Elsewhere (318)
Christopher Rufo on self-flattering fantasies:
This is fantasy. Hillegass and the young protesters, who work, live, and study in unprecedented peace and prosperity, are play-acting an imaginary historical drama designed to win fawning coverage on MSNBC, not to stop Governor DeSantis from building concentration camps on the beaches of the Sunshine State.
Andy Ngo shares a bedlamite horror story:
Frankly, I’m still processing the words trans therapist. On Twitter, Mr Ngo adds, “As I dig into more disturbing criminal cases involving extreme violence or child sex abuse, I’m finding many of the suspects are trans but are never reported as such by press, sheriff’s offices, or prosecutors.”
And Amy Wax on ‘equity’ versus competence:
Now, that is an Orwellian phrase. I guess I would ask, do the patients who are treated by these doctors give a hoot about “latent ability”? Do you know your stuff? Are you a good doctor? Have you mastered this complex material? And of course, the notion that “latent ability” is the same across the board is pure ideology. […]
Someone once asked me, “What do you think it means when people do poorly on the SAT or the MCAT [Medical College Admission Test]?” I said, “It means they don’t know the answers to the questions.” [So, they then said,] “Well, the test doesn’t measure anything meaningful…” Which is a falsehood – of course it does. Is it the be-all and end-all? No, but it gives you a lot of information.
I had an academic physician tell me, anonymously, that in his department, the one black fellow flunked his board exams four times. And the whole department has to mobilise to make sure he passes the next time… They’re not going to leave this doctor alone until they push him through the meat grinder somehow. But think about the patients who are going to have him as a doctor. It just makes no sense. People have to be allowed to fail, on their own level, and according to a single standard.
Needless to say, other prickly topics are touched on. Professor Wax, and her enemies, have cropped up here before.
Update, via the comments: On the subject of ‘equity’ versus competence, see also this.
Feel free to share your own links and snippets, on any subject, in the comments.
A worthwhile reminder.
Nevertheless, the turtle moves!
If I recall correctly, “bad air” from nearby swamps–which coincidentally had mosquitos.
Ironically, I read something long ago about some old peasant beliefs that manure piles were healthy to have in the vicinity. Shrug.
As I’ve aged – gracefully, imperceptibly – my dislike of padding has increased. It’s one of the reasons I haven’t read fiction in decades. And why I find bad pacing in TV dramas difficult to excuse.
If I recall correctly, “bad air” from nearby swamps–which coincidentally had mosquitos.
True of Rome at least, and why the wealthy lived on hills, or so the story goes.
I read some fiction, but far too much of it is indeed padded. Consider, for example, the well documented phenomenon of the popular science fiction short story or novelette which got expanded into a novel: Often the added material made the story weaker. The rule of thumb is that a short story has “punch” because it is quickly read and is tightly focused on the main point of the story. A novel adds more characters and events and details of the setting in order to add “richness”, but often that “richness” serves no particularly greater purpose and can be downright dull in a mediocre writer’s hands. (That is, I believe, why I stopped reading George R R Martin in the mid 1980’s.) In the hands of a talented writer, all that “richness” can further expand and advance the central ideasj. (One of my favorite examples is The Book of the New Sun which is almost kaleidoscopic in its richness of setting and events, but all of which contribute to the “message”.) As a third middle example, take Roger Zelazny’s novelette …And Call Me Conrad, which he expanded into the novel This Immortal. You can find intelligent people on both sides of the debate over which is better.
A related complaint: The TV series which is begun without any planned story arc, and which eventually peters out without answering the questions or resolving the issues which drew the viewers in.
As I think Daniel pointed out, bad pacing is particularly irritating in dramas produced for subscription streaming services, which should offer greater flexibility in terms of series length, and episode length, and should bypass the obligation to shoehorn in story beats to accommodate ad breaks.
In what way does ‘misgendering’ differ from truth telling?
Orson Scott Card is a repeat offender in this category.
Zelazny gets a pass – both …And Call Me Conrad and This Immortal are worth the read.
Not all expansions are to be disdained – Michael Flynn’s Eifelheim being an example.
bad pacing is particularly irritating in dramas produced for streaming services
The medium shapes the format of the message; you write TV differently when you have to cram your story into 24 or 47 minutes and you have no guarantee that the audience will have ever seen the previous episode, or will ever see the next one.
Jonathan Kay on “deadnaming” taboos and related matters of farce.
Docs: I know lots. Some keep up, Some don’t. They can be subject to fads like not being concerned about smoking risk years ago or food fads.
Fascism: The definition is when industry (and media) acts in concert with government. That is what we have currently but it is NOT controlled by the right. It is universities requiring a DEI statement to hire you or media calling burning cities “mostly peaceful”. Protesters calling the move of abortion to state legislatures “fascism” means they believe the people should not be allowed to legislate on their favorite topic. The Disney thing is informative. Dems opposed Citizens United for years (the case was about a film critical of H Clinton) saying corporations should not be able to contribute to campaigns. Now that corps are taking hard left positions like Disney in FL, it is totes ok and fascism to punish the company. Good business advice is to keep your company out of politics.
See also the school teachers who think that parents should have no say in what is taught to their children.
Docs: I know lots. Some keep up, Some don’t. They can be subject to fads like not being concerned about smoking risk years ago or food fads.
Pretty sure after 35+ years I know and have worked with more, and as with any profession, trade, or other employment field, there are going to be those two standard deviations either way who don’t keep up or go for woo, but the 95.4% in the middle, not so much.
The ones on either end will only attract those attracted to their foibles – though there is frequently a lot of money to be made hawking woo.
Nobody I have ever known or worked with would refer to a specialist stuck in 1975. If nothing else, that would be malpractice on our part, though there are patients who would go on their own hook because the guy stuck in 1975 is more likely to tell the patient what they want to hear.
Nobody I have ever known or worked with did not keep current*, if one does not, not only is licensure potentially in jeopardy, but one does not get privileges at a hospital or other practice privileges, one is also at risk of being sued into oblivion, even if Doc 1975 is in a solo practice in East Swamproot Pennsyltucky (Pop. 126 + a possum).
*(which does not mean swallowing and regurgitating The Current Thing™ contrary to what some might think)
Every now and then I’m reminded of just how glad I am to have dropped my subscription to Forbes when I did.
This tolerant and peaceful chap who only wants to live his true identity gives a warning.
He should be permanently removed from society.
“licensed behaviour technician”
Think about that title for a moment. Could it be more dehumanizing? “Sir, your behaviour is outside of normal parameters. Our licensed behaviour technician will perform an adjustment.”
Perhaps we should be thanking Tara, our charming and totally ladylike “poly trans lesbian,” for clarifying the issue. Albeit inadvertently.
Roly Poly Trans Lesbian
(No need to thank me).
I think we’ll give that one a post of its own. Comments that-a-way.
Been traveling. Finally home and see this…
Yeah, Jeenius. Get with the program. Doctors are not doing that anymore. Nor the PSA test. I had to explicitly ASK to have that tested in my recent bloodwork. Not because I buy any of it today but because whatever whims you people work on are likely to shift in the future and I like to have at least some objective data.
Of course by 1975 they had gotten over their collusion with the ice cream companies with that tonsillectomy nonsense.
And you need to lighten TF up, Francis. Obviously. Pathetic dodge of the very pertinent question. How many children died or had complications from those completely unnecessary operations that were all the rage in the 1960’s? They worked the subject into the stories of several family/children’s TV shows. No, it wasn’t the ice cream companies that were making bank on that though.
I could fisk that some more but what’s the point? Your arrogance won’t allow you to take criticisms seriously. But as for your NoRealScotsman-ish argument about finding another doctor, that involves a $400 charge just to interview one. Which is why I switched to the son of my now deceased doctor. Corporate robot that he is. See above.
The medical profession has been out of control for quite some time now. If this scamdemic has one redeeming factor, it’s that it brought some degree of serious attention to the problem. Either the majority of doctors are ok with all this BS, chopping dicks and breasts off, mask mania, everything p-gives-you-cancer hysteria, or the majority is opposed but too chickenshit to address the issues. I don’t know which scenario is worse.
Added…because I gave up on your dodging my points before I encounter what pst quoted…
This is just insulting. Similar to when arguing about global warming with a millennial and he asked me “Do you even believe in dinosaurs, dude?” What a pathetic line of reasoning for a #Science guy. See? This right here is your problem.
Mine started much earlier but, like probably everyone here, I pushed through until I had a real professional job and less time/patience for too much BS. My rule of thumb on this is that books written before the 20th century, before widespread newspaper publishing, before radio, movies, tv, ease of travel to significant cities, I excuse/tolerate long windedness in writing because people wanted their long nights filled with some form of entertainment and ideas. Anything published after 1890 descending into the post-WWI era gets viewed with suspicion that increases with the number of pages and distance in time from 1890. OK, it’s an even more complicated formula but that’s the bulk of it.
Or being excessively concerned about second hand smoke or the occasional cigar or pipe. Or red meat…or…
Ooh, this. Amazing…yet not so…that such is tolerated by educated…”educated” people. People have certainly read Orwell. Yet few seem to understand what they were reading. Or why.
Charles Dickens: Notorious for padding. Paid by the word. Newspaper serializations.
Doctors are not doing that anymore.
Aside from the urologists, general surgeons, colorectal surgeons, internists, gastroenterologists, ER, family practice, oncologists, neurologists (if indicated), orthopods (if indicated)*, and some others to include, lest we leave the ladies out, OB/GYNs when indicated.
But yeah, the ophthalmologists, otolaryngologists, cardiologists, and allergists, not so much.
Poe’s Law frequently applies to you, but in answer to your question, no, children were not dropping like flies – in the ’60s, 7/100,000 or about 70 in 1965 with various comorbidities being major risk factors. As far as unnecessary goes, back then as now, persistent/recurrent infection with or without secondary complications such as airway obstruction and inner ear infection are indications. Do you get your info from Rense or just “…the stories of several family/children’s TV shows…”?
Projection, it is not just for breakfast anymore, but there is a difference between “criticisms” and unfounded and/or ill informed ramblings.
Apparently you didn’t get the message. You’re not “current” in your own medical knowledge. GP’s are not routinely screening for prostate enlargement because they’ve come to the late conclusion that the cure is worse than the disease. Now whether or not I completely agree with that is a separate issue from your obstinate refusal to address the problem of the medical field going rogue. Which has happened mostly because the medical field, much like the Church of the past, and the “educators” of the present, are so wrapped up in their belief in their own inherent goodness that they must demonize all criticism and/or mock such as ignorance (added: or Evil). I find it doubly interesting that all three of those institutions have been held much higher esteem by women than by men. Odd, that.
Again, not the bloody point. It was an insanely unnecessary risk. A point which you choose, intentionally, to dance around. Which is why they stopped doing them. Do you not see some degree of parallel between this and the gender surgery stuff? Yes, of course it’s an exaggeration. But the root of the problem, well one of the roots anyway, is similar.
Poe’s law my ass. Another senseless insult. It’s not like I’m some rando internet being. Your failure to grasp such humor is far more a reflection on you than me. Do you believe in dinosaurs, dude?
Damn. Setting up my computer and re-reading my post…
It should be obvious but lest it get jumped on as an excuse to avoid the general idea…No, they didn’t stop doing them entirely. But they did stop doing them such that they are not so prevalent that half the kids in the neighborhood have had them done. Or whatever the number was. I was in preschool back when this was a thing. Looking in my friend’s throat trying to figure out what exactly got removed. But it was a very prevalent thing. The ice cream was quite a seller to the children back then.
Here are some links for your general edification regarding how prevalent the procedure was promoted. Children’s books, The Bob Newhart Show, My Three Sons, many others. Pretty sure it was in the script of Elvis and Mary Tyler Moore movie Change Of Habit as well but can’t find the exact script. Search engines keep trying to feed me info on the procedure no matter how I qualify otherwise. There are many, many other examples.
GP’s are not routinely screening for prostate enlargement because they’ve come to the late conclusion that the cure is worse than the disease.
No, they are following the USPSTF guidelines (which is a whole different discussion) because that is what the AAFP guidelines are, not that all follow it, but if you bothered to look up the AAFP guidelines for comprehensive exams, it includes the DRE which, during a comprehensive exam, is indeed a screening test for a number of things already mentioned besides the prostate.
For a focused exam for symptoms like urinary hesitancy, frequency, post void dribbling, your GP is going to give you a DRE. If you go in for a focused exam for a headache and you get a DRE, you have probably picked another sketchy doc.
There were about a million tonsillectomies in 1965, roughly 70 deaths, with the highest risk and rate in kids with other problems. That is not “insanely unnecessary risk” given potential complications, particularly of bacterial tonsillitis back when antibiotic options were more limited. As far as “stopped doing them” goes, 250,000/year in the US at present is as interesting a definition of “stopped” as your definition of “insane risk” or “humor”.
Right. Little Golden Books and My Three Sons were in league with Big ENT. Got it. Too bad Newhart was too late to get in on the sweet, sweet, tonsillectomy gold rush.
JHTDC man. How many strawmen are you going to throw here? The bloody obvious point is that the surgeries, at the volume that they were performed, were unnecessary. The question, at least from a utilitarian perspective, is do deaths from unnecessary procedures outnumber deaths that would have resulted from doing nothing? Which itself is a deviation from the first do no harm thing. It’s own argument. Apparently, at some level, just like the digital prostate exams, someone decided that the procedure was worse than the risk of the disease.
None of this should be so bloody hard to understand. Yet this is the crux of the problem. Your desperation to maintain your high and mighty place requires an imaginary world where those who disagree, even if doing so somewhat theoretically and/or facetiously, must be defeated. Preferably humiliated. And if that means misrepresenting, misinterpreting, or intentionally misunderstanding what your critics have to say, so be it. Thus the beautiful merger of medicine and government that is going on. Y’all fit very well together. Much like my former profession of technology and government. Don’t be evil. Heh.