The time: early 80s. The place: the spare room in my parents' house. My father spent hours at the machine, staring lines and lines of green, hard-to-read words. I toddled up to see what was so interesting, and discovered that, even though the screen was boring, it had BUTTONS! So, of course, I tried to push the buttons.
In one of his better parenting decisions, rather than telling me not to push the buttons, my father decided to teach me which buttons to push. We started with a simple kiddie game called Bouncing Numbers. A number bounced around the screen, and I had to press the same number on the keyboard. To get to the game, I had to put a certain diskette into the disk drive, then type "RUN BOUNCING NUMBERS". So many letters, and it took a long time to find them all because the buttons with the letters on them weren't in any sensible order! But I figured it out and quickly became fluent in it. I learned how to run some other games, got into one of the programming books and started writing simple programs, and by the time I reached kindergarten I was confidently computer-literate.
Many people have written tributes to Steve Jobs in the past few days, most often singing the praises of Apple's 21st-century creations. But Apple's first inventions were some of the very first home computers ever. Bringing the computer into the home enabled me, and thousands of others like me, to become fluent computer users before we could tie our shoes. We'd then invite our friends over to play computer games, and, within a generation, computers evolved in popular consciousness from big scary geeky technology to something anyone can just sit down and figure out.
Saturday, October 08, 2011
Thursday, October 06, 2011
Voter's Resources
Since we just had a federal election in May, I'm not rewriting everything from scratch. The pertinent links are below. For how to use them, click on "How to Vote", "Where to Vote", and "How to Vote Strategically" below. As usual, this post will be updated until election day. If I've missed anything, please let me know in the comments.
Getting Started
Election day is October 6.
Voter information from Elections Ontario
My How to Vote
My Where to Vote
My How to Vote Strategically
Platforms
Conservative
Green
Liberal
NDP
Tools
CBC Vote Compass
Election Prediction Project
Hill and Knowlton Predictor
DemocraticSPACE
LISPOP
Riding-by-riding polls for the GTA
Getting Started
Election day is October 6.
Voter information from Elections Ontario
My How to Vote
My Where to Vote
My How to Vote Strategically
Platforms
Conservative
Green
Liberal
NDP
Tools
CBC Vote Compass
Election Prediction Project
Hill and Knowlton Predictor
DemocraticSPACE
LISPOP
Riding-by-riding polls for the GTA
Voted
Another election on a beautiful day, and another provincial election nursing a virus (which has mutated from a sore throat to a runny nose today). I encountered many many doggies today and got a lot of petting in, including my next-door neighbour's dog for the whole elevator wait and ride. Hopefully that's enough good luck.
I didn't get a voter's card this year and had to wait in a bit of a line to register (a process that was a bit slower than I recall) but it got done in under half an hour with no particular difficulties. I voted in a seniors' residence instead of a school this time. Some of the residents were milling around outside watching all the comings and goings, and I believe some of them were working at the polling station. Nice friendly community-like chat waiting in line, dogs and children got squeed at, and the whole process took under half an hour.
Now I'm at home to nurse my cold and a glass of wine, and watch results.
I didn't get a voter's card this year and had to wait in a bit of a line to register (a process that was a bit slower than I recall) but it got done in under half an hour with no particular difficulties. I voted in a seniors' residence instead of a school this time. Some of the residents were milling around outside watching all the comings and goings, and I believe some of them were working at the polling station. Nice friendly community-like chat waiting in line, dogs and children got squeed at, and the whole process took under half an hour.
Now I'm at home to nurse my cold and a glass of wine, and watch results.
Wednesday, October 05, 2011
Complaints about vitaminwater
Given the sudden dearth of Fruitopia in my environs, I decided to try the flavour of vitaminwater that looked like it was indicated for fighting a cold ("defense" it's called, complete with USian spelling.)
1. The flavour said raspberry-apple. It didn't taste like raspberry, or apple, or fake raspberry, or fake apple. It tasted like fake cranberry. If I wanted that, I'd get cranberry juice.
2. The nutrients featured prominently on the label were vitamin C and zinc. However, on reading the fine print, I noticed these were the last two of the medicinal ingredients, behind a bunch of B vitamins (which, while important nutrients, are not what I'm after when I'm fighting a virus).
3. It contains 90 mg of vitamin C and 3.75 mg of zinc. In contrast, my vitamin C supplements contain 500 mg, and my zinc lozenges contain 35 mg (plus 50 mg of vitamin C).
I suppose I should have read the label in detail before I bought it, but I'm used to things sold medicinally (and this is labelled medicinally, with medicinal and non-medicinal ingredients rather than a nutrition box) containing significant amounts of the nutrients they're meant to supplement. In any case, I resent actual foodstuff (i.e. fruit juice) being taken off the shelves in favour something that's less food-like, less nutritious, less effective, and less yummy. I don't mind fake food in and of itself, but I don't want it displacing real food!
1. The flavour said raspberry-apple. It didn't taste like raspberry, or apple, or fake raspberry, or fake apple. It tasted like fake cranberry. If I wanted that, I'd get cranberry juice.
2. The nutrients featured prominently on the label were vitamin C and zinc. However, on reading the fine print, I noticed these were the last two of the medicinal ingredients, behind a bunch of B vitamins (which, while important nutrients, are not what I'm after when I'm fighting a virus).
3. It contains 90 mg of vitamin C and 3.75 mg of zinc. In contrast, my vitamin C supplements contain 500 mg, and my zinc lozenges contain 35 mg (plus 50 mg of vitamin C).
I suppose I should have read the label in detail before I bought it, but I'm used to things sold medicinally (and this is labelled medicinally, with medicinal and non-medicinal ingredients rather than a nutrition box) containing significant amounts of the nutrients they're meant to supplement. In any case, I resent actual foodstuff (i.e. fruit juice) being taken off the shelves in favour something that's less food-like, less nutritious, less effective, and less yummy. I don't mind fake food in and of itself, but I don't want it displacing real food!
Tuesday, October 04, 2011
Where has all the fruit punch gone?
Normally, I drink water during the day and with meals. However, I'm currently nursing a sore throat (likely viral), so I find myself wanting juice.
Citrus juices are on my no list for GERD, so I decided I'd drink fruit punch. At home I just mixed up a jug of Minute Maid fruit punch from concentrate (which has been my default juice since childhood), and at work I figured I'd just buy a couple of single-serving bottles of the same stuff or its Fruitopia equivalent.
But they don't sell it anywhere. Cafeteria, food court, drugstores, convenience stores, the juice aisle in the grocery store - no one has single-serving bottles of fruit punch, or in fact any non-citrus non-cranberry fruit juice.
They sell orange juice, lemonade, cranberry juice (which I'm not terribly fond of and, at least in the forms being sold in single-serving bottles, does not have significant amounts of vitamin C), and a bunch of sports drinks and vitamin water concoctions.
But I don't want fortified flavoured water when I'm sick, I want actual fruit juice! The sweetness is what soothes my throat and makes it go down easier than water.
Last time I was sick in a way that made me want juice, you could get a few different kinds of Fruitopia everywhere. Now you can't. It seems to have all been replaced with vitamin water. I already have vitamins and water in my arsenal, what I need is juice. But, somehow, it's been discontinued.
Citrus juices are on my no list for GERD, so I decided I'd drink fruit punch. At home I just mixed up a jug of Minute Maid fruit punch from concentrate (which has been my default juice since childhood), and at work I figured I'd just buy a couple of single-serving bottles of the same stuff or its Fruitopia equivalent.
But they don't sell it anywhere. Cafeteria, food court, drugstores, convenience stores, the juice aisle in the grocery store - no one has single-serving bottles of fruit punch, or in fact any non-citrus non-cranberry fruit juice.
They sell orange juice, lemonade, cranberry juice (which I'm not terribly fond of and, at least in the forms being sold in single-serving bottles, does not have significant amounts of vitamin C), and a bunch of sports drinks and vitamin water concoctions.
But I don't want fortified flavoured water when I'm sick, I want actual fruit juice! The sweetness is what soothes my throat and makes it go down easier than water.
Last time I was sick in a way that made me want juice, you could get a few different kinds of Fruitopia everywhere. Now you can't. It seems to have all been replaced with vitamin water. I already have vitamins and water in my arsenal, what I need is juice. But, somehow, it's been discontinued.
Monday, October 03, 2011
Things They Should Invent: central repository of research ideas
As I've blogged about before, one thing I really enjoy about the workplace as opposed to academia is that I don't have to come up with my own ideas for what to work on. All my major projects, even in undergrad, were "think of a topic and do a project on it," and I could never think of a good topic or tell what kind of topic would produce a good project. In the workplace, I simply translate what I'm assigned. This is one of the reasons why I haven't done a graduate degree - the idea of having to think up a thesis topic (and probably project topics for the coursework) puts me off now that I've become accustomed to a world where I simply do what I'm told.
However, I often come up with ideas for research in other fields.
Surely I'm not the only person in the world who has trouble thinking of something suitable to research. And surely I'm not the only person in the world who occasionally thinks "Hey, someone should do a study on that!"
So why not put the two together?
We need one single central website where people can post any research ideas they come up with, and would-be researchers can look for good ideas. The ideas could be random things that occur to you, or they could be information you want for which no research has been conducted (for example, if you'd like clinical testing conducted on a natural remedy you're considering). Prospective researchers could use ideas or use them as a jumping-off point for their own ideas. Researchers who do use ideas could mark them as such, thus drawing attention to their research. Users could also vote for other ideas, so the ideas that more people like get a more prominent place on the page. Perhaps this demand for the research could even be a factor in helping secure research grants?
However, I often come up with ideas for research in other fields.
Surely I'm not the only person in the world who has trouble thinking of something suitable to research. And surely I'm not the only person in the world who occasionally thinks "Hey, someone should do a study on that!"
So why not put the two together?
We need one single central website where people can post any research ideas they come up with, and would-be researchers can look for good ideas. The ideas could be random things that occur to you, or they could be information you want for which no research has been conducted (for example, if you'd like clinical testing conducted on a natural remedy you're considering). Prospective researchers could use ideas or use them as a jumping-off point for their own ideas. Researchers who do use ideas could mark them as such, thus drawing attention to their research. Users could also vote for other ideas, so the ideas that more people like get a more prominent place on the page. Perhaps this demand for the research could even be a factor in helping secure research grants?
Sunday, October 02, 2011
Things They Should Invent: drop-in daycare in medical buildings
This post was inspired by the following question from a Carolyn Hax chat:
Reading this, I remembered how one of the community pools where we'd have swimming lessons had a "daycare", which was really just a room where kids could go and play with toys under adult supervision while their parents participated in adult swim classes or took a younger sibling to an infant class.
So why not put something similar in medical buildings?
It would be easier than a regular daycare from the perspective of all parties. The daycare operators wouldn't need to plan a curriculum or provide snacks since the kids would only be there for an hour or two. And the parents wouldn't need to worry about whether the daycare provides an optimal curriculum and a classroom environment that's conducive to social development, all they need for a couple of hours is for it to be safe.
It wouldn't even be terribly extortionate for the daycare to be run on a for-profit basis and charge the parents market rates for their kids to attend, because any parents who are in the market for drop-in daycare while they attend a medical appointment would otherwise have to pay for child care during their medical appointment anyway.
I'm surprised there aren't more things like this.
Hello, I am feeling very overwhelmed and hope that I can get a kick in the pants. I have 2 children under 2. My husband and I moved to a city we hate - despite months of attempts, the moms groups have been very cold to me, for example. He is getting deployed, and is away for weeks at a time. It takes everything in my power to get up each morning and do things with my kids. I know I am battling with depression and/or PPD, but I can't go to a therapist because I don't have child care. I know the steps to take to help improve my mood and stress level (exercise, etc.) but I can't drag myself out of it all to start, and I just wind up eating junk on the couch after the kids go to bed. Any words of advice? Thanks, I've been reading this chat since the beginning.
Reading this, I remembered how one of the community pools where we'd have swimming lessons had a "daycare", which was really just a room where kids could go and play with toys under adult supervision while their parents participated in adult swim classes or took a younger sibling to an infant class.
So why not put something similar in medical buildings?
It would be easier than a regular daycare from the perspective of all parties. The daycare operators wouldn't need to plan a curriculum or provide snacks since the kids would only be there for an hour or two. And the parents wouldn't need to worry about whether the daycare provides an optimal curriculum and a classroom environment that's conducive to social development, all they need for a couple of hours is for it to be safe.
It wouldn't even be terribly extortionate for the daycare to be run on a for-profit basis and charge the parents market rates for their kids to attend, because any parents who are in the market for drop-in daycare while they attend a medical appointment would otherwise have to pay for child care during their medical appointment anyway.
I'm surprised there aren't more things like this.
Saturday, October 01, 2011
Teach me how union finances work
There is clear choice in this election, said Hudak from Dundas on Saturday. Taxpayers can’t afford to pay big union boss salaries anymore or pay for their ad campaigns, he has said.
Does Tim Hudak not understand how union finances work, or do I not understand how union finances work?
My understanding, extrapolated from conversations with union members and observations from having worked in a unionized environment, is that union members pay union dues out of their salaries, and the expenses of operating the union (including advertising and any pay the union leaders receive for doing their union leader duties) are all funded from the union dues. My understanding is that the employer does not pay into the union (wouldn't that be a heinous conflict of interest?) So the amount of money a union spends on various things is between the union and its members.
Extrapolated to the provincial government, this means that the money union leaders get for their work as union leaders and the money unions spend on ad campaigns come out of the pockets of provincial public servants, in their role as the employees. The taxpayers, in their role as employer, aren't paying for any of it. And what the unions spend money on is between them and the public servants - the taxpayers and the government, in their capacity as employer, have no say in it or authority to change it.
Am I understanding this correctly? If not, please correct me in the comments.
Friday, September 30, 2011
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Things They DID Invent: Interview Your Bully
A while back, I came up with the idea of interviewing bullies and other mean people to get inside their head and find out what they're thinking.
Turns out Salon is doing it, having people interview their bullies! Half of me thinks this is brilliant, half of me thinks no good can possibly come of it, and half of me wishes I was brave enough to do it myself.
Turns out Salon is doing it, having people interview their bullies! Half of me thinks this is brilliant, half of me thinks no good can possibly come of it, and half of me wishes I was brave enough to do it myself.
Monday, September 26, 2011
Things They Should Invent: sleepable ER waiting rooms
This story of a blogger's experience in the ER got tweeted into my twitter feed, and what struck me reading it is that, because he arrived in the ER in the evening and had to wait several hours, he basically went a night without sleep.
This sounds like a solvable problem.
What if there were cots for ER patients waiting to be seen? What if there were recliner chairs? What if, instead of just calling patients' names, the admissions people would actually go out into the waiting room to find them?
If patients could sleep in the waiting room, that makes wait times less of a problem. Compare the prospect of sitting for hours in an uncomfortable chair in a room full of sick people vs. the prospect of taking a nap and they'll wake you up when they're able to treat you. It would turn some ER visits (for example, a small child with a fever) from a nightmare to a mere inconvenience. Sleeping certainly gets better health outcomes than sleep deprivation. And hospital staff will have to deal with fewer angry/agitated/distressed patients if a significant number of patients are asleep.
With a few changes in furnishings and interior decoration, they can make the whole ER experience far easier and less stressful for everyone.
This sounds like a solvable problem.
What if there were cots for ER patients waiting to be seen? What if there were recliner chairs? What if, instead of just calling patients' names, the admissions people would actually go out into the waiting room to find them?
If patients could sleep in the waiting room, that makes wait times less of a problem. Compare the prospect of sitting for hours in an uncomfortable chair in a room full of sick people vs. the prospect of taking a nap and they'll wake you up when they're able to treat you. It would turn some ER visits (for example, a small child with a fever) from a nightmare to a mere inconvenience. Sleeping certainly gets better health outcomes than sleep deprivation. And hospital staff will have to deal with fewer angry/agitated/distressed patients if a significant number of patients are asleep.
With a few changes in furnishings and interior decoration, they can make the whole ER experience far easier and less stressful for everyone.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
The Ontario voter list mystery
I'm not on the Ontario voter list this election. I'm never on the Ontario voter list. Every single Ontario election since I was 18, I didn't receive a voter card and had to register on election day.
I have voted in (and registered at) every Ontario election since I was 18. Last election, I lived at the same address as I do now, so my registration from last election should be valid.
I was registered federally for, and voted in, the election this past May, and I'm pretty sure both federal and provincial get their voter's lists from the tax rolls. I recently got a jury duty questionnaire, which means provincial does know about me. But I'm not on the voter's list. And the same thing happens every election. Weird.
I have voted in (and registered at) every Ontario election since I was 18. Last election, I lived at the same address as I do now, so my registration from last election should be valid.
I was registered federally for, and voted in, the election this past May, and I'm pretty sure both federal and provincial get their voter's lists from the tax rolls. I recently got a jury duty questionnaire, which means provincial does know about me. But I'm not on the voter's list. And the same thing happens every election. Weird.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Things They Should Invent: incentivize clinical testing of natural remedies
Whenever I'm looking into natural remedies for various things, I keep running up against the problem that clinical testing simply hasn't been done so answers don't exist to the questions I have. A lot of the time I'm willing to take the risk and try it out on myself, but for certain things (like if I think might weaken my birth control pills, for example) I want hard data. And I keep googling up against the fact that studies haven't been done, because studies aren't required for natural remedies.
I don't want to make clinical testing mandatory, because that would take a bunch of stuff off the shelves until it gets tested, even if many people have been using it harmlessly and effectively for years and years. I just want to create some kind of carrot to encourage testing of natural remedies, and to remove any barriers to testing them.
Unfortunately, I don't have any specific ideas that wouldn't have been thought of already. They'd be able to put "clinically tested" on the label. They know that already. They could do they research as pure science, through universities, rather than commercially like pharmaceutical companies do. They know that already. Someone could start a non-profit. They know that already.
But it would be extremely useful if this could somehow be made to happen, and it would increase the credibility of natural remedies in the eyes of those who are likely to be skeptical, including conventional medical professionals who are disinclined to recommend useful remedies solely on the basis that they haven't undergone formal testing.
I don't want to make clinical testing mandatory, because that would take a bunch of stuff off the shelves until it gets tested, even if many people have been using it harmlessly and effectively for years and years. I just want to create some kind of carrot to encourage testing of natural remedies, and to remove any barriers to testing them.
Unfortunately, I don't have any specific ideas that wouldn't have been thought of already. They'd be able to put "clinically tested" on the label. They know that already. They could do they research as pure science, through universities, rather than commercially like pharmaceutical companies do. They know that already. Someone could start a non-profit. They know that already.
But it would be extremely useful if this could somehow be made to happen, and it would increase the credibility of natural remedies in the eyes of those who are likely to be skeptical, including conventional medical professionals who are disinclined to recommend useful remedies solely on the basis that they haven't undergone formal testing.
Friday, September 23, 2011
Teach me how Catholic school funding works
People talk about Catholic school funding as though everyone is paying for it out of their own taxes. Most recent example I've seen is from this article, written by a Catholic school parent:
So here's where I'm confused: from time to time, I receive a form from the municipal property assessment people that contains a question about which school board I want to support. I don't remember the exact wording and I don't have a form with me so I'm probably missing some information, but I remember that anyone can support the English-language public board, people who meet certain Catholic requirements (which I meet by virtue of having been baptised) can support the Catholic boards, and people who meet certain Francophone requirements (which I do not meet) can support the French-language boards. You can vote for trustees only in the board you support.
So is everyone really paying for the Catholic boards, or are they only being paid for by people who direct their taxes that way on their assessment? If they're being paid for by everyone, why does the municipal property assessment ask us which board we want to support? If they're only being paid for by people who direct their taxes that way, why do so many people think they're being paid for by everyone?
Now, you’ll hear defenders of the current discriminatory system say that the Catholic board is funded only by Catholic taxpayers who choose to direct their school taxes to the separate system. Not true: Catholic and public schools alike are funded by general provincial revenues, and the amount of funding each school gets is determined for both systems by a per-pupil formula set by the province. But even if it were true, it would be grossly unjust. Those who send their children to private schools aren’t exempt from paying taxes to fund the public system, just as those who drive are not exempted from paying taxes to support transit capital costs.
So here's where I'm confused: from time to time, I receive a form from the municipal property assessment people that contains a question about which school board I want to support. I don't remember the exact wording and I don't have a form with me so I'm probably missing some information, but I remember that anyone can support the English-language public board, people who meet certain Catholic requirements (which I meet by virtue of having been baptised) can support the Catholic boards, and people who meet certain Francophone requirements (which I do not meet) can support the French-language boards. You can vote for trustees only in the board you support.
So is everyone really paying for the Catholic boards, or are they only being paid for by people who direct their taxes that way on their assessment? If they're being paid for by everyone, why does the municipal property assessment ask us which board we want to support? If they're only being paid for by people who direct their taxes that way, why do so many people think they're being paid for by everyone?
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Ever wondered what Ontario would look like with a different electoral system?
Check out Three Ontario Votes. You go and cast an imaginary ballot under three different electoral systems, and after the election they'll release the results, so we can see what our province would look like with a different electoral system.
Previous results models for different electoral systems use real-life election data, which is problematic because some voters' strategies might be different under a different electoral system. But this model lets you cast a vote under each of the systems being tested, for the election that's actually happening right now in real time.
We'll get extremely useful information out of this study - more useful than any existing data to inform any future decisions about electoral reform. I strongly encourage everyone of all political stripes to go to Three Ontario Votes and vote with each of the ballots so this information will be as complete as possible.
Previous results models for different electoral systems use real-life election data, which is problematic because some voters' strategies might be different under a different electoral system. But this model lets you cast a vote under each of the systems being tested, for the election that's actually happening right now in real time.
We'll get extremely useful information out of this study - more useful than any existing data to inform any future decisions about electoral reform. I strongly encourage everyone of all political stripes to go to Three Ontario Votes and vote with each of the ballots so this information will be as complete as possible.
Monday, September 19, 2011
How I want my doctor to approach alternative medicine.
I was pleased to see that CPSO is considering guidelines that are more open-minded about alternative medicine, but I'm concerned at the kinds of criticism this idea is receiving.
I would love to have my doctor give me alternative medicine advice because then I'd get one-stop shopping. My doctor would tell me if I would benefit from seeing a gastroenterologist or a gynecologist or a dermatologist. He would tell me if I would benefit from taking a certain vitamin or if I should avoid a certain over-the-counter drug. I'd also like him to tell me if I'd benefit from seeing a naturopath or taking a certain herb. I don't want to have to come up with the idea myself.
However, it concerns me that some organizations don't want CPSO even thinking about alternative medicine because it's "unscientific" or "unproven".
The reason why many alternative therapies are "unproven" is because they aren't required to undergo the same scientific testing as conventional medicine, so they often don't. The fact that they're unproven doesn't mean that they don't work, it doesn't mean that they're dangerous, it just means that the science hasn't been done yet.
Analogy: I have never in my life undergone any sort of formal English-language proficiency testing. That doesn't mean I can't speak English. Of course, you can't go around blindly assuming that I can speak English either, but you could conduct an informal, unscientific test by speaking to me in English, and the results of that would be a pretty good indicator.
I'm also worried that critics seem to be assuming that unproven = harmful. It's very possible for something to not have been tested scientifically but not be harmful. It's even possible for it be ineffective but not be harmful.
Analogy: When I was having difficulty swallowing, I googled up the reflexology points for the esophagus and massaged them. Is reflexology scientifically proven? A quick google is inconclusive. (To say nothing of the fact that my amateur attempt at reflexology was probably not properly done.) But it certainly wasn't harmful for me to sit there massaging my own feet on the off-chance that it might help.
One of the (many) things that frustrates me about GERD "treatment" is that conventional medicine and naturopathy recommend different (and often contradictory) diet changes. For example, conventional medicine says no to citrus and yes to low-fat milk products, and naturopathy is the other way around. So I find myself in the position of having two trained, credentialed, experienced professionals, both of whom have gotten results for me in the past, telling me opposite things. And, because I don't feel pain when I'm refluxing, I can't even do an experiment and see which works best for me.
I see conventional and alternative medicines as complementary tools in my toolkit, and I want my practitioners to work together as a team rather than competing with each other. When I see medical professionals getting alarmist, conflating "unproven" with "dangerous", it starts making me wonder if they have something to hide. And I don't want to be wondering if they have something to hide, because I need to be able to trust them - I'm not smart enough to figure stuff out myself.
If my doctor were to start warning me away from all alternative treatments just because they haven't gone through full clinical testing, I'll just end up feeling disinclined to tell him about any alternative treatments I might be experimenting with. I want him to warn me away from anything known to be dangerous, point me towards any treatments or alternative medicine professionals likely to be useful, and non-judgementally give me any information he might have about things that are harmless but likely ineffective. Anything less is useless to me and weakens the credibility of his profession in my eyes.
I would love to have my doctor give me alternative medicine advice because then I'd get one-stop shopping. My doctor would tell me if I would benefit from seeing a gastroenterologist or a gynecologist or a dermatologist. He would tell me if I would benefit from taking a certain vitamin or if I should avoid a certain over-the-counter drug. I'd also like him to tell me if I'd benefit from seeing a naturopath or taking a certain herb. I don't want to have to come up with the idea myself.
However, it concerns me that some organizations don't want CPSO even thinking about alternative medicine because it's "unscientific" or "unproven".
The reason why many alternative therapies are "unproven" is because they aren't required to undergo the same scientific testing as conventional medicine, so they often don't. The fact that they're unproven doesn't mean that they don't work, it doesn't mean that they're dangerous, it just means that the science hasn't been done yet.
Analogy: I have never in my life undergone any sort of formal English-language proficiency testing. That doesn't mean I can't speak English. Of course, you can't go around blindly assuming that I can speak English either, but you could conduct an informal, unscientific test by speaking to me in English, and the results of that would be a pretty good indicator.
I'm also worried that critics seem to be assuming that unproven = harmful. It's very possible for something to not have been tested scientifically but not be harmful. It's even possible for it be ineffective but not be harmful.
Analogy: When I was having difficulty swallowing, I googled up the reflexology points for the esophagus and massaged them. Is reflexology scientifically proven? A quick google is inconclusive. (To say nothing of the fact that my amateur attempt at reflexology was probably not properly done.) But it certainly wasn't harmful for me to sit there massaging my own feet on the off-chance that it might help.
One of the (many) things that frustrates me about GERD "treatment" is that conventional medicine and naturopathy recommend different (and often contradictory) diet changes. For example, conventional medicine says no to citrus and yes to low-fat milk products, and naturopathy is the other way around. So I find myself in the position of having two trained, credentialed, experienced professionals, both of whom have gotten results for me in the past, telling me opposite things. And, because I don't feel pain when I'm refluxing, I can't even do an experiment and see which works best for me.
I see conventional and alternative medicines as complementary tools in my toolkit, and I want my practitioners to work together as a team rather than competing with each other. When I see medical professionals getting alarmist, conflating "unproven" with "dangerous", it starts making me wonder if they have something to hide. And I don't want to be wondering if they have something to hide, because I need to be able to trust them - I'm not smart enough to figure stuff out myself.
If my doctor were to start warning me away from all alternative treatments just because they haven't gone through full clinical testing, I'll just end up feeling disinclined to tell him about any alternative treatments I might be experimenting with. I want him to warn me away from anything known to be dangerous, point me towards any treatments or alternative medicine professionals likely to be useful, and non-judgementally give me any information he might have about things that are harmless but likely ineffective. Anything less is useless to me and weakens the credibility of his profession in my eyes.
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Why I've lost confidence in Dell
Every computer I've ever owned myself has been a Dell. Up until this past week, my experience with them has been consistent: I get 4ish good years of use, then have a hardware problem. The faulty hardware problem is promptly resolved via excellent warranty support, and I get another year or two out of the computer, after which I'm happy to replace it for something more up to date. Because of this longevity and excellent support, I've always blindly turned to Dell when buying my next computer, figuring it means I won't have to worry about my computer for five years.
Unfortunately, this confidence was shattered this past week.
The computer is a Dell XPS 15 bought brand new in December 2010. Last Saturday, I started having problems with Windows loading. Sometimes it would freeze on the Welcome screen, sometimes I'd get a black screen with a mouse cursor, sometimes the desktop would load but nothing I clicked on would do anything. After a System Restore failed without rebooting Windows, I called tech support.
I didn't have to wait on hold at all, just do the menu dance, and a very nice tech walked me through some troubleshooting. I appreciate his work because he started at a more advanced level than I'd been troubleshooting at rather than reiterating the basics, and was very patient through a troubleshooting process that took over an hour. We eventually determined there was a problem with my wifi adapter (I hadn't noticed because my primary internet connection uses an ethernet cable), so he uninstalled and reinstalled it, and my computer booted up beautifully. He then told me that I'd be receiving an automatic follow-up email, and if I had any further problems I should forward the email to the address indicated and they'd give me a priority call back. Brilliant idea! That would mean we don't have to troubleshoot from scratch if the problem reoccurs!
Unfortunately, the problem reoccured the next day (Sunday). And, on top of that, the computer couldn't find the wifi adapter that had just been reinstalled the day before. So I forwarded the email to the address indicated and got an automatic reply saying they aim to reply within six hours during their business hours (9-7 Central).
But they never called back.
I emailed again on Monday and Wednesday and tweeted @DellCares (who requested a DM with pertinent information and said they'd look into it), but I never got my callback.
Meanwhile, my computer was deteriorating. I was working in Safe Mode with networking, unable to access games or music or word processing. Boot-up was slower each time, the computer couldn't always detect its network card, bizarre things started happening (itunes opening when I plug in my ipod even though I specifically set it not to do that, then telling me it couldn't read the iphone even though it isn't an iphone; browsers giving me random encoding errors even on simple websites).
On Thursday, I gave up. I got an external hard drive, backed up all my stuff, and reinstalled everything from scratch using my recovery disk. It took three hours (back-up, reinstallation, and getting all my settings just so), but everything has been working properly since then (knock wood).
But this makes me lose confidence in Dell for two reasons:
1. Serious, mysterious problems that hinder useability even though my computer is only nine months old. I've never before in my lifelong relationship with Dell had to actually use the recovery disks. This makes me nervous. Whenever a boot-up takes a second or two longer than usual, I start worrying that it's a sign of a serious problem.
2. I didn't get a "priority" callback! I waited five days, requested it four times through two different mediums, and no one called me. I've always gone with Dell because I could trust their support, and now I can't? And this despite the fact that I invested in the biggest warranty possible? What will happen when I have a bigger hardware problem that can't be fixed with a full reinstall?
In the interest of fairness, I should say that I never called Dell back either. I had the option of calling them again and starting from scratch, and I opted not to, first because I still had internet access in safe mode and I decided I'd rather relax and go about my life than wait on hold/going through first-level support. I figured the phone would ring when there was someone ready and available to give me second-level support. I should also point out that, in response to my second complaint to them, @DellCares apologized and told me to contact them so they could escalate me if the problems reoccur after reinstallation.
But I've still lost confidence, mostly because they specifically told me that forwarding the email to the address specified would get me a priority callback, and it didn't. What other promised support might I not get in the future? What if it happens when I need to work? What it happens when I'm away from home and my full resources and dependent on wifi? (That is why I bought a laptop in the first place, even if I don't often end up taking it out of my apartment.) What if I were a less technically proficient customer and a full recovery wasn't easily feasible for me? And WTF even was the problem in the first place?
This loss of confidence spirals out and affects my interpretation of my whole relationship with the company. For example, during my tech support call, the technician told me about a product Dell solves that detects and repairs problems with your system. It was clearly part of his script to push this product, which I normally wouldn't have given any thought. But sitting there working in Safe Mode awaiting a callback that wasn't coming, I started wondering if they put something in the computers to deliberately make them malfunction so they can push this product.
Sometimes when people blog about problems with products or support, the company wants to make it right. The unfortunate thing in this case is that there's nothing Dell can do to make it right, apart from doing their jobs properly in the future. Getting my callback now would be useless since I got the computer working. Free stuff would be useless because there simply isn't anything I need from Dell. A store credit would be irrelevant because there wasn't money involved in this interaction, unless they wanted to give me a store credit that would last for five years and win back my trust in the meantime. (If I do have to buy a new computer in less than five years, it won't be from Dell).
All Dell can do to win back my confidence is have my computer work properly for the rest of its planned life, and give me support properly next time I need to call them, preferably without trying to sell me software at the same time. But, even so, I'll probably be doing at least some cursory comparison shopping next time.
Update: Dell initiated a follow-up call on Tuesday (9 days after I requested a call back) and we made contact on Wednesday after a round of telephone tag. They apologized for the delay, saying it was due to "technical reasons" (which doesn't instill confidence when I'm after a solution to a technical problem), listened to my whole story, and apologized for the mix-up, but there wasn't much else they could do for me because I'd already used the recovery disk.
Unfortunately, this confidence was shattered this past week.
The computer is a Dell XPS 15 bought brand new in December 2010. Last Saturday, I started having problems with Windows loading. Sometimes it would freeze on the Welcome screen, sometimes I'd get a black screen with a mouse cursor, sometimes the desktop would load but nothing I clicked on would do anything. After a System Restore failed without rebooting Windows, I called tech support.
I didn't have to wait on hold at all, just do the menu dance, and a very nice tech walked me through some troubleshooting. I appreciate his work because he started at a more advanced level than I'd been troubleshooting at rather than reiterating the basics, and was very patient through a troubleshooting process that took over an hour. We eventually determined there was a problem with my wifi adapter (I hadn't noticed because my primary internet connection uses an ethernet cable), so he uninstalled and reinstalled it, and my computer booted up beautifully. He then told me that I'd be receiving an automatic follow-up email, and if I had any further problems I should forward the email to the address indicated and they'd give me a priority call back. Brilliant idea! That would mean we don't have to troubleshoot from scratch if the problem reoccurs!
Unfortunately, the problem reoccured the next day (Sunday). And, on top of that, the computer couldn't find the wifi adapter that had just been reinstalled the day before. So I forwarded the email to the address indicated and got an automatic reply saying they aim to reply within six hours during their business hours (9-7 Central).
But they never called back.
I emailed again on Monday and Wednesday and tweeted @DellCares (who requested a DM with pertinent information and said they'd look into it), but I never got my callback.
Meanwhile, my computer was deteriorating. I was working in Safe Mode with networking, unable to access games or music or word processing. Boot-up was slower each time, the computer couldn't always detect its network card, bizarre things started happening (itunes opening when I plug in my ipod even though I specifically set it not to do that, then telling me it couldn't read the iphone even though it isn't an iphone; browsers giving me random encoding errors even on simple websites).
On Thursday, I gave up. I got an external hard drive, backed up all my stuff, and reinstalled everything from scratch using my recovery disk. It took three hours (back-up, reinstallation, and getting all my settings just so), but everything has been working properly since then (knock wood).
But this makes me lose confidence in Dell for two reasons:
1. Serious, mysterious problems that hinder useability even though my computer is only nine months old. I've never before in my lifelong relationship with Dell had to actually use the recovery disks. This makes me nervous. Whenever a boot-up takes a second or two longer than usual, I start worrying that it's a sign of a serious problem.
2. I didn't get a "priority" callback! I waited five days, requested it four times through two different mediums, and no one called me. I've always gone with Dell because I could trust their support, and now I can't? And this despite the fact that I invested in the biggest warranty possible? What will happen when I have a bigger hardware problem that can't be fixed with a full reinstall?
In the interest of fairness, I should say that I never called Dell back either. I had the option of calling them again and starting from scratch, and I opted not to, first because I still had internet access in safe mode and I decided I'd rather relax and go about my life than wait on hold/going through first-level support. I figured the phone would ring when there was someone ready and available to give me second-level support. I should also point out that, in response to my second complaint to them, @DellCares apologized and told me to contact them so they could escalate me if the problems reoccur after reinstallation.
But I've still lost confidence, mostly because they specifically told me that forwarding the email to the address specified would get me a priority callback, and it didn't. What other promised support might I not get in the future? What if it happens when I need to work? What it happens when I'm away from home and my full resources and dependent on wifi? (That is why I bought a laptop in the first place, even if I don't often end up taking it out of my apartment.) What if I were a less technically proficient customer and a full recovery wasn't easily feasible for me? And WTF even was the problem in the first place?
This loss of confidence spirals out and affects my interpretation of my whole relationship with the company. For example, during my tech support call, the technician told me about a product Dell solves that detects and repairs problems with your system. It was clearly part of his script to push this product, which I normally wouldn't have given any thought. But sitting there working in Safe Mode awaiting a callback that wasn't coming, I started wondering if they put something in the computers to deliberately make them malfunction so they can push this product.
Sometimes when people blog about problems with products or support, the company wants to make it right. The unfortunate thing in this case is that there's nothing Dell can do to make it right, apart from doing their jobs properly in the future. Getting my callback now would be useless since I got the computer working. Free stuff would be useless because there simply isn't anything I need from Dell. A store credit would be irrelevant because there wasn't money involved in this interaction, unless they wanted to give me a store credit that would last for five years and win back my trust in the meantime. (If I do have to buy a new computer in less than five years, it won't be from Dell).
All Dell can do to win back my confidence is have my computer work properly for the rest of its planned life, and give me support properly next time I need to call them, preferably without trying to sell me software at the same time. But, even so, I'll probably be doing at least some cursory comparison shopping next time.
Update: Dell initiated a follow-up call on Tuesday (9 days after I requested a call back) and we made contact on Wednesday after a round of telephone tag. They apologized for the delay, saying it was due to "technical reasons" (which doesn't instill confidence when I'm after a solution to a technical problem), listened to my whole story, and apologized for the mix-up, but there wasn't much else they could do for me because I'd already used the recovery disk.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Programming note
Currently experiencing technical difficulties. Blogging will resume once they've been resolved. Expect a review of the Dell XPS 15 and Dell warranty support once I'm back.
Friday, September 09, 2011
What to do when someone is standing in front of the seat you want on the subway
I always get really annoyed by people who stand in front of empty seats on the subway, blocking access to those seats for others who might want to sit down.
The other day, I was inadvertently that idiot standing in front of the seat. (The seat was vacated just before I was about to get off the train myself, and I was too oblivious to think to move.)
This lady moves in towards the seat, but I'm blocking the way. So she says to me "Oh, sorry, were you going to sit there?" Which led me to step back from the seat, give it to her, and apologize.
Some people argue that you should just ask standers who are blocking seats to move so you can sit down, but not everyone is comfortable with that approach and it is marginally confrontational, asking the stander to stop doing something (thus implying that they're being bad). This lady's approach allows both people to save face and look generous by offering the seat to each other, with the same end result.
Thanks, subway lady, and I apologize again for blocking your seat!
The other day, I was inadvertently that idiot standing in front of the seat. (The seat was vacated just before I was about to get off the train myself, and I was too oblivious to think to move.)
This lady moves in towards the seat, but I'm blocking the way. So she says to me "Oh, sorry, were you going to sit there?" Which led me to step back from the seat, give it to her, and apologize.
Some people argue that you should just ask standers who are blocking seats to move so you can sit down, but not everyone is comfortable with that approach and it is marginally confrontational, asking the stander to stop doing something (thus implying that they're being bad). This lady's approach allows both people to save face and look generous by offering the seat to each other, with the same end result.
Thanks, subway lady, and I apologize again for blocking your seat!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)