Stinging Jellyfish Attack New York City Triathletes

Stinging Jellyfish Attack New York City Triathletes

Though it reads like a seedy headline from the National Enquirer, this time, the truth was floating and bobbing in the warm waters of the Hudson River on July 20 for the annual New York City “Olympic Distance” Triathlon. This year I arrived much earlier for the swim start, and was much less panicked due to the efforts of my niece who also raced on Sunday. Looking out onto the river, men in my group leaned over the edge and noticed the bobbing pink-red lion’s mane jellyfish, and said with great confidence, one of the wise swimmers said, “Oh those guys, they won’t sting. You believe me right?”

I wanted to. I really wanted to, as I still have some residual trauma from a man-o-war sting operation off the coast of Miami when I was a kid. The pain was so intense, so shocking, that I was sure I’d been chunked in two by a shark. But the overconfident triathlete was wrong this time. They did sting. And they stung hundreds of the swimmers, but luckily, I did not irritate any of the jellyfish, and had actually forgotten them as I was trying hard to keep up with my own swim strokes as well as swinging arms and legs to my right, my left, my rear, my feet, and way too close for proper lane etiquette. The early swimmers (I started at 5:59 a.m.) had a stronger current, so I recorded a WR of 23:57 though in the pool where I train, the same swim sans jellyfish would have taken 45 minutes minimum.

Unfortunately, one triathlete, from Buenos Aires, was pulled unconscious from the Hudson. An initial autopsy was inconclusive, but many of the triathletes wondered if he was stung multiple times, or had an allergic reaction, or simply was overheated in his wet suit waiting for his start time. I’d never heard of deaths in triathlons, but of course they occur in longer leg races, with one dying earlier in the year in the New York City marathon trials for the Olympics. Surprisingly, five others have died in triathlons this year, all in the water. Oddly, I did not know any of this was happening until I was visiting with my step-nephew who was also in the race.

The transition area (one of two) had about 1500 look alike bikes, so we had to practice what our area would look like when gasping for air with half a wet suit clinging to the bottom half. In Transition One, the trick is to get the wet suit off, the helmet on, the shoes on with or without socks, and run with bike until a nice volunteer says you can mount for the ride. Try doing that when you are out of breath. Races are often lost in the transition area, and of course, I was a bit slow, but once out on the West End Highway, I started to remember the climbs and descents (nothing like the Tour de France, of course, but a climb for an old guy is still a climb). My niece and I concluded that the Department of Transportation had actually altered the terrain since last year, and even the year before as it was much hillier than either of us remembered. But I sense the road was just the same, our memory just a bit poorer as we are placed into older and older age groups. This year, I wasn’t as terrified descending one of the long climbs at 35 mph, but I still wondered about what I would do if I hit an unidentified object and began to sail away from my bike. But that didn’t happen, so we both pushed as hard as we could through the route, and finally came back to our transition area (again!) to dismount, and get ready for the run to Central Park.

This was the most grueling part of the race, as who wants to run their best time after a long swim and an even longer bike ride, but the stakes were high, as I was trying just to match my time from last year, or improve by a second or two. Just as with the bike ride, the route seemed longer than last year, but I sense it was just fatigue and exhaustion setting in, and of course, the temperature was in the mid 80’s for most of the triathletes. A far too cheery volunteer greeted us at mile 3 and said this was “his hill” and it felt much more of a demanding grade than last year, but I knew that if I could get to the north end of Central Park, then most of the remaining kilometers would be a descent, but that also was a fuzzy memory. Someone passed by me (actually hundreds passed by me on their way to the finish), a young woman who saw my Wisconsin triathlete outfit, and said she was from Wauwatosa, a suburb of Milwaukee. How often does that happen?

But the person that kept me on pace faster than maybe last year was actually my niece who started about 15 minutes after my start, and our agreed upon signal was hearing “Hey Uncle De I’m right behind you.” Then we would sprint into the finish line together as champions. So when the flags started appearing, and the well wishers’ whoops got louder and louder, and I heard no “Uncle De…,” I decided I had about 2 minutes of sprint air left, so I picked up my pace from a fast jog and decided to try and pass a few ahead of me. What a thrill that was, as I was usually the person who heard “passing on your right” most of the route. It’s quite amazing what a race like this can do. I ran across the finish line a little better than last year, and was greeted with a medallion (everybody gets one), an icy cold towel, and a commemorative ball cap and the best cold bottle of iced water I’ve ever tasted. What a great way to see 31.93 miles of New York City in three hours, thirteen minutes and 50 seconds!?

Repeat Dreams of Olympic Triathlon

REPEAT DREAMS OF OLYMPIC TRIATHLON

What’s the point of climbing the mountain if you already have before? If you swam the English Channel, why risk becoming fish bait again? Is doing something “over” like repeating Freshman English? This morning I was out on my two wheeler spinning up and down Lake Drive off the shores of Lake Michigan in Milwaukee. A stunning sunrise. Not too many automobile drivers to face down at 5:30 a.m. Even the local coffee shop near the yacht club was closed as it was just too early for any human activity. But the air was quite humid, as storm clouds were brewing above, so I wanted to get in three long loops up and down the Drive to get in about 40K of cycling, the distance for the upcoming New York Nautica “Olympic” Triathlon on July 20.

I’m not exactly sprinting up the hills with my low gear, but I am making some tiny improvements. The old swimming hole for open water practice has some dangerous blue green algae, which in one report, is even dangerous to touch, as many of the local lakes and rivers have been infused with all sorts of dangerous runoff by-products due to the abundance of Biblical rains last month. So I continue to go back and forth in the indoor pool, pretending I am swimming down current in the Hudson in a few weeks. Actually I can visualize the meter markers: 1500, 1200, 900, something like that. Last night I just had to get into my wetsuit to see if I could remember the technique for getting it on, and of course, getting it off in less than a minute. The “off” exercise of getting the wetsuit off is quite demanding, especially if you try doing it standing up. That’s the sign of a “seasoned” triathlete. New triathletes often fall down trying to get all that rubber off in order to get to the next stage.

I do miss Pewaukee Lake, as creepy as the weeds were last year. There’s something euphoric about swimming, or attempting to swim, in open water. No buoys, no pushoff at either end, no concrete bottom; no, instead, weeds sucking you down, the markers for a turn are too far to see without binoculars, and the real problem is drifting away from the turn buoys, as there are no “lane” buoys to help you go straight down and back. But I do appreciate the level of fear when I am far out, way out, and the faster swimmers passed by 10 minutes ago. So perhaps in not risking death to the blue green algae, and e-coli, I may be in for a bigger shock than last year when I dipped into the Hudson for the first time in my life. I knew Cosmo Kramer in one episode of “Seinfeld” had attempted a swim, but I am having trouble finding the particular episode to draw upon any of his swim stroke tips.

The fast jogging has been slowly improving. What’s helped is to make the gym treadmill my friend, as well as a track field in west Milwaukee where I find encouragement from younger, speedier, thinner triathletes who think nothing of 8 800s. So it’s all coming together, whether or not I am ready for the Nautica Redux. The run through Central Park last year was quite exhilarating, but to have to swim .9 mile in questionable waters, and bike up the West End Highway in low gear, only to turn around and race down it in terrifying speeds, is really too much for older people. Who knows, it could be the hottest day in New York City. Most of all I hope I have the good sense to “PICK UP THE CHIP” (timing device) before I join my age group holding onto the rope that keeps us all from drifting.

I must have fallen during one of the training sessions, for now I am starting to wonder about an even longer distance, the so called 70.3 or “half Iron.” That would be 70.3 miles to travel, with a longer swim, more hours on a bike seat, and then a twice as long jog/run as now. Hey, I’m even thinking about trying a half Marathon this August. I probably will need to be certified soon, but for now, I’m either “in training” or resting from training. I am hoping, but not expecting, to break last year’s time by at least a second, maybe two. We’ll see. I need a nap now.

More Suffering On Its Way

More Suffering on Its Way

Many of you are enjoying the sunny days of June, planning a picnic, going for a swim perhaps in a favorite lake; others might be contemplating a lunch outside, or maybe even attending to the weeds circling your tomatoes. Others will be standing in line for job fairs. Some will be sorting through the remains of their home, if they can even find what once was their home. Others are still floating in rivers and bays, not yet quite buoyant to pop up and be spotted, or nibbled on by finny creatures. Sooner or later, we’re all in tears, wondering why this has happened to us.

In the new issue of The New Yorker, (June 9-16, 2008) James Wood wonders about it as well, or we could say, on your behalf, as he reviews a number of new books which update the constantly befuddling conundrum of suffering. If you have made it this far in the blog, I would urge you to read the article, “Holiday in Hellmouth,” either in the print edition, or in the on-line edition before reading any further.

Now that you have at least glanced at the essay, I do wonder if good people would ever stop lamenting our sorry situations when we are down and out, groveling in our religious pity over terribly troubling life experiences that take us to the very depths of who we are as creatures of this earth. As you know by now, the book review/reflective essay is beautifully written to invoke our own miserable lives when something breaks down and reminds us of something more powerful has caused this to happen, or at least we might want to think so.

Suffering is something we can all relate to, right, for who doesn’t have a little empathy or pity for someone or some country or even a few whales who have gotten themselves onto a beached predicament. We all have feelings, right? Some of us express them better than others, right? Some respond impulsively with a check to alleviate the pain. Others talk about it at the water cooler, if there even is a water cooler anymore. Others just shake their head, somewhat relieved what has happened has not yet happened to themselves, a reminder that we are all close to what Job has already experienced eons ago.

But for all the Jewish and Christian references Mr. Wood reminds us of as he reviews several new books on our oldest theme, I do wonder why he has not balanced the essay with any Eastern traditions such as Buddhism which has something quite powerful to say about suffering. Heaven, or the idea of Heaven, writes Mr. Wood, is the concept that seems to “right” all the wrongs that have blemished this earthly life. And linked to Heaven, of course, is the Messiah, or the Awaited Messiah. In other words, it’s been bad, but in the next life, all our troubles will somehow vanish, that is, unless we’ve been tried and sentenced in the Heavenly Court for crimes that created someone else’s suffering.

But the Buddhists do have something that balances all of this, which Mr. Wood has strangely left out of his absorbing essay. Life is suffering, the Buddha would say. But when bad things do happen to Buddhists, no one cries out why did a Greater Force cause or allow this to happen? Life simply includes moments, perhaps even years, where things do go badly, but we can alleviate this suffering by becoming a little less absorbed in or own ego, and assisting others who are in pain and who are suffering. But there’s no Messiah, or God, or Heaven as a reward for this action, for there is simply the loving act of assisting others that lessens the burden of suffering. For both Buddhists and Hindus, the cycle of samsara, of life, death, and rebirth, in some way provides an answer to this suffering.

As much as I enjoy the films starring Sharon Stone, I do wonder why she so naively blamed the earthquake in China on China’s “Tibetan” problem. She blamed this tectonic motion in the Sichuan Province on bad karma. A few days later she apologized when she realized her foolishness about Chinese karma. I wonder what brought Sharon Stone to this enlightenment on Eastern thought. Was she, like many of us, empathetic to the cause of Tibetans? Probably so. Was it a response to their suffering? Probably so. Did the scheduled gay pride parade in New Orleans actually cause Hurricane Katrina, as Pastor John Hagee argued from his pulpit? Probably not.

The frustrating experience of reading this wonderful essay in The New Yorker is that if feels like it could go on for another hour or so, or a few more days at least. Suffering may be our biggest mystery, especially if on our picnics, or swims, or weeding our gardens, we step into the even more mystifying abyss of why are we here. Perhaps we can address that next time when I will propose that we read a terrific little Roman classic by that ever happy writer, Epictetus.

Pondering Space

Pondering Space

As some of us will draw up hankies, or noise horns, or anything that will draw attention to the final end of the longest primary in American history, may I remind you that space may not be what you thought it was, at least from your college science perspective. I know, some of you are still reeling from the pain of losing Pluto to sub-planetary status, but try to get over it, as we have much much more work to do in understanding all the new space around Pluto, and beyond Pluto, space that we forgot to include back in our science class. Now scientists are telling us we should be watchful, not of who’s going to be on the Platform as the presumptive candidate of either Party, but of a new dark force, aka “dark energy,” as described by a science news writer, Dennis Oberbye, in the June 3, 2008 edition of the New York Times.

From one simple perspective, we may have to invent a new metaphor of Newton’s falling apple to be able to appreciate what has always been going on in deep space, but we’ve never been able to talk about it before, as we did not have the technology to measure what was “out there.” Now with the aid of a supercollider (see “Chasing God on the French/Swiss Border Mar 27,2008 blog) scientists will be able to hypothesize that perhaps all of our theories about the universe may be too SMALL.

According to the science article, “Dark, Perhaps Forever,” we could be tapping more than $600 million to search for this “dark energy.” And more than a few scientists think this may not be enough. But even more problematic is the idea of our concept of the universe, that we are actually in the one and only universe. We may not be in the one and only, in fact, it’s looking more like one in a zillion, as reported in the Times. And that takes us to the “meaning” question, doesn’t it, as we all want to know that we actually have some relevance in this big old neighborhood.

But according to one interviewed scientist, Dr. Edward Witten, in light of this new dark force, we may have to reconstruct what’s in our heads about what’s out there: “Before the discovery of the dark energy, quantum physicists tended to assume that the ‘vacuum’ we live in has some deep meaning that reflects nature’s deepest secrets….But if ours is only one of a zillion in a haystack, there is nothing special about it, no secret to be found.” Those remarks reflect for many of us, as long as there is a universe “out there,” or “in us,” surely we must have some meaning, but if the universe is only one of so many that we can’t count, does our “meaning factor” still hold up as defined by our religious texts, keeping in mind some of the religious texts don’t even bother to bring it up!

If everything works out, and the deep space budget can keep expanding exponentially, then sometime mid next decade, scientists will launch “J-dem,” (aka Joint Dark Energy Mission, as reported in the Times article). Perhaps then we’ll have a better fix on just how deep is deep space, but then, scientists are not completely sure they’ll have all the definitive answers. Some of you may be deeply disappointed to have invested so much in something so big, but like we’ve been doing ever since we put together the first machine, we keep trying to define ourselves by objects made by ourselves.

I don’t know about you, but I’m staying up for this one, as it’s almost too exciting to fall asleep over. In the meantime, if you are still looking for meaning, you can watch tonight’s finale of the Democratic Primary contest, or at least the possible end of the finale, or maybe the idea of the possible end, depending on political “dark energy.” Everything keeps changing, right?

Addendum on Race Talk Blog

Here's a recent op-ed on a need for a national dialog on race. Thought you might want to at least know about this upcoming conference.
Blogmeister, DeWitt Clinton

By William S. Cohen and Janet Langhart Cohen
Special to CNN


Editor's Note: William Cohen is a former Republican senator and defense secretary in the Clinton administration. His wife, Janet Langhart Cohen, is a former TV journalist, model and author. They are the co-authors of "Love In Black and White," a memoir about race, religion and their experiences as an interracial couple.


William Cohen and Janet Langhart Cohen say that U.S. racial prejudice is still too divisive to be history.

(CNN) -- In 1835, Alexis DeTocqueville, in his seminal work, "Democracy in America," prophesied that the abolition of slavery would not eliminate racial prejudice, which he declared was "immovable."

Sen. Barack Obama, in running for the presidency of the United States, is challenging DeTocqueville's bleak assessment of the human heart. It remains unclear whether the Illinois senator is on a hopeless mission, or whether the American people will decide to make history by breaking with it.

Any discussion of race or racism inevitably stirs uncomfortable reactions. America is, indeed, a nation of immigrants. Most of our ancestors came here in search of a better life. Africans, however, arrived here in chains to make a better life for others. Yet to date, we have been unable to discuss the horrors of the enslavement, lynchings, segregation and degradation of African-Americans without prompting resentment or indifference.

"That's all in the past," is a common retort. "We had nothing to do with it. It's history. Get over it." The problem, however, as the results in a number of the primary states reveal, is that racial prejudice is not history, and neither whites nor blacks are over it.


While Obama has moved the subject of prejudice out from the shadows, more than his exotic name, origin and religious affiliation are at issue. When Colin Powell, one of America's most accomplished military leaders and diplomats, contemplated running for the presidency in 2000, his family feared for his safety. Also, during that same year, when Sen. John McCain ran for our highest office, he was the victim of a vile, racist smear in South Carolina.

There are deep grievances held by black Americans over their past and present treatment by the white majority and equally profound resentments held by many whites over what they see as preferential treatment for the black community. Unfortunately, a discussion of the racial divide in our country is too often reduced to sound bites or shouting matches. Moreover, the preachings and exhortations of several prominent religious leaders, rather than nurturing and appealing to our spiritual needs, have instead served to inflame passions and reinforce old falsehoods and antagonisms.

We are convinced that what is needed in America is a serious, open, civil dialogue on racial, ethnic and religious prejudice. To this end, in July, we are convening a conference in Washington on race and reconciliation with political, spiritual and business leaders. Our goal: to further a national conversation about the need for truth, tolerance and reconciliation.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writers.

Race Talk

Race Talk
Haven’t you had it with the “race” question? Perhaps you’re still fuming over the “female gender bias” question, both of which have turned the Democratic Presidential nomination process into a shooting gallery. I’m no expert on either, as many of you know, but I do work with men and women as university colleagues in a town called Whitewater, of all places, and I have also taught, at several universities, students of both sexes and of many nationalities and races for, well, let’s see, since stepping off a plane from Vietnam in 1970. But the issue of race has simply made me crazy enough to shout, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.” The character Howard Beale (Peter Finch) was mad about something else in “Network,” but I really am screaming as I write this to you all.

“Race” in my humble opinion, is now bogus, for it no longer has any meaning, in any context, and I am certain it has always been used to demean and invoke fear in one or the other, depending on who has had the larger stick. I am sick of the political, childish methods that many Americans have about their “fear of the other,” for it’s not always fear of the (insert color) man. I do admit I’ve lived behind the veil of whiteness all my life, but perhaps it is my experience as an educator that allows me to see that all students are not only equal, but that no student in my mind deserves more or less attention simply because of skin pigmentation.

When I recently heard West Virginians (over NPR evening news) describe their opinions about the candidate Barak Obama, my first reaction was what has made white West Virginians so fearful of a qualified nominee? I admit, also, I did find it hard to simply understand Appalachian dialect in reference to the Democrat from Illinois, (“Whites look out for Whites, Blacks look out for Blacks”). Hearing that, I sensed not just disgust, not just intolerance, but a sincere and deep hatred for someone who aspires to lead our nation in the post Bush era.

Has any discussion over differences ever been clarified through the myopic lens of race? Has it ever settled any misunderstanding? Has race ever clarified a position between groups that disagree? Has color of one person ever adequately defined a person’s human qualities? Has distinguishing race as the only factor in an argument ever made both parties equal in stature? Has the word “race” ever lifted one up in admiration and esteem? Perhaps it is possible that we are all racists when we are confronted with our own terrible fears of the “other,” but how much of that is something we’ve learned from our own culture, from our own parents, or even from our own true blue friends?

I also admit (I admit I’m doing a lot of admitting here, but bear with me, subscribers) to Democratic Party principles, and would easily be placed far left of center on any political position, but I just have to say, Let’s start a debate not about whether race is a factor but whether or not race has nearly always denigrated meaningful relations between human beings.

I see remnants of European Colonialism and its racial superiority, and even see the 19th and early 20th Century pseudo science of Eugenics as a factor woven into our national discussion in this primary season. The discussion has made politicians, and those wanting to vote for politicians, and those commenting about politicians and the electorate, as nothing more than an ugly bear baiting screened-in event where we pay other people to humor us with disgusting epithets and slurs.

So even though our forum here is small, I wonder if we can consider whether talking about race in any context would ever make us more thoughtful, engaging citizens. Call us Canadians, Bolivians, Afghanis, Greeks, Egyptians, Kenyans, Belgians, or even Americans, but from this moment on, I urge you, as “Roseanne Roseannadana” might if she were still on “Saturday Night Live,” to talk amongst yourselves and see if you can find a purpose in defining a person, candidate or not, through the lens of race. Though sociologists have probably already discounted the merits of race as a determining factor in ethnicity, I hope that someday soon (and it needs to be soon) we can have candidates (and applicants, and all the rest of aspiring individuals) who will be seen for what they can offer an electorate, and not on how they will or will not carry the white or the black or the brown vote.

I am always reminded of the sincere and heartfelt remark of the Dalai Lama: “Treat everyone as a friend.” That requires almost too much of us, but it certainly is a concept to try to wrap around our view of not seeing each other as one race or another.

Comments? Reply To All, if you wish.

Chasing God on the French/Swiss Border

CHASING GOD ON THE FRENCH/SWISS BORDER

What are you doing this summer? Some have made plans for wandering through Natural History in New York City. Some will see relatives. Some hope to find a beach, even if it is still cold. Most of us will mow lawns, or sit on lawns, or pull weeds from lawns. But what are our particle physicists going to be doing in an underground reactor facility beneath farm yards and mooing cows on the French/Swiss border? Remarkably, miraculously, they will be searching for the last argument in the Big Bang Theory, the “God Particle,” for those of you not in the particle physics/string theory business. Though no priests, rabbis, clerics, imams pastors or gurus have been invited to even witness the event, in case a miracle does happen, what is most exciting about the study is the possibility of knowing, finally, What put the bang in the Bang?

What we’re all crossing our fingers for is the hope for finding what is known as the “Higgs boson,” or for those who have jobs in fields unrelated to particle physics, this is the key, or “missing link” to Aristotle’s notion of The First Cause or The Unmoved Mover. Let’s review, quickly. There’s you, then there’s your wonderful parents, then we have your grandparents….see where this is going? Let’s go all the way back. Back further than anyone can really imagine. Yes, that far back. So perhaps there was something that caused something that caused something to be formed, yes? Okay, what caused that? That I believe, as a non-particle physicist, has frustrated scientists for eons. For the non-particle thinkers, this is a no brainer. Why not say….God?

Okay, this is where it gets a bit more complicated? Isn’t it obvious the place we’re at, or in, or on, is such a lovely place, despite the trash not being picked up on Thursdays, that surely we should come to our senses (our Bicameral minds, to quote a psychologist, Julian Jaynes, who wrote on the evolution of the consciousness, 1976) and realize something Intelligent made Everything. But according to Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg, quoted in a recent interview with Newsweek, “the more we learn about the universe, the less sign we see of an intelligent designer.”

Here we have to go to religious texts, to clarify one point. All religious texts remind the faithful that God was the Agent behind the Cosmos. Okay, but who wrote the texts? Here I am always reminded of Tip O’Neill, former Speaker of the House, who commented that “all politics are local.” If you believe that, then perhaps we can spin his remarks to include, all “texts” are political. In other words, anything written has a purpose, an agenda, perhaps with the exception of assigned English papers. Even the beloved Rambam (Rabbi Moses b. Maimon, or Maimonides, 1135-1204 C.E.) questioned if YHVH was the creator of the Universe, which contradicted everything that Aristotle and every Jew wants to believe about the Creator. The Rambam simply mused that we’ll never know. So, we’re back to the people’s views. Literate people. Essentially, those who have special vision, either mystical or holy, who “know” how the Universe came about. Well, that’s what our summer scientists are hoping to find out. But what if they find not the “God Particle” but the “Not-God Particle”? Will we lose our sense of Purpose?

Here’s where it gets tough. If you already believe that A) the world is made by a Maker, and that Maker, in many different names and religions, is God, and B) that God gives purpose to life, then no matter what our particle physicists find this summer, it won’t matter, because we’re hard headed people, and we don’t like change. Besides, that would be a very threatening proposal, of which few if any Real human beings would really believe our underground scientists. But…are you still with me…? But, what about the greater percentage of living and non living forms in the Cosmos that don’t perceive their purpose? Would these “elements” feel devastated? Perhaps not, as H.S., or homo sapiens, deemed it necessary to claim Authority not only above Everything, but also claimed a text which proved it. There you have it. Thanks again to Julian Jaynes who helped us, even if his theory is questionable, to imagine when ancients began to think for themselves, instead of relying on the signs of a god in his Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind.

So, if you’re still with me, how many will vote for finding the Higgs boson? Here are a few more important questions. How much will this cost? How many bottles of French wine and how many wheels of brie cheese will be consumed when the flying protons are at rest in the Large Hadron Collider? Will the French government really protest the summer Games in Beijing? Will Switzerland’s right wing party banish Middle Eastern minorities out of their country? Who knows what will happen? Let’s wish our particle fellows God speed.