Med School Blows Past the Education Bubble

Note that this article has been updated to also include some of the private discussions with thought leaders in the past. You can read my final overview of my research into the Millennial generation along with what I predicted and what happened as they matured at this link. While I still speak about Echo Boomers and iGenZ privately, I seldom add new articles to this specific blogspot site. If you're reaching out about a speaking engagement, you can contact me at the research firm SqlinSix.

I expect the partisans to argue about this article as far as the health care law is concerned:

Health experts, including many who support the law, say there is little that the government or the medical profession will be able to do to close the gap by 2014, when the law begins extending coverage to about 30 million Americans. It typically takes a decade to train a doctor.

However, pertinent to the education bubble, we need doctors - and medical school is not in a bubble compared to other degrees. Of course, in how economics says education is a waste, we find that supply and demand ultimately matter, something many are missing when they try to argue in favor of education. While our marketplace holds too many degrees, unfortunately, we are seeing a major gap in some professions - the main one being medical school. In fact, law school is in a huge bubble, while these same students won't consider pursuing a medical degree (an MD is much harder to obtain). One related point I speak about that goes missing in this analysis is that while lawyers want all systems to become more bureaucratic, doctors want the system to produce superior results. The United States almost graduates more lawyers than doctors - what do you think the long term effect of this will be? I expect that the medical system in the United States will grow more complex over time.

Unfortunately, even though Echo Boomers are highly educated, they do not realize these trends in front of them or what this means.

The Supply and Demand Problem

Unlike other degrees, we have a major supply problem with medical school. We have a massive generation aging (the Baby Boomers) and we've expanded medical coverage under the health care law (increasing competition for goods and services). We don't have the equivalent increase in students attending medical school and we continue to see a rise in lawyers - these lawyers will only complicate the future healthcare system. In other words, health care costs will continue to rise for the foreseeable future due to a lack of doctors (this factor alone will cause problems). As this causes pain in the medical field, it could create more shortages because a shortage of labor can lead to overwork of that labor (ie: with a doctor shortage, existing doctors have to "offset" the labor shortage, thus some may choose to retire early). This could also cause pain in related medical professions, such as nursing.

Another factor, contributing to this problem, is the hostility toward young men on college campuses. In a private discussion I had with executives I titled Too Many Young Men In STEM Fields, I highlighted government policies trying to attract more young women, while punishing young men with interest in science (normally, a precursor to medical school). To put it bluntly: we need doctors regardless of their gender.

You may recall that I've noted that about 12-18% of young male Echo Boomers had planned to and left the United States. Many of these young men had the ambition to become doctors. Why didn't they? Read that article again and note my point about the education environment they would have felt. That's a cultural influence on a person's decision. These men chose to leave the country, work and starte businesses elsewhere.

While I understand the political move, as young women predominantly are viewed as a voter base, the problem is that we have a labor shortage in medicine. When you're faced with a labor shortage, you don't exacerbate the problem with policies that increase the shortage. Don't miss that male doctors are much more likely to work longer hours than female doctors. This means that you would need close to as much as twice as many female doctors as male doctors.

This observation becomes humorous when you realize how many industries "want more women" (tech, engineering, etc). You can see the contradiction: we would need twice as many female doctors, but you have tons of incentives for women that don't require the length of medical school. You can see what will happen in the future.

Insight: The unintended consequences of serving only your group of people is that you end up undermining your group of people. We live in a society with a specialized division of labor. In this society, we rely on others and their skills (specialty). If we have a shortage of any specialty, we all pay a higher cost. Any political policy that favors one group over another in a way that would discourage one group from obtaining a specialty (especially when that specialty is in a shortage), will result is huge consequences for everyone including the favored group.

Ideology Over Pragmatism

A college professor once told me that all problems fundamentally begin when people place an ideology over pragmatism and we see that here. We have a shortage of doctors, an aging population, and plans to expand healthcare (all on top of a growing national debt that will eventually bankrupt the country).

Yet we don't have the fundamentals in place for these things to exist in reality. In addition, we're adding legal complexity to the healthcare system and we're discouraging young men from going to college, ironically lowering the supply of future doctors that we'll need. In a way, the future looks bright for those in medical school, but sadly looks dim for the rest of the country.

The Automation Myth

One response I get and have gotten from thought leaders? "We'll automate healthcare." Future promises of AI (though AI has been around since the 1970s) or other technological tools that will make healthcare better. Ironically the people saying this don't realize that automation in healthcare has not actually made it better - people are not living longer. In fact, when you compare communities that don't use technology (ie: Amish) with communities that do, it's difficult to see how increased automation has had any impact.

While outside this post's scope, one of many reasons for this in healthcare involves care: we feel better when we know that someone or someones care of us. Visiting a doctor is not the same experience as seeing a health report without any interaction that we're doing good. Humans are social creatures and what can be easily overlooked in medicine is that removing the social side of medicine removes some of its care. This means that automation can help, but should not replace people because patients may get value from the social side of care.

If automation doesn't move standards of living forward, then the automation doesn't matter. You can automate many things in your life and you should. But automate something that you deeply enjoy, such as a computer playing the piano for you rather than you playing your favorite song. It doesn't fit. Why? Because most of us don't want to automate what we enjoy; we want to experience what we enjoy. In some cases, the social side of healthcare is very important - speaking with a caring doctor or nurse actually helps us feel better or inspires us to feel better. If that's what we need, then no report (or future robot) will help us.

"Too Many Young Men In STEM Fields"

Note that this article has been updated to also include some of the private discussions with thought leaders in the past. You can read my final overview of my research into the Millennial generation along with what I predicted and what happened as they matured at this link. While I still speak about Echo Boomers and iGenZ privately, I seldom add new articles to this specific blogspot site. If you're reaching out about a speaking engagement, you can contact me at the research firm SqlinSix.

Apparently, we need fewer men [Update: dead link removed] in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, according to the current administration:

[Highlights snipped; read the full article for details.]

Quotas limiting the number of male students in science may be imposed by the Education Department in 2013.

...

Obama hinted that Title IX quotas would soon come to engineering and techology[.]

The author argues that this is about choice, not gender and makes an interesting point about the liberal arts:

Gender disparities in a major are not the product of sexism, but rather the differing preferences of men and women. The fact that engineering departments are filled mostly with men does not mean they discriminate against women anymore than the fact that English departments are filled mostly with women proves that English departments discriminate against men. The arts and humanities have well over 60 percent female students, yet no one seems to view that gender disparity as a sign of sexism against men. Deep down, the Obama administration knows this, since it is planning to impose its gender-proportionality rules only on the STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, and math), not other fields that have similarly large gender disparities in the opposite direction.

This should strengthen Obama's popularity among women. In addition, I expect that this will help retain and possibly expand his popularity among female Echo Boomers. Statistically, this is a good choice because I've observed that women vote more frequently than men.

The Unintended Effects

I do not care about the political debate on either side regardless of people's view. However, with fewer men in STEM fields, we will see fewer doctors along with fewer hours worked by doctors. I will continue to highlight this point because you will see it in the future: you have a retiring generation (Baby Boomers) which will need healthcare and policies are disincentivizing young men from attending college, who tend to study career paths that lead to medicine. Healthcare will be extremely expensive in the future, but mostly because of the effects on labor that policies like these have.

On a pertinent side note, if you limit the number of men who can enter STEM fields, you'll also have even fewer men attend college. However, I've long said that the best opportunities for young men are no longer in the United States of America in the same manner that the best opportunities for young men in the Soviet Union were not in the Soviet Union.

U.S. Males Dump Marriage

Note that this article has been updated to also include some of the private discussions with thought leaders in the past. You can read my final overview of my research into the Millennial generation along with what I predicted and what happened as they matured at this link. While I still speak about Echo Boomers and iGenZ privately, I seldom add new articles to this specific blogspot site. If you're reaching out about a speaking engagement, you can contact me at the research firm SqlinSix.

[Update: dead image]

It looks as if Pew saw something other social research has failed to see (check out the below image; update - no longer available). Using sentiment trackers and analysis, so far U.S. males (n=1000+) seem to be hostile toward the idea of marriage (contributing to the low marriage rate ?).

This study, of course, is ongoing, and the findings seem similar to the Pew findings - though, unlike Pew, this study does not evaluate what is considered the "most important thing in life," but what is the general sentiment toward marriage of men and women. To a certain degree, I think the Pew study creates a weakness by asking a dumb question, instead of trying to capture the overall sentiment (which would be more accurate). Nonetheless, a post explaining more details about this study (which is much larger) will be forthcoming.

[Update: dead image]

While my study does not calculate age (unlike the Pew study), this seems to reconcile with my findings where Millennial males didn't seem interested in the prospect of marriage. As it turns out, male Echo Boomers may be wise for abstaining from marriage. While this bodes well for men, it creates a dilemma for culture.

Related, there's been an increase in young women who say that having a successful marriage is one of the most important things. A recent study might even show why they would think this since parenthood ranks of high importance to young women as well:

A new study discovers that while mothers have a unique social and emotional bond with each child, a father’s love contributes as much — and sometimes more — to a child’s development.

...

The results from more than 500 studies suggest that while children and adults often experience more or less the same level of acceptance or rejection from each parent, the influence of one parent’s rejection — oftentimes the father’s — can be much greater than the other’s.

In other words, Kay Hymowitz is both right and wrong about family formation: while a marriage - including a man and woman - cultivates the best environment for child-rearing, the Millennial generation will probably have a low marriage rate, affecting its other social value, parenthoood.

Impacts (Update From Private Discussions)

For reasons that I don't care to understand, discussions about marriage and fatherhood can often seem politically incorrect. I will not communicate all my thoughts here for this reason and continue to speak privately about many of the trends along with the why, but there are a few public points worth noting that cannot be denied.

Civilized society is a relatively new concept in human history. It has allowed us to do many things that our ancestors could have only dreamed of doing. But it's not guaranteed. I will end this point here and note that I have more to say privately.

Which Is A Bigger Bubble: Tattoos or Degrees?

My money is on the education bubble popping first, but sooner or later tattoos will lose their appeal with Echo Boomers and other generations.

Dan Eisenberg Discusses Telomere Length and Age

The responses to the interview questions may not represent the views of The Echo Boom Bomb's author. These interviews are provided to inform readers of information from experts and provide these experts with a medium where they can answer questions without any content changes. All linked material to products in interviews such as books or videos are affiliated with the supported platforms, such as Amazon or others. To see the full list of interviews related to Echo Boomers, iGenZ or Automons, see the ending acknowledgements on this post.

Does a birth from a late father potentially affect the longevity of the offspring? Does it have any impact on telomere length? Dan Eisenberg has studied this and discussed this in a recent finding. I recently interviewed him on his study so that he could explain it. You can find the study here. Dan Eisenberg is a Ph.D. candidate at Northwestern University and has been published with many other authors in peer-reviewed journals (which you can read at the link above this). Along with being a Ph.D. candidate, he's received numerous awards and honors, as well as helped with several humanitarian efforts.

1. What were the findings on your recent study related to older fathers and their children in terms of telomere length?

Telomeres are pieces of DNA found at the ends of our chromosomes that cap and protect the chromosome (like the plastic tips at the end of shoelaces). Each time one of our cells replicates telomeres tend to get a little shorter. So as we get older telomeres get shorter (in tissues in our body which replicate). When telomeres get too short, the cell can no longer replicate and sometimes dies off. Thus, shorter telomeres seem to contribute to deteriorating health with age.

However, previous studies have shown that children of older fathers have longer telomeres (probably because as a man ages, telomeres in his sperm get longer). Our study shows for the first time that this happens across at least two generations: older fathers not only have offspring with longer telomeres, but their sons also have offspring with longer telomeres. That is, having an older grandfather on your dad’s side at the birth of your father predicts that you will have longer telomeres.

This implies that having a father and/or grandfather who reproduced at later ages might cause you to live longer because you were born with longer telomeres. This might be an evolutionary mechanism which allows the offspring to receive a signal of what the environment was like in recent generations. If your father and grandfather were able to live to reproduce at a later age it might be more beneficial for you to invest in having a healthier longer life.

You can read the original study here.

2. How do telomeres relate to health and longevity?

Telomere length is shortened by cell division and replication and shortened telomeres limit the ability of cells to replicate. As such, in general telomeres probably influence cells and parts of our bodies in which cells divide and replicate more. Such cells include our immune system, skin and gut lining. Consistent with this, shorter telomere lengths are associated with increased mortality from infectious diseases and cardiovascular diseases.

However, I also want to note that, as in most science, we need to be careful not to assume correlation is causation. Shorter telomeres in blood are also associated with (and probably caused by) increased stress, infection, poor diet and lack of exercise. Because of this, it can be difficult to definitively discern whether and how much associations between shorter telomeres and poorer later health imply that telomeres are causing this or whether telomeres are more of a marker of past damages. Still there are some good reasons to think that shorter telomeres do actually cause poorer health.

3. I know many people are already asking this question at this point, so I'll go ahead and ask it: outside of aging (for men here), any other ways for people to lengthen their telomeres?

The best bet remains the usual suspects: don't eat too much, eat healthy food and exercise. Meat consumption, particularly processed meat has been associated with shorter telomeres (see here, here, and here). I'd recommend avoiding any supplement/medication which claims to extend your telomeres.

If you are asking about how men might extend the telomere lengths of their sperm, this is an intriguing question. The only thing I know of that influences sperm telomere length is age. However, my evolutionary theory about father's and grandfather's age influencing telomere length of children as a sort of adaptive signaling mechanism, raises the question of whether other things in men's environments also influence the telomere length of his sperm.

4. Up to this point in your research, what's been your most suprising finding?

To some extent, I was not very surprised by the results. I predicted that the paternal age effect on telomere length would persist across multiple generations in a publication last year in the American Journal of Human Biology (see here). I predicted this because factors like being a first born child or a last born child of a man in the same environment would result in different telomere lengths. But if the effect of paternal age averages across generations than a baby receives not just the signal of what the environment was like for dad, but dad's dad and dad's dad's dad. This could mean that the telomere length a baby inherits conveys a more accurate message about what the recent past environment was like--and what it is likely to be like for that baby growing up.

On the other hand, we only show this association from paternal grandfather's (father's father's age) not maternal grandfathers (mother's father's age at mother's birth). This is peculiar, was unexpected and calls for more research about why there is such a difference in how telomeres are passed on from mothers than from fathers.

Interview: “I Can’t Afford My Private Student Loans”

My interview with Natalia Antonova

Also, see yesterday's post on how modern "education" has deceived some Echo Boomers and members of iGenZ.

"Give Us Facebook Or We'll Take A Lower Paying Job!"

Note that this article has been updated to also include some of the private discussions with thought leaders in the past. You can read my final overview of my research into the Millennial generation along with what I predicted and what happened as they matured at this link. While I still speak about Echo Boomers and iGenZ privately, I seldom add new articles to this specific blogspot site. If you're reaching out about a speaking engagement, you can contact me at the research firm SqlinSix.

Quick Summary:
Some Echo Boomers would take a lower paying job, provided they could surf Facebook at work. Reminder: Echo Boomers love self-esteem boosts more than sex and money.

For the humorous article of the week but one in which executives should be aware of - some Echo Boomers would take a lower paying job if it meant that they could access Facebook at work:

According to Cisco’s second annual Connected World Technology Report, which surveyed 1,400 college students age 18 to 23, and 1,400 young professionals under 30, across 14 countries, the ability to use social media, mobile devices, and the Internet more freely in the workplace can influence job choice, sometimes even more than salary.

In fact, 40 percent of college students and 45 percent of young professionals said they would accept lower-paying jobs in exchange for those freedoms. You read that right.

In other words, some Echo Boomers see work as another place to "digitally hang out" with their friends. We see this pattern with some Echo Boomers; they don't see doing work as something that fulfills you. Some Echo Boomers don't respect their time, money or the value of their work. To them, work is time to have fun not serve the customer or client.

In other words, companies like Microsoft, Cisco or Apple may consider cutting their Millennial employees' salary while giving them Facebook freedom, and about half of the their Millennial workforce would remain. Likewise, Echo Boomers may not see companies provide them with raises to stay because the generation doesn't take work seriously - as a means of providing value. We may see employers in the future reluctantly give Echo Boomer raises, if at all.

As an interesting side note, I could not tell if the author of the article was kidding or not in some places. For instance:

Remember, as kids they earned trophy after trophy for just for participating. So it’s no surprise to learn that they are hungry for positive feedback.

But like anything else in their lives, if it isn’t posted on their wall, it’s almost like it didn’t happen at all. In other words, accolades that can be viewed by their colleagues will pack twice the punch. Facebook makes it painless to commend and reward your employees publicly.

The message that employers may get here is don't give the Echo Boomers a raise - post a "good job" on their Facebook Wall, and they'll be happy for a day (or week, or month, or year). Technically, Echo Boomers enjoy self-esteem boosts (more than sex and money), and for some, a self-esteem boost may be a post on their Facebook Wall. Getting a "good job" publicly on their Facebook Wall and looking good in front of their friends beats a raise. Of course, there will be Echo Boomers who do not value this flattery and they'll see it as such. If you have an employee who does not have Facebook at all, you may want to stick with giving him* the actual raise.

*I write him intentionally because I don't know a single female around my age without a Facebook account. By contrast, about 10% of my male friends around my age do not have Facebook accounts.

Interview: Matt Kramer On Predatory Leadership

The responses to the interview questions may not represent the views of The Echo Boom Bomb's author. These interviews are provided to inform readers of information from experts and provide these experts with a medium where they can answer questions without any content changes. All linked material to products in interviews such as books or videos are affiliated with the supported platforms, such as Amazon or others. To see the full list of interviews related to Echo Boomers, iGenZ or Automons, see the ending acknowledgements on this post.

Note: the paragraph format of this interview was updated to assist with related and complete thoughts.

A brief biography about Matt Kramer:

Matt Kramer is parent-child mediation, mediator, photographer, entertainment entrepreneur, talent consultant and coordinator. He's based in Dallas and Austin Texas, doing business throughout Central and North Texas, and outside the area. He's also studying predatory leadership and how it affects our society. You can get more information about him on his website, [Update: dead link removed - his site is no longer active] mattkramer.com .

1. What is predatory leadership?

Predatory Leadership is the display, by one's actions, policies or agendas, of their mental, emotional and subconscious investment into attaining their goals, openly or covertly, by any means, with complete disregard or concern for the consequences of their efforts upon others.

2. How has predatory leadership affected the business and political worlds?

Predatory leadership is evident throughout almost all aspects of society.

In the domestic arena, the behavior is identified in verbal and physical abuse in families. In regional municipalities it shows up in government corruption as in the City of Bell, a small town east of Los Angeles in which the city manager was paying himself over $800,000 a year and helping his cronies milk the local economy with comparably illegitimate salaries at the expense of the inhabitants of the city (Gottlieb & Knoll, 2011). It shows up in a corporate culture that replicates the evils associated with destructive forms of competition focused on increasing shareholder profits while ignoring pollution controls, quality control, employee safety, etc. It showed up in Bernie Madoff. One example is the corporate - political scandals in which city officials take or demand bribes, currying favors for vendors and suppliers whose products are not in the best interests of their constituents. It shows up in religious organizations protecting pedophiles at the expense of their victims. It showed up in Radio-Te´le´vision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM) when its disc jockeys spent months exploiting racial prejudice and exhorting its listeners to prepare to reclaim their country via the extermination of their Tutsi neighbors (Li, 2004). It shows up when any dictator censors free press, imposes martial law and assassinates his opponents in order to maintain illegitimate control of the nation.

Predatory leadership wreaks havoc upon humanity in myriad ways too numerous to include in this document. The proliferation of the psychological culture of predatory leadership is thousands of years old. The impact and consequences of this syndrome shows up throughout all levels of culture in ways that are invisible as well as visible. Conventional wisdom says that man is violent by nature, that war is inevitable. That a few bad apples make the organization look worse than it is. But maybe that's just a symptom of the pervasive nature of the predatory leader. There are pockets of humanity, small communities where leaders are not corrupt. There are idealists working hard to change systems that perpetuate destructive, harmful practices at all levels of government and throughout society. Countering their passionate efforts are powerful forces employing maximum effort to sustain the status quo in spite of the harm suffered by many people in the process.

3. What are the solutions to predatory leadership?

While I do not have all the answers, I believe the initial stage of any solution begins with verifiable information. Most people do not recognize the early warning signs of socipathic behavior. Our awareness of the nature of this pathology is akin to the status of medicine in the 16th century – physicians then did not know about bacteria and viruses; most of their theories about illness were wrong. Due to their ignorance, they didn't know they were spreading diseases among their patients.

Teach everyone, especially children, to recognize the early symptoms of narcissism and sociopathy at a young age; they will have the opportunity to make better choices in whom they choose to follow, promote, elect or marry.

A second stage would be to develop opportunities for people to gather and brainstorm more solutions. By educating and involving the general population in generating solutions, ideas will surface that are workable within the resources of those involved.

4. Suppose someone tells you: "People who succeed in business/politics are in leadership positions because they worked harder than everyone else, not because they are sociopaths." How would you address this assertion?

Certainly there are successful business people and politicians who earned their success legitimately. While it may be difficult for the uninformed to identify "healthy" from "toxic" personalities, one concern is that in order to succeed, some of them had to replicate sociopathic behavior (the ends justify the means) in order to gain their success.

For example, a top executive at Nestle's may have empathy and be concerned about the way Nestle's marketing techniques raise mortality rates for third world infants but in order to hold on to his position, he withholds his point of view and goes along with the company's policies (Breastfeeding.com, 2012).

5. Last question, and this one is quite the challenge. I would argue that some people in our world like to be prey; meaning they would like a predator for a leader. While normal individuals, like you and I, find this appalling, after working in social psychology, I studied people who desired to be abused (as disturbing as this phenomena is). How do we address people who want to be abused?

There are a number of reasons this may happen, and you are more correct than you may realize.

On the domestic level, some who have low self esteem deny themselves the opportunity for healthy relationships; subconsciously they will "punish" themselves by getting into abusive relationships.

On the larger social level, some people do gravitate to leaders they feel will carry out policies and agendas they themselves do not want to handle. Another reason is that those leaders provide a parental role – the followers want to believe their leaders know more than they do. The "toxic" follower will believe the lies of a toxic leader who promises lies they want to hear (like blaming a minority for their problems or pushing a false short term solution for a difficult problem), rather than accept a truth (such as a long term solution) they don't want to hear from someone else. (Lipman-Blumen, 2006). Hopefully those who are educated to this phenomenon will not fall prey to it.

Matt's Sources:

1. Breastfeeding.com (2012). The Nestle Boycott. Retrieved from: http://www.breastfeeding.com/advocacy/advocacy_boycott.html

2. Gottlieb, J. & Knoll, C. (2011). Robert Rizzo, aide accused of conspiracy in Bell corruption scandal. Retrieved from: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/31/local/la-me-0331-bell-indictment-20110331

3. Li, D. (2004) Journal of Genocide Research (2004), 6(1), March, 9–27 Carfax Publishing Blumen-Lipman, J. (2006). The Allure of Toxic Leaders: Why We Follow Destructive Bosses and Corrupt Politicians – and How We can Survive Them. New York, NY: Oxford University Press

Who Is Generation Z?

Note that this article has been updated to also include some of the private discussions with thought leaders in the past. You can read my final overview of my research into the Millennial generation along with what I predicted and what happened as they matured at this link. While I still speak about Echo Boomers and iGenZ privately, I seldom add new articles to this specific blogspot site. If you're reaching out about a speaking engagement, you can contact me at the research firm SqlinSix.

Quick Summary:
Generation Z follows Generation Y. Generation Z is born from 1996 to 2011 Generation Z is smaller than Generation Y. Generation Z only knows of a world with the internet, this is why I refer to them as iGenZ. Generation Z (in the United States) faces a dismal economic future.

I explain in this article why I refer to Generation Z members as iGenZ. Like Echo Boomers, I generally refer to the title of the generation as Generation Z (like Generation Y as the title for Echo Boomers).

Basic Introduction

Many of the regular readers know all about Generation Y [updated link] , but may wonder about the following generation: Generation Z. The next fifteen year generation completed its final year of birth (2011), and will be coming of age over the next few decades. What we know about Generation Z at this time is that it's not as large as Generation Y, it only knows about a world with the internet, and it will face a dismal economic picture.

One potential inaccurate statistic that I'll state is that Generation Z is smaller than Generation Y. I state this without numbers because Generation Y is 80 to 86 million strong, whereas kids born from 1994 to 2004 (most of which are Generation Z, though it goes seven years after that date) are only 23 million strong. Numerically speaking, even if the remaining 7 years of Generation Z doubled the first 8 years, it still wouldn't be larger than Generation Y (23 + 46 = 69). On top of this, with the economy current performing poorly, many people (especially Echo Boomers [updated link]!) have delayed family formation: in fact, that's one of the things I write about on this blog. This has sucked some size from Generation Z.

The Millennial generation may not realize this, but many of its members can still recall a world without the internet. They can recall doing research by going to the library and searching manually through a database (gosh, I can remember looking through the actual cards!). The world has completely changed now: with the rise of the internet, Wikipedia, Google and some specialized blogs have become the major source of information, along with electronic news. Generation Z only knows the internet, as the youngest iGenZ (born in 1996) would have been born in a world already with the internet. And about the time these early iGenZ became fully conscious, the internet was becoming widespread. The effects of this fact remain to be seen: I cannot theorize at this time what this will mean for Generation Z. This is one reason that you will sometimes see me refer to Generation Z as iGenZ.

The United States as an economic superpower has declined rapidly over the last decade and this will have a major influence on both Generation Y and Z. Some young members of Generation Y might be able to recall a low national debt and a major surplus (2000), while this is completely foreign to Generation Z as they come of age. This change won't just affect the political spectrum and how iGenZ votes, but it will affect how iGenZ conducts business. The attitudes toward frugality may amp up in this generation if financial factors do not significantly change for the United States soon.

Technology Native

Since iGenZ only know of a world with the internet, we may feel tempted to think they will spend more time on the internet than Echo Boomers. I predict this early, as iGenZ will have early access to the internet in their life. However, we don't require technology as humans. I do not know if the over abundance of technology may shift attitudes toward it. In the same way that Echo Boomers often dislike big companies from previous generations, iGenZ may later dislike technology companies that Echo Boomers loved. We all forget that youth can reject the ideas and behaviors of older generations. This is part of how humanity progresses.

For the present time, iGenZ will heavily use the internet. They will also heavily trust what they see, read or hear on the internet. What happens as they age? We'll see and it's a trend I'll be watching carefully.

Lacking Basic Critical Thought

One iGenZ pattern I've recently made public involves their inability to critically think on a basic level. I've observed this on basic critical thought, not advanced. For an example, taking information about energy in the physical and developing an understanding of how that will affect economic perspectives of trade and value involves synthesizing a broad amount of information that seems unrelated. (Most members of iGenZ will have no idea what I just wrote here.) We all know that this is part of our mind's glory: we can take unrelated information and see patterns, make predictions, and execute on these with success.

However, many members of iGenZ struggle to apply relatedinformation. Consider what I just wrote. We're not talking about a step that involves sythesis or integrated thinking. We're talking basic understanding. An abundance of information (the internet) leads to a lack of execution and an inability to think, even in the information one has. You can see this with iGenZ. Every now and then I'll meet an impressive member of iGenZ, but he (and it's almost always a "he") is only impressive because of his lack of access to his mobile phone and internet. For an example, I once met an iGenZ member who was running three registers at the gas station. When I asked why, he replied that his colleagues called in sick. He was doing the work of three people. But most of his peers would have simply used that as an excuse to surf social media on their phone and distract themselves with non-work related information.

The internet, search engines, and some applications of AI are making this problem worse. At our research firm, we've cautioned people that if you don't practice imagination, then you won't know how to think, but only what to think. We note reading is one way to practice imagination, but that's not the only way (one can stare at the wall for an entire day and this activity will also engage their imagination). Either way, if you work with iGenZ, you'll frequently see this pattern.

Interview: Jessica Setnick on Eating Disorders

The responses to the interview questions may not represent the views of The Echo Boom Bomb's author. These interviews are provided to inform readers of information from experts and provide these experts with a medium where they can answer questions without any content changes. All linked material to products in interviews such as books or videos are affiliated with the supported platforms, such as Amazon or others. To see the full list of interviews related to Echo Boomers, iGenZ or Automons, see the ending acknowledgements on this post.

One struggle that Generation Y females and males face is eating disorders, and it seems to be a growing problem. Like with many problems, misinformation can spread and cause some people to avoid seeking the appropriate help. I recently interviewed Jessica Setnick, who is an expert on eating disorders:

Jessica Setnick introduced her compassionate and practical approach to helping individuals with eating disorders in 2003 with website around eating disorders [updated link and description]. She is the author of The American Dietetic Association Pocket Guide to Eating Disorders and Director of Training and Education for Ranch 2300 Collegiate Eating Disorders Treatment Program [Update: dead link removed]. She is available for presentations and training workshops, and can be reached through her website, www.UnderstandingNutrition.com [link updated].

1. What is an eating disorder?

An eating disorder is the name we give to a chemical problem in the brain that causes a person to use food and eating-related behaviors in inappropriate ways. It is similar to the brain problem that causes a person to use drugs or gambling (for examples) in inappropriate ways. Since scientists/doctors have not been able to identify yet the exact brain problem, we identify eating disorders based on the visible symptoms and behaviors.

2. What factors contribute to or cause eating disorders?

The main contributing factor (as we understand it to date) is a problem with brain chemistry. This problem can be innate (something a person is born with, even if it is not revealed until a later age), or it can be something that is caused by stress, which damages the functioning of the brain, or most likely, it is a combination of the two.

Once the brain chemistry problem is in place, it makes eating disorder behaviors seem desirable, because they modulate brain chemistry. For example, binge-eating changes brain chemistry, because an overload of tryptophan (found in carbohydrates) increases the level of serotonin in the brain. Serotonin gives a feeling of calm to an anxious person. Another example is that self-induced vomiting causes a change in brain chemistry, similar to exercise. When someone with an eating disorder-prone brain is in a panic, vomiting provides them with relief. This behavior then becomes the person’s go-to ‘solution’ for managing stress.

Because the stressor in the equation often comes from the environment, society’s attitudes toward weight and eating are often mentioned as contributing factors in creating eating disorders. The pressure that individuals feel to perform, to meet societal standards of attractiveness, of success, and so on can push them to trial eating disorder behaviors, such as skipping meals, overexercising, dieting, etc. If the person has the genetic or stress-caused brain chemistry problem that makes these behaviors biochemically ‘rewarding’, then he or she will adopt the behaviors on an ongoing basis as a ‘solution’ or self-medication.

3. I've heard that people, who struggle with eating disorders, have emotional connections to food. Is this true, false, or only slightly accurate?

It depends how you interpret ‘emotional connections to food.’ To be more accurate, I would rephrase it slightly into “people with eating disorders use food and eating-related behaviors (eg overeating, undereating, vomiting, overexercising, food rules, etc.) to help manage emotional stress.” So yes, there is an emotional connection with food, and certainly an unhealthy relationship with food, but not necessarily an “I love food!” type of emotional connection.

4. How are eating disorders treated?

The gold standard of eating disorder treatment to date is a three-pronged base of:

Nutritional Counseling (with the goal of nutritional replenishment and restoration, education about the appropriate role of food, and a healthy relationship with food),

Medical Treatment (management of any conditions that have been caused or exacerbated by the eating disorder, such as osteoporosis or osteopenia, thyroid or other hormonal problems, heart conditions, and so on)

Mental Health Treatment (includes both psychiatry, to manage brain chemistry and underlying or exacerbated issues such as depression, anxiety, ADD, OCD, bipolar disorder, chemical dependency, etc. AND psychotherapy, to heal emotional wounds that prolong the eating disorder and to teach skills for more appropriate coping with stress).

Added to those, any combination of group therapy; peer-led or 12-step support groups; family therapy; inpatient, residential, or day hospital care; plus adjunct therapies such as art therapy, movement therapy, equine therapy, and so on; may be recommended on an individual basis.