The most recent contribution to our Let It All Hang Out blog gave the medical profession a hefty punch in the solar plexus, by openly criticizing its proclivity for prescribing drugs as a prime cure-all, as opposed to insistence on patients’ sensible eating practices. However, since our reading audience includes no doctors, we deem it only fair to offer a reply from a mythical physician, based on the reaction that would likely result.
Accordingly, here is what we might expect in retaliation from an irate medical practitioner:
“Do you believe for an instant that we doctors are unaware of the benefits forthcoming
from a carefully controlled diet? Most of us have forgotten more than you presently
know about this matter. Nevertheless, how much could we ever accomplish by focusing
principally on choice of foods as the best approach for a patient? Can you honestly
expect the great majority of them to listen? Forget it. The unfortunate fact is that we’re
practically forced into writing hefty prescriptions, just to offset the damage so many
people have brought on themselves by eating improperly, and otherwise not taking good
care of their bodies.
“We continually tell people to quit smoking, but how many ever really do? Way too many
of them will go on puffing and wheezing until Joe Camel knocks them cold some day
not too far down the line. Furthermore, how are we expected to treat those who
obediently nod their heads in response to our semi-stern advice about reducing their
calorie, sugar, cholesterol, and other harmful intakes, then leave our offices and head
straight to the nearest McDonald’s for a burger and fries lunch?
“Quit blaming us for trying to do our best to salvage what we can out of an ailing,
mistreated human anatomy. Give us due credit for a noble effort.”
Thank you, Doctor. We stand duly admonished.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
WORDS OF WISDOM GLEANED FROM BROWSING THE INTERNET
Upon selecting a title for this particular piece, we were promptly reminded of Wordsworth’s classic Lines Composed a Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey, written in 1798. However, we must assure the reader that what we’re about to expound upon falls far short, from the lyrical beauty standpoint, in comparison to the master’s chosen metric verse. As a matter of fact, the central theme which concerns us here is a rather unsavory one, namely bowel cleansing, hence improved health, through proper and careful dietary habits. Ugh!
We also admit to thoughts having arisen concerning musical virtuoso Arthur Sullivan, whose well-known The Lost Chord describes how he had allegedly created a singular perfect sound one afternoon, while browsing at an organ. We raise this point because we recently experienced a vaguely similar feeling, again nowhere near the blissful sensation described in the famous song, but rather by coming across a rare touch of sheer wisdom, thanks to certain internet content.
What the foregoing paragraphs add up to is that, while happening to read about the somewhat uninspiring subject cited above, we noted how the article included a little-known quotation by Thomas Edison back in his day. Although not a qualified physician, this gentleman nevertheless did utter a medical-related statement which we feel makes a tremendous amount of sense. Unfortunately, what the esteemed genius of the scientific world had to say on the matter has never sunk in, despite his sage prediction.
Very simply, Edison’s prognosticative utterance was:
“The doctor of the future will give no medicine, but will interest his patient in the care of
the (human) frame, in diet and in the cause and prevention of disease.”
How about that, Folks? As far as we’re concerned, the man was right as rain in principle, yet a full 180 degrees off base from the accuracy angle.
To summarize our case as succinctly as possible, we merely ask the question “How many doctors have you ever consulted, receiving prime advice about careful dieting? Sure, the boys and girls of the medical world might bring the matter up, but almost always as a secondary issue. Once they’ve diagnosed your ailment, the first method of attack lies in loading you up with drugs by the veritable carload, while ignoring not only the superior benefits accruable from better eating, but the potentially harmful side effects which those pharmaceutical concoctions are apt to bring about.
Obviously, the Pfizers, Squibbs, Bayers, and Mercks of this world love those solid medical practitioners, who are so inclined and adept at helping peddle their questionable value wares.
From our personal end, though, we fail to hold anywhere near the same respect.
We also admit to thoughts having arisen concerning musical virtuoso Arthur Sullivan, whose well-known The Lost Chord describes how he had allegedly created a singular perfect sound one afternoon, while browsing at an organ. We raise this point because we recently experienced a vaguely similar feeling, again nowhere near the blissful sensation described in the famous song, but rather by coming across a rare touch of sheer wisdom, thanks to certain internet content.
What the foregoing paragraphs add up to is that, while happening to read about the somewhat uninspiring subject cited above, we noted how the article included a little-known quotation by Thomas Edison back in his day. Although not a qualified physician, this gentleman nevertheless did utter a medical-related statement which we feel makes a tremendous amount of sense. Unfortunately, what the esteemed genius of the scientific world had to say on the matter has never sunk in, despite his sage prediction.
Very simply, Edison’s prognosticative utterance was:
“The doctor of the future will give no medicine, but will interest his patient in the care of
the (human) frame, in diet and in the cause and prevention of disease.”
How about that, Folks? As far as we’re concerned, the man was right as rain in principle, yet a full 180 degrees off base from the accuracy angle.
To summarize our case as succinctly as possible, we merely ask the question “How many doctors have you ever consulted, receiving prime advice about careful dieting? Sure, the boys and girls of the medical world might bring the matter up, but almost always as a secondary issue. Once they’ve diagnosed your ailment, the first method of attack lies in loading you up with drugs by the veritable carload, while ignoring not only the superior benefits accruable from better eating, but the potentially harmful side effects which those pharmaceutical concoctions are apt to bring about.
Obviously, the Pfizers, Squibbs, Bayers, and Mercks of this world love those solid medical practitioners, who are so inclined and adept at helping peddle their questionable value wares.
From our personal end, though, we fail to hold anywhere near the same respect.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
WHO'S ON FIRST?
We find ourselves a bit perplexed these days as to which professional group is the bigger gouger when it comes to billing for services. We’re unable to determine whether lawyers or doctors stand in first place. It seems to be a mighty close race.
Friday, February 5, 2010
OUR OWN MISTER ED
Ed was a classmate throughout our high school days. We never had a chance to get to know him too well, since he lived in the far yonder part of town. According to memory, he tended to keep to himself, not having much to say, even in response to the teachers up front.
There are, however, some unique features about this quiet and reserved lad. The first was his family setting. Reliable sources informed us that his father owned a good-sized piece of farm land, and in his spare time had sired seventeen children, mostly female, all occupying the same domicile. Ed had arrived second last among the brood.
The old man would haul the undergraduate portion of his flock to school in his truck each morning, then pick them up after classes had ended. As we understand it, he’d actually call the roll every afternoon, as an army platoon sergeant might, making sure the crew was complete.
Farming didn’t generate a whole lot of revenue in those days, and having to feed, clothe, and otherwise support a congregation that huge put wide gaps in the household budget. This was quite evident in certain cases. Every few weeks or so, Ed and his younger brother (Nos. 16 and 17 in respective sequence) would both show up at school with freshly cropped hair, and their father’s sugar bowl utilization couldn’t go unnoticed. Typically, only the outer edges would have been trimmed off, leaving the covered area untouched, and hence resembling an overgrown lawn.
During our final year, the coming graduation amenities required each senior to visit a designated photo studio for a class annual mug shot. This obviously called for a conventional suit to pose in, which was a luxury Ed’s parents couldn’t afford. He likely arranged to borrow the needed woolens from somewhere, since his youthful face did appear along with those of his class confederates.
In the post-graduation years, our paths crossed but once for a few brief casual words, no more. We have learned, though, how in due course our once sugar bowl-coiffed, tweedless Ed and his siblings inherited the farm land their father had long tilled, converting the area into a housing development.
For the past several decades, therefore, our Mr. Ed has enjoyed millionaire status, and we applaud his good fortune, especially in view of such a humble beginning. While residing in several foreign countries and meeting natives from numerous others, we’ve seen or learned about very few where similar opportunities are available to a kid growing up on the wrong side of the tracks.
There are, however, some unique features about this quiet and reserved lad. The first was his family setting. Reliable sources informed us that his father owned a good-sized piece of farm land, and in his spare time had sired seventeen children, mostly female, all occupying the same domicile. Ed had arrived second last among the brood.
The old man would haul the undergraduate portion of his flock to school in his truck each morning, then pick them up after classes had ended. As we understand it, he’d actually call the roll every afternoon, as an army platoon sergeant might, making sure the crew was complete.
Farming didn’t generate a whole lot of revenue in those days, and having to feed, clothe, and otherwise support a congregation that huge put wide gaps in the household budget. This was quite evident in certain cases. Every few weeks or so, Ed and his younger brother (Nos. 16 and 17 in respective sequence) would both show up at school with freshly cropped hair, and their father’s sugar bowl utilization couldn’t go unnoticed. Typically, only the outer edges would have been trimmed off, leaving the covered area untouched, and hence resembling an overgrown lawn.
During our final year, the coming graduation amenities required each senior to visit a designated photo studio for a class annual mug shot. This obviously called for a conventional suit to pose in, which was a luxury Ed’s parents couldn’t afford. He likely arranged to borrow the needed woolens from somewhere, since his youthful face did appear along with those of his class confederates.
In the post-graduation years, our paths crossed but once for a few brief casual words, no more. We have learned, though, how in due course our once sugar bowl-coiffed, tweedless Ed and his siblings inherited the farm land their father had long tilled, converting the area into a housing development.
For the past several decades, therefore, our Mr. Ed has enjoyed millionaire status, and we applaud his good fortune, especially in view of such a humble beginning. While residing in several foreign countries and meeting natives from numerous others, we’ve seen or learned about very few where similar opportunities are available to a kid growing up on the wrong side of the tracks.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
THE NEED FOR A FITTING SLOGAN
Slogans have long been put to use as inspirational battle cries. A look at our past history brings several prominent ones to mind. Prime examples include “Remember the Maine!”, “Remember the Alamo!”, “54-40 or Fight!”, “Remember Pearl Harbor!”, “Sink the Bismarck!”, “I shall return!”, “We Shall Overcome!”, and others adopted for various organized endeavors.
It stands to reason, then, that our esteemed Republican Party is deeply lacking a proper and meaningful theme. In light of its record over the past century – at least from the end of Teddy Roosevelt’s administration forward – we feel they should choose a fighting slogan which matches the political doctrines consistently extolled year after year. Accordingly, what could be more appropriate than “Repeal that stupid Magna Charta!”?
It stands to reason, then, that our esteemed Republican Party is deeply lacking a proper and meaningful theme. In light of its record over the past century – at least from the end of Teddy Roosevelt’s administration forward – we feel they should choose a fighting slogan which matches the political doctrines consistently extolled year after year. Accordingly, what could be more appropriate than “Repeal that stupid Magna Charta!”?
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
THE BADDEST DAY
Our literary gentry have long forgiven the Bard of Avon for his classic grammatical blunder when describing the knife wound inflicted by Brutus on his friend Julius Caesar as the “most unkindest cut of all”. Actually, the gentleman had no choice but to preserve a ten-syllable line, in what the scholars label iambic pentameter. Although certainly not claiming to measure up to Willie Shakespeare, we’ve nevertheless decided to take comparable license in the above title. Our theme in this instance is speculation on what singular event throughout the just-closed 20th century stands as the most disruptive to mankind’s ongoing welfare -- applying our chosen vernacular to call it the “baddest”.
Quite a few disastrous occurrences immediately come to mind, due to either human action and/or failure to exercise adequate preventive measures. Each item on our selected list is cited and analyzed below, in determining which we consider as having wrought the most devastating long range effect.
1. The sinking of the Titanic? Not really since, despite the tragedy, this served
as a useful wakeup call against complacent living.
2. The 1929 stock market crash? A depressing blow indeed, but lacking permanent ill effect.
3. The Hindenburg explosion? A latter-day equivalent to the Titanic, but it taught us to abandon the dirigible as a key international transport means.
4. Pearl Harbor? A highly upsetting business, but such happening at least convinced America never again to let down its guard.
5. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? This comes mighty close to rating as the very worst, because of a universal trepidation over nuclear energy use, which hasn’t abated one bit ever since.
6. The 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon? This event made Pearl Harbor look like a mild disturbance by comparison, but has provided yet another valuable lesson in security requirements.
Our studied answer has to be “none of the above”. Except for the last two, the disruptive effect doesn’t shape up as being very long lasting.
Over and above them all, we’ve picked the founding of the Israeli state in 1948. The reason is that such act amounted to pouring gasoline on a fire which has been raging for millennia. The Arab-Zionist controversy, perpetuated through outright mutual hatred, hasn’t slackened off one iota since, and appears unlikely ever to.
Our old adversary Adolf Hitler and his Nazi cronies were indirectly responsible for such unfortunate move. Once the full horror of the Holocaust had become known to the entire world, the international powers had no alternative but to bend over backwards in uttering a profound apology to the Jews. The most fitting gesture at the time could be nothing short of recreating Israel as a nation, even though it meant telling the on-site inhabitant Palestinians to get lost. The Arab universe couldn’t possibly have been administered a more insulting blow.
The most damaging upshot has been Uncle Sam’s ill-fated policy of unceasingly sticking his proboscis into Middle East affairs, always taking Israel’s side, thus making new enemies by the score every day. This situation not only provided the venom to stage the September 11, 2001 raids, but earlier brought on the sabotaged Pan Am plane crash over Lockerby, in obvious retaliation to Ronald Reagan’s mad bomber air strikes on Libya.
Every U.S. President from Harry Truman onward has held an abject fear of offending Israel, to make sure the American Jewish vote doesn’t get sacrificed come next election day. The established doctrine finds our government simply winking at the undiminished inhuman treatment accorded that country’s neighboring Palestinians.
In closing, the message we’re trying to convey here decidedly does not constitute anti-Semitism on our part. We can firmly state that opposition to the United States’ fondling of Israel has no bearing on our feelings toward Judaism. The country is at fault, not the religion.
Quite a few disastrous occurrences immediately come to mind, due to either human action and/or failure to exercise adequate preventive measures. Each item on our selected list is cited and analyzed below, in determining which we consider as having wrought the most devastating long range effect.
1. The sinking of the Titanic? Not really since, despite the tragedy, this served
as a useful wakeup call against complacent living.
2. The 1929 stock market crash? A depressing blow indeed, but lacking permanent ill effect.
3. The Hindenburg explosion? A latter-day equivalent to the Titanic, but it taught us to abandon the dirigible as a key international transport means.
4. Pearl Harbor? A highly upsetting business, but such happening at least convinced America never again to let down its guard.
5. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? This comes mighty close to rating as the very worst, because of a universal trepidation over nuclear energy use, which hasn’t abated one bit ever since.
6. The 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon? This event made Pearl Harbor look like a mild disturbance by comparison, but has provided yet another valuable lesson in security requirements.
Our studied answer has to be “none of the above”. Except for the last two, the disruptive effect doesn’t shape up as being very long lasting.
Over and above them all, we’ve picked the founding of the Israeli state in 1948. The reason is that such act amounted to pouring gasoline on a fire which has been raging for millennia. The Arab-Zionist controversy, perpetuated through outright mutual hatred, hasn’t slackened off one iota since, and appears unlikely ever to.
Our old adversary Adolf Hitler and his Nazi cronies were indirectly responsible for such unfortunate move. Once the full horror of the Holocaust had become known to the entire world, the international powers had no alternative but to bend over backwards in uttering a profound apology to the Jews. The most fitting gesture at the time could be nothing short of recreating Israel as a nation, even though it meant telling the on-site inhabitant Palestinians to get lost. The Arab universe couldn’t possibly have been administered a more insulting blow.
The most damaging upshot has been Uncle Sam’s ill-fated policy of unceasingly sticking his proboscis into Middle East affairs, always taking Israel’s side, thus making new enemies by the score every day. This situation not only provided the venom to stage the September 11, 2001 raids, but earlier brought on the sabotaged Pan Am plane crash over Lockerby, in obvious retaliation to Ronald Reagan’s mad bomber air strikes on Libya.
Every U.S. President from Harry Truman onward has held an abject fear of offending Israel, to make sure the American Jewish vote doesn’t get sacrificed come next election day. The established doctrine finds our government simply winking at the undiminished inhuman treatment accorded that country’s neighboring Palestinians.
In closing, the message we’re trying to convey here decidedly does not constitute anti-Semitism on our part. We can firmly state that opposition to the United States’ fondling of Israel has no bearing on our feelings toward Judaism. The country is at fault, not the religion.
Friday, January 15, 2010
EDUCATION FAILURE REVISITED
This piece complements the one recently published under the title Our American Classrooms -- Institutions of Learning or Localized Dictatorships? We have a few more comments to make on the subject of a misdirected educational system.
People here and there seem forever to talk about certain schools as being great, leading, outstanding, model, tops, or whatever. In contrast, therefore, those not so glorified automatically become classified as mediocre or worse.
At this point, we'll jump in with our private opinion that there is no such thing as a poor school. Instead we have poor students, due mainly to countless legions of "yessir, nosir, no excusesir" teachers who conform to the system's rigid rules, focusing on disciplinary control, adherence to going by the proverbial book straight down the line, and results measurement exclusively by exam grades.
It's true that a competent teacher will periodically be blessed with a brightly shining pupil, whose classroom capabilities remain in the mentor's memory throughout his or her career. However, this is far from the issue. We needn't be concerned with the occasional brilliant learner and self-applier. The problem revolves around the hoi polloi -- those never properly oriented as to what schooling should really be all about. Meanwhile, as Charles Sullivan laid out so effectively in his essay of previous blog article reference, the system has long been churning out excessively-disciplined automatons, not creative-minded citizens, by the millions.
For further emphasis, we wish to add that we consider strict rule adherence doctrines to be highly non-beneficial. They mold education into a fear-bound process, and accomplish little from the standpoints of individual thinking and free expression.
Nevertheless, we can't overlook the necessity of maintaining schoolroom order, which will require teachers to finally shed their hitherto lord and master rules to become understanding leaders and guidance counselors instead. Obviously, in light of the already hidebound traditions which prevail, this won't exactly be an overnight development. In fact, we're inclined to fear it may never happen.
People here and there seem forever to talk about certain schools as being great, leading, outstanding, model, tops, or whatever. In contrast, therefore, those not so glorified automatically become classified as mediocre or worse.
At this point, we'll jump in with our private opinion that there is no such thing as a poor school. Instead we have poor students, due mainly to countless legions of "yessir, nosir, no excusesir" teachers who conform to the system's rigid rules, focusing on disciplinary control, adherence to going by the proverbial book straight down the line, and results measurement exclusively by exam grades.
It's true that a competent teacher will periodically be blessed with a brightly shining pupil, whose classroom capabilities remain in the mentor's memory throughout his or her career. However, this is far from the issue. We needn't be concerned with the occasional brilliant learner and self-applier. The problem revolves around the hoi polloi -- those never properly oriented as to what schooling should really be all about. Meanwhile, as Charles Sullivan laid out so effectively in his essay of previous blog article reference, the system has long been churning out excessively-disciplined automatons, not creative-minded citizens, by the millions.
For further emphasis, we wish to add that we consider strict rule adherence doctrines to be highly non-beneficial. They mold education into a fear-bound process, and accomplish little from the standpoints of individual thinking and free expression.
Nevertheless, we can't overlook the necessity of maintaining schoolroom order, which will require teachers to finally shed their hitherto lord and master rules to become understanding leaders and guidance counselors instead. Obviously, in light of the already hidebound traditions which prevail, this won't exactly be an overnight development. In fact, we're inclined to fear it may never happen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
