Our economic dependence on caffeine?

In South American travel guides of the late 1800s, it was commonly noted that in some regions workers chewed the leaves of the coca plant, stimulating them with "remarkable endurance" in their thin-aired mountain regions. One might feel a bit of pity for these wretched Andeans, having to overclock their internal systems simply to cope with the reality of their environment.

Yet if we replace one stimulant with another — cocaine with caffeine — aren't many of us, as workers or students, in the same situation? I would be quite surprised to learn that the US Government has not studied in depth the economic benefits of stimulants, particularly caffeine, and the benefits conferred upon national productivity by a Starbucks on every corner. I am sure both academia and professional sports are quite aware of the financial benefits of competition fired by wink-wink amphetamine use. How much have we begun to depend, for our own economic well-being and competitiveness, upon personal overclocking? I would be very interested to learn of studies of this sort.

Muckrake enjoys his stimulants of choice too. Yet there seems to be a difference between imbibing for pleasure and for survival. If the latter is the case, let's note it clearly and honestly and openly.

The quest for research excellence at the University of Minnesota: a reality check

The noble goal of attaining Top Three status amongst public institutions has led to discussions of feasibility and strategy at Sally's, The Local, and the patio of Eastcliff. Having been involved in several of these, often in the company of others, Muckrake has resolved never to join in unless each member of the panel has begun his or her second Summit Pale Ale, ensuring a conversation that is more lively, open, and a bit less cynical than otherwise — if not productive, at least there's the promise of a decent buzz for all.

I have noticed a rather tacit speed-bump on our highway to greatness, one that actually is a bit embarrassing. I believe, in general, University of Minnesota researchers are in fact rather comfortable, if not happy, with their current situation. And thus, there really is no impetus to change at the grass roots level. From the workaday perspective, a researcher already has plenty of challenges. How our Top Three Quest will improve anything at all in the near term is simply not obvious. The University can do its improving, but in the meantime I have work to do ...

Any honest discussion will acknowledge this.

Hello to my friends, and welcome!

I suspect the University of Minnesota's attempt to improve its status as a research institution is being watched with interest by university presidents all over the United States. Why? It's a paradigmatic struggle: Balancing consensus and leadership. Traditional academic values (tenure, academic freedom) vs economic realities (operating cost, return-on-investment). It's happening for all to watch and learn from.

I am a Minnesotan, an insider, an outsider, and a financial supporter. I believe I will be very glad to meet you online, and I look forward to many happy, thoughtful, and fruitful exchanges.

Yours very truly,

Muckrake