Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 08:26:05 -0400

From: Courisse Knight <CKnight@SGU.EDU>

Subject: Re: Should I remove myself from the HEDIR?

At the very least, if I read your responses to the listserve and find them

to be outrageous I can have a discussion with my colleagues noting

something like ..."can you believe people think that way".

I appreciate the opportunity to see diverse opinions. It's good

research.

------------------------------

#90

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 08:02:49 -0600

From: Debra Lafler <deblafler@CHARTER.NET>

Subject: college health

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Here are a few additions to the suggestions for college health:

1. The ACHA organization that was already mentioned is the best resource.

They also have the National College Health Assessment that colleges can

purchase/use to assess their population's health needs.

2. For general national goals for college health, there is a Healthy Campus

Initiative through Healthy People 2010:

3. Another great organization is the Bacchus & Gamma Peer Education Network.

They work with college/university based health education/promotion programs

(usually run out of the Student Health/Counseling/Life Center), for the

purposes of health promotion on campus for students, that also have a

student work group (club, volunteer, or paid positions) usually called Peer

Educators/Counselors/Advisors.

The national organization segments the country into "areas", and each area

has their own coordinator. They have an annual conference called their

General Assembly, and then local area conferences as well. They are a great

organization for anyone in college-student health programming.

Their Health Awareness weeks are also listed on the National Wellness

Institute's Health Observances Calendar (e.g., Safe Spring Break in March)

Good luck!

Debra Lafler, MA

Madison, WI

**

** Support the HEDIR With Your Gift

**

** Advertise with HPCareer.net

**

------------------------------

#91

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:46:14 -0500

From: Jim at CPP <jvgrizzell@CSUPOMONA.EDU>

Subject: Re: Fern's Re: Huckabee and public health

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Fern's advice is excellent.

To help us use our health educator skills to influence behaviors of politicians and lawmakers I suggest we read Alan Andreasen's book,

Social Marketing in the 21st Century

He describes "upstream interventions." We typically do "downstream" health education and social marketing to change/influence the behavior of the people with the health problems. But Andreasen describes very well how we can apply commercial marketing concepts with stages of change, theory of reasoned action, social marketing approach and more theories and model to change/influence lawmakers and regulators voting and support behaviors for our/society's interests.

Jim

Jim Grizzell, MBA, MA, CHES, HFI, FACHA

CHES CEU NCHEC Provider # SSP2786

Health Promotion Program Planning with the Social Marketing Approach: An Online Self-Study Course (10.5 CECH) -

C - 909-856-3350

E - jvgrizzell@csupomona.edu

E - jim@healthedpartners.org

F - 202-379-9786

----------------- o

--------------- </\_

-------------- _/\ ~~~~~~~_o

____________/______O`-`O__________/\o

________________________~~~~~~~~~

------------------------------

#92

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 10:02:06 -0500

From: Penny Bailey <penny.bailey@TRHD.DST.NC.US>

Subject: Re: Should I remove myself from the HEDIR?

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

No ... this should be a place to vent. I trust however when seeking change

.. number one tennent of health education is to start where the people are.

------------------------------

#93

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:06:45 -0600

From: James Teufel <teufel@SIU.EDU>

Subject: Re: Huckabee and public health

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Mark,

I understand and appreciate your modern position. With regard to religion

and health, I am taking a more extreme position on religion and health than

most because the pendulum must swing closer to a moderate position. In my

research, most people begin with the premise that religion is good for

health. I have decided to take the contrarian position to balance the

debate (I know me being contrarian is a shocker). My position begins with

the opposing assumption that religion either does not influence health or

has a negative impact on health. In my or others research at the level of

states or nations, religion is typically negatively associated with health.

However, once one control for absolute and relative poverty the association

is negated, except for capital punishment. Once one includes a couple of

additional control variables such as education, then this association

attenuates as well. At the level of the state and nations, religion has no

influence on health, though it is associated poverty and education (more

poverty + less education= more religion). Some researcher such as Harold

Koenig and colleagues dedicate their existence of the positive association

between religion (in the case of Koenig the Christian religion is best for

health) and health. They try to show evidence for intercessory prayer.

However, meta-analyses show there is no true association. This is

interesting in part because there is a bias in publishing significant

result, not statistically non-significant. They also try to show that

church attendance, not the construct of social support and networks, improve

health. This position is a threat to science as a method. It also

approaches research from an antiquated metaphysical model. Religion is good

for coping with uncertainty, but the question should be is there a better

way, not to simply maintain the status quo. To quote Karl Marx:

"Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and

the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed

creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a

spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of

religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real

happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the

demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." Karl Marx, Critique of

Hegel's Philosophy of Right. As an aside Marx also wrote "I am not a

Marxist."

James

------------------------------

#94

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 10:27:24 -0500

From: "Dr. Molly Laflin" <mlaflin@BGNET.BGSU.EDU>

Subject: Re: Should I remove myself from the HEDIR?

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

"Dialogue should involve considerable conflict and disagreement. It

is precisely such conflict that pushes [people} to questions existing

premises and make sense of their experience in a new way." Ikujiro

Nonaka

"Emotional impulse is essential for inspiration, and if, regardless

of discomfort, one is looking for new connections and ideas, what

better place is there than conflict to find some?"

"Revolutions are, after all, messy, rarely smooth and almost never

without conflict." Big Places Big Plans page 2

Molly Laflin

------------------------------

#95

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:06:33 -0600

From: "Lyde, Adrian R" <arlyde@ILSTU.EDU>

Subject: Re: Should I remove myself from the HEDIR?

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

James,

You absolutely SHOULD NOT remove yourself from the HEDIR. Our

profession and our nation need thoughtful, contrarian voices to add

various perspectives and information to discussions of all kinds...but

especially to problem solving! Thanks for putting yourself/ideas out

there for all HEDIR-ites to consider, mull over, get angry at, and learn

from (I know...I'm not supposed to end a sentence with a preposition.).

:)

Adrian R. Lyde, PhD, CHES

Coordinator, Pre-Student Teaching Clinical Experiences

Cecilia J. Lauby Teacher Education Center

Illinois State University

DeGarmo 61P

Normal, IL 61790-5440

(P)309.438.5024

(F)309.438.8684

Education is man's going forward from cocksure ignorance to thoughtful

uncertainty.

Kenneth G. Johnson

This transmission is intended and restricted for use by the above

addressee only. It may contain confidential and/or privileged

information exempt from disclosure under federal or state law. In the

event some other person or entity receives this transmission, said

recipient is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or

duplication of this transmission or its contents is prohibited. If you

should receive this transmission in error, please call me immediately @

309.438.5024, delete the file from your system, and destroy any hard

copies of this transmission. Thank you.

------------------------------

#96

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:27:19 -0600

From: "Stephen L. Brown" <slbrown@SIU.EDU>

Subject: Re: Huckabee and public health

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Many Americans misinterpret the Establishment/Free Exercise Clauses

of the First Amendment which read: "Congress shall make no law

respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free

exercise thereof"

The courts have generally held that this prohibits branches of the

federal (or local) government from establishing or giving

preferential treatment to any church or religious organization. It

also prevents the government from interfering with individual or

assembled religious practice unless it substantially violates law or

the rights of others.

Like it or not, neither clause explicitly or even implicitly

prohibits religious individuals or religious organizations from

attempting to influence governmental policy or laws. In fact, such

attempts to influence government are protected by law. Zealous,

bible-thumping religionists have just as much right to try to sway

public policy as cautious researchers armed with reams of data. If

we don't like the religious approach to public health (or other

issues) then we need to be more vocal and more persuasive during

these public debates.

Steve

At 02:16 PM 1/9/2008, James Teufel wrote:

------------------------------

#97

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 10:32:06 -0800

From: William Cissell <cissellguill@YAHOO.COM>

Subject: Tolerance of contraian views

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

James,

Do not be so sensitive to your critics. As one of your strong fans, I would be greatly displeased if you let your critics drive you to cease posting some of the most interesting and thought provoking messages on HEDIR. Whether I agree with a poster of thought provoking messages, I appreciate their comments.

Early in the history of HEDIR, a social conservative posted a message and predicted he would be flamed for expressing his views. I responded with a teasing message that, as a former Marine, I am trained in operating flame throwers. I presented an opposing argument about the view he expressed. Later, I heard from a professional friend that the poster of the socially conservative message was greatly offended by my comments and pledged to never again post to HEDIR. I am personally disappointed that he did not continue to post and have an interesting dialog.

If we cannot tolerate views that are contrary to our own, we will have much discomfort in our social interactions and limit our exposure to many interesting and stimulating ideas. If an idea offends us, we should explain why and suggest a view that we believe is superior to the one we dislike. We should not call people with views we do not support names or try to insult them. Rather, we should show them respect and admire them for being willing to express their views.

I do not mean to lecture. I have certainly been guilty of castigating another's point of view on topics with which I have a major investment at one time or another. However, as I age and, hopefully, mellow, I am trying to exhibit wider acceptance and show respect for those with views that are at odds with my own.

We can always express support of those posting the views that we embrace and encourage continued expression of these views. We can accept the posting of those with whom we disagree and ,at the very least, tolerate their continued posting of the opposing views.

Bill Cissell

The Ancient One

____________________________________________________________________________________

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

**

** Support the HEDIR With Your Gift

**

** Advertise with HPCareer.net

**

------------------------------

#98

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 10:38:33 -0800

From: William Cissell <cissellguill@YAHOO.COM>

Subject: Belated Congratulations of Mark Kittleson

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Salute, Saluki!

I have not researched the list of AAHE Scholars with Saluki connections, but I believe there are several. Mark, you join the ranks of people like Drs. Sliepcevich and Bob Russell, whom I believe to be prior AAHE Scholars. These are scholars of note, and joining their ranks is indeed a testament to your accomplishments. You make us proud to be your colleagues.

Bill Cissell

An Old Dog

____________________________________________________________________________________

Be a better friend, newshound, and

**

** Support the HEDIR With Your Gift

**

** Advertise with HPCareer.net

**

------------------------------

#99

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:46:44 -0500

From: "Craig M. Becker, Ph.D." <beckerc@ECU.EDU>

Subject: Re: Tolerance of contraian views

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Isn't it great debate and contesting of ideas what helps us develop

new ones? Please continue to offer thought provoking thoughts - both

sides. I believe it is these conflicting ideas that the contesting of

these ideas that inspires better thoughts.

--

Be Wellr,

Craig M. Becker, Ph.D.

Department of Health Education & Promotion

East Carolina University

Greenville, NC 27858

Telephone: 252-328-5312

beckerc@ecu.edu

**

** Support the HEDIR With Your Gift

**

** Advertise with HPCareer.net

**

------------------------------

#100

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:05:38 -0800

From: William Cissell <cissellguill@YAHOO.COM>

Subject: Applause for Mary

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Mary,

Thank you for giving us insight into what it has been like living in Arkansas while Mr. Huckabee served in leadership. This is more valuable than the spin that political pundits place on comments about religion that have been made by him.

I believe that the current adminstration has trampled on some restrictions the legislators previously approved in the Consitution and its amendments. It seems likely that someone of the religious convictions reported on behalf of Mr. Huckabee, should he be elected, would continue the pattern encouraged by President Bush. However, your experience suggests otherwise.

It seems very likely that voters across our great nation are unlikely to elect next year a president that appears to have views very similar to President Bush. Currently, many who voted for President Bush in the past two elections are disaffected with the performance of his administration on several levels. These disaffected voters are apt to vote against someone like Mr. Huckabee. Still, former President Clinton predicted that Mr. Huckabee would become a political force in the coming election well before the polls began to shjow strong support for him. President Clinton described Mr. Huckabee as a wise and able politician who is very apt to gain considerable popularity as voters learn more about him and observe him in campaigning activites. Also, Mr. Clinton complimented Mr. Huckabee on his record in getting healthcare legislation passed in Arkansas.

It is likely that Mr. Huckabee can gather considerable support in states with social conservatives in the majority. It is unlikely that he will generate enough support in other states to win the election should he receive the Republican nomination.

Keep up your interesting posts.

Bill Cissell

____________________________________________________________________________________

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

**

** Support the HEDIR With Your Gift

**

** Advertise with HPCareer.net

**

------------------------------

#101

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:36:27 -0600

From: James Teufel <teufel@SIU.EDU>

Subject: Re: Huckabee and public health

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

I agree that the citizenry has the right to express their religious beliefs

and to practice their religion, which is an integral part of the

Establishment Clause. However, there is a difference between religious

belief and practice, and decisions of policy makers. Said another way,

there is a difference between a religious populace and a theorcratic

government. Thomas Jefferson stated that "Christianity neither is, nor

never was a part of the common law." John Adams declared that "The

government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the

Christian religion." I agree that people have forgotten the original intent

of the Establishment Clause, but the balance has not shifted in repressing

the religious. Instead, it has shifted in establishing religion to suppress

secularism (e.g., intelligent design, which in no way is justified in

science, and solely positions Christian faith as science).

James

**

------------------------------

#102

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:37:44 -0800

From: William Cissell <cissellguill@YAHOO.COM>

Subject: Hard to generalize about the influence of religions on health

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

James,

I appreciate the way you express contratian views. However, I disagree with the generalization that religion affects health negatively. While substantial research supports your position that in many instances and across substantial periods of human history religions, i.e., the Roman Catholic Church throughout the Middle Ages, have had a negative impact on human health, other research documents instances and long-term patterns of policies by religious groups, including Seventh Day Adventists and Mormons among others, which have discouraged behavior that negatively impacts human health.

Bil Cissell

____________________________________________________________________________________

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

**

** Support the HEDIR With Your Gift

**

** Advertise with HPCareer.net

**

------------------------------

#103

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:03:09 -0400

From: "Randolfi, Ernie" <randolfi@MSUBILLINGS.EDU>

Subject: Re: Hard to generalize about the influence of religions on health

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Bill,

Do you mean to say that as health educators we should not generalize about

religion, and only encourage the doctrines of those that tend to be

associated with positive health behavior outcomes? Similar to how some

currently advocate for the adoption or avoidance of certain types of food?

Love the continuing discussions of religion and politics. If you have a

thin skin learn to cope with your delete key.

Ernie Randolfi

------------------------------

#104

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:09:05 -0600

From: James Teufel <teufel@SIU.EDU>

Subject: Re: Hard to generalize about the influence of religions on health

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

I write based on empirical and historical evidence, which does not support

the standard argument that religion is good for health. The belief that

religion is good for health certainly fits the cultural meme. However, it

does not seem that the cultural meme is supported by historical or empirical

evidence. There are of course exceptions to every rule. If we are looking

at exceptions to rules, however, we should neglect the evidence regarding

smoking and lung cancer or poverty and health. Functioning from the

philosophy of negating the preponderance of evidence through exceptions

counters science and would have an obvious and debilitating impact on public

health. Additionally, the discouragement of behavior, for example through

the construction of sin, had a very small positive impact on health relative

to the impact of science and reason. The spread of science and reason led

to remarkable human improvement and health improvement in the last 200

years. The acceptance of science and reason has improved health more in the

last 200 years than in the prior 10,000 years in which religion and

superstition dominated thought and action. Should the preponderance of

evidence and soundness of argument influence public health? Or should

exceptions and unsound argument drive public health? I am a bit "old

school" in that I still believe in some of modernism that embraced reason

and the Enlightenment. Postmodernism has its place, but I believe, for the

most part, Post-modernism has decimated human reasoning. Not all opinions

are equal. People do not have the right to position an unsubstantiated

opinion as a fact, regardless of what some of the empty post-modern

philosophers may believe. I have heard countless people state some of the

most ridiculous arguments, then follow with the position that there beliefs

are as valid as any other persons-- this is nonsense. I am not accusing you

of a ridiculous argument, but I think it is important to offer more support

of premises in order to increase the soundness of argument. I have no

problem yielding to the idea that religion is good for health instead of

simply neutral or at worst negative, but I have not seen enough evidence to

convince me of this claim. I believe skepticism is a more admirable

capacity of humanity than faith. I know that many would disagree with this

perspective, however.

James

------------------------------

#105

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:42:09 -0600

From: Karl Larson <klarson3@GUSTAVUS.EDU>

Subject: Western thought as a dominant mode

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

I find myself wondering whether we're overlooking the reality that

not all health and not all healing is measurable. While James makes

valuable points, they clearly stem from a Western mode of medicine

and Western mode of thought. I will certainly agree that the double-

blind, multi-year, community-wide clinical evidence supporting

religion as a healthy notion is sparse, if not absent, but I am

wondering if we are confusing logic with reason. It is logical, by

James' approach, that we negate these fringe studies in favor of

fast, hard, empirical evidence. Yet is it reasonable to ignore 3000

years of alternative medical system practice that has clearly been

the most dominant and consistent source of health our world has

known? And the basis for that success is the relationship between

body, mind, and spirit? This is not post-modernism. It is indeed

ancient and enlightened.

Modern example? Current studies on faith and health. While there

really is not a defined causal link, and most likely never will be,

it is indeed within reason, that the practice of one's faith has

shown health benefit. Whether its causal, indirect, or placebo based

is irrelevant. Our profession is not about, at least in my mind and

in my practice, a "one path to health" approach. There are indeed

different ways to reach ones end goal of positive health. If the

practice of ones faith reduces stress levels, provides an support

system, creates a more positive attitude, 'saves' a relationship....

then more power to those for whom it works. And faith then becomes of

of many approaches in a health educators arsenal for improving the

health status in the community they work.

KL

Karl Larson, PhD

Assistant Professor of Health Education

800 W. College, Lund 212G

Gustavus Adolphus College

St. Peter, MN 56082

507-933-7591

klarson3@gustavus.edu

------------------------------

#106

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:53:14 -0800

From: Kathleen Judith Young <Kathleen.Young@CSUN.EDU>

Subject: Re: Tobacco Grant Funding Sources

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Dear Colleagues:

I have 2 students who are looking for tobacco grant funding sources one in tobacco policy the other in tobacco behaviors (Hooka); besides the obvious funders (Legacy, etc.) could anyone refer other funding sources?

Happy New Year to all, Kathleen

Kathleen J. Young, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor

Public Health Education/MPH Program

Department of Health Sciences

College of Health and Human Development

California State University, Northridge

18111 Nordhoff Street

Northridge, CA 91330

818-677-4725

Fax: 818-677-2045

"The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot

read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and

relearn." Alvin Toffler

**

** Support the HEDIR With Your Gift

**

** Advertise with HPCareer.net

**

------------------------------

#107

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:33:05 -0600

From: James Teufel <teufel@SIU.EDU>

Subject: Re: Western thought as a dominant mode

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Karl,

David Seedhouse has positioned a fairly devastating critique of the WHO

definition of health and the construction of well-being as outcomes of

health promotion. There is not room nor time here to lay out the entire

philosophy of Seedhouse. The basic argument, however, is that well-being is

either an unsubstantiated and immeasurable form of post-modernism or

attempts to impose the objective on the subjective. Health is a measurable

construct for which there are reliable and valid assessments, whereas

well-being is an infinitely abstract and amorphous construct. Karl Popper

also attempted to destroy Marxist dialectic; if one believes Popper's

argument, it would also present a problematic position for well-being health

promotion. Where is the evidence is my question. From the Popperian

perspective, Karl (Larson not Marx) has presented contradictory statements

and therefore the argument of "faith", "holistic health", or "alternative

medicine" must be rejected. Essentially, it is implied that alternative

medicine cannot be measured but that it has an influence (a potentially

positive influence) on health. This statement is a logical impossibility

and therefore must be rejected. There is little evidence that alternative

medicine has an impacted health, which is a necessary conclusion because it

is proposed that it is immeasurable. This is the perfect example of the

post-modern fallacy.

Additionally, for the most part, reasoning and logic are synonymous. It is

difficult to confuse logic and reason because they are synonyms. Reason is,

however, sometimes perceived as a more broad term that includes logic-- a

formal system of reasoning. One should also not confuse reason and

evidence. Reason requires at least symbolic evidence.

Regarding the glorification of the past without reason or evidence is a

problematic process. I could say that people should use "alternative

housing" meaning relics of the past such as no air conditioning or running

water. Nostalgia has important limits. In the same way, my "alternative

housing" example is ridiculous, especially since we know that it would harm

health. Without including evidence for the positive impact of "alternative

medicine", we must error on the side of caution and not simply defer to

nostalgia. One should also not confuse deduction with reasoning and

evidence. Both induction and deduction can support reasoning, and induction

and deduction could be included in empiricism as long as a person is not a

strict empiricist (a little rationalism is not catastrophic)-- though Hume

certainly thought the induction was problematic. I did not say that

clinical trials were the only way to support reasoning, nor do I believe

this. Obviously, there are other methods. However, what is the method of

support for "alternative medicine", the CHES, etc? Is it blind faith or

group think? Or is there actual evidence-- excepting post-modern

idiosyncratic belief systems or a shear desire to believe?

To rock it out 1980s style and to quote Clara Peller, "Where's the beef?"

The field of health education cannot afford to have an old school Wendy's

commercial to stand as a more sound form of skepticism and reasoning than

the field can produce.

James

------------------------------

#108

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:39:16 -0800

From: William Cissell <cissellguill@YAHOO.COM>

Subject: Re: Hard to generalize about the influence of religions on health

Good question. No, I believe that, if you study the history an=

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Ernie,=0A=0AGood question. No, I believe that, if you study the history an=

d policies of most organized religions, you will find examples of encourage=

ment of behaviors that both enhance and pose potential risks to health. Th=

e role of the Roman Catholic Church in empahsizing spiritual health at the =

expense of physical and other dimensions, facets, and aspects health during=

the Middle Ages of Western Civilization is an extreme example of a religio=

us organization threatening physical well-being. However, the Roman Cathol=

ic Church during other periods of history has had policies that encourage b=

ehaviors that promote physical and other dimensions, facets and aspects of =

health as well as the spiritual dimension. =0A=0AI cited the Seventh Day Ad=

ventists and Mormons only to provide some examples of religious policies wh=

ich promote physical health that are readily recognizable. Other organized=

religious groups have policies and programs that promote various dimension=

s, facets and aspects of health. Many community organizers have written ex=

tensively of black American churches participating in projects and programs=

that promote health in all of its dimensions, facets and asapects. Health=

educators need to understand the value systems of the individuals, groups =

and poulations with which they work and seek to increase appreciation o=

f the benefits of promoting all dimensions, facets and aspects of human he=

alth.=0A=0AWhile I do not support federal programs that target faith-based =

organizations as recipients of federal funding, I do support health educato=

rs, public health professionals and social service professionals collaborat=

ing with faith-based organizations in planning, implementing and evaluating=

health promotion programs within communities. I am currently entertaining=

the prospect of serving on the Inter-Faith Council of my community to stim=

ulate increased support of health promotion projects and programs by it mem=

ber organizations.=0A=0ABill Cissell=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFro=

m: "Randolfi, Ernie" <randolfi@msubillings.edu>=0ATo: William Cissell <ciss=

ellguill@YAHOO.COM>; hedir <HEDIR-L@listserv.siu.edu>=0ASent: Thursday, Jan=

uary 10, 2008 2:00:48 PM=0ASubject: Re: Hard to generalize about the influe=

nce of religions on health=0A=0ARe: Hard to generalize about the influence =

of religions on health=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ABill,=0A=0A =0A=0ADo you mean to say t=

hat as health educators we should not generalize about religion, and only e=

ncourage the doctrines of those that tend to be associated with positive he=

alth outcomes? Similar to how some currently advocate for the adoption or =

avoidance of certain types of food? =0A=0A =0A=0ALove the continuing discus=

sions of religion and politics. If you have a thin skin learn to cope with=

your delete key. =0A=0A=0A=0AErnie Randolfi=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AOn 1/10/08 3=

:37 PM, "William Cissell" <cissellguill@YAHOO.COM> wrote:=0A=0A=0A=0A> ** =

w.hedir.org/2008award.htm=0A=0A> **=0A=0A> ** The HEDIR RSS=0A=0A> ** www=

.hedir.org/hedir.xml=0A=0A> **=0A=0A> =0A=0A> James,=0A=0A> =0A=0A> I appre=

ciate the way you express contratian views. However, I disagree with =0A=

=0A> the generalization that religion affects health negatively. While sub=

stantial =0A=0A> research supports your position that in many instances a=

nd across =0A=0A> substantial periods of human history religions, i.e., the=

Roman Catholic =0A=0A> Church throughout the Middle Ages, have had a nega=

tive impact on human =0A=0A> health, other research documents instances and=

long-term patterns of policies =0A=0A> by religious groups, including Seve=

nth Day Adventists and Mormons among =0A=0A> others, which have discouraged=

behavior that negatively impacts human health.=0A=0A> =0A=0A> Bil Cissell=

=0A=0A> =0A=0A> =0A=0A> =0A=0A> =0A=0A> =0A=0A> _____________________=

_________________________________________________________=0A=0A> ______=0A=

=0A> Looking for last minute shopping deals? =0A=0A> Find them fast with Y=

?category=3Dshopping=0A=0A> =0A=0A> **=0A=0A> ** Support the HEDIR With Yo=

*=0A=0A=0A=0A-- =0A=0A=0A=0A=0AErnesto A. Randolfi, Ph.D.=0A=0ADepartment o=

f Public Health and Preventive Medicine=0A=0ASchool of Medicine=0A=0ASt. Ge=

orge=A2s University =0A=0AUniversity Centre =0A=0AGrenada, West Indies=0A=

=0A=0A=0APhone: 1-473-439 2000 X2628 Fax 1-473-444-1219=0A=0A=0A=0AE-mail:=

erandolfi@sgu.edu=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ADISCLAIMER / CONFIDENTIALIT=

Y NOTICE =0A=0A=0A=0AThis communication is for use by the intended recipien=

t and contains information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrigh=

ted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are he=

reby formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail=

, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by =

return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless explicitly an=

d conspicuously designated as " E-Contract Intended", this e-mail does not =

constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a co=

ntract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sende=

r's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers of d=

ata to third parties. =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A _____=

___________________________________________________________________________=

____=0ANever miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. =0Ahttp://www.yahoo.=

com/r/hs

**

** Support the HEDIR With Your Gift

**

** Advertise with HPCareer.net

**

------------------------------

#109

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:04:04 -0800

From: William Cissell <cissellguill@YAHOO.COM>

Subject: Re: Western thought as a dominant mode

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

Karl,

Great points! Another perspective is that medical science, pharmaceutical industries, medical equipment industries and health care systems may be causing some serious threats to various dimensions of human health. Much of our illicit drug abuse involves use of pharmaceutical products developed by our pharmaceutical industries. When control systems fail pharmacies supply clients with defective medications. When control systems fail, large quantities of highly addictive or dependency-inducing pharmaceutical products wid up in the hands of illegal suppliers. Also, unwise and careless use of pharmaceuticals by prescribing physicians contribute to the development of drug resistant infectious agents.

Will the net result of the scientific discoveries and practices of the past 200 years continue to make human existence better, or will it be an increase in miseries and undesirable health outcomes?

Bill

------------------------------

#110

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 20:20:25 -0600

From: "teufel@siu.edu" <teufel@SIU.EDU>

Subject: Re: Western thought as a dominant mode

** Call for Nominations

** HEDIR Technology Award

**

** The HEDIR RSS

**

I agree that science has made major advancements. I also believe

that the contemporary moral systems that dominate culture are not

capable of dealing with the advancements of humanity. Human

progress has outpaced moral progress. Morals in the United

States are in large part positioned as a religious exercise.

Religion has changed across time, but the moral system changes

too slowly; in large part because religion is not an individual

practice (as per Roger Williams who was of course persecuted by

the religious system) but a social process. Religious

bureaucracy, organization,and promotion of blind faith makes it

an impotent moral system in the developed world. We must develop

a moral system that applies to the modern world or atrocities are

inevitable or what Daniel Leviton would call horrendous death.

James

**

** Support the HEDIR With Your Gift

**

** Advertise with HPCareer.net

**

------------------------------