No. It's you who do not understand free-markets and capitalism.
The so-called collapse you are talking about occurs if and only if someone passes a law that protects turf or establishes barriers to entry that are not surmountable by startups that cannot command the same capital or priveledges from.gov.
With the excuse that it would be wasteful to have multiple pipes run to my house I only have Time-Warner and legacy PacBell. Nobody can come into my home to compete and to make matters worse I can't even lay fiber to the fiber optic port 1000 ft away because of moronic city constraints.
In addition, capitalism works regardless of the perceived fairness of the transaction. In a free-market the price-point is different, as defined by the market-clearing price. In a constrained transaction, where the.gov interference sets the price differently than the market-clearing, there will be problems. The franchise situation with cable essentially means that cable can charge a greater price than otherwise, which means for guaranteed priceing they have fewer customers than otherwise or in other terms their price/performance sucks. And guess what -- no bureaucrat can fix that. If they [.gov] choose the market price what did I need the.gov idiot for in the first place? If they set it higher... well that's the favoritism we all know so well. If they set it too low, the area will become a wasteland of no service because noone will step in to provide or demand will greatly outstrip supply - either way it sucks... Fancy that -- markets work...
Also monopoloy is not evil at all provided it comes about naturally. ALCOA was a wonderful example. Prior to the bogus antitrust action, they deployed aluminum worldwide at ever decreasing prices while making an obscene profit taking advantage of their declining average cost curves.
With respect, you don't understand and you are ignorant of the facts.
The FDA kills tens of thousands of people by not approving things that work (and are available elsewhere) by being over-cautious. It happens all the time and is the stark reality.
And, I am building a device. My regulatory process is a scant 10 million dollars, which I can tell you with the certainty that the sun rises tomorrow is 8.3 million dollars more than is needed to prove that this device works. As a result of the 3 year process which I could do in 180 days, somewhere on the order of 50,000 patients/yr will be deprived of a life-saving treatment for diseases from which they will die.
Also you confuse regulatory approval with clinical trial. Of course a drug that doesn't make it thru trial should go nowhere. That's not what it's about. There are many drugs, clinically successful, which don't make it to market because of regulatory cost. Semi-successful drugs that do what they are intended for may be profitable at 100 million dollar/3 yr regulatory cost level, are not so at the 1.2 billion dollar/8 yr regulatory cost level. The approval process is too expensive. Period.
Poppycock! You confuse deregulation with lack of law. Plus you are dropping the historical context in which the scientific method had yet to be applied to medicine.
All that is required is freedom and law aligned with the goal: to deliver choice and an exponentially advancing health market. Please see computer explosion for reference. We don't have a Computing Device and Software Agency do we?
So...
Get the FDA out of the way between me and my doctor.
Which means the following: The FDA labels a drug with ROYGB, red, orange, yellow, green, blue based on the amount of clinical data supporting the drug. There is a high-transparency informed consent that goes along with each color. Red is "It might kill you as easily as it might help. Use at your own risk", Blue is "We know everything about the damn drug. It works. Here are the side-effects." Anyone who doesn't register into the FDA process is a criminal and you toss him/her in jail.
Doctors and patients get to use any drug of any color provided they track, follow and report on the patient and drug. Would work like a charm.
Freedom and science coexist peacefully if the structure is designed right.
First, let me say I am a primary stakeholder. I am a Chief Medical Officer in a medical device company with a device that shows spectacular clinical activity.
Well, the patent holders in the arena have damnable method patents on all the key parts, and haven't done squat in the arena for better part of 20 years. And it's an almost impossible logjam of non-collaboration. So once again, irrational patents rear their ugly head. And we won't talk about patents on naturally occuring proteins, not a new man-made drug, but a protein made from recombinant methods of naturally occuring DNA. I urge everyone to take a look at the patent on BMP-7 -- 1996 -- almost certain to reverse major tubulointerstitial damage in the kidneys, languishing on the vine as a result of the patent. (Hey, OrthoBiotech -- how many more years before you pull the trigger?) While the inventor deserves a Nobel for the clinical identification, he does not deserve a patent. He didn't invent BMP-7. Nature did. He noticed what it does and proved it beyond clinical doubt.
While the device-side of the FDA is a reasonable 2-3 years for approval at low cost (though still mostly useless and an extra-step) the drug-side is totally criminal in its existence. We are approaching 1.2 billion dollars to get a drug thru the process and it is absurd. Every time the FDA expands its regulatory web, fewer drugs and devices make it to market. It's a huge resistor sitting across the current of medical creation.
I don't need either patents or anything else to protect my market. It's hard enough to make science into clinical treatment that anyone who can do it and compete with me is welcome. What I need is the damn artificial stakeholders to be de-empowered by the elimination of method patents, elimination of patents on naturally-occuring proteins, elimination of obvious patents on combined therapy.
I also need the huge regulatory web that dictates patient selection and over-restricts my patient base to go away. One would think that multifactorial statistical analysis was a forgotten or unknown art listening to FDA regulators. And the damnable meaningless questions, the endless drivel the FDA requires to prove safety. There is no such thing as safety -- negatives can't be proved. I can only prove harm. My device has a 3% mild complication rate and what looks like an 80% remission rate against diseases that are uniformly fatal. Why the hell do I have to jump thru a zillion hoops to get to a damn feasibility trial with people dying like flies? In a country based on freedom, we have no health freedom.
And there is no such animal as an FDA scientist. Even those with Ph.D.'s in the sciences are bureaucrats. They are interested that their precious questions on their forms are answered not that the device/drug works or simplifying things to get something to market. Well, the cost of those forms are tens of millions of dollars of work, most of which is NOT essential to making the damn thing happen clinically. And the hubris -- we at the FDA guarantee safety -- what bs -- how many have died from Vioxx -- how many have died waitng for beta-blockers to show up -- how many drugs with good but not great clinical activity never made it due to regulatory cost?
And the socialism of medicine -- with CMS/HCFA dictating reimbursement, fer cryin out loud, why should anyone go into business when they can't get a real market price on anything. There are great devices just sitting in the wings which don't come into the market because overall reimbursement is peanuts relative to value. Noone is going to deliver to market a device with a treatment price of $15K, a direct cost of $5K that has only a 500 dollar reimbursement level. Oh, without breaking the non-disclosure agreement, let me say it would be worth your 15K to have the treatment even if it was out-of-pocket. In mass-market mode the cost of that device would plummet to peanuts over 5 years.
Obviously I am very frustrated that I can't deliver, for mostly artificial reasons
Just shows that the IEEE is ignorant of economics.
There IS a market clearing price for access to their database. Only I can guarantee it's not at $9 per paper which is what we experience in medicine (and noone really uses the online journals as a result).
Price it low and convenient, run lean, and there will be no issues...
Which just shows you that little understanding of the underlying biology yourself.
Cholesterol levels are actually singularly unimportant. Inflammation, homocysteine and c-reactive protein are infinitely more important.
But thanks to pharmaceutical research and medical dogma everyone worries about their cholesterol instead of whether they are inflamed or living a lifestyle that induces inflammation.
Well, I did say "area" in the sentence that followed.
Again, 100 years of brainwashing and folks think you can't describe it "classically". Of course you can. It only requires that the impacting wave be smaller than the surface it's impacting and the area integrals associated to momentum/energy transfer do the rest. But that's if I wanted to be a real pain. You are fundamentally correct.
I am attacking a very small part of QM -- something that does not invalidate for example, either quantization, wave packets etc. I'm attacking the notion that the particle is indefinite because given HUP I don't have an exact measurement. And downstream this leads to all sorts of nonsense, including the absurd notions of the power of QM computation.
Sigh. And then we can reformulate everything in a Clifford Algebra using classical axioms and get the same exact results but proving that QM computation is a chimera. So what! Use your head. At any moment in time the damnable 100 electrons are in a *particular* state -- and thus *cannot* be coerced into representing 2^100 states simultaneously.
It's failure to see that an epistemological potential is not a physical reality and this traverses the whole of QM as it presently exists. Absurd conclusions of computing power all rest on the premise that I can hold two or more states in superimposition until I need to calculate. The only reason this nonsense exists is because of mis-interpretation of a particular aspect of QM.
Wishing you well. You get the last word if you want it but I go to go back to my day job -- cancer research.
Yep. So what? I never said it the 100 electrons couldn't represent the information.
However, my 100 regular bits will quite nicely represent 2^100 states just as well. In fact my 256 megs of bits in my laptop can outstrip the possible states any day.
What they (nor the q-computer) will ever do is represent 2^100 states all at the same time and perform some miraculous quantum collapse calculation.
Macroscopically if I do the double-slit experiment using REGULAR waves in a tub of water I DO get the result you would expect -- interference patterns. Noone would reasonably claim that there were any quantum states anywhere in that system. Yet shrink it down orders of magnitude and I'm told to discount everything about entities? No -- sorry.
Also you need to understand that I am not discounting quantum theory -- I'm discounting a particular aspect of physical interpretation. And I am a QM geek (amateur) and I have stumped more than one physics professor on this particular point. (There is no satisfactory answer at present.)
When all is said and done I bet that we will have quantum computation -- but it will just be ultrafast classical computation.
I'm sorry, but it's time to call a spade a spade. This shows the total collapse of modern day physics.
And it goes right back to the wrong physical interpretation of the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle and treating statistics as if they have physical reality.
This idea that the electon is in some fuzzy position described by its probability is an epistemological statement -- not a physical one. The electron wave is somewhere 100% of the time in definite form. Looking at it from orders of magnitude larger in size -- of course I express where it is probabilistically! Nonetheless, the electron qua electron is a definite entity in a definite state (e.g spin up / spin down) in a definite area and not in some fuzzy quantum duo-state ready for quantum collapse on measurement. In other words, 100 quantum bits, all blathering by physicists aside, will do only what 100 regular bits do.
Put another way -- 70% chance of rain doesn't "quantum collapse" upon measurement to either it rained or it didn't. The system state was, regardles of my inability to know it -- just "it did rain" or "it didn't rain". Similarly, why does anyone believe that a quantum computation will collapse into meaningful bits?
Or put another way: An alien species tracking me on the planet surface at 12 hour intervals might conclude I quantum leap between continents by the damn physical interpretation of probabilities. Of course that's absurd -- I take a plane. Similarly, we look at electron position and states at extraordinarily slow timeframes and make quantum assertions of leaps and state -- and I'm supposed to take this seriously (as a physical interpretation)!
Please -- epistemologically 2^100 bits has 10^30 states -- but physically it's just 100 regular bits.
OH FOR PETE'S SAKE. Grow up. The war on Iraq was a net positive, it deflected an enormous number of terrorists and similar fools into a corner of the planet where we can kill them unhampered. Iran is destabilized and Syria doesn't know where to hide.
Plus if you work your way through something like
Pax Neo-Tech
you might learn something.
During a recent upgrade, the backup software only copied 50% of the data, backing up the D: drive but not the C: drive even though it copied the whole C: directory structure.
Then to add insult to injury, the RAID controller went haywire , destroying my only remaining copy.
I lost some irreplaceable stuff. I could have used a counselor. I was depressed for days!
Which just shows you don't know the history of the industrial revolution.
Patents were not enforced, were generally ignored and the crucial idea of standardized, division of labor on an assembly line was not patented.
Note the market explosions in every patented commodity once the patent ran out. Wasn't there a recent article on steam engine patents were once again, the whole production of steam engines exploded when the primary patents expired?
I find the replies by my brethren physicians appalling.
Every study ever done shows ridiculous levels of variation in diagnosis and treatment. The best of us are wrong, in non-trivial cases, 20% of the time, and most of us do worse than that. But since there is no real individual negative feedback loop on clinical practice [do you know YOUR error rate -- not the pathetic sanitized morbidity/mortality rounds on the topic] you don't know when you are wrong and patients lost in follow-up erases the evidence. Would you fly with a pilot that ends up at the wrong airport 1 out of 5 times?
The simple fact is that the unaided mind, when referencing a memorized knowledge foundation, simply sucks. The idea that you WOULD NOT use a tool specifically designed to improve your abilities is like saying you would prefer to do surgery instead of putting someone in an MRI.
To top it off, fascist HMO, socialist Medicare and absurd malpractice not to mention HIPAA and bureaucracy -- are the foundational problems that if eliminated would return competition to this market and move it forward. Fee for service has yet to be surpassed. It worked.
The fact that a major institution still uses the admission process that I scribbled on a napkin for them in 1992 shows you how bad things really are within healthcare. [I'm good at business system design -- but not THAT good.]
The fact that my wife underwent 3 hours of exams in agony when I TOLD THEM it was a ascending UTI/kidney infection and could be verified within seconds by tapping her back over the kidneys -- instead she suffered because of defensive medicine. We should be using our brains! I had to literally force myself into the exam room and demonstrate to a *Harvard*-trained doctor I was right. In shock, the guy immediately prescribed antibiotics and pain med. I left fit to be tied. Did I mention that a PKC would have diagnosed this within moments?
And you guys DON'T WANT to use a tool which increases your abilities. SHAME ON YOU.
I recently had a bad liver problem. A WORLD-EXPERT had the gaul to tell me that there was nothing to be done to improve my liver functions. Poppycock! A trivial literature search revealed two substances that radically improve such function, my LFT's were so low the next time around that they repeated the test to be sure.
So much for going by memory... use the information technology that geniuses like Weed provide and that hard-working folk like me who know how to design functional clinical systems provide for you.
Slashdot Mirror
No. It's you who do not understand free-markets and capitalism.
.gov.
.gov interference sets the price differently than the market-clearing, there will be problems. The franchise situation with cable essentially means that cable can charge a greater price than otherwise, which means for guaranteed priceing they have fewer customers than otherwise or in other terms their price/performance sucks. And guess what -- no bureaucrat can fix that. If they [.gov] choose the market price what did I need the .gov idiot for in the first place? If they set it higher... well that's the favoritism we all know so well. If they set it too low, the area will become a wasteland of no service because noone will step in to provide or demand will greatly outstrip supply - either way it sucks... Fancy that -- markets work...
The so-called collapse you are talking about occurs if and only if someone passes a law that protects turf or establishes barriers to entry that are not surmountable by startups that cannot command the same capital or priveledges from
With the excuse that it would be wasteful to have multiple pipes run to my house I only have Time-Warner and legacy PacBell. Nobody can come into my home to compete and to make matters worse I can't even lay fiber to the fiber optic port 1000 ft away because of moronic city constraints.
In addition, capitalism works regardless of the perceived fairness of the transaction. In a free-market the price-point is different, as defined by the market-clearing price. In a constrained transaction, where the
Also monopoloy is not evil at all provided it comes about naturally. ALCOA was a wonderful example. Prior to the bogus antitrust action, they deployed aluminum worldwide at ever decreasing prices while making an obscene profit taking advantage of their declining average cost curves.
With respect, you don't understand and you are ignorant of the facts.
The FDA kills tens of thousands of people by not approving things that work (and are available elsewhere) by being over-cautious. It happens all the time and is the stark reality.
And, I am building a device. My regulatory process is a scant 10 million dollars, which I can tell you with the certainty that the sun rises tomorrow is 8.3 million dollars more than is needed to prove that this device works. As a result of the 3 year process which I could do in 180 days, somewhere on the order of 50,000 patients/yr will be deprived of a life-saving treatment for diseases from which they will die.
Also you confuse regulatory approval with clinical trial. Of course a drug that doesn't make it thru trial should go nowhere. That's not what it's about. There are many drugs, clinically successful, which don't make it to market because of regulatory cost. Semi-successful drugs that do what they are intended for may be profitable at 100 million dollar/3 yr regulatory cost level, are not so at the 1.2 billion dollar/8 yr regulatory cost level. The approval process is too expensive. Period.
http://reason.com/9505/SASHA.may.html/
Sure.
.govs. Get CE mark. Live happy and rich -- but not in France.
China. So much for any freedom.
Europe. Sell soul to a dozen
Caribean Union. Not too bad.
Brazil. Not too bad again.
Singapore. Hmmm. Rich pseudo-capitalist country with a mostly free reign. Ok. Definite winner.
South Korea. Top of the line -- oops N. Korea and nukes... might be worth the risk tho.
Mexico. Pay off one of 32 ruling families. Make zillions. Ok. Definite winner if one can afford bribes.
Poppycock! You confuse deregulation with lack of law. Plus you are dropping the historical context in which the scientific method had yet to be applied to medicine.
All that is required is freedom and law aligned with the goal: to deliver choice and an exponentially advancing health market. Please see computer explosion for reference. We don't have a Computing Device and Software Agency do we?
So...
Get the FDA out of the way between me and my doctor.
Which means the following: The FDA labels a drug with ROYGB, red, orange, yellow, green, blue based on the amount of clinical data supporting the drug. There is a high-transparency informed consent that goes along with each color. Red is "It might kill you as easily as it might help. Use at your own risk", Blue is "We know everything about the damn drug. It works. Here are the side-effects." Anyone who doesn't register into the FDA process is a criminal and you toss him/her in jail.
Doctors and patients get to use any drug of any color provided they track, follow and report on the patient and drug. Would work like a charm.
Freedom and science coexist peacefully if the structure is designed right.
First, let me say I am a primary stakeholder. I am a Chief Medical Officer in a medical device company with a device that shows spectacular clinical activity.
Well, the patent holders in the arena have damnable method patents on all the key parts, and haven't done squat in the arena for better part of 20 years. And it's an almost impossible logjam of non-collaboration. So once again, irrational patents rear their ugly head. And we won't talk about patents on naturally occuring proteins, not a new man-made drug, but a protein made from recombinant methods of naturally occuring DNA. I urge everyone to take a look at the patent on BMP-7 -- 1996 -- almost certain to reverse major tubulointerstitial damage in the kidneys, languishing on the vine as a result of the patent. (Hey, OrthoBiotech -- how many more years before you pull the trigger?) While the inventor deserves a Nobel for the clinical identification, he does not deserve a patent. He didn't invent BMP-7. Nature did. He noticed what it does and proved it beyond clinical doubt.
While the device-side of the FDA is a reasonable 2-3 years for approval at low cost (though still mostly useless and an extra-step) the drug-side is totally criminal in its existence. We are approaching 1.2 billion dollars to get a drug thru the process and it is absurd. Every time the FDA expands its regulatory web, fewer drugs and devices make it to market. It's a huge resistor sitting across the current of medical creation.
I don't need either patents or anything else to protect my market. It's hard enough to make science into clinical treatment that anyone who can do it and compete with me is welcome. What I need is the damn artificial stakeholders to be de-empowered by the elimination of method patents, elimination of patents on naturally-occuring proteins, elimination of obvious patents on combined therapy.
I also need the huge regulatory web that dictates patient selection and over-restricts my patient base to go away. One would think that multifactorial statistical analysis was a forgotten or unknown art listening to FDA regulators. And the damnable meaningless questions, the endless drivel the FDA requires to prove safety. There is no such thing as safety -- negatives can't be proved. I can only prove harm. My device has a 3% mild complication rate and what looks like an 80% remission rate against diseases that are uniformly fatal. Why the hell do I have to jump thru a zillion hoops to get to a damn feasibility trial with people dying like flies? In a country based on freedom, we have no health freedom.
And there is no such animal as an FDA scientist. Even those with Ph.D.'s in the sciences are bureaucrats. They are interested that their precious questions on their forms are answered not that the device/drug works or simplifying things to get something to market. Well, the cost of those forms are tens of millions of dollars of work, most of which is NOT essential to making the damn thing happen clinically. And the hubris -- we at the FDA guarantee safety -- what bs -- how many have died from Vioxx -- how many have died waitng for beta-blockers to show up -- how many drugs with good but not great clinical activity never made it due to regulatory cost?
And the socialism of medicine -- with CMS/HCFA dictating reimbursement, fer cryin out loud, why should anyone go into business when they can't get a real market price on anything. There are great devices just sitting in the wings which don't come into the market because overall reimbursement is peanuts relative to value. Noone is going to deliver to market a device with a treatment price of $15K, a direct cost of $5K that has only a 500 dollar reimbursement level. Oh, without breaking the non-disclosure agreement, let me say it would be worth your 15K to have the treatment even if it was out-of-pocket. In mass-market mode the cost of that device would plummet to peanuts over 5 years.
Obviously I am very frustrated that I can't deliver, for mostly artificial reasons
Just shows that the IEEE is ignorant of economics.
There IS a market clearing price for access to their database. Only I can guarantee it's not at $9 per paper which is what we experience in medicine (and noone really uses the online journals as a result).
Price it low and convenient, run lean, and there will be no issues...
Which just shows you that little understanding of the underlying biology yourself.
Cholesterol levels are actually singularly unimportant. Inflammation, homocysteine and c-reactive protein are infinitely more important.
But thanks to pharmaceutical research and medical dogma everyone worries about their cholesterol instead of whether they are inflamed or living a lifestyle that induces inflammation.
Bah -- If you do a Google on BMP-7 you will find that you can regenerate the kidneys and reverse renal disease.
So no need to grow new organs -- just regenerate them!
Well, I did say "area" in the sentence that followed.
Again, 100 years of brainwashing and folks think you can't describe it "classically". Of course you can. It only requires that the impacting wave be smaller than the surface it's impacting and the area integrals associated to momentum/energy transfer do the rest. But that's if I wanted to be a real pain. You are fundamentally correct.
I am attacking a very small part of QM -- something that does not invalidate for example, either quantization, wave packets etc. I'm attacking the notion that the particle is indefinite because given HUP I don't have an exact measurement. And downstream this leads to all sorts of nonsense, including the absurd notions of the power of QM computation.
Sigh. And then we can reformulate everything in a Clifford Algebra using classical axioms and get the same exact results but proving that QM computation is a chimera. So what! Use your head. At any moment in time the damnable 100 electrons are in a *particular* state -- and thus *cannot* be coerced into representing 2^100 states simultaneously.
It's failure to see that an epistemological potential is not a physical reality and this traverses the whole of QM as it presently exists. Absurd conclusions of computing power all rest on the premise that I can hold two or more states in superimposition until I need to calculate. The only reason this nonsense exists is because of mis-interpretation of a particular aspect of QM.
Wishing you well. You get the last word if you want it but I go to go back to my day job -- cancer research.
Yep. So what? I never said it the 100 electrons couldn't represent the information.
However, my 100 regular bits will quite nicely represent 2^100 states just as well. In fact my 256 megs of bits in my laptop can outstrip the possible states any day.
What they (nor the q-computer) will ever do is represent 2^100 states all at the same time and perform some miraculous quantum collapse calculation.
Wrong analogy on the macroscopic level.
Macroscopically if I do the double-slit experiment using REGULAR waves in a tub of water I DO get the result you would expect -- interference patterns. Noone would reasonably claim that there were any quantum states anywhere in that system. Yet shrink it down orders of magnitude and I'm told to discount everything about entities? No -- sorry.
Also you need to understand that I am not discounting quantum theory -- I'm discounting a particular aspect of physical interpretation. And I am a QM geek (amateur) and I have stumped more than one physics professor on this particular point. (There is no satisfactory answer at present.)
When all is said and done I bet that we will have quantum computation -- but it will just be ultrafast classical computation.
I'm sorry, but it's time to call a spade a spade. This shows the total collapse of modern day physics.
And it goes right back to the wrong physical interpretation of the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle and treating statistics as if they have physical reality.
This idea that the electon is in some fuzzy position described by its probability is an epistemological statement -- not a physical one. The electron wave is somewhere 100% of the time in definite form. Looking at it from orders of magnitude larger in size -- of course I express where it is probabilistically! Nonetheless, the electron qua electron is a definite entity in a definite state (e.g spin up / spin down) in a definite area and not in some fuzzy quantum duo-state ready for quantum collapse on measurement. In other words, 100 quantum bits, all blathering by physicists aside, will do only what 100 regular bits do.
Put another way -- 70% chance of rain doesn't "quantum collapse" upon measurement to either it rained or it didn't. The system state was, regardles of my inability to know it -- just "it did rain" or "it didn't rain". Similarly, why does anyone believe that a quantum computation will collapse into meaningful bits?
Or put another way: An alien species tracking me on the planet surface at 12 hour intervals might conclude I quantum leap between continents by the damn physical interpretation of probabilities. Of course that's absurd -- I take a plane. Similarly, we look at electron position and states at extraordinarily slow timeframes and make quantum assertions of leaps and state -- and I'm supposed to take this seriously (as a physical interpretation)!
Please -- epistemologically 2^100 bits has 10^30 states -- but physically it's just 100 regular bits.
OH FOR PETE'S SAKE. Grow up. The war on Iraq was a net positive, it deflected an enormous number of terrorists and similar fools into a corner of the planet where we can kill them unhampered. Iran is destabilized and Syria doesn't know where to hide.
Plus if you work your way through something like Pax Neo-Tech you might learn something.
People,
The caffeine in tea doesn't do anything because it's opposed by theanine.
Just take a couple theanine capsules a day for a week and you will be in the clear while you drop your caffeine intake.
No fuss, no muss and no caffeine withdrawal...
During a recent upgrade, the backup software only copied 50% of the data, backing up the D: drive but not the C: drive even though it copied the whole C: directory structure.
Then to add insult to injury, the RAID controller went haywire , destroying my only remaining copy.
I lost some irreplaceable stuff. I could have used a counselor. I was depressed for days!
Which just shows you don't know the history of the industrial revolution.
Patents were not enforced, were generally ignored and the crucial idea of standardized, division of labor on an assembly line was not patented.
Note the market explosions in every patented commodity once the patent ran out. Wasn't there a recent article on steam engine patents were once again, the whole production of steam engines exploded when the primary patents expired?
I find the replies by my brethren physicians appalling.
Every study ever done shows ridiculous levels of variation in diagnosis and treatment. The best of us are wrong, in non-trivial cases, 20% of the time, and most of us do worse than that. But since there is no real individual negative feedback loop on clinical practice [do you know YOUR error rate -- not the pathetic sanitized morbidity/mortality rounds on the topic] you don't know when you are wrong and patients lost in follow-up erases the evidence. Would you fly with a pilot that ends up at the wrong airport 1 out of 5 times?
The simple fact is that the unaided mind, when referencing a memorized knowledge foundation, simply sucks. The idea that you WOULD NOT use a tool specifically designed to improve your abilities is like saying you would prefer to do surgery instead of putting someone in an MRI.
To top it off, fascist HMO, socialist Medicare and absurd malpractice not to mention HIPAA and bureaucracy -- are the foundational problems that if eliminated would return competition to this market and move it forward. Fee for service has yet to be surpassed. It worked.
The fact that a major institution still uses the admission process that I scribbled on a napkin for them in 1992 shows you how bad things really are within healthcare. [I'm good at business system design -- but not THAT good.]
The fact that my wife underwent 3 hours of exams in agony when I TOLD THEM it was a ascending UTI/kidney infection and could be verified within seconds by tapping her back over the kidneys -- instead she suffered because of defensive medicine. We should be using our brains! I had to literally force myself into the exam room and demonstrate to a *Harvard*-trained doctor I was right. In shock, the guy immediately prescribed antibiotics and pain med. I left fit to be tied.
Did I mention that a PKC would have diagnosed this within moments?
And you guys DON'T WANT to use a tool which increases your abilities. SHAME ON YOU.
I recently had a bad liver problem. A WORLD-EXPERT had the gaul to tell me that there was nothing to be done to improve my liver functions.
Poppycock! A trivial literature search revealed two substances that radically improve such function, my LFT's were so low the next time around that they repeated the test to be sure.
So much for going by memory... use the information technology that geniuses like Weed provide and that hard-working folk like me who know how to design functional clinical systems provide for you.
Your patients will live longer.