Re:Smart move (oh god, I'm replying to AC)
on
Why Doctors Hate Science
·
· Score: 2, Informative
That's absolutely correct, there are many reasons for performing a "pap smear" on patient's without a cervix, the most cogent is a history of dysplasia/cancer to assess the surrounding tissue for spread. The vaginal "cuff" as it's called (the area at the top of the vagina that was closed when the cervix was removed) is "scraped" very much like a pap smear. The ordering of the pap smear test using a lab slip is required to specify the specimen site (ie, cervix, vaginal cuff, etc).
As an ob/gyn, I don't relish the idea of ill-informed beaurecrats telling me how to practice medicine. The beaurecrats want to automate the practice of medicine so they can pigeonhole all diagnosis and treatments into cubby holes and check boxes in order to analyze and arrive at such statistics as pap smears per hour and state--as if it means something--"Dr B does a pap smear for $3.97 while Dr C charges $3.99." Therefor, we're only going to pay $3.97 for any and all pap smears. Think it sounds funny? That's exactly how Medicare pays, without regard to how easy or difficult it may be to perform a pap smear on various patients.
You might just as well say you can reduce all of programming to a universal automated system, plug in a description of inputs and desired outputs and some algorithm generates perfect code. There are many aspects of programming that could be considered an "art form". The same is true with medicine, law, research and a host of other disciplines.
Because that's where, in our system, we determine if her claim was factually valid. It was, so she won. I don't see what's so confusing here: court is where it should have gone and been resolved.
I didn't RTFA, but I think the only thing the judge ruled on was her right to free speech, NOT on her claim of a "botched" surgery. Those are key and distinct differences. The problem with reviewing this case from the side lines, is that most of us are not qualified to evaluate this woman's surgery. We can view the results and decide if we like or dislike how she looks now, but we can't assess the surgery. There are many, many variables that may have been involved with her final, "look": she may not have followed surgeon's post-surgical instructions regarding care and precautions (ie, avoid tanning, avoid spa massages, avoid surprise parties). Even if the surgery was perfect, and even if she followed his directions exactly, there's often quite a variance in surgical outcome simply based on good vs poor genetics regarding healing, or simply piss-poor "protoplasm" as many would say.
Since you referred to them as the, "older generation", I suspect you heard what you wanted to hear rather than trying to understand what was trying to be said. Don't worry, it's a common trait of the "younger generation" to doubt anything and everything that's gone on before because, "what the hell", no one knows as much about the world and what should be done than the proverbial younger crowd. My 8 year old thinks candy for breakfast is a good idea... In an 8 year old, I can appreciate and be amused by her logic... in someone in your age group, it's cause for concern. Sadly, costly mistakes generation after generation are caused by NOT learning from the past, because the former generations are too old and senile to be given any credance. It's not a nationality issue, it's an older-wiser vs younger-enthusiastic issue. Remember the phrase, "Don't trust anyone over 30?" That's been every generations' motto.
Thanks for a well written response. OP must have been trolling or not aware of the BPL implications. The FAQ is a good one, but the flame wars on other sites make for more interesting reading.
BPL sounds like a great idea, but so far, its implementation has really screwed the over-the-air broadcast industry, HAM radio operators (www.ARRL.org), many healthcare facilities, emergency responders, etc. The radiation/harmonics from BPL just isn't filtered properly (yet).
A few years ago when I practiced in Minnesota, the hospital had a contract with AT&T. You simply dialed an 800 number, mentioned which language you needed, and in about 30 seconds, you had someone medically knowledgeable on the speakerphone fluent in English and the desired language. Spanish was the most common, but Somali, Chinese and occasionally other languages were needed. Didn't matter what time of day or night. I don't see a computer changing that any time soon. It was wonderful, but expensive too, I'm sure.
Being in the medical field too, with similar interests and background... I agree with everything you've stated. There's more a perception of the importance of medical records than reality. Most such records would require an "expert" to perform data mining. We should all be more concerned with identity theft based on information from other sources.
Many contemporary software developers think they invented the computer. Every generation is "entitled" to think they're saving the world.
I'm a little biased, having been a VAX/VMS zealot for many years (VMS 2.1 through 5.0) and more VAX hardware platforms than I care to list... By today's standards they were slower and mostly line oriented, but that's not to say they didn't have their uses whether running Unix or VMS. They had the equivalent of IM's (Phone/Talk) and a host of business/research applications. Not to mention one of the time's largest contributed software library.
I have the satisfaction of knowing that in 20 years, those developers will look back upon today's computers and say, "...those computers sucked".
People knock HAM radio as an old-timers form of communication, but in a disaster, that's who they look toward for assistance with communication. These days, you don't need to know morse code (a former roadblock for many), just pass a simple 35-question exam.
KC5xxx
Re:Dumb Terminals For Everyone
on
The PC Is Not Dead
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I agree with you. I was in IT in the late 70's and early 80's when PC's came into vogue. Prior to that, everyone used a central mainframe or minicomputer through dumb terminals. IMHO a few things promoted the acceptance of PC's in the corporate world: mouse/desktop interface, spreadsheets, "turbo" programming languages, AutoCAD, "instant" response time and a few other things. A few of these were available on host computers, but there wasn't the sense of privacy/ownership/entitlement that folks now enjoy with their "own" PC at work.
For awhile, the other members of my IT group and I fought bringing the PC's into the corporation, citing licensing/maintenance fees, abuse potential, support costs. Of course we were looked upon as simply trying to save our jobs.
It's amusing to me now, no longer in the IT field, to see such an emphasis on thin clients and a resurgence of interest in dumb terminals connected to central "servers." Places where I work now use PC's mostly to run terminal emulation programs connecting them to central servers/mainframes (for electronic medical record software, Outlook on-line, internet access to medical reference websites, etc)--they might as well be VT100's.
They say the poularity of yo-yos is an 8 year cycle, I suspect the popularity of dumb terminals is about 15. I predict the next big wave of PC popularity around 2020. j/k
Unless the Energizer batteries were put in backwards, in which case they would've kept coming, and coming, and coming (sorry, old joke -- What happens when you put batteries into the Energizer Bunny, backwards?).
I guess we'll differ on this. With all the facts, I trust Harvard--a world renowned institution and teacher of ethics--to decide in this case of applicants, what is and isn't ethical. So to me, I consider Harvard's opinion very relevant. I may not be able to define "ethical" to everyone's satisfaction, but for myself I can recognize when something appears unethical. And of course, I personally always behave in an ethical manner (/humor).
Interesting that, despite the school's opinion that no amount of rationalization could make this behavior acceptable, you (and others) still attempt to find a way around the intent that applicants wait until official notification. The "no harm, no foul" mentality applies only in corrupt sports.
IANAL but given that this thing's been an internet "staple" for nearly a decade or more, I think Disney would have a hard time coming out now with a C&D effort. Happily you [mis]spelled Hampster "correctly" in the context of the original web page. Of course, the correct spelling of the rodent is hamster (no "p"). I long ago copied that webpage and music to my computer to save it for my great, great, great grandkids' amusement someday.
I had an i850 for awhile. I quit using it for about two - three months and when I tried using it again, the ink had dried out on the print head and despite several "deep cleaning" cycles, it refused to print (well, actually it went through the motions of printing but very little ink showed up on the paper). Looking on the internet, I discovered replacement print heads were $60-90. Figuring I had nothing to lose, I dismantled the printhead, soaked it in rubbing alcohol overnight and blew it out with compressed air. It started working beautifully... I was ready to throw it away.
Same here. I'd heard of Red Hat and Whitebox, but not Centos; until now (publicity, even when it's bad, can make your name better known... reminds me of the plethora of "nip slips" all over the news recently). But then again I'm not a Linux expert. Since I'm no longer in the IT field, I had to search around and read a number of reviews before deciding months ago to play with Debian instead of a RH derivative.
Same here. I'd heard of Whitebox, but not Centos; until now. I'm not a Linux expert, but months ago I decided to play around with Debian rather than RH or Whitebox.
Slashdot Mirror
Excellent!
That's absolutely correct, there are many reasons for performing a "pap smear" on patient's without a cervix, the most cogent is a history of dysplasia/cancer to assess the surrounding tissue for spread. The vaginal "cuff" as it's called (the area at the top of the vagina that was closed when the cervix was removed) is "scraped" very much like a pap smear. The ordering of the pap smear test using a lab slip is required to specify the specimen site (ie, cervix, vaginal cuff, etc).
As an ob/gyn, I don't relish the idea of ill-informed beaurecrats telling me how to practice medicine. The beaurecrats want to automate the practice of medicine so they can pigeonhole all diagnosis and treatments into cubby holes and check boxes in order to analyze and arrive at such statistics as pap smears per hour and state--as if it means something--"Dr B does a pap smear for $3.97 while Dr C charges $3.99." Therefor, we're only going to pay $3.97 for any and all pap smears. Think it sounds funny? That's exactly how Medicare pays, without regard to how easy or difficult it may be to perform a pap smear on various patients. You might just as well say you can reduce all of programming to a universal automated system, plug in a description of inputs and desired outputs and some algorithm generates perfect code. There are many aspects of programming that could be considered an "art form". The same is true with medicine, law, research and a host of other disciplines.
Because that's where, in our system, we determine if her claim was factually valid. It was, so she won. I don't see what's so confusing here: court is where it should have gone and been resolved.
I didn't RTFA, but I think the only thing the judge ruled on was her right to free speech, NOT on her claim of a "botched" surgery. Those are key and distinct differences. The problem with reviewing this case from the side lines, is that most of us are not qualified to evaluate this woman's surgery. We can view the results and decide if we like or dislike how she looks now, but we can't assess the surgery. There are many, many variables that may have been involved with her final, "look": she may not have followed surgeon's post-surgical instructions regarding care and precautions (ie, avoid tanning, avoid spa massages, avoid surprise parties). Even if the surgery was perfect, and even if she followed his directions exactly, there's often quite a variance in surgical outcome simply based on good vs poor genetics regarding healing, or simply piss-poor "protoplasm" as many would say.
Since you referred to them as the, "older generation", I suspect you heard what you wanted to hear rather than trying to understand what was trying to be said. Don't worry, it's a common trait of the "younger generation" to doubt anything and everything that's gone on before because, "what the hell", no one knows as much about the world and what should be done than the proverbial younger crowd. My 8 year old thinks candy for breakfast is a good idea... In an 8 year old, I can appreciate and be amused by her logic... in someone in your age group, it's cause for concern. Sadly, costly mistakes generation after generation are caused by NOT learning from the past, because the former generations are too old and senile to be given any credance. It's not a nationality issue, it's an older-wiser vs younger-enthusiastic issue. Remember the phrase, "Don't trust anyone over 30?" That's been every generations' motto.
Nice job! The video was an extra nice touch.
Thanks for a well written response. OP must have been trolling or not aware of the BPL implications. The FAQ is a good one, but the flame wars on other sites make for more interesting reading.
BPL sounds like a great idea, but so far, its implementation has really screwed the over-the-air broadcast industry, HAM radio operators (www.ARRL.org), many healthcare facilities, emergency responders, etc. The radiation/harmonics from BPL just isn't filtered properly (yet).
A few years ago when I practiced in Minnesota, the hospital had a contract with AT&T. You simply dialed an 800 number, mentioned which language you needed, and in about 30 seconds, you had someone medically knowledgeable on the speakerphone fluent in English and the desired language. Spanish was the most common, but Somali, Chinese and occasionally other languages were needed. Didn't matter what time of day or night. I don't see a computer changing that any time soon. It was wonderful, but expensive too, I'm sure.
Being in the medical field too, with similar interests and background... I agree with everything you've stated. There's more a perception of the importance of medical records than reality. Most such records would require an "expert" to perform data mining. We should all be more concerned with identity theft based on information from other sources.
Many contemporary software developers think they invented the computer. Every generation is "entitled" to think they're saving the world.
I'm a little biased, having been a VAX/VMS zealot for many years (VMS 2.1 through 5.0) and more VAX hardware platforms than I care to list... By today's standards they were slower and mostly line oriented, but that's not to say they didn't have their uses whether running Unix or VMS. They had the equivalent of IM's (Phone/Talk) and a host of business/research applications. Not to mention one of the time's largest contributed software library.
I have the satisfaction of knowing that in 20 years, those developers will look back upon today's computers and say, "...those computers sucked".
KC5xxx
For awhile, the other members of my IT group and I fought bringing the PC's into the corporation, citing licensing/maintenance fees, abuse potential, support costs. Of course we were looked upon as simply trying to save our jobs.
It's amusing to me now, no longer in the IT field, to see such an emphasis on thin clients and a resurgence of interest in dumb terminals connected to central "servers." Places where I work now use PC's mostly to run terminal emulation programs connecting them to central servers/mainframes (for electronic medical record software, Outlook on-line, internet access to medical reference websites, etc)--they might as well be VT100's.
They say the poularity of yo-yos is an 8 year cycle, I suspect the popularity of dumb terminals is about 15. I predict the next big wave of PC popularity around 2020. j/k
That was a great book, well a good throw away type novel anyways.
Unless the Energizer batteries were put in backwards, in which case they would've kept coming, and coming, and coming (sorry, old joke -- What happens when you put batteries into the Energizer Bunny, backwards?).
Not anymore...
Bravo!
You and the moderator must be from Yale.
I guess we'll differ on this. With all the facts, I trust Harvard--a world renowned institution and teacher of ethics--to decide in this case of applicants, what is and isn't ethical. So to me, I consider Harvard's opinion very relevant. I may not be able to define "ethical" to everyone's satisfaction, but for myself I can recognize when something appears unethical. And of course, I personally always behave in an ethical manner (/humor).
Interesting that, despite the school's opinion that no amount of rationalization could make this behavior acceptable, you (and others) still attempt to find a way around the intent that applicants wait until official notification. The "no harm, no foul" mentality applies only in corrupt sports.
Not being a webserver specialist, what kind of resources does it take to withstand a full-on assault /.'ing?
IANAL but given that this thing's been an internet "staple" for nearly a decade or more, I think Disney would have a hard time coming out now with a C&D effort. Happily you [mis]spelled Hampster "correctly" in the context of the original web page. Of course, the correct spelling of the rodent is hamster (no "p"). I long ago copied that webpage and music to my computer to save it for my great, great, great grandkids' amusement someday.
The Jury Nullifcation citation was an interesting read, thanks.
I had an i850 for awhile. I quit using it for about two - three months and when I tried using it again, the ink had dried out on the print head and despite several "deep cleaning" cycles, it refused to print (well, actually it went through the motions of printing but very little ink showed up on the paper). Looking on the internet, I discovered replacement print heads were $60-90. Figuring I had nothing to lose, I dismantled the printhead, soaked it in rubbing alcohol overnight and blew it out with compressed air. It started working beautifully... I was ready to throw it away.
Same here. I'd heard of Red Hat and Whitebox, but not Centos; until now (publicity, even when it's bad, can make your name better known... reminds me of the plethora of "nip slips" all over the news recently). But then again I'm not a Linux expert. Since I'm no longer in the IT field, I had to search around and read a number of reviews before deciding months ago to play with Debian instead of a RH derivative.
Same here. I'd heard of Whitebox, but not Centos; until now. I'm not a Linux expert, but months ago I decided to play around with Debian rather than RH or Whitebox.