Earworms 101

When I have a notion that some correlated event in my life is actually causal, I like to try to collect real data on the “notion” to see if it is true.  For example, I might have a sense that reading a book at night helps me to sleep better, or that every time I eat green peppers, I have heartburn at night.  But I wonder – are these vague notions actually true?  Does one cause the other?  Are they even actually correlated?  We all tend to get convinced of these kinds of connections based on just a few events that stick out in our minds.  We become so convinced of the correlation that we live our lives as if the notion were true without really pursuing any test of our assumption. I don’t like the idea of being misled in this way – even if it is something innocuous – so I try to design a way to test the notion and see if the data really supports it.  Over time, I’ll try to discuss a few of these attempts, but, in this entry, I’m going to start with an experience that is, I think, fairly universal:  earworms.

 

Earworms are those songs that play again and again in your head from time to time.  What causes them to happen?  There are a lot of notions about earworms, but I wondered if they were really true.  For example, I’ve heard people say a few times that the song you hear in your head is one that you heard but didn’t get to listen to all the way to the end. The notion is that your brain picks it up and tries to finish it.  Even Wikipedia thinks this notion is true.  But is that really true?

 

You probably don’t care about earworms, but I find them fascinating.  Why do they happen?  I find anything that your mind/brain does to be fascinating.  One interesting thing about earworms is that the song that plays in your mind is sometimes a song you don’t even like.  Often, after some time, you really want to get it out of your mind.  But it seems like you can’t.  It’s my mind, isn’t it?  Why can’t I just say “stop thinking about that song” and my mind just obeys and stops thinking about a particular song?  If our mind can’t control our mind, who does???

 

So…I started trying to track what songs became earworms and the conditions under which I heard the song (if at all) a little over three years ago.  During that time, I have identified 21 earworm songs that lasted long enough for me to remember to write them down.  Unfortunately, I have a bad memory so I know that during the past few years, I’ve forgotten to record earworm songs many times, creating some inaccuracies in my data collection.  I’ve tried to remedy that in the past couple of months – I’ll talk about that near the end of this entry.  But, for what it’s worth, here are my observations:

 

1.  Earworms can be intense while they are occurring, but once they leave my mind, I have a hard time recalling what the song was the next day.  That’s why I found tracking earworms to be difficult.  If I didn’t write it down the day it occurred, I would forget.  I would remember that I had an earworm…but I couldn’t remember what the song was.

 

2.  For me, earworms almost always occur in the morning and tend to only last through the morning.  After that, they are forgotten.  There were only two occurrences over the past 3+ years where the same song lasted two successive days in my head.  For what it’s worth, those songs were “Trying to Get That Feeling Again” by Barry Manilow and “Nobody Does It Better” by Carly Simon.

 

3.  Where do earworms come from?  For me, the most common situation is this:  I listen to music on the way home from work (I typically bounce around about six or seven different stations) and then, two or three days later, the song pops into my mind as an earworm!  I can never tell what song is going to become an earworm and, also, I would have listened to plenty of other songs in the two or three days since I heard it.  This particular characteristic fascinates me.  What is going on in our brains that a song you hear can bounce around unconsciously for days, and then somehow bubble to the surface one random morning?  That’s just crazy.

 

4.  I’ve tried the “partial song” idea.  Sometimes, when I’m coming home from work, I’ll hear a song I like and so I’ll turn it off halfway through (anything for science!).  I can never remember what song it was, but I do remember doing it.  All I know is that none of those songs have ever become earworms. 

 

5.  Earworms aren’t always songs that I heard being played somewhere.  One time I saw a Facebook post listing One-hit Wonders and it included the song “Black Betty” by Spiderbait.  That’s a song I haven’t heard in decades probably.  Yet, a day or so after I randomly read the title on a list, it bubbled up as an earworm.  It’s not a song I particularly like and, in fact, I’d say that earworm songs can be either songs you like or dislike – I don’t think that matters.

 

6.  I’ve rarely had an earworm that was a new song.  In fact, most of my earworms are songs I would have heard many times when I was growing up (like, I mean, 60’s or 70’s music) but haven’t heard much, if at all, since then.  The one exception to this rule (that I’ve noted in the past 3+ years) is the “Wellie Wisher’s Song”, which is a song from a kids show that my grandkids were watching.  That song became a very intense earworm for about a 24-hour period one time while I was on vacation.

 

7.  I wondered if it is possible to “create” an earworm by listening to a song over and over again.  So, I tried listening to a worship song with a simple chorus over and over again on my way to work (typically I hate listening to the same song over and over again – hate it).  The next day was a stressful day at work but then the following morning, that song was an earworm.  So, I do think it is possible to create earworms.

 

8.  I think ongoing stress reduces earworms.  I base this on the fact that earworms tend to go away for me once I get to work and face the various pressures of the day.  Also, during some stressful periods in my life, I’ve had an absence of earworms for one to two weeks at a time.  However, the relationship to stress might be indirect.  For example, when I’m stressed I might be less likely to listen to the radio on the way home, and therefore less opportunity for an earworm to pop up.

 

9.  One thing that seems odd to me is that earworm songs are very rarely a song on my playlist.  I sometimes listen to songs at work with headphones in order to drown out the background noises.  I’m a pretty boring guy, so my playlist has consisted of pretty much the same songs for years.  Yet, as far as I can recall, none of those songs have become earworms.  You’d think that the more common songs would have a higher chance of becoming earworms, but it doesn’t seem to work out that way.

 

10.  As I mentioned earlier, the one thing I couldn’t measure was how often I have earworms.  So, about two months ago I started trying to track earworms every morning.  Here is the data so far:  4 earworm mornings out of 64 total days tracked, or about 6%.  I would say that the last month has been more stressful than usual, and also I think I haven’t been listening to songs as much on my drive home.  Anyway, I’ll keep tracking this over time and see what happens.  I’ll have to give an update down the road.

 

If you feel so inclined, I think you would find it interesting to do your own tracking.  If you do, let me know the results and I’ll pool things together.  I suppose it would also be interesting to see if there are common songs that tend to be earworms…like “Baby Shark”, haha. 

 

One word of warning though.  Just the act of tracking your own earworms has some effect on their occurrence I believe.  For example, in the morning when I fill out my spreadsheet regarding earworms, just the act of thinking “did I have an earworm this morning?” can sometimes trigger an earworm.  In fact, I bet my mention of the song “Baby Shark” in the previous paragraph has triggered an earworm (unless you are one of the fortunate people in the world who has never heard that song).  I apologize for that!

 

If I think about this from a brain physiology perspective, I find the concept of earworms to be quite difficult to explain, and possibly quite useful in understanding some difficult concepts such as consciousness.  An earworm is absolutely a conscious event – that’s what makes it so annoying at times – it seems to be some unconscious meandering of our brain that somehow bubbles to the surface to become conscious.  But how in the world does that happen?  I am conscious of hearing a song on the radio, which then somehow begins bouncing around in my brain totally unconsciously…for days (!), before somehow becoming conscious again and again for a few hours, and then disappears from consciousness, never to be heard from again.  How in the world does that happen??? 

             I know that one thing neuroscientists search for are “neural correlates of consciousness”, which involves figuring out the minimum brain structure that is necessary for consciousness (e.g. humans can lose one whole half of their brain, and yet still be conscious).  But the existence of earworms seems to complicate that concept.  Presumably, songs are stored in memory in the brain in some manner by strengthening the connections between some whole set of neurons.  I don’t think anyone knows the details here, but let’s imagine that there is some way to trigger this series of neurons to “play back” the song in your mind.  By hearing the song once, it makes the “triggering” event to be more sensitive and easier to initiate.  Yet, for some reason it is not triggered for days?  I would suggest that it must get triggered over that period, but it just “plays” the song in the background – in our unconscious mind.  Then, somehow, one day, that same path yields a conscious result and, for whatever reason, now that hair trigger keeps getting tripped repeatedly for a while.  Or maybe it fires spontaneously for a while?

             My point here is that it is the same set of neurons in both the unconscious and conscious case.  The same set of neurons encode the earworm.  So what makes them unconscious for some period and then conscious for another period?  This would mean that the seat of consciousness, or at least some aspect of it, changes over time.  To me, this highly complicates the idea of finding a neural correlate for consciousness because it would seem to indicate that consciousness can “take up residence” in different areas of the brain at different times.  I find this fascinating.

             I suppose it is also possible that the pattern of neuronal firing gets copied from some kind of deep memory into some kind of “conscious memory”, which then gets played over and over.  There is, certainly, a “working memory” or “short-term memory” in the brain.  But one would still have to wonder how it is that such a transfer of a whole set of neuronal firings can get transferred and why does it take days for that to happen?  It’s not like we hear the earworm song again and again between the time that we hear it and the time that it becomes an earworm.  On the contrary, we never hear it again until it pops, often unwanted, into our conscious minds. 

             The existence of earworms does seem to clearly indicate one fun thing about our brains:  our brains must contain some kind of “playlist” of a huge group of songs that we have heard throughout our lifetimes.  I know that some of my earworms occurred with songs that I had not heard for twenty or thirty years.  Yet, somehow, that song has been stored in my brain for all that time – just waiting to be released.  That seems really crazy!!!

 

An Observation

Jesus:  "...hypocrites!..."  Matthew 23:13

I have known many atheists and many theists and many shades of "-eists" in between.  

I just have one question:

Why is it that atheists often live as if there is a God...and theists often live as if there is no God?

We are all hopeless hypocrites.

Solitude...what's that?

             I was reminded the other day about the importance of having a time of solitude away from the distractions of everyday life.  It is my observation that most of us spend 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in the pursuit of distractions.  I don't think that's any new revelation - I think that has been the tendency of our society for decades, if not longer.  But we've honed the skill to an impressive level and we've developed a wonderful array of technologies to help us achieve our goal.  We are now able to achieve 24/7 distraction.  We got what we wanted and...well...it's a disaster!

             There's a car commercial about safety features in some car - automatic braking I think - that illustrates the problem.  A distracted woman who is looking at her phone crosses the street in front of a car.  The driver is also distracted, but the automatic braking system prevents a really bad outcome from occurring.  The driver and walker look at each other, smile, and go on with their distracted lives.  We can all appreciate the physical danger of being distracted.  But the bigger problem with living a distracted life is not the physical danger, but the existential danger.  I'm thinking about the less obvious danger of living your entire life without really considering the big issues of life:  the legacy you will leave after you die, the purpose of your life, and so on.  In fact, I think our society tends to laugh a bit at these kinds of questions, as if they were from an older, less sophisticated time.  Society seems to say "no one asks those questions anymore."  But, if society laughs, it is a nervous laughter.  If you feel that questions like "what is my purpose in life?" are childish, then you have fully bought into a life of distraction and I feel sorry for you.  These are not childish questions at all, although even a child could ponder them. 

             We like to say "what you don't know can't hurt you" even though we all know that is about as false of a statement as any.  But we also live as if "what you don't think about can't hurt you."  That is also false, of course.  We know it is.  We just don't want it to be false and so we try not to think about it.  Which proves the point.

             So, with this blog entry I am going to suggest that you try to overcome the constant world of distraction for at least some finite period of time.  I am also going to suggest a slight bit of "structure" to your escape from distraction.  However, to be honest, if all you do is try hard to escape your world of distraction with no other goal than that it seems like a good idea, you will be better off than most.  You don't have to "structure" your time the way I'm suggesting.  But I figure that some of you might benefit from some ideas!

             Here's what I propose:  I strongly encourage you to take at least three separate sessions of solitude, each at least two hours long.  These have to be real solitude.  You have to go someplace where you can be certain that no human being or man-made thing can talk to you or interrupt your thoughts.  No phone of course.  No checking of texts, emails, etc..  I really doubt you can do this in your house.

             I suggest two hours, but that is a minimum.  A whole day would be much better.  But you need at least two hours because the first hour will be spend trying to "un-distract" yourself and thinking of all the things you have to do.  In fact, it might take a few days to "un-distract" yourself, but you've got to start somewhere.  Some effort is better than none at all.

             Driving is a possible option.  You have to have the radio/phone off.  And you need to go someplace that doesn't require your focus.  Driving on the freeway across the Great Plains is perfect.  In the continental U.S., I'd say the best is to be on I-94 headed west at about 6am on a clear, dry day.  Driving around in a big city, especially one you are unfamiliar with, will definitely not work!

             A hotel room could work, but it likely has more distractions.  A park is ok...but you need to be away from other people, as they are way too distracting.  A walk or run can work.

             As you try to settle in to a time of solitude and thinking, you will constantly be distracted by the things you need to do, so you need some way of writing them down and mentally trying hard to set them aside and move on.  Your mind will drift and after spending two seconds considering one of the questions below, you will find that you've wasted 15 minutes thinking about something else completely. Don't get frustrated with your brain, it's trying its best!  Just focus back on the question at hand and try again.  I am totally convinced that the direction of your life can change in five minutes of deep concentrated thinking.  A time of solitude could lead to a step change in your thinking and the way you live your life.  Of course, in order to get five minutes of deep thinking strung together into one cohesive line of thought may take hours...days?...years???...but you have to try.  You have to try.

             It helps, at least for people like me with bad memories, to be able to write down your thoughts as they come to you.  Or dictate them if you are driving.  For me, a good train of thought comes to me and then I start moving on to something else and I say to myself "I won't forget that first thought - I'll come back to it."  Then I forget that first thought.  I don't know if everyone has the same problem I have, but if I don't write it down, it is gone.  It never happened. 

             As a suggested starting point, I have three questions that I suggest you ponder - one for each of your two hour sessions.  I have a few notes about each question just to get you started, but I really encourage you to go your own way on these.  These are the kinds of questions and topics that we need to think deeply about.  By not thinking about these issues, we've already made some kind of default decision, almost unconsciously, about what the answers are.  The problem is, these are deep, foundational, life altering issues.  Whether we know it or not, every important thing we do, and our response to most issues we face, is dependent on the answers we have either consciously or unconsciously decided on questions like these.  We've built a skyscraper on the dirt.  Maybe we're lucky and the dirt happens to be solid granite and so we are fine.  Maybe.  But maybe we've built on plain old dirt.  It may hurt, but we may find that we need to start over - this time by building a solid foundation first.

             This is your uniquely human privilege and responsibility.  Cows don't think about these things.  So, if you don't take the time to think about these issues, you are no better than a cow.

             To get your mind to think more deeply on the questions below, my suggestion is that, after you express your own thoughts in answer to these questions, you imagine someone next to you saying simply "Really?"  I'm thinking of "really?" in the tone of:  "Are you serious?  Is that really your answer?  Is that the best you could come up with?"  This forces you to think deeper!

             Here are four questions I offer as starting points.  Of course, each question is a group of questions around a common topic.  I'm hoping that the general group of questions helps you to guide your thoughts.  Personally, I would pick only one to concentrate on for each session of solitude.  I know I suggested three sessions, but I have four questions.  So...if you only have time for three sessions, look at the question you're going to have to leave out!

 

1.  Legacy.  What will my legacy be in 100 years?  What do I want to have said about my life?  What am I going to do if I ever retire?  What are my plans after retirement is over?

 

2.  Morality.  What human activities do I see around me that I consider positive activities?  What activities do I see around me that I consider negative activities?  How do I decide which things are positive and which things are negative?  How do I decide which things are good for me to do and which things are bad for me to do?  Is my basis for making moral decisions always based on how I feel about something?  Is there any way that I might be wrong about my moral decision-making?  How would I know if I was wrong?  Has there ever been a time when I decided to do something that I didn't really want to do?  Why did I do it - what caused me to do something I didn't want to do?  Do I always do the things I consider to be positive or good things to do?  If not, why not? 

 

3.  Body and Soul.  Is the "mind" different from the "brain?"  Are any of my thoughts "original" or is every thought the result of previous input to my brain?  Am I really just a bag of chemicals?  What evidence would I need to have to conclude that there is no such thing as a soul?  What evidence would I need to have to conclude that there is a soul?

 

4.  Natural and Supernatural.  How would I know that something supernatural existed?  If there is a God of any sort, what would that God have to do to communicate with me?  How would I know it was God?  Can miracles happen?  How would I know if miracles can or cannot happen?  What defines a miracle? 

 

             Well, there are some questions to get you started.  Now - stop acting like a cow and find your place of solitude!

Top Five Worst Inventions/Ideas Still in Use (Part II)

            This entry continues my list of the top five worst inventions/ideas that are still very much in use today.  In my previous entry on this topic, I covered numbers 3-5.  Now it is time for the top two on my list.  But first, I’ll mention a few things that didn’t make it in the top five, but were close.  The QWERTY keyboard has to be one – that fact that the inefficient keyboard layout persists to today is a bad idea.  Loosely related is the persistence of worthless letters of the alphabet, namely X, Q, and C, which can be replaced by other letters.  I also find that words spelled oddly…or should I say weirdly…make no sense either.  Can’t we just hold to some basic spelling rules?  Another thing that probably should be in my top five is the "rule" that people get to vote on taxes for public schools but almost nothing else.  Why does that make sense?

            As I mentioned before, I think you should try making your own list and writing it up.  Let me know and I will add links.  But remember, the inventions still have to be in use today.  Without further ado, here are my top two worst inventions that are still in use today. 

Worst Idea #2:  The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act...aka "HIPAA"

            HIPAA is a law passed by the US Congress in 1996.  Otherwise referred to as the "Privacy Act" because that is the most visible outcome of the law.  Actually there continue to be additions to the original law.  Some of you probably have never heard of it and so it doesn't make sense that it would be the #2 Worst Idea on my list.  And, honestly, to a certain extent, I am using it here as an example of a law that started with a good idea, got expanded upon in the process of being put together, and then, when passed, had many unintended consequences.  Such laws are, in general, very bad ideas.  Also, unfortunately, such laws are very difficult to undo once they have been enacted.  In my experience, HIPAA is a perfect example of such a situation, it is very bad, and makes it to #2 on my list of the worst ideas that are still part of our daily lives.

            You may not think of HIPAA as part of your daily life, but if you have ever been to the hospital or doctor's office, you had to fill out at least one form that was solely related to the HIPAA law and its subsequent derivatives.  You probably didn't read the HIPAA form because you had 50 other forms to fill out and that one seemed pretty irrelevant.  If you don't work in the healthcare industry in some way, then it probably has little consequence to you.  It wouldn't make your list or even cross your mind.

            I work in medical research and I deal with the consequences, both intended and unintended, every day, whether at work or at home!  And, for the most part, those consequences are entirely a waste of time.  Yes, there are some good things about the general concepts that were part of the original law, but the whole concept of "patient privacy" took on a life of its own.  One annoying thing is that often, even if everyone, including the patient, agree that some of the law's requirements are a waste of time, it is not allowable to bypass the requirements.  It's like creating a 25 mile per hour zone on a freeway so that a family can cross from one side to the other, and then that family says, no, we'll take the bridge five miles down the road, yet the 25 mile per hour zone is left in place.  There's no logic there.  Red tape for the sake of red tape.

            The unintended consequences have to do with the “privacy” part of the law, which, as I understand, wasn’t even the original intent of the law (and the word “privacy” doesn’t even appear in the title).  The original intent was to make sure that health information could “stay with the patient” – meaning it was “portable” (that is in the title) when the patient is treated at different hospitals and clinics.  The privacy part came in under the “accountability” portion of the law.  This also was a good idea, but this is where the really bad (and probably unintended) concepts arise. 

            The HIPAA law and related laws have spawned a whole industry.  Check it out for yourself (for example:  https://www.hipaatraining.com/).  There are companies that sell entire training programs on how to navigate the HIPAA laws.  Every institution doing research had to create an entire process to meet the requirements of HIPAA that rivals the process for obtaining informed consent for research.  All such institutions now have a "Privacy Officer" and a staff of people whose entire job is to make sure that everyone in the institution is following the HIPAA laws so that the institution doesn't get fined.  That is a bad unintended outcome - at least I sure hope it was an untended outcome!!

            I don't know anything about Congressman Bill Archer, but he gets my thumbs down for introducing this bill to Congress.  This was a Pandora's Box.  There are some good things in this law, but there are also some really poorly thought-out aspects that, at this point, are nearly impossible to undo.  It is more red tape that slows progress and created a whole industry that creates nothing productive.  It's like creating a new tax that just goes to pay the salaries of the people collecting the new tax. 

            Laws with unintended consequences, baggage and red tape are #2 on my list.  But, in my opinion, there is one clear winner...

           

Worst Idea #1:  Hand Blow Dryers

            Yes, I'm talking about those stupid hand dryers that you find in public bathrooms.  It seems like they have been around for about 30 years or so.  Someone decided it was a way to save trees by reducing the use of paper towels.  They did a good job of marketing them to cities and counties and states, and so they are everywhere now.  I hate them.  If they were a good idea, people would install them in their homes.  They don't.

            Maybe they don't bother you.  They bother me because of a number of factors that come together:  1) I end up in lots of places where the bathrooms have hand dryers (like rest stops and so on), 2) unlike most men (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4504379/), I always wash my hands after using the bathroom, 3) I like my hands to be dry, 4) I don't want to spend any more time in a public restroom than I have to, so I want to get in and get out.

            The thing is, paper towels work great.  They are fast, efficient, and they just work.  It's hard to improve on something that is so simple:  a wimpy piece of paper.  With a paper towel, you can dry your hands in 5 seconds.  You can even dry your hands as you're walking out the door if you really are in a hurry.  You can take a paper towel with you to clean something up.  Hand blow dryers take what seems like forever to work and they cement you to one specific spot.  If you really want your hands fully dry, you've got to stand right there until they are dry.  I've timed them - they take maybe 30-60 seconds typically.  But that is a five- to ten-fold increase in the time it takes to dry your hands.  That's a poor trade-off.  In my observation, men are much more likely not to wash their hands at all, or to leave with completely wet hands, when the only option for drying their hands is one of those ridiculous hand blow dryers.  Further, recently I've noticed some bathrooms have both paper towels and a hand dryer.  In those cases, I have never ever observed anyone opting for using the hand dryer.  Does anyone think they are better at drying your hands???

            Part of the problem with hand blow dryers is not the dryer itself but the way they are implemented in public restrooms.  First, there is often just one, which then becomes the main bottleneck in a busy bathroom.  Again, what happens?  People don't wash their hands because they don't want to stand in a line waiting for the one precious dryer.  This is especially great if it is an old wimpy dryer that takes forever to work.  Also, I've sometimes observed them to be placed up high, which means that when you use it, it blows water all over you.  If you're in a wheelchair, then you're really stuck, not to mention that the dryers are against the wall which makes them hard to get to in a wheelchair.  Paper towels you just grab and go and dry your hands anywhere.  There is never a line for people waiting to get paper towels!

            Of course, the big supposed draw of hand dryers is that you are doing your part to save trees by making hand drying much more inconvenient.  If that was really the goal, then they should be crank operated (or put a pedal down below and operate the fan with your foot).  To install a device that sucks up electricity to drive a heater and high-powered fan in exchange for a paper towel dispenser that uses no energy at all seems like a very questionable trade-off for claiming that it is "good for the environment."  It also takes energy and resources to build the hand dryers.  Of course the same can be said for the process of making paper towels.  At home we use cloth towels, which have to be washed and require energy and water.  It's not simple to figure out which option is the most energy efficient.  My guess is that they are all pretty similar and that the impact on the environment is not drastically different among the different options.  If I were to rate things on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 = no impact on the environment and 5 = huge impact on the environment, I'd say they would all be given a "2".  Therefore, the decision regarding what option for hand drying should be made on other factors...like efficiency of hand drying!  I'm pretty sure that you could do a lot more to help the environment by riding a bicycle instead of driving a car.

            Somewhere along the line, the marketers of hand dryers needed an additional sales gimmick beyond the idea that they were good for the environment, so they came up with the idea that they spread less germs.  I assume the point was that there was less touching of things with a blow dryer?  I don't know - it's not like you're grabbing the same paper towel that someone else used.  I think the idea was that with a manual paper towel dispenser, you sometimes had to pull some kind of lever to get the next towel out.  But there are plenty of other ways to design a paper towel dispenser so that you don't have to touch anything other than the towel.  Further, a lot of hand dryers have a button you have to push, so that totally defeats the "no-touch" concept.  Maybe the argument was that air had less germs than paper???  Well, as you probably know, that concept was totally debunked.  As it turns out, hand dryers are really good at blowing germs onto your hands, as described in this study:  https://aem.asm.org/content/84/8/e00044-18.abstract

            One thing I found while traveling across the country one time when I was on crutches for a bad knee:  hand dryers are as inconvenient as you can get.  I don't think anyone thought this through.  After you hobble to the sink to wash your hands, you now have to find where the hand dryer is, because it is never right next to the sink (probably because that would be an even bigger bottleneck - or maybe someone doesn't want to mix water and high current hand dryers!).  If you need your crutches to walk over to where the dryer is, you have to grab the crutches with your wet hands.  Also, there's no place to rest your crutches near the hand dryer.  Paper towels just work better - assuming they are placed next to the sink, where they should be.

            Another limitation is if you want to dry some other part of your body other than your hands.  For example, when you drive across the country, it is not uncommon that you want to wash your face or your mouth.  Hand dryers are not designed to dry your face.  Paper towels just work better.  It's obvious.

            So, in summary hand dryers are slow, they are inconvenient, they spread germs, and they probably use up just as much energy and have just as much impact on the environment as paper towels.   For those reasons, hand air dryers are the #1 worst invention that we currently still use.  That's an invention I'd like to see disappear!

Top Five Worst Inventions (or Ideas) Still in Use (Part I)

            I know that there are plenty of lists of the “Ten Worst Inventions” or “Top 100 Bad Ideas” – lists that include New Coke, the Edsel, the motorized surfboard or the machine gun that shoots around a corner.  But those are all obviously flawed and never became popular.  And then there are lists of ideas that were very popular at one time and now you wonder why they seemed like such good ideas – like pet rocks or eight-track tapes (fade out – click – fade in…who thought that was an acceptable idea??).  As much fun as those lists are, I’m not intending here to duplicate those lists.  I’m taking a different approach.  I want to consider ideas that are still very much in use today and, as far as I can tell, probably will still be used in the foreseeable future.

            First, a few caveats and rules.  This list will, necessarily, be U.S.-centric, although I believe some of these are used world-wide.  Most of these inventions/ideas have been around for a long time.  But the key point is that they are still in use and still accepted as if they were good ideas today!  Actually, I think the #1 item on my list is going to become a thing of the past, but the others seem fairly well-entrenched in our society.  But, in my opinion, they should all go.  And we would all be better off for it!

            Given the basic topic, I had to make some additional requirements – otherwise the list becomes kind of boring.  First, I left out all inventions related to war.  One could certainly make the argument that the atomic bomb was the worst invention of all time – at least on some level.  Or that gunpowder was a bad idea.  If you think war is fundamentally bad, then these would certainly be bad ideas, despite the fact that they have other positive uses.  But if you kept war inventions on the list, then that would be the whole list and it would hardly be interesting.  Second, I left medicines off the list.  Medicines of course can be great, but can also have awful side-effects.  Chemotherapy, for example, would probably be on the list of “worst inventions” even though it saves lives.  Opiates would also be on that list.  Further, I didn’t include anything related to tobacco or alcohol.  I think the point with many of those items is that even the inventors of those things recognized that they had both positives and negatives (like chemotherapy).  So…none of those things are on the list. 

            Of course, this is my list so I picked the things I think are the worst.  You may disagree with me on some of these and some of them may not annoy you as much as they annoy me.  So…you should make your own list!  Maybe someday we can get rid of these and replace them with better ideas.

Worst Idea #5:  Speed Bumps

            Speed bumps are a bad idea.  I’m talking about those lumps of asphalt placed in parking lots or sometimes on streets that are jarring to your car.  They are placed there so that people don’t drive too fast.  To me they are extremely annoying.  They are uncomfortable to drive over and they surely are not good for your car.  They have no redeeming qualities.

            What makes this a bad idea?  Well, they are designed to solve the problem of people driving too fast in certain places.  Apparently, signs saying “slow down” or “speed limit 10 miles per hour” don’t work.  Having police or someone monitor the location is just too expensive.  But a speed bump hardly seems like a good solution.  I imagine some meeting somewhere where this was first discussed.  “I have an idea:  let’s destroy the road so badly that people can’t drive fast over the road or it will destroy their car.”  Seriously?  That’s the best idea anyone could think up???  A speed bump is like creating an intentional chuck-hole in the road, and then maintaining it so that it stays as a chuck-hole. 

            This has one of the key features of bad ideas that you will see as a theme in this list:  it punishes everyone equally when only a few people are really being targeted.  Not everyone speeds along in a parking lot.  In fact, most people proceed slowly because they don’t want to get into an accident.  Yes, there are a few crazy people.  But punishing everyone seems like a bad idea.  In fact, it makes me wonder:  if fear of messing up their car in a parking lot fender-bender doesn’t cause people to go slower, then why would creating a bunch of chuck-holes make people go slower?  Do speed bumps even work?  Yet they are everywhere.  Bad idea.

Worst Idea #4:  English System of Measurement

            I’m not talking here about the original invention of the foot, yard, mile, pound, etc.  Those original ideas are fundamental and important.  But I’m considering the continued, stubborn use of the English System to be the #4 worst idea.  The metric system is just better.  No one would pick the English System in a blind taste test.  But we, in the U.S., keep drinking the English System coolaid even though it tastes bad and is more expensive.  How can that not be one of the worst ideas ever?

            But really, what’s so bad about keeping both systems around, as we do in the U.S.?  Well…many, many, many, many things.  First, it hinders communication.  When other people across the world use the metric system, we are unfamiliar with what they are referring to.  I know that language barriers are difficult (which, by the way, probably should have been on my list), but why should we throw in something so basic as units of measure?  Second, trying to maintain two units, switching back and forth, creates opportunity for mistakes…like the Hubble!  That was one expensive missed unit conversion.  Third, the English System is more difficult to learn…and we make our kids learn both.  In fact, we make them learn how to convert units from one system into another.  Fourth, it is an extra expense for the average consumer.  For example, I have an English and a metric socket set.  And those costs are hidden in other products – mechanics, for example, have to have two full sets of tools, and that expense gets passed on to the consumer. 

            I know there are major problems with converting to the metric system.  I remember some big push in the mid-70s when I was told we were going to switch en masse – as a nation – to the metric system on some day (or at least that’s how my kid-mind translated it).  Highway speed limit signs were changed to km/h.  Radio stations started giving the temperature in Celsius.  It was weird.  People tried changing their idioms…”a kilogram of flesh” or “walk a kilometer in their shoes.”  Whatever that was (I guess that was the Metric Act in the 70’s – I don’t know exactly – I was a clueless teenager at that time), it was a dismal failure.  The fact that car speedometers have km/h as well as mph dates back to that time I think.  In fact, as I recall, cars around that time had the km/h as the large numbers and mph as the small numbers.  Well… that didn’t work!

            The biggest difficulty with conversion to the metric system, though, is the manufacturing base.  The fundamental components of manufacturing systems are based on the English system.  It’s not just that the milling machine bit is one quarter inch in diameter with a one quarter inch shaft. It comes down to issues such as milling machines being built on drive screws with English units (hundredths of an inch).  Every scale on the machine is in hundredths of an inch.  Converting such a machine, if it is even possible, is very expensive.  And it comes down to the manufacture of basic building materials.  Houses are made with 2X4 studs and half inch plywood sheets.  All totally based on English units.  And those sizes don’t convert to any reasonable round number metric units.  To change all of that infrastructure is an incredible expense.  The more you think about how the basic units of measure affect every aspect of your lives, the more you realize what a daunting task it is to convert the entire country’s infrastructure to a metric-based system.

            I don’t know if we will ever change.  I think each successive generation is more well-versed in the metric system, so maybe that will influence us over time.  Personally, I will know we’ve made the fundamental change when I go to the lumberyard and have to buy 45X90s instead of 2X4s and when plywood comes only in logical metric thicknesses (10mm, 25mm).  Then I know we will have made the leap and left this bad idea.  And guess what?  Even though I know it’s a bad idea to stick with the English system, I will not be happy!  I will still have a workshop full of tools and bits and jigs and fixtures that are all designed around English units.  Instead of being able to pass them on to my kids, they’ll probably just end up as scrap metal.  Melted down, I suppose, and turned into metric tools!

Worst Idea #3:  Keys and Passwords

            Yes, I know that this is an unusual entry and probably not on most people’s lists of bad inventions.  What's wrong with keys?  Keys can be very creative.  Coupled with locks, it’s actually quite an impressive technology in and of itself.  However, my contention is that, though keys are extremely creative, the whole need for keys (and locks) is based on a fundamentally flawed foundation.  

           

            Why do we need keys and locks and passwords?  For example, I have some kind of electronic key for my minivan (that apparently would cost me hundreds of dollars to replace if I lost it – how is that an improvement?).  I have to have it to start my car.  Why?  Why do I personally have to have a key?  Why do I have to lock the doors whenever I get out?  Why?  There’s only one reason:  to keep someone else from stealing my car. 

            To me that is the fundamental flaw:  keys solve the wrong problem.  The better solution would have been to change simple human behavior!

            Let’s go back to some ancient time in human history when keys and locks were first invented.  I have no idea when that was, but let’s just say they were invented by the Egyptians some five thousand years ago.  Some Pharaoh experienced the problem that people were taking food from his storehouses and he decided this had to stop.  He sat with his wise council and heard them come up with two major options.  On the one hand, one wise counselor suggested that they could put a hidden stick through a hidden hole and lock the door to the storeroom.  Only the Pharaoh, who would be told where the hidden lock was, would know that you needed to remove the stick in order to get in.  The second wise counselor had a totally different idea.  He suggested that they train people not to steal!  Everyone laughed when this wise counselor brought up his idea.  As you might guess, the first counselor was promoted to the position of Royal Locksmith and was famous for the rest of his life.  And his hidden stick trick lasted about two days until someone figured out where the stick was hidden.  Then that wise counselor came up with a new version of his lock, and that took the thieves a couple of months to figure our…and the cold war between owner and thief was on.  And continues to this day.  Owners make more complicated locks and keys.  Thieves figure them out.  Everything has to be locked up to keep it safe.  A key for your house.  A key for your car.  A key for your office.  A combination for your safe.  A combination for your bicycle lock.  A key code to get into your bank account.  …a password to get into your computer…and another password…and another password…and an encryption service…and so on it goes.  The battle between owners and thieves is never-ending and unwinnable.  Just think about how much time and money is spent making sure our “stuff” is locked up!  There are whole industries built around this constantly escalating cold war.

            And so we put up with keys and carrying around keys.  We have key card access which then gets accidentally revoked or gets messed up or the card gets lost. I think it would be interesting to know how much productivity is lost across the world by the need for security options.  And don’t get me started on passwords!  How many do you have?  I have hundreds and there is no chance that I can memorize them.  So, I have to take the time to look them up just to get into my own accounts.  In fact I have a password to get into this blog!  Why?  So that you don’t break in and write some blog for me?  Is that a problem?  OK – I asked you not to get me started on passwords.

            Here’s how ridiculous we have gotten with this whole thing.  A few years ago I had my car stolen while I was at work.  When I called my insurance company, one of the first questions they asked me was “was the car locked?”  I assured them that the car was locked.  Later I found out that if my car hadn’t been locked, my insurance would have denied my claim.  Denied my claim?  Don’t you see how messed up that thinking is?  The thieves have won!  Their behavior is considered so normal that if I fail to lock up my own car, it’s my fault it got stolen.  Is that right?

            Well, I say we should stop laughing at the second wise counselor and just consider it for a moment.  Why do we tolerate stealing?  Everyone agrees it is wrong.  My wife and I have raised five kids.  I've had five different two-year olds, and, guess what?  You teach them not to steal!  You don't just say “Oh well, that's part of human behavior. Go ahead and take things.  We’ll just lock up everything we don’t want you to have.”  Yes, I know - we put locks on cabinets so the toddlers can't get into them and we put covers over electrical outlets.  But that’s because they are toddlers and they haven’t learned yet.  But they also aren't going to be deep thinkers in terms of lock-picking ability.  These are simple “locks” for a brief period of time.  But when they get older we don’t just escalate the “cabinet-lock cold war” and start installing a deadbolt on every cabinet so that our five-year old can’t get in.  No.  We teach them not to steal and we don’t tolerate stealing.

            So why is it that when it comes to adults we have to have all sorts of fancy contrivances to try to keep rational human beings from stealing our stuff?  To me it seems to be an incredible failure of human ingenuity.  We can train two-year-olds, but we can’t train adults???  To borrow a common phrase…”We can get someone to the moon and back alive but we can't figure out how to stop someone from taking things that are not their own?”  Doesn’t that seem odd to you?  It does to me.

            The point is, maybe if the Pharaoh had taken the second counselor’s advice, and we’d been working on how to modify human behavior for the past 5000 years, maybe we’d be better off!

            Of course I know that fixing human nature would rival the invention of writing as the greatest ever.  However, to me it's a sad indictment on our complete inability to modify human behavior.  But, then, I also believe that human beings are fundamentally flawed – unable to live up to even their own personal standards – but that that’s a whole different topic for another time. 

            Because the owner-thief cold war is unwinnable and going to continue for forever, I’m making keys and passwords my 3^rd worst idea – only because it is a very costly solution to a common problem. Of all the things on my list, this one is the one I'm certain is going to persist throughout all of human history.

            ….NextI will reveal my top two worst inventions of all time.