High for Health

In almost every country around the world, marijuana is illegal. Yet some countries, such as Canada, Austria, Germany, the United States, the Netherlands, Israel, Spain, Portugal, Finland, and Italy discriminate its legality on medical lines. And in the United States, 14 states have laws allowing for the use of medical marijuana - Alaska, California, Clorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

Virginia is currently attempting pass new marijuana legislation that would reduce punishment for carrying non-medical marijuana and allow doctors to prescribe medical marijuana. The plan is being met laughably.

But what is the difference between "medical" marijuana and "street" marijuana? What benefits does medical marijuana have? Medical grade marijuana has two specific strains, Cannibis sativa and Cannibis indica, strains that have been found to be more potent than cannibis strains used in recreational marijuana. Medical marijuana also provides interaction between differing cannabonoids (THC, CBD, CBN) to allow for greater effects and benefits than could singular cannabonoids. Certain strains treat certain medical problems in certain ways making it beneficial to combine or mix strains.

Medical Marijuana is used to treat problems such as arthritis, cancer, chronic pain, fybromyalgia, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, and nausea brought on through conditions such as AIDS/HIV and cancer. Medical marijuana can be administered either through pill form or vaporization - the latter method (inhalation) has been proven to be the most effective course.

I'm mixed on the issue. I don't believe marijuana should be illegal at all. I'm not sure medical marijuana is that much different than "illegal" marijuana. They are both, for the most part, grown in similar matters, maybe under different conditions, but the under the same concept. And both produce a high through various strains. I'm not a scholar on this issue, so there may be facts differentiating the two that I have not come across, but if one is legal (medical), in some states, but the other (street/illegal) is illegal, doesn't that seem a little hypocritical? Yes, the individuals receiving medical marijuana are proven to have difficulties that could be alleviated through marijuana use, but individuals that cannot afford to buy medical marijuana may be turning to the streets for marijuana where it is unregulated and potentially dangerous.

Oh,. and legalizing marijuana would bring millions if not billions into the overall U.S. economy. That's a different story.

2010: The Winter Olympics

To be frank, I haven't watched a single minute of the 2010 Winter Olympics from Vancouver, Canada. I've never much been one to watch the Olympics either - I never watched a whole Olympics, but only bits and piece. Mainly, I'm a winter X-Games kid of guy - it happens every year and, roughly, the same people are involved. I can connect with the athletes involved and feel like I know them. I don't really feel connected to the Olympics because I don't follow the athletes that participate in the Olympics.

But strangely enough, I feel a pride well up in me when I see the United States, as of now, leading the medal count with 8 overall medals and tied with Germany and France with 2 gold metals respectively. I suppose its some kind of hidden national pride. But I don't watch it. I'm more of a football guy - no baseball, no basketball, no golf or tennis. Football and soccer and rugby.

But I will comment on a situation that has arisen during this year's winter games - track speed and availability in regards to the death of Luger Nodar Kumaritashvili. Kumaritashvili died Friday, Feb. 12, during a training run at Whistler Sliding Center at the Whistler Blackcomb  resort in British Columbia.

Critics and other athletes alike are voicing concern over the speed of the track. Topping out at speeds above 90 mph, Whistler's speeds are acknowledged by many as non-necessary speeds for luging. Luging speeds of 84 mph are, theoretically, attainable, but not common said Interantional Luge Federation President Josef Fendt (Cnn.com). Moreover, other sled-sport teams, such as Skeleton, Bobsled, and other Luge teams, were concerned before the start of the Olympics due to lack of training time on Whistler's tracks. Apparently, sled teams, except the Canadian teams, were allowed ample training on Whistler's notoriously fast course.

Critics also voice concern over the protection provided on the course. Many of the metal columns lining the track for support are un-padded and exposed - Kumaritashvili hit one of those un-padded girders. 

But others are not so fast to blame anyone or anything in particular. Dr. Kevin Plancher, a doctor for the U.S. Ski and Snowboard team, said athletes, being competitive by nature, can sometimes push themselves too hard, inviting greater chances of injuries (Cnn.com). He continued, "We have to educate our athletes to what they should or should not be doing," (Cnn.com). And since the accident, many athletes have confessed that they do not see Luge as a dangerous sport.

"But luge athletes will be the first to tell you they are more driving technicians than adrenaline junkies, and when pressed about why they would participate in a sport that's so dangerous, several concede they don't consider the sport to be that risky," (Cnn.com, David Epstein).

But all concede that Whistler is faster than most tracks, if not the fastest track. And the question is raised: do sled sport, Luge, Skeleton, Bobsled, have to be so fast? Yes, teams are racing against each other, but only in time-trial. This is not Nascar where each sled team races alongside each other towards a fininsh line. If track speeds were decreased in order to promote the safety of athletes, the same priniciples of competitiveness would still survive and the racers would race the same ways, just at slower speeds.

Just a thought.

A little about fast-food

Every day, millions of people around the globe stand in line to order fast-food. They're on the go - late for work, late for class, taking the kids to soccer practice, watching the baseball game or just too tired to cook. It's got to be fast, it's got to be now, it's got to be instantaneous and rewarding and, most importantly, good.

But good doesn't always mean healthy. America, where fast-food is king, contains the highest percentage of overweight individuals at about 35 percent. Some 1 in 3 Americans are overweight, a ratio not seen in most European and almost no Asian countries. One of the culprits - fast food.

Americans eat fast-food, sometimes, for every meal in a day and for many meals throughout the week. And everyday, Americans are exposing themselves to certain dangers over and over again. Fast food contains high amounts of sodium, cholesterol, sugar, carbohydrates, and fats (saturated-fat, trans-fat and non-saturated-fat). A majority of food served at fast food joints contains, in one meal, more than, or equal to, the maximum daily allowance of calories - some meals contain more than 2,000 calories.

For example, occasionally I enjoy Dairy Queen's 1/2lb., Flamethrower Grillburger - it's a 1/2lb., of meat slapped between two Kaiser buns with jalapeno bacon, lettuce, tomato, and pepper-jack cheese. It tastes great, but here are the caloric facts that have kept me from eating one everyday:

Calories: 1010/ 108 percent of daily value
Calories from fat: 630/ 125 percent of daily value
Total Fat: 70g                                                                                    
Saturated Fat: 25g

Publish Post

Trans Fat: 1.5 g
Cholesterol: 185mg/ 62 percent of daily value
Sodium: 1540mg/ 64 percent of daily value                                                                              
Total Carbohydrates: 42g/ 14 percent of daily value
Dietary Fiber: 2g/ 8 percent of daily value
Sugars: 9g
Protein: 56g

(Most fast-food web sites have nutritional calculators that give an idea of caloric intake and the overall nutritional value of foods served at their restaurants).

It's not just McDonald's, or all fast-food for that matter, that's contributing to the obesity problem in America, the obesity problem that is, to some extent, spilling out into other countries. It's a combination of easy meals and sedentary lifestyles. But we won't get into that here as that's a whole other discussion.

But think about fast-food and what it means to you. Stay home and cook a meal every now and then, even if it is time consuming and gets in the way of things. It's healthier to cook at home...and it costs less money. Don't be a sizeable part of the over $100 billion a year Americans spend on fast-food. And don't get me wrong - I love fast-food...just not all the time.

This Sing-Along's not so Horrible

I'm not a fan of musicals. Musicals, as a whole, are corny and although fictions just as most movies are, seem exceedingly fictitious in their overall verisimilitude. Often, the plots and stories of musicals are undermined by the ridiculousness of the overall framework and construction, but mainly the way in which the dialogue is presented - in song.

Although fiction presents to the audience a sequence of events that have never occurred and are make believe, in all realms of possibility, the sequence of events could, possibly, occur in the real-world (science fiction and fantasy aside). Here, the audience can connect with the film and believe the actions on screen are in some way real. But in the real-world no one sings to one another - dialogue is simply carried out through speech. The verisimilitude of the musical is severely hampered by the unbelievability of the story through song.

Yet, I make an exception. Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog is, yes, a musical. It is a musical set within a fictitious world of fiction. What I mean is that the film knows itself to be fiction - it does not don an air of reality and thus the audience all ready knows, from the outset, the film is not to be regarded, on the surface, as a  catalyst for commentary of the real-world. The audience expects something different of the verisimilitude.

Another reason I enjoy this musical lies within the overall production of the film. Penned and filmed during the WGA (Writer's Guild of America) writer's strike, Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog was originally released in a series of episodes released online and filmed on the small budget of $200,000. There were very little constraints placed on the production as the film was viewed as a web show and no big studios were involved. And the quirky mise-en-scene (the overall look of the film) lends itself to the indie, pseudo-superhero film that it is. The props, costumes, and chiaroscuro are consistent to the overall plot and story, as well as production and feel of the film.

 And that is another reason the film is great - it's about superheroes and villains that aren't so "super" or "villainy."  The characterization is surprisingly rounded considering the film is a mere 42 minutes in length and the shift of the villain as the antagonist to the villain as the protagonist throughout is quite intriguing.Moreover, the sing-along parts reflect the absurdity and comedy of the film making the film, overall, much more cohesive than if the dialogue and song had been of a more serious nature.


 Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog is a short film that doesn't take itself seriously and thus allows the audience to accept it as a musical and a superhero comedy, an unlikely combination of genres.