tv Book TV in Santa Barbara California CSPAN February 7, 2016 9:00am-10:07am EST
laws? >> well, you've limited it to the postwar period when, in fact, it should be much earlier than that. teddy roosevelt is the exhibit a, i believe, of departure from a constitution of limited government. president cleveland vetoed a bill in 1887,100 years after the constitution was written, that provided the sum of $10,000 for the relief of texas farmers who were suffering from a brought to buy them seeds. and he said in his veto message that he could find no authority for this expenditure under the constitution. ..
convert the native population to christianity. today it has a population of around 90,000 is known for its spanish architecture. with help from mark cox communications cable partners, for the next hour we will visit with the city's local authors. >> how important is the ocean to santa barbara? in the wiki to santa barbara. beautiful beach, harbor, houses right on the water. and then you say to yourself, what would happen if the water rose? three and a half million people in california live within three and a half foot of the modern sea level. many of them in the bay area. that's a lot of people to move. >> we also sat down with ronald reagan biographer lou cannon. >> reagan was smart. he didn't comment on books about him like he did say, i
interviewed him, and he said well, i hear you are writing another book about me. and i said yes, governor, i'm going to write about you until i get it right. he said good line, which is about as much praise or, as you're going to get. >> first we visited the archives at the old mission santa barbara. this was founded in 1786 but the church structure has been rebuild several times over the years. the current one that we occupied was rebuilt after the earthquake
in 1820. it dates from about the 1830s. california mission system historically was established to help the spanish government extend its colonial control into what was the front you for them, in this case the california frontier, especially in light of the 18th century of incursions by other european powers, english, french and russian. not just this territory but other frontier territories. so with the mission system working hand-in-hand with the colonists who were expected to come in and establish spanish colonial towns and cities, emissions were part of that arm of spanish colonialism but it had another purpose especially for the friars. for so foremost the missions were here to evangelize or spread christianity to the non-christian population in california.
santa barbara is special in several ways, but for so foremost i think it's special because it's the only california mission that was not closed, that was not secularized. it's been operating as a franciscan catholic church since its founding. so as the other nations were secularized and closed, much of the contents of those missions, the documents, looks, the art and artifacts ended up coming to santa barbara mission. and form the core of our archival library. so it's very special in the way as well. it's the legacy of the work of the friars in california. >> we are looking at a portrait of the founder of the mission system in california who was recently canonized as a saint, but it is an important portrait for us because it helps us imagine what this man looked like. we don't have a record that he actually sat for a painting, but
what we have within our knowledge is that the original of this portrait was painted in the late 18th century, maybe a year or two after his death. and that the original was lost during the mexican revolution in the 1910s, 20s, and that before it was lost two copies of that painting were made, and we have one of them in the other one remains in mexico. this is now the official image, the image that was used during his canonization. it is an important part of our collection as we have such a vast collection of related material. we are looking at a dedication page for the register recording that was meant to record the sacrament of extreme ocean, record the burial of the last
rites given, in this case, we the people here in santa barbara. it tells an interesting story about the founding and also the founder of the missionary santa barbara and the founding of santa barbara as a spanish colonial city. it was prepared with the understanding that he was in this area to found and dedicate the chapel at the royal presidio as well as the new mission, that the new mission he would be founded. this was very much desired. he really wanted to work with the population here along the santa barbara channel. so he prepared it as such an actress this year that this is going to be the bulk of the deceased that was prepared to record the burials of those here
originally. we can see mission has been crossed out and has been changed to agree with royal presidio. this tells us a story that was later recorded in a biographer about the conflict between center and in this case the governor here in california under spanish rule, that was a constant battle between the missionary and a civil and military authorities. in this case, sarah had disobeyed the governor's order to only have one fryer at the mission and instead have to. and in retaliation rally the governor tells sarah when he is he ready to establish the mission of santa barbara that no, that's not what happened on this trip. only the royal presidio will be established at its chapel, and
the mission is going to have to wait. in the biography in which this incident is reported, sarah is very upset by this development. but we have here not only a document that tells us about this complex relationship between religious and civil and military poverty but also tells us that this is when santa barbara is touted as a spanish colonial town. this is her birthday, the 21st of april 1782. this addendum in different color ink was by the man who founded the santa barbara mission four years later after serra's have when he is now president of the california mission of the system. county we see serra's signature, very elaborate signature signed president. i just find it a remarkable
piece of history all on one pa page. >> as the fires came and announced the european population game, or the colonists came, the non-indigenous population came, a world was changing. environmental world was changing. to such a degree that for the native peoples here in california, to carry on a traditional life before contact became really impossible. and so often they found refuge here at the nation. it was a place where they could find food. and so they did come willingly often, but their understanding perhaps of what the commitment meant differed between what the friars thought it would -- what it meant and what the indigenous population thought it meant. i think what a lot of the native population didn't understand was theirs was a lifetime commitment. and so they were to be part of the mission, a part of this society from here on out.
once they became christians. that didn't mean they couldn't come and go. they were allowed to come and go and visit their home villages but they had to return. that was often a commitment they didn't understand. so it was a very complex relationship. also here at the archive library we have a very extensive collection of photo images beginning about the 1860s. this is one of the examples that we really cherish at the archive library. it's an 1870s print of a glass plate negative carleton watkins come and we see signed and dated in the top corner. one of the reasons a very important photo for us is that we think it's the earliest known photograph of shoe m.a.s.h. women here at the mission door. and, unfortunately, whether it's
in paintings or photographs, people i very rarely included in images, very rarely people they've american people into just, very rarely any people. soda actually have image that records the chumash women definition is extraordinary and a wonderful addition to our collection. we get a sense of the church and the nation itself in the wing with the friars would have lived. in the late 19th century. over here off to the right would've been the house that would help the friars run the enterprises that were happening here, the agriculture enterprises and others. and then off-camber would have been the village where the chumash himself lived. so in a sense of this place in the late 19th century, and you
even get a sense that there's not much going on around the mission in terms of structures being built. it's not built up as it is now. but it is an extraordinary piece of evidence for us and representative of many of the images we have here in our collection. the archive is a very important resource in telling the history of the friars in california but not just the fires in california about the development of santa barbara end of the last. this mission in particular is symbolic of the city of santa barbara in many ways. it's a cornerstone for this community whether they are members of the spirit or whether they're catholic or not. there are things that happen here so it has become a cultural center as well as a built a place for working church. it has services edge weekend. we have a population of about a dozen friars that still littered it's a living mission.
it is still a vital part of the franciscan friars of the west. and will continue to be an important part of their future. not just their history. >> you are watching booktv on c-span2. this weekend where visiting santa barbara, california, to talk with local authors and tour the city's literary sites with the help of our local cable partner cox committee cases. next we talk with peter alagona, author of "after the grizzly" about california's history of endangered species. >> one thing that people often notice when they visit california is the state flag. on our state flag we have the california grizzly. the california republic or grizzlies have been extinct in california since at least 1924. at the time of the gold rush when california was being
brought together as a state, formed as a new state immunity, the grizzly was everywhere. it was a symbol of the state. it was a symbol of this western frontier and it was a symbol of sort of the idea of telephone as a kind of new frontier where people went, came to do bold things in a new place. this species was extinct in the state by the 1920s and so now i think people are starting to ask the question, should that always be the case? conservation is really a term that dates back to the 19th century into united states. california came along a little bit later than some of the eastern states in terms of developing conservation policies and programs at the local level, but in california and in the west conservation emerged as an organizing framework for land management and natural resource management. by around the early 20th century.
at that time most other conservation initiatives were focused on forests, protecting and preserving and conserving forests or the greatest use for the longest time for those people. the utilitarian view of conservation. also natural resources like water, forage for livestock and, of course, wildlife as well. wildlife has become a major focus of conversation over the years -- conservation over the years increasing during the 1930s and in the '60s and '70s with the passage of a variety of new laws to preserve wildlife, including the federal endangered species act of 1973. i talk about the california grizzly in my book because it's incredibly compelling species for a lot of different people. it's an excellent example of how conservation emerged into united states. grizzlies occur around the northern hemisphere really, hudson bay in canada all the way to the persian gulf did you can
believe that, all around the northern hemisphere. in europe there's a large population and also a small population in the contiguous u.s. 48 states. grizzlies have been listed as threatened in the lower 48 states for around 40 years. part of the reason they been listed as threatened is because in areas like the southwestern portion of the united states, including california, grizzlies were essentially hunted to extinction by the early 20th century. at that time a lot of people really still believed that its decline was natural as a result of colonization and population growth and economic exploitation. some people thought it was inevitable or necessary for a civilization to grow in a place like california with a large population numbers for wild species like the grizzly does to go extinct or by the time of the grizzlies disappeared, some people started to question that
view and to articulate a new vision that included large wild animals and other wild species as part of a new conservation vision for the country along with population growth and economic development to get wasn't until the early part of the 20th century that the federal government became involved. in 1900 congress passed an act which was the first federal law to preserve fish and game in this country. and then passed a series of initial laws including some treaties through the progress of air into the new deal era of the 1930s, and then culminating in the 1960s and '70s with the passage of several key pieces of legislation that sought to preserve fish and wildlife, given plans, in ways that were not previously done. those include the marine mammal protection act, the u.s. endangered species act, and other laws as well. conservation for much of its history has been a broadly
bipartisan endeavor. in the early part of the 20th century people who are conservatives and liberals, people who were republicans and democrats largely supported conservation measures. that continued through the early part of the 1970s. the u.s. endangered species act was passed in congress in the house by a vote of 390-12. and in the senate by a 92 to zero voice vote. virtually unanimous in 1973. today you can't name a post office with those kinds of those. like? the reason was at the time conservation was considered a broad interest to all sorts of people in society, and the idea was that the species should be preserved for everyone to the future. since the passage of the act in 1973 about 1600 species have been listed threatened or endangered in the united states. in california about 300 species have been listed as threatened or endangered.
california's the second highest number of threatened and endangered species of any state other than hawaii. hawaii has the greatest amount and the reason is although hawaii seems like a garden paradise to people who visit, the native fauna of hawaii has been severely impacted by colonization, economic expansion, that have taken a hold on the island and pushed out some of the natives. beginning in late 1970s and particularly in the early 1980s when ronald reagan was elected president, you had a significant reaction to the conservation laws of the 1960s and '70s by people who believed the government had overstepped its authority. many of these folks actually consider themselves conservationists but they believe conservation should be done at the local level or at the state level. they believe local land owners
should be largely responsible for conservation activities on their lands and in their communities and that the federal government was a poor steward of the lands and resources, and that it was very remote sort of institution to be managing local land. and so the idea was that land management of resource management should go back to the local communities. this has been a controversial viewpoint ever since and we still have a wide variety of opinions and debate about this exact issue today. in my work i studied a variety of different species that exist for different kinds of political debates a complex under the endangered species act. one is the law the desert tortoise, a flagship species for the mahdi desert that attract a lot of attention because when it was listed as threatened in the late 1980s, this invoked a new set of management guidelines and a new process by which the federal lands of the mojave
desert would be managed. so the desert tortoise became a flashpoint for debates about the proper management of public lands in that area region. i also talk about species like the san joaquin kit fox come an adorable little box that lives in the southern joaquin valley in california and lives in natural areas but also has somehow been some urban areas like in the bakersfield metropolitan area where it lives among people in places like golf courses and public parks. so this has brought up new questions about how to best manage a native endangered species in a growing urban area which is proving to be a real challenge. in this area where we are at right now, just behind is the site of conservation for the snow we bluebird which is an endangered bird species that has the unfortunate circumstance of liking to invest on popular beaches where people walk their dogs and serve and enjoy the outdoors.
this has proven to be a challenge or managers in places like this who are trying to get how to best preserve wildlife in a place where people like to go and use the resources as well. another part of the equation is that over time we've just started to learn about urban ecology. i think this is one of the great frontiers in a way ironically one of the great frontiers of ecological research in the 21st century. most ecologists historically have avoided urban areas like the plague. why you become an ecologist? not to do your field research in chicago or new york city or los angeles. you do it because you want to be an actual park or wilderness area. we have a new breed today who are starting to study urban areas, urban ecosystems, and to learn more about how they function. this is improving, proving in increase in port because of charges he species use these urban areas in new and
interesting ways. twilight appearing in urban areas haven't seen in those areas for a very, very long time, coyotes in new york. here in santa barbara we have a small population of badgers. we have bobcats and coyotes and a wide variety of other species including a lot of birds as well. this is i think the real opportunity and a frontier for research and conservation over the next several decades. >> you are watching booktv on c-span2. this weekend we're in santa barbara, california, with the help of our local cable partner talks communications. next week aren't about rising sea levels at the threats they pose to coastal cities from brian fagan author of the attacking ocean. >> how important is the ocean to santa barbara? in a way it is in santa barbara. beautiful beach, harbor, houses
right on the water. and then you say to yourself, what would happen if the water rose a foot? 3.5 and people in california live within three and a half foot of the modern sea level. many of them in the bay area. that's a lotta people to move. at the height of the last ice age sea levels were 300 feet lower than today. but at the same time much of scandinavia and was covered with thick ice sheets. ice sheets in north america all the way from alaska down to seattle and the great lakes. and over the next six or 7000 years, these ice sheets effectively melted, vanished. all that water poured into the oceans. the earth's crust and land adjusted and rose. so you've got a very complex
process going on but it's a melting iceberg my book "the attacking ocean" really is about the story about people have adjusted to rising sea levels. for instance, in europe you have the north sea which separates britain from the continent. what people don't realize is that 12,000 years ago the north sea was dry land. england as part of the continent. there was no english channel. there were estuaries, marshlands, logos. but by 5500 b.c., sea levels have risen because of melting ice sheets and natural global warming. not humanly caused. the north sea flooded and all these wetlands banished.
research has been done, and they estimate probably several thousand hunters and forgers lived in the wetlands. they lived in small bands and the sea level rise, tinker toy, was probably so fast that you could be born any particular bait and the time he died, life expectancy been was about 28 may become your looking at a completely different landscape because i see that coming. you probably spent a lot of your life afloat in dugout canoes. the biggest defense you have against rising sea levels was that you could move because your possessions were portable. when the north sea flooded people simply moved to higher ground on either side. today we live in cities in the millions, and a very good example is shanghai in china. enormous place.
shanghai is at sea level, the chinese government ignore it all. the problem is that this walling off is only going to a certain point because at the same time they are building high rise buildings and the land is sinking under the weight of the groundwater being drawn out is again causing a shift. what do you do? do you move several million people? if so, where are you going to put them? if so, can you persuade them to leave? there comes a point where you have roots in place. i have roots in santa barbara. been here a long time. there's people in the north sea have roots and the people in the valley and into mesopotamia have their roots. their roots are totally different. one thing we did learn from hurricane katrina, one of the most important weapons that
humans have in the face of catastrophic disaster are their ties in a community, and it would come church, whatever you like. that's what makes life function. but did it in a much more anonymous urban world we are facing completely different issues. do you wall off new york? do you resettle people at higher ground or what? whatever you do the cost is going to astronomic. it's not a problem that you or i face. it's a problem our great-grandchildren will live every day of their lives. but the real effects are going to be a much higher incidence of extreme weather events. and extreme weather events he would be major el niño's like we are facing now, or just major
storms. if we get a storm here, you've got the wind coming in from the south east and you get a quite vicious see. it that coincides with an exceptionally high tide, which can happen, what's going to happen to houses when sea levels are higher right on the beach? what do you do? do you rebuild? do you move? this is already going to happen. i wouldn't be surprised if the rest of this winter as the el niño's storms coming, if there is endemic in many places here, which is due to the extreme weather. and if you add to that down the line rising sea levels, you've got an interesting situation, to which there is another side. does the government, this is something we do know, pass legislation which forbids people to live at a certain height above the sealevel?
or does that in effect -- does that affect individual property rights? do you simply wait for the forces of the marketplace to make prices of houses on the beach go down so low? nobody knows. i went to a lecture about four or five years ago by a retired major general in anglerfish who is now in charge of the future basically and security. he talked about rising sea levels, and he said that within 50 years, that's within the lives of our grandchildren, bangladesh is going to have to move between 30-50 million people. not thousands, millions. where are you going to put them? india doesn't want them. they have issues with land. there's no space. do you adapt to? this is the kind of question to rising sea levels are making us
confront. one of the biggest challenges humanity faces, one we have barely begun to face in this migration situation in europe, what do we do with ecological refugees? many of whom have deep ties to agricultural land like bangladesh. how are they going to adapt to a modern industrial city state in the midwest or in northern italy? that's an interesting question. what this is about the future of our relationship with the ocean? it says that we are, a number of things. one is about we are really good at denying. denial is easy to do. number two, we don't always rise to the challenge. the cost may be astronomic in terms of human life but we did eventually rise to the
challenge. humans have lived with sea level rise way for a long time. what we are confronting out is a long-term problem that really is unique because the silent elephant in all this room is people, population, expanding population. i don't how many people live on the coastal plains in major cities, on estuaries imports, but it's a heck of a lot of people. maybe two or 300 million. these are the people who you've really got to think about as living generations. we have a huge responsibility for the future, and the sooner we start thinking about it and doing it, the easier it's going to be. because to me the biggest lesson of all this is we have terrible
problems with the population. we also have another jumper problem. that is short-term political thinking. we've got to develop mechanisms both locally and internationally to deal with this. >> during booktv's recent visit to santa barbara, california, we spoke with ronald reagan biographer lou cannon about his relationship with the 40th president and the challenges of writing about a sitting president. >> i was a reporter in sacramento in the '60s. i covered ronald reagan a little in his first campaign for governor which he started out in 65, and he was elected in 66. i don't know, i've been there
eight months, maybe six months into his governorship and i said i don't really understand this guy. as i got into writing about my first book is called ronnie and just come as a got into writing what was a history in some ways early parts were political history of california and history of these two men, i found that people would say tell me things that give me insights that they just never would as a news reporter. and that i wasn't interested, it wasn't so much how are going to vote on that bill or why, but where did you come from and why do you care about the things you care about? and i became deeply involved in the stories of these two people. i gained a lot of confidence right it and i thought, well, i can do this. it's something i enjoy doing.
the other thing is when i was finished with it, although i probably, critical acclaim and all that, i realized although i knew an awful lot more about them when i started doing lots of things i didn't know. in fact, i sometimes think as you get old it's a matter of subtracting the you realize how little you know by anyone or about anything. so i guess i was inspired to write more books. my second book which was simply about reagan, simply called reagan, he never commented. reagan was smart. he didn't comment on books about him. there was another book written, the first book written about him and he was asked what he thought about it, and he joked, i didn't have time for light reading.
he was smart enough not to get drawn into their conversation about, books about them. he did say, i interviewed him and i remember what it was because he'd been elected and it was december of 1980 and he was elected but he had not been supporting it. he was president-elect. all of us who knew him we call the governor into the day he became president and then he was mr. president. and he said, well, i hear you write another book about me. and i said, yes, governor, i'm going to write about you don't get it right. and he said good line, which with reagan, is about as much praise or, as you're going to get. reporters always struggling with questions of access. that wasn't so much that a problem for me. when you're writing a book about
someone, if you had the reputation, as i hope i have, of being fairmount -- fair-minded and trying to get all sides of the story, people would talk to you, most people will talk about books. i say most people. all these years, the one person who would never talk to me was jane wyman, his first wife. she just did want to talk to anybody about him. she didn't. most people will talk to you. the problem with reagan was this, it was a very specific problem. reagan was, in 1968, nixon had been nominated and making was going around the country speaking to republican candidates. the way they put it to me is people put to me, they said you have more time with him, but actually it was mostly goes
reagan is afraid to fly. he didn't like flying and they like having someone in there to occupy his time. the second night out i'm going over my, i would interview him during the day. i had a tape recorder and i took notes and i was going over my notes to see, and i realized that he had told me, because death is near photographic memory, he told me almost word for word what he had said in his, he wrote a memoir. evilly dictated it called where's the rest of me, in 1965. and so i'm kind of, i feel anxious about this because i go to in the next and i said governor, this is very interesting but you've already told this story kind of word for word. in your book. you look at me, cocked his head and said he wants something new? i said yes, governor.
that would be very helpful. and so in every interview after that, including all the time he was president, there's always something he would tell me that was new. i remember going over with a colleague from the "washington post" many years later who was kind of complaining, he was a young college and is complaining that reagan just repeated his speech at the i said yeah, but he will tell us something new. he always did. you had to sort of listen for it. so with reagan the question for me wasn't so much about access as it was trying to separate, trying to find out the colonel of what he was told me. >> after all the time i spent with him and all the years, i felt that i couldn't really get to know what, it was part them he helped himself.
mrs. reagan bailed me out. i called her up and she sent, come on over to the house. she never did this before or after. this is your time. she was always usually quite formal. she was dressed in jeans, putting stuff in the laundry. she was just being, and i didn't take it because, i just feel stuck. she said, there are times that i can't get behind this barrier. and what she, her analysis of reagan was, of her husband, was that he had been, we always focus on the alcoholism of his father, but the other thing was that he had been nomadic. they kept moving from town to town.
partly that was because of his father's drinking. partly because of the times. they were trying, and so reagan didn't have a lot of friends like you or might have in grade school or something. his only friend was his brother. so that was a part of him that he kind of developed an inner life that was very personal, and they didn't let people into. so he was a challenge. he was a challenge. he was always, always had good manners and he got very angry at me as someon some as i wrote ine "washington post," but he was never uncivil about it. he was never, i mean, in one sense he was good to cover because he recognized you have a job to do and it wasn't just promoting them. >> the hardest thing for anyone,
the hardest thing for any of us is not to be judged by somebody else's and this is. somebody might say reagan is this, too conservative. i don't agree. the hardest thing is to judge you by your own premises because none of us ever quite come out, reagan included, to her own opinion of our self. that's what i wouldn't do very well writing about stalin or hitler or an evil person, because i wouldn't have enough empathy to be able to want to see the world the way they saw it. but, in fact, i tried it once and i'm going to say -- i quickly given up because i didn't have enough respect for the person that i was writing about 200 want to write about them. i have to write about people, not that i agree with but that i have some regard for. reagan once said something to me, one of the things that
surprised the dickens out of you, because i don't know what animated, like father who's jack, same name as his father, and he is also an alcoholic, irish-american, alcoholic. reagan said once, he said, he didn't say this kind of thing and said, maybe that's one of the reason you are interested in me. i don't know what i said. i think maybe he's right. i'm empathetic women very critical. i need to stop myself from, i think becoming too critical. you can always see things afterward and much more clearly. there is a british historian, a woman, she wrote that history is
written backwards, but it's lived forward. those of us who were not there can never understand what it was like at the time. i asked one of the editors once an editor of the "washington post" who i deeply respected, one of the great people i've ever worked for adequate before in his own right, whether he thought i didn't over backwards to much and was too critical of reagan. he said i thought i was, but that i had to figure it out. it's one of the few things about getting old that is good i don't worry about that at all anymore. i don't worry is this how to soft? just write it.
if the writer tries to get right is doing the greatest service to his readers and to himself that he can possibly do. >> during booktv's recent visit to santa barbara, california, we spoke with kathleen sharp about the prescription drug program known as epo developed in the 1980s to fight for the detailed team of therapy. it was later abuse by former professional cyclist lance armstrong which resulted in his being banned from the sport. >> when lance armstrong was found to be guilty of using epo, i thought i, here is the reason for this whole book and is sure to come out to the public and to have them understand. because epo help people who are undergoing chemotherapy but there was lots of abuse of this
multibillion dollars of drug. studies started coming out over the years it became clear high doses -- would actually give people heart attacks or aneurysms and it was fatal. the thing is that every drug has a risk and reward. but we as patients he be told what those are. in the case of epo we didn't know for two decades or so. the stories i opened up with have to do with jim was diagnosed with cancer. his family brought him home. they thought he would recuperate at lease with his own time to get happen to be his birthday party and all of his family had come over. this 20 people, nephews and nieces and children and grandchildren. wants all the cake has been eaten and a soda has been bought, people go home and it's jim and his high school sweetheart. suddenly he starts bleeding on his years in from his nose and
from his throat. he can't even talk to key can even ask for a. he passes out. by the time the paramedics, they were shocked. it was like a murder scene with blood all over the wall and the couch. what he died from was an overdose of epo that have been given to him by the doctors and hospitals that had been caring for. this drug has a lovely invented breakthrough story becomes the first biotech blockbuster and a camera market in the late '80s and early '90s when a tiny company by the name of amgen which is right down the road in thousand oaks made the first fda approved drug. they needed a partner like johnson & johnson with deep pockets and a lot of marketing know-how. in the beginning to promote epo and get into the market amgen had a partnership with johnson & johnson. album is supposed to be really was supplement the blood. it was a blood drug, not a pharmaceutical drug. that's how the fda considered
it. so the drug became medicare's number one we adverse drug. $100 billion bonanza. you can imagine what that did for their stock and j&j's market. it just became the drug that ofy other pharmaceutical want to imitate the the only thing the fda approved epo four was for chemotherapy related fatigue. that was it. if the fda watch television they could see it as all kinds of commercials promoting epo and the various brands for tiredness, fatigue, not having enough get up and go. it wasn't hard to find out that the doctors were prescribing it in unofficial in unapproved ways. but during the late '90s, 1997, 1998, early 2000 the fda
was asking for both amgen and j. and j. to please give us a new study. show us that this is not harmful. it's now so huge that we need to look at it again. year after year the company did not have been in use doors which exacerbate the problem until became a public health issue. but we started noticing that athletes who are using epo back in the '80s, the late 1980s, this is what amgen was just starting to research this wonder drug they called it, and bicyclist in france and italy were using it and getting it on the black market and injecting it. and overdosing. many of them were found dead in switzerland come in france. and so the were already red flags the dangers of this drug. but then both johnson & johnson and amgen weekend to push and promote in inappropriate ways the drug more and more chemotherapy patients were starting to die.
come to find out that as many as 10 or 15% were sometimes 30% depend on what steps you looked at other patients were dying from this drug that was supposed to be homeless. the people who are drug dying from this drug were dying from heart attacks or dying of aneurysms. some people i interviewed for the book "blood medicine" were dying from too many red blood cells so there blood was pouring out of the years and the nose and eyes. mostly it was heart attacks and aneurysms and these proved to be more fatal than the cancer that the people were hoping to recuperate from. the fda does have control. it could pull the drug after a decent hearing and specialists and experts tell us what's really going on. but even more important medicare and medicaid could no longer do business with these corporatio
corporations. that really should happen often because that was absolutely destroyed a lot of the financial and profit motive a lot of these companies who play fast and loose with the rules. but so far the government and the fda has never done that with any drug. medicare is the honeypot for all the pharmaceutical and health care companies. medicare pay something like 60-70% of the cost of these drugs. in other words, a lot of old people get cancer and so the doctors and hospitals are going to build medicare, medicaid or some other government agency for the cost at a high price. this is why you see so many companies now developing cancer drugs. they're very expensive. leukemia drugs. because they tended bill medicare and medicaid and other programs of high costs in hopes it would get that money. this toy really did take place and unfold in washington, d.c.
where you have the government agencies like the fda regulating the medicine. but because the whistleblowers were out here on the west coast, one was mark ducks buried was up in seattle and his best friend was down in tucson. they were rival salesman trying to sell want another with epo until they realized to their shock that the high-cost, high promotions, the money they were giving their clients, the doctors, were actually illegal. so they tried to alter their bosses back in new jersey but nobody wanted to really deal with it. these two men on the west coast tried to alert reporters and journalists and authors are it took him three years before they got to get in before i agreed to do. that i realized all my god, this is a 90 story gone back. these two men are trying everything they can to make something right.
i think nobody was taking this story shows the because you had this giant, $200 billion a year corporation called johnson & johnson. johnson & johnson make baby shampoo. they are our favorite health care company. it just seemed like it was too incredible to be true. surely a corporation would not purposefully commit fraud and knowingly heard people just for money. but alas, they came to be the case. now people are much more aware of the dangers of epo because of lance armstrong and the doping issue. it's interesting because amgen in which, of course, is what of the makers of epo recently had to pay almost a billion dollars for the fraud that it committed. but mark ducks buried was working for johnson & johnson entity and that case never got as far in court.
johnson & johnson had many other drugs that they were found guilty of falsely promoting or fraudulent or molding and it had to pay dearly for the. but epo is not one of them. today if it can to find out that his doctors just prescribed a drug and he wants to know whether or not it's safe, it's kind of difficult to find that out. there's been one amazing breakthrough with the affordable care act, which some people call obamacare. and that is that doctors have to disclose publicly from which companies they are taking money. if j.j. is one of those companies they're taking money from, and a consumer or patient has been prescribed this particular drug, announced that perhaps there might be a vested interest. so it's easier than it was 10 years ago but it's still not as easy as it should be. that's partly because of the lack of really a lot of muscle that the fda doesn't have to
enforce safety laws. it seems today with so many drugs been discovered in a really serious side effects that were not disclosed, it was the fda allowed him to remain on the market that we have sort of a breakdown in the system. patient safety is not as strong as it could be in this country. and furthermore our drug and health care costs are far more expensive than many to be because of the marketing and promotion often illegal or off-label. we are only one of to symbolize or first world countries that allow pharmaceutical to advertise on television. that's a big red flag. these commercials have quick micro very, very fine print and you surely cannot expect patients to be looking at all the side effects imprint. and a lot of times the dangers of the drug is not revealed until years later.
there's a little sort of thumbnail rule i remember from reporting on this book, which is that about 30-40% of health because go to medicine, another 30 those defrauded, and another 30 postmarketing. this is what we have in the for private sector health care. i think timmy "blood medicine" and epo is a perfect example of that failed system. >> now a literary tour of the santa barbara, california, with the help of our local cable partner cox communications. we start our trip with pico iyer who discusses his book "the art of stillness" which describes what about we momentarily stopped traveling and slow down his life. >> the first day i decided to do nothing was i think a really busy day. i was working in new york city some years ago and had a very
exciting job. we used to work late and it was exhilarating and i got into a cab to go home. we worked for blocks with the times square with all flashy lights and the sense of a kid being in the big city. i was really happy but suddenly i realized then, i'm racing around so much, i never have the chance to think how deep this happens this. i was in an adrenalin adrenalint this is what i want to be doing with my whole life? i was in my 20s event and i was covering world affairs for "time" magazine. i had interesting to look but i thought i cannot separate myself from slight to see if it's the life i should be living. so i should do something radically different and to japan and i realized although there's a lot of surface excite in my life, it wasn't really sustaining the. if i was to in my life thinking i spent the whole of it for blocks of transcript made i wouldn't think it was a good life. i had an apartment on the 13th
floor on park avenue. traffic is rumbling past all night. i would get out, get into my 25th floor office onto the street in the middle of rockefeller center. i would often work 15 to 16 hours a day and doesn't join the work. at the end of the i would get back in the box, down to the subway, they after day for four years. and now where i live in japan i did a to an apartment in the middle of nowhere with my wife, i kids. we have no car, no bicycle, no tv. no media. and so i wake up, have breakfast, i make 10-foot commute to my desk because it's such a tiny apartment. the desk is next to the bed and the dining table. i write for maybe five hours, and then i take a long walk around the neighborhood. after that we have a cares about the size and doubles at the end
of a cup of tea and read for an hour, take another walk and then i will slowly take your e-mails. they seem like they're coming from another planet. then i will go and play ping pong with my elderly neighbors and then i will read somewhere that isolate maybe five hours left over in the day. .. >> so at some point i think all of us, we have to find a way to just step back and catch our
breath. that's my extreme way, but i think everybody is thinking about their own way nowadays. of course, when i gave up this secure and glamorous job for a life doing nothing in japan, all my friends and family and colleagues were shocked. i remember soon after i moved to japan, i got a postcard from one of my oldest friends from high school, and he says sounds like you've gone crazy, well done. i thought, well, there's a true friend, he understands my needs. of course, my parents were concerned, giving up the steady income for the unknown, and my colleagues thought i was mad, and most of them are still in new york 30 years on and enjoying it, so it wouldn't be right for them. but it's the one move i've never regretted. fault i'm i was in new york city, i was always thinking what if i were in cairo toe leading a radically -- kyoto leading a radically different life? as soon as i got to japan, i instantly felt at home x i
thought this is the life that's been watering for me, and -- waiting for me, and i'm glad i made my way to it. a few years after i made my way to japan, i was invited to drive into the cold, dark hills in los angeles to visit my hero since boyhood, the great singer and poet leonard cohen. and i was really moved to find that this man who could be living anywhere in any high style that he wanted had chosen to become a zen monk. he was living for five and a half years in this quite severe, forbidding monastery doing really grueling manual work and literally sweeping up and cleaning things day in and day out. and this is a man who is already a have beenty and -- celebrity and in his 60s. that made a big impression on me. while i was staying in the monastery with leonard cohen, he came town one night to my little
cabin, and he said this is the really profound exciting entertainment i've had in life. and this is a man who'd tasted sex and drugs and rock and roll and travel, every kind of adventure. but he said this is the most sustaining thing that i've found. and i didn't -- i was in my mid 30s at that time. i didn't fully understand it, and i said maybe he's just saying it because it sounds impressive. but as the years have gone on, i've found the same thing. i'm, by profession, a travel writer, so i've been to many exciting places. i'm always in places that sound wonderful, but i've never found a trip that's satisfied me in as deep a way as going nowhere. and i've also noted because i've been traveling for 40 years and have been writing about travel for 30 years i remember maybe when i was beginning in the 1980s i would talk about going to tibet and going to cuba, and my friends' eyes would lightening up. before the internet, we didn't each -- it was hard to know what they sounded like or felt like
or sounded like. nowadays anybody watching this program can access every last corner of tibet probably on her smartphone tonight while lying in the bath. and i noticed that nowadays people's eyes really light up when i say i'm going nowhere. i'm going to a place without cell phones, where there's no tv reception and no boss can send me an e-mail for three days. wait, how do you get there? i want the directions to this place. and i think, i mean, this book, "the art of still 'em," was written in response to the fact that the typical person is probably getting 200 e-mails a day, 20 texts and 16 phone calls, and was so out of both, we can't do justice to any of them. most of us are happiest when we're lost in a conversation for five hours or in a movie or a beautiful landscape. but when we're texting here and answering a call there and taking care of an e-mail and getting in the car, most of us are not fulfilled, and we're caught up in this kind of accelerating roller coaster that
we never really asked to get on, but we don't know how to get off. and if we're dizzy now year, we'll be ten times dizzier next year because all of our devices are speeding up and getting more and more ubiquitous. i love technology, and i think it's made our life brighter, more interesting, healthier, happier, but i don't always trust myself with technology, and i feel it's like having a very strong drug at your disposal. if you do, it's really, really hard to get away from it. as you probably know, there are now 400 internet rescue camps in china alone where they literally have to administer cold turkey as if kids were addicted to heroin, but they're addicted to the internet. there's something called e-mail apnea now. there's a new condition which is literally the psychological fear of being outside of mobile phone contact. so these devices are wonderful, but we've surrendered to them so quickly that i think we're sometimes in danger of losing balance. the world health organization
has called stress the health epidemic of the 21st century, and it's increasing more almost every individual every day, so we're almost reaching a function where we can't function anymore. it's really hard, if you're busy, it's really hard to be kind or happy or wise. and that's really where our deepest fulfillment comes. so kindness, happiness and wisdom probably come from untethering ourself from busyness and opening ourselves up to something more spacious. in my book i try to give a few examples and models of probably what everybody knows and is feeling already. which is that we're getting more and more movement in our life. and to cope with all the movement, we need a little wit of stillness -- a little bit of stillnd, just a few drops of stillness every day will make a movement more tolerable. >> for more information on booktv's recent visit to santa barbara and the many other destinations on our cities tour, go to