Healthy lifestyle for a healthy heart, this should be the punchline for everyone who is above the age of 25 in the country of India as well as in any sort of developing country in the world. Health and fitness experts point out that there is a barrage of new change in food habits, alcohol intake, smoking, change in acceptable limitations of these bad habits and most important - excess amount of food available at quick disposition.

In an interview with HT Lifestyle, Dr Chandrashekhar Kulkarni, Consultant, Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery [CVTS] at Global Hospital in Mumbai's Parel, shared, Nowadays, most of the people dont even walk and drive to the restaurant or just order it online. Minimal activity and maximal intake at the wrong time of the day is a harbinger of disease namely heart attack, as well as other problems which can be because of deposition of calcium and cholesterol in the arteries going into your brain, kidneys, heart and intestines. So, this collectively causes reduction in the particular artery. In this case if it is in a heart artery it is called heart attack.

He suggested the following important habits which can curb a heart attack:

1. Dietary modification - Eat sensible, have good intelligent choices when its come to outside food. Try to reduce the amount of quick service restaurants or high intake of salt or fried items. Maybe you can settle for a simple sandwich with some amount of vegetables and very less cheese. Try to avoid double cheese pizza and try to eat simple food bowl with less amount of salt or sugar.

2. Exercise - Burning of the excess calories and excess fats all around your body is a very important and can reduce chances of getting a heart attack especially .

3. Carefully examining your family tree - Understanding the potential hazards of contracting any type of cardiovascular disease, including heart attacks, paralysis, kidney disease, and inexplicable loss of fingers and toes due to artery blockages. If there is a heart attack index case in your family, it will be one of the parents or a very close generation of relatives, such as uncles and aunts, if the heart attack occurred around the age of 50. As a result, you should start checking yourself after the age of 35 because you might have a reassuringly high risk of getting yours

4. Maintaining a very minimal amount of alcohol intake and complete refrainment of tobacco - Preventing acquired causes of coronary artery disease is of utmost importance. Keeping a close eye on vitamin B12 intake should also be a top priority. Serum homocysteine levels should also be checked in order to determine whether any particular patient has a family history of early coronary artery disease. These are preventive in many individuals, and straightforward vitamin B complex additions as well as their contributing variables can help avoid serious coronary artery disease in the populations we are seeing today.

Echoing similar suggestions while adding to the list of tips, Dr Zainulabedin Hamdulay, Consulting Cardiothoracic Surgeon at Masina Hospital Heart Institute in Mumbai's Byculla, recommended:

1. Monitor your blood pressure - High blood pressure gradually increases the blood flow in the arteries which makes them less elastic and also damages the cells of the arteries inner linings. The fats from the diet gets collected in these damaged arteries resulting in decrease of oxygen rich blood flow to the heart, this can lead to heart attack. Checking your blood pressure on regular basis can help to keep it under control.

2. Eat a heart healthy diet - Diet is one of the important factor which can help to keep your heart healthy. Other risk factors for heart disease like cholesterol, high blood pressure, inflammation etc. are affected by your diet. Avoid foods which have high levels of saturated & trans fats, salt and sugar. Regular intake of foods which are rich in fibre, minerals, vitamins, whole grains and healthy fats can boost your heart health.

3. Work out regularly - Obesity is a factor that can lead to the onset of cardiac complications. Continuous physical activity is necessary to keep your weight in check. Regular physical activity can also help to control or modify cholesterol level and high blood pressure which are the major risk factors for heart disease. Jogging, running, working out at the gym or home, there are plenty of activities you can do to keep your heart healthy.

4. Manage your stress Stress is a major contributor to all kinds of problems in our life physically, mentally, emotionally, and psychologically. Ongoing stress also known as chronic stress can lead to unhealthy lifestyle habits like smoking, drinking too much alcohol, less physical activity and overeating which can affect the heart. Effectively dealing with stress is very important. There are many ways like deep breathing, yoga, carving time for hobbies etc., if done on regular basis can help to reduce stress.

Read the original here:
6 habits that can curb a heart attack - Hindustan Times

A calisthenics coaching club in Pune was full of athletes on a mid-July Sunday morning, as they gathered around four pull up bars, two parallel bars, and one monkey bar. There were flying plumes of chalk, and lots of hype music playing in the background. This was the freestyle calisthenics national championship, with the winners getting a spot at the Street Workout World Championships (SWWC) to be held in Latvia in August.

There is no official calisthenics federation in India, primarily because it is not an Olympic sport yet. But the Latvia-basedWorld Street Workouts and Calisthenics Federation (WSWCF) has two affiliated member groups in India. One of these, the National Calisthenics Federation of India, does not operate anymore. The other is the Alphapack Calisthenics India, with five-time national champion Kunal Mahour, 26, acting as the main link between Alphapack and the world federation.

Also Read: The rise and rise of women in calisthenics

National calisthenics champion Kunal Mahour.

The top 16 countries at the SWWC get to send two male athletes and one female athlete to Latvia, and Mahours 13th-placed finish at the competition in Moscow last year has ensured more exposure to Indias calisthenics community. I have been representing India for a few years now, and have decided to take a backseat and start organising more events to make sure others get a chance to compete at the highest level, says the Pune-based athlete.

Mahours organisation also helped India hostthe global qualifiers for the Calisthenics World Cup (another event organised by the world federation) in March, in which athletes from countries around India participated to decide who would compete in the super finals. Ive been in touch with the world federation since 2014 now, and Ive told them how we keep calisthenics alive in the country without funding. But with the kind of response we are getting, it makes sense for India to host more of these events, Mahour says. He adds that there are plans to change the name of Alphapack Calisthenics to something more official sounding.

Also Read: Are continuous glucose monitors a new fitness fad?

The national freestyle championships introduced a female category for the first time this year. Srushti Shah, 22, was one of only two competitors at the event, but it was still a watershed moment for the sport: If I dont start competing now, then when? We have to start at some point, she says. Shah is a computer engineer and now a certified calisthenics coach, and is almost single-handedly inspiring women to take up calisthenics. Apart fromher personal Instagram handle, which has nearly 45,000 followers, she has also started a community calledCalisthenics Girls India and a training platform called Grip It.

We have had more than 200 women turn up for meetups across five cities at calisthenic parks, with the most successful ones called freestyle Fridays, which allows everyone to show their skills and more importantly, learn, she says. Shah will be travelling to Latvia with her own savings, but says that the sport has to grow enough for sponsors to back athletes to make it easier for athletes to compete abroad.

Also Read: 3 great tips to boost your fitness

Competitions usually involve athletes getting two minutes to showcase their skills, often divided in categories such as: static/holds, dynamic moves, and flow. The number of moves in calisthenics is endless, and has interesting names as well. An example would be Srushti Shahs routine: I started with a shrimp and failed it. Then I went on to do an undertopsy, followed by a dragon 360, and finally a reverse flyaway. My statics included a back lever, a front lever, and a one-arm elbow lever.

Having done some calisthenics in life, one of my happiest moments in a gym was when Mahour and other trainers gathered around for my muscle-up 360 attempt, celebrating the first time I managed to pull off a grab. This is the kind of support and camaraderie that fuels the sport. Pioneers like him and Srushti Shah are important to the sustenance of the sport, and producing better athletes.

Also Read: 5 great accessories for your monsoon workouts

The gap in international competition is reducing, but India is not that far off. When Mahour finished 13th at the SWWC, he scored of 35 out of 60. The first-placed athlete had a score of 52 and the 2nd-placed athlete 48. The 10th-placed athlete had 38 points. I think where we are right now could be accelerated with some kind of government support but if you take that out of the equation, calisthenics is accelerating at a very exciting level in India, he says.

As for Shah, she is revelling at the fact that so many women are stepping forward to learn. Six months ago, hardly a few people could do a back lever. In the last meetup I attended, I saw 20 athletes get it right. The clincher in calisthenics is that of course it looks cool but it also develops your fitness and physique. The added sweetener is you have a skill under your belt which isnt a conventional lift of some kind.

Pulasta Dhar is a football commentator and writer.

Here is the original post:
Is calisthenics India's newest fitness and sports cult? - Mint Lounge

Amy Norton

THURSDAY, July 21, 2022 (HealthDay News) -- Adding the drug Keytruda to standard chemotherapy can extend the lives of some women with an aggressive form of breast cancer, a new study finds.

The study involved women with advanced triple-negative breast cancer, a hard-to-treat form of the disease. Keytruda (pembrolizumab) is already approved in the United States as an option for those patients, based on evidence that it stalls the cancer's progression.

Now the new findings, published July 21 in the New England Journal of Medicine, show that the drug can extend some patients' lives, too.

Specifically, Keytruda improved overall survival among women whose tumors had high levels of a protein called PD-L1. For them, the drug added seven months to their median survival, compared with standard chemotherapy alone: 23 months versus 16 months.

People are also reading

That means that half of the women on Keytruda lived longer than 23 months, while half died sooner.

"We knew we can control the disease [with Keytruda], but that does not necessarily mean that patients live longer," said Dr. Naoto Ueno, a breast cancer specialist at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

"This study proves you can also extend overall survival," said Ueno, who was not involved in the research.

Triple-negative cancers account for about 10% to 15% of all breast cancers, according to the American Cancer Society. They are so called because the cancer's growth is not fueled by estrogen, progesterone or a protein called HER-2.

Unfortunately, that means women with the disease have fewer treatment options, because commonly used hormonal therapies and "targeted" HER-2 drugs do not work for them.

Instead, the traditional mainstays of treatment have been surgery and chemotherapy.

That has been changing in recent years, however. In 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Keytruda for treating women with advanced triple-negative cancer cases where the cancer had spread beyond the breast, including distant sites in the body.

A year later, the drug was approved for early-stage triple-negative cancer that has a high risk of recurrence. In those cases, Keytruda is given before and after surgery.

The latest trial, funded by drug maker Merck, involved 847 women with advanced triple-negative breast cancer. The researchers randomly assigned 566 to receive Keytruda plus chemotherapy, while the remaining 281 patients received chemo plus a placebo.

Keytruda, which is given by infusion, belongs to a newer class of cancer drugs called immune checkpoint inhibitors. They work by releasing a particular "brake" on the immune system, which allows it to attack cancer cells.

Patients in this trial received Keytruda every three weeks, up to 35 times.

In the end, the drug extended survival for women whose cancer cells had large amounts of PD-L1 on their surfaces. PD-L1 is one of the "checkpoint" proteins that inhibits the immune system from killing cells.

Overall, 38% of trial patients had those high PD-L1 levels defined as 10 or higher on a scoring system. They were the ones who gained a survival advantage from Keytruda.

In contrast, the drug made no significant difference for women with lower PD-L1 scores: Those on Keytruda lived for a median of just under 18 months, versus 16 months among patients in the placebo group.

It all means that doctors should use the PD-L1 score to pinpoint women likely to benefit from Keytruda, said lead researcher Dr. Javier Cortes, head of the International Breast Cancer Center, in Barcelona.

For patients with high PD-L1 levels, he said, chemo plus Keytruda should be considered the "standard of care." (PD-L1 levels are not important, however, in treating early-stage triple-negative cancer, Cortes noted.)

Ueno agreed that the PD-L1 score should be used in treating advanced triple-negative cancer, and already is. "So these findings won't change what we do," he noted.

It's important to identify patients likely to benefit, and those who probably won't, both doctors said: Keytruda can cause side effects like fatigue, nausea and skin reactions, and its list price tops $10,000 per infusion, according to Merck.

For women with low PD-L1 scores, there are other options, Ueno said.

Last year, the FDA approved a drug called sacituzumab (Trodelvy) for women with advanced triple-negative breast cancer who have tried standard treatments. It's an antibody that delivers chemo directly to cancer cells.

"There's a lot of new drug development happening," Ueno noted.

He encouraged women with triple-negative cancer to talk to their doctor about not only standard treatments, but also whether they might qualify for any clinical trials of new therapies.

The American Cancer Society has more on treating triple-negative breast cancer.

SOURCES: Javier Cortes, MD, PhD, head, International Breast Cancer Center, Barcelona; Naoto T. Ueno, MD, PhD, professor, medicine, and chief, section of translational breast cancer research, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston; New England Journal of Medicine, July 21, 2022

Continue reading here:
Keytruda Extends Survival for Women With an Aggressive Breast Cancer - Journal Times

Marie Claire is supported by its audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn commission on some of the items you choose to buy.

Ministers are promising to end decades of inequality.

In groundbreaking news today, ministers are promising to reshape the narrative and tackle decades of systemic, entrenched gender health inequalities in England with a new womens health strategy.

Theyve announced plans to retrain doctors, up the number of cancer checks and launch female health hubs, alongside improving access to contraception, IVF, maternity support and mental health services.

The first womens health strategy ever announced by the UK government comes after a survey of almost 100,000 women revealed the extent of their negative experiences of not being listened to by medical professionals, of being palmed off while male counterparts were listened to, and of being turned away when facing debilitating and often chronic conditions.

84% felt they are ignored or not listened to when seeking NHS help and thousands felt they persistently needed to advocate for themselves.

The strategy, which is 127-pages long, admits that historically, the health and care system has been designed by men, for men.

Video you may like:

It was originally due to be published last year but has been pushed back several times.

Speaking of the womens experiences, Maria Caulfield, the Womens Health Minister, expressed her sadness and shock. When we launched our call for evidence to inform the publication of this strategy, women across the country set us a clear mandate for change, she said. Tackling the gender health gap will not be easy there are deep-seated, systemic issues we must address to ensure women receive the same standards of care as men, universally and by default, she shares.

Health Secretary Steve Barclay agrees, adding : It is not right that 51% of our population are disadvantaged in accessing the care they need, simply because of their sex.

The publication of this strategy is a landmark moment in addressing entrenched inequalities and improving the health and wellbeing of women across the country.

The governments Womens Health Ambassador, Dame Lesley Regan, went on to add that this is an opportunity to reset the dial on womens health after years of the NHS failing women.

Theyve also vowed to make sure the necessary research is commissioned into certain under-represented female health conditions, tackling the data gap. At current, there is a serious lack of research into several prominent female health conditions, including the likes of endometriosis and PCOS.

Any new or trainee medics will now be tested on topics including menopause and gynaecology.

As per the strategy:We heard concerns that women had not been listened to in instances where pain is the main symptom, for example, being told that heavy and painful periods are normal or that the woman will grow out of them.

Women also told us about speaking to doctors on multiple occasions over many months or years before receiving a diagnosis for conditions such as endometriosis.

What do you reckon a good move or does more need to be done?

Go here to see the original:
How the first ever women's health strategy in England will affect you - Marie Claire UK

It is important that we maintain a balanced level of cholesterol in the body, since it can cause fatty build-ups in the arteries, leading to reduced blood flow to the arms and legs. This condition is also called peripheral artery disease (PAD), which causes acute pain.

Therefore, the Mayo Clinic reveals that pain, while using one's arm, could be a tell-tale sign of raising cholesterol.

If left untreated, the pain could take the form of aching and cramping when knitting, writing or doing other manual tasks, as per the health body. The entire process of pain beginning from the start of the movement to a resting position is also called claudication.

UK's National Health Services says that the pain can range from mild to severe, and usually goes away after a few minutes when you rest your legs."

"Both legs are often affected at the same time, although the pain may be worse in one leg," it adds.

Originally posted here:
High cholesterol: Two painful sensations to watch out for in your arm - Times of India

Will a monkeypox shot stop the danger from having sex with a horny stranger? Gutfeld said to introduce the topic on his June 30 show. He continued that it has mostly infected men who have had sex with other men at parties and, addressing fellow Fox News host Brian Kilmeade, added that the United States has not seen any deaths yet, but just to be safe, Kilmeade, no more sleepovers. Kilmeade is married to a woman; the joke here is that its funny to call him gay.

Gutfeld later asked Kilmeade, who hosts Fox & Friends, how the morning show was covering the issues.

Running from it, Kilmeade responded, before downplaying the symptoms and known number of cases. What is the big deal? Walk it off, were Americans.

The segment also included a pre-taped bit in which a monkey doctor addressed questions at a fake press conference, including one from a character with a stereotypical lisp who asked if the monkey would consider spending a sexual weekend with me in Cabo. Whether intentional or not, the segment drew on the long-standing homophobic idea that HIV/AIDS emerged because of gay men having sex with monkeys.

Back at the panel, Gutfeld teed up Donald Trump senior adviser Lara Trump to mock the subject.

You know, Lara, apparently monkeypox is spread by gay anonymous sex at raves, he said with an inflection that signaled he was saying something funny. What are your thoughts?

Well how long do we have? Trump said in a jokey, over-the-top response.

You know, we are the only show that has been consistently covering this topic almost every week, sometimes every day, even if there are 300 cases, because its just great to talk about, Gutfeld concluded.

The previous week, Gutfeld used almost the exact same homophobic set-up in a panel with Fox News host Emily Compagno.

All right, last question to you, Emily, monkeypox is caused by anonymous gay anal sex at raves, Gutfeld said. Care to comment?

Im OK on that one, Compagno dodged, highlighting her discomfort with the very idea for comedic effect.

Other conservatives comedians got in on the bit as well. At PJMedia, Kevin Downey Jr. wrote an entire blog about what he considers strange sexual practices among men who have sex with men and the spread of monkeypox, and how to address the outbreaks.

Just a hunch, but perhaps we can start by abstaining from group sex with gay men who recently romped around Antwerp dressed as dogs and horses, he wrote.

Much of the overt anti-gay panic among right-wing pundits took place on Twitter.

Right-wing pundit James Lindsay deployed homophobic innuendo to make a confusing point about government control:

Read this article:

Conservatives' homophobia is putting gay and bisexual men at greater risk of monkeypox - Media Matters for America

Jordan Peterson, the Canadian psychologist and anti-woke crusader who has stirred controversy and garnered praise, opprobrium, and ridicule for his pronouncements on postmodernism, neo-Marxism, gender, morality, and the rules of successful living, has donned a new pundit hat to opine on Russia, Ukraine, the war, and the West. The maverick professor lays out his thoughts on the subject in a 50-minute video that garnered over 1.4 million views in the week since it was posted; the transcript can be found on the Daily Wire, where Peterson is now a regular contributor. Unfortunately, the main conclusion one can derive from the video is that creeping pro-Kremlin sentiment is a real problem in certain social conservative quartersand its an ugly thing.

Peterson starts with the obligatory I think what Putin has done is unconscionable disclaimer, and he even throws in a denunciation of the collusion of the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church. But it doesnt take long to reach the inevitable but: Theres a need, Peterson says, to deeply understand the motive forces for this war in order to end it and prevent similar future conflicts.

Fair enough. Peterson mentions his March 4 interview with foreign policy scholar Frederick Kagan, who put forward the thesis that Vladimir Putin is a prototypical authoritarianor even a thug in the Hitlerian moldand that Russias invasion of Ukraine is the result of Putins personal desire for empire and power as well as an expression of the imperial expansionism that typified the Soviet Union. But that explanation apparently isnt good enough for Peterson, so he turns to University of Chicago realist John Mearsheimers 2015 lecture, Why Ukraine is the Wests Fault, for an alternative perspective more sympathetic to Russias concerns.

Peterson gravely notes that he was concerned that Mearsheimer might be a Russian apologist, but thankfully that does not seem to be the case. Then he moves on to the apologetics: NATO and EU expansionism into Ukraine . . . has already and will continue to pose an intolerable threat to the Russians, who view Ukraine both as an integral part of the broader Russian sphere of interest and as a necessary buffer between the Europe that has invaded Russia to terrible effect in 1812 and 1941. (By the way: It wasnt Europe that invaded Russia on either of those occasions; it was Napoleon and Hitler, who also invaded numerous countries in Western Europe. If every country that repeatedly got invaded over the course of its history is entitled to an obedient buffer country on its borders, its going to be buffers all around.)

The blame NATO defense of Russias actions is, as Ive written before, bogus. But one part of Petersons elaboration on this argument is so striking that it deserves to be quoted in full:

Mearsheimer states, starkly (and this explains a fair bit of Putins potential motivation) that Russia would rather see Ukraine destroyed, razed to the ground, than comfortably ensconced in the Western sphere of influence.

If true, I would say that this doesnt exactly contradict the authoritarian with a bent for imperial expansionism (or even thug in the Hitlerian mold) take on Putins actions. Neither does a third point Peterson then brings up: that Russia sees Ukraine as a threat to its primarily petro-funded economy, particularly in relation to the European market. Sorry, but if you invade another country and slaughter people to protect your oil and gas trade, it might not make you Hitlerian, but it definitely makes you the baddies.

But even these explanations dont suffice for Peterson, who wants to find the wokeness angle in order to tie all this to his hobbyhorse. Here, according to Peterson, is the real story:

Putin regards the current West as decadent to the point of absolute untrustworthiness, particularly on the cultural and religious front. . . . And whether he believes this or notand I believe he doeshe is certainly able and willing to use the story of our degeneration to make his people wary of us and to convince them of the necessity of his leadership and to unite them in supporting his actions in Ukraine. . . .

And are we degenerate, in a profoundly threatening manner? I think the answer to that may well be yes. The idea that we are ensconced in a culture war has become a rhetorical commonplace. How serious is that war? Is it serious enough to increase the probability that Russia, say, will be motivated to invade and potentially incapacitate Ukraine merely to keep the pathological West out of that country, which is a key part of the historically Russian sphere of influence?

Petersons example of Western degeneracy is Ketanji Brown Jacksons elevation to the Supreme Courtnot only because she was picked on the basis of her race and sex (since Biden had explicitly narrowed the pool to black women), but because, during her confirmation hearings, she punted on the question What is a woman? by answering, Im not a biologist. Peterson concedes that it was a gotcha question, but then concludes that it doesnt matter: The fact that woke ideology simultaneously makes being a woman one of two key criteria for a Supreme Court seat and muddies the meaning of woman means that it violates the principle of non-contradiction and makes our culture irredeemably irrational.

What does this have to do with Russia and Ukraine? In Petersons view, the Russians see woke ideology as a new version of the Communist quest to remake human nature and tell themselves something like this:

Those Westerners are so out of their mindpossessed by the very same ideas that destroyed us for a century (and didnt they?)that we simply cannot trust them. Those Westerners are so out of their mind that a devastated but neutral Ukraine is preferable to a functional bordering state aligned with the US and Europe. Those Westerners are so out of their mind that well push the world to the brink of a nuclear war and potentially beyond to keep them off our doorstep. Because weve been there before and were not going back.

Peterson does stress once again that Putin himself may or may not believe this and that, regardless of his sincerity, he is weaponizing the War on Wokeness to promote his imperial and self-aggrandizing goals. However, he still maintains that the real key to solving the Russia/Ukraine problem lies in winning the civil war in the West by defeating the radical ideas of Marxist inheritance that are currently destabilizing our societiesand that, as long as those ideas dominate, American and Western support for freedom in Ukraine is nothing but shallow moral posturing.

Where to begin?

The notion that the Wests moral standing vis--vis Russia in 2022 is undercut by some uniquely terrible moral degeneracy and irrationality does not pass the laugh test. For instance, as David Frenchpoints out,for a good part of the Cold War the United States tolerated not only racial segregation but the often-violent oppression and disenfranchisement of black Americans in the Southern states. I daresay this was in drastic contradiction with the principles of freedom and democracy we were upholding in opposition to Soviet Communism. Does Peterson really think that putting Justice Jackson on the Supreme Court after a selection process limited to black women is more reprehensible than excluding blacks (and, in many cases, women) from a wide range of high-level public positions?

(Incidentally, Putin has also invoked the history of racial injustice in the United States as proof of American hypocrisy on human rights, continuing the Soviet-era tradition of such whataboutism. Authoritarians will weaponize whatever they can!)

One could also point out that Putins obsession with keeping Ukraine out the Wests clutches goes back to circa 2004which is to say, it started about a decade before what liberal pundit Matt Yglesias dubbed the Great Awokening: the shift to the new progressive focus and framework on race, gender, and other identities.

Whats more, if we want to talk about contradiction and non-contradiction, Petersons own plea for Western civilizational renewaland his claim that such a renewal will ensure a more friendly disposition from the Russian political establishmentis profoundly incoherent. He asserts, for instance, that the radical ideas he finds so corrosive must be defeated not only by adherents of traditional religious values but by classic liberals [and] small-c conservatives defending the heritage of the Enlightenment. But he also argues that Russia sees itself as championing a religiously ordered society built on Russian Orthodox values; he even cites Dostoyevskys A Writers Diary, a collection of political newsletters, as an expression of this philosophy. Leaving aside the repellent passages on the Jewish Question in that work, there is no doubt whatsoever that Dostoyevsky loathed and feared degenerate Western influence at a time when Western liberalism was about 150 years away from going woke.

As the cherry on top, Peterson mentions the neofascist crank Aleksandr Dugin as a genuine philosopher whose influence on Putin supposedly shows the Russian leaders authentic interest in philosophical and theological matters. (Peterson had previously discussed Dugins alleged status as Putins adviser, and his hostility to Western liberalism as a driver of materialistic hyper-individuality, in a 2015 lecture.) Im not even sure whats more important to point out here: that Dugins philosophy is virulently hostile to even to the least woke varieties of Western liberalism, or that Dugin is either a kooky, occultism-obsessed prophet of Russian imperialism or a mega-troll whose public persona is a kind of performance art. (Of course, in truly postmodern fashion, it is possible that he is some combination of both.) The bottom line is that if you take Dugin seriously as a philosopher, youve well and truly jumped the shark.

Whether or not Western liberalism should return to its more classical roots is a topic for another day. In any case, such a pivot cannot be the answer to the current crisis in Ukraine if only because of how long it would take to happen. But Peterson has some short-term proposals, too:

Perhaps the declaration of Ukraine as a neutral state for a minimum period of twenty years.

Perhaps a new election in Ukraine subject to ratification by joint Russian-Western observers.

Perhaps a pledge on the part of the West to not offer to Ukraine any membership in NATO or the EU that is either not simultaneously offered to Russia or moving forward on terms acceptable to Russia.

Peterson concedes that his suggestions might be wrong and even dreadfully nave, which is probably the most accurate thing he says in this entire piece. Consider their substance: His first proposal would directly reward Russia for its naked aggression.

The second is an arrangement Russia would only accept if it were facing imminent, ignominious defeat and desperately needed a deal to save face. (Any election in Ukraine today would hand a resounding victory to pro-NATO, anti-Russia candidates even in those parts of the country where pro-Russia sentiment and skepticism toward NATO were widespread before the war.)

As for the third proposal, it too amounts to a reward for Russias invasion, granting the country a veto on Ukrainian membership not only in NATO but in the European Union. Whats more, by Petersons logic, an offer of NATO or EU membership to Russia should be seen as a menace to the country, not a friendly overture: Didnt he just tell us that Russia is going to war in Ukraine partly to keep the scourge of Western liberal decadence from its door?

The reality is that, for all the Wests culture-war problems, the defense of Ukraine is both the most genuinely liberal cause (in the classic sense of the word) and the most genuinely moral cause that exists in our public and political space right now. And, be it reflexive contrarianism, pandering to his fan base, or genuine conviction, Peterson now finds himself on the wrong side of that causewhich arguably reduces all his talk of defending of Western civilization and upholding strict moral standards of good and evil to, yes, shallow posturing. The worrying question, given his large fan base and his status as a conservative celebrity, is how many people will follow him there.

Read the original:

Jordan Petersons Pro-Putin Punditry - The Bulwark

1. How Jordan Peterson Ruined His Image in Islam  New Lines Magazine
2. A Christian Woman's Remarks on Jordan Peterson  Juicy Ecumenism
3. Skeletor recites Jordan Peterson's essay about his Twitter suspension  Boing Boing
4. Jordan Peterson Gives Important Advice to Christian Churches. Should We Take It?  Daily Citizen
5. 'Grifter' Really Is the Only Word to Use for Jordan Peterson  The Daily Beast
6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read the original:

How Jordan Peterson Ruined His Image in Islam - New Lines Magazine

COMMENTARY: In their defense of Rubins decision to become a father by artificial means, these conservatives concede one of the most offensive premises of transgenderism.

I had a hard time watching Jordan Petersons conversation with Dave Rubin about gay parenting and transgenderism. Im deeply disappointed in them. Ill cut right to the chase. These men claim to be opposed to transgenderism. However, in their defense of Dave Rubins decision to become a father by artificial means, they concede one of the most offensive premises of transgenderism. They evidently believe that with enough money, medical technology and legal support from the state, a man can do anything a woman can do. They are literally erasing women, while congratulating themselves on how thoughtful and profound and conservative they are.

I predict this cognitive dissonance will not last indefinitely. Within five years, Peterson and Rubin will repent: they will either repent of their opposition to transgenderism or they will repent of their support for gay parenting.

David Rubin and his civilly married partner, David Janet, want to become fathers. Rubin learned from his association with Jordan Peterson that parenthood is one of the keys to maturation and a fully actualized life. But neither of the two Davids is willing to have a sexual relationship with women. Indeed, by defining themselves as gay, they publicly attest that they do not respond sexually to a woman. So, they have contracted with a series of women to assist them in achieving this maturation milestone of fatherhood.

When I wrote my first article on this subject, I knew that they had purchased eggs from a woman they selected from a catalogue. And I knew that they had rented the services of two different women for surrogacy, one to gestate the embryos created with each of the mens sperm.

I didnt know until watching this video conversation, that the men have thoroughly studied the benefits of breastfeeding. They have two industrial freezers full of pumped breast milk. Where did this breast milk come from? The gestational mothers? Some other women? Do the two Davids think it matters where it came from? We also learn that these fathers are planning to involve female role models in their childrens lives, including their female relatives and night nurses.

So lets tally this up. Weve got the genetic mother, the gestational mother, the night nurses, the female relatives and no doubt, other female caregivers. But we have no legally recognized mother. Not one of these women has a legally recognized permanent place in the childrens lives. All of them are legal strangers to the children. This is literally female erasure the exact thing that so many female opponents of transgenderism have passionately decried.

These men have broken motherhood, the most fundamental human relationship, into a series of functions. Theyve transformed mother, an organic, integrated personal reality, into something artificial, scattered and impersonal.

Middle-of-the-night-breastfeeding illustrates what I mean. Although I have mothered more than 10 children, (depending on how you count: long story) I have only had the privilege of nursing one of those children. I can tell you from that experience: there is nothing like breastfeeding. My whole body relaxed into the care of that child. Getting up in the middle of the night was actually a joy. Nothing else mattered but me and the baby. In the words of one of our favorite lullabies, Things less important, will just have to keep, while I rockabye my baby to sleep. I was heartbroken when my daughter gave up breastfeeding at the age of five months.

(By the way, young Miss Chloe Cole, in her testimony to the harms of attempting to change her sex, made this very point. She realized that she would never be able to nurse a baby, because she had amputated her breasts. But I digress.)

I need not point out that the nice ladies the Davids engage to pump the breast milk and bottle feed the babies in the middle of the night are not going to have that attachment experience. Nor are the babies going to have the same bonding experience they would have with their natural mother nursing them from her breasts.

Natural motherhood integrates the genetic mother, gestational mother, nursing mother, care-giving mother, legally-recognized mother all into one person. Ordinary motherhood is natural, with nothing artificial, or dare I say, man-made. Most of all, ordinary motherhood is personal. My personal identity is crucial to my child and her identity is crucial to me. We are irreplaceable to each other, unlike the collection of interchangeable parts the surrogacy process relies upon. Does a man of Jordan Petersons caliber seriously believe these babies are going to be unscathed by this process?

Peterson seems as if he really knows better. He even said, You guys have the resources to navigate all this. Well, that is true. They do have resources. But a man shouldnt need extraordinary resources to be a good father. The first duty of fatherhood is to love your childs mother. Indeed, that is the ordinary way of becoming a father in the first place. David Rubin has already failed in this most basic duty. He will not be able to fully repair this breach, no matter how rich or smart he is, no matter how much society rallies around him.

All these theories are about to come crashing down around their heads in a few short weeks. The babies will arrive in their lives, changing them forever. All these mens beliefs will be tested by reality. These men wont be able to keep their carefully balanced, nuanced positions indefinitely.

That is why I predict repentance of one sort or another is in these mens futures. On one hand, they may try to brazen it out. I was so wrong to be mean to trans people, the sex of the body isnt so important after all, my partner is a wonderful mother-figure, Ive grown, blah, blah, blah. Or the two Davids are going to be astonished by fatherhood. Jordon Peterson is going to see the problems in real life and in real time. They are going to see that asking a male partner to play the female nurturing role is much more complicated than they expected. One of the children will raise a question or react or behave in some way that will prompt these men to ask, What have I done? At that point, all their past life decisions will come into question.

For me, an infertility crisis in my mid-thirties prompted me to start walking back my life decisions. I ended up reconsidering everything Id done and believed since about the age of 14. I came back to the Church. I can testify: there is life on the other side of repentance. I pray these men take the right path.

See the original post here:

Memo to Jordan Peterson and Dave Rubin: Mothers Are Irreplaceable - National Catholic Register

On the intellectual bankruptcy of moral equivalence

By David French

The Third Rail examines the disputes that divide America. Sign up to get it in your inbox.

Theres a pattern emerging in parts of the right. It goes something like this. Yes, Russia is wrong to invade Ukraine, but And what follows the but is invariably an avalanche of excuse-making and false moral equivalence. NATO provoked Russia, Ukraine provoked Russia, orand this is my favoriteWestern wokeism provoked Russia.

Earlier this week the extraordinarily popular Canadian professor Jordan Peterson released a lengthy (and immediately viral) video that represented the virtual platonic form of the argument that Russia is wrong, but If you have a spare hour, Id urge you to watch his entire lecture, if only to understand a view you may not hear much in your daily life.

I want to focus on a specific claim by Petersonthat Russia has not only gone to war to protect itself from what he describes as Western degeneracy, but that our alleged degeneracy robs the West of the moral high ground in the conflict. Heres a key quote:

And what is this degeneracy? Peterson talks about radical gender ideology, the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson (yes, really), and her reluctance to define a woman during her confirmation hearings. Heres more Peterson:

Petersons moral equivalence does not (yet) hold majority Republican support. While Republicans are less likely to support Ukraine in the conflict than Democratsand less likely to support strict economic sanctions against Russia and sending military support to Ukrainestrong majorities still oppose Vladimir Putin.

Petersons beliefs, however, are still worth addressing, and not just because they undermine American support for an ally that is directly confronting one of our nations chief geopolitical foes. His beliefs also lead to a sense of unjustified existential despair about the state of our own civilization and culture.

In short, while the West has problems, it is not degenerate by any reasonable historical measure, and there is no reasonable comparison between the virtue of NATO and Russia. To argue otherwise is to be ignorant or to engage in gravely deficient moral reasoning.

The rights disproportionate commitment to moral equivalence in the Russia-Ukraine war is explained partly by pure contrarianism (opposing anything the elite supports) and partly by a profoundly negative view of modern Western cultural life, and a prewar view of Putin as a muscular representative of specifically anti-woke Christian nationalism.

Theres no question that Putin has forged a close relationship with the Russian Orthodox Church, but that is an indictment of the Russian Church, not an endorsement of Putin. Hes a brutal war criminal who employed his military in indiscriminate attacks against civilians in the wars in Chechnya and Syria well before the wholesale slaughter in Ukraine.

Moreover, its hardly the case that Russia itself is a hotbed of religious fervor. Its far more secular than the United States (53 percent of Americans say religion is very important in their lives, versus only 16 percent of Russians). Russia has a substantially higher murder rate than every member of NATO, including the United States. It suppresses religious freedom, and it has one of the highest measured abortion rates in the world.

Is Russia defending itself against Western degeneracy and protecting the Christian faith? No, its distorting and appropriating Christianity to inflict its own pathological criminality on a peaceful nation and its innocent people.

Petersons critique of the West as degenerate or insane rests largely on the existence of radical gender ideology and illiberal wokeness that does have profound influence in a number of key Western cultural institutions, including the academy, large corporations, and much of the mainstream press.

Yet the Western-protected regime of individual liberty and the rule of law not only protects its citizens from the worst excesses of authoritarians on the left and the right; it protects the mechanisms of internal critique that can and do lead to reform. Moreover, even with wokeness abroad in the land, NATO countries remain among the best places in the history of the world to build a life and raise a family.

Neither America nor its Western allies have ever been perfect. Weve always been profoundly flawed. Indeed, the United States that fought World War II was far more degenerate or pathological than it is today. We liberated Europe from Nazi tyranny and Asia from Japanese despotism at the same time that we maintained an apartheid-like Jim Crow regime in the South.

But that did not render the moral high ground in the Second World War up for the most serious debate.

Ive long been a participant in the American culture war. I was a pro-life and religious-liberty litigator for more than 20 years before I became a journalist. I also know that its easy to lose perspective when you spend too much time immersed in domestic disputes. Most of us, however, get jolted back to reality when we see the true face of aggressive, authoritarian evil. A clash over whether to use the word woman or a person with the capacity for pregnancy is a moral and philosophical dispute that can be mediated through the instruments of liberal democracy.

A Russian cruise missile launched into an apartment building, by contrast, represents a truly different order of depravity. A nation or culture does not have to be perfect to be right, and make no mistakein the clash between the war criminal in the Kremlin and Ukraine and its NATO allies, the true moral high ground could not be more clear.

The rest is here:

Jordan Peterson Is Wrong About Russia, and the West - The Atlantic