Amanda Ripley Author of The Unthinkable

Thursday’s in-flight death of Continental Airlines pilot, Craig Lenell, may have been a surprise to passengers, but it’s not the first time a pilot has died in-flight. As recently as 2007, another Continental pilot died en route from Houston to Puerto Vallarta, Mexico.  An MSNBC list of other instances where pilots died or passed out in-flight is published here.

Lenell, who served 32 years as a Continental pilot, was 60 and apparently healthy (per FAA rules, commercial pilots over 40 are required to undergo twice-yearly physicals). He died of a heart attack. According to CNN, of the five pilots who have died in-flight since 1994 (when the FAA began tracking this information) all were filed under the category “cardiac.”

Just like more firefighters die from heart-related conditions than fires, more pilots die from heart attacks than plane crashes. In this case, it’s hard to say if age was a factor. Up until two years ago, Lenell would have been forced to retire at 60. But in 2007, Congress voted to raise the mandatory retirement age to 65. Proponents of the change say that age is a positive, rather than a negative: more experienced pilots are typically safer pilots. The average age of pilots in the US has been gradually rising (check out the FAA stats here), and CNN predicts that Thursday’s death will revive the debate over pilots’ mandatory retirement age. 

Introducing a new, highly portable Unthinkable. Fifty percent lighter. New bonus section on How to Boost your Survival Odds and assorted other updates. More book, less money. Ta-da! 

Wherever I go to talk about the brain in disasters, I get asked one question in particular: What about children? How does a child’s brain respond to a disaster? Is it different than an adult’s brain?

Yes, very different. And the differences make children both better and worse at responding to disasters. It depends on the age of the child and the type of disaster, of course, along with a million other caveats. But here’s what we know:

* Before a disaster strikes—Young children have extremely plastic brains. They can learn faster than adults, making them ideal targets for hands-on training. They are also free of the baggage that adults carry--the fear of looking foolish or overreacting. That’s why firefighters visit schools. Children stop, drop and roll. They don’t just talk about it. And the brain learns much better by doing than by talking. To quote this Time story on a child’s brain:

“While new synapses continue to form throughout life, and even adults continually refurbish their minds through reading and learning, never again will the brain be able to master new skills so readily or rebound from setbacks so easily.”

* During a disaster—As with adults, children will draw upon whatever patterns were in their heads before a disaster strikes. They have fewer patterns in there, however, which can help or hurt. In fires, frightened children sometimes hide in closets--making them hard for firefighters to find. They may be afraid when they see a firefighter in full gear. But again, there is opportunity. If a child has rehearsed evacuating her house from her bedroom in advance, that will help. If a child has seen a firefighter in full gear, that gives the brain something to work with. You can now buy smoke detectors that let you record a voice message. This is a fabulous idea. A child will respond much better to a parent’s specific, aggressive command--in a very serious voice--than to a loud beeping squawk.

* After a disaster—Research into why children develop posttraumatic stress disorder is actually very encouraging, I think. It shows that the two things that correlate with stress symptoms are under our control: 1) Amount of TV coverage of the disaster viewed by the child and 2) Parental distress.

Those two factors can matter more than almost anything else. If a child sees TV coverage of a building collapse, that child may think the building is collapsing over and over again. If it were up to me, CNN and FOX would run ticker warnings to this effect during coverage of disasters. That’s how dangerous this footage can be.

Likewise, if a parent over-shares his fear and anger over a terrorist attack with a child, the child may have no way to put that into perspective. As the National Center for PTSD explains in an extremely helpful fact sheet:

“Although you yourself may be anxious or scared, children need to know that attacks are rare events. They also need to know that the world is generally a safe place.”

After Katrina, Congress created a National Commission on Children and Disasters to study how we can build children into smarter preparedness and response plans. They are supposed to send their recommendations to Congress next year. I look forward to seeing what they come up with. Here’s hoping they are creative--and built around the way children’s brains actually work. 

News outlets, including CNN, are identifying James von Brunn, 88, as the suspect in a shooting at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum in DC. What appears to be his web site, which is getting swamped with traffic and may not work for long, portrays a man who is angry and anti-semitic, among other inadequate adjectives.

I am relieved to hear that the shooter was quickly disabled by security guards and is now at GW University Hospital, just around the corner from my office. It sounds like a security guard is in worse shape, and we can only hope for the best.

We will need to learn more about what happened. But there are a few things we may want to keep in mind: Almost all the major museums in DC already have metal detectors and guards. The monuments and museums have been heavily fortified with Jersey barriers and other obstacles since 9/11.

But they are still relatively open, free spaces for reflection and learning, and that’s what makes them precious. Spaces thronged every day by school children and visitors from around the world. It will be important, I think, to be smart in responding to this shooting. Or else we risk giving the shooter exactly what he wanted--magnifying his spasm of violence into a lasting legacy.

Stay tuned. 

IN AMERICA, THE PEOPLE IN CHARGE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT spend millions of dollars a year holding training drills and tabletop exercises. All well and good. But when was the last time that you--the most important person on the scene--got invited?

Thanks to John Solomon for flagging last week’s 5-day nationwide drill in Israel as a model for a meaningful drill. Imagine: a drill that includes the entire population--and features surprise scenarios that require people to take action.

This is the way the brain works. The brain doesn’t learn by reading lists and listening to occasional public statements of officials in grey suits. The brain learns by doing. If we want to train the people who matter most in major disasters--the people who do the majority of life saving--we should invite them to the drill. Otherwise, we’re just play acting--designing emergency plans for emergency officials. Round and round the meta emergencies go.

It’s worth pointing out that Israel’s Home Front Command (similar to our Homeland Security Department) figured this out a long time ago. Human behavior matters more than technology. Look at the English version of their web site and notice the large button at the top labeled: “How to Act in an Emergency.” Click here to find out “How to Behave in a Terrorist Attack” or an earthquake or a fire or a flood. Downright elegant.

In general, I am not quick to point to Israel as a model for the U.S. The threats and context are very different, and I think some of our police departments tend to over-learn from Israel. But not in this case. On this subject, we under-learn.

Israel has got this exactly right. By comparison, DHS offers a mind-numbing list of preparedness and response publications, resources and regulations. From NIMS to NIPP to HSEEP. Ugh. I am unusually obsessed with this subject, and even I cannot bear to stay on this page for more than 6 seconds. 

A vivid snapshot of American life in 2009 in today’s New York Times. The piece, by Kevin Sack, details the complex calculations people in Rocky Mount, NC, have to make when filling their prescriptions during a recession. For example, take James S. Crawford, who arrived at the pharmacy just after being discharged for his 3rd heart attack:

“Mr. Crawford, 61, who makes do on $1,800 a month in Social Security and veterans’ benefits, decided he could afford only the heart, blood pressure and acid reflux pills. ‘If I can rob a bank,’ he said, chuckling, ‘I’ll be back for the others.’ Before leaving, he handed over yet another prescription, just for safekeeping. It was for Plavix, an anticlotting drug that helps coronary patients avoid new blockages, and it had been written in early February after Mr. Crawford’s second heart attack. At $160, the co-payment was so high he had never considered filling it.”

Now consider an alternate universe: When I lived in France in 2003, I got sick. I put off going to the doctor because I didn’t know how much it would cost. I had health insurance through Time Magazine, but I had to submit claims on my own because I was living abroad, and I had no idea how good my coverage would be. Anyway, when I didn’t get better after a couple of weeks, I gave in and called a doctor in the village of Fontainebleau, where I lived.

I made an appointment for the same day. On my way there, I stopped at an ATM and took out about 100 Euros, just in case. When I got to the doctor’s office, I filled out a short form and then went in to the exam room, without waiting. The doctor checked me out and decided to prescribe antibiotics and a couple other things. (One of the downsides to universal health care is that a lot of doctors go nuts with the prescription pad.)

Then he apologized. He looked somber. He said that since I was not a French citizen, I would have to pay for the visit out of pocket. I nodded and said I understood. Then he asked me for the equivalent of $20. I handed it over. It was less than I might pay for a co-pay back home. Then he gave me a wad of prescriptions and sent me to the pharmacy next door.

At the pharmacy, the woman who filled my prescriptions also apologized. Because I was not covered by the French health care system, she said, I’d have to pay out of pocket. She looked almost ashamed. Again, I swallowed hard. She gave me a bill for… the equivalent of $15. For three prescriptions including antibiotics (which I did need) and a couple silly things I didn’t need.

I walked out and understood what health care could look like. I had gotten more service for less money than I ever got in the States. I didn’t even bother submitting those claims to my health insurance company. For $35, I’d gotten more than my money’s worth.

I know France has its problems. Believe me. I could go on for days about the excessive strikes, the culture of labor entitlement and the bureaucracy, not to mention the implications of a population that does not clean up dog poop from the sidewalk. I know their health care system isn’t perfect, either. But I am telling you: Americans are getting screwed. Most of us don’t even know what a good health care system would look like anymore.

In France, Mr. Crawford would have gotten his drugs. Why couldn’t he get them here? Because we subsidize the rest of the world (including France) by refusing to negotiate as a country for lower drug prices. We pay more and they pay less. Because our doctors expect to make more than French doctors expect to make, partly because they pay an ungodly sum for medical school. When US docs find they can’t make as much as they expected, they overbook and overcharge. Because of a long list of reasons that are no longer mysterious or acceptable.

So it kills me to read about people in America having to leave life-saving prescriptions unfilled because of the greed and ideology of a minority of politicians and businesses. It pains me to read about the opponents to health care reform dragging out the same old, fear-mongering stories to try to prevent America from joining the rest of the civilized world. Seems to me that Americans deserve a system that is at least as good as the one in France or the UK. (Check out this interactive chart comparing the US health care stats to those of other nations.)

The Department of Homeland Security has begun thinking outside this universe. According to a Washington Post article, they’re turning to science fiction writers. Apparently science fiction writers flocked to the 2009 Homeland Security Science & Technology Stakeholders Conference and offered imaginative ways to think about threats. This is considered “science fiction in the national interest” by the writers. Their services are pro bono, and most of the writers have a conventional science background, such as a PHd in physics. According to Rolf Dietrich, Homeland Security’s deputy director of research, the writers “help managers think more broadly about projects, especially about potential reactions and unintended consequences.” And how do the bureaucrats, in exchange, help the writers...? A free trip to Washington and a much-needed boost to the self-esteem of sci-fi geeks everywhere.

Fascinating article in the NY Times about “virtual autopsies” being done on soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since 2004, CT scans have been given to every service man and woman killed (autopsies have been performed since 2001)—a new procedure implemented by Captain Craig Mallack, a Navy pathologist.

The CT scans have been valuable pragmatically and psychologically, it seems. For the military, the scans reveal blind spots in equipment. The findings have already led to improvements in body armor and medical gear.

But the detailed analysis is also important to the families of the deceased, who crave information about their loved ones’ last moments. According to the Times, about 80-90% of families ask to see the report--which comes with a warning not to read it alone.

An example of the good that can come from using expensive technology wisely--and then sharing the results.