On immunity

So, what does it mean to cite something? What should be cited? How do we draw the line of what is fact and what is fiction?

The interesting thing about having access to endless amounts of news, columns, opinions, peer-reviewed articles, stories, blogs, gossip and academia research is that you can form any opinion you want.

Data isn’t going to change our minds anymore because now you can cite your chosen narrative.

What is so interesting in following the anti-vaccination movement is the cloud of fear that follows. Despite all the access to comforts and resources, the world is still trying to kill us. Our amygdala (fight, flight and freeze response) knows this and takes over the discourse.

Because no one want to believe that they are responsible for hurting themselves or their children.

The very word “shot” (in Britain it is called “jab”) stirs certain emotions. The answer then is to become better choice architects. There is no reason why a shot can’t be called a life saving utensil. We can design our choices to ease the fear on invincible carnivorous bugs, to ease the tension.

Yet, despite countless studies to debunk myths and gossip, dangerous narratives based on fear not science, based on anxiety not data, based on bias and prejudice not certitude, continues to get perpetuated. Not even one of the most heavily regulated industries is enough to squash the narratives.

This is the power of fear and culture has on our lives.

What’s fascinating is that someone without access to vaccines is not the problem. No, it is the white, wealthy, educated parents who are going unvaccinated. “Perhaps it’s not for me” is a luxury that most of the world does not get to enjoy.

Here is the thing, we all want the same thing. We want to be safe. We want to be loved. We want to be remembered. We want to be understood. We want to be missed when we are gone.

The problem with the discourse on immunity is a system error. It is the system that has made us skeptical. Can I trust big manufactures? Can I trust the government? Can I trust these fellow bloggers? Who is there to trust anymore?

We have a right to be skeptical of big pharma or to be afraid what is in these vaccinations. It has led us to understand the potential side-effects better. It’s lead to more intervention and regulation. AND it’s okay to ask if someone if they are choosing to vaccinate and to ask why not if they’re choosing not to.

Because this is an issue that affects everyone.

But it is not data or statistics we are arguing. We are addressing fear. Instead of citing another CDC study, address the fear. Address why they are afraid. That fear will never go away, but perhaps, you can teach someone to dance with it.

It was only thirty years ago, that is was normal to drive around without a seatbelt. For most of us today, it is so automatic to put on the seatbelt that it’s weird to not put one on. Now, we need to do the same for vaccinations.

HT Eula Biss

Your solution isn’t the problem

It’s the follow through.

Whether we are talking about your golf swing or finding a new job or starting a non-profit…

You have great ideas. Lots of them. But that is what they are and will remain until you show action. 

Ideas are not solutions until they actually help someone get across the chasm of how things were to what they ought to be.

We tend to talk ourselves into waiting until a better solution presents itself before we step up, you might be surprised to discover that if we take more action better solutions tend to open up. 

Carry something they don’t have

There are a lot, I mean a lot, of really inept people at the heads of organizations. Not everyone, of course, but there are plenty of CEO’s or managers or members of the Board that don’t have 30 years of experience. They have one year of experience repeated 30 times.

Now, they’re making 10 or 20 or 100 times more per hour than the person on the bottom.

You might not have the resources they have (access to capital, resume with a prestigious title or a degree from a famous college), and yet, despite all the advantages, you can still carry something they don’t have…


Here is the thing, no one is saying you can’t pick the really difficult projects that people are afraid to touch. No one is saying don’t put in the time and effort to solve nearly impossible problems. You can choose to delay gratification and say no to the marshmallow.

The door is wide open. The light is green. These are skills that you can practice and learn. If it is a skill it can be taught, it can be learned, it can be fostered.

Red tape

What’s it for?

Is it really to caution us or to insulate us?

Are we that worried about the one What if? scenario that we forget why we started on this journey to begin with?

History is long enough now that we forget why we do the things we do.

You may not be able to cut through “this is the way that it’s always been.”

But if you don’t try how will you ever know?

[The job as a linchpin is to learn to cut through. It’s a job that never ends.]


Wilderness therapy industry rant

The problem with wilderness therapy isn’t the lack of qualitative data to prove the effectiveness of the field.

The problem is that it costs on average $30,000 to $60,000 to go through a program.

Outside the 1%, no one can afford that.

Instead of focusing and trying to hush the loon noises and validate the field, maybe we should hyper-focus on creating better access for an incredible experience.

The by-product: Qualitative data follows the quantitative.

Self-serving bias

Given two choices, humans will almost always choose the one that serves their own interest best.

It’s nothing personal, but we tend to skew things toward our favor. Often without much thought.

The problem is when we play finite games. If we are playing to win, if we are playing to raise our status (and lower someone else’s), negotiations will inevitably stall.

In a world of where we “split the baby,” no one wins.

Maybe worth considering to take less and leave more on the table. Someone doesn’t have to lose in order for you to win.