morsel

It starts off insidiously.

First a small bite, a tantalising taste - I savour the spicy richness, the crisp texture resounds in my head. My taste buds buzz with delight.

I pause and wait, comtemplating the experience, absentmindedly reflecting back on the experience that has just passed as I go on with other things I was doing previously. Time passes.

The last threads of flavours die out, and slowly, my attention once again becomes focussed on the little bowl on my table. I stop doing what I'm doing, and delicately pick out my next target within the pile. This time the sharp tanginess is expected, but the burst of flavour is just as pleasing as before. I munch away, and the sensations gradually fade out as they chase the remnants running down my throat. Time passes.

This time, subconscious thoughts penetrate through my mind, popping up here and there, wondering about when the next might be. I am confused as I am distracted away from my task at hand. I look around the room, searching for what might be bothering me - my gaze once again rests on the little white dish. I grab the most perfect of the lot - little specks of colour speckling across the regular rounded shape - and quickly gobble it down. The flavour hits the palate, and I am sated.

The flavour is disappearing, but there is still a lingering question on my tongue. I frown. Attention wanders between the books and the bowl. There is a quick but intense inner struggle, me watching on the sidelines, not knowing what the outcome will be. But of course, I do know. My hand reaches out, and grabs whatever it can. This time I get the same hit, but it is somehow different. My tongue searches for what it is after, but yet can't quite locate. The flavour has built up, with this new assault combined with the remnants of the previous one, yet it is somehow not enough.

I quickly combine a pile easy enough to fit into my mouth now, and gobble it. I pass the contents around my mouth, searching longingly for the climax to hit, yet it is not quite there nor the same. The bitter saltiness is starting to creep up upon my palate, as the initial vestiges of the fine spiciness dwindle down to nothing. My books are forgotton about.

I lick my fingers now, searching longingly for the elusive target that may have accidentally been stuck there. They lack the overwhelming saltiness, but yet don't satiate me entirely. My handfuls grow by the second, as more and more are needed to keep my mind at peace. The white ceramic bowl is soon empty.

Soon, bowl after bowl is filled and emptied soon after the contents leave there resting place, and my physiological dependence and tolerance grows. There is no more pleasure in this endeavour - it is just keeping whatever stimulation on my tongue going for as long as possible. I am scared of letting the feeling go away. Brine overwhelms my fingers, and my senses - I can smell nothing but the ooze of the flavour hanging around the gritty ends of my teeth now. I feel I can go no further.

But the package is still not finished, a small group of left-overs sitting at the bottom. Though not wanting to continue the onslaught to my senses, reason finally succumbs; physiological dependence finally gives way to psychological dependence, and the rest are ungratiously spilled out on the used and dirty bowl and licked up clean.

And then, just like that, it is finished. There is no more. I am exhausted. Brief thoughts of grabbing a new lot cross my mind, but are duly shut out. I am nauseated. And then I think how lucky it is that there was an endpoint to all of this, that I was able to stop.

The complete stages of addiction, over a bag of chips.

Theory Evaluation

From the history, philosophy and sociology of science, there are at least four fundamental categories of criteria by which theories are judged:
(1) logical criteria
(2) empirical criteria
(3) sociological criteria
(4) historical criteria.

(1) Logical criteria:
(a) a simple, unifying idea that postulates nothing unnecessary
(b) logically consistent internally
(c) logically falsifiable
(d) clearly limited by explicitly stated boundary conditions so that it is clear whether or not any particular data are or are not relevant to the verification of falsification of the theory.

(2) Empirical criteria:
(a) be empirically testable itself or lead to predictions or retrodictions that are testable
(b) actually make verified predictions and/or retrodictions
(c) concern reproducible results
(d) provide criteria for the interpretation of data as facts, artifacts, anomalies, or as irrelevant.

(3) Sociological criteria:
(a) resolve recognised problems, paradoxes, and/or anomalies irresolvable on the basis of preexisting scientific theories
(b) pose a new set of scientific problems upon which scientists may work
(c) posit a "paradigm" or problem-solving model by which these new problems may be expected to be resolved
(d) provide definitions of concepts or operations beneficial to the problem-solving abilities of other scientists

(4) Historical criteria:
(a) meet or surpass all of the criteria set by its predecessors or demonstrate that any abandoned criteria are artifactual
(b) be able to accrue the epistemological status acquired by previous theories through their history of testing (i.e. be able to explain all of the data gathered under previous relevant theories in terms either of fact or artifact, without anomalies
(c) be consistent with all preexisting ancillary theories that already have established scientific validity.

(From: On Defining a Scientific Theory)

Metablog

Why do I blog?

I've been wondering for a while. I don't think that I particularly blog for exactly the same reasons as other people do...

I don't I particularly type for others to see. It's purpose is not really for others to see, and for me, I don't think that essentially it should make much difference what others think of me. Ideally, it should just be my own feelings that are produced, and it shouldn't matter what others judge me by, as I should have integrity, and just go by what I evaluate to be best. In other words, I shouldn't have to cave in to peer pressure and discard my own beliefs, even if the majority think I might be mistaken, and I have some evidence to support my beliefs. On the other hand, I can see that being human is being in a part of a social group... that we are not islands and that especially in this modern world, that we rely more and more upon others to survive. It is the fact that we as humans are social animals that necissitates us interacting with others to go on with our everyday existence.

I find that I may have ideas that I get during the day. But when it come to the evening, when I have time to record them, I seem to forget what I had though about. Recently, I've taken to jotting down ideas during the day, and now I've been able to record some of the things that pass through my mind. This, is in fact, one of the reasons, i think, that I blog. I feel that there are many ideas that I get that may in fact be useful (for the future), but that I more often that not forget every day. The idea of blogging therefore captures some of the soon-to-be-forgotten ideas and makes sure that they are on file that I may browse back on them in the future, and perhaps expand on them.

Perhaps another minor reason is that I can practice my typing. I seem to be getting through an aweful lot of words doing this.

I think one reason that I blog that perhaps is not followed up upon is the discussion of ideas. I find it especially interesting when people comment and discuss ideas that have been raised, and that new views on ideas are raised, and perhaps can be discussed. The only problem I find is that people often as not don't follow up on discussions, and I find that what would otherwise be interesing threads, end up dying.

Cruisology

I read an article about people, and their associations. It was much along the lines of a few conversations i've had with friends about judging people. The particular example in case was Wagner, and how he was associated with the Nazis. I must admit that I haven't really been well read into history and what actually happen in his case. But from what I heard, the story goes that in the past Wagner (who was a german?) was rather liked by the Nazis, and it was often played by them. Later on after the war, the Jewish community (which had been persecuted by the Nazis during the war) came to shun and reject the music of Wagner, because it had been supported by the people that had suppressed them.

Now, I don't know the exact history of Wagner, nor the circumstance around it. But, supposing that Wagner had composed some pieces independently with his own focus, and the German regime had taken it on board - then I can't see that there's anything inherently wrong about the music. Although I might be antagonistic against the regime, it logically shouldn't bias my opinion on the music that they supported. But then, comes the question, what happens if Wagner's music was inspired by the Nazi's, and what they stood for? Would that mean that it might be immoral to support the music as well? Or what happens if he never declared that the regime was the inspiration for his music, but that it was originally based upon this? What should the stance be?

In modern terms, this dilemma has arrived at my doorstep through the movie 'War of the Worlds'. On one hand, it sort of seems like a half-decent action movie (though i've heard from friends it's pretty shit anyway), that I might have been willing to see. On the other hand, Tom Cruise has been publicly supporting Scientology and rejecting medicine and psychiatry, which I have witnessed firsthand its effectiveness and logicality. So, should I be boycotting his movie, based upon his belief? Should I change my opinion of his acting based upon what he believes as a person? Am I supporting his belief by indirectly paying for his work for doing a movie that I may enjoy artistally? I still think that I shouldn't see his movie, but I not sure whether this is based on rationality, or just that I don't like scientology, and think its stupid, even though this may not have a sway upon movie acting.

But as yet I still haven't seen his movie.

Etiquette

Study, sleep, study, hospital, eat, study, sleep.

Is this what dedication is about? Is this what next year is about? I can see me losing myself next year, immersing myself in work, thinking nothing but medicine, doing nothing but medicine. Total immersion. I had my first dream about medicine stuff the other day, a sign that i've really been studying hard i think. I am proud of myself (for sticking with it so far). 3 weeks, 12 more to go. Will I be counting the days to the end of the year in a few months time?

I had a few run ins with random 'fate' stuff last week (and the week before). Seems to be a lot of stuff happening straight after I had learnt about it the previous day. Like, for instance, T-tubes, and seeing one used on a gall-bladder the next day, or a tute on SVT's and seeing one in a code blue the next day, or learning about death certificates, after doing one on the previous weekend. I guess in all these cases i'll be presented with these things everyday anyway. But its strange i should learn about them for the first time, and also see them for the first time, in such close chronological order.

I've been thinking about conversations recently. And time management. What got me thinking was the time spent during the day, and especially the formalities involved in talking with new patients, and new people. It seems to me that a lot of time is wasted with cursory introductory messages to people that you already know, where questions are asked where you are not really asking a question. For example, little things like 'how's it going' or 'how are you'. I think that amongst people that you don't know that well, or perhaps with patients, this may be appropriate for starting the social and professionaly interaction, for example. But perhaps in the example between friends, this may not be necessary. With people that you know, it seems to me that they/we have already gotten to an equal stage where these formalities can be dispensed with, and where you are comfortable with just chatting without these social commitments. Therefore, it should be possible to plunge straight into conversations with friends, straight from where you left off the previous time, without any awkwardness.

I think that the same principle should apply with seeing patients too... in a while, you should be able to dispense with formalities and curtesies, and go on straight with what you might want to talk about. I guess the problem might be that sometime, especially in a medical situation, these formalities might be an 'icebreaker' to get on to the real issues, and so in some cases may be warranted. But i stil think with friends, these things should be a triviality, and can be made redundant. If you are felling glum, you should be able to tell your friends straight off without them asking for it.

Diabolic Medicine

I've recently come to an idea to combine parts of my OCPD personality, an addictive computer game (Diablo 2), and medicine. In the past, and in fact during most of my schooling history, study and work has been totally separated from fun and play, in my mind. Although some subjects may have interested me, or perhaps had stimulated my thinking, in the end it usually became tiredsome when I had done too much of it. Not so with games though. Here, I found I could play hours on end without a drop in the interest, nor a drop in my concentration, which was the main problem with studying. So in the past, I had thought about somehow combining them, personal extra-cirricular interest with study, but not working out exactly how this would be. Now, it seems, I may have the answer (at least for me).

In Diablo, one of the most addictive things I found, was the constant search of items. As many as I would find, there would always be more, and it was the quest to find particular ones that probably kept me playing for the length of time that I did. In particular, there were certain groups of items (sets) that had some special properties when you found all of the items of that particular group. These, especially when I had found a few of the pieces of the sets already, really motivated me to play. It was in considering this fact, that I thought of a way in which I could apply it to my studies - classifying illnesses into 'sets' and treating them like items. That way, I could 'run' patients until I had found, for example, all the major causes of chest pain. By treating it as a 'set', I might be able to find some more motivation to go and actively seek out patients.

In addition to this, I was also wondering about the difficulty I had in remembering all the details of the patient, as many had similar problems and co-morbidies - all the features seemed to be blended and blurred into a mess in my brain. Patient details were also hard to remember, just by reading their name on a list. I then thought that attaching some sort of adjective to a person would enable some sort of recall, as I could then distinguish between the patients. Seeing that there were so many patients around (especially this week in my medical ward), I decided that just one adjective wouldn't be enough. After pondering that for a while, it suddenly dawned on me in fact how similar this was to magical items in Diablo! In this way, I think the way I might go about it would be to have sets of different adjectives, perhaps of increasing strength (e.g. plump, fat, overweight, obese, etc.) that I could apply as prefixes and suffixes. In the end, I might end up with something like 'the Lithuanian (prefix) old (quality) woman (item) of incontinence (suffix)'. Of course, to make this more interesting, as well as providing me with more motivation, I might need to 'play' this game with others too, perhaps also having some sort of scoring system to it too.

Although this may seem a bit impersonal, it has to be kept in mind that the primary purposes of this is for motivation to see patients and study, as well as a potentially useful memory aid. It should in no way affect the treatment or management of patients, nor should these names be said to patients - i'm sure they might (in some cases) be less than happy to hear them. Though, this is certainly not unique to medicine, there are many other such examples of things that should not be told to patients, in some settings.

I will trial out these techniques, and see how effective it is for me.

The biggest tenor

Went to hear the MSO on saturday (30/7/05) arvo ('Reaching for the Stars'), and then to Jake's place for a 'welcome back/end of holiday' party. Had a tabasco tequila slammer, the chilli was surprisingly good at covering up the godawful taste of the tequila, and also left a pleasant tingly feeling at the back of my mouth.

After the MSO concert, I had a coffee with Chi at Gloria Jeans, and we ended up doing the Quiz Master. To my surprise, a few of the questions were either identical, or about the same topics, as was in a game of Articulate that I had played at Trish's house the Thursday night before. After doing the quiz, during the course of the conversation, Chi also ended up mentioning in a different context, a reference to one of the previous questions again, which I noticed and commented upon. Lastly, as I was walking along the street from the cafe to dinner, I noticed a poster which I had not seen before (probably because I never really walk around that part of town) in large letters advertising the very same name, in full, that had thrice been referred to previously.

Event 1: Articulate - Amerigo Vespucci, Placido Domingo, (another which I have temporarily forgotten)

Event 2: Quiz master - What continent was named after Amerigo Vespucci, Which of the 3 tenors is the oldest, by at least 5 years (answer was Pavarotti), (the other correlate).

Weirdness factor:
Rareness: 8, it is the first time i've played Articulate, and I haven't done the quiz master for about a year. On the other hand, there were dozens of questions we went through in Articulate, and there were more than 3 questions on the quiz master, so perhaps there is a higher chance than i expected that one or more of the questions correlated with each other.
Awareness: 9, I couldn't have noticed that the questions were to be asked in quizmaster before I chose to do it.
Control: 7, i didn't bring Articulate, but I did choose to do the quizmaster.

Total: 24/30

Event 3: Chi, when talking about some random topic later on, makes up the character name of 'Luciano'.

Weirdness:
Rareness: 7 (its not a common name, one that I don't hear often at all)
Awareness: 2 (Luciano is Pavarotti's first name, even though this was not stated on the answer)
Control: 1 (Chi was talking, which I assume he is mostly in control of)

Total: 10/30

Event 4: Spotting the one poster on the wall of posters inside an alley whilst walking past briskly. Poster has 'Luciano Pavarotti' with some additional advertisement.

Weirdness:
Rareness: 9 (don't think I've seen that before)
Awareness: 6 (probably subconsciously wondering about the name - and my gaze was probably drawn to that particular poster out of the whole wall due to this)
Control: 6 (My actions were mostly in my direct control - gaze, head turning; though its not like I picked that particular route because I knew the poster would be there or anything)

Total: 20/30