Monday, September 15, 2008

Oh, for the love of Pete. Is this for real???

Okay, everybody. I want to prepare you for this. Normally, I wouldn't spread around pseudo-science of such a low quality, but I wanted you guys to see what gets passed off these days as legitimate scientific research. Now you tell me. Is this a sound basis for the growing standard of "Evidence-Based Medicine"? Or should we be looking backward to the allegorical for guidance. I'm pretty sure that we're staring in the wrong direction.
Cold And Lonely: Does Social Exclusion Literally Feel Cold?

ScienceDaily (Sep. 15, 2008) — When we hear somebody described as “frosty” or “cold”, we automatically picture a person who is unfriendly and antisocial. There are numerous examples in our daily language of metaphors which make a connection between cold temperatures and emotions such as loneliness, despair and sadness.

We are taught at a young age that metaphors are meant to be descriptive and are not supposed to be taken literally. However, recent studies suggest that these metaphors are more than just fancy literary devices and that there is a psychological basis for linking cold with feelings of social isolation.

Psychologists Chen-Bo Zhong and Geoffrey Leonardelli from the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management wanted to test the idea that social isolation might generate a physical feeling of coldness. They divided a group of volunteers into two groups. One group recalled a personal experience in which they had been socially excluded—rejection from a club, for example. This was meant to tap into their feelings of isolation and loneliness. The other group recalled an experience in which they had been accepted into a group.

Then, the researchers had all the volunteers estimate the temperature in the room, on the pretense that the building’s maintenance staff wanted that information. The estimates ranged widely, from about 54 degrees F to a whopping 104 degrees F. Here’s the interesting part: Those who were told to think about a socially isolating experience gave lower estimates of the temperature. In other words, the recalled memories of being ostracized actually made people experience the ambient temperature as colder.

“We found that the experience of social exclusion literally feels cold,” Zhong said. “This may be why people use temperature-related metaphors to describe social inclusion and exclusion.”

In another experiment, instead of relying on volunteers’ memories, the researchers triggered feelings of exclusion by having the volunteers play a computer-simulated ball tossing game. The game was designed so that some of the volunteers had the ball tossed to them many times, but others were left out.

Afterwards, all the volunteers rated the desirability of certain foods and beverages: hot coffee, crackers, an ice-cold Coke, an apple, and hot soup. The findings were striking. As reported in the September issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, the “unpopular” volunteers who had been ostracized during the computer game were much more likely than the others to want either hot soup or hot coffee. Their preference for warm food and drinks presumably resulted from physically feeling cold as a result of being excluded.

“It’s striking that people preferred hot coffee and soup more when socially excluded,” Leonardelli said. “Our research suggests that warm chicken soup may be a literal coping mechanism for social isolation.”

These results open up new opportunities in exploring the interaction between environment and psychology, such as the study of mood disorders (e.g., Seasonal Affective Disorder). Research on Seasonal Affective Disorder has focused on the idea that lack of sunlight during winter results in feelings of depression in normally healthy people.

The current study indicates that the cold temperatures may also contribute to feelings of sadness and isolation felt during the winter months. In addition, this study suggests that raising the thermostat a bit might be an easy method of promoting group interaction and cooperation in social settings.

Thursday, September 11, 2008

Outrageous Democrat Comments - Chapter 1


I've decided to start a running record of ridiculous comments made by Democrats. I make no claims about how many Democrats and other leftists agree with these comments, but I can only imagine what would happen if roles were reversed, and statements of this sort were made by Republicans or Independents.


I also offer this as "Exhibit A" to those who would have me approach Democrat ideology with an "open mind".


“If you want change, you want the Democratic Party. Barack Obama was a community organizer like Jesus, who our minister prayed about. Pontius Pilate was a governor.”
-- Rep. Steve Cohen (D - Tennessee)

[John McCain has chosen a running mate (Sarah Palin)] "whose primary qualification seems to be that she hasn't had an abortion."
-- Carol Fowler, South Carolina Democratic Party Chairwoman

"It's funny that New Orleans will get a hurricane. That's funny because it is due to hit when President Bush is scheduled to speak. Isn't that cool?"
- and -
[Sarah Palin is] "Dan Quayle on steroids".
- and -
"Other than the fact that she is a female, [Sarah Palin] has nothing to offer."
-- Don Fowler, former National Chairman of the Democratic National Committee and husband to Carol Fowler (above), overheard (and recorded) speaking to South Carolina Congressman John Spratt (D - South Carolina) on a plane after the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people! God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human! God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme!"
-- Reverend Jeremiah Wright ("one the 10 most influential pastors in America", according to the Obama campaign)

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."
-- Reverend Jeremiah Wright (five days after the attacks on 11 September 2001)

"We should also examine the foreign policies of the the U.S. to make sure that we occupy the moral high ground in these conflicts. In particular, we have to examine some of the root causes of this terrorist activity...For nations like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, or much of the Middle East, young men have no opportunities. The only education they are receiving is that provided to them by religious schools that may not provide them with a well-rounded view of the world.”
-- Senator Barack Obama, Chicago Defender, 17 October 2001 (Making excuses for the terrorists, only 36 days after they killed over 3,000 American citizens. Apparently, it was our own fault.)

"I would say that, as an ardent practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the Church have not been able to make that definition. And St. Augustine said at three months. We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have impact on a woman’s right to choose."
-- Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D - California), when asked when life begins. She actually answers "We don't know when life begins, but a woman should be able to choose to end that life anyway, regardless of what the Church says." Don't make any future Sunday plans, Nancy.

"God has given us, each of us, a free will and responsibility to answer for our actions. And we want abortions to be safe, rare and reduce the number of abortions. That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception. My Republican colleagues do not support contraception. If you want to reduce the number of abortions, and we all do, we must, it would be easier to support family planning and contraception, you would think."
-- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (further digging a Vatican-sized hole for herself when challenged on her statement about the inability of the Catholic Church to decide when life begins).
"You don't have money to fund the war or children. But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement."
-- Pete Stark (D-CA)

“Al Qaeda really hurt us, but not as much as Rupert Murdoch has hurt us, particularly in the case of Fox News. Fox News is worse than al Qaeda -- worse for our society. It’s as dangerous as the Ku Klux Klan ever was.”
-- MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann, in (of course) Playboy, October 2007 (sour grapes???)

"Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform....We pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?...[T]he recent NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary -- oops sorry, volunteer -- force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.”
-- William Arkin, WashingtonPost.com military columnist

Insurgents “are running out of people to kill,” and “There are fewer targets of opportunity.”
--David Obey (D-WI), November 2007, as to why deaths in Iraq had decreased

“I think a draft produces a better Army than the one we would have with all volunteers, because I think you get average Americans if you have a draft. And if it’s an all-volunteer Army, you get people who join up because of some problem in their own lives. They don’t have anything else to do, they don’t have a job, or they can’t find what they want to do, so they join the Army. And it doesn’t produce the best Army.”
-- CBS’s Andy Rooney, March 2007. As a veteran, thanks, Andy. I guess McCain gets to be the "crazy old man" instead of you. Pity.

"Sure, there's less violence, but that's because we've ethnically cleansed most of Baghdad."
--Jim Moran (D-VA), December 2007

"You have to make your own decisions about what the President knows, this war is lost, and that the surge is not accomplishing anything, as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday,"
--Majority Leader of the United States Senate, Sen. Harry Reed (D - Nevada), April 2007

"It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
--Senator Barack Obama

"We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
--Senator Hillary Clinton

"God bless the America we are trying to create."
--Senator Hillary Clinton

"You think people can work all day and then pick up their kids at child care or wherever and get home and still manage to sandwich in an eight-hour vote? Well Republicans, I guess can do that. Because a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives."
--Democratic National Committee Chairman, Gov. Howard Dean (D - New Hampshire)


Monday, September 8, 2008

Falling in love again???

I have been moonlighting. On the weekends, I've been working at an urgent care clinic in the area. I admit that I've been avoiding family practice. I'm not sure why. As usual, of course, I've done lots of self-examination about it.

Part of the reason I fled was my inexperience. Medical school and residency teach you lots of things. As most people can agree, however, they do little to teach you about communicating with sick people. That's actually the hardest part. I had a very naive vision of my role and the sorts of relationships I would have with my patients. I was looking backwards, to a much simpler time, when people either liked or at least wanted to like their doctor. It's different now. We often have to fight the perception that we are cheats, liars, thieves, or all of the above. I had no idea how in the world to answer that. My feelings of disappointment led me to act defensively - to assume the worst.

Another problem I had was the feeling of being overwhelmed. "General medicine" is such an inocuous term for what it really is - never being surprised by anything. There is a difference, though, between "never being surprised" and "always knowing the answer". With time and more experience, I've found that there are ways of breaking this fact to the patients that don't make them feel that they've just thrown away a co-pay.

In a funny way, it was immersing myself in exactly what I feared that allowed me to grow. Unwittingly, the doctor who feared and resented the attitudes of his patients and who feared having to say "I don't know" placed himself in the one job in the world where that is almost all there is - Occupational Medicine. I don't just have occasional bad interactions now - they are constant. And this conversation happens nearly every day:

"Well, Mr. Smith, I've reviewed your MRI and the results are negative. That means there appears to be nothing wrong with your knee"

"Well, I can tell you there is definitely something wrong with it!"

"Well, unfortunately, sir, the last three examinations I've performed on your knee were negative, the examination by the physical therapist was also without objective findings, and now the MRI fails to show anything. There may very well be something wrong with you, but it is so subtle as to be invisible to me, other health professionals, and the MRI machine."

"So what's wrong with my knee?!?"

So when I started back with the general medicine stuff, it didn't seem so bad this time. I also found that the things I was most afraid of - the emergency medicine things - aren't nearly so daunting as they used to be. And even though I'm exhausted after working basically 21 days straight with five more to go before the first real day off, I think I might be able to do this GP thing again after all. Have Medicine and I reconciled? It's a bit too early to know for sure, but it's a good start.

Friday, August 29, 2008

Lord Obama bin Biden for Galactic Chancellor!!!

I give in. The pomp and circumstance are just simply too much. I'm only human. Resistance truly is futile. Obama's sarcastic and dismissive brow-beating last night finally stole my last ounce of strength. I must embrace the dark side.
And Darth Biden. Those teeth! Those amazingly white, shockingly gleaming teeth! So beautiful. So dangerously sharp...
And speaking of teeth, I never did see Michelle's all night. Did they wire her mouth shut or something? Or maybe Obama the Great did one of those things where he choked her without touching her - the Dark Side really is powerful.
They will stop at nothing. They've already stooped to calling McCain a "senile...old man". They've called the majority of our fellow citizens "clingers" to guns and God. Now Gov. Palin gets her turn. It's almost too easy - Obama Khan will probably leave the dirty part to Joe - calling her a "typical white broad". Of course her five kids will likely have to suffer, too. The stakes are just too high.
Let's just surrender now. We are ignorant and poorly-educated. Not all of us poor kids get to go to Harvard, you know. Only the "special" ones.
We welcome your Pax Obama, O Great One!!! We salute you!!! We await the glorious coming of the New Age you promised us!!! May the Earth begin to cool as you gloriously predicted!!! Indeed, We are the ones We've been waiting for!!! I see it so clearly now. Your wisdom, it burns my tiny brain, your Eminence...!!!
________________________________________________________
...Oh my goodness. Even I underestimated the depths of depravity to which some of the lefties are stooping about Palin and her children. I just checked in on HotAir...unreal.
I wonder if His Eminence will repudiate the comments. If not, it should be the duty of all decent, moderate Democrats to jump ship on him. This is beyond "swiftboating". This is beyond dirty. I'm starting to think there really is a Dark Side involved here.
__________________________________________________________

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Breaking News in the Class War: Obama bin Biden Invades Denver

In a typically dreary and narcotic lefty speech, Senator Joseph Biden accepted the nomination of the American Communist Party for the vice-chancellorship of the country of Unitedstates. In the speech, he lamented the current state of American affairs. As he put it, never before in his lifetime had so many people been prevented from participating in the "American Dream". With his elderly mother nodding her approval from the cheap seats, he promised to change things.

What I did find surprising is the failure of the assembled members of the Democratic Socialist Peoples' Party to rise up with a groan of fury and rip him limb-from-limb for this open threat to their agenda. I mean, seriously. Restore the American Dream? The Socialists have worked so hard, and they had just about killed it. Plus, why would he bring up such a topic just when people had almost forgotten all about it?

Maybe he actually means it. Is that possible? I had always figured him for a typical liberal panderer, but maybe he actually aims to restore the American Dream. If so, we'll know soon enough. For those on the bottom of the "social ladder", he will demand that they go to 12 years of school before becoming eligible for social welfare, and will begin speaking in very direct and pointed terms about the destructiveness of single-parent homes, teenage births, drug culture, failure to learn English, and crooked local politics. This will be his first step in restoring the American Dream to those who, in his words, "need it most".

He'll likely then turn his attention to the nation's small-business owners, whose presence and success drives the nation's economy. He will likely publicly celebrate the most successful ones, praising their enormous incomes as a well-deserved reward for all their hard work, and encouraging others to follow their example. He will probably drop the tax burden on them and lower the capital gains tax rate so that their investments can be even more profitable for them, and so that they can hire more people - the people who had previously been living in miserable, unemployed squalor, until Senator Biden's brave stand for the American Dream. Now those people, too, are on the road to growing more powerful and independent. Maybe someday they, too, will own their own business and make it big.

He will have much more work to do, of course. This is only the beginning of restoring the American Dream. He will have to work to encourage large corporations to do business in America rather than moving overseas. He'll probably do this by lowering their exposure to frivolous lawsuits and by decreasing their tax burden, or at least by simplifying the tax law. When he does this, those companies and corporations won't "send jobs overseas" any more - they won't have to. They'll be able to hire Americans - probably some of the same ones that would have spent their previously uneducated lives waiting on the next hand-out or participating in the drug trade - that is, until Joe Biden came along and saved the American Dream for them.

Of course, this is all just speculation. I'm sure the Honorable Mr. Biden has much better ideas than mine. Or, I suppose, he could just continue to do what he's spent the first several decades of his career as a politician doing - the complete opposite of everything I suggested.

He could just keep on tacitly encouraging entire generations of the poorest Americans to stay uneducated, unmarried, untrained, and unintelligible. He could just continue to tell those people that none of that is their fault and that they should continue to trust him to fight all their battles for them, if they will just continue to blindly vote for him. He might just continue to support labor unions and trial attorneys as they make business nearly impossible for American companies, and then continue to smear the companies that move to countries where free enterprise is still a valued system. And, as Vice Chancellor, he may just continue to make it harder and harder for small businesses to begin and even harder to survive.

Or maybe I just have him and his agenda all wrong. Maybe a nation of dependent, uneducated, hopeless drones just working from check-to-check and always looking to the central government for their very survival is his picture of the American Dream that people are being robbed of. I guess maybe to him it means people who might as well save their energy instead of taking the risk of starting their own company because it only exposes them to greater legal and financial risk with no real hope of reaping a reward.

But I guess I could be wrong about Joe Biden. Maybe he's got the guts to save the world after all.

Monday, August 4, 2008

So there I was, without my foil hat...!

I awoke Friday morning with a sick feeling I couldn't quite put my finger on. I didn't feel ill. It was more like being "pre-ill" - that almost-but-not-quite sick feeling you get right before the fever hits. I continued feeling strangely all the way to work. I hadn't been aware of the total solar eclipse until I pulled up in the parking lot. Without a better cosmic excuse, I just chalked the weirdness up to that. As the day wore on, however, I began to wonder if it might have been something else.

Have you ever heard about how animals act before a natural disaster? Dogs before the "Christmas Tsunami" were said to inexplicably flee inland. Traditional lore in West Texas describes the bizarre behavior of pets hours, sometimes even a day or two, before a devastating tornado. I believe that this weird feeling I had Friday morning was the human equivalent. Everything in me said "Stay home!". I wish I'd have listened.


It started out very well - nice and easy until about 9:30. Then the gates opened. And it wasn't our typical mix of patients, either. It was as if every single disgruntled person in the world was trying to push their way into our waiting room. I had threats of lawsuit. I had to dismiss two patients within 10 minutes for being obstinate, malingering, and making false accusations against me. I had more lies, more threats, and on and on. It lasted nearly all day. By 4 p.m. I was nearly down for the count.


Somehow we made it through. I just wish I understood what caused this to happen - solar eclipse, mind-control rays gone mad...? Something was definitely up. I guess I'll know what to expect next time.

Monday, July 28, 2008

Scientists Report 30% of U.S. Adults are Disabled; Other 70% Exhausted


This is a perfect example of the reason I view "Evidence-based medicine" with a suspicious eye. The first reaction is one of interested surprise - "What? 3 out of 10? Amazing! I never would have thought..."


For me at least, there is a second thought process that begins to form when I hear these seemingly unbelievable reports: I begin to assess whether that information is consistent with common sense. Those who preach the religion of Evidence would call that inappropriate, unscientific, or even "allegorical" (that is the new term for idolatry in the Church of Evidence).


Think about it. How many people do you know? How many people are you in contact with? Would you say that 30% of them are "disabled" in some way? I know literally hundreds of people as a result of my work as a doctor. There is no way that 3 out of 10 of them are disabled.


So, then, what does this mean? Am I horribly mistaken? Is there a vast unknown number of Americans with disabilities out there? Have I simply missed them somehow? Or has some sort of error been made in this study?


Errors occur from time to time, and are dealt with by the scientific method itself. Unless of course, the study does not lend itself to scientific methodology. Errors can be of basically two types - (a) errors in data collection and (b) errors in conclusions regarding the data. At the very least, I believe the author of this study is guilty of scientific error. Fortunately for her, her study can not be subjected to scientific scrutiny. Her interpretations of the data indicate that there is something missing - some piece of the puzzle undefined. So much so that a dedicated physician, diligently attempting to find how this study might impact his practice feels left out of the inside joke. So I continue digging...


The author is Barbara M. Altman, Ph.D. A former employee of the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics, Dr. Altman, a psychologist by training, has a long history of research dealing with the disabled. She seems especially interested in the relationship between disability and occupations. In fact, she seems to be a bit of a revolutionary in this field. She supports a new and controversial definition for disability that, as the review of her textbook puts it, "focuses attention on the dual themes of theory and methodology that must form a basis for studies of impairment and disability". It goes on to describe the general aim of the book:

"Issues discussed include: critiques of current concepts of disability; the fit between sociological role theory and the concept of disability; the operationalization of different definitions of disability; conducting surveys with people with impairments; the reliability and utility of several qualitative research methodologies as applied to impairment and disability. Overall, the papers in this volume represent the beginning of a resurgence of interest in social science theories and methodologies within the study of impairment and disability".


Allow me, if you will, to define this for those of you as-yet untrained in the language of Psychotripe. Dr. Altman and her co-editor wish to redefine disability. No longer is it merely the (they would say seriously inadequate) definition which deals with concrete, objective, verifiable facts of inability to perform a certain task. Now this highly-charged social phenomenon of disability is placed into the nebulous universe of the psychologist, where definitions are impossible because nothing has actual meaning. If you read the methodology for the study, you find that Dr. Altman unilaterally uses the broadest possible sense of the term "disability". In her world, disability includes "feelings that interfere with productive work". Under this ridiculous definition, I and the ever-diminishing number of us who actually get up every morning and go to work and make a living are clearly, perhaps permanently, disabled.


Here is the problem. It is fine if Dr. Altman wishes to destroy any useful meaning for the term "disability". In fact, I support her right to live in a self-made universe without meaningful definitions. That will not be enough for Dr. Altman, however. As evidenced by her much-publicized recent study, this will grease the skids for vast increases in tax monies spent to care for this new onslaught of the "disabled". Those of us who are too busy paying for all those leeching off the system already will once again be harnessed with a new yoke.


If we are going to use "Evidence-Based Medicine" as the new standard for practice, I demand that we at least exercise some controls on what constitutes evidence. I barely scratched the surface of this article and found what appears to be a deep, dark, festering core of liberal social engineering, propaganda, and dishonesty. How many other "studies" could be similarly debunked?