To celebrate Women’s History month, this year I am going to profile Lizzie Magie.

Who?

I hadn’t heard of her either until herstory (sic) was revealed in 2015.

Elizabeth (aka Lizzie) Magie invented the game Monopoly.

Oh no, you say, that was Charles Darrow, who created the game during the depression, was rejected by the major game companies, and produced it himself. A Philadelphia department store, Wanamaker’s, agreed to sell it and it became a hit. Only then did the major game companies take notice. Darrow claimed that he was the sole inventor and Parker Brothers purchased the rights to the game, giving the family royalties in perpetuity.

Except that is only the tail end of the story. The game of Monopoly went through several iterations before Darrow played it at a friend’s house in Atlantic City and called it his own invention.

The original game was invented and patented by Elizabeth Magie in 1904. She was the first developer of a square boardgame. Before her invention, games were played on linear boards. Her patent would have been lost to history had Parker Brothers not tried to sue Professor Ralph Anspach for trademark infringement when he offered an Anti-Monopoly game. As part of Anspach’s decade-long legal defense, he discovered that the true story of Monopoly was missing a few game pieces.

The board game, Monopoly, bears little resemblance to the game that Magie patented and even thwarts the original purpose of her game, which she named The Landlord’s Game.

But we’ll get to that. First, let me tell you why I am highlighting Lizzie Magie for Women’s History month.

Lizzie Magie was born in 1866 at a time when women had few options in life. Fortunately, she was born to a family who encouraged her to use her intellect. Her father was a newspaper publisher and an abolitionist.

Magie was an outspoken feminist and a critic of the role that women were relegated to at that time. To highlight her views, she purchased an advertisement auctioning herself off as a “young woman American slave” looking for a husband to own her. Its goal was to show the limited opportunities and status for women and African American people in America. She believed the only people who were free in America were white men.

In the early 1880s, she moved from Illinois to the D.C./Maryland area and worked as a stenographer, typist, and news reporter. She was also a short story and poetry writer, comedian, stage actress, feminist, and engineer.

At the age of 26, Magie received her first patent for an invention to make the typewriting process easier by allowing paper to go through rollers. At the time, women held fewer than 1% of all patents.

But, back to Monopoly.

Magie was a staunch advocate of Georgist philosophy, a progressive economic theory named after Henry George. Georgists proposed a single tax on land instead of income. The tax would be assessed according to the usefulness, size, and location of the land. It was to replace other taxes that are considered to be both unfair and inefficient. Wealthy property owners would pay higher taxes and those who owned no property would pay no taxes.

Many progressive political leaders at the time supported this economic perspective. In theory, it would motivate people to cultivate land and would redistribute wealth to people of low socioeconomic status. It put a premium on people’s work over their ownership of land.

To demonstrate how much better a cooperative Georgist approach was over capitalism, Magie invented The Landlord’s Game, which could be played both as a strictly capitalist game (such as Monopoly is today) or a Georgist game. The purpose of the game was to demonstrate that the cooperative Georgist approach resulted in all the players being happy vs. the capitalist version where there was only one winner.

The Landlord’s game gained a following among the intellectual elite, being played by faculty and students at colleges such as the Wharton School at University of Pennsylvania, Harvard University, and Columbia. Eventually a community of Quakers in Atlantic City adopted the game and gave it its property names. It was this game that Charles Darrow played thirty years after Magie’s patent.

The Atlantic City version game retained the core elements of Magie’s game, but also included modifications to make the game easier to play. The Quakers renamed the properties after Atlantic City streets and added fixed prices. Darrow eliminated the Georgist rules, redesigned the board, added tokens (at the time people were using whatever pieces were handy such as a thimble), designed the cards, and named the game Monopoly.

After discovering that Magie owned the original patent, Parker Brothers purchased her Landlord’s Game patent and two more of her game ideas; but there was little promotion for those games, and the games were lost to history.

In my opinion, what makes Magie an important figure in Women’s History is not the game that she originally invented, but who she was. She was an early feminist, willing to flout the conventions of her time and live a broader life. Her life goal was to increase opportunities for women and African Americans. And the fact that she invented the predecessor to the game of Monopoly, well that is just one more feather in her cap.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

As I have gotten older, driving the car 26+ hours from my Talbot County home to Key West, has gotten too difficult. My two dogs are very good travelers, but it is a long trip for all three of us. The past few years I have been leaving my car in Maryland and living in Key West without a car.

Key West is a small bicycle Island and it is not very difficult living without a car. Friends and relatives loan me a car on the rare cases when I need one…but otherwise, I can get around easily on my bicycle.  When I first moved to Talbot County, I saw the same opportunity for replacing cars with bicycles. We have a flat landscape, reasonable weather, and wide roads. Attempts to get more bicycle lanes were not successful, but, for the most part, I can get by with cycling around town and using my car twice a week. It is a lifestyle that I have been drawn to.

That leaves the problem, what to do with the car. A hybrid car is not happy unless it gets weekly mileage. Easy enough when I am here, but not so easy when I am in Key West.

This year I left it on a farm and the local caretaker agreed to drive it once a week. But last week, the car was not operating properly, lights were flashing, and it would only go 5 miles per hour.

I had it towed to the local dealer, not looking forward to the bill. The dealer called, it was a first for them, a little bunny had stowed away in the engine. ( It is hard to see her tucked away in my engine, but I hope you can see her little pink nose in the picture.) She had chewed through some wires and built herself a little nest.

“Don’t kill it,” I pleaded.

The repair crew agreed and spent several hours (cha-ching) coaxing her out of her unusual nesting choice.

It is funny how we view critters. I chase the bunnies that munch on my beloved pansies and flowers; but I want to save a little guy nesting in my engine, costing me a fortune in repairs. I wonder what it is, maybe just the sheer tenacity of this little bunny, or her cute little bunny nose…but I handed the dealership my credit card and she ran off into the woods.

And left all of us with bunny tales.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

Recently, a joint Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committee unanimously approved an over-the- counter (OTC) version of the prescription naloxone (aka NARCAN) nasal spray, an opioid overdose reversal agent.

Opioid overdoses are a national crisis. In 2021, there were over 80,000 opioid overdose deaths (70–80% of all drug overdose deaths in the US). Thirty four percent of opioid overdoses happen to individuals under 34. The rise of fentanyl-laced drugs is considered a key reason for these rising death rates.

Opioid deaths occur because of respiratory depression (the victim stops breathing). Ninety five percent of opioid overdoses can be successfully reversed if naloxone is administered in time. The drug begins working right away, enabling victims to breathe normally 2 to 3 minutes after the first dose.

The drug is easy to administer and does not require inhalation, assembly, or specialized training. It’s also easy to carry, store, and does not require needles. Further, in 40% of the deaths, there was a bystander who could have administered naloxone.

Proponents argue that making naloxone spray available OTC in vending machines, convenience stores, supermarkets, and big box stores would help overcome current barriers to accessing the drug. For example, despite the rising death rates, some pharmacies still refuse to stock naloxone.

All 50 states have a Standing Order which allows pharmacists to dispense naloxone without a prescription. However, states have different liability protections and different rules for when a pharmacist can prescribe the drug.

Easier access to naloxone could also reduce the shame and stigma, especially among the young and most vulnerable, who fear that going to the ER might result in exposure or arrest. This may be their first encounter with a drug, or they may have gotten it from a friend or at a party. Widespread availability of naloxone would also reduce deaths from accidental overdoses of a prescribed opioid (deaths in the elderly population are increasing).

Opponents argue that naloxone prevents users from receiving the consequences of their actions and it does little to help users turn their lives around. They argue that it perpetuates the cycle of addiction. The data disproves these claims, in fact, it shows that those who have had a near death experience are MORE likely to enter treatment. The majority of overdose patients do not have repeated overdose events.

Naloxone also causes opioid withdrawal symptoms, which can act as a catalyst to seek treatment and maintain recovery.

Researchers investigated the traits of those who oppose the widespread availability of naloxone. In a regression analysis that adjusted for demographic characteristics, they concluded that opposition was most strongly related to authoritarianism, the perception that opioid users present a threat to the country, a belief that users have lower moral standards, and that this is a just consequence for their sins.

Fortunately, the committee disagreed.

“The unanimity of the committee is a profound statement about how important this is,” said Dr. Jeffrey Brent, University of Colorado, Aurora.

This isn’t a cure for the epidemic, but it is a cure for the deaths caused by it. It removes judgement in favor of giving users the opportunity to recover.

Of course, those who prefer punishment and judgement will not be pleased with this recommendation or the data that supports it. But most of us believe that the goal should be to reduce mortality, not prescribe morality. Notable celebrities, such as Prince, would be alive today had they had access to this life-saving drug.

Thousands of deaths will be avoided by expanding access to naloxone.

Now, that’s a win.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

Hallelujah is one of the most popular songs in recent times, with 1500 artists recording their own renditions. Leonard Cohen spent over a decade writing and rewriting the verses (over 180). Yet, Columbia Records president, Walter Yetnikoff, hated the album so much that he quashed its release in the United States.

Why did the powerful Columbia Records president hate it? His reasons are known only to himself, but to be fair, Leonard Cohen has a voice that only Bob Dylan could appreciate.

Over time, well-known musicians picked up the song, including Bob Dylan and Jeff Buckley. Gradually, the song began to enter the mainstream. But it took a famous movie (Shrek) twenty years after the song’s “non-release” to make it available to all audiences.

Today, this song is played at weddings, in movie and television soundtracks, churches, funerals, television shows, and concerts. If not for artists and their quest for outstanding music, this iconic song would never have made it into popular culture.

It seems hard to believe, but it is not remarkable in the arts or sciences.

Here are a few of the many examples.

The Beatles were rejected by the British label Decca records.

Camille Saint-Saëns (1835-1921) is often considered the most underrated composer. Even those unfamiliar to classical music would recognize his organ symphony from the song and score of the movie, Babe. (After he completed this symphony, he said, “that is the best that I can do.”) Anyone who has heard it can appreciate its greatness.

Emily Dickinson wrote her poems in obscurity. Fewer than a dozen of her nearly 1,800 poems were published during her lifetime and those were altered to fit the conventional poetic rules of the day. It was not until her death that her sister Lavinia discovered her collection of poems. They were published in 1890, to initial criticism (of course).

The great works by Claude Monet were initially deemed to be “formless, unfinished and ugly.” As a result, Monet and his family lived in poverty. His seminal work “Impression, Sunrise” eventually gave the school of painting its name, Impressionism, but it was not until the 1880s that his works began selling.

Similarly, Van Gogh produced over 2,100 artworks, 860 of which were oil paintings, which weren’t recognized or appreciated during his lifetime. Struggling with mental illness throughout much of his life, Vincent Van Gogh committed suicide at 37.

During Bach’s lifetime he was only regarded as a successful organist. His compositions were ignored. It was not until the early 19th Century that his musical compositions were finally introduced.

Kafka died at 40, without a single work published, and if it weren’t for a friend, Max Brod, his novels would never have become the classics that they are today. Dying of starvation brought on by tuberculosis, Kafka requested Brod burn all of his works after he died. Instead, Brod made it his goal to get Kafka’s works published.

Henry David Thoreau was virtually ignored in his lifetime. His focus on nature and his social activism made him an outsider. Thoreau died having only published two of his works, which had not been well-received.

John Kennedy Toole is the author of one of my favorite novels, A Confederacy of Dunces. Yet Toole’s novels weren’t accepted into publication during his lifetime. Without his mother’s perseverance, we would never have read the manuscript that won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1981.

In science, these misses have been more impactful.

Gregor Mendel’s work on genetic inheritance wasn’t accepted or understood by scientists of the day (despite his extensive efforts). His work was only appreciated in 1900, 16 years after his death, and 34 years after he first published it. Curiously, Charles Darwin had a copy of Mendel’s paper, but he apparently didn’t read it until after his seminal work on The Origin of Species.

One refusal to implement a significant scientific discovery resulted in the deaths of thousands of people and even cost us a United States president. Ignaz Semmelweis, a Hungarian physician working in the mid-1800s in Austria, observed that his hospital had a very high death rate, especially in childbirth and infant mortality. At the time physicians would deliver a baby directly after performing an autopsy without washing their hands. He suspected that this death toll could be lowered by surgeons washing their hands between patients. But he was mocked by his colleagues. Despite demonstrating that hand washing significantly reduced the death rate, it was never accepted. His own hospital abandoned the practice after he died, and its death toll increased six-fold. Twenty years and many deaths later, Louis Pasteur’s discovery of germs proved Semmelweis right.

President James Garfield suffered horribly and died unnecessarily after an assassination attempt because his physician refused to wash his hands or maintain cleanly standards.

A number of scientists and philosophers recognized that the earth revolves around the sun, including Aristarchus (310BC to c. 230 BC), Copernicus (1473 to 1543), Johannes Kepler (1571 to 1630) and most famously Galileo (1564-1642). But the church and other scientists refused to accept their conclusions.

Einstein was unable to get a job, and only his father’s connections allowed him to land a job as a patent clerk. His early work on relativity was ignored or dismissed by many scientists because it challenged the scientific theory of ether. Einstein recognized that space and time were bound together and combined it with gravity in his theory of general relativity of 1915. Despite early ridicule and disbelief, the complicated theory was ultimately recognized as a paradigm shift in physics.

These are just some of many examples of talented artists and scientists whose work was ignored, despite their importance.

Yet, most of these individuals had some form of privilege that allowed them to create and continue their work. Cohen, for example, came from a wealthy Canadian family and was allowed to do this art without commercial success. Even Van Gogh came from a privileged upbringing.

I often ponder how many geniuses were prevented from using their intellectual and artistic talents due to gender, location, status, wealth, culture, religion, race, and circumstances.

I am convinced that our society has suffered from ignoring obscure, unsupported geniuses who did not have the opportunity to help or change humanity…if only.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

There are a number of paradoxes in science and mathematics; and most are highly technical. One of those that is accessible to us is the Fermi Paradox.

First, a simple definition of paradox. A paradox is a statement that contradicts itself or a situation which seems to defy logic.

Enrico Fermi posited his paradox late in his life, by asking the question, “Where is everybody?” In other words, given the vastness and age of the cosmos why have we not detected other signs of extraterrestrial civilizations?

Fermi was a well-known Italian American physicist who emigrated to the United States to escape antisemitism (his wife was Jewish) after he received the Nobel prize in 1938. He was one of the influential scientists of the nuclear age, developing the mathematical statistics, exploring the implications of neutrons, and directing the first controlled chain reaction involving nuclear fission. He held many honors, including the Nobel Prize, the DEA Enrico Fermi Award, Fermilab (the National Accelerator Laboratory associated with the University of Chicago), and has an element named for him, fermium.

Fermi recognized that Earth was a fairly typical planet revolving around a fairly typical star. Logically, there should be civilizations out there older and more advanced than our own, some of which should have already mastered interstellar travel. Yet, to date, there is no conclusive evidence that they exist. His paradox is particularly compelling when we consider the vastness of a universe that contains over 200 billion galaxies.

So, what are the possible hypotheses to explain the Fermi Paradox?

One, is simply, there isn’t any intelligent life in the universe, we are a unique creation by God. This is proclaimed in our religious texts. And further, it is impossible to prove the null hypothesis; so therefore, while this may be true it cannot be proved.

Another hypothesis is that it simply takes a lot of time for signals to travel across the cosmos. Due to the limitations of the speed of light, their signals may not have reached ours, and ours may not have reached them. (The photos that we are seeing from the Webb telescope show galaxies as they existed billions of years ago.) Further, earth is situated in a rural part of the Milky Way galaxy. Advanced civilizations may be focusing their efforts on more accessible regions of the Milky Way.

Another supposition is that it is we have been receiving signals but do not have the capabilities of understanding or accessing them. There is no reason to assume that life elsewhere in the universe would look or operate like us. Our species has always been limited by our perception and our ability to measure. It is likely that there are other energies that we cannot perceive or access. Other advanced civilizations may be sending out signals, but we don’t have the technology to detect or decipher them. Their language, mathematics, realities, science, and consciousness could be completely different from ours.

The opposite could also be true; other life may not be as evolved as we are. It may be that intelligent beings like us are simply rare in the universe. It took billions of years for earth to create the society that we have today, so it makes sense that it would take billions of years for other species to become advanced enough for interstellar communication, intergalactic space travel, and possible colonization. Perhaps we are one of the first species to make it this far. After all, 99 percent of all species that have ever lived on Earth are now extinct, and we are the only species that has ever been able to leave the planet.

Closely related, the Phase Transition hypothesis proposes that the conditions to support life as we know it may have “just” fallen into place. Life may just be forming and evolving, uninterrupted by cosmic threats and astrological disasters, into an advanced civilization.

Another hypothesis is called the Transcension Hypothesis, namely they have already visited us, perhaps in our earliest formations and determined that intelligent life did not exist or that it was too primitive. There are many books, the most famous written by Erich von Däniken (Chariots of the Gods). Von Däniken argued that traces of alien visits were recorded in legends and artifacts of earlier civilizations (like the Nazca Lines, in Peru).

Another hypothesis, The Zoo and Planetarium Hypotheses, has proponents arguing that aliens are not only observing us from afar, but have us locked into a kind of “celestial cage,” leaving us off-limits from other advanced civilizations. Proponents contend that our understanding of the universe represents a mere illusion that has been created by civilizations that have the ability to manipulate matter and energy at cosmic scales.

Recently, in October 2017, Canadian astronomer Robert Weryk was reviewing images captured by a telescope and noticed a dot of light moving at almost two hundred thousand miles per hour. (A cornerstone of Einstein’s theory is that nothing can move faster than the speed of light…but is that an accurate assumption?) After ruling out all other possibilities, Avi Loeb, a Harvard astrophysicist, concluded that it was a byproduct of an alien civilization and represents the proof we need to conclude there are other civilizations in the galaxy.

He is one of the first highly respected physicists to become convinced that the 2017 sighting represents conclusive evidence of other extraterrestrial life. His conclusion is both controversial and ridiculed. For those who are interested, his book Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth published in 2021 is a work of courage. In his willingness to be ridiculed by the scientific community, he asks the question, “are we ready to confront the possibility that there are both more intelligent and less intelligent species outside of earth.”

He believes not.

There are many other paradoxes, a famous one is the liar’s paradox, which is, briefly: “Everything that I say is a lie.” But the Fermi Paradox is a lot more interesting. It allows us to be creative, think in abstractions, and humbly recognize our insignificance.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

A friend of mine was lamenting over her daughter’s breakup with her boyfriend. At the end of their vacation, the boyfriend pronounced that he wanted to return to his previous girlfriend. Considering that all parties (except him, of course) believed that this vacation would end with a proposal of marriage, it was a devastating time in her daughter’s life.

“But at least she has her girlfriends,” my friend said. “And that is really more important.”

She’s right, I could not get through life without my girlfriends and sisters. We share a need for these close relationships.

So, how, and why do women form such intimate partnerships? Researchers theorize that in earlier societies women had to move into their new husband’s family circle, (much like traditional Chinese, Muslim, and Indian cultures do today). Alone in their new world, it was essential for women to quickly build connections with other women for emotional support and help.

Research shows that close female friendships are more important for women than they are for men. By disclosing vulnerable information, women build trust quickly. As a result, women’s friendships tend to be more intense. These friendships thrive on intuition, intimacy, emotional support, and deep connection. This close relationship even results in the release of oxytocin and serotonin. The latter is a neurotransmitter that helps combat depression and can create a general feeling of well-being.

Male friendships are less intimate and more side-to-side. They tend to hang out in groups, while women prefer smaller, more intimate relationships. Women’s relationships are face-to-face and maintained through intimacy, communication, and support. Men are more likely to remain friends after a disagreement, but women-to-women relationships can be more fragile.

A researcher asked each gender what they were looking for in a friendship. Men preferred friends that have common interests, offer wealth or status, and can help them find dates, while women expressed more interest in friends who offered emotional support. Friendships between males are often transactional. Men have a larger number of friends, but fewer intimate ones. Men are more likely to bond by engaging in shared activities, such as sports, while women tend to bond through disclosing secrets, talking, and spending time together.

Men make friends easier as they do not feel pressure to disclose personal information. A humorous anecdote with my husband underscores this. When my husband and I were making our wedding plans, he asked me to hold off sending invitations until he told his weekly golfing partners that he was seeing someone (we had been dating for 18 months).

Why are girlfriends important to women?

Everyone who has them knows the answer…but just in case, this is what psychologists say:

• Girlfriends are the backbone of women’s support system.
• Girlfriends offer a different and honest perspective. They serve as a sounding board and offer an outsider’s viewpoint. They are a safe outlet to discuss problems and try out possible solutions.
• Girlfriends frequently act as a trusted advisor, their goal is to help.
• Girlfriends operate in a trust environment that allows them to share secrets and honesty.
• Girlfriends boost self-esteem.
• Girlfriends are dependable and loyal.
• Girlfriends are essential when life goes sideways.
• Girlfriends provide love and support as well as a safety net.
• Girlfriends are each other’s champions.
• There are medical benefits as well. Women with strong friendships have higher survival rates from breast cancer, less depression, less stress, and have a longer life expectancy.
• Same age friends offer a shared experience.
• Sharing a positive experience with a girlfriend increases excitement.
• Older women with strong girlfriends have improved self-care. When someone sincerely worries about us, we are more conscientious.
• Prolonged conversations with girlfriends stimulate brain activity.
• Overall, girlfriends serve as a crucial emotional support system: giving advice, being a shoulder to cry on, keeping secrets, listening, while boosting self-esteem.

The Memoirist, Rebecca Traister, said it best. “Female friendship has been the bedrock of women’s lives for as long as there have been women.”

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

I am one of those weirdos who still wears a mask, gets regular vaccinations, and uses hand sanitizer. But these precautions were no match for an extended family member who failed to recognize that he had COVID. Which is how I finally contracted the virus. The person claimed his symptoms were “just allergies” until he finally tested himself. (If I had a dollar for every time I got a cold from someone who said it was “just allergies,” I would be a wealthy woman.)

But my symptoms are very mild, only a headache, achiness, sore throat, and unhappy lungs. Despite having several risk factors, including asthma, my doctor, who is an expert in infectious diseases and runs the health department in Key West, recommended against taking Paxlovid. The Omicron variant, while more contagious, is less dangerous for someone who has kept current with their vaccinations and has mild symptoms. I consider myself lucky.

But COVID 19 is still a threat and for more reasons than you think. For one, monoclonal antibodies are ineffective against these new variants. And the new variants are even more contagious than previous ones.

The newest subvariant of Omicron, is so transmissible that everybody is at risk of catching it, even if they’ve already been infected and are fully vaccinated. It now accounts for 27.6% of COVID cases in the US and is especially prevalent in the Northeast, accounting for more than 70% of cases.

COVID 19 is also more dangerous than previously believed. A recent article in Nature reported the findings from autopsies of 44 unvaccinated people who died from severe COVID. The results were alarming. The virus was found in the respiratory system and 79 other body locations, including the heart, kidneys, liver, muscles, nerves, reproductive tract, and eyes.

They concluded that the virus is capable of infecting and replicating within the human brain, thus crossing the blood/brain barrier. They believe that the virus spreads via the blood in its early stages throughout the body.

The CDC discovered that COVID 19 has been in the US longer than previously thought. Apparently, the US Patient Zero returned from Wuhan Province in China and went into the emergency room on January 15, 2020. The first US fatality occurred in February 2020.

To date, almost 102 million cases have been diagnosed in the U.S and there have been more than 1.1 million COVID-related deaths. Globally, there have been more than 668 million cases and 6.7 million COVID-related deaths (and probably a lot more, because it is known that China underreports).

And now there is Long COVID.

Long COVID, long-haul COVID, post-COVID-19 condition, and chronic COVID are all names for the health problems that some people experience within a few months after being infected. Long COVID can also trigger other health conditions, such as diabetes or kidney disease.

Since recent research shows that the virus infects many parts of the body, it makes sense that the immune system could malfunction. Like most autoimmune diseases, Long COVID is most common in women. It is currently estimated 7.5% of adults who contracted COVID 19 will suffer from Long COVID (although the newest Omicron variant seems to have fewer). Some of the symptoms of Long COVID are brain fog, fatigue, body pain, shortness of breath, racing heart, sleep disorders, and mental health issues (e.g., depression). These are similar symptoms to Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Fibromyalgia, and Chronic Lyme Disease. Other Long COVID symptoms, such as rapid heartbeat, chronic pain, and dizziness fall in the category of nervous system disorders.

The causes of Long COVID are also unknown (like most autoimmune diseases) so scientists are speculating that it could be damage caused by the virus or by the body’s immune system. Others surmise that the virus may be hiding in the body, possibly the gut. Scientists suspect that this virus reactivates, causing the immune system to become overactive and attack the patient’s own organs and tissues.

Studies are not clear on who is at risk for developing Long COVID. It appears that women, those who reported more than five symptoms in the first week of infection, and those with preexisting health conditions (asthma, auto-immune diseases) may be more susceptible to Long COVID. And the newest research suggests that those infected with COVID more than once have an increased risk of developing Long COVID as well as other health complications. So being infected once doesn’t make you immune and makes you at risk for Long COVID if you get reinfected. The evidence shows that reinfection further increases risks of death, hospitalization, and damage to multiple organ systems.

People who’ve kept up their vaccinations are less likely to have a reinfection, or when they do have a reinfection, are less likely to have severe infection.

And Long COVID can kill. To date, 3,500 US deaths have been attributed to Long COVID.

This scourge will be with us for a long, long time. To protect ourselves, doctors recommend continuing to wear masks, using sanitizer, and, most importantly, keeping up-to-date on vaccines. Despite our desire to be “past this,” we must recognize that this is a novel virus to the human immune system, and scientists are only beginning to learn about its long-term impact.

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

It happens to all of us at some period in our lives. Our world is shaken, the support foundations that we depended upon crumble. Nothing is assured.

It feels like being knocked over by an ocean wave. As we tumble through the surf, we don’t know where or how to plant our feet. It feels endless, that we will never be able to find the sand again, for a few seconds, we wonder if this is the end. Our feet finally do plant themselves in the sand, and we stand up. But we are not the same, we are covered in sand, disheveled, disoriented and maybe sporting some minor scratches.

From now on, the ocean is never the same. The steel-gray blue, undulating swells are no longer beckoning. There is something dangerous, unseen. We now realize that these rhythmic rolling swells hide a deadly power and undertow.

We may take a while to venture back in, but if we do, we are mindful, this is not the same predictable space. We can no longer fully trust the seashore.

This is an analogy for life. We swim in those waves with the unseen danger lurking below, lulled by their predictability into a false security. We are confident that we can ride them. But after being tumbled, we know that these familiar waves hide a raw and deadly power; and we are no longer immune to them.

Transition periods hit us when we are least expecting them. We have been lulled by the gentle waves of life and our experience into believing that we have constructed a solid, predictable fortress and we have built strong foundations. Others may be vulnerable, but not us.

And then it happens. A death, a divorce, a break-up, an unexpected life change, an accident, an illness, losing a job or a friend; a family member who is struggling. This is our reckoning. The secure platform that we built was just temporary and maybe even an illusion. We are left with uncertainty, just tumbling, tumbling, tumbling.

But sometimes these periods are just caused by where we are in life. Sometimes we need a life correction. We need to re-evaluate our goals. While mid-life crises are well documented, it is beginning to be recognized that there is also a mid-twenties crisis. Newly “adulted” children who worked hard to get into their chosen colleges, or careers, or a new car, or life experiences and they wonder…is this really what I wanted? Is this the right path? Usually, the job is not what they expected, it may be dull. Entry level jobs can be tedious and rarely allow us to use our skills. And all that education…most of it is irrelevant. Young adults in trades must “bide their time” either as an apprentice or waiting until they can get their own clients and the resources to buy their own equipment. New adults recognize that choices come with consequences and there is no parent to fix them. (How disappointing it was for me to realize that I couldn’t eat ice cream whenever I wanted it.)

We wonder how it happened, how or where to plant our feet and sometimes blaming ourselves for missing the signs. And when we come out of one of these situations…we are forever changed. Our belief in our own invincibility is gone and our shattered confidence takes time to rebuild. While our scars and scratches may be invisible to others, they are not to us.

And in the moment when we are churning and rolling underwater, we will latch onto anything to get it to stop.

Curiously, this also follows the path of scientific discovery. Thomas Kuhn, in his seminal book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, recognized that science doesn’t proceed linearly either. Usually a theory is proposed, scientists try to prove or disprove it, then a new theory or a new discovery occurs and science “jumps” to a new model. Progress in science is not an inexorable path to knowledge, instead it is a series of paradigm shifts. (Think how Einstein changed the paradigm of time and space.)

Most religions, philosophies, faiths, etc. tell us to treat this as a gift. A time to reshape our life. Before this event, we were too busy living our lives to see that we might be headed in the wrong direction. Or we got overconfident, ascribing success to our accomplishments, rather than good fortune. We didn’t recognize that we are cycling fast because the wind was at our back.

I like to refer to it as the universe telling us to stop, reflect, quit doing what I am doing. But I don’t know why the universe has to be so mean about it.

I did a lot of searches, have read a lot of books, taken courses, and have consulted with life coaches, therapists, friends, and advisors. And I have compiled a list of things you can do when you hit this period of uncertainty.

1. First, grieve. Give yourself permission to wallow in your loss…not forever, but long enough. Unfortunately, there is no shortcut for grief, you can’t go around it, you have to go through it.
2. Next, detach from your current direction. Human nature is to “double down” and do what we were doing more rigorously, instead of the listening to the call to stop.
3. Reflect on how you got here. Was it something within your control? If it was, why did it happen? Was it something out of your control (death, firing, illness)? In this case, it will take more time to find out where to go from here. Ask…what is the universe (or God) trying to teach me?
4. Mentally try out different paths but stay put. Remember this is an unpleasant time filled with anxiety and disorientation. The urge is to try to find the easiest, quickest way out of this. It only causes you to repeat your mistakes or make bad choices. (Running “from something” rather than “to something.) You are in this space, no matter how unpleasant, for a reason, to learn something about yourself.
5. Remember to ground yourself. Your thoughts will scatter in irrelevant directions, making it difficult to concentrate and solve even simple problems.
6. Ask yourself questions. What do I love? What am I good at? What will give me purpose? Often it feels hard to get answers to these questions, certainly some of them evolve. But sometimes, if we don’t believe that we know the answer, we really might, it is just that we don’t LIKE the answer. (For example, staying in a bad relationship.)
7. Make a fluid plan. This is a journey and, as awful as it is, it will take a while; sometimes years, to find your path. And you will make many detours along the way. Your trusted advisor can help you before you go too far on the path.

• Create simple rules, baby steps and set reminders: For example, today, I am going to take a walk in nature.
• Meditate and ask for guidance.
• If you can afford it, get a coach or a therapist. They are trained to see patterns that may be obscured.

8. Balance the need to stop making excuses and hold yourself accountable. At the same time, don’t judge yourself too harshly. Everybody gets here at some point in their life. For example, if it is an event over which you had no control (e.g., death, health); recognize that you did not choose this and don’t punish yourself for being lost.
9. Find trustworthy people who love you and will be honest. Ask them for their advice. Choose people who won’t judge you or get frustrated with you for being lost. Their advice may be wrong, but they have your best interest at heart. And if you don’t agree with them, at least delay your decision until you are no longer anxious. Rely on trusted friends and family members over and over again.

During this period, you are most susceptible to predators, cults, malevolent people, and others who promise to have the answers. They don’t. How could they? They don’t know you. A move in this direction is very dangerous and can make a temporary existential crisis a permanent one.

And remember that this is something that everyone must go through. This is what can make life so difficult…but you will get through it, with the help of loved ones.

Henry David Thoreau, found his lost self in nature: “Not until we are lost do we begin to understand…and resolve only ever to be ourselves.”

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.

While walking my dogs at sunrise this morning, I could not help but marvel at the wisps of cirrus clouds hovering around the horizon. As the sun rose, they changed colors from dark gray, to white, to pink, to yellow, to violet; finally resting on their lacy white daytime color.

Clouds are gifted at enhancing mother nature, especially at dawn and dusk when they scatter and refract the sun’s rays to bring us a rainbow of hues. I remember watching a sunset at the St. Michaels harbor where a matrix of small stratus and cirrus clouds changed colors as the sun’s rays bent over the horizon. Their hues changed from pink to orange to yellow while showcased against an aqua sky and red sun slipping down the horizon. It took my breath away.

Clouds do that. Their water vapors and ice crystals serve as a prism to bring us all the colors in the spectrum.

Clouds are also shapeshifters. They coalesce to form fanciful shapes, allowing us to imagine figures and faces. When I was young, it made sense to me that God would be sitting high on one of these pillows, his arm outstretched for me to join him. I marveled at these puffy cumulous clouds; plumped up pillows just waiting for me to bounce on.

But clouds are also illusionists. Only later did I discover that these fluffy billowy shapes were merely a deception, created by water vapor, rain droplets, and condensation.

Clouds can also be scary. Those angel-soft pillows of fluffy, huggable shapes can quickly become menacing black and gray shrouds. Gathering, combining, darkening, turning a bright blue sky into an ominous darkness, cloaked in uncertainty.

Then, this menacing darkness brings a sacred gift, water.

Cumulus clouds are not the only low lying clouds. Stratus clouds are actually the lowest. They can descend to the earth in the form of mist or fog. Stratus clouds can be layered, especially in winter, appearing as a drab, gray gauze transforming our powerful sun into a feeble white ball. They can persist for weeks or months, leaving a melancholia hovering over a gray landscape.

Then we have our high clouds and while there are three basic types of high clouds, the ones we know best are cirrus clouds. Until the modern age, cirrus clouds were created naturally, but today, contrails produced by jet exhaust are forming into cirrus clouds

But clouds hold a secret. They are unpredictable. Their behavior even eludes scientists. Clouds are known to be a major factor on the Earth’s climate system, especially over the oceans. And, as we grapple with climate change, different types of clouds may be more helpful than others.

While clouds remain the biggest mystery in their impact on climate, there are two things that scientists know. Frostier high clouds are too thin to reflect much sunlight away from the earth, but their ice crystals do trap heat rising from the earth’s surface at night, adding to the problem of global warming. And this is particularly problematic with contrail-formed clouds. A 2011 study suggests that the net effect of contrail clouds contributes more to atmospheric warming than all the carbon dioxide (CO2) produced by planes since the dawn of aviation.

How will global warming affect clouds and vice versa? Scientists are not sure, but they are worried. Clouds are considered the thermostat that sets Earth’s temperature.

Some models predict that a warming earth will cause low clouds to dissipate, enabling more solar energy to strike the planet and thus increasing the temperature at a faster rate.

However, their impact remains an unknown variable in the equation because cloud dynamics are both complex and localized. Recent concern about the accuracy of scientific models is directed at those all-important blankets of low clouds hovering over our oceans. These stratus and cumulus clouds shade about 20% of the oceans, reflecting up to 60% of the solar radiation, thereby cutting the amount of energy that reaches the Earth’s surface by as much as 7%.

But these low clouds also have drawbacks. While they shade the planet during the day, at night they act as insulating blankets. High clouds, on the other hand, are heat traps, reflecting little away from the earth, while trapping the heat at night. If scientists had a safe way to make low clouds thicker (thus, more reflective), it could reduce the rate of global warming.

But, back to the gorgeous gauzy flows.

Beyond the common clouds that we see, there are also rare clouds. Kelvin-Helmholtz clouds are high clouds that look like waves, mimicking famous Japanese prints. Lenticular clouds resemble flying saucers.

But the rarest cloud of them all is also the highest cloud, the noctilucent cloud, at the very edge of space. These clouds appear on the horizon at dusk in the northernmost latitudes from June through August, and glow like electric blue spider webs across the dark sky. For those who are awed by nature, this video captured by a Scottish astronomer shows noctilucent clouds against the background of an aurora borealis. https://www.theguardian.com/travel/video/2013/aug/23/northern-lights-timelapse-caithness-scotland-video

When I think about the nebulous nature of clouds, their unpredictability, and their beauty, I am reminded of the lyrics from the Joni Mitchell song, Both Sides Now.

I’ve looked at clouds from both sides now

From up and down and still somehow

It’s cloud’s illusions I recall

I really don’t know clouds at all

Angela Rieck, a Caroline County native, received her PhD in Mathematical Psychology from the University of Maryland and worked as a scientist at Bell Labs, and other high-tech companies in New Jersey before retiring as a corporate executive. Angela and her dogs divide their time between St Michaels and Key West Florida. Her daughter lives and works in New York City.