I am not a scientist or a doctor or connected to the health care industry in any way…but I’d like to think I have a little common sense.

And my common sense has me questioning the new guidelines released this week for mammograms.

I understand the new guidelines are based on scientific evidence but what about anecdotal evidence?

Here are just two examples in my own life.

My sister’s dear friend Kathyrn from Austin, Texas was diagnosed this year with breast cancer after a self-breast exam.  She is 33 years old.

My former colleague and friend at KIRO-TV, Michelle Millman, discovered a lump earlier this year during a self-breast exam.  She is 42 years old.

If both of these women followed the new guidelines they would not have had mammograms or even conducted self-breast exams.

Thankfully these women detected the cancer early and they have a good chance of beating it and becoming breast cancer survivors.

Please watch this video of Michelle Millman reacting to the new guidelines.  We can all learn from her insight and grace.

I have used this blog to write mostly about issues relating to the media and this topic is so timely, I had to get it in.

I was asked recently, “When, if ever, is it appropriate to use photographs or video of dead American troops?”

During my 13 years as a journalist I have worked in five newsrooms and this question has been discussed many times, especially since September 11^th.

The issue came up this week because of the death of Army Specialist Aaron Aamot.  Aamot is a Ferndale High School graduate and the first Whatcom County soldier to be killed in the War in Afghanistan.

A local journalist/blogger provided a link to a national news website that posted photographs of the last minutes of Specialist Aamot’s life and that of his comrade.  The photos show his military vehicle overturned and on fire.  It also shows the mortally wounded troops pinned under the vehicle and rescue efforts to save them.  And finally there is a photograph of two body bags.

There are no hard and fast rules when it comes to the usage of graphic photos like these.

Wide shots are generally accepted but shots of bodies or body parts are usually frowned upon.  News directors and reporters usually ask themselves several questions before making a decision.  Is this video or photograph absolutely critical to the story?  Does it add an important element to the story that can’t be achieved through other means?  Can the story be told without the images?

The day after September 11^th, my news director at the time, banned all video of the airplanes hitting the towers, the towers falling, people jumping to their deaths and victims on stretchers.  He said it was out of respect to the victims and their families.  When I worked along the Texas/Mexico border my news director at the NBC station had a ban on all photos/video showing bodies, body parts, body bags and/or blood.  And in that situation we were dealing with mostly drug cartel members and murderers.  So, if there was a ban on the deaths of those types of individuals what do you think would be the protocol on the deaths of American heroes?

I am fortunate that I’ve worked with news directors and editors that don’t believe in, “if it bleeds it leads.”

If it were my story and my decision in this situation, I would likely have used the battlefield shots and stay clear of the more sensitive photographs.  Specialist Aamot was just killed last week, he hasn’t even been laid to rest.  His family is going through the unimaginable right now and images of their loved one on the battlefield can only cause more discomfort.

But what do you think?  Are these photos appropriate?

This video is a MUST see.  It is 11:33 long but I promise it is worth it!  It’s Jon Stewart of the “Daily Show” slamming CNN for fact-checking SNL.

Warning: the last minute is quite crude and contains foul language.  The words are bleeped out.

The best program on television, hands down, is CBS News Sunday Morning.

While most people look forward to sleeping in on a Sunday morning, I set my alarm.  I rise around 7 o’clock, start the coffee and settle in for an hour and a half of entertaining, thought provoking, stimulating, totally absorbing, and compelling stories.

This news magazine program that started in 1979 hasn’t changed much since…well, 1979.  It is a slower-paced, in-depth series of taped news stories.  There are no “live” reports, flashy graphics, background music or shaky camera movements.  The show even ends with a 30 to 60 second video from a park or garden with only nature as the soundtrack.  Who does that anymore?  60 seconds of birds chirping or waves crashing on shore would lead to an immediate channel change on any other show but it works somehow on this program.

In this age of reality TV, cable news and incessant entertainment-driven news, CBS News Sunday Morning is a breath of fresh air.  Yes, I know, it’s an odd use of the word “fresh” in describing a news magazine that’s been on the air for 30 years but it really is my favorite show and a great way to start a Sunday, my favorite day of the week.

I understand the use of death penalty in the United States of America.  Our criminal justice system is a well thought out legal network of checks and balances and it’s hard to dispute the accuracy of DNA evidence.

But what about executions in Iraq?  This article made me shudder.  How could anyone support the death penalty in a society eroding with injustice and violence?

When I worked in Seattle, I interviewed many people when city officials first proposed a 20-cent fee on disposable bags.  The vast majority supported the idea, so I was a bit surprised that the measure failed.

I have a couple of conflicting views on the issue.  Personally, I use reusable bags and wish more people would do the same.   There are billions of plastic bags in our landfills, along our highways and on the bottom of the ocean– all harmful conditions for our environment.  Some opponents have said that there isn’t any proof that less bags or the proposed fee would actually help the environment.  Well, I say, it certainly wouldn’t hurt.

But, on the flip side, I think when it comes down to it, I would not support a measure that tried to affect change through a tax.  Maybe with time and education more people will choose to do the right thing on their own, not forced into action with a tax.

I personally don’t feel that the protests and presence of healthcare opponents at town-hall meetings are manufactured, but I do feel many of those people are doing a great disservice to their cause.

Swastikas, hanging lawmakers in effigy, death threats—you are losing all credibility… for you and, unfortunately, even for the people who are bringing legitimate arguments to the debate.

I say if you feel strongly one way or another, go out in force!  Express yourself!  But compose yourself, so you come across as someone with intelligent and well thought out arguments for healthcare reform.

The person who screams the loudest, does not win the fight!

A Sudanese female journalists faces 40 lashes for wearing pants in public which is against strict Islamic law.  She is also quiting her U.N. job that gives her immunity so that she can challenge the law.

A painful but powerful stand, detailed in this article.

The federal minimum wage increase took effect recently.  And, of course, the debate immediately began and still rages on as to whether it’s a good move for our economy.  One side says it will hurt businesses, as owners will be forced to lay off additional employees.  The other side says it will generate millions of dollars in consumer spending.  And there are others who say the wage increase still falls short for America’s lowest earners.

On the morning the increase took effect, ABC News Radio asked a few workers in North Carolina for their reaction.  Here’s a sampling we played on the Bellingham Morning News.

“That’s a haircut.”  “Maybe I could go to the club twice in a week.”  “That’s great!  My phone bill is unreal.  I’ve got to pay it.”

Are you kidding me!  Was that just a bad sampling of interviews?  Or, has this recession not hit us hard enough?  I thought in this down economy people were struggling to put food on the table, saving more, cutting back on over-consuming, and revaluating life’s priorities.

Are we so spoiled that someone’s biggest concern is that they can only go to the club once in a week?  If you’re phone bill is too much, stop sending so many texts or stop talking so much.

I can only imagine what my grandparents would have to say about our struggles, compared to what they went through during the Depression.

I know that there are families truly scraping by during this recession and that’s why it infuriates me to hear people complaining about such inconsequential things.

I expect us to examine and fawn over the First Lady’s choice of clothes on inauguration day but I was blown away by two recent headlines on the Huffington Post website.  “Michelle Obama, Family Changes Clothes Mid-Flight” and “Obama’s Fourth of July Fashion”.  The first article even included detailed photos of shoes, belts, sweaters, etc.!  Since when do we care?

Does our obsession with celebrities and material objects now include the office of the President of the United States?  What do you think?  It seems trivial and quite silly to me.