August 25, 2019

No Image

Colts Star Andrew Luck Stuns NFL Fans With Retirement Announcement

NPR’s Michel Martin speaks with The Nation’s Dave Zirin about Andrew Luck’s surprise retirement from the NFL.



MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:

In less than two weeks, the NFL will kick off its 100th season, but now it will do so without one of its biggest stars. Yesterday, the Indianapolis Colts quarterback Andrew Luck shocked the football world by announcing his retirement at the age of 29. In an emotional press conference after the Colts’ preseason loss to the Chicago Bears, Luck described why he came to the decision.

(SOUNDBITE OF PRESS CONFERENCE)

ANDREW LUCK: I’ve been stuck in this process. I haven’t been able to live the life I want to live – taking the joy out of this game. And after 2016, where I played in pain and was unable to regularly practice, I made a vow to myself that I would not go down that path again.

MARTIN: News of the retirement was reported during last night’s game, and Luck was booed by Colts fans as he walked off the field. We wanted to talk more about this, especially about what this retirement might mean for the game, so we’ve called on Dave Zirin. He is the sports editor for The Nation magazine and host of the “Edge Of Sports” podcast.

Dave, thanks for joining us once again.

DAVE ZIRIN: Oh, it’s great to be here. Thank you.

MARTIN: So he’s not the first player to retire in what might be considered his prime. But obviously, this retirement seems to be kind of hitting a lot of people. Why do you think that is? Like, what’s the big deal here?

ZIRIN: Well, it’s a big deal because it just doesn’t happen to quarterbacks. Players do retire early, particularly over the last 10 years. But you haven’t seen a quarterback in the National Football League retire in their 20s after a Pro Bowl season since 1952.

MARTIN: There are people who are criticizing his decision. We mention he was booed by fans last night. And, you know, some people questioned his toughness. For example, Dan Dakich of ESPN’s Indianapolis affiliate said, you know, I have family working in steel mills, cops, teachers making far less, and this guy is tired my backside – questioning his toughness. But, you know, other people draw different conclusions. What do you think it means?

ZIRIN: Well, first of all, I think it means, like, a very – a huge existential fear for the National Football League – the idea that their biggest stars in their prime might consider walking away. I think for a lot of the fans who are booing, I think, shame on them. I mean, when you look at the list of injuries that Andrew Luck has faced in his 20s from a lacerated kidney to grade-A concussions, it’s more than understandable why having just been recently married as well he might want to take the long view with regards to his life.

MARTIN: And I do want to note that on Twitter, a number of other fans or other people are expressing support for him, including other athletes, including other football players – I mean, saying, you know, he needs to do what’s best for him, and he needs to do what’s best for his family. But I wonder – you know, we’re hearing all these other signs – like, for example, there are reports that fewer parents are letting their kids play at the…

ZIRIN: Yeah.

MARTIN: …At the youngest ages – that, you know, Pop Warner’s seen a decrease in the number of kids coming out. Is there a bigger issue here that the league needs to address?

ZIRIN: Well, I don’t think it is addressable. I mean, one of the things that the NFL Players Association, the union, always says is that we’re the only industry that has a 100% injury rate beyond sports. And that’s something more and more parents have become conscious of over the last 10, 20 years, particularly on the issue of concussions.

And when you think about somebody like Andrew Luck who comes from an upper-middle-class family, who has a degree from Stanford, I think this is particularly the kind of player who the NFL fears is going to be no longer part of the NFL family – someone who actually has life options and isn’t just playing football because it’s the only option out of poverty.

MARTIN: And before we let you go, is there anything else that you’d, you know, want to say about this? I do wonder whether there’s – in the recent years, as the – more and more information has come out about the cost to the players and the cost to their bodies long-term, especially – even players who only play through college and don’t go to the pros – a lot of fans have faced this as an ethical question for…

ZIRIN: Yeah.

MARTIN: …Themselves. And I wonder if there’s something here as well that people should be thinking about.

ZIRIN: I would say that there are people who play football because they have to, and there are people who play football because they want to. And Andrew Luck has always been firmly in that second category. And so for him to say what he said – that because of injuries the actual fun has gone out of the game – that’s what’s really sending shockwaves throughout the NFL world.

MARTIN: That is sports journalist Dave Zirin.

Dave, thank you so much.

ZIRIN: Thank you, Michel.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Consequences Of The U.S. Deficit

The U.S. deficit is set to reach a record $1 trillion. NPR’s Leila Fadel speaks with Michael Peterson of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog group.



LEILA FADEL, HOST:

The U.S. budget deficit is ballooning, headed to over a trillion dollars by 2020 according to projections just released by the Congressional Budget Office. Why? Tax cuts and increased government spending, plus tariffs dragging down economic growth. Michael Peterson is CEO of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog group.

Welcome.

MICHAEL PETERSON: Thank you very much.

FADEL: So what does that mean for, for example, a young American just starting her career? How will a trillion-dollar deficit affect her?

PETERSON: Well, the deficit places a burden on the next generation. So we already have $22 trillion of debt on our books today and this has driven – the most important being demographics. We have a very significant baby boom generation that’s just beginning to enter retirement. And when they retire, they come out of the workforce and stop paying in and go into the retirement system and start taking out. So each one of them sort of is a double whammy. So what happens when you have a huge level of debt like this is that it comes with an interest burden. So today, we’re paying a billion dollars a day in interest.

FADEL: Oh, wow.

PETERSON: And that’s a billion dollars that can’t go into something else. It can’t go into a safety net program or an investment or international defense, or it’s a billion dollars that we need to collect from our citizens that we wouldn’t otherwise have had to.

FADEL: Now, your work is really dedicated to getting politicians to pay attention to this debt. Is it working?

PETERSON: Well, I would say they’re certainly not paying enough attention. We’re in this situation due to a significant lack of leadership and lack of fiscal responsibility. The truth is the vast majority of Democrats and the vast majority of Republicans want our politicians to spend more time addressing this issue because they may not understand all the effects and all the different numbers, but they know it’s not a good thing for them and their future and their kids and grandkids.

FADEL: These two parties have really different economic approaches. How do you talk to both parties and how do you appeal to them to focus on what you think is so important in this debt?

PETERSON: This is too big a challenge for any one party to take and solve on their own. I don’t think any party would ever do that. And even if they did, it probably wouldn’t last. So it’s the classic type of problem where we all need to come together and solve it. And I think there are strong arguments on both sides of the aisle in favor of addressing this.

So if you’re a progressive and you care about the safety net or you care about inequality or you care about climate change or infrastructure, having this debt burden makes it more difficult to tackle all of those issues because there’s just less resources available for these programs.

If you’re on the conservative side and more for limited government, you know, we have a $365 billion interest tab this year – that’s a billion dollars a day – will be exclusively used to pay interest. So that’s theoretically more taxes than we would need to burden our citizens with. So, again, whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, having more debt is not helpful.

FADEL: That’s Michael Peterson. He heads the Peter G. Peterson Foundation.

Thank you so much.

PETERSON: Thank you very much.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Academic Science Rethinks All-Too-White ‘Dude Walls’ Of Honor

All the portraits hanging on the wall inside the Louis Bornstein Family Amphitheater at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston on June 12, 2018 were of men, nearly all white. The portraits have since been removed.

Pat Greenhouse/Boston Globe via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Pat Greenhouse/Boston Globe via Getty Images

A few years ago, TV celebrity Rachel Maddow was at Rockefeller University to hand out a prize that’s given each year to a prominent female scientist. As Maddow entered the auditorium, someone overheard her say, “What is up with the dude wall?”

She was referring to a wall covered with portraits of scientists from the university who have won either a Nobel Prize or the Lasker Award, a major medical prize.

“One hundred percent of them are men. It’s probably 30 headshots of 30 men. So it’s imposing,” says Leslie Vosshall, a neurobiologist with the university and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

Vosshall says Maddow’s remark, and the word “dude wall,” crystallized something that had been bothering her for years. As she travels around the country to give lectures and attend conferences at scientific institutions, she constantly encounters lobbies, conference rooms, passageways, and lecture halls that are decorated with portraits of white men.

“It just sends the message, every day when you walk by it, that science consists of old white men,” says Vosshall. “I think every institution needs to go out into the hallway and ask, ‘What kind of message are we sending with these oil portraits and dusty old photographs?'”

She’s now on a committee that’s redesigning that wall of portraits at Rockefeller University, to add more diversity. And this is hardly the only science or medical institution that’s reckoning with its dude wall.

At Yale School of Medicine, for example, one main building’s hallways feature 55 portraits: three women and 52 men. They’re all white.

“I don’t necessarily always have a reaction. But then there are times when you’re having a really bad day — someone says something racist to you, or you’re struggling with feeling like you belong in the space — and then you see all those photos and it kind of reinforces whatever you might have been feeling at the time,” says Max Jordan Nguemeni Tiako, a medical student at Yale.

He grew up reading Harry Potter books, and in that fictional world, portraits can talk to the characters. “If this was Harry Potter,” he muses, “if they could speak, what would they even say to me? Everywhere you study, there’s a big portrait somewhere of someone kind of staring you down.”

Yale medical student Nientara Anderson recently teamed up with fellow student Elizabeth Fitzsousa and associate professor Dr. Anna Reisman to study the effect of this artwork; the results were published in July in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.

“Students felt like these portraits were not just ancient, historic things that had nothing to do with their contemporary experience,” says Anderson. “They actually felt that the portraits reinforced contemporary issues of exclusion, of racial discrimination — of othering.”

Yale has recently been commissioning new portraits, including one of Carolyn Slayman, a geneticist and member of the Yale faculty for nearly 50 years, as well as one of Dr. Beatrix Hamburg, a pioneering developmental psychiatrist and the first black female Yale medical school graduate. And there’s an ongoing discussion at Yale about what to do with all those old portraits lining the hallways.

One option is to move them someplace else. That was the approach taken at the department of Molecular & Integrative Physiology at the University of Michigan. Ally Cara, a Ph.D. student there, says its seminar room “featured portraits of our past department chairs, which happened to be all male.”

The 10 or so photographs were lined up in a row. “When our interim chair, Dr. Santiago Schnell began his service a couple years ago, he wanted to bring a more modern update to our seminar room,” Cara says, “including bringing down the dude wall and relocating it.”

The photos are now in a less noticeable spot: the department chair’s office suite. And the seminar room will soon be decorated with artwork depicting key discoveries made by the department’s faculty, students, and trainees.

“We really want to emphasize that we’re not trying to erase our history,” says Cara. “We’re proud of the people who have brought us to where we are today as a department. But we also want to show that we have a diverse and inclusive department.”

Changes like this can be a sensitive subject. At Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, one of Harvard’s teaching hospitals, there’s an auditorium that for decades was covered with large portraits of 31 men.

“It made an impression,” says Dr. Jeffrey Flier of Harvard Medical School, who first saw the wall of portraits back in the 1970’s. But recently, he walked in the auditorium and “was taken aback because, instead of this room filled with portraits of historically important figures from the Brigham, the walls were empty.”

When I last lectured in ?@BrighamWomens? Bornstein auditorium, walls were adorned with portraits of prior luminaries of medicine & surgery. Connecting to a glorious past. Now all gone. Hope everyone is happy. I’m not. (Neither were those I asked- afraid to say openly). Sad. pic.twitter.com/Bsz89r2SBB

— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) April 12, 2019

The portraits were relocated to different places around the hospital. And while Flier says he understands why there needed to be a change, he prefers the approach taken in another Harvard meeting place called the Waterhouse Room.

It had long been decorated with paintings of former deans, says Flier, and “all of those individuals were white males. I am among them now, hanging up there as the most recent former dean of Harvard Medical School.”

But right up there with Flier’s portrait are photographs of well-known female and African-American physician-scientists, he says, because his predecessor added them to the walls of that room.

“You don’t want to take away the history of which you are justifiably proud,” says Flier. “You don’t want to make it look like you are embarrassed by that history. Use the space to reflect some of the past history and some of the changing realities that you want to emphasize.”

But some argue that the old portraits themselves have erased history, by glorifying white men who hold power while ignoring the contributions to science and medicine made by women and people of color.

One rare exception, and a poignant example of the power and meaning of portraits in science and medicine, can be found at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. There, a black technician named Vivien Thomas worked for a white surgeon named Alfred Blalock. Even though Thomas had only a high school degree, he joined Blalock’s lab in 1930; the pair spent decades developing pioneering techniques for cardiac surgery together.

The last time the two ever spoke, Blalock was in poor health, and in a wheelchair. Together they went to see the portrait of Blalock that had recently been hung in the lobby of the clinical sciences building, which had been named after him.

Soon after that, Blalock died. And a few years later, Thomas received word that a group of surgeons was commissioning a portrait of him. “My first reaction was that surely I must be dreaming,” Thomas wrote in his autobiography, which he originally entitled Presentation of a Portrait: The Story of a Life.

When the portrait was presented to the hospital in 1971, Thomas told the assembled surgeons that he felt proud and humbled. “People in my category are not accustomed to being in the limelight as most of you are,” Thomas said. “If our names get into the print, it’s usually in the very fine print down at the bottom somewhere.”

In his memoir Thomas wrote, “it had been the most emotional and gratifying experience of my life.” He wondered where the portrait would be hung, and thought someplace like the 12th floor, near the laboratory area, would be appropriate. He was “astounded” when Dr. Russell Nelson, then the hospital president, stated “We’re going to hang your fine portrait with professor Blalock. We think you hung together and you had better continue to hang together.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)