HinesSight

Check out Salem Political Snark

For a long time I've written about local Salem, Oregon political issues on this blog. Recently I started a new blog, Salem Political Snark. That's where new posts about Salem politics can be found. If you're a Facebook user, give the Salem Political Snark Facebook page a "like." Then you'll get new posts in your Facebook feed. Scroll down for new HinesSight posts.

Netflix, like life, works in mysterious ways

I've used psychedelics, meditation, and philosophy to understand the mystery of the cosmos -- with decidedly mixed success. But now that I've reached what feels like the astoundingly old age of 70, I'm pleased to find wisdom any way it appears to me.

Such as, through the unexpected workings of Netflix. Which led me yesterday to a better appreciation of what is really important in life.

My mini-enlightenment began when I noticed that "A Star is Born" was available in our Netflix DVD queue as of February 20. So I elevated it to next in line and mailed back the movie we'd just watched, "The Wife."

However, I didn't realize that Netflix would send us our next request on February 19, when "A Star is Born" wasn't available. So I got an email saying "Dan in Real Life" was on its way to us. 

Damn, I thought. That's probably a loser of a movie, since it was released in 2007 and we've had no interest in seeing it over the past dozen or so years even though it was near the top of our Netflix queue. So my plan was to return it as soon as it arrived, to hasten the arrival of what we really wanted, "A Star is Born."

Things turned out differently, though. Which, interestingly, is the central theme of "Dan in Real Life," as the Rotten Tomatoes synopsis describes: 

Widowed father and family-advice columnist Dan Burns, who is reeling from the heartache of loss, takes refuge by trying to maintain order with his three rebellious young girls, while dodging anything unexpected or outside the box.

But when Dan heads to Rhode Island, his miffed daughters in tow, for the annual fall weekend thrown by the large and boisterous Burns family, everything changes. Soon after his arrival, he runs into an alluring woman named Marie in a bookshop.

For the first time in a very, very long time, Dan experiences real, live sparks--only to have to douse them liberally when he discovers Marie is, in fact, the brand-new girlfriend that his brother Mitch is about to proudly introduce to the family.

As the weekend gets underway in the close quarters of a crowded house filled with quirky, prying relatives, Dan and Marie try to squelch and cover up their growing mutual attraction at every turn, leading to one comical situation after another. Yet, no matter how hard they try to do the very opposite, Dan and Marie can't help but fall in love.

Now, Dan is about to realize that no matter how wise safety might seem, when it comes to real life, he's going to have to break all the rules.

Good advice. 

Last night I told my wife, Laurel, that "Dan in Real Life" got pretty good critic and viewer reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, so we should give it a look-see rather than returning it without watching the movie. After all, if it sucked, we could stop watching it after half an hour or so.

But both of us loved the movie. Steve Carell was great in it, as was Juliette Binoche. This romantic comedy even made us laugh out loud several times, and we usually keep our amusement silently inside our heads.

The movie was short enough (98 minutes) for us to see it in one Wednesday night sitting.

However, it was long enough that we didn't have time to see any of our usual politically-oriented TV shows that pile up in our DVR for eventual watching. Like, Late Night With Stephen Colbert, The Daily Show With Trevor Noah, Full Frontal With Samantha Bee, Last Week Tonight With John Oliver, Real Time With Bill Maher. 

(Why is it all of these have "with" in the show names? Another mystery of the cosmos.)

What struck me as I headed off to bed after watching the local -- OK, Portland, since Salem doesn't have a TV station -- 11 pm news was how much calmer I felt, compared to our usual television-watching routine. Almost always my wife and I feast, maybe even overdose, on a diet of the above-mentioned politically heavy shows.

Given that the Mueller report appears to be coming out next week, part of me was wondering what Colbert, et. al., had to say about this important development. However, a larger part of me was feeling good about the, well, feel-good message of "Dan in Real Life."

Love is what counts most in life.

Not politics. Not the Mueller report. Not the 2020 election. Or any election. And love, no matter who is fallen in love with, can't be controlled, predicted, anticipated, or even understood. It is simply there, a mystery in plain sight.

If you haven't seen "Dan in Real Life" and want to get a feel for the movie, here's four clips from the last part of it.

Here Dan and his brother Mitch, whose girlfriend is the woman Dan is falling in love with, Marie, both sing to her in their separate ways. Marie likes what Dan did, yet also is confused by it.

I loved the bowling scene. Dan (Steve Carell) and Marie (Juliette Binoche) meet up after Marie realizes that she really isn't attracted to Dan's brother and leaves the family reunion. But she calls Dan and says, "I had to leave. But I didn't get very far." What they didn't know is that the whole family also has decided to go bowling.

Dan feels bad that he's been letting down his three daughters. They get him back on track with Marie, though.

And naturally there's a happy ending in the closing credits. Geez, I really like romantic comedies.

The totality of one's life is what counts, not a few screwups

Shock! I totally agree with a piece by Bret Stevens, the New York Times columnist who usually tilts too far rightward for my progressive taste. 

But "Why Ralph Northam Should Not Resign" is absolutely correct in its condemnation of judging people by a few missteps that they've made, rather than the totality of the path they've taken in life. 

Stevens notes that almost all of us have done things that, in retrospect, make us cringe. Here's some personal examples from the high school period of my 70-year-old life. I want to note that my behavior was shared by most of my white, middle-class friends, so I'm using "we."

-- We called anybody who seemed the least bit effeminate "faggot." Well, actually we used that term as an insult for anybody, not just possible homosexuals.

-- We used "retard" with wild abandon for anyone who had a mental disability.

-- We called our Mexican-American classmates spics, taco benders, and greasers. They had their own insulting terms for us, though spoken in Spanish. 

So am I a bad person? Of course not.

Back in 1962-66, my high school years, there was virtually zero attention paid to diversity, sensitivity, political correctness. Girls took Home Economics. Boys took Shop and Mechanical Drawing. Feminism was just dawning, if not still below our horizon.

Sure, it could be argued that my inconsiderate behavior occurred when I was a teenager, not in my 20s, as was the case with Virginia Governor Ralph Northham wearing blackface. But that really isn't the point.

The question is whether society is going off the rails when there's an expectation that people in public life, such as politicians, must be held to a standard that few of us could meet.

Here's some excerpts from Stevens' opinion piece:

It’s probably for the best that Ralph Northam seems determined not to resign as governor of Virginia. He may have done something ugly and dumb many years ago, when he was a young man and prevailing notions of socially permissible behavior were uglier and dumber than they are today.

In the face of a political and reputational disaster he has stumbled badly in explaining himself. If he weathers the scandal, it will mainly be because all of his potential successors have grave compromises of their own.

In the 35 years between those two points he has, by all appearances, lived an upstanding life without a hint of racial bias. If we are going to embrace a politics where that’s not enough to save a sitting governor accused of no crime, we’re headed toward a dark place.

...each of us might want to perform an internal audit before we join the cast-the-first-stone coalition. [Stevens then cites his own history of mild bigotry.]

I admit to all of this not as a form of moral — or immoral — exhibitionism, but because I think it’s true of the overwhelming majority of people irrespective of their race or gender. (If you don’t agree, audit yourself twice.) Few of us are proud of these lapses. Many of us are trying to be considerably more mindful about them.

But most of us don’t rip ourselves to pieces over them, either.

That’s because we believe that our worst moments and dumbest utterances shouldn’t define us.

That our youthful behavior is more of a reflection of what is around us than a representation of what’s inside. That we deserve to be judged by the decency of our intentions and the totality of our deeds. That we are entitled to a presumption of innocence, a measure of forgiveness, a sense for our times, and multiple opportunities for redemption.

Absolutely. 

A poll has found that Virginians are divided on whether Northam should resign, with 47% saying he should, and 47% saying he shouldn't. It's interesting that African-Americans are more supportive of Northam than whites, with 58% wanting him to stay in office and with 37% wanting him to resign.

Now, obviously there are degrees of bad behavior.

I'd rate wearing blackface and doing a Michael Jackson imitation, the only offense Governor Northam has admitted to, as a mild infraction. But sexual assault, which Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax has been accused of by two women, that's much more serious.

I'm fine with Northam apologizing and remaining as Governor. However, if Fairfax's accusers turn out to be credible, almost certainly he needs to resign. 

Apologies aren't enough in many cases. Often, though, apologies are too much. Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank makes this case in "The Democratic apology tour is a sorry spectacle." 

He observes that Elizabeth Warren is apologizing for claiming Native American heritage. Joe Biden regrets backing tough-on-crime legislation. Kirsten Gillibrand regrets her previous pro-gun and tough-on-immigration positions. Meanwhile, Trump never apologizes for anything, even though he has done hugely more that merits an apology. 

Democrats are just big on apologizing, even when this isn't justified.

Us liberals often have unduly high expectations of politicians. We want them to have hewed to an ideal of progressive purity throughout their career, even though in everyday life we all learn from our mistakes (frequently more than we learn from our successes).

So stay in office, Governor Northam. And cut down on the apologizing, fellow Democrats. No one is perfect. It makes no sense for someone to resign or apologize when at the time they supposedly erred, they had no idea that what they were doing was wrong.

Consumer Reports needs to investigate itself after subscription "glitch"

I'm a big fan of Consumer Reports. I've been a subscriber to their magazine for as long as I can remember. And in recent years I've been an "All Access" subscriber so I could also peruse their digital information via ConsumerReports.org

But today Consumer Reports screwed up by sending me, and who knows how many other subscribers, a false email message saying that I'd changed my membership from All Access to Digital -- which meant I wouldn't be getting the magazine anymore.

When I read the message (shown above), I was perplexed. I was almost completely sure that I hadn't changed my membership. However, recently I'd visited ConsumerReports.org to check on car reviews, since my wife and I have been trying to decide between buying a 2019 Subaru Forester or 2019 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid.

So I thought there was a slim chance that somehow in all of my clicking around on the Consumer Reports web site, my membership had gotten shifted from All Access to Digital. 

Thus somewhat stupidly I clicked on the "Reactivate All Access" link, figuring that if I'd inadvertently changed my membership, this would restore it to All Access (print + digital). But what happened was, I ended up on a page that asked me to pay $55 to upgrade to an All Access membership again.

Even more stupidly, in retrospect, of course, I used PayPal to fork over that amount to Consumer Reports. Understand: up until this point I really did believe what Sue Melfi, Director of Member Support, said in the message above: I did value what Consumer Reports offers, including the "reliable services" Melfi mentioned.

Thus the trusting part of my brain figured that my All Access subscription had lapsed, and I needed to pay to get it going again. After doing the PayPal thing, though, a non-trusting part of my brain came to life and I checked the label on an issue of Consumer Reports that had come not long ago.

It said that my subscription was good until May 2021. 

That caused me to phone Consumer Reports support. Not surprisingly, I got a message saying that due to heavy call volume I could leave a message asking for a callback within several days. That sounded ominous, since I suspected that as more subscribers read the erroneous email message from Consumer Reports, the call volume would increase even more.

I shifted to the Chat option and reached Emily within a few minutes. She told me that there was a "glitch" with the email message -- which seemed like an overly weak word to use for what really was a totally false message. 

At any rate, it took 20 minutes or so for me to describe the problem and for Emily to credit my PayPal account for the unnecessary upgrade to an All Access subscription. At which point a new problem arose: Consumer Reports had opened up a new All Access account in my name, which is what I now was logged into.

Emily had to send me an email with instructions on how to reset my password so I could access my old account that had an All Access subscription ending in 2021. All in all, I spent well over an hour (maybe more) dealing with the Consumer Reports "glitch."

Annoyingly, I haven't gotten any email message from Consumer Reports apologizing for the problem and stating that actually I didn't change my subscription from All Access to Digital.

I haven't lost faith in the ability of Consumer Reports to accurately assess products and services. But I definitely have lost faith in the ability of Consumer Reports to ensure the quality of its own subscription product.

Subaru Forester or Toyota RAV4 Hybrid, that is our question

I'm an automobile aficionado. I love reading car reviews and pouring over comparative specs. But at the moment I'm (almost) overdosing on a question my wife and I are pondering:

Which vehicle would best meet our needs, wants, and desires? A 2019 Subaru Forester or a 2019 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid? 

We know we want a smaller SUV to replace our semi-beloved 2014 Toyota Highlander. I say "semi," because we now are a three-car family, with Laurel mostly driving her truly-beloved Chevy Volt, and me mostly driving my truly-beloved VW GTI.

Both of those cars are much more pleasant to drive than the Highlander, which seems weirdly large to us given what we're used to driving-- even though it is classed as a mid-sized SUV. Also, the 2014 Highlander has exactly zero of the driver assist features we've come to depend on in the Volt and GTI.

Like blind spot warnings, rear cross-traffic alerts, dynamic cruise control, and such. And since the Chevy Volt has been discontinued by GM, when our lease is up we lean toward returning the car rather than purchasing it, which would leave Laurel driving the Highlander replacement. 

Our first plan was to get a 2019 Subaru Forester, a compact SUV with lots of safety features. We'd merely planned to test drive one last Saturday at Capitol Subaru here in Salem, Oregon.

But after a test drive and extensive conversing with a knowledgeable salesperson, Matt Trexler, we ended up putting down a $500 deposit on a Forester that needed to be built for us in Japan, since there was precisely one white Touring model available in the Northwest, and the chance was slim that a Washington dealer that had the car would be willing to part with it.

Plus, we wanted to add some factory accessories that this car didn't have. The photo above roughly shows what the Forester we ordered would look like.

Not all that exciting, but I like the look. The boxiness of the Forester puts it out of the modern crossover mainstream. On the positive side, I really liked the feeling of openness and visibility from inside the car produced by the large windows.

So we were all set to join the Cult of Subaru that has a whole lot of members in Oregon. Half the cars in the LifeSource Natural Foods parking lot seem to be Subarus some days, with the rest being Prius'es. And trailheads also are a notorious gathering place for Subarus.

Then came yesterday's Super Bowl.

Per usual, I watched the recorded football game and fast-forwarded through the commercials. Later in the evening, Laurel and I perused the commercials and halftime show -- both of which were more boring than previous Super Bowls.

A Toyota ad did catch Laurel's eye though. It showed the 2019 RAV4. Me, I don't find the redesign of the RAV4 to be all that attractive. A hybrid is shown above. The front end doesn't seem to go with the rest of the car, though I'm sure plenty of people would disagree.

I was familiar with the car, but since Laurel seemed to like the Forester as much as I did, I failed to mention to her that a Hybrid version of the 2019 RAV4 was scheduled for release in late March, with models farmed out to reviewers in late 2018.

Thus now we're pondering the pros and cons of switching our deposit to a RAV4 -- which would be easy, since the Capitol Auto Group sells both Subarus and Toyotas. Today Laurel drove a 2019 gas model, and liked it. But she also liked the Forester. So we're trying to decide if we know enough about the RAV4 to jump over to it.

I'm undecided, in large part because the RAV4 hybrid isn't available yet. We've watched several lengthy videos of people (OK, men; women rarely seem to be car reviewers) discussing the pros and cons of the 2019 RAV4 Hybrid. Mostly pros, since the redesign seems generally well done. 

Aside from the front end, in my totally personal opinion. 

Laurel and I aren't geeky or mechanical enough to fully grasp the differences between the Forester and RAV4 all wheel drive systems.

Naturally the Subaru salesman touted symmetrical all wheel drive. And a neighbor who also is considering getting a Forester is impressed with the X Drive option on new Subarus, which adds extra oomph to the AWD system when you're in really deep snow or mud.

Maybe someone will read this blog post who has some amazingly perceptive comment on the differences between the 2019 Forester and RAV4 Hybrid that will sway us in one car direction or the other. We like the better gas mileage with the RAV$ Hybrid, plus the extra horsepower it offers.

However, the Forester has a few extra safety features, along with that Subaru cult feeling that I like. There's a reason you see so many old Subarus: they're dependable, well-made, and practical. 

Compared to my VW GTI, which is the most enjoyable car to drive I've ever owned, neither a Forester or RAV4 Hybrid is going to be a similar joy to throw into curves and zip around town in.

But that isn't what we're looking for in a Highlander replacement. We live in rural south Salem, where the roads can be icy/snowy in winter at times, so safety and traction are important to us.

Either the Forester or RAV4 Hybrid should meet that need, especially with winter tires -- which I'm a big believer in. With winter tires on my GTI, I feel much more comfortable that I'd be with all season tires on a SUV. That's how big a difference winter tires make on snow and ice.

However, an all wheel drive system AND winter tires make for an even better combo, for sure.

I should note that our best option probably is to wait for the release of the RAV4 Hybrid while keeping our deposit on a new Forester.

We need to check with Capitol Subaru to see if this will be possible. I suspect that it would be, given that Capitol Subaru almost surely could sell the Touring model we've ordered with little problem if we decided to switch to a RAV4 after it is released.

We're leaning toward the RAV4 Hybrid, since it has considerably higher mileage (no EPA rating yet),  looks more interesting, and should function just fine in the all wheel drive department.

LifeSource Natural Foods has a great response to my blog post

I really appreciate the prompt response from LifeSource staff after I sent them a link to the blog post I wrote yesterday, "I love LifeSource but recent changes are disappointing." 

Matt Trickey, the bulk department manager, emailed me this morning with some insights into the challenges that LifeSource Natural Foods faces -- along with most other locally owned stores in Salem. 

I feel considerably more sympathetic to LifeSource now.

It isn't that what Matt said is totally new news to me. I just hadn't fully understood how difficult it is for LifeSource to compete against grocery stores that are jumping onto the organic/natural foods bandwagon, yet have hugely more financial resources and buying power than LifeSource.

Anyway, here's what Matt sent to me, after getting his permission to share the message publicly. 

Brian, thank you for the link to your blog post. I'll give it a read and bring it up with my managers so we can discuss it together.

   

We value your perspective, and we do agree that we have made some changes to our store in response to consumer trends in the natural foods industry. We are indeed trying to stay viable and relevant in a rapidly changing landscape.

In a sense, we have been very successful in our promotion of organic and non-GMO foods. With that rapid growth, we have seen these categories become adopted by mainstream retailers and online retailers alike. However, competition in mainstream retail strongly favors large businesses with financial leverage we will never possess.

 

Online retail behemoths have drastically rewritten the retail narrative to the point where long established brick and mortar stores are metaphorically crumbling in economic despair.

 

We once occupied a niche in Salem that allowed us to grow and flourish, but this niche has become so attractive to larger investment interests, that entire chains of natural food stores have cannibalized each other to the point of assimilation into the single predominant online retailer.

 

(Whole Foods ate Wild Oats, and now Amazon has eaten Whole Foods.)

 

As you can probably imagine, this presents a formidable challenge to LifeSources'  viability as a small retail business. 

   

Long past where most business owners would have sold a flourishing business to investors, Alex has remained true to his values, to the people of Salem, and to the people who run this business on a daily basis.

 

For example, Marie and I have certainly enjoyed the very special privilege of growing our family in the relative economic stability of this business. We have always been aware, though, that it is a precarious and tentative market niche, and we have been very conservative with our finances as a necessity of prudence.

 

During my tenure at LifeSource, I have seen the many struggles and changes to the business as our niche market has been overtaken by much larger economic forces, and I am very aware of the challenges facing all independent natural foods retailers.

   

At no other time has the market viability for small retailers been this precarious, yet we continue to seek new opportunities to serve Salem, and stay relevant to those who share our values. LifeSource was envisioned and established as a model of sustainability, and we are at a crucial point where we can only hope the community will still find value in our vision as we persevere in this endeavor.

 

Thank you for your continued belief in a brighter future for LifeSource. We will certainly give serious consideration of your perspective as we do our best to continue to serve the community.

 

Sincerely,

Matt Trickey

Bulk Department Manager

on behalf of everyone at

LifeSource Natural Foods

 

This photo is from a 2014 Salem Is profile of Matt, "Producing Happiness."

I love LifeSource, but recent changes are disappointing

This is a "tough love" blog post, because I've shopped a lot at LifeSource Natural Foods ever since it opened way back when. Three or four times a week I go there.

But changes LifeSource has been making cause me and my wife to be a bit less satisfied with the store.

I readily admit that those changes probably are profitable for LifeSource. However, they go against the grain of my longtime vegetarianism -- which began about 50 years ago while I was in college.

(Along with other students of a crazed Greek yoga teacher, we started the second health food store in San Jose, California in 1970.)

Basically, I think LifeSource is going overboard on the "natural" part of its name to the detriment of "health." Natural foods aren't always healthy. And some healthy foods aren't completely natural. 

Here's some specifics of what concerns me about the direction LifeSource is going. Again, I'm speaking as someone who hasn't eaten a bite of meat or fish since 1968, and is pretty well informed about nutrition.

Deli offerings. In the early days of LifeSource, they almost always had tofu and brown rice in the deli/takeout section of the store. Now, macaroni and cheese (full-fat variety) is common, while tofu and rice have almost completely disappeared. When I asked about this a few months ago, I was told that many people nowadays believe they are allergic to tofu.

But I doubt that's the whole story.

Now I'm much less likely to get something from the deli/takeout section, even though I peruse it often. My suspicion is that LifeSource has learned what their customers are most willing to buy, even if that isn't the healthiest food to eat.

OK. The market has spoken. That's capitalism.

However, it leaves health-minded vegetarians like me and my wife without the choices that we used to enjoy. Even the walnut loaf that was common in the deli last year has been missing for quite a while. But chicken breasts are a daily feature, I'm pretty sure.

Which gets me to...

Meat has multiplied. In the early days, I believe LifeSource had nothing with meat in it. Then warning signs appeared: "contains meat." Eventually there was a small meat section. Now there's a really big meat section. 

I understand that most people believe that meat can be part of a healthy diet. In small doses, I agree.

However, even if meat is "natural," that doesn't make it healthy. Or good for our planet. There's much evidence to support the contention that being a vegetarian or vegan is both healthy for people and for the environment. 

Almost every story about global warming that I read in one of the science magazines I subscribe to says that raising animals for food is one of the most carbon-intensive things that humans do. Thus eliminating meat from one's diet is one of the best actions an individual can engage in to reduce carbon emissions -- along with not flying.

As the meat section at LifeSource has steadily enlarged, other areas of the store had to be reduced. Such as...

Alternatives to meat have dwindled. Back when I became a vegetarian, there were no meat substitutes like there are today. No veggie burgers. No flavored tofu or tempeh. You had to make your own vegetarian meals, being careful to find good sources of protein.

LifeSource used to have many varieties of tofu and tempeh. Now that section has dwindled considerably in size. I used to enjoy the teriyaki tempeh strips as an alternative to tofu, both of which are alternatives to meat. Now I'm pretty sure there is only unflavored tempeh at LifeSource.

And shockingly, today I went to get a package of "beefless ground beef" for the vegetarian tacos I'm about to make for dinner, but found that apparently LifeSource no longer carries this vegetarian staple. So I drove back to Trader Joe's, where I'd already shopped before going to LifeSource, in order to get some.

Other items are lacking. I suppose most people feel aggrieved when a store stops carrying a favorite item, wondering how the heck someone decided to discontinue this marvelous product. That feeling just has been happening more frequently with me at LifeSource. 

As noted above, meat alternatives are becoming less common, while meat items are becoming more common.

The bread section seems smaller now, with fewer whole wheat varieties that we much prefer, though I could be wrong about this. Not a big deal, but today I also saw that one of our favorite jams, Oregon Growers strawberry rhubarb, was no longer on the shelf, with another brand seemingly replacing it. 

And rather strangely, when I tried to custom order a case of Loma Linda Little Links from LifeSource, rather than getting it via Amazon, at first I was told that they don't carry anything from Loma Linda because it doesn't meet their standards.

I don't know what the offending ingredient in Little Links is: corn oil? hydrolyzed soy protein?

Regardless, I can guarantee that Little Links are considerably healthier than lots of items sold by LifeSource. But while my custom order was taken, I never got it, so I had to resort to getting my Little Links via Amazon.

I'll end by noting that LifeSource Natural Foods still is a big favorite of ours. It's a very pleasant place to shop, with friendly employees and a great selection of items.

Not as cheap as Fred Meyer and other stores that carry organic items (LifeSource's prices for organic raspberries are much higher than Fred Meyer, for example), but my wife and I are happy to pay a bit more to support Salem's premier locally owned natural food store.

And we appreciate the 10% senior discount. 

We just wish LifeSource would tilt a bit back in the direction of "health." It's hard for me to believe that I'm the only LifeSource customer longing for tofu and brown rice to return regularly to the deli/takeout section. Doesn't have to be there all the time, of course.

But once in a while would be nice. (Note: my wife just told me that she bought tofu from the Deli section at lunchtime recently. I usually go to the store in the evening, and I don't recall seeing tofu available in the Deli for many months, if not years.)

Yikes. Our dog is becoming more catlike. Not good.

Fortunately, we live out in the country. Thus only a few people would have wondered why we spent well over half an hour yesterday screaming "ZuZu, come!" into increasing darkness. 

However, the bad news is that some of those few people are cat lovers, and our dog's name is ZuZu, so they might have been listening smugly, thinking, "I'm glad we don't have a disobedient dog."

What perplexed us was that until recently ZuZu didn't behave weirdly. Basically she was a normal dog. I mean, look at that sweet face. Could this canine drive her owners into, not quite madness, but definitely major irritation?

Yes. She could. 

ZuZu is becoming more catlike. Now, we don't have anything against cats. I'm more fond of them than my wife, but aside from their bird-killing habit, Laurel is OK with cats. She just doesn't want our dog to act like one.

Yet this is what's happening. Hopefully we're not going to wake up one morning and find a snarling 65 pound feline stalking us, but that's the trendline ZuZu appears to be on. Here's why I say this.

Refusal to come when called. Yesterday, like I always do prior to our evening dog walk, I put ZuZu's harness and blinking light on her, then opened our front door to let her out while I put on my dog walking shoes and clothes. When I went outside just a minute or two after ZuZu, she was nowhere to be seen. 

Which was unusual. Usually she's sitting right there, waiting for me.

I called her. Then I called some more. Hearing me, Laurel came outside. Laurel is the alpha human in ZuZu's eyes, as she does the dog training. So when Laurel yelled in a commanding voice, "ZuZu, come!" and no dog appeared, we knew there was a problem.

We kept calling ZuZu for a long time. We walked around a good share of our ten acres, yelling "ZuZu" and "ZuZu, come!" We got worried that our dog had been attacked by coyotes, or wandered up to the road and been hit by a car. 

Then, when it was almost completely dark, I turned around in our yard and saw ZuZu trotting up, blue light blinking, as if nothing was wrong. Ready for my walk now, was her expression. 

Our theory, based on some sleuthing by Laurel this morning, is that ZuZu was happily chewing on some remnants of a dead deer in the brush not far from the fenced dog yard at the back of our house. Which means, ZuZu must have heard us calling the entire time. 

Her brain just was so engrossed in whatever she was doing -- again, likely chewing on a deer bone, or whatever -- ZuZu felt no desire to obey the "Come!" command that Laurel had taught her. Because she gets amply rewarded with dog treats when she obeys that command, until recently ZuZu reliably came when we yelled "Come!"

However, we'd both been noticing that it was taking her longer to come back to us. Hence, her behavior has been getting more cat-like.

In my first marriage, when cats were the family pet, I recall wandering around the house for many minutes, calling our cat's name,  because there was no sign of the cat and I couldn't be sure that it hadn't gotten outside somehow. Eventually I noticed the cat sitting on top of a tall bookcase that I'd passed by numerous times while calling for it.

It looked at me with the utterly catlike expression of, I heard my name, but I didn't feel any need to move since I was completely comfortable just sitting here. 

That's totally normal cat behavior. Dogs, though, are supposed to come when called. So that's one reason we're worried that ZuZu is turning into a dog-cat hybrid.

Fussy eating. Here's another sign of our dog's cattishness.

ZuZu used to devour her food extremely rapidly as soon as her bowl was put down on the floor. We theorized this was because she had been a stray before we adopted her from a Portland shelter. Eat when you can, as fast as you can, since it may be awhile before more food appears seemed like a stray's motto.

And ZuZu was pleasingly omnivorous. She liked broccoli when we mixed it in to her kibble and canned dog food. Ditto with canned pumpkin. ZuZu wolfed it all down. 

No more. Along with not reliably coming when called, our dog now looks upon her food bowl a lot like I remember how cats eat: fussily.

My recollection is that cats who have graced my life (I'd never say that I owned a cat, since that word implies a higher degree of control than cats I've experienced provide to humans) would turn up their nose if, say, I mistakenly bought some cans of "Fancy Tuna" rather than "Extra Fancy Tuna." 

You screwed up, bozo, our cat would speak wordlessly after sniffing its bowl. Then it would go on a hunger strike until Extra Fancy Tuna returned to the cat food cupboard.

ZuZu isn't quite that fussy.

She has, though, developed some eating habits that remind me of myself when I was young. Now our dog won't eat her kibble and canned food if broccoli is in her bowl. Ditto with pumpkin. Even if we put broccoli and pumpkin in separate containers, if they're close to her dog food bowl, she won't eat until the offending food is removed from the vicinity.

Hopefully ZuZu is just going through a catlike phase of her dog life, and isn't experiencing a feline transformation. If she starts purring when patted, we'll really worry.

For now we're working on restoring ZuZu's understanding of what "Come!" means. And she's been eating her food without much of a problem so long as we keep items like broccoli and pumpkin far away from her bowl.

It's difficult enough to understand why other people do what they do, and people can talk.

Dogs are much more of a mystery, since they inhabit a canine psychological realm that is off-limits to us humans. So we'll adapt to ZuZu's eccentricities, while trying to get her back on track on the come-when-called and eating fronts.

Photos of Salem Women's March 2019

Here's photos I took today at this year's Salem Women's March. My wife is the "cover girl." (Or "cover woman," I hasten to add.) The 2019 Women's March was just as inspiring as the 2017 and 2018 marches. Lots of creative signs, which I feature in the photos.

Damn you, GM. I wanted more plug-in hybrids, not none.

General Motors has announced that it won't be making any more plug-in hybrids. It has killed off the Chevy Volt as of March 2019.

Our 2018 Chevy Volt

My wife and I have owned (well, leased) three Chevy Volts, as described in these blog posts I wrote about them:  a 2012 model, a 2015 model (which our dog bought!), and a 2018 model.  

So we're disappointed that General Motors is only going to have pure electric and pure gasoline cars/trucks -- no more plug-in hybrids. Here's an excerpt from a Green Car Reports story, "GM president dashes hope of another Volt, says no more hybrids."

Fans were hopeful that the company planned to replace it [Volt] with another plug-in hybrid with similar technology based on GM's Voltec system, in which it invested most of a billion dollars a dozen or so years ago.

However the message could hardly be clearer, that GM plans on focusing on pure battery electric cars in the future, and not "waste" resources building plug-in hybrids.

Hopes for a replacement for the Volt that might be somewhat larger—perhaps a crossover or something with more rear-seat room—sound likely to go unfulfilled, despite the fact that GM is planning to introduce exactly such a car in China this year: the Buick Velite 6 plug-in hybrid. The Velite 6 is also expected to have a fully-electric option when it goes on sale.

Yes, as that story says, us Chevy Volt fans were hoping that if GM discontinued that car, it would introduce Volt technology in a crossover or SUV. That seemed like a no-brainer, but apparently GM executives are lacking in the cranium department.

Look: my wife and I are avid environmentalists. We've owned an all-electric Nissan Leaf (briefly), several Toyota Prius'es, and a hybrid Toyota Highlander. But the Chevy Volt has met our needs better than any other green car. 

We live in the country, about six miles from the Salem, Oregon city limits. My wife is the primary driver of our Chevy Volt. It's gasoline engine, which is better termed a generator, rarely is used. Almost always the 45 miles or so of all-electric range is all that's needed for driving into and around Salem.

But if my wife needs to go to Portland, or on longer trips locally, the Volt transfers almost imperceptibly from battery to gasoline power. That's a big plus for us. Range anxiety was one of the reasons we sold our all-electric Nissan Leaf and leased a Chevy Volt back in 2012.

My wife absolutely loves the Volt. It's like her favorite thing ever, with the exception of me and our dog (I think). The Volt has improved over the years, with the 2018 model we have now considerably more attractive both inside and out than the previous models we've leased.

Yet GM has decided to say bye-bye to the Volt.

That makes no sense to us. Most other plug-in hybrids have a considerably lower all-electric range, the Honda Clarity being an exception. Or, if they have a higher all-electric range, the gasoline backup is so puny, the total range is much less than the Volt's (BMW i3, for example).

I'd been hoping that GM would have a plug-in hybrid SUV or crossover if the Volt was discontinued. However, a Chicago Tribune story has the right-on title, "Where are the plug-in SUVs? Automakers ignore what buyers want." 

The world's automakers are asleep at the wheel.

While customers clamor for more SUVs like the Toyota RAV4, Ford Edge, Chevrolet Traverse and Honda HR-V and as electric-drive technology advances rapidly, it's virtually impossible to find an electric or plug-in hybrid vehicle in the fast growing urban-utility vehicle segment.

Mitsubishi builds the world's best-selling plug-in hybrid SUV. Mitsubishi, for crying out loud.

That's no knock on the Outlander, but it demonstrates a shocking bankruptcy of imagination at Chevy, Ford, Honda, Hyundai, Toyota and Volkswagen. Each of those brands literally builds millions more vehicles than tiny Mitsubishi.

But the little brand with the triple-diamond badge was the only one that understood: At the intersection of growing environmental awareness and soaring SUV sales lay a new class of vehicles that deliver the height and room of an SUV and run on batteries at least some of the time.

Yet the Mitsubishi SUV only has 22 miles of all-electric range. That isn't very much -- about half of what the Chevy Volt offers. Thus my wife likely will hold on to our 2018 Volt for quite a few years.

Maybe one day we'll feel comfortable getting another all-electric car. However, we really like plug-in hybrid technology, since it works so well in the Chevy Volt. Hopefully some brand other than GM will realize that there's a fairly large number of buyers who want to go more green than a gasoline car, yet aren't attracted to an all-electric car, or a typical hybrid.

Plug-in hybrids hit the sweet spot for us and many others. It's just too bad that GM has given up on this market.

Dr. Vinay Prasad zaps fellow physicians at provocative Salem City Club talk

"Maybe 40% of what doctors do is mistaken."

That was one of the first of many OMG! zingers medical provocateur Vinay Prasad, MD MPH, flung at us at today's Salem City Club presentation, rather drily titled Evidence Based Medicine: Weighing the Evidence for Effective Health Care.

But not one moment of his talk was boring. In fact, it was one of the most interesting and entertaining City Club talks I've experienced. And I've been to many of them. Prasad is a great speaker: funny, caustic, informed, blunt, spontaneous.

I found what appears to be a very close version of his talk on You Tube. So if you find my summary of what Prasad told us today piques your interest, check this video out. His talk starts at about four minutes in.

Later in his talk Prasad noted that there's no way to know exactly what percentage of medical care is ineffective. So it could be less or more than 40%. Regardless, it's a lot. 

If you're thinking that this makes him less than universally popular among his fellow doctors, you'd be correct. After his talk I asked him how his presentation is received by other MDs. He told me that in Europe and Canada he gets a standing ovation. But in Texas, say, speaking to cardiologists, Prasad said he'd get boos.

Which speaks volumes about the sorry state of our American health care system. Or more accurately, non-system. As is well known, we spend way more on health care than other comparable countries yet have health outcomes that are worse. 

There are many reasons for this, but paying for costly medical services that don't provide any real benefit is a major contributor.

Prasad noted that we have a bias toward believing in continual technological process. He showed a slide of an old Model T next to a Tesla Model T. Now, this was the only error I recognized in his talk, since I couldn't find any sign via the Great God Google that a Tesla model with that initial actually exists or is planned.

But it is conjecture, so some apparent Prasad literary license is fine with me.

His point with the auto analogy is that we can see how much cars have progressed since the Model T era. Ditto with computers, cell phones, televisions, and so much else. But with health care we can't discern progress with the naked eye. Controlled studies are necessary.

And these frequently demonstrate what the title of a book he's co-authored refers to: Medical Reversal. This is when doing something is found to be no better or worse than a prior standard of care.

Examples: routine hormone replacement therapy for post-menopausal women and steroid injections for certain spinal problems. Regarding the latter, a a controlled study where half the patients got a salt water injection revealed that both groups felt better.

Which points to the power of placebos. And a question I asked during the Q & A period.

It went like this: "If both steroid and salt water injections benefit patients with back pain, please comment on the ethical issues surrounding placebos, since doing away with ineffective treatments seems like doing away with a witch doctor a tribe believes in, and who makes them feel better."

Prasad's answer made sense, though it raises additional questions. He said that a medical treatment shouldn't be more costly than a placebo, and also shouldn't be any riskier than a placebo.

And he correctly pointed out that bottles of pills marked "Placebo" can be bought on Amazon, since it has been found that even when people know a treatment is a placebo, it still provides benefits to many.

Publication bias is one reason why ineffective treatments get so much attention. Journals like to publish reports of positive findings involving new forms of medical practice. So studies that show something doesn't work, or is a review of the effectiveness of an established medical practice, don't get as much publicity.

Prasad said about doctors, "A lot we learn because someone senior to us taught that it works." In other words, doctors believe in their own experience -- much of which surely shouldn't be trusted, because it isn't based on solid science. 

Again, the 40% figure is just a guesstimate. But Prasad told us that the actual percentage of ineffective treatments in medicine is much more like snow in Chicago than a massive California earthquake. Meaning, it happens frequently, not rarely.

Even randomized clinical trials came in for some criticism, since companies funding them often hope to make billions of dollars by getting a new drug, device, or whatever approved. So they put considerable effort into increasing the odds that a clinical trial will show that their innovation is effective.

I'm vague on how this is done. But if you peruse Prasad's impressive web site, you'll find countless (almost) papers, articles, and other material to read on a wide variety of subjects. The News and Media page has some profiles of Prasad.

I enjoyed "Did he really just tweet that? Dr. Vinay Prasad takes on Big Pharma, Big Medicine, and his own colleagues -- with glee." Here's how it starts out:

Dr. Vinay Prasad is a professional scold: He takes to Twitter each day to critique this cancer drug as ineffective, or blast that one as overpriced, or dismiss the clinical trial of another as completely irrelevant.

So it’s a bit of a surprise to catch him at the bedside of an elderly man with lymphoma, laughing gently with his patient as he inquires about his day — and painstakingly explains a potent drug’s unpleasant side effects.

Prasad’s empathic bedside manner — and generally affable mien — is at stark odds with his digital persona as a caustic crusader for the principle that solid scientific evidence, not hope or hype, should guide how we as a society spend $700 billion a year on health care.

Just 34, Prasad has become an influential voice in the medical community through his prolific, high-impact publishing, a steady stream of media cameos, and — of course — his vociferous Twitter presence. Among his main arguments: Drug costs have spiraled out of control. Conflicts of interest run amok in health care. We don’t have any idea how well new cancer drugs and diagnostics work, thanks to ill-designed clinical trials. And more than half of all practiced medicine is based on scant evidence — and possibly ineffectual.

Needless to say, such positions haven’t won him many close friends among pharma companies — or even among some fellow doctors. He doesn’t much care.