This letter from a seriously unhappy customer of a British telecommunications company is damn funny -- and then it turns downright hysterical toward the end. Read the whole thing -- slowly, so as to savor it.
Oh, how I do love the Holy Internet, and its amusing Begotten Son E-mails from Crazy People! They bless us with The Funny.
Those of you have have seen the movie and/or play versions of "The Miracle Worker" might be interested in this short 1930 newsreel clip in which Anne Sullivan explains how she taught Helen Keller to speak:
Ayn Rand was a great admirer of "The Miracle Worker", a now-classic play about Sullivan and Keller.
In her essay, "Kant Vs. Sullivan" (from Philosophy: Who Needs It), Rand wrote:
...Annie Sullivan, her young teacher (superlatively portrayed by Anne Bancroft), is fiercely determined to transform this creature into a human being, and she knows the only means that can do it: language, i.e., the development of the conceptual faculty. But how does one communicate the nature and function of language to a blind-deaf-mute? The entire action of the play is concerned with this single central issue: Annie's struggle to make Helen's mind grasp a word -- not a signal, but a word.We had the pleasure of seeing a theater version of "The Miracle Worker" with some friends when it came to Denver last year, and it was a real treat precisely because of the talent of the actresses who played Sullivan and Keller.
...To my knowledge, "The Miracle Worker" is the only epistemological play ever written. It holds the viewer in tensely mounting suspense, not over a chase or a bank robbery, but over the question of whether a human mind will come to life. Its climax is magnificent: after Annie's crushing disappointment at Helen's seeming retrogression, water from a pump spills over Helen's hand, while Annie is automatically spelling "W-A-T-E-R" into her palm, and suddenly Helen understands.
The two great moments of that climax are incommunicable except through the art of acting: one is the look on Patty Duke's face when she grasps that the signals mean the liquid -- the other is the sound of Anne Bancroft's voice when she calls Helen's mother and cries: "She knows!"
This week on We Stand FIRM, the blog of FIRM: Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine:
Here's yet another Open Thread for your thoughts:
For anyone in the fiery grip of a random question, comment, joke, or link they'd like to share with NoodleFood readers, I hereby open up the comments on this post to any respectable topic. (Please refrain from posting personal attacks, pornographic material, and commercial solicitations.)
Horror of all horrors, I think that I'm out of bacon at the moment. However, this flow chart tells me exactly what to do:
Today's "Spot the Difference" quiz features recent brain MRI scans from Diana and Paul. Can you tell the difference between the two?
Hint: Diana has a PhD in philosophy, which means she spends her days pondering deep thoughts about "the fundamental nature of existence, of man, and of man's relationship to existence."
Paul is a radiologist, which means he spends all day "looking at the pretty pictures!"
Diana's brain:
Paul's brain:
I'm pretty sure the humor of this image is self-explanatory:
Perhaps the translation was done by this Chinese lady, taught English by her very helpful grandson:
Oh, this one is soooo going to all of my relatives... :^)
[from www.xkcd.com/627/ HT: JasonG]
The Objectivism Seminar just wrapped up its intensive tour of Dr. Leonard Peikoff's seminal book, Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand. It was great!
it's much better to actually be a part of the conversation, so please join in on our next adventure: Dr. Peikoff's other book, The Ominous Parallels! It seems so fitting with our current political trajectory and speed.Is the freest country on earth moving toward totalitarian dictatorship? What were the factors that enabled the Nazis to seize power in pre-war Germany? Do those same conditions exist in America today?
These are the questions raised -- and answered, with frightening clarity -- by Leonard Peikoff, Ayn Rand's intellectual heir, in his powerful book The Ominous Parallels.
"We are drifting to the future, not moving purposefully," Peikoff warns. "But we are drifting as Germany moved, in the same direction, for the same kind of reason."The first session will be in about two weeks (September 7), so you have plenty of time to order your copy and be ready to bring your knowledge and questions to the conversation! This isn't as technical a work as Objectivism, so we're planning on moving at the rate of about a chapter each week or two. Please visit www.ObjectivismSeminar.com for more information.
Much to my delight, Kevin McAllister has agreed to act as the commissioner for a fantasy football league for fans of NoodleFood. Hence, the "John Galt League" has been resurrected!
You need not be an Objectivist to join the league, but you should be a fan of NoodleFood, not hostile to me and mine. Kevin has told me that "If Immanuel Kant tries to join, I'll reject him." (So there, Manny!)
The league will be run on ESPN.com. When I managed the John Galt League two years ago, my greatest frustration was that communication between teams was difficult. So I often felt like I was playing with a bunch of strangers, not friends and acquaintances. To alleviate that problem, I've created a mailing list for the league on Google Groups. That way, we can trash talk at will discuss some of the interesting epistemic and ethical dimensions of the game over the course of the season.
If you want to join the league, you need to sign up with the Google Group. Then we'll all sign up on ESPN, then Kevin will schedule a draft. If you have any questions or problems, please contact Kevin McAllister at kevin@mcallister.ws.
Space is very limited, so sign up now if you want to join.
Thank you, Kevin!
Brian of Reality Talk has the latest Objectivist Roundup. Go check it out!
Read more...This Virtual Objectivist Club -- produced by the excellent folks at the Objectivist Club Network -- is a great opportunity for students on a campus without an Objectivist club to study Ayn Rand's philosophy.
The Virtual Objectivist Club (VOC) is a weekly phone-based/online discussion group dedicated to the study of Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism. The VOC is being offered for the first time this 2009 academic year. It's open to any current students who would like to learn more about Objectivism.Here's more from "Keith & the OCN Team":
During the Fall 2009 semester, we'll meet online to discuss essays and topics from either the Ayn Rand Reader or from free, online resources. Each meeting will be hosted by a rotating set of moderators, including Greg Perkins, Diana Hsieh, Kyle Haight, Andrew Dalton, and Kurt Colville. We'll meet on Wednesday evenings at 9 p.m. Eastern.
If you're a student who does not have access to a study group at your school, we may just be the group for you. If you're interested, you can get more information and our full schedule at http://www.oclubs.org/voc.
I helped start the Objectivist Club Network (OCN), an organization dedicated to helping all Objectivist Campus Clubs. OCN is not affiliated with the Ayn Rand Institute, although we support them and regularly communicate with them to ensure our respective organizations are not duplicating efforts.Back in the dark days of 300 baud modems and gopher, I was a tender young undergraduate at Washington University in St. Louis. Sadly, I was the only person interested in Ayn Rand's philosophy on the whole campus, from what I could tell. I definitely felt lonely and isolated -- and I would have jumped at the chance for anything like the Virtual Objectivist Club. If you're in that kind of situation, albeit with faster modem, I'd definitely recommend that you consider the VOC.
Recently we've expanded our efforts to solve a new problem: there are students interested in joining an Objectivist club where no club exists. Some of these students start their own club, but others don't have time to start a club or do not find enough participants on campus to form a club.
We've created the Virtual Objectivist Club (VOC) for these students -- a phone-based discussion group dedicated to the study of Objectivism. Meetings will be weekly, beginning this September, each moderated by an experienced Objectivist. The group is open to any current students who would like to learn more about Objectivism.
My request: Please help spread the word to any students you know who may be interested in learning more about Objectivism. The deadline for applying to the VOC is August 31st. Students can learn more and apply at: http://www.oclubs.org/voc
Please let me know if you have any questions and we greatly appreciate you sharing this with others!
Proto magazine is a quarterly biomedical and health magazine published by the Massachusetts General Hospital, which is one of the premier teaching hospitals for Harvard Medical School.
One of their "Policy Watch" articles in the Summer 2009 issue was entitled "The Future of Obesity?" The topic was what sorts of government programs (if any) should be imposed to stop the obesity epidemic. They interviewed eight people, most of whom were in favor of some sort of government-run "public service campaign" and/or new regulations to fight obesity along the same lines as the anti-tobacco campaign of the 1990s.
The author Charles Slack got my name through Craig Biddle (editor of The Objective Standard) and he was good enough to interview me as one of the eight "experts" specifically to provide a pro-freedom perspective on obesity regulations.
My quote from "The Future of Obesity?" appears on page 2:
DON'T TREAD ON THE RIGHT TO BE FATThis mirrors one of my themes from my earlier Christian Science Monitor piece, "Universal Healthcare and the Waistline Police".
In a free society, the individual has the right to make diet and lifestyle choices—and the responsibility to enjoy or suffer the consequences.
The government should not try to solve the obesity problem by coercing consumer behavior or by restricting the freedom of businesses to advertise their products. Some argue that such controls are justified because people who develop obesity-related illnesses will be treated at taxpayer expense. But the sole legitimate function of government is to protect individual rights, not violate them. Just because government currently violates individual rights by forcing citizens to pay for others’ health care does not justify further violations in the form of telling Americans what we may or may not eat. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Those who become ill as a result of their poor choices should pay the price themselves or rely on voluntary charity rather than be supported by taxpayer dollars.
--Paul Hsieh, a physician in Denver, is a co-founder of Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine, a nonprofit group that promotes personal liberty and free markets in health care.
PajamasMedia has published Amit Ghate's latest OpEd on the real cause of goverment waste.
This is Amit's third essay for PJM. His example again proves that a citizen-activist can gain nation-wide exposure, if he is willing to publicly advocate his ideas and to clearly articulate them in a fashion that others can relate to.
Congratulations, Amit!
Here's yet another Open Thread for your thoughts:
For anyone in the fiery grip of a random question, comment, joke, or link they'd like to share with NoodleFood readers, I hereby open up the comments on this post to any respectable topic. (Please refrain from posting personal attacks, pornographic material, and commercial solicitations.)
This unfortunate gentleman broke his C2 vertebra in his neck:
Here's what it should look like (in a different normal patient):
Here's a line drawing showing the normal anatomic relationships:
An MRI scan was immediately performed and it showed that the spinal cord was still intact:
The patient underwent emergency neurosurgery to stabilize his fracture and is doing well.
I saw this on Twitter a few weeks ago, via @amyalkon, and I'm so going to use when people claim that atheism is just another religion:
"If atheism is a religion then not collecting stamps is a hobby."Other variations might work too:
... then watching daytime soaps from your parents' couch is a career.I still prefer the "not collecting stamps" version, however. Any others? Read more...
... then starvation is just a different kind of eating.
... then not giving to charity is a way of being charitable.
Another case from the night shift. This 81 year old man was in a bad car accident, and was sent from an outside hospital to our Level 1 Trauma Center.
What's wrong with these pictures? (As usual, you can click on the image to see it full size.)
Answer tomorrow.
Wowee, my diploma arrived in the mail on Saturday. Me being me, I scanned it:
I must say that I feel terribly cheated: it's only 8.5 x 11. Shouldn't seven grueling years for a Ph.D deserve a larger piece of paper? Ah well, I will just have to console myself with my new-found "rights and privileges"!
The August 20, 2009 New York Times reported that President Obama is trying to make the argument that we have a "moral obligation" to provide universal health care.
This is good news for free market reform advocates.
The President and his political allies know that they are losing the economic arguments, so they are now trying to shift the argument to the moral plane. But this happens to be our strength. Most Americans want to "do the right thing", but they are sometimes mistaken as to what that right thing is. Fortunately, more and more people are raising the point that universal health care is wrong because there is no such thing as a "right" to health care.
Here are a few recent OpEds along these lines
Mike Rosen, "No 'Right' To Health Care"
Denver Post, August 13, 2009
John Lewis, "Health Care: Why Call It a 'Right'?"
Huffington Post, August 12, 2009
John Mackey, "The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare"
Wall Street Journal, August 11, 2009
Theodore Dalrymple, "Is There a 'Right' to Health Care?"
Wall Street Journal, July 28, 2009
Wendy Milling, "Lest We've Forgotten, Health Care Is Not a Right"
RealClearMarkets, June 23, 2009
In my opinion, the best-formulated arguments are from John Lewis and Wendy Milling. But all of these writers are trying to steer the debate in the right direction -- to the level of morality and rights. And their arguments are resonating with ordinary Americans.
This means that Americans are receptive to a discussion of these issues at the fundamental philosophy. At some level, they recognize that this fight is not merely about a particular economic program, but about the future direction of America.
The best essay I've ever read along these lines is Dr. Leonard Peikoff's classic article entitled, "Health Care is Not a Right", available at the FIRM website.
(This is the 2007 version by Leonard Peikoff updated with the assistance of Lin Zinser. For printing, I recommend the PDF version, but for sending as an e-mail link there's also an HTML version. The Ayn Rand Center website also has a nice PDF version suitable for printing.)
As Dr. Peikoff noted:
...Most people who oppose socialized medicine do so on the grounds that it is moral and well-intentioned, but impractical; i.e., it is a noble idea -- which just somehow does not work. I do not agree that socialized medicine is moral and well-intentioned, but impractical. Of course, it is impractical -- it does not work -- but I hold that it is impractical because it is immoral.Last week, a local doctor called me up to tell me that he had started surfing the FIRM website, read Dr. Peikoff's essay, and thought it was the best analysis he had ever seen on this issue, precisely because it cut to the heart of the debate.
This is not a case of noble in theory but a failure in practice; it is a case of vicious in theory and therefore a disaster in practice.
I want to focus on the moral issue at stake. So long as people believe that socialized medicine is a noble plan, there is no way to fight it. You cannot stop a noble plan -- not if it really is noble. The only way you can defeat it is to unmask it -- to show that it is the very opposite of noble. Then at least you have a fighting chance...
This week on We Stand FIRM, the blog of FIRM: Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine:
Here's yet another Open Thread for your thoughts:
For anyone in the fiery grip of a random question, comment, joke, or link they'd like to share with NoodleFood readers, I hereby open up the comments on this post to any respectable topic. (Please refrain from posting personal attacks, pornographic material, and commercial solicitations.)
I've created a Twitter feed for NoodleFood posts under the name @NoodleFood. Notably, that new account won't be used for anything other than the blog feed. I don't plan to follow anyone from it. I'll continue to use @DianaHsieh for my real tweets and follows. Of course, I'll likely re-tweet some of my favorite blog posts via @DianaHsieh, but if you want the whole lasagna, follow @NoodleFood.
Wow, I just realized that nothing about that paragraph would have made the slightest bit of sense to me ten years ago, before the rise of blogs, let alone the creation of Twitter. If you're baffled, please just go on your merry way. It's only useful information for people on Twitter.
On Wednesday, I spent a fair bit of time cleaning up and re-organizing the shelves in the office. See how nice and neat they look now!
That picture only shows about two thirds of those shelves, and we have even more bookshelves in other parts of the house. (Yeah, we have lots of books.)
However, in the process, Paul's desk got rather messy.
Paul has tended to put anything and everything on the bookshelves. However, we no longer have room for that. So he's going to have to get acquainted with "Mr. Filing Cabinet" and "Mr. Drawer." It's good to make new friends!
I've long been irritated by people's use of quotes to indicate emphasis. Hence, I find The "Blog" of "Unnecessary" Quotes damn funny. A few days ago, I saw the following sign in the waiting area of the Littleton Hospital Emergency Room. I just couldn't resist taking a photo, although I'm sure that the other people in the waiting area thought me a bit strange.
I'm pleased to know that the hospital takes these so-called conditions seriously. Anyone who claims to have them will surely be sent straight to the psych ward!
(In all seriousness, Littleton is an excellent community hospital. Thankfully, they provide medical services, not grammar lessons.)
Long-time NoodleFood reader William Stoddard sparked a heated discussion on mandatory health insurance at Megan McArdle's Atlantic blog.
Here's the letter from him that she is quoting:
I'm not sure I'm in any of the four groups of uninsured people you identify. I'm 59 years old, self-employed, and uninsured... because I can't afford to pay for even catastrophic coverage. I have a touchy gall bladder; I haven't had an attack in several years, but it's a pre-existing condition, so it raises my premiums, which are painfully high anyway for a man my age. I've been self-employed since 2002, when my former corporate job was outsourced. Does that fit any of your categories?Later in the comment thread, Stoddard elaborates on his views:
If the House of Representatives proposal passes, I expect that my premiums will be right at the legal maximum of 12% where subsidies kick in... assuming that my income doesn't rise past the threshold where a single man is ineligible for help! It averages around $40K, so 12% is $400 a month. I know I can't afford to pay that; I used to pay that much for Blue Cross, and it left me under chronic financial stress. So I'm planning to pay the penalties; 2.5% is $1K a year, which will hurt me, but it won't completely wipe me out. On the other hand, I can't see how it's supposed to help me maintain my health.
But I'll tell you, I supported Obama over both McCain and Clinton partly because he opposed mandates. Now he hasn't said a word to stop them. I don't know if I could bring myself to vote for a Republican, but if the Democrats inflict this financial injury on me, they can forget about my ever voting for another Democrat. I didn't know if Obama was trustworthy; now I know.
In response to Mr. Thacker's question, John McCain's proposals on health care were the single thing that most strongly tempted me to vote for him; they are very close to what I would prefer... though not as close as John Mackey's proposals in the August 11 Wall Street Journal. I was deterred from supporting McCain by cultural issues, and centrally by his endorsement of the Republican Party's intolerable orthodoxy on abortion. Obama's position on mandates was just enough to make him a marginally lesser evil.Stoddard is asking the sorts of questions that many Americans are asking. It will be very interesting to see how our political leaders respond.
If Obama were maintaining his position... which he could do easily, by announcing that he will veto any bill that includes mandates... then whatever proposal Congress came up with, if it cost too much, I could remain uninsured and at least not be made worse off. Mandates take that protection away from me; they allow Congress, or some administrator, to decide what I am supposed to be able to afford, and require me to comply. And without mandates, if a lot of people choose not to sign up, Congress will get the message that their proposals aren't working; with mandates, people who send them that message faces fines. Their willingness to resort to compulsion does not inspire confidence in their ability to devise something that people would willingly choose.
And I'm not in the category where large numbers of people will be hurt. The Democratic proposals will really damage many people in their twenties, by forcing them to spend large amounts of money on insurance for the sake of lowering costs for people my age. All income redistribution strikes me as ethically dubious, but income redistribution from the young and poor to the old and nonpoor seems hard to justify in terms of the values the Democratic Party claims to support. What they actually support seems to be forcing 45 million Americans to become customers of the health insurance industry, whether they can afford it or not... the same industry that has completely failed to control health care costs.
I'd like to play fantasy football this year, but I don't want the burden of acting as league commissioner, as I've done in the past. I'd just like to be a mere team. (Go Sedalia Sea Monkeys!)
Is anyone interested in putting together a league of NoodleFood readers?
Nick Provenzo of Rule of Reason has the latest Objectivist Roundup. Go check it out!
Read more...Lately, I've been working on delegating my activism work as much as possible. Delegation is brand-new skill for me. My work in graduate school -- meaning taking courses, teaching courses, and writing my dissertation -- was all mine to do. (Outsourcing is frowned upon, in fact!) Traditionally, I've created and managed activism projects by myself -- like my OList.com e-mail lists. I've helped others as needed -- like by editing their op-eds and articles. On occasion, I've collaborated with other people -- like in writing the policy paper on Colorado's Amendment 48 with Ari Armstrong. However, I've only rarely delegated work.
Mostly, I've just done whatever I could on my own, without asking for or expecting help from others. In part, that reflects a strength of mine: I don't wait for marching orders from on high, nor do I depend on the approval of others, nor do I expect others to implement my good ideas. Instead, my standard approach is simply to see what needs doing and then do it. However, I've become seriously overtaxed of late -- particularly given today's unprecedented opportunities for activism.
This summer, I'd planned to delegate some work. However, I've done far more than I expected -- much to my delight. The more that I delegate, the more that I see that I could and should delegate even more. It's addictive!
Here's what I've done so far:
Delegate as much as you can. If you optimize for short-term results you over-utilize your best people (that often means you!) and burn them out. Focus on increasing your leverage not short-term output. Start by delegating tiny pieces to someone, so small they usually agree to help. You both learn about work together and if you're both happy you'll find ways to get them involved more over time.He then expanded on those comments in a later e-mail as follows:
I'm far from an expert on delegating or managing people, but hopefully this will start an interesting discussion. In our update we mentioned one tip, here is an expanded list of explicit principles I have that I've found successful:The second person added the following:
1) First, know your volunteers. Understand their interests and their strengths. We keep an excel file of this and review it regularly and we schedule a short "get to know you" phone call with all new people who express interest.
2) Make small specific requests of individual people and agree on a hard deadline with them. The very first time you do this it's best to do it over the phone.
3) Follow-up with them *before* the deadline to make sure their on track. This reaffirms for them that their contribution will be meaningful to you and you're looking forward to it.
4) After they deliver let them know how much you appreciate it, give them honest feedback about the work they did and any changes you need, and let them know what's going to happen with their work. Nothing kills motivation more than someone volunteering their time and contributing something and then not knowing when their contribution is going to be used, acted upon, published, etc. If your volunteer has to follow-up with *you* then you know you didn't communicate enough.
5) Change the way you measure your own progress and success: don't focus on how much you (your group) got done this week or this month, this compels you to work harder yourself and put in more hours. Instead, measure your success by how much got done without you doing it. Focus on leveraging not output. If you maximize leverage then output will follow. Just like in business you focus on creating value and profit will follow.
Here is the approach we take:That advice was very helpful to me -- and I hope that it inspires some appropriate delegation of your work! Read more...
1. We make a list of everything we need to do and then categorize the tasks
2. We then look at the categories and discuss which tasks or categories of tasks we feel we're ready to give to someone else
3. We brainstorm individuals we think can do these tasks
4. We schedule a call with the person who is our top choice and see if they are interested in getting involved and doing the task. If they cannot help then we ask if they know of anyone else who could help. Phone calls take less time than in-person meetings, but are more effective than emails going back and forth and give us a chance to sell the person on the task and get them excited about getting involved.
Here are some things I always have to remind myself that help save me time and delegate effectively:
1. No task is too small to delegate. ...
2. Everything takes longer then you think it will take, so again, you want to even delegate the small pieces/tasks.
3. It is often lazy not to delegate because it's more work in the short term to delegate something, but in the long term it makes your organization more effective. So I often tell myself not to be lazy and to delegate :)
4. Be very careful about what commitments you take on. I try to view my time like a budget and always think about the trade offs.
5. Stop giving tasks to people who have proven to be unreliable - we will give up on people so that they do not waste any more of our time.
6. Be open to new ideas and ways of doing things.
I'm considering switching the NoodleFood comments to Disqus, as that would enable me to add a whole lot of awesome features without the burden of programming them myself. Any thoughts on that -- or suggestions of alternative systems?
Read more...Here's yet another Open Thread for your thoughts:
For anyone in the fiery grip of a random question, comment, joke, or link they'd like to share with NoodleFood readers, I hereby open up the comments on this post to any respectable topic. (Please refrain from posting personal attacks, pornographic material, and commercial solicitations.)
On September 19th, Craig Biddle will be in Denver to speak to Front Range Objectivism about "What Principles Are and Why We Need Them." Here's the announcement:
FROST Supper Talk: Craig Biddle on "What Principles Are and Why We Need Them"I have nothing but the highest expectations for this talk. Please join us, if you can! Read more...Date: Saturday, September 19, 2009 Time: 6:00 pm social hour (cash bar); 7:00 pm dinner; 8:00 pm talk Location: West Woods Golf Club, 6655 Quaker Street in Arvada, Colorado Cost: $60.00 per individual, $35.00 for students RSVP: To Ann Williams by September 14th via e-mail (ann6031@msn.com) or by phone at 720-363-0345. You can pay at the door; send a check to FROGS c/o Betty Evans, 1140 US Hwy 287 STE 400-283, Broomfield, CO 80020; or use Paypal to send your payment to betty@frontrangeobjectivism.com. Mr. Biddle will present material from chapter one of his book in progress, "Good Thinking: The Science of Selfishness." He will examine the nature and need of principles, show that they are essential guides to good thinking, discuss the dual standard of validity and its significance with respect to principles, examine the relationship of principles and egoism, and discuss why acceptance of altruism proportionally precludes the possibility of principled thinking. The talk will be followed by a Q&A, during which Mr. Biddle will answer questions relating to this material and other aspects of his book.
Craig Biddle is the editor of The Objective Standard and the author of Loving Life: The Morality of Self-Interest and the Facts that Support It . He is currently writing a book about the principles of rational thinking and the fallacies that are violations of those principles, which is tentatively titled "Good Thinking: The Science of Selfishness."
Here are the two images again.
Abnormal image (81 year old man who sustained a cardiac arrest):
Normal comparison image:
The surface of the brain consists of folds of grey matter at the surface with white matter lying deep to that layer. Slight differences in tissue density show up on the CT images as a slight difference in their relative brightness, with the outer layer of grey matter appearing slightly brighter on the images and the deeper layer of white matter appearing slightly darker.
In a normal brain, you should be able to make out an undulating boundary between the two layers, as shown here:
Here's a stock photograph of a similar brain slice from a pathology specimen showing the grey and white matter in "real life":
The abnormal image from the ER patient shows loss of the normal grey-white junction. That's the critical visual finding. This can happen when there's internal swelling of the brain tissues.
When the ER patient suffered his cardiac arrest at home, he lost the normal blood flow to the brain for a few minutes too long. This caused his entire brain to subsequently swell within the confined space of the skull, obliterating the normal grey-white junction.
In medical terms, this is called "diffuse cerebral edema" (as Tod correctly surmised), in this case due to "anoxic brain injury".
Unfortunately, these patients tend to do very poorly, even if their heart function is subsequently restored.
Here's more information from a neuroradiology textbook (see Figure I on the lower right of the page).
I've been re-reading Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged this summer, as part of a whirlwind ten-week Atlas Shrugged Reading Group for members of Front Range Objectivism. I've learned so much more about the novel than I expected. I have enjoyed the process of finding so many new delights in it. In addition to releasing my discussion questions, I hope to blog about some of what I've learned this upcoming fall and spring, as I work through the novel again in a slower-paced reading group in Colorado Springs.
For the moment, I just wanted to note my particular pleasure at this near-final passage from Galt's Speech:
In the name of the best within you, do not sacrifice this world to those who are its worst. In the name of the values that keep you alive, do not let your vision of man be distorted by the ugly, the cowardly, the mindless in those who have never achieved his title. Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. Do not let your fire go out, spark by irreplaceable spark, in the hopeless swamps of the approximate, the not-quite, the not-yet, the not-at-all. Do not let the hero in your soul perish, in lonely frustration for the life you deserved, but have never been able to reach. Check your road and the nature of your battle. The world you desired can be won, it exists, it is real, it is possible, it's yours.Given the sordid state of the world today, I felt like John Galt grabbed me and shook me when I read those words. Read more...
But to win it requires your total dedication and a total break with the world of your past, with the doctrine that man is a sacrificial animal who exists for the pleasure of others. Fight for the value of your person. Fight for the virtue of your pride. Fight for the essence of that which is man: for his sovereign rational mind. Fight with the radiant certainty and the absolute rectitude of knowing that yours is the Morality of Life and that yours is the battle for any achievement, any value, any grandeur, any goodness, any joy that has ever existed on this earth.
Here's another abnormal head CT scan from our practice, with a comparison normal image from a different patient. The abnormal image is from an 81 year old man who came to the ER in cardiac arrest.
Abnormal image:
Normal comparison image:
What's the critical difference between the two images?
The answer will be posted tomorrow.
The August 11, 2009 Wall Street Journal recently published an OpEd by Whole Foods CEO John Mackey, proposing some genuine free market alternatives to government-run "universal health care".
In his piece, "The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare", Mackey makes several good recommendation including:
• Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs)(Read the whole thing.)Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost.
Dear Whole Foods,Diana also sent them this letter:
My wife and I have been customers of Whole Foods for many years now, here in the Denver metro area.
We were delighted to read CEO John Mackey's excellent piece in the Wall Street Journal proposing genuine free market health care reforms rather than the usual heavy-handed top-down government-mandated "solutions", which is all we're hearing lately.
In particular, I applaud his recognition of the fact that there is no "right" to health care. This is the fundamental moral issue underlying the health care policy debate. Any attempt by the government to guarantee a false "right" to health care must necessary violate the actual individual rights of patients, providers, and taxpayers. Hence, I'm glad that Mr. Mackey is proposing solutions that will lower health costs for Americans while respecting our individual rights.
This country was founded on principles of freedom and individual liberty. I'm glad that CEO Mackey recognizes and respects that fact. As a result, my wife and I are delighted to continue to give our business to Whole Foods and we will encourage our friends and colleagues to do so as well.
Sincerely,
Paul Hsieh, MD
Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine (FIRM)
http://www.WeStandFIRM.org
Dear Whole Foods --In times like this, the courage of men such as John Mackey should be praised and rewarded. Read more...
I have been a regular shopper at Whole Foods for the past year, but now I have more to appreciate about your stores than your fine nuts, hearty meats, and pungent cheeses. I salute CEO John Mackey for his op-ed proposing free market health care reforms.
I am particularly grateful for Mr. Mackey's clear statement that health care is a need not a right. Too often, people think that their want creates an obligation on the part of others to satisfy it. In fact, a person is responsible for satisfying his own needs and wants in life. His rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness enable him to do that: they allow him the freedom to act in pursuit of his own goals without forcible interference from others. They do not allow him to rob and plunder his neighbors. If that is permitted by law, the results are exactly as Ayn Rand portrayed in "Atlas Shrugged."
I realize that many Whole Foods shoppers support socialized medicine, so I particularly appreciate Mr. Mackey's willingness to speak out on this issue. Such courage is rare in America today.
Thank you!
Diana Hsieh (Ph.D, Philosophy, CU Boulder)
Sedalia, Colorado
As I mentioned in Saturday's post, I'm suffering from server problems related to file permissions. Some upgrade to the kernel created security problems, so my internet host turned off chmod access. That wouldn't be so terrible, except that any new file uploaded to the server is now created with permissions of 600 (read and write only for the owner) rather than with 644 (read for all, write only for the owner). I can't change the permissions manually, neither through the shell nor with ftp.
That means that individual pages for new blog posts are not viewable on the web; you'll see an "Error 403: Access Forbidden" page instead.
That sucks hard, particularly because my internet host has only offered vague promises about when the problem will be fixed. Hopefully, some work-around will be hit upon soon, as the current set-up means that all my web sites are either frozen or broken.
In the meantime, you can read posts from the the main NoodleFood page and view and post comments using the "New Page" link at the bottom of the post.
Update: My internet host just finally told me a method by which I can chmod the files manually. That will be a pain, and I can't guarantee that I'll be able to do it pronto, but at least it's something.
This week on We Stand FIRM, the blog of FIRM: Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine:
Here's yet another Open Thread for your thoughts:
For anyone in the fiery grip of a random question, comment, joke, or link they'd like to share with NoodleFood readers, I hereby open up the comments on this post to any respectable topic. (Please refrain from posting personal attacks, pornographic material, and commercial solicitations.)
For some reason that I can't quite fathom, many people seem to think that you simply cannot eat certain foods without a carbohydrate delivery device such as chips, crackers, tortillas, bread, and the like. Usually, such carbohydrate delivery devices offer little to nothing in the way of taste. They certainly aren't healthy, particularly not if fried in vegetable oil. And they often produce that nasty "ugh, I'm so full" feeling that most people consider to be a normal part of eating.
In contrast, I find that silverware of various kinds -- and even my fingers on occasion -- is a wonderful method of transporting the yummy, healthy food from plate to mouth without the intervention of needless carbohydrates. For example:
This superb classic pre-CG video explains how a vehicle's differential works:
You may wish to start at 1:30.
Safety tip: Don't do the stunt that starts at 9:00!
A guy goes on a planned backpacking trip around Europe for two weeks. He tells his girlfriend of his plans. However, she somehow forgets that. She sends him a rather memorable series of e-mails.
Am I wrong to think that this pain ray bears a disturbing resemblance to Project X in Atlas Shrugged?
The so-called "Active Denial System" works by heating the outer surface of the target's skin using millimeter waves -- short wavelength microwaves. The effect is painful, but generally harmless, and forces the target to get out of the beam. ...Unlike "Project X," this device won't kill a person. Yet it seems like just the kind of device that some statist government might like to use to control ... say ... unruly "mobs" of protesters. Read more...
[The Silent Guardian] is Active Denial in a box, a 10,000-pound containerized system that can be mounted on a ship, a truck, or a fixed installation. It's got an effective range of about 250 meters. The beam has a power of around 30 kilowatts.
On his August 12, 2009 radio show, Rush Limbaugh read extended sections of John Lewis' analysis of the Democrats' Health Care Bill HR3200.
Here's a transcript of Limbaugh's program segment: "A Duke Professor Explains What the Health Care Bill Actually Says"
Here's the link to Dr. Lewis' full analysis of HR3200.
If John Lewis' ideas reach enough people, he might have just saved our country.
C. August of Titanic Deck Chairs has the latest installment of the Objectivist Roundup. Go check it out!
Read more...In yesterday's post on homeowner's associations, I mentioned my new barn, currently in the process of being erected. So I thought I'd post a picture of its current state. (Click for a larger version.)
The man on top of the barn is David Brown, my builder peopleguy. He's mostly working alone, but occasionally hires help as need. I've been completely happy with my choice of him for the project. The work has been delayed a bit by the birth of his third child, but that's no problem for me. The metal roof is scheduled for installation today. So it will be looking quite different in short order, I think.
Here's a sweet announcement from the Ayn Rand Bookstore. A new book -- Winning the Unwinnable War, by editor and lead contributor Elan Journo, with additional essays by Yaron Brook and Alex Epstein -- is now available for preorder from the Ayn Rand Bookstore for expected delivery in November. Here's the description:
Eight years after 9/11 and in the shadow of two protracted U.S. military campaigns in the Middle East, the enemy is not only undefeated but emboldened and resurgent. What went wrong--and what should we do going forward?The 250 page softcover will be selling for $27.95. Preorder now! Read more...
Winning the Unwinnable War shows how our own policy ideas led to 9/11 and then crippled our response in the Middle East, and it makes the case for an unsettling conclusion: By subordinating military victory to perverse, allegedly moral constraints, Washington's policy has undermined our national security. Owing to the significant influence of Just War Theory and neoconservatism, the Bush administration consciously put the imperative of shielding civilians and bringing them elections above the goal of eliminating real threats to our security. Consequently, this policy left our enemies stronger, and America weaker, than before. The dominant alternative to Bush-esque idealism in foreign policy--so-called realism--has made a strong comeback under the tenure of Barack Obama. But this nonjudgmental, supposedly practical approach is precisely what helped unleash the enemy prior to 9/11.
The message of the essays in this thematic collection is that only by radically re-thinking our foreign policy in the Middle East can we achieve victory over the enemy that attacked us on 9/11. We need a new moral foundation for our Mideast policy. That new starting point for U.S. policy is the moral ideal championed by Ayn Rand: rational self-interest. Implementing this approach entails objectively defining our national interest as protecting the lives and freedoms of Americans--and then taking principled action to safeguard them. The book lays out the necessary steps for achieving victory and for securing America's long-range interests in the volatile Middle East.
Another round in the eternal struggle of man vs. computer.
Here's a recent emergency room x-ray from the night shift, with the associated ER history:
I'd say the machines won this round...:
(You can click on the images to see the full-sized versions.)
Here's yet another Open Thread for your thoughts:
For anyone in the fiery grip of a random question, comment, joke, or link they'd like to share with NoodleFood readers, I hereby open up the comments on this post to any respectable topic. (Please refrain from posting personal attacks, pornographic material, and commercial solicitations.)
The homeowner's association in our rural-ish neighborhood is fairly benign. We don't have many restrictions on what we can build on or do with our property, although we do have some dumb provisions in our covenants.
For example, our five-acre properties are limited to three horses each, whereas the county would permit ten horses. That's dumb: three horses can be a major nuisance if not cared for properly, while ten horses can be perfectly fine if managed well. Moreover, the three-horse limit means that an ordinary family with three or more riders might not be able to accommodate their perfectly ordinary number of horses. So the restriction doesn't address the potential nuisance, yet excludes many potential home buyers. Its sole virtue is that it's easily enforceable.
Even more strangely, the covenants place no restrictions on the number of livestock animals, except that they cannot be raised for commercial purposes. So I simply must comply with the county rules, namely:
In the ER/RR zoning districts and in the A-1 and LRR districts parcels 2.3 to 8.9 acres in area, the number of animals is limited to 1 animal per half acre for large animals, such as, cows, horses, mules or llamas, and 4 animals per half acre for smaller animals, i.e., sheep, goats, swine, miniature horses, or alpacas.Since I have just over five acres, I can have two horses, sixteen pigs, and sixteen sheep. Or forty goats. Or ten cows. Or five cows and twenty goats. I could go on, but you get the idea. Oh and on top of that, I can have up to 30 chickens and 50 rabbits. While I do plan to get another horse and some livestock in the next year, once my new barn is finished, I don't think I'll be anywhere near those limits!
I'm pleased to report three bits of news about the new OGrownups e-mail list.
First, list manager Jenn Casey of Rational Jenn has a partner in crime: C. August of Titanic Deck Chairs. Thank you, C!
Second, non-Objectivists are now welcome to subscribe to the list, but as lurkers only. In other words, they can read posts to the list but not post themselves. Such people need only be interested in parenting and education based on the principles of Objectivism. If you're one of those people, please indicate when you subscribe that you're requesting to join as a non-Objectivist lurker. (Bosom buddies of David Kelley, Chris Sciabarra, Nathaniel Branden, and the like are still unwelcome.)
Third, the list has nearly 100 subscribers already, and good discussion is already underway. Hooray!
The New York Times published an excellent letter from Daniel Schwartz in response to its article on Ayn Rand and BB&T, Give BB&T Liberty, but Not a Bailout. It reads:
Re "Give Me Liberty, but Not a Bailout" (Aug. 2), which described how the chairman of BB&T, the banking company, is a proponent of the Objectivist ideas of Ayn Rand:Nice! The other published letter was offensive, in that its basic point was to suggest that Ayn Rand's political views were the product of her experience with the Soviets. Yet even that could have been worse. Read more...
The article quotes one of Ms. Rand's detractors as calling her "irrelevant." Given that Ms. Rand described Objectivism as "a philosophy for living on earth," this claim is ironic indeed. No other philosophy is as focused on dealing with the needs of real people. This is clear from the case of BB&T. Could Plato or Kant take credit for the success of a business in the way that Ms. Rand could take credit for this bank's success?
Objectivism, as a philosophy which upholds rationality, honesty, justice, and pride -- not as duties, but as tools for success -- is very relevant.
Daniel Schwartz
San Diego, Aug. 3
The writer is a graduate student in philosophy at the University of California, San Diego.
This morning, I noticed this super-positive review of Atlas Shrugged by Terry Savage of MoneyShow.com. It begins:
Who is John Galt?Go read the whole thing -- and then please write a positive comment to encourage her to write more! (The registration process is rather onerous, but you can post an anonymous comment. I did that, then left my name.)
If that doesn't ring a bell--or even if it slightly jogs your memory--I have a summer reading recommendation for you during this lazy month of August.
I'm in the midst of re-reading Atlas Shrugged, the legendary novel first published in 1957 by Ayn Rand. It reads as if it were written this month--and that's only the first shocking thing that will strike you if you're brave enough to attempt this 1,100-page work of art.
I remembered its influence it had on me when I read it as a teenager, and it strikes with new force as I read it today in the context of Obamacare, wage and car "czars," and multibillion-dollar "cash for clunkers" payouts, and amid headlines decrying profits, bonuses, speculation, and well, financial success.
If the comparisons don't strike you within the first 100 pages, you can stop reading. But if every page leaves you wondering how this novel could have been written 50 years ago, when it so perfectly depicts our own times, then I won't have to exhort you to finish.
I'm about one-third of the way through, and as I reread through more mature eyes and in today's context, I find it even more compelling. I'm sure I will have more to say on this blog in coming weeks.
Ari Armstrong created three great YouTube videos from a recent "Hands Off My Health" rally in Longmont. Ari reports that about 150 to 200 people showed up to this rally in the middle of the day on a weekday. Amazing. Even better, I'm pretty impressed with their reasons for opposing the current proposals for heath care "reform," i.e. socialized medicine. Here are the three videos:
Longmont Colorado Health Rally Participants Reply to the Democratic 'Mob' Charge:
Longmont Colorado Health Rally Interviews, August 6 2009, Part 1:
Longmont Colorado Health Rally Interviews, August 6 2009, Part 2:
Great job, Ari!
This week on We Stand FIRM, the blog of FIRM: Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine:
Here's yet another Open Thread for your thoughts:
For anyone in the fiery grip of a random question, comment, joke, or link they'd like to share with NoodleFood readers, I hereby open up the comments on this post to any respectable topic. (Please refrain from posting personal attacks, pornographic material, and commercial solicitations.)
As I mentioned, I had oral surgery last Tuesday, July 28th. For a full week, I felt pretty miserable. After the first day, I wasn't in pain. Yet I was dour, grumpy, and miserable -- as poor Paul can attest! I was also easily tired. I didn't dare drive myself anywhere, and the simple act of walking down the driveway wore me out. I couldn't figure out what the problem was, but I suspected that I was in more pain than I realized, that my body was in a bit of shock, that the medication was affecting me, and/or that I was aggravated by my diet of soft foods.
Six days after my surgery, that changed for the better. I woke up on Monday (August 3rd) feeling like my old self again. I was happy and chipper. I took pleasure in eating. I was able to drive down to Colorado Springs to pick up the raw milk for our co-op in Castle Rock -- over two hours high stress driving due to the delicate timing and iffy traffic -- without feeling tired afterward.
Given that radical change, I began to suspect that I was pretty seriously affected by the drugs I had been taking -- particularly the steroids. (I've never had any kind of response to antibiotics before.) The steroid I took was methylprednisolone (a.k.a. medrol) for six days, starting with six doses and tapering down to just one. I took my last dose on Sunday morning. So the timing made sense.
My periodontist confirmed that such mood changes are fairly common on the steroids. He told me that some people feel much better on them -- namely people who have arthritis or other orthopedic problems. However, people without such problems tend to feel crappy on them, as I did.
All in all, I'm rather surprised that I reacted so strongly to the steroids. I'm not surprised that they made me tired, but their effects on my mood were downright alarming. I didn't feel like myself that week -- and truly, I wasn't myself! I don't think I've ever taken a mood-altering drug before, and I don't think I want to repeat the experience!
This experience surely has some profound implications for philosophic questions about personal identity and philosophy of mind. I'll leave that for you to discuss in the comments.
Here's the head CT image from yesterday.
Yes, that round ball at the 11 o'clock position is the patient's right eye protruding forward out of the eye socket! You can even make out the brighter lens in the front of the eyeball:
The reason is a long-neglected cancer destroying much of the right side of his face. Here's another image slicing through a slightly lower portion of the face:
The left eye is in its normal position in the eye socket (the "orbit"), at approximately the 1 o'clock position of this image.
Erosophia has the latest Objectivist Round-up. Go check it out!
Read more...Here is a CT image of a patient's brain. 
For orientation purposes, he is lying on his back on the scanner facing the ceiling.
Pretend you're standing by his feet looking up at him. Hence, the top of the image is the front of his head, the bottom of the image is the back of his head, the left side of the image is his right, and the right side of the image is his left.
Answer tomorrow.
The Obama Administration is asking people to report on "fishy" conversations about health care they encounter:
Opponents of health insurance reform may find the truth a little inconvenient, but as our second president famously said, "facts are stubborn things."I'm a patriotic American, so I decided to report myself this morning. Here's what I sent, inspired by what some other OActivists did:
Scary chain emails and videos are starting to percolate on the internet, breathlessly claiming, for example, to "uncover" the truth about the President's health insurance reform positions.
...
There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.
Dear Minister of Propaganda,Please do send a protest e-mail to flag@whitehouse.gov. I'd love to see them flooded with useless-to-them e-mails. Read more...
I'd like to report myself. I think that the Obama administration is attempting a government takeover of health care. Mandates are bad enough in themselves, and they're just one step on the road to total government control of medicine. That's appalling. I support individual rights and free markets in health care -- not more government welfare and controls.
I've told that to tons of people. Please tell me when and where I should report to my re-education camp.
For many years, I've been able to do my work reasonably well with a stripped-down version of David Allen's stellar Getting Things Done method for managing work. (If you've not yet read his book, aptly titled Getting Things Done, I strongly recommend it.) While in graduate school, my work projects weren't complex: "read, write, read, write, and write some more" were my basic orders for every day. My home projects mostly consisted of periodic maintenance work, not distinct projects. Still, I couldn't imagine living without the basic principles of GTD: I just had too much to do.
In my post-Ph.D work, however I've found that my projects have exploded -- not just in number but also in complexity. I've spent much of this summer attempting to clarify and organize them, while also doing what needed to get done. That's not been an easy task! I've had to think more deeply about my priorities, projects, and methods than ever before. Moreover, I've radically reworked my own implementation of GTD. In the process, I've found that I'm simply getting closer and closer to the full-blown system that David Allen recommends.
Here's some of what I've been done over the past few months and weeks:
I'm Diana Hsieh, a philosopher specializing in practical ethics. I received my Ph.D in philosophy from the University of Colorado at Boulder in 2009.
Paul Hsieh is a physician specializing in orthopedic and emergency radiology. He blogs about science, technology, and random humorous items at GeekPress. He's a co-founder of Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine (FIRM) and regularly writes for its blog, We Stand FIRM. He has published a slew of op-eds and essays on health care policy. You can e-mail Paul at paul@paulhsieh.com, and follow him on Twitter @PaulHsieh.
Greg Perkins is a software architect working in the R&D labs at Hewlett-Packard, Boise. His degree is in mathematics and computer science. Greg hosts The Objectivism Seminar. Aside from work and philosophy, he plays jazz saxophone professionally with groups such as The Sidemen and Onomatopoeia. You can e-mail Greg at greg@eCosmos.com, and follow him on Twitter @gregperk.
Back to TOP
Tweet
Share
Stumble
Reddit
