Optimism and its global Importance — Especially Now

A recent article describing Sir David Tang's observations about optimism as the cure for the global economic meltdown is one of the most important messages delivered in the past three months. You can read it in its entirety here. It deserves far more exposure, in my opinion.

Sir David makes several wise observations, including the need to distinguish value and cost, to recognize that size and importance are not the same thing, and to appreciate that productive work is one the most important "assets" we have. Notice that productive work is not the same as making money. People who trade paper derivatives on wall street make money, but their work is not productive in the sense that it adds much value to the world.

There are not more educated people as a result of trading derivatives, no new houses, roads or labor saving products as a result of the work of those financiers, and no entertaining poems, or beautiful planted trees to decorate the landscape. Nor, indeed, are there well made clothes, shoes, or cars that provide useful benefits to society as a result of such work. If work is done only to make money, no real tangible wealth is created. It's just paper that can be traded for products and services that represent real work. Often, this wealth comes at another person's expense.

Work that produces something of value for the world is work that gives the doer a sense of contribution and pride. When that work goes away, people lose meaning and become depressed. People without productive work are among the unhappiest people in the world, not because they lack money, but because they lack the work itself. As a result, they can lose hope and become pessimists.

Sir David Tang notes that pessimists have a way of creating more pessimism. And when people are pessimistic, they often create a self-fulfilling prophecy. If they believe there is no future, they begin to act in ways that creates that dismal outcome. On the other hand, laughter and optimism are equally contagious and inspire hope and actions that create better futures. Humans in groups have the power to create optimism or pessimism.

There is abundant research in the psychological literature that demonstates the value of optimism. Few if any of these studies discuss optimism and economic outlook, but many show that optimistic people are more resilient, live longer, and are able to influence their own healing. Studies show that optimists make the best salespeople. While their mood probably makes them seem more approachable or engaging, their belief in making the sale also makes them more engaged and persistent. Sales success requires persistence.

Besides, optimists are more fun to be around. Economic stimulus packages that create jobs double the return on their investment. Why? Because the result can not only be people with the ability to earn money for rent, food and clothes, but more importantly people who feel better about themselves and their futures because they are doing productive work.

Life Balance, What is it?

One of the aims of this blogsite is to promote dialogue about aspects of living well, focusing on how human activity, or how people use their time, contributes to their happiness, health and well-being. When it comes to lifestyles, daily routines can be regular, predictable and peaceful, or they can be volatile, unpredictable and stressful. Most of us experience lives that show characteristics of each extreme. Which is better? Should we be striving for steady state, and what would that be like? Is the journey through life best viewed as a highway metaphor where we try to maintain a course in the middle? How do we define that "middle ground"?

An earlier post in this series alluded to balance, pointing out that Michelle Obama, the incoming first lady, sees work-family balance as an important public health and family issue. Because lives out of balance are typically stressful, imbalance can be said to contribute to illness and chronic diseases, as pointed out in the post on resilience.

Most people intuitively understand that regular, predictable, and stress-avoidant routines are related to their well being, and thus they have a personal view of what life balance means, or what type of lifestyle works best for them.

Eighteen months ago, I had the privilege of participating in an international conference in Canada that brought together scientists and other experts from many disciplines for a discussion about life balance from theoretical and scientific perspectives. Although there were many interesting ideas expressed about how to define, study and otherwise understand life balance, another perspective examined during the meeting was philosophical. Is life balance a valid concept, or is it just another name for similar "positive states"? For example, is it the same idea as "well being" or "quality of life" with just another name?

My view is that all three concepts have features in common. However, life balance seems unique because it focuses specifically on how activity is organized within a life to help us achieve the outcomes we desire. I surmise that there is no one "life activity formula" that works for everyone, but that a successful formula must include certain characteristics or reflect identified principles.

What is your idea of a balanced life? What lifestyle characteristics do you think social scientists should consider in studying this concept? I look forward to reading your posts.

Thinking and Doing in Ways that Protect Health

This blogsite is about doing, so the key points in this post will not come as a surprise to readers. In a previous blog I promised to address the issue of resilience, or the body's ability to ward off the harmful effects of stress.

Many websites have lists of characteristics that are counterproductive to successful coping. Negative thinking, over-eating, obsessing, self blame, overworkiig and other detrimental behaviors and attitudes are widely known and may seem obvious as detriments to effective oping or health.

However, most web articles on this topic, including one from the highly acclaimed Mayo Clinic, overlook an important factor that is key to successful resilience. That factor is having engaging, meaningful, purposeful activities. If important preventive factors include a positive self concept and having opportunities for interacting with friends, it seems clear that doing things we enjoy with people we enjoy doing them with is likely to be a useful approach to promoting two critical dimensions of resilience: meaningful social relationships and a positive self concept. There is abundant literature to show that enjoyment in doing, which often comes from mastering challenge and doing something well, leads to better self esteem, improved positive feelings, and the release of hormones that are good for our immune system.

The theories of coping include strategies that have been called "active coping". Typically, these involve direct problem solving actions to address barriers that are frustrating, or dilemmas that are particularly stressful. What this post suggests is something different. What is suggested here is finding satisfying, engaging and meaningful activities that help us spend time enjoyably, have fun with others, and perhaps develop skills or a sense of completion that makes us feel good about ourselves.

I also recommend the strategies contained in this useful article by Tamar Chansky published in the Huffington Post. Dr. Chansky's recommendations offer more detailed variations on DLW's themes; namely, how we as individuals can create our own resilience through what we do (or avoid doing!).

Doing is not a universal elixir. But doing the right things helps us by keeping our immune systems stronger so that we can avoid the biological consequences of stress. Most importantly, if we build these practices into our daily lifestyles, and not just when we feel stressed, we will be making a habit of doing life well.

Stress is not good for you...not that you thought it was!!

If there is anything that can be said about life in the United States these days (or the world, for that matter), it's that there are lots of things going on that can cause worry or concern. It is a scientific fact that the most unhappy people in the population are those who are unemployed, so it should be seen as a societal concern that the unemployment rate is rising to levels not seen for decades. The new administration understands that the cost for not doing something will be far greater than the cost of an economic stimulus package, no matter how large. Why? Well, it's not just because people need to earn a living and buy things to get the economy back on track. It's also because economic downturns can affect public health by making the population more susceptible to illness.

But this blog post is not about politics or economic stimulus proposals. It's about stress and what it does to our bodies over time. We all generally perceive that being stressed out is not a good thing. But perhaps many of us feel that as long as we can get beyond the stressful periods and have some time for R&R (rest and recuperation), so to speak, we can shake off the consequences of stress and there will be no harm done.

The truth is, however, that over time, the effects of stress add up. It takes a toll on the body. And scientists now have a way of measuring that "toll" through objective means. These tests, which include blood pressure, cholesterol, and several other measures of "physiological" fitness, are collectively called "allostatic load". When the body responds to stressful circumstances, that process is called allostasis. Medical and psychological understanding of how stress shortens our lives and makes us susceptible to acute illnesses and longer term chronic diseases has now advanced rapidly. Scientists now have a better understanding of how the process works, and the area of "psychoneuroimmunology" or PNI, is where this knowledge is being gained.

The theory of how our worries activate hormones to tax our immune systems is too involved for this blog, but I recommend that interested readers take a look at a good book written in an interesting, understandable way called: Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers, by Robert Sapolsky, PhD. The title of the book is a shorthand way of communicating the relationship between stress and health. Part of the reason we overtax our immune systems is because we worry about things that have happened to us or might happen to us. That worry signals our body to activate stress hormones that are good when they are needed, but harmful if they are around when they aren't needed. Dr. Sapolsky uses the example of the fire station that runs out of fuel and fresh men when it is constantly responding to false alarms, and compares that fire station to our immune systems, which are supposed to stamp out germs and other invaders to keep our bodies healthy. Immune systems get worn down by high and persistent levels of stress.

So...as my son once told me: "chillax". That was good advice. People who are able to chill and relax, are more resilient to the adverse consequences of stress. They experience less wear and tear on their bodies, and chances are, they will be more likely to live longer and healthier lives...and thus be able to "do life well." It turns out that resilience, or the ability to endure stress with fewer adverse consequences, is related to happiness. But that is a topic for a future blog post. Stay tuned!

(For readers interested in a readable but more complete and scientific account of allostasis and allostatic load on the web, go here.)