forcing companies to hire useless HR staff to process the associated paperwork… a tour de force… carefully explains to CEOs how HR poisons their companies and what steps they may take to marginalize this threat… It is time to turn the tide against this madness, and Death by HR is an important research tool… All CEOs should read this book. If you are a mere worker drone but care about your company, you should forward an anonymous copy to him.

 


More on education and child development :

Student Loan Debt: Problems in Divorce
Early Child Development: The High Cost of Abuse and Neglect
Child Welfare Ideas: Every Child Gets a Government Guardian!
Tuitions Inflated, Product Degraded, Student Debts Unsustainable
Free Range Kids vs Paranoid Child Welfare Authorities
“Crying It Out” – Parental Malpractice!
Brazilian For-Profit Universities Bring Quality With Quantity
The Affordable, Effective University: Indiana and Mitch Daniels
Real-Life “Hunger Games”: Soft Oppression Destroys the Poor
“Attachment Parenting” – Good Idea Taken Too Far?
Real Self-Esteem: Trophies for Everyone?
YA Dystopias vs Heinlein et al: Social Justice Warriors Strike Again
Steven Pinker on Harvard and Meritocracy
Social Justice Warriors, Jihadists, and Neo-Nazis: Constructed Identities

More on Social Decay:

“Marriage Rate Lowest in a Century”
Making Divorce Hard to Strengthen Marriages?
The High Cost of Divorce
Divorced Men 8 Times as Likely to Commit Suicide as Divorced Women
Cuba: Where All but the Connected are Poor
“Postcards from Venezuela”
Ross Douthat on Unstable Families and Culture
“Income Inequality” Propaganda is Just Disguised Materialism
The Social Decay of Black Neighborhoods (And Yours!)
“Marriage Markets” – Marriage Beyond Our Means?
Real-Life “Hunger Games”: Soft Oppression Destroys the Poor
Why Did Black Crime Syndicates Fail to Go Legit?
“Why Are Great Husbands Being Abandoned?”
Culture Wars: Peace Through Limited Government
Steven Pinker on Harvard and Meritocracy

“Breaking Bad”–The Lessons of Walter White

Real Self-Esteem: Trophies for Everyone?

Medals for Everyone

Medals for Everyone

I briefly discuss real self-esteem, which grows out of real accomplishments and the esteem of people around you, and false self-esteem, which is artificially maintained, in the book chapter “Self-Esteem and Attachment Type.”

One of the themes of honest relationships based on reality is avoiding false self-esteem. The 1970s “self-esteem movement” attempted to give self-esteem to all children by giving awards and recognition to all regardless of achievement. Children are born with a sense of fairness, and children continuously told they are fabulous when they can see they have not done well at something learn that adults lie to them and that they are really not special at all. Only awards for real achievement can build solid self-esteem, and the achievements are more important than the rewards.

Reason has a poll on the topic: “57 Percent of Americans Say Only Kids Who Win Should Get Trophies.” Naturally there are big differences in who understands tough love and who doesn’t, but on the whole most people understand that rewards for everyone (at least after the age of 5!) makes the rewards meaningless and breeds cynicism.

The poll captures the difference in attitudes between “tough love,” fiscally conservative sorts, who favor awards for real achievement, and the soft squishes who think big government can give away happiness in the form of programs and benefits, who want trophies for everyone (and tend to oppose recognition of high achievement):

The competitive desire for winners to be rewarded correlates with fiscal conservatism. Among those who only think winners should get a trophy, 64 percent have a favorable view of capitalism, 64 percent thinks markets better solve problems than government, and 63 percent favor smaller government providing fewer services. In contrast, among those who think all kids should get a trophy, a plurality (49%) have an unfavorable view of capitalism, 50 percent thinks a strong government better solves problems than the free market, and 54 percent favor larger government providing more services.


Death by HR: How Affirmative Action Cripples OrganizationsDeath by HR: How Affirmative Action Cripples Organizations

[From Death by HR: How Affirmative Action Cripples Organizations,  available now in Kindle and trade paperback.]

The first review is in: by Elmer T. Jones, author of The Employment Game. Here’s the condensed version; view the entire review here.

Corporate HR Scrambles to Halt Publication of “Death by HR”

Nobody gets a job through HR. The purpose of HR is to protect their parent organization against lawsuits for running afoul of the government’s diversity extortion bureaus. HR kills companies by blanketing industry with onerous gender and race labor compliance rules and forcing companies to hire useless HR staff to process the associated paperwork… a tour de force… carefully explains to CEOs how HR poisons their companies and what steps they may take to marginalize this threat… It is time to turn the tide against this madness, and Death by HR is an important research tool… All CEOs should read this book. If you are a mere worker drone but care about your company, you should forward an anonymous copy to him.

 


More on education and child development :

Student Loan Debt: Problems in Divorce
Early Child Development: The High Cost of Abuse and Neglect
Child Welfare Ideas: Every Child Gets a Government Guardian!
Tuitions Inflated, Product Degraded, Student Debts Unsustainable
Free Range Kids vs Paranoid Child Welfare Authorities
“Crying It Out” – Parental Malpractice!
Brazilian For-Profit Universities Bring Quality With Quantity
The Affordable, Effective University: Indiana and Mitch Daniels
Real-Life “Hunger Games”: Soft Oppression Destroys the Poor
“Attachment Parenting” – Good Idea Taken Too Far?
Public Schools in Poor Districts: For Control Not Education
YA Dystopias vs Heinlein et al: Social Justice Warriors Strike Again
Steven Pinker on Harvard and Meritocracy
Social Justice Warriors, Jihadists, and Neo-Nazis: Constructed Identities