Cheapskate dating.

Coffee, drinks and polite conversation--dating is hard.

The date in my mind’s eye: dressing ‘up’ to go someplace boring yet expensive (drinks, dinner a movie?) with a person I don’t really know–and possibly don’t want to know–Running the risk of being bored to tears (or just plain shocked and awed) until the bill comes.  Argh! Ok, ok, maybe things will go well and you’ll have a polite conversation that sounds a bit like a job interview with flirting . . .double argh!!!

At the end of it all, you’ve spent quite a bit of money on something that you didn’t really enjoy(especially if your a  man who insists on paying for everything OR if your a man dating a woman who expects you to pay for everything–sorry guys).  Not fun, not frugal!  I’d rather go to the dentist and be drilled.  If you think about it, both experiences involve a loss of time, expense, discomfort and polite yet inane conversation–but at least with the dentist you get something for your money.

But I have a better solution to finding (or stumbling upon) a partner . . .or just someone to have fun with.

Enjoy being single and take advantage of things you can do because you’re single.  First of all, being single is fun.  You can go where you want, keep your home exactly as you like it, pick up and leave for the weekend, wear hideous pajamas or no pajamas, read up on the classics, take classes, do sports.  Think big in this department.

By enjoying being single you’re likely to become a more interesting person with independent ideas, passions . . .a soul. You’re likely to know what you enjoy which will help you find other people who might enjoy something similar. If you’re not someone who likes to spend lots of money on cocktails, dinners out and movies then you’re not likely to meet someone who does if you spend your time say, playing Frisbee or gardening.

Find other people who share your passions and spend time with them–doing things you already like. Some of these people might spark your interest romantically.  If so, great.  If not, oh well, at least you spent your time doing what you already enjoy! If you meet someone you think you might like, you can invite them to do something you enjoy–and this can be an activity that costs nothing.  You might even decide to that someone’s passions and interests help you re-define attractive.

Skip conventional dating altogether. DH and I met at work, chatted a bit and discovered we both enjoyed running and hiking.  We went on a few hikes together, DH  noticed that I could hike as fast as he could and did so without complaining –and the rest was history.  If we spent money on our ‘dating’ phase, it was on gas and an occasional sandwich for a long hike.  Had we never developed a romantic interest in one another, our time would still not have been wasted because we were both already doing something we love.

Maybe hiking isn’t for you.  Here are some ways I’ve seen people meet or get to know each other:

• writing clubs, book clubs
• conferences on topics that interest you
• travel
• athletic activities
• rare tree club (no joke)
• language exchanges (fun and free!)
• Chess, checkers or cards
• Cooking and wine-tasting (ok, this one costs money, but if it’s your passion, you’re already doing it, right?)
• art galleries, shows etc
• volunteer projects

I bet you can think of some passions that you could share with other people (without wasting time or money) in the place of ‘dating.’ Feel free to share.  And if anyone actually did have a good experience with traditional dating, I’m very, very curious.

Economic recession, solidarity and big government

Recently, I watched a lively discussion about the failing manufacturing and industrial economy in France on C’est dans l’air ( a nightly round-table type discussion where a regular host discusses timely topics with a panel of invited experts).  During a particularly memorable part of the show, one of the economists argued that the French were going to have to show some solidarity with the factory workers whose plants are closing and whose jobs are moving overseas(or simply disappearing into thin air).

Oh, and by the way, he also argued that the French would need to look out for the large number of out jobless who are nearing the end of their unemployment benefits.  When the show’s host asked the economist to elaborate on how the country would pay for such assistance, the economist declined to state–apparently such policy must be determined by the politicians.

Solidarity, a word you don’t hear too often in the US, punctuates social, economic and political conversations  in France.  In this case, solidarity with the unemployed in France means either increasing the national debt or raising taxes. Even the noblest of intentions come with a price tag after all.

Do we, in fact have a responsibility to others during hard times, or do we simply keep plugging away with our lives hoping we can go untouched by rising unemployment and inflation–regardless of what happens to others? Should we let our times become a struggle between those who are lucky enough to go untouched by economic turbulance and those thrown entirely off course by it?   Does the cost we’re prepared to pay as a society depend on how much we personally think we’ll be affected as individuals?–Difficult questions, none of which I claim to be able to answer.

On the one hand, I love the French way of caring for those who happen across hard times.  The French remember constantly that whatever happens to someone else could, in fact, happen to them. The empathy and the government funding tend to flow freely in such cases.

However, the government is here to help you to a degree that sometimes becomes . . .invasive.

Take, for example, the wide range of government agencies that can help you overcome the red tape involved in opening a business.  Resources abound in France that are unheard of in the States–free advice, services, counseling, loans, accounting . . .Then again, if the same government that works so hard to ‘help’ would just cut back on its red tape in the first place, you might be able to start your own business without government assistance.

As much as I love the idea of helping others, I know that government ‘help’ comes with a price. The more government programs we put in place, the more intrusions occur in our lives, the more bureaucracy and paperwork springs up and the more money bleeds out into strange and wasteful practices.

Sometimes France and the US seem like two ends of the political spectrum that could both stand to learn from each other. In this case, however, I’d love to see a solution that breaks out of the traditions of both nations.  Am I wrong in hoping that we may find a way to care for those who are out of work and in financial trouble without increasing the size of government (and it’s debts) to new levels?

Of course, deciding not to rely on big government also has its costs. In this case, such a decision would demand significant personal and social action.  I wonder if we’re capable of such an undertaking, particularly in a time when all of us are feeling a pinch.  If your French, your morale is apparently quite low these days, so perhaps you could use a little boost from the government.  If your in the US, however, chances are you have too little trust in the government to consider such assistance.

False choices in frugality: ‘Lotions and potions’ versus filth and rejection.

Do you strive to cut costs in personal hygiene?  Minimize the amount of weird little vials in your travel case? Do you avoid slathering yourself in strange chemicals and them washing them down the drain?  If you’re like me you willingly drop frivolous beauty products but you don’t want to sacrifice being clean, healthy and happy to your quest for simplicity. Given my preference for ‘AND’ rather than ‘OR’ on the path towards simplification, it comes as no surprise that this article has me festering  with annoyance.  The article from the Daily Mail tells the tale of one woman who opted not to step into the shower, not to rinse her hands, not to brush her teeth for six weeks with the objective of discovering:

. . . whether we are all simply wasting our money in the name of vanity. Are all the lotions and potions that women–and millions of men–use religiously every morning merely a form of social and psychological armour, or do they have a practical physical use?

Don’t get me wrong, I value the objective of the experiment and found the article entertaining (fun fact: after 6 weeks without bathing her bacteria counts were up 5000 times but still considered ‘normal’ by doctors. . .)  I’d just ask that people examine the choice that the folks at the Daily Mail present to us: ‘lotions and potions’ or filth and rejection. The woman in question had been spending roughly 2,000 pounds a year on beauty products and then switched suddenly to not even dousing herself with water.  She staggered from one extreme behavior to another–the actions of someone who has entirely lost touch with the difference between health and cleanliness and frivolous addiction to consumer beauty products.

I’m not particularly surprised that other moms at her kid’s school found her behavior odd–are you?  People have been washing themselves to the best of their abilities since ancient times and people in third world countries with limited access to clean water continue to do whatever they can to stay clean. Not maintaining any form of personal hygiene is a behavior typically reserved to the highly depressed, the insane and it carries significant health risks*–two reasons why such behavior might be considered socially unacceptable.

*If you, like the subject of the Daily Mail article, have somehow forgotten about hand washing and germ theory, here is a very basic primer by the CDC.

Does one woman’s re-discovery that bathing serves a purpose mean that we should just default to using beauty and hygiene products without thought or question simply because some company invents them and markets them? The very premise of her experiment steers carelessly in the direction of a false choice.  What about simply washing your hands several times a day with soap (or an alcohol solution if you have allergies to soap), brushing with a toothbrush and baking soda and, say, even partaking in a weekly shower with only water and a good scrub with a washcloth?  That in itself may sound extreme to most people although it remains healthy and, dare I say, socially acceptable.  For the frugal, health-conscious or the minimalist, it only requires two ingredients: baking soda and bar soap (or rubbing alcohol).  Heck, she could have use the baking soda once a week too to wash her hair, but I digress. I admit that while the false choice presented by the article annoys me, the topic fascinates me and I’m glad it’s reaching mainstream consideration.

I’m curious to know about the various middle paths my readers (quite possibly not a mainstream sampling of people) take between good personal hygiene and social acceptance on one hand and minimalism and frugality on the other.   How many personal hygiene products have you been able to cut out?  Which ones are non-negotiable?

Barter in the business plan

Although I’m not actively looking for work, I’m always scheming and pondering new business ideas.  Starting my own business just sounds interesting, dare I say, fun.   Oh, I have had my own tiny business before and both my parents and in-laws ran small businesses, so I know the struggles, and yet . . . I can’t quite shake the idea.  Perhaps the instinct to dream up small businesses emerges before birth (like wanderlust).  These days in my scheming, I find myself exploring the idea of using barter as a means of payment for future clients.  I imagine a business where you would accept several forms of payment: cash, check . . . exchange.

Part of the wine selection at our local caviste's.

A real life example: The last time I worked in France, I taught English lessons to professionals at other small businesses–including at our local caviste. DH and I typically spend nearly 75 euros a month on wine (you could call this our one serious luxury, I think!)  The shop owner used to pay me 30 euros for an English lesson (typical price around here).  I would pay 1/3 of that directly to the government in taxes and social charges.  If I went back to his shop to buy my wine (I did and still do, by the way), I’d pay another 19% sales tax (TVA).  If I bought 2 bottles of wine for around 20 euros (about what I earned teaching the English lessons), the caviste would keep about 16 euros after TVA.

So he paid me 30 euros for English lessons, so that I could earn 20, which I paid him for two bottles of wine, so that he could earn 16 . . .

But what if  the merchant pays me directly in wine? I would still get the same amount of wine I normally would get for 20 euros.   The shopkeeper could ‘pay’ me 2 bottles of wine that could have earned him 16 euros after taxes.  I still get my wine, but the shopkeeper can now afford more lessons.  So, we both have a pretty good deal.

Of course there are limits to the usefulness of barter. I wouldn’t want to ONLY earn bartered goods, first of all, because I only need so much wine.  Once I have a surplus, I’m not sure what I’d do with it.  You can’t put wine in the bank and collect interest and you certainly can’t invest it or use it to pay the rent.  Of course, not everyone has something I want.  I have two prospective clients for English lessons–a primary school teacher and a woman who sells parts to truck drivers.  Off the top of my head, I can’t think of anything I’d like to trade with them, so collecting cash for at least some of my business would be worthwhile.  That said, I would be interested in trading with the organic grocery store, the outdoor equipment shop and who knows maybe even the odd restaurant or cafe from time to time.

Barter and the black market: ethical considerations? Not declaring income means refusing to pay into the system you profit from.  If we all do this all the time, we’ll have a hard time paying for roads, health care, public schools etc.  Barter in France is especially lucrative BECAUSE you avoid the tax cycle as your money changes hands.   Of course many people benefit from a little travail au noir in France.  But the fact that many people do it and everyone seems to accept it certainly doesn’t make it ethical.  I’m still mulling this one over.

So what do you think?  Can you see yourself accepting barter as a means of payment for your business?  Do you already use barter either within our outside of your profession?  Is barter an ethical way to get more from your time working or the equivalent of tax evasion?

Living with less even when the going gets tough: Defending my way of life.

Concerned scrutiny comes my way on two fronts these days.  Friends and family have long fretted over the fact that I don’t have a car, a driver’s license, a job, that I don’t go to the movies, out to restaurants, shopping etc .   “Can you really be happy?” they ask.  With DH’s car accident and the aftermath, people assume that I ought to take a ‘break’ from the simple life.  All the more reason to ‘live a little,’ to break out of what some clearly see as self denial.  I sometimes think people confuse voluntary simplicity with poverty–particularly now that life has tossed me a curve ball.  Some even seem to confuse my pared-down activities with the slippery descent into depression.

When people ask me how I’m doing, they do so hesitantly,  as if they expect the worst, nodding unconvinced when I tell them I’m doing fine–well, even.  The spoken and non-verbal reactions people have had to my situation (and my take on it) occasionally make me doubt myself.  I mean, if everyone looks at you funny, you’re going to check that your fly isn’t open or your skirt isn’t tucked into your underwear right?  So I ask myself some questions: Did I disconnect from reality at some point?  Are things worse than I thought?  I would argue that many simply fail to notice some of the comforts simplicity affords me. . .

Prioritizing by moving closer to DH, dropping non-essential activities might look like sacrifice to some, but to me, it’s a luxury. Our careful spending habits and our financial situation allow me to pack up in one place and move to the next to be close to DH at a time when it really matters.  The by-product of some of my actions (like moving in with the in-laws for a while or not ‘going out’) will probably result in spending less money, though they’re hardly self-deprivation.  I could rent out another apartment and hit the town shopping, eating out, going to movies, but I don’t because I don’t want to.

My lack of consumption-based socializing does not point to depression! I prefer cooking a meal for my in-laws to eating out, working on my blog to  going to movies or attending concerts.  (I prefer almost anything to shopping.)  People don’t observe me partaking in some of my favorite pass times–like figuring out a way to grow veggies on the in-laws balcony (spring is coming!) baking bread, or learning about foraged food.  By the way, battling depression with compulsive shopping, weight gain or ‘going out,’ doesn’t strike me as a better solution. Indeed, many people today confuse busy with healthy–with sad results.

Moving in with my in-laws does not strike a deathblow to my ego, it doesn’t make my skin crawl with worries that I’m regressing or becoming less of an adult. I stay with them because like staying with them.  We get along.  We support each other and DH during this time.   I consider myself quite lucky to have family close by that I get along with well enough to pull this off. Think about it–how many people can claim the same luxury with in-laws or blood relatives?  People often sacrifice close family ties for the sake of business and consumption.  I present to you just one more of the luxuries provided by a simple, frugal existence: functional family.

People wrongly assume that I’m unhappy because of DH’s accident long recovery.  On the contrary,  seeing him regain his strength reminds me of watching some amazing force of nature take place–the spring arriving, a baby bird hatching.  Less than three months ago he was hooked up to all manner of machines and tubes now he’s back on his feet (next stop: walking with crutches!).  Surprised and thankful happiness seem the appropriate response, a response that is possible because I haven’t cluttered my mind with irrelevant burdens.

My relatively austere lifestyle and my lack of employment may not tempt most.  I can see that the additional ’stress’ of dealing with the rehabilitation of a spouse after an accident, or the thought of moving in with in-laws might also bring out fear and uneasiness.  Still, my reaction to the situation, while possibly a-typical, doesn’t hurt anyone–au contraire.  I’m pretty sure that my contentedness in the midst of all of this allows me to be strong and support others as I go.

I firmly refuse to break out of my simple life now simply because some of my loved ones would be ‘reassured’ by such a step–as much as I would love to reassure those around me, it is hardly the goal of my existence.  I prefer to be happy rather than to appear happy.

Is home made worth it? Wild rose hip jam.

A homesteading pioneer might make everything he or she consumes, I however, like to choose my battles.  I usually decide on items that end up being less expensive, better for the environment, more ethical or just plain better when I make them at home.

A cache of wild rose hips just waiting to be foraged.

Wild rose hip jam involves a time investment. First, you need to find the fruit and ‘harvest’ it.  To make about 8 jars of jam, (with about 2 kilos of fruit) I spent roughly 45 minutes picking.  The fruit grows on thorny bushes and that you need to harvest it after a frost–in my case, I climbed a couple snow banks to get to my prize.  Writing about it, it sounds like hard work, but I found my afternoon picking rose hips profoundly satisfying.

The process of making jam from fruit that even starving winter birds won’t nibble fascinates me. Bite into a wild rose hip and you will taste the plump juicy and wretchedly sour outer flesh–right before you choke on the treacherous clump of itchy fuzz hiding within.  The prickly interior of the rose hips, and the tendency of pranksters to slip it down the pants of the unsuspecting has earned this fruit the nickname gratte-cul–or butt scratcher–at least for the French.

Rose hips in their natural environment . . .before I picked them.

Costs in Time: Ultimately, making the jam took my in-laws and I two afternoons (that’s about 18 person hours!).  Adding on my own picking outing, we’re getting close to twenty hours of human work!

Costs in money: The fruit cost nothing, 2 kilos of sugar cost about 3 euros.  My MIL already had a large supply of used jars  for storing the jam. Each jar of jam cost about .38 euros.  Not bad at all considering you can usually buy home made quality organic jam at the market for no less than 4-5 euros a jar.  I haven’t priced supermarket jam lately, but I bet our jam can beat the supermarket price any day!

Energy costs: I picked the fruit on  a path near DH’s rehab center, so I won’t count transportation costs (as I didn’t make an extra trip).  The fruit and the jam had to be simmered for about 40 minutes for two batches.  Probably the cooking time bothers me the most in all this.  I wonder if a low energy equivalent exists . . . I may research using a thermal cooker or a crock pot?  Any ideas out there?

Benefits of home made:

• Jam producers rarely offer rose hip jam for sale, so if you want it you have to make it.
  

  Wild rose hip jam.

• Rose hips are high in vitamin C (although I wonder what the cooking process does to their health benefits.)
• My in-laws and I love the taste of the jam–frankly, if we didn’t, we wouldn’t bother making it.
• We can barter our jam with others.  For example, we have a number of family and friends who regularly give us gifts from their gardens and their foraging expeditions (raspberry jam, apples, walnuts, mushrooms . . .a motherload of eggplants this summer).  The scarcity of rose hip jam allows us to give a little something in return even though we don’t have a garden.

So what do you think? Would the jam be worth it for you?  What home made items do you find worth wile?

The process, should you chose to try it yourself:

To make the jam, you first pull off the buds leftover from the withered roses on the end of each berry.  Then, you soak and wash your fruit in the sink.  Afterward, in a large pot you simmer them on low heat until the fruit starts to break open, then stir gently until you have a chunky red mush.  You then push the mush through a strainer . . .but if you push too hard the fuzz will get through and you’ll have itchy, hairy jam!  Once you have your processed fruit, you weigh it and add an equal portion of sugar then simmer again for about 20 minutes.  Store as you like!

Indentured servants: credit card debt, student loans.

Actually, the status of indentured servant may be preferable to the situation of some of our contemporaries.  Wikepedias defines an indentured servant as:

a laborer under contract to an employer for a fixed period of time, typically three to seven years, in exchange for their transportation, food, clothing, lodging and other necessities. Unlike slaves, an indentured servant was required to work only for a limited term specified in a signed contract.^{[1] [2]}

When you think about how long it takes people to pay of various debts (and that one can’t easily escape student loans and credit cards even through bankruptcy) 3-7 years of servitude sounds like a great deal. Sure, back in colonial times you had to work your debt off with backbreaking work on a tobacco plantation, but the current solution to working off debt may involve soul-crushing and alienating work and can consume decades, even lifetimes.  Heck, back in the day, indentured servants received room, board, transportation–now you just pay:  principal, interest, late fees, collection fees . . .

Can’t think of a horrifying anecdote involving student loan debt right off the top of your head?  Read this article from the Wall Street Journal about a woman who will likely be paying student loans until she’s 70.  I won’t go into the perils of credit card debt as I’m guessing you’re well informed on that.  (Insert credit card nightmare here:_____).

For full disclosure, I should admit that I incurred $12,000 of debt from student loans which I was able to pay off in about 1.5 years of full–time employment upon graduation.  So I’ve been there, to a degree. Let’s say I’ve had just enough of a taste of debt to realize that it limits your abilities to choose your career (or lack thereof):  your lifestyle, your place of residence (and on and on).  Want to work part-time, retire early, live a downshifted lifestyle, start a new business, move to another country?  You’ll find all of the above to be more complex with debt.   I’ve already worked myself free, thanks.  You won’t see me becoming indentured again any time soon.

Personal preferences aside, should we worry about the number of Americans who are choosing to become long-term indentured servants? I personally always get a little nervous when I start thinking about telling other people what to do with their money.  And protecting rational adults from their own behavior?  I don’t intend to take on that fight.

What about protecting ourselves from the behavior of those ‘rational adults’ out there who are racking up the debts? The individuals who bought homes they could not afford, and the credit dealers who made it so easy to get an adjustable rate mortgage, the banks that are too big to fail (but not too broke to keep lobbying the government).  What if, as this article from the Huffington Post argues, credit card debt is lurking quietly in a hidden corner, waiting to do it’s worst?  ‘Bad’ debt ‘bundled,’ sold and featured in pension funds–it all sounds oddly familiar.  I’m starting to feel . . .’impacted’ by these debtors and creditors.   Is it just me?  Maybe it’s just me.

I don’t owe these lending institutions anything. I’ll be interested to see if someone uses my tax dollars to save anymore of them from ‘failure.’

What does it cost us socially and intellectually to have so many indentured servants amongst us? Does it hurt us all when growing numbers of people give up their freedom for a bigger house and more stuff?   Can an indentured servant make a decision to shake off a lifestyle that proves unsustainable?  Can an indentured servant go on strike or skip work to protest?  Can an indentured servant cut back on his/her work week enough to raise well-adjusted children?

I’m not sure I approve of a society of indentured servants.  I recently saw a poster here that stated:

Pas question de payer leur crise! (No way we’re paying for their financial crisis!)

‘Their’ on that poster could refer to Americans in general as the French banks took greater care in lending and as student loans and credit card debt barely exists here.    Perhaps, as a complacent American, the poster is talking about me—and my crisis.  Still, I have to admit, I share the writer’s sentiments . . .

Fast times and a guest post on Miss Minimalist

If you haven’t already checked out this site, I highly recommend MissMinimalist.com.  You can find all ideas minimalist from the practical to the philosophical.  If you enjoy travel AND keeping it simple, there are some interesting ideas on that topic as well!  You’ll find my guest post on the minimalist spotlight today.

In the meantime, I hope you’ll excuse my decision to prioritize my life and not post on my own blog for a couple of days while I pack up, move out of my old apartment and attempt to pass the ‘theory’ section of the French driving test–all without a car and blindfolded.

Well, ok, not blindfolded. . . I’ll be back by Thursday!

Save money: change your definition of attractive.

I’ve had this topic on my mind for sometime and planned a post for next week, but this article by Jacob at ERE and the following discussion inspired me to push up my ‘deadline.’  Don’t worry, I’ll post about global change later.

What we find ‘attractive’ is subjective, influenced by everything from mass media to culture, constantly changing and under our control. My modest proposal: if you want to save money on ‘grooming’ and find a partner capable of the same frugality, change your perspective, and never look back.

What exactly does it take to feel attractive?

I have two solutions for those who want to feel attractive: change your appearance or change your perspective. (Hint, one of the solutions is much cheaper and more sustainable than the other.)   For me, working out to produce ‘perfect abs,’ applying lipstick, finding the perfect undergarments or buying new clothes never cuts it.  I’ve found the secret to feeling attractive: go a month without a mirror and stop worrying about it!

Have you ever had an experience where you were out in the woods camping or backpacking and didn’t actually see yourself for a long time?  Those I know who have had this experience usually find that they feel unusually attractive during this time–or at least confident in their appearance (and I’ll swear by it myself).  If you don’t believe me, try it . . .

On being attractive to others:

“But,” you might argue, “you can feel attractive and be tragically wrong!”  Beauty is, after all, in the eye of the beholder.  Being attractive may not just be for personal satisfaction or self-fulfillment–you may actually want to find a partner who also finds you attractive.  In that respect, I think the following two questions are worthy of consideration:

• How many people need to find you attractive for you to be attractive enough?
• Who do you want to find you attractive?
• How much actual effort, resources and money are required to achieve this desired level of ‘attractiveness?’

An experiment with the bare minimum:

In my twenties I traveled through Europe with blatant disregard for my appearance.   (No, I did not look like a super model dressed in fashionable yet shabby clothes–I looked . . .frumpy).  I was surprised to learn that some men are attracted to women who carry a backpack, don’t wear makeup, don’t mess with their hair, wear the same jeans for days on end, don’t watch TV . . . I’ve found that you can ‘attract’ other human beings with minimalist efforts towards personal appearance–  AND that you may actually attract ‘higher quality candidates.’ The men that tended to find me attractive in my ‘frumpiness’ tended to value athletic activities, travel, intelligent conversation and also tended to be non-conformists. As far as numbers go, I’m sure that probably only 10-20% of men my age found me attractive–at most–I was not about to win a beauty contest, but you don’t need to win a contest to find a partner, do you?

Changing what you consider attractive in others:

By the time I met DH, I was already so picky that I wondered if I would ever be in a relationship again.  What attracted me to him?

Interests in life beyond money and status: DH had switched from being an engineer to being a primary school teacher because he liked it better and wanted more time for his family and his interests.

Low-maintenance appearance: DH dresses simply, has a low-maintenance haircut.  He is athletic-looking because he is someone who regularly enjoys sports–not because he spends hours a week in a gym ‘bulking up.’  (Don’t even get me started . . .)

Self-control in spending habits: DH lived in a sparse, low-rent apartment.  His willingness to save money on comforts and appearances allowed him (and still allows him) to spend selectively on developing passions: biking, cross country skiing, guitar . . . I didn’t have to worry about DH judging me for living in a cheap-o apartment with all borrowed furniture and sleeping on the floor.  I don’t ever have to worry about DH spending us both into horrific credit card debt!

Intelligence and ideas: DH is an educated and thoughtful person who can have interesting conversations on a number of topics (in two different languages!).  I occasionally want to shoot myself if I get stuck in a conversation with someone who has no intellectual interests, so DH’s keen capacity for abstract thought helps me avoid a messy end.

Kindness and strength of character: When we first started dating, I told DH he was  one of the nicest people I knew–and he winced, preparing to be dumped.   Apparently not everyone finds this trait attractive.  But I know too many interesting, intelligent and otherwise gifted people who seem unable to use their powers for good. 

I admit that I am possibly strange in my thoughts on what is attractive, and I’m curious to know what others think. What is your definition of ‘attractive?’  Do you find people you can appreciate easily?  Do you feel that people are attracted to those who spend more time, money and energy on appearance?

Note: I wanted to talk about frugal alternatives to dating in this post as well, but I realize there is too much to say.  It will have to wait.

Placebos, homeopathy and bad medicine

A couple months ago I went to my doctor with sinus pain, sniffles and a sore throat.  I suspected allergies, but wanted to be sure I wasn’t suffering form some lingering sinus infection–or an evil twin lodged somewhere in a dark, snotty corner . I wanted an ‘all clear’ to keep up my athletic activities.  I got that . . . and a homeopathic ‘cure’ for allergies.  I’ve never experienced such a thing before, although apparently doctors regularly prescribe homeopathy in France.

I politely took the prescription as I marveled at the fact that my excellent doctor had prescribed me sugar pellets. In the spirit of experimentation, I decided to try them out–after all, they are 100 % reimbursed by social security and they can’t hurt me.  I noticed absolutely no change–whatsoever.  Admittedly, my state of mind was not ideal for the placebo effect to take hold.  I decided to be thankful for my good health, continue my athletic activities and toss the sugar pills.

I recently read a series of articles lambasting homeopathic medicine and its use in France in Sciences et pseudo-sciences, ( a radical publication that  demands scientific backing for common broad statements of truth ). Jean Brissonnet, in his article “The Dr. House Syndrome” argues that homeopathic medicine flies directly in the face of what French doctors learn when they get their license to practice medicine.  In Brissonnet’s eyes, when traditional doctors prescribe homeopathy, they’re going against the teachings that give us faith in them by offering medicine that has no backing in clinical trials. He concedes that doctors may be attempting to use the placebo effect to heal their patients, but argues that the placebo effect can be induced by the doctor-patient relationship as much as by the sugar pills the doctor may or may not prescribe.

Studies on the placebo effect fascinate me.  I wish that Brissonnet had gone on to also critique some of the mainstream medications (Prozac anyone?)  that increasingly struggle to compete with the placebo.  Click here for an interesting article on this phenomenon.

I often wonder  how many doctors prescribe traditional medications without hope that they will ‘cure’ anything but will simply relieve patient anxiety and possibly the experience of symptoms.  To what extent are traditional medications used as placebos–placebos with side effects.

Obviously many traditional medications do have a proven and demonstrable effect when used appropriately. Antibiotics, for example, have a demonstrable and proven effect on fighting bacterial infection.  They may have something of a placebo effect on people fighting viral infection, although there are serious drawbacks to fighting the common cold this way!

When is it appropriate to call in the placebo effect or homeopathy in fighting illness?  I suppose it can’t hurt if a person finds that homeopathy ‘cures’ their anxiety, depression or erectile dysfunction.  But would you opt for homeopathy only if you had HIV, TB or malaria? Here’s an article from The Guardian detailing concerns of British scientists regarding the use of homeopathy to treat such diseases in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

Personally, I am all for studying and using the placebo effect wherever possible. If you can improve someone’s depression with the doctor-patient relationship then why not do it?  If you can help change someone’s experience of chronic pain through sugar pills or meditation, then so much the better.  If an herbal remedy is proven to be as effective in HIV treatment as conventional meds and with fewer side-effects, of course I approve.  But I have to agree with the British scientists in their critique of supplying people in need of medical care for serious illness with a ‘remedy’ that is no better than the placebo.  And so far, I have never heard of a study that shows that malaria can be cured with sugar pills or the placebo effect.

What do you think?