On 9/29/2022 8:05 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:04:48 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> On 9/29/2022 5:48 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:18:16 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/29/2022 11:09 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 9/28/2022 6:11 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not rapid or passionate about the subject but it's not
>>>>>> nothing and Mr Kunich did not make it up entirely.
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew, I'm sorry, but that sounds like the weakest possible
>>>>> justification for Tom's biased outrage. Tom implied
>>>>> myocarditis from vaccination was common and serious. In
>>>>> actual fact, that paper found one mild event in almost
>>>>> 200,000 doses.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your justification "it's not nothing" would apply to just
>>>>> ONE occurrence out of hundreds of millions. That
>>>>> justification has zero value.
>>>>>
>>>>> And of course Tom didn't make it up "entirely." As with most
>>>>> propaganda, he took a tiny kernel of truth and distorted it
>>>>> grossly. That behavior deserves no defense.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As is evident (and explicitly noted by you among others), Mr
>>>> Kunich often embellishes or exaggerates or whatever beyond
>>>> credibility but there's usually something basically true at
>>>> the root of it. This is not to excuse the fantastic
>>>> hyperbole, just to note that something odd is at its root.
>>>
>>> You mean like his wild eyed tale about how difficult it was to live
>>> where the Monsoon winds blow?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Come visit Wisconsin in January and we'll swap hardship stories.
>
> I don't believe that you have Monsoon Winds in Wisconsin....
>
>

Seems like it on a January bike ride! The cold wind cuts
like a knife.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 15:31:46 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

> VAERS is GENERALLY ignored.

GENERALLY you're right, but it might take a few decades for it to
completely disappear. Even the CDC seems to be abandoning VAERS. The
new and improved version is much better controlled. I'm getting a
bivalent booster vaccination on Oct 6 at the local CVS pharmacy. As
part of the procedure, I create and account and login to:
<https://vsafe.cdc.gov>
which is the replacement for VAERS in the area of vaccines. I create
an account and enter any adverse reactions AFTER the vaccination.
Unlike VAERS, it's not an uncontrolled free for all. I have no idea
if political organizations can obtain access to the data without it
being polluted by VAERS data:
<https://dearpandemic.org/data-on-vaccine-side-effects-from-v-safe/>
<https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8>
If it's managed like it's predecessor (VDS), I predict disaster:
<https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vsd/index.html>

>Doctors have better things to do than write up reports to the government. So the numbers are unreliable.

Have you been to a hospital lately? Unfortunately, I have. On every
floor are several rooms with nothing but computer screens. The rooms
I saw had about 10 to 15 computers per room. Same at the nurses
stations. I saw doctors, nurses, administrators, etc spending
considerable time filling out forms on these computers. There were
computers on portable carts rolling around the hallways, also for
filling out forms. When I visited my doctors, the first 15 minutes
was spent correcting the errors entered during the previous visit,
while the last 10 minutes was spent writing a release form and
possibly a visit summary. Sometimes, the doctor does the visit
summary in his office, because those appeared online several days
after the visit. During the visit, there is an assistant present,
continuously entering notes on the computer.

In your ideal and imaginary world, doctors do only medicine. Reality
is quite different. How much of the data goes to the government, I
don't know. I suspect very little. All the government wants are
summaries, totals, statistics, and legal compliance reports.

It's good to know that you haven't seen the inside of a hospital in
quite some time. Stay healthy.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 20:16:44 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 9/29/2022 7:57 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:03:45 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/29/2022 5:44 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 17:11:19 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I didn't forget your question. Now I have a moment to
>>>>> retrieve that paper.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have the URL of that paper?
>>>>
>>>>> Dr Kirk Milhoan is a board-certified pediatric cardiologist.
>>>>> He reports that myocarditis is the only serious side effect
>>>>> publicly recognized by FDA and CDC after the Pfizer or
>>>>> Moderna mRNA shot. Both agencies describe the events as 'rare'.
>>>>
>>>> "Board files complaints against Maui health officer, physician"
>>>> "Both have supported COVID-19 treatments that federal agencies warn
>>>> against" (September 28, 2022)
>>>> <https://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2021/08/board-files-complaints-against-maui-health-officer-physician/ " rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2021/08/board-files-complaints-against-maui-health-officer-physician/>
>>>>
>>>> "I understand I’m going to be investigated. I thought this might
>>>> happen," Milhoan said Friday. "Usually people who suggest early
>>>> treatment come under some type of scrutiny for what they’re doing. I’m
>>>> not anti-vaxxer. I’m pro-vaccine. I’m not asking people not to get
>>>> vaccinated. All I’m trying to do is, I see people who are infected,
>>>> now what do I do? It’s too late (at that point) to say, ‘Go get
>>>> vaccinated.’ "
>>>>
>>>> Retaliation by the Hawaii Medical Board? Methinks probably yes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It was the 20 September Epoch Times dead tree edition.
>>> I get them second hand a week or so after pub date.
>>
>> I looked it up.
>> https://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2021/08/board-files-complaints-against-maui-health-officer-physician/
>> The Hawaii Medical Board has filed complaints against Maui’s top
>> health official and a Valley Isle physician following reports that
>> they backed COVID-19 treatments that state and federal health agencies
>> advise against.
>>
>> https://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2022/04/doctors-cleared-of-covid-19-misinformation-allegations/
>> “Upon careful review of all available information, it appears that
>> there is insufficient evidence to support violation of the Statutes
>> regarding the practice of medicine,” Kavan Saiki, a supervising
>> investigator for RICO, said in a letter sent to Pang’s attorney. “We
>> will therefore be closing this case and no further action will be
>> taken.”
>>
>> The complaint seems to have arise from "expressed support for
>> treating COVID-19 with hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, two drugs
>> that both the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the
>> Food and Drug Administration have urged residents not to take to treat
>> the virus."
>>
>
>Exactly, which is where this conversation turned earlier:
>
>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/apr/7/michigan-democrat-thanks-trump-hydroxychloroquine-/
>
>Actual practice of medicine or other scientific inquiries
>are OK until they run smack up against someone's ideology.

Modern Medicine?
"Michigan state Rep. Karen Whitsett said she began feeling relief “in
less than two hours” after being prescribed the drug on March 31."

Get real, it takes an hour, or more, for an aspirin to "cure" a head
ache.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:27:35 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 15:31:46 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
><cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> VAERS is GENERALLY ignored.
>
>GENERALLY you're right, but it might take a few decades for it to
>completely disappear. Even the CDC seems to be abandoning VAERS. The
>new and improved version is much better controlled. I'm getting a
>bivalent booster vaccination on Oct 6 at the local CVS pharmacy. As
>part of the procedure, I create and account and login to:
><https://vsafe.cdc.gov>
>which is the replacement for VAERS in the area of vaccines. I create
>an account and enter any adverse reactions AFTER the vaccination.
>Unlike VAERS, it's not an uncontrolled free for all. I have no idea
>if political organizations can obtain access to the data without it
>being polluted by VAERS data:
><https://dearpandemic.org/data-on-vaccine-side-effects-from-v-safe/>
><https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8>
>If it's managed like it's predecessor (VDS), I predict disaster:
><https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vsd/index.html>
>
>>Doctors have better things to do than write up reports to the government. So the numbers are unreliable.
>
>Have you been to a hospital lately? Unfortunately, I have. On every
>floor are several rooms with nothing but computer screens. The rooms
>I saw had about 10 to 15 computers per room. Same at the nurses
>stations. I saw doctors, nurses, administrators, etc spending
>considerable time filling out forms on these computers. There were
>computers on portable carts rolling around the hallways, also for
>filling out forms. When I visited my doctors, the first 15 minutes
>was spent correcting the errors entered during the previous visit,
>while the last 10 minutes was spent writing a release form and
>possibly a visit summary. Sometimes, the doctor does the visit
>summary in his office, because those appeared online several days
>after the visit. During the visit, there is an assistant present,
>continuously entering notes on the computer.
>
>In your ideal and imaginary world, doctors do only medicine. Reality
>is quite different. How much of the data goes to the government, I
>don't know. I suspect very little. All the government wants are
>summaries, totals, statistics, and legal compliance reports.
>
>It's good to know that you haven't seen the inside of a hospital in
>quite some time. Stay healthy.

Here all medical records in the hospitals I have been to in the past
few years are computerized, to the extent that when "the computer goes
down" all patient check in and visits to the doctor stop. When you do
get in to see the doctor he will be studying the computer screen....
to review your records.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 9/29/2022 9:16 PM, AMuzi wrote:> On 9/29/2022 7:57 PM, John B. wrote:
>>
>> The complaint seems to have  arise from "expressed support for
>> treating COVID-19 with hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, two drugs
>> that both the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the
>> Food and Drug Administration have urged residents not to take to treat
>> the virus."
>>
>
> Exactly, which is where this conversation turned earlier:
>
> https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/apr/7/michigan-democrat-thanks-trump-hydroxychloroquine-/
>
> Actual practice of medicine or other scientific inquiries are OK until
> they run smack up against someone's ideology.

Or more accurately, until anecdotes run up against a competent
understanding of science. Heartfelt anecdotes are still just anecdotes,
and anecdotes are not how medical science determines treatment protocols.

Medical science gives much greater credence is given to properly
controlled trials that generate large numbers of data points.

But people of a certain political ideology tend to latch fiercely onto
any anecdote that seems useful to that ideology.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 09:04:42 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:27:35 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 15:31:46 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>><cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> VAERS is GENERALLY ignored.
>>
>>GENERALLY you're right, but it might take a few decades for it to
>>completely disappear. Even the CDC seems to be abandoning VAERS. The
>>new and improved version is much better controlled. I'm getting a
>>bivalent booster vaccination on Oct 6 at the local CVS pharmacy. As
>>part of the procedure, I create and account and login to:
>><https://vsafe.cdc.gov>
>>which is the replacement for VAERS in the area of vaccines. I create
>>an account and enter any adverse reactions AFTER the vaccination.
>>Unlike VAERS, it's not an uncontrolled free for all. I have no idea
>>if political organizations can obtain access to the data without it
>>being polluted by VAERS data:
>><https://dearpandemic.org/data-on-vaccine-side-effects-from-v-safe/>
>><https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8>
>>If it's managed like it's predecessor (VDS), I predict disaster:
>><https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vsd/index.html>
>>
>>>Doctors have better things to do than write up reports to the government. So the numbers are unreliable.
>>
>>Have you been to a hospital lately? Unfortunately, I have. On every
>>floor are several rooms with nothing but computer screens. The rooms
>>I saw had about 10 to 15 computers per room. Same at the nurses
>>stations. I saw doctors, nurses, administrators, etc spending
>>considerable time filling out forms on these computers. There were
>>computers on portable carts rolling around the hallways, also for
>>filling out forms. When I visited my doctors, the first 15 minutes
>>was spent correcting the errors entered during the previous visit,
>>while the last 10 minutes was spent writing a release form and
>>possibly a visit summary. Sometimes, the doctor does the visit
>>summary in his office, because those appeared online several days
>>after the visit. During the visit, there is an assistant present,
>>continuously entering notes on the computer.
>>
>>In your ideal and imaginary world, doctors do only medicine. Reality
>>is quite different. How much of the data goes to the government, I
>>don't know. I suspect very little. All the government wants are
>>summaries, totals, statistics, and legal compliance reports.
>>
>>It's good to know that you haven't seen the inside of a hospital in
>>quite some time. Stay healthy.

>Here all medical records in the hospitals I have been to in the past
>few years are computerized, to the extent that when "the computer goes
>down" all patient check in and visits to the doctor stop. When you do
>get in to see the doctor he will be studying the computer screen....
>to review your records.

It's about the same here. I haven't had to deal with a computer
failure yet, but did get delayed 3 hrs while someone repaired the
printer that produced the release documentation. Not everything was
fully computerized, so the printed release documentation was needed
for me to obtain a referral.

My doctor mentioned that he gets only about 5 minutes to review each
patients file before the interview. Prior to meeting a nurse has
taken various vitals. I'm also handed a list of drugs and asked to
verify that everything is correct. It's NEVER correct and hasn't been
for about 10 years.

To save time, I bring my list of drugs, medical history and current
problems with me to every visit. That brings the doctor up to date
faster than trying to sift through the voluminous notes on the
computer screen. My memory isn't good enough to recall all the
details and I assume that the doctor is no better. I also bring a
prepared list of questions because I get nervous and tend to forget my
assorted problems. The various lists have grown over the years. I
fumbled during my last visit, when someone wanted to know what time of
day I take my various drugs. I also bring the results and historical
graphs of my recent blood tests, which also hasn't been fully
computerized between different medical establishments. Turf war, I
guess.

For a typical 30 minute "checkup" office visit, I see the doctor for
maybe 5 to 10 minutes maximum. The rest is mostly dealing with the
computers.

In the future, such visits will probably be replaced by a
"conversation" between my Starfleet medical Tricorder and the doctors
computer, without the personal involvement of the doctor, nurse, or
myself.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Saturday, September 24, 2022 at 1:44:17 PM UTC-4, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Sep 2022 07:34:15 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 6:09:50 PM UTC-4, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> >For a fixed location, it
> >> looks like this:
> >> <https://www.visualgps.net/VisualGPSView/images/ssScatter.png>
>
> >Yup, I see a lot of this
> >https://www.strava.com/activities/4424213642
> >That was actually in my basement (the lower building) but it has me running around between my and my neighbors yards.
> Terrible but fairly typical if you're dealing with reflections and low
> signal levels.

Right, one of my teammates regularly posts his basement session, which in his location and tracker tends to drift north, going through several neighbors houses. We kid him about being the kool aide man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ar6xC8KM-jk&t=3s

> I see 10 position reports and approximately 13 meter
> error radius. Switch to "satellite map" for a better view.

I know how to do that, there's no need. I know the vast majority of that particular ride took place in my basement even though Strava thinks I was in the forsythia hedge on the property line

If your
> "connect the dots" map was over a 30 minute "ride" as Strava
> indicates, you were only getting a valid position report an average of
> once every 3 minutes. Such data is useless for measuring speed, but
> does illustrate what is wrong with using distance between position
> reports divided by time to calculate speed.

Which is the basis of this conversation

>
> Incidentally, if you're going to make a habit of riding in your
> basement, I can show you how to build a GPS signal amplifier. It's an
> amplified patch antenna on the roof, RG-188u coax cable to the
> basement, power injector, and a 2nd passive patch (transmit) antenna
> in the basement. However, it's useless. All your position reports
> will show that you're riding in place. You can ride in circles in
> your basement and your GPS will show that you're not moving (much).
> It's not too difficult to guess how I found that problem.

Thanks, I'd rather spend the time actually riding....

>
> Trivia: Your Strava link above suggests that I login to Strava to see
> more detail. When I do so, there is some more detail, but the "3m"
> distance ruler in the lower left of the map disappears.

That's odd, but then Strava does some things rather oddly anyway.

>
> What GPS device do you use for recording your rides for Strava?

I was using a suunto ambit 3 for a while, but the app sucked and the thing felt like I was wearing a 1-pound weight on wrist so I switched to a Garmin 745. Hands down a better device. I use that for my road rides and running and bought a Garmin 530 for my MTB rides (larger display for mapping when going on woods excursions). FYI - The device used is listed in the upper right of the ride posting.

> --
> Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
> PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 2:03:16 AM UTC-4, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 14:16:58 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 4:54:56 PM UTC-4, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 11:18:14 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> >> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 12:50:16 AM UTC-4, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >> Also, if you search the document for "Doppler", you'll find that speed
> >> >> measurement is heavily tied to Doppler shift measurement.
> >> >Doppler radar is precisely how every law enforcement radar speed "monitoring" system works. (now watch Jeff prove me wrong again).
> >> Yep. There are other systems (monopulse, phased array, CW, etc) that
> >> will provide other useful information besides speed, such as which
> >> freeway lane the speeding car is in. Mobile speed guns are mostly IR
> >> laser:
> >> <https://kustomsignals.com/handheld-lidar/prolaser-4>
> >> while fixed installations (automatic speed traps) use RF.
> >>
> >> Incidentally, I have two really ancient 24GHz Kustom Road Runner radar
> >> guns. Plenty fun measuring the speed of passing cyclists and
> >> calibrating my car speedometer.
> >> <https://photos.app.goo.gl/92mdDZmTuCQUPEpK9>
> >Right, I got a radar detector as a present a few years ago that has a Lidar detector as well. I really can't use it in my area becasue there are so many other sources that set off the radar section. When I did have it in the car I don't think the lidar warning ever went off, but I had to keep it turned off most of the time since my commute at the time took me through a long section of strip malls with automatic door openers to the stores. You'd think the FCC would have set aside a different band for that.
> Umm... LIDAR is radar using light instead of RF (radio frequencies).

ummm, yeah, I know what the LIDAR acronym means.

> There's nothing in a strip mall that will trigger LIDAR. However, the
> 10.525GHz and 24GHz supermarket Doppler motion detectors will trigger
> radar detectors.

You misunderstood, admittedly I wasn't clear. My point was that the LIDAR section never went off for any reason. The radar section went off at speed traps - the implication being that our local law enforcement didn't use lidar. I then segued into stating that I stopped using the detector because it would go off so annoyingly in congested areas. That wasn't actually related to the fact that the lidar never went off.

>
> A LIDAR speed gun can produce a reading in 0.3 seconds. See data
> sheet at:
> <https://kustomsignals.com/handheld-lidar/prolaser-4>
> In the time your radar detector needs to detect the LIDAR light, the
> speed trap already has your speed and photo, and you don't have any
> time to slow down.

Its pretty much the same for radar. I know of lawsuits that have been filed because someone using a radar detector was ticketed. People generally don't understand that once the radar detector has gone off, the radar gun already has a speed reading. I had a summer job during my first two years of college at Centrolonics corporation in Westford Massachusetts where the Whistler radar detectors were made before they off-shored to taiwan. The summer before my freshman year I was a PC assembler. The next summer I got to work as a test technician in my own personal Faraday cage (well, shared across two shifts). I heard a lot of stories.

>
> As for a dedicated frequency for different services, there's not
> enough spectrum available to do that. The FCC no longer makes
> decisions based on technical merit or need.

They don't now, but back in the 80's they had a lot more authority. They could very well have set aside some BW back then for police radar and forced automatic door openers and intrusion alarms further off.

The ongoing debacle about
> LightSquared/Ligado interfering with GPS is a good example of
> frequency allocation based on politics instead of technology.
> <https://spacenews.com/report-ligados-wireless-network-will-interfere-with-iridium-and-some-gps-services/>
> I can provide about 5 other past examples of politics over-riding
> technology if you want.

I'm sure I can provide as many, if not more.

> --
> Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
> PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 8:39:45 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 09:19:23 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> >
> >I especially like the part that if you die as a result of being vaccinated you should report it to VAERS.
> Did you actually read your reference"

What do you think? That idiot is famous for posting links that contradict what he claims - he still insists the CDC website shows only 8000 deaths from covid.

> I ask as even a casual glance
> tells the reader that:
> "Myocarditis and pericarditis have rarely been reported..."
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

On 9/30/2022 12:31 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 09:04:42 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:27:35 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 15:31:46 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> VAERS is GENERALLY ignored.
>>>
>>> GENERALLY you're right, but it might take a few decades for it to
>>> completely disappear. Even the CDC seems to be abandoning VAERS. The
>>> new and improved version is much better controlled. I'm getting a
>>> bivalent booster vaccination on Oct 6 at the local CVS pharmacy. As
>>> part of the procedure, I create and account and login to:
>>> <https://vsafe.cdc.gov>
>>> which is the replacement for VAERS in the area of vaccines. I create
>>> an account and enter any adverse reactions AFTER the vaccination.
>>> Unlike VAERS, it's not an uncontrolled free for all. I have no idea
>>> if political organizations can obtain access to the data without it
>>> being polluted by VAERS data:
>>> <https://dearpandemic.org/data-on-vaccine-side-effects-from-v-safe/>
>>> <https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8>
>>> If it's managed like it's predecessor (VDS), I predict disaster:
>>> <https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vsd/index.html>
>>>
>>>> Doctors have better things to do than write up reports to the government. So the numbers are unreliable.
>>>
>>> Have you been to a hospital lately? Unfortunately, I have. On every
>>> floor are several rooms with nothing but computer screens. The rooms
>>> I saw had about 10 to 15 computers per room. Same at the nurses
>>> stations. I saw doctors, nurses, administrators, etc spending
>>> considerable time filling out forms on these computers. There were
>>> computers on portable carts rolling around the hallways, also for
>>> filling out forms. When I visited my doctors, the first 15 minutes
>>> was spent correcting the errors entered during the previous visit,
>>> while the last 10 minutes was spent writing a release form and
>>> possibly a visit summary. Sometimes, the doctor does the visit
>>> summary in his office, because those appeared online several days
>>> after the visit. During the visit, there is an assistant present,
>>> continuously entering notes on the computer.
>>>
>>> In your ideal and imaginary world, doctors do only medicine. Reality
>>> is quite different. How much of the data goes to the government, I
>>> don't know. I suspect very little. All the government wants are
>>> summaries, totals, statistics, and legal compliance reports.
>>>
>>> It's good to know that you haven't seen the inside of a hospital in
>>> quite some time. Stay healthy.
>
>> Here all medical records in the hospitals I have been to in the past
>> few years are computerized, to the extent that when "the computer goes
>> down" all patient check in and visits to the doctor stop. When you do
>> get in to see the doctor he will be studying the computer screen....
>> to review your records.
>
> It's about the same here. I haven't had to deal with a computer
> failure yet, but did get delayed 3 hrs while someone repaired the
> printer that produced the release documentation. Not everything was
> fully computerized, so the printed release documentation was needed
> for me to obtain a referral.
>
> My doctor mentioned that he gets only about 5 minutes to review each
> patients file before the interview. Prior to meeting a nurse has
> taken various vitals. I'm also handed a list of drugs and asked to
> verify that everything is correct. It's NEVER correct and hasn't been
> for about 10 years.
>
> To save time, I bring my list of drugs, medical history and current
> problems with me to every visit. That brings the doctor up to date
> faster than trying to sift through the voluminous notes on the
> computer screen. My memory isn't good enough to recall all the
> details and I assume that the doctor is no better. I also bring a
> prepared list of questions because I get nervous and tend to forget my
> assorted problems. The various lists have grown over the years. I
> fumbled during my last visit, when someone wanted to know what time of
> day I take my various drugs. I also bring the results and historical
> graphs of my recent blood tests, which also hasn't been fully
> computerized between different medical establishments. Turf war, I
> guess.
>
> For a typical 30 minute "checkup" office visit, I see the doctor for
> maybe 5 to 10 minutes maximum. The rest is mostly dealing with the
> computers.
>
> In the future, such visits will probably be replaced by a
> "conversation" between my Starfleet medical Tricorder and the doctors
> computer, without the personal involvement of the doctor, nurse, or
> myself.

Long ago (1070s?) I read a science fiction story with a theme of intense
specialization. It was set in a future where, oh, maybe one bike
mechanic would specialize in fixing front flat tires, but would be
unable to help with rear flat tires.

Anyway, in that story, physicians were very low level, low intelligence
workers. There were issued small hand-held devices into which they input
your symptoms. The devices specified the treatments. The author seemed
to be visualizing a "smart phone" or mini-tablet.

Somewhat related: One friend of mine is a professor at a medical
college. In our last conversation, he ranted for quite a while about the
attitudes of most modern medical students. As he described them, they're
all in it for the big house and luxury BMW. They're competent
academically, but fundamentally uninterested in learning. If it's not
going to be on the test, they don't want to bother learning.

We're fortunate to have had an excellent primary care physician for
decades, since his practice was brand new - and we knew him a bit even
before then, when he was in high school. We've been with him so long
that our patient files are thick with actual paper!

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 9/30/2022 8:03 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 2:03:16 AM UTC-4, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> A LIDAR speed gun can produce a reading in 0.3 seconds. See data
>> sheet at:
>> <https://kustomsignals.com/handheld-lidar/prolaser-4>
>> In the time your radar detector needs to detect the LIDAR light, the
>> speed trap already has your speed and photo, and you don't have any
>> time to slow down.
>
> Its pretty much the same for radar. I know of lawsuits that have been filed because someone using a radar detector was ticketed. People generally don't understand that once the radar detector has gone off, the radar gun already has a speed reading.

While I've never used one, I always thought the rationale for radar
detectors was that they'd pick up the signal that was beamed at another
car up ahead of you, hopefully early enough to slow down if necessary.

My only use of radar has been (back when I was sorta fast) to sprint at
one of those "Your Speed Is..." radar road signs. I was proud when I
registered 30 mph.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:24:14 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 9/30/2022 12:31 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 09:04:42 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:27:35 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 15:31:46 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> VAERS is GENERALLY ignored.
>>>>
>>>> GENERALLY you're right, but it might take a few decades for it to
>>>> completely disappear. Even the CDC seems to be abandoning VAERS. The
>>>> new and improved version is much better controlled. I'm getting a
>>>> bivalent booster vaccination on Oct 6 at the local CVS pharmacy. As
>>>> part of the procedure, I create and account and login to:
>>>> <https://vsafe.cdc.gov>
>>>> which is the replacement for VAERS in the area of vaccines. I create
>>>> an account and enter any adverse reactions AFTER the vaccination.
>>>> Unlike VAERS, it's not an uncontrolled free for all. I have no idea
>>>> if political organizations can obtain access to the data without it
>>>> being polluted by VAERS data:
>>>> <https://dearpandemic.org/data-on-vaccine-side-effects-from-v-safe/>
>>>> <https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8>
>>>> If it's managed like it's predecessor (VDS), I predict disaster:
>>>> <https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vsd/index.html>
>>>>
>>>>> Doctors have better things to do than write up reports to the government. So the numbers are unreliable.
>>>>
>>>> Have you been to a hospital lately? Unfortunately, I have. On every
>>>> floor are several rooms with nothing but computer screens. The rooms
>>>> I saw had about 10 to 15 computers per room. Same at the nurses
>>>> stations. I saw doctors, nurses, administrators, etc spending
>>>> considerable time filling out forms on these computers. There were
>>>> computers on portable carts rolling around the hallways, also for
>>>> filling out forms. When I visited my doctors, the first 15 minutes
>>>> was spent correcting the errors entered during the previous visit,
>>>> while the last 10 minutes was spent writing a release form and
>>>> possibly a visit summary. Sometimes, the doctor does the visit
>>>> summary in his office, because those appeared online several days
>>>> after the visit. During the visit, there is an assistant present,
>>>> continuously entering notes on the computer.
>>>>
>>>> In your ideal and imaginary world, doctors do only medicine. Reality
>>>> is quite different. How much of the data goes to the government, I
>>>> don't know. I suspect very little. All the government wants are
>>>> summaries, totals, statistics, and legal compliance reports.
>>>>
>>>> It's good to know that you haven't seen the inside of a hospital in
>>>> quite some time. Stay healthy.
>>
>>> Here all medical records in the hospitals I have been to in the past
>>> few years are computerized, to the extent that when "the computer goes
>>> down" all patient check in and visits to the doctor stop. When you do
>>> get in to see the doctor he will be studying the computer screen....
>>> to review your records.
>>
>> It's about the same here. I haven't had to deal with a computer
>> failure yet, but did get delayed 3 hrs while someone repaired the
>> printer that produced the release documentation. Not everything was
>> fully computerized, so the printed release documentation was needed
>> for me to obtain a referral.
>>
>> My doctor mentioned that he gets only about 5 minutes to review each
>> patients file before the interview. Prior to meeting a nurse has
>> taken various vitals. I'm also handed a list of drugs and asked to
>> verify that everything is correct. It's NEVER correct and hasn't been
>> for about 10 years.
>>
>> To save time, I bring my list of drugs, medical history and current
>> problems with me to every visit. That brings the doctor up to date
>> faster than trying to sift through the voluminous notes on the
>> computer screen. My memory isn't good enough to recall all the
>> details and I assume that the doctor is no better. I also bring a
>> prepared list of questions because I get nervous and tend to forget my
>> assorted problems. The various lists have grown over the years. I
>> fumbled during my last visit, when someone wanted to know what time of
>> day I take my various drugs. I also bring the results and historical
>> graphs of my recent blood tests, which also hasn't been fully
>> computerized between different medical establishments. Turf war, I
>> guess.
>>
>> For a typical 30 minute "checkup" office visit, I see the doctor for
>> maybe 5 to 10 minutes maximum. The rest is mostly dealing with the
>> computers.
>>
>> In the future, such visits will probably be replaced by a
>> "conversation" between my Starfleet medical Tricorder and the doctors
>> computer, without the personal involvement of the doctor, nurse, or
>> myself.
>
>Long ago (1070s?) I read a science fiction story with a theme of intense
>specialization. It was set in a future where, oh, maybe one bike
>mechanic would specialize in fixing front flat tires, but would be
>unable to help with rear flat tires.
>
>Anyway, in that story, physicians were very low level, low intelligence
>workers. There were issued small hand-held devices into which they input
>your symptoms. The devices specified the treatments. The author seemed
>to be visualizing a "smart phone" or mini-tablet.
>
>Somewhat related: One friend of mine is a professor at a medical
>college. In our last conversation, he ranted for quite a while about the
>attitudes of most modern medical students. As he described them, they're
>all in it for the big house and luxury BMW. They're competent
>academically, but fundamentally uninterested in learning. If it's not
>going to be on the test, they don't want to bother learning.
>
>We're fortunate to have had an excellent primary care physician for
>decades, since his practice was brand new - and we knew him a bit even
>before then, when he was in high school. We've been with him so long
>that our patient files are thick with actual paper!

Years ago I knew a "Special Forces Medic" and these people had
considerably more training then the ordinary "Medic". They shot dogs
and then treated the bullet wound, for example. He told me that the
most terrifying tests that they took were diagnoses. Given a list of
symptoms and test results and asked what was the most likely cause,
2nd most likely, and so on. He said that when the patient was a USian,
in the U.S. it wasn't too difficult but sometimes the patient was
designated as "a local native of N.E. Burma" or some such thing, which
broadened the possibilities tremendously.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:24:14 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Long ago (1070s?) I read a science fiction story with a theme of intense
>specialization. It was set in a future where, oh, maybe one bike
>mechanic would specialize in fixing front flat tires, but would be
>unable to help with rear flat tires.
>
>Anyway, in that story, physicians were very low level, low intelligence
>workers. There were issued small hand-held devices into which they input
>your symptoms. The devices specified the treatments. The author seemed
>to be visualizing a "smart phone" or mini-tablet.

That's already the case for "factory service" in the automotive
industry. The problem is that it's too expensive to train a mechanic
to do everything. So, the person with "mechanic" inscribed on his
overalls, plugs a diagnostic interface into the vehicle ODB2 ports,
connects to the mother ship via the internet, and waits for the
computer to provide him with a laundry list of things to check and
replace. I've seen the output and it's both amazingly detailed and
often totally wrong. The instructions to the "mechanic" are to follow
the procedures and replace the parts in the order recommended. If the
vehicle recovers, then he can stop. Otherwise, he keeps replacing
parts until there are no more parts to replace.

Telemedicine seems to be drifting in the same direction. Currently,
it is possible to "meet" with a doctor using Zoom or other
conferencing software. However, what I'm seeing is less and less
doctor and more an more what you might call specialists. In many
ways, that's a good thing. However, like all good things, it will
probably turn into a nightmare when it becomes over-used and
over-subscribed.

>Somewhat related: One friend of mine is a professor at a medical
>college. In our last conversation, he ranted for quite a while about the
>attitudes of most modern medical students. As he described them, they're
>all in it for the big house and luxury BMW. They're competent
>academically, but fundamentally uninterested in learning. If it's not
>going to be on the test, they don't want to bother learning.

That was me while attending college. I did the absolute minimum
required to survive the class. The time saved was spent "learning by
doing" and other marginally academic activities. I also had to be
employed at least part time in order to afford college, and had to
carry a minimum unit load to avoid getting drafted. The only time I
wasn't working was the last two quarters before I graduated, where a
begged my parents for money so I wouldn't need to work and could
concentrate on salvaging my GPA (grade point average).

A common adage was the way to recognize future doctors in school was
by their low grades in science and math. I never bothered to check,
but it seems likely.

>We're fortunate to have had an excellent primary care physician for
>decades, since his practice was brand new - and we knew him a bit even
>before then, when he was in high school. We've been with him so long
>that our patient files are thick with actual paper!

Paper? That hasn't been banned yet in California. Natural gas
heating and 1 lb propane camping cylinders will soon be difficult to
find:
<https://camperreport.com/california-bans-propane-cans/>
<https://www.agweb.com/markets/pro-farmer-analysis/california-first-state-ban-natural-gas-heaters-furnaces>
Paper products are further down the list of things to ban.
Like the Bush 2.0 war against terror, the war against the products
that make our civilization worthwhile also never ends.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 12:31:52 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 9/30/2022 8:03 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 2:03:16 AM UTC-4, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> A LIDAR speed gun can produce a reading in 0.3 seconds. See data
> >> sheet at:
> >> <https://kustomsignals.com/handheld-lidar/prolaser-4>
> >> In the time your radar detector needs to detect the LIDAR light, the
> >> speed trap already has your speed and photo, and you don't have any
> >> time to slow down.
> >
> > Its pretty much the same for radar. I know of lawsuits that have been filed because someone using a radar detector was ticketed. People generally don't understand that once the radar detector has gone off, the radar gun already has a speed reading.
> While I've never used one, I always thought the rationale for radar
> detectors was that they'd pick up the signal that was beamed at another
> car up ahead of you, hopefully early enough to slow down if necessary.

That's _a_ rationale. I remember one place the cops in a small town I used to live in would set up a radar trap was around a right-hand bend in the road after a long straight downhill, there was a steel guardrail on the left side of the road. What they didn't realize was that the radar would bounce off the guard rail, so anyone who had a radar detector would see them 1/4 mile away, but the signal coming back to the cop car wasn't "reliable" enough to get an accurate reading until you actually got around the bend.

>
> My only use of radar has been (back when I was sorta fast) to sprint at
> one of those "Your Speed Is..." radar road signs. I was proud when I
> registered 30 mph.
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

On 9/30/2022 8:24 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:24:14 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 9/30/2022 12:31 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 09:04:42 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:27:35 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 15:31:46 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>>>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> VAERS is GENERALLY ignored.
>>>>>
>>>>> GENERALLY you're right, but it might take a few decades for it to
>>>>> completely disappear. Even the CDC seems to be abandoning VAERS. The
>>>>> new and improved version is much better controlled. I'm getting a
>>>>> bivalent booster vaccination on Oct 6 at the local CVS pharmacy. As
>>>>> part of the procedure, I create and account and login to:
>>>>> <https://vsafe.cdc.gov>
>>>>> which is the replacement for VAERS in the area of vaccines. I create
>>>>> an account and enter any adverse reactions AFTER the vaccination.
>>>>> Unlike VAERS, it's not an uncontrolled free for all. I have no idea
>>>>> if political organizations can obtain access to the data without it
>>>>> being polluted by VAERS data:
>>>>> <https://dearpandemic.org/data-on-vaccine-side-effects-from-v-safe/>
>>>>> <https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8>
>>>>> If it's managed like it's predecessor (VDS), I predict disaster:
>>>>> <https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vsd/index.html>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Doctors have better things to do than write up reports to the government. So the numbers are unreliable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you been to a hospital lately? Unfortunately, I have. On every
>>>>> floor are several rooms with nothing but computer screens. The rooms
>>>>> I saw had about 10 to 15 computers per room. Same at the nurses
>>>>> stations. I saw doctors, nurses, administrators, etc spending
>>>>> considerable time filling out forms on these computers. There were
>>>>> computers on portable carts rolling around the hallways, also for
>>>>> filling out forms. When I visited my doctors, the first 15 minutes
>>>>> was spent correcting the errors entered during the previous visit,
>>>>> while the last 10 minutes was spent writing a release form and
>>>>> possibly a visit summary. Sometimes, the doctor does the visit
>>>>> summary in his office, because those appeared online several days
>>>>> after the visit. During the visit, there is an assistant present,
>>>>> continuously entering notes on the computer.
>>>>>
>>>>> In your ideal and imaginary world, doctors do only medicine. Reality
>>>>> is quite different. How much of the data goes to the government, I
>>>>> don't know. I suspect very little. All the government wants are
>>>>> summaries, totals, statistics, and legal compliance reports.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's good to know that you haven't seen the inside of a hospital in
>>>>> quite some time. Stay healthy.
>>>
>>>> Here all medical records in the hospitals I have been to in the past
>>>> few years are computerized, to the extent that when "the computer goes
>>>> down" all patient check in and visits to the doctor stop. When you do
>>>> get in to see the doctor he will be studying the computer screen....
>>>> to review your records.
>>>
>>> It's about the same here. I haven't had to deal with a computer
>>> failure yet, but did get delayed 3 hrs while someone repaired the
>>> printer that produced the release documentation. Not everything was
>>> fully computerized, so the printed release documentation was needed
>>> for me to obtain a referral.
>>>
>>> My doctor mentioned that he gets only about 5 minutes to review each
>>> patients file before the interview. Prior to meeting a nurse has
>>> taken various vitals. I'm also handed a list of drugs and asked to
>>> verify that everything is correct. It's NEVER correct and hasn't been
>>> for about 10 years.
>>>
>>> To save time, I bring my list of drugs, medical history and current
>>> problems with me to every visit. That brings the doctor up to date
>>> faster than trying to sift through the voluminous notes on the
>>> computer screen. My memory isn't good enough to recall all the
>>> details and I assume that the doctor is no better. I also bring a
>>> prepared list of questions because I get nervous and tend to forget my
>>> assorted problems. The various lists have grown over the years. I
>>> fumbled during my last visit, when someone wanted to know what time of
>>> day I take my various drugs. I also bring the results and historical
>>> graphs of my recent blood tests, which also hasn't been fully
>>> computerized between different medical establishments. Turf war, I
>>> guess.
>>>
>>> For a typical 30 minute "checkup" office visit, I see the doctor for
>>> maybe 5 to 10 minutes maximum. The rest is mostly dealing with the
>>> computers.
>>>
>>> In the future, such visits will probably be replaced by a
>>> "conversation" between my Starfleet medical Tricorder and the doctors
>>> computer, without the personal involvement of the doctor, nurse, or
>>> myself.
>>
>> Long ago (1070s?) I read a science fiction story with a theme of intense
>> specialization. It was set in a future where, oh, maybe one bike
>> mechanic would specialize in fixing front flat tires, but would be
>> unable to help with rear flat tires.
>>
>> Anyway, in that story, physicians were very low level, low intelligence
>> workers. There were issued small hand-held devices into which they input
>> your symptoms. The devices specified the treatments. The author seemed
>> to be visualizing a "smart phone" or mini-tablet.
>>
>> Somewhat related: One friend of mine is a professor at a medical
>> college. In our last conversation, he ranted for quite a while about the
>> attitudes of most modern medical students. As he described them, they're
>> all in it for the big house and luxury BMW. They're competent
>> academically, but fundamentally uninterested in learning. If it's not
>> going to be on the test, they don't want to bother learning.
>>
>> We're fortunate to have had an excellent primary care physician for
>> decades, since his practice was brand new - and we knew him a bit even
>> before then, when he was in high school. We've been with him so long
>> that our patient files are thick with actual paper!
>
> Years ago I knew a "Special Forces Medic" and these people had
> considerably more training then the ordinary "Medic". They shot dogs
> and then treated the bullet wound, for example. He told me that the
> most terrifying tests that they took were diagnoses. Given a list of
> symptoms and test results and asked what was the most likely cause,
> 2nd most likely, and so on. He said that when the patient was a USian,
> in the U.S. it wasn't too difficult but sometimes the patient was
> designated as "a local native of N.E. Burma" or some such thing, which
> broadened the possibilities tremendously.

I think using computers for diagnosis could or should generally make
sense. I assume what a physician is doing is mentally processing a
flowchart or a checklist of some kind - as in, "He's got a fever but he
had no chest congestion. His complexion is pale and his blood pressure
is higher than normal... what could this be?" ISTM that could be done
more efficiently and reliably by entering those data points into software.

The same medical professor said that computing power already beats
clinical judgment in many cases. The specific example he gave was
deciding whether a skin lesion is skin cancer or not.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 10/1/2022 10:15 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 9/30/2022 8:24 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:24:14 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/30/2022 12:31 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 09:04:42 +0700, John B.
>>>> <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:27:35 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
>>>>> <jeffl@cruzio.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 15:31:46 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>>>>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> VAERS is GENERALLY ignored.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> GENERALLY you're right, but it might take a few
>>>>>> decades for it to
>>>>>> completely disappear. Even the CDC seems to be
>>>>>> abandoning VAERS. The
>>>>>> new and improved version is much better controlled.
>>>>>> I'm getting a
>>>>>> bivalent booster vaccination on Oct 6 at the local CVS
>>>>>> pharmacy. As
>>>>>> part of the procedure, I create and account and login to:
>>>>>> <https://vsafe.cdc.gov>
>>>>>> which is the replacement for VAERS in the area of
>>>>>> vaccines. I create
>>>>>> an account and enter any adverse reactions AFTER the
>>>>>> vaccination.
>>>>>> Unlike VAERS, it's not an uncontrolled free for all.
>>>>>> I have no idea
>>>>>> if political organizations can obtain access to the
>>>>>> data without it
>>>>>> being polluted by VAERS data:
>>>>>> <https://dearpandemic.org/data-on-vaccine-side-effects-from-v-safe/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8>
>>>>>> If it's managed like it's predecessor (VDS), I predict
>>>>>> disaster:
>>>>>> <https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vsd/index.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doctors have better things to do than write up
>>>>>>> reports to the government. So the numbers are
>>>>>>> unreliable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you been to a hospital lately? Unfortunately, I
>>>>>> have. On every
>>>>>> floor are several rooms with nothing but computer
>>>>>> screens. The rooms
>>>>>> I saw had about 10 to 15 computers per room. Same at
>>>>>> the nurses
>>>>>> stations. I saw doctors, nurses, administrators, etc
>>>>>> spending
>>>>>> considerable time filling out forms on these
>>>>>> computers. There were
>>>>>> computers on portable carts rolling around the
>>>>>> hallways, also for
>>>>>> filling out forms. When I visited my doctors, the
>>>>>> first 15 minutes
>>>>>> was spent correcting the errors entered during the
>>>>>> previous visit,
>>>>>> while the last 10 minutes was spent writing a release
>>>>>> form and
>>>>>> possibly a visit summary. Sometimes, the doctor does
>>>>>> the visit
>>>>>> summary in his office, because those appeared online
>>>>>> several days
>>>>>> after the visit. During the visit, there is an
>>>>>> assistant present,
>>>>>> continuously entering notes on the computer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In your ideal and imaginary world, doctors do only
>>>>>> medicine. Reality
>>>>>> is quite different. How much of the data goes to the
>>>>>> government, I
>>>>>> don't know. I suspect very little. All the
>>>>>> government wants are
>>>>>> summaries, totals, statistics, and legal compliance
>>>>>> reports.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's good to know that you haven't seen the inside of
>>>>>> a hospital in
>>>>>> quite some time. Stay healthy.
>>>>
>>>>> Here all medical records in the hospitals I have been
>>>>> to in the past
>>>>> few years are computerized, to the extent that when
>>>>> "the computer goes
>>>>> down" all patient check in and visits to the doctor
>>>>> stop. When you do
>>>>> get in to see the doctor he will be studying the
>>>>> computer screen....
>>>>> to review your records.
>>>>
>>>> It's about the same here. I haven't had to deal with a
>>>> computer
>>>> failure yet, but did get delayed 3 hrs while someone
>>>> repaired the
>>>> printer that produced the release documentation. Not
>>>> everything was
>>>> fully computerized, so the printed release documentation
>>>> was needed
>>>> for me to obtain a referral.
>>>>
>>>> My doctor mentioned that he gets only about 5 minutes to
>>>> review each
>>>> patients file before the interview. Prior to meeting a
>>>> nurse has
>>>> taken various vitals. I'm also handed a list of drugs
>>>> and asked to
>>>> verify that everything is correct. It's NEVER correct
>>>> and hasn't been
>>>> for about 10 years.
>>>>
>>>> To save time, I bring my list of drugs, medical history
>>>> and current
>>>> problems with me to every visit. That brings the doctor
>>>> up to date
>>>> faster than trying to sift through the voluminous notes
>>>> on the
>>>> computer screen. My memory isn't good enough to recall
>>>> all the
>>>> details and I assume that the doctor is no better. I
>>>> also bring a
>>>> prepared list of questions because I get nervous and
>>>> tend to forget my
>>>> assorted problems. The various lists have grown over
>>>> the years. I
>>>> fumbled during my last visit, when someone wanted to
>>>> know what time of
>>>> day I take my various drugs. I also bring the results
>>>> and historical
>>>> graphs of my recent blood tests, which also hasn't been
>>>> fully
>>>> computerized between different medical establishments.
>>>> Turf war, I
>>>> guess.
>>>>
>>>> For a typical 30 minute "checkup" office visit, I see
>>>> the doctor for
>>>> maybe 5 to 10 minutes maximum. The rest is mostly
>>>> dealing with the
>>>> computers.
>>>>
>>>> In the future, such visits will probably be replaced by a
>>>> "conversation" between my Starfleet medical Tricorder
>>>> and the doctors
>>>> computer, without the personal involvement of the
>>>> doctor, nurse, or
>>>> myself.
>>>
>>> Long ago (1070s?) I read a science fiction story with a
>>> theme of intense
>>> specialization. It was set in a future where, oh, maybe
>>> one bike
>>> mechanic would specialize in fixing front flat tires, but
>>> would be
>>> unable to help with rear flat tires.
>>>
>>> Anyway, in that story, physicians were very low level,
>>> low intelligence
>>> workers. There were issued small hand-held devices into
>>> which they input
>>> your symptoms. The devices specified the treatments. The
>>> author seemed
>>> to be visualizing a "smart phone" or mini-tablet.
>>>
>>> Somewhat related: One friend of mine is a professor at a
>>> medical
>>> college. In our last conversation, he ranted for quite a
>>> while about the
>>> attitudes of most modern medical students. As he
>>> described them, they're
>>> all in it for the big house and luxury BMW. They're
>>> competent
>>> academically, but fundamentally uninterested in learning.
>>> If it's not
>>> going to be on the test, they don't want to bother learning.
>>>
>>> We're fortunate to have had an excellent primary care
>>> physician for
>>> decades, since his practice was brand new - and we knew
>>> him a bit even
>>> before then, when he was in high school. We've been with
>>> him so long
>>> that our patient files are thick with actual paper!
>>
>> Years ago I knew a "Special Forces Medic" and these people
>> had
>> considerably more training then the ordinary "Medic". They
>> shot dogs
>> and then treated the bullet wound, for example. He told me
>> that the
>> most terrifying tests that they took were diagnoses. Given
>> a list of
>> symptoms and test results and asked what was the most
>> likely cause,
>> 2nd most likely, and so on. He said that when the patient
>> was a USian,
>> in the U.S. it wasn't too difficult but sometimes the
>> patient was
>> designated as "a local native of N.E. Burma" or some such
>> thing, which
>> broadened the possibilities tremendously.
>
> I think using computers for diagnosis could or should
> generally make sense. I assume what a physician is doing is
> mentally processing a flowchart or a checklist of some kind
> - as in, "He's got a fever but he had no chest congestion.
> His complexion is pale and his blood pressure is higher than
> normal... what could this be?" ISTM that could be done more
> efficiently and reliably by entering those data points into
> software.
>
> The same medical professor said that computing power already
> beats clinical judgment in many cases. The specific example
> he gave was deciding whether a skin lesion is skin cancer or
> not.
>

On Saturday, October 1, 2022 at 9:03:54 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 10/1/2022 10:15 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 9/30/2022 8:24 PM, John B. wrote:
> >> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:24:14 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> >> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 9/30/2022 12:31 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 09:04:42 +0700, John B.
> >>>> <sloc...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:27:35 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
> >>>>> <je...@cruzio.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 15:31:46 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> >>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> VAERS is GENERALLY ignored.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> GENERALLY you're right, but it might take a few
> >>>>>> decades for it to
> >>>>>> completely disappear. Even the CDC seems to be
> >>>>>> abandoning VAERS. The
> >>>>>> new and improved version is much better controlled.
> >>>>>> I'm getting a
> >>>>>> bivalent booster vaccination on Oct 6 at the local CVS
> >>>>>> pharmacy. As
> >>>>>> part of the procedure, I create and account and login to:
> >>>>>> <https://vsafe.cdc.gov>
> >>>>>> which is the replacement for VAERS in the area of
> >>>>>> vaccines. I create
> >>>>>> an account and enter any adverse reactions AFTER the
> >>>>>> vaccination.
> >>>>>> Unlike VAERS, it's not an uncontrolled free for all.
> >>>>>> I have no idea
> >>>>>> if political organizations can obtain access to the
> >>>>>> data without it
> >>>>>> being polluted by VAERS data:
> >>>>>> <https://dearpandemic.org/data-on-vaccine-side-effects-from-v-safe/>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> <https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8>
> >>>>>> If it's managed like it's predecessor (VDS), I predict
> >>>>>> disaster:
> >>>>>> <https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vsd/index.html>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Doctors have better things to do than write up
> >>>>>>> reports to the government. So the numbers are
> >>>>>>> unreliable.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Have you been to a hospital lately? Unfortunately, I
> >>>>>> have. On every
> >>>>>> floor are several rooms with nothing but computer
> >>>>>> screens. The rooms
> >>>>>> I saw had about 10 to 15 computers per room. Same at
> >>>>>> the nurses
> >>>>>> stations. I saw doctors, nurses, administrators, etc
> >>>>>> spending
> >>>>>> considerable time filling out forms on these
> >>>>>> computers. There were
> >>>>>> computers on portable carts rolling around the
> >>>>>> hallways, also for
> >>>>>> filling out forms. When I visited my doctors, the
> >>>>>> first 15 minutes
> >>>>>> was spent correcting the errors entered during the
> >>>>>> previous visit,
> >>>>>> while the last 10 minutes was spent writing a release
> >>>>>> form and
> >>>>>> possibly a visit summary. Sometimes, the doctor does
> >>>>>> the visit
> >>>>>> summary in his office, because those appeared online
> >>>>>> several days
> >>>>>> after the visit. During the visit, there is an
> >>>>>> assistant present,
> >>>>>> continuously entering notes on the computer.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In your ideal and imaginary world, doctors do only
> >>>>>> medicine. Reality
> >>>>>> is quite different. How much of the data goes to the
> >>>>>> government, I
> >>>>>> don't know. I suspect very little. All the
> >>>>>> government wants are
> >>>>>> summaries, totals, statistics, and legal compliance
> >>>>>> reports.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It's good to know that you haven't seen the inside of
> >>>>>> a hospital in
> >>>>>> quite some time. Stay healthy.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Here all medical records in the hospitals I have been
> >>>>> to in the past
> >>>>> few years are computerized, to the extent that when
> >>>>> "the computer goes
> >>>>> down" all patient check in and visits to the doctor
> >>>>> stop. When you do
> >>>>> get in to see the doctor he will be studying the
> >>>>> computer screen....
> >>>>> to review your records.
> >>>>
> >>>> It's about the same here. I haven't had to deal with a
> >>>> computer
> >>>> failure yet, but did get delayed 3 hrs while someone
> >>>> repaired the
> >>>> printer that produced the release documentation. Not
> >>>> everything was
> >>>> fully computerized, so the printed release documentation
> >>>> was needed
> >>>> for me to obtain a referral.
> >>>>
> >>>> My doctor mentioned that he gets only about 5 minutes to
> >>>> review each
> >>>> patients file before the interview. Prior to meeting a
> >>>> nurse has
> >>>> taken various vitals. I'm also handed a list of drugs
> >>>> and asked to
> >>>> verify that everything is correct. It's NEVER correct
> >>>> and hasn't been
> >>>> for about 10 years.
> >>>>
> >>>> To save time, I bring my list of drugs, medical history
> >>>> and current
> >>>> problems with me to every visit. That brings the doctor
> >>>> up to date
> >>>> faster than trying to sift through the voluminous notes
> >>>> on the
> >>>> computer screen. My memory isn't good enough to recall
> >>>> all the
> >>>> details and I assume that the doctor is no better. I
> >>>> also bring a
> >>>> prepared list of questions because I get nervous and
> >>>> tend to forget my
> >>>> assorted problems. The various lists have grown over
> >>>> the years. I
> >>>> fumbled during my last visit, when someone wanted to
> >>>> know what time of
> >>>> day I take my various drugs. I also bring the results
> >>>> and historical
> >>>> graphs of my recent blood tests, which also hasn't been
> >>>> fully
> >>>> computerized between different medical establishments.
> >>>> Turf war, I
> >>>> guess.
> >>>>
> >>>> For a typical 30 minute "checkup" office visit, I see
> >>>> the doctor for
> >>>> maybe 5 to 10 minutes maximum. The rest is mostly
> >>>> dealing with the
> >>>> computers.
> >>>>
> >>>> In the future, such visits will probably be replaced by a
> >>>> "conversation" between my Starfleet medical Tricorder
> >>>> and the doctors
> >>>> computer, without the personal involvement of the
> >>>> doctor, nurse, or
> >>>> myself.
> >>>
> >>> Long ago (1070s?) I read a science fiction story with a
> >>> theme of intense
> >>> specialization. It was set in a future where, oh, maybe
> >>> one bike
> >>> mechanic would specialize in fixing front flat tires, but
> >>> would be
> >>> unable to help with rear flat tires.
> >>>
> >>> Anyway, in that story, physicians were very low level,
> >>> low intelligence
> >>> workers. There were issued small hand-held devices into
> >>> which they input
> >>> your symptoms. The devices specified the treatments. The
> >>> author seemed
> >>> to be visualizing a "smart phone" or mini-tablet.
> >>>
> >>> Somewhat related: One friend of mine is a professor at a
> >>> medical
> >>> college. In our last conversation, he ranted for quite a
> >>> while about the
> >>> attitudes of most modern medical students. As he
> >>> described them, they're
> >>> all in it for the big house and luxury BMW. They're
> >>> competent
> >>> academically, but fundamentally uninterested in learning.
> >>> If it's not
> >>> going to be on the test, they don't want to bother learning.
> >>>
> >>> We're fortunate to have had an excellent primary care
> >>> physician for
> >>> decades, since his practice was brand new - and we knew
> >>> him a bit even
> >>> before then, when he was in high school. We've been with
> >>> him so long
> >>> that our patient files are thick with actual paper!
> >>
> >> Years ago I knew a "Special Forces Medic" and these people
> >> had
> >> considerably more training then the ordinary "Medic". They
> >> shot dogs
> >> and then treated the bullet wound, for example. He told me
> >> that the
> >> most terrifying tests that they took were diagnoses. Given
> >> a list of
> >> symptoms and test results and asked what was the most
> >> likely cause,
> >> 2nd most likely, and so on. He said that when the patient
> >> was a USian,
> >> in the U.S. it wasn't too difficult but sometimes the
> >> patient was
> >> designated as "a local native of N.E. Burma" or some such
> >> thing, which
> >> broadened the possibilities tremendously.
> >
> > I think using computers for diagnosis could or should
> > generally make sense. I assume what a physician is doing is
> > mentally processing a flowchart or a checklist of some kind
> > - as in, "He's got a fever but he had no chest congestion.
> > His complexion is pale and his blood pressure is higher than
> > normal... what could this be?" ISTM that could be done more
> > efficiently and reliably by entering those data points into
> > software.
> >
> > The same medical professor said that computing power already
> > beats clinical judgment in many cases. The specific example
> > he gave was deciding whether a skin lesion is skin cancer or
> > not.
> >
> I get your analysis but it's a system not a profession.
>
> The brother of a good friend is a family practice GP in
> suburban Milwaukee who's taking early retirement. Mothers
> bring in children with earaches or runny noses or such,
> bacteria test negative. He explains that it's viral but
> mothers demand antibiotics (ineffective for viruses). Being
> right and being professional gets you an online rating of
> 'bad doctor'. AI won't help that.

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 14:19:25 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>VAEERS works pretty good in general to report adverse effects
>in most vaccines but the covid-19 vaccines didn't even qualify
>as vaccines.

It's called VAERS, not VAEERS, and it's not intended to establish
causality:
<https://vaers.hhs.gov/about.html>
"VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused a health
problem". This is the 5th time I've mentioned this to you.

>Then he can tell us that VAIDS isn't a real disease brought on
>by multiple injections of mRNA vaccines after your immune system
>already is reacting to the SARS-Cov-2 spike protein.

"Fact Check-‘VAIDS’ is not a real vaccine-induced syndrome, experts
say; no evidence COVID-19 vaccines cause immunodeficiency"
<https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaids-fakes/fact-check-vaids-is-not-a-real-vaccine-induced-syndrome-experts-say-no-evidence-covid-19-vaccines-cause-immunodeficiency-idUSL1N2UM1C7>
(Feb 11, 2022)
"Contrary to claims circulating online, there is no such thing as a
"vaccine-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome" or "VAIDS", according to
experts consulted by Reuters."

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558