♪ Music Playing ♪ >> COMING UP NEXT ON "ARIZONA HORIZON," A LOOK AT A PROPOSITION-319, WHICH WOULD PROHIBIT THE USE OF PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS FOR TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS.

ALSO TONIGHT, THE IMPACT OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DECISION TO SCALE DOWN MILITARY EXERCISES WITH SOUTH KOREA.

AND WE'LL HEAR ABOUT A NEW BOOK WITH THE ENCOURAGING TITLE "LONGEVITY MADE SIMPLE."

THOSE STORIES AND MORE, NEXT, O "ARIZONA HORIZON."

>> "Arizona Horizon" is made possible by contributions from the friends of Arizona PBS.

Members of your public television station.

>> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO "ARIZONA HORIZON."

I'M TED SIMONS.

PROPOSITION-319 IS AMONG THE BALLOT MEASURES TO BE DECIDED O BY VOTERS IN NOVEMBER.

PROP-319 PROHIBITS STATE AGENCIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FROM USING PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS TO IDENTIFY VIOLATORS O TRAFFIC LAWS.

SPEAKING AGAINST THE PROPOSITIO Joining us tonight is will Humble, executive director of the Arizona public health association.

Now, we should note that we invited state senator Wendy Rogers the main backer of the proposition to speak in favor of the measure but she could not appear on this date and declined purchasing air attempts.

Will, good to have you here, thank you for joining us what exactly does Proposition-319 call for.

>> What it does is essentially prohibit any future jurisdiction, city, town, from doing any kind of photo enforcement, whether that's red light, cameras, the intersection cameras, or regular speed cameras if they don't have a contract already to do that enforcement.

So, for example, Phoenix and those cities that do have photo enforcement and keep and they still want to do it, if this passes they have to go to the ballot and have the voters approve that after two years and then every 10 years after that.

So it essentially locks out cities that don't already have photo enforcement.

Tucson is a good example.

Tucson does not have photo enforcement now.

If this passes they could never, ever do it.

Ever.

>> Right.

Right.

So in other words, existing systems would need voter okay to remain, new systems for both.

>> I should have said that.

>> Let's sea what else you have to say about this.

This is a controversial issue.

I know the proponents, they say it's a controversial issues and thus should be decided by voters.

Are they wrong?

>> I agree with that.

I am fine with the direct democracy part of the proposition.

If you are going to do something like this in your town, why not ask the voters if that's what they want to do.

I am fine with that.

What I really don't like is the fact that cities that don't currently have it, could never do it.

So take a town now that's really small, doesn't need any photo enforcement of anything, 15 years from now, might be a really busy -- they might have really dangerous interim sections, city Council, the track, the law enforcement, they are all on the same page that they need a red light camera at a certain intersection, they will not be able to do it if this passes.

>> So your idea is that citizens should have -- >> I am fine with that.

>> That's one of the main arguments.

>> I am good with that.

>> From the other side.

>> Yeah.

>> Due process, law enforcement officers should have discretion and there should be someone witnessing this, a human being as opposed to a camera and an algorithm.

Does that make sense?

>> I think that does make -- there are checks and balances within the jurisdictions that have the system now.

I think some of those could be more robust.

Actually there could be better guardrails around where these cameras go and the decisions that are made.

And the due process parts of what you are describing.

>> But the idea that they should only be made by law enforcement officers.

Why is that a bad idea?

>> Law enforcement is reviewing these.

>> At the moment, at the time.

>> At the moment.

Yeah.

Certain jurisdictions didn't do it that way if that's what they want to do.

>> Okay.

>> I mean, the voters in that city, could decide that's the way we are going to do it.

>> You are speaking a very well pro 319.

>> That's what I said, like I am not 100 percent against this thing.

What I really object to is that it prevents cities that don't have it now from ever doing it ever in the future.

And this is would be voter protected.

It's the legislature could never undo it.

>> One of the reasons that this is on the ballot and one of the reasons people don't lick this kind of thing is because they think it prioritizes fines over fairness.

Do they have a point there in.

>> In some jurisdictions they do have a point.

So here I am doing pro and con.

>> Yes.

I feel like we've got the debate on both sides.

>> Lets take paradise valley for example.

They have roads in paradise valley, McDonald is a good example.

It has a really low speed limit Like 25 miles an hour.

And there is -- there is a road -- a speed camera every 300 meters.

I mean, it's -- it's over enforced.

And so there are jurisdictions like paradise valley that I think are over doing this it's a drive-3 kind of town, people use Tatum and those things.

And you drive down Tatum and there's five of them.

>> They are all dressed like cactuses.

>> No, they are no.

That's something else.

>> All right.

Let's talk about the safety aspects.

>> Good.

>> All right.

The idea that red light cameras, people know -- especially for inter sections and such, they'll slam on their brakes, it causes crashes, rear-end collisions in particular.

>> They have a point.

[ Laughter ] >> You did your homework.

>> Thank you.

>> So what -- here is the thing, I am an evangelist for the red light running intersection camera.

>> That's the one you want to see.

>> I want to keep that.

That's the public health value.

>> Okay.

>> The speed cameras and the speed traps that are set up, there's very little public health value for that except in school areas.

It's the red light cameras that save lives.

And here is how they do it.

The red light cameras -- this is a national study of seven different cities with a couple of hundred intersections, they looked at that and found that when you have a red light intersection camera, it cuts down on those really violent explosive T-bone crashes that kill people by 25%.

That's a big decrease in really dangerous collisions.

Those ones where someone is turning left and you plow into them or you got the green and someone run a red light into you.

So it reduces those things by 25%.

But it also increases the -- in that study, it increased the slow rear ending crashes by 15%.

>> Interesting.

Because I -- >> Those are injury-free crashes for the most part.

>> And but I would think this would -- and the argument is, that it increases erratic driving wherever so busy looking around where is the camera, what's this, what's that?

I think you get inconsistent driving here.

>> All I can tell you is, when they did the study, and it was a robust study with lots of cities.

>> Yeah.

>> It showed a big reduction of violent, dangerous, crashes, those T-bones in those intersections and saved a lot of lives.

>> What you are saying is you put this on the balance out and it passes that's a done deal.

And that's a done deal forever.

>> Forever.

>> Yes.

>> So a city like Tucson who doesn't do -- or Glendale that doesn't do photo enforcement now, would never, ever be able do it no matter how dangerous their intersections get.

>> One last chance here to support your side as opposed to the proposition.

Senator Rogers, calls photo radar a scam.

Her quote it's is it's not a safety program but a business built on fines.

>> In some jurisdictions that's true.

But look at what it can do at these intersections.

By the way, I wouldn't even be debating this and arguing against 319 if this had just gone after photo radar.

It's the intersection cameras I care about.

>> I think we had a chance to have a link here on the screen if you want to read the full proposition, there it is right there.

The full proposition, we have them all up there.

Go ahead and take a look at that.

And you'll see arguments for and against.

My goodness gracious.

>> I gave more for than against >> Yeah.

All right.

Will Humble, problem 319, photo radar traffic enforcement, good to have you here.

>> I don't need someone to debate with.

>> You do it yourself, yeah.

>> PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYS THAT TH U.S.

WILL BE SCALING BACK JOINT MILITARY EXERCISES WITH LONG-TIME ALLY, SOUTH KOREA.

TH PRESIDENT'S STATED REASONING IS THAT THE EXERCISES SEND, QUOTE, Inappropriate and hostile signals to the leader of North Korea with whom the press claims to have a, quote, very good relationship.

ANOTHER REASON, SOUTH KOREA HAS NOT JOINED THE U.S.

IN THE WAR AGAINST IRAN.

FOR MORE ON ALL THIS WE WELCOME DANIEL ROTHENBERG, THE CODIRECTOR OF THE FUTURE SECURITY INITIATIVE.

Good to see you again, thanks for joining us.

>> Thanks so much.

>> So reducing military drills with South Korea.

I found this a surprise.

Did you find this a surprise?

>> More importantly south Koreans found this a surprise.

>> Yeah.

Talk to us of why is this happening?

>> We don't always know why the president makes the claim that makes, we have 28,500 military personnel stationed full-time in south Korea.

That's been going on for a long time really since the Armistice didn't end the Korean war but put a pause on it.

I think one thing that is interesting here, is president trump reasonably asked the question of why should the U.S.

provide so much support to allies like South Korea?

>> Why should we?

It's been kind of -- it seems relatively clear.

You got that part of the world there where China is a major menace to a bunch of places, or at least wants to be -- other places consider China from Taiwan to Japan and south Korea.

Should we not have a presence there?

>> Right.

So I think what is positive about all of this is that it may be focuses a little attention on the reason, if we look at the history, one of the most extraordinary stories in the post second world war post Korean war era, has been the growth of South Korea.

From a country that had a per capita income of under $100 a year to 37,000 now.

A country that's a boom being success story.

A country that's maybe hard to Marge it's 25 to 35 miles from the North Korean border in downtown Phoenix that's like cave creek.

Or fountain hills and you have half the population living in the metropolitan area.

You have a country that blossomed and boomed in the shadow of a constant looming threat.

>> And the president thinks it's not fair that we are putting all of those resources there while they succeed?

>> There is the question.

You can view it as an investment in regional security and our own national security.

In global security or you could view it as is some kind of a bad deal.

We could put this in context of something like $5 billion a year, when you count -- that's the U.S.

support for this military presence.

You know, that's maybe three to four days of the current Iran war in cost.

It's a lot of money.

Does it get us something useful I think it's a good question to ask.

For years the U.S.

has said resoundingly yes.

>> Yeah.

The impact on these military exercises.

On things like coordination in China starts sabre rattling more with Taiwan, is and other areas in that part of the world, do we lose some coordination by not having these drills up to speed?

>> The answer has to be yes.

the reason is coordinated exercises happen is to improve the ability of the U.S.

military and the south Korean military to work together.

It's been going on for years and years.

I don't know that it's right that a single skipped exercise or just an exercise is going to radically change the capacity of the U.S.

and its ally, South Korea, to act.

But it stands for something and I think it's also a sign of a sort of dangerous move in the region.

Like why do we want to cozy up to North Korea?

And why do we want to give this away when in return let's say we are really getting nothing from the north Koreans?

>> Again, as you mentioned, what kind of message does this send?

Not only to that part of the world, but all of our allies everywhere.

>> Clearly a confusing message, right?

It's not clear exactly what the substance of this is.

In the long-term.

It's not clear fits a passing phase, we all remember or perhaps not, the way in which the first -- in the first trump administration lots of efforts were made to cozy up to Kim Jong UN and trying to maybe achieve a meaningful breakthrough in what were unsuccessful efforts to limit nuclear proliferation in North career afternoon since 2017 we have seen a radical increase in their nuclear capabilities by almost every measure.

It's lard to know how this will reverse.

>> The idea of improving diplomacy with North Carolina.

We all understand that it makes for a better world but it doesn't seem to be doing that, "A."

"B" they were fire missiles recently.

And North Korea just shrugged off everything the president said we don't want anything to do with this.

Why -- HMM.

Why does -- who thinks this is a good idea?

>> Yeah, well, we don't know what this is yet.

I think the idea of negotiating with North Korea has to make sense.

At some level really the old model has failed.

That is to say, the old model back in 1994 when the initial accords were drafted and put in to place the point was to keep North Korea from advancing in nuclear capabilities.

That's not the case now.

So what is the way forward?

The best way forward would be sort of what the south Koreans are suggesting, which is some graduated process whereby they come to an agreement, you know, you stop the increase in nuclear research and advance, and then you try to like wit al way at the stockpile and maybe eventually in the future, there is some sort of nonproliferation.

>> Does that particular end, are you seeing that possible result being helped by what the president is now saying publically?

>> It's so hard -- what was said publically is such a shock to the system it's hard to manage it.

One thing worth thinking about in this crazy world when nuclear weapons were first created and deployed by the U.S., in the region, the thought was there would be massive proliferation by advanced states of nuclear weapons.

The treaty was signed in the 1960s, that's a long time ago.

Only nine states in the world that have nuclear weapons North Korea being one of them.

It's been shockingly successful when you consider the potential advantages to a state of having weapons.

So what that has shown us is that international law and international agreements can actually work.

But we are trending towards a world where some of that success is deeply threatened.

>> So does the president is have a point when he says these kinds of exercises at this kind of level, unnecessarily hostile and provocative especially to a regime like North Korea?

>> He's right in that North Korea doesn't like seeing increased capacity of south Koreans working with the U.S.

for all of that -- what that means.

Whether it -- it seems strategically not particularly useful to give away that desire.

Which I am sure is something North Korea wants without getting something in return.

Maybe there is a side back deal we don't know about.

But what do know is from the first Trump administration's efforts, that pretty useful goal, really did not work so what is the path forward?

You know, let's hope it's something better than what we have seen in the past.

>> All right.

Daniel Rothenberg again, a future security initiative.

Really interesting stuff.

And a lot -- every day it's something else.

Interesting scenario over there Thank you, sir, appreciate.

>> Thank you so much, Ted.

♪ Music Playing ♪ ♪ Music Playing ♪ >> A lot of plants that that are still here the cacti, saguaro is one that is really prominent to the people.

To the community.

They have a lot of report for the saguaro itself.

It provides the fruit and also provides us with materials for our houses.

In the summertime when the fruit is ready to be harvested, it's what we call our new year.

It's to reflect on everything in the past year.

But also to look forward to the coming year and what's coming up.

At the time they would do a certain ceremony.

Whether in different communities or just with families, they would sing traditional songs to bring the rain.

Because we live on the desert, we need the water, again, to survive.

♪ Music Playing ♪ >> A NEW BOOK SUGGESTS THAT LIVING LONGER AND FEELING YOUNGER IS EASIER THAN YOU THINK.

THE BOOK IS TITLED, "LONGEVITY MADE SIMPLE," AND IT PROMISES T CHALLENGE EVERYTHING WE THINK W KNOW ABOUT HEALTH, AGING AND TH FUTURE OF MEDICINE.

"LONGEVITY MADE SIMPLE" WAS WRITTEN BY DR.

SHAD MARVASTI, ALONG WITH FORMER U.S.

SURGEON GENERAL RICHARD CARMONA.

WE SPOKE TO DR.

MARVASTI ABOUT THE BOOK.

good to see you again.

>> Great to see you again as well, Ted.

>> Yeah.

All right.

How simple can longevity be made?

You are saying this is simple.

Longevity sounds like an awfully complicated issue.

>> It sound more complicated than it is.

The reality, is you don't need to be a billionaire bio hacker to have the greatest technology and put down of these expenses to really get the most bang for your buck.

And this really book say culmination of nearly 20 years of my clinical experience in treating patients and really taking a whole person approach to health.

Where we look at the science of epigenetics, most people are familiar with genetic but epigenetics is above and beyond our Genes, our zip code is more partner than our genetic code than terming longevity.

>> How does it affect your longevity.

>> Where we live, how active we are, how socially isolated we are, or connected we are, what we eat, those stress ors in our life, these social behavior and lifestyle determinates actually turn our Genes on or off for better or worse.

You can think about the Genes we inherit like hardware and these genetic inputs as upgraded or downgrading our software.

>> Interesting.

The five daily habits you talk about in this good the action anyone is dress you call it the dress code.

D-R-E-S-S what do they stand for?

>> Diet, relationships, exercise, stress, and sleep.

So these are the key epigenetic inputs.

Diet is the number one risk factor for premature preventable disease the standard American diet is nearly 70% processed foods or what a call Franken foods that's a software downgrade it turns on Genes that cause cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's disease.

But if we switch to a whole food diet, that's mostly plants and basically whole vegetables, fruits, healthy fats we turn on Jean that protect us against cancer and heart disease.

>> So can real quick, you are not just saying don't eat this stuff it's bad now, you are saying eat this stuff it's good now.

>> Absolutely.

I am telling you the things that you eat and saying that your Gene expression actually changes not in a matter of years, not even months but we can actually change Gene expression in a matter of weeks in the same time that it takes for your taste buds to turnover, in four to five weeks, you can actually change Genes and turn on the ones that improve health and longevity.

>> The "R" is relationships.

>> Yes.

So critical.

So underestimate.

Big Harvard study looking at graduates over 50 years and they found that the single best predictor of health and happiness later in life is not your cholesterol level whether you had meaningful authentic relationships in your life it could be romantic relationship or close friendship.

A space of vulnerability and trust and that turns on Genes that improve longevity.

>> Exercise that we know this, exercise is almost an elixir.

>> Any movement.

We see in the blue zones where people live longer any movement is actually very helpful.

It's not like you have to have an expensive gym membership just walking for 30, 45 minutes a day, just being active that's really it.

>> And the two "Ss" stress and sleep.

>> Short-term stress like a sauna or cold plunge can actually help make your body more resistant to disease.

And healthy.

But long-term chronic stress can actually increase chronic inflammation.

So doing practices like yoga, tai-chi, meditation, mindfulness space, stress reduction, these actually change brain structures in just eight weeks and help your body cope with stress over the long-term.

>> And as far as leap is concerned, it's -- >> It's about getting a consistent rhythm.

It's about getting access to real sunlight early in the morning.

To reset your circadian rhythm your internal clock and having good leap shy Jean you wake and seen at the same time.

>> I am asking if I friend here, does good sleep hygiene mean waking up when animals wake you up or something in the middle of the night?

Does that bother your sleep hygiene?

>> That doesn't necessarily if you are getting really good rem sleep you won't get woke up by that.

>> If you are you have to figure out what to.

>> Yeah.

>> Basically type two diabetes can be reversed, correct.

>> Yes.

>> Lose pounds normalize broad fresh usual of these things you can do.

>> Yes.

>> For free.

>> That's it.

>> For free.

>> And the thing is peep think I have heart disease, diabetes, he Alzheimer's my family therefore I' going to get it.

Our Genes are not our destiny and we can control our path inch the book we give practical tips on how to do it and add that into your daily life.

>> I was going to ask about the mental aspect.

Where does willpower come into all of this?

All of these things you need to get it done and you can't just sit and expect it to be done to you.

>> I think you need guidance and you need support which is where the fields of integrative medicine, lifestyle medicine, what we are calling whole health now, this approach where we are not just giving you medication or surgery but prescribing food as medicine, prescribing exercise as medicine.

And then as you are making those changes, and we are helping you along that path, you are actually deprescribing medication I am taking people off blood pressure medication as their blood pressure comes down and taking patients off diabetes medication or their blood sugar comes down they are making the connections with data.

Using technology like continuous glucose monitors to see how your activity left, the foods you eat, affect your blood sugar numbers then real time, you can actually make those changes and get reinforcements.

>> Dr.

shad Marvasti, longevity made simple.

Condition on the book.

Best of success to you, and this is really interesting stuff.

Going to have to look it up.

Gotta have to figure it out.

>> Thank you very much, Ted.

>> Good to have you here.

>> And that's it for now.

I am Ted Simons, thank you so much for joining us.

You have a great evening.