Of Unseasonable Snow and an Earthquake in an Unlikely Place

 Those of us who believe in the scriptures often wonder whether things happening today are fulfillment of prophecies of things that are to happen in the end of time.
  Yesterday, I heard of a snowstorm in Hawaii, and my thoughts turned to Matthew 24, which says there will be earthquakes in divers places. While a snowstorm is not an earthquake, I wondered at the likeness of a snowstorm being in an unlikely place to that of an earthquake being in an unlikely place.
  As it turns out, snowfalls in Hawaii actually aren't uncommon. The volcanic mountains are so high, snows often top them. The name of the highest peak, Mauna Kea, in fact, translates as "white mountain."
   But, the snow usually doesn't come this early. A snow in late November is uncommon.
   Just one day later (today) after I thought on the scripture of earthquakes in divers places, we get just that, an earthquake in an unusual place -- Delaware. With a magnitude of only 4.1, it was hardly a whopping quake. Still, the fact remains it happened in an odd place.
   "For nation shall rise up against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places." (Matthew 24:7)
   The world is to be in commotion in the last days. Looking around, I would say that is happening some.
  (Blog revised a little 12/1/17)

The Best Ideas Should Make the Biggest News

   Books should be news, big news.
   I am not a book reader. Wish I were. But, on the rare occasion I browse through the bookstore, I am excited by what is out there, the information and wonderful thinking crammed into books.
   The information in these books should be news. Yes, books do make some news, when a significant news-maker releases them. But, I am saying books should be making the news for what is in them, not just because someone important wrote them.
   Our best ideas should always be news. If they do not receive attention, the wind and the sand will blow over them. The ideas will be lost. When someone has a wonderful idea, we need to hear about it to learn from it.
   If I were head of a large news agency, I would have at least one staffer whose beat was books -- nothing else. He (or she) would be charged with sorting through the books, and finding the ones with notable arguments, and notable ideas.
   And, when the ideas contained in these books were significant -- which would be often -- we would run the stories in lead fashion, ahead of the other news of the day.
   Even if the writer were an unknown.

Is it Humane to have them End their Lives Strung Out on Drugs?

   In the past 20 years, the number of seniors being hospitalized for opioid overuse has increased fivefold. Of all the medications prescribed in the U.S., seniors receive one-third of them. They are, perhaps, our biggest users of opioids.
  America, if you have an opioid problem, don't forget to recognize your seniors are a large part of it -- maybe the largest part. If we would be compassionate towards them, we should consider their plight.
   I think of hospice, and of how it means comfort care instead of treatment to cure. That translates, in part, to pain medications. Can you say, Opioids?
   So, when the pain sets in, of course a pain pill is offered. Now, do we suppose that seniors are somehow less susceptible to addiction? And, do we suppose it doesn't matter, for they are so old, anyway? Whereas when those younger receiving opioids, we might become concerned, when seniors are involved we are more likely to not give it a second thought.
   I wonder if more overdose deaths among seniors go lost and unnoticed because we too quickly assume their deaths are due to from old age.
   Whether they are on hospice or not, do we have a tendency to say, Don't bother them with treatments their bodies are no longer able to endure, for they are too frail for those, and are likely going to die anyway. Just give them some pain pills and let them die in peace.
   From what I know about opioids, I'm not so sure this is the best route to peace. From what I know, they, the opioids themselves, come with hazards that prevent many seniors from ending their lives in peace. To me, the more humane solution, when you can, is to fix their problem with curative care so they don't have to end their lives strung out on drugs.

Drama's Highest Hour Speaks of an America Duped by the Russians

   Sometimes I sit back and reflect on just how unbelievable, how storybookish, the drama is. We elect a president like none other. Yes, that is part of it. But, is it possible he colluded with Russia to be elected? Is it possible the Russians pitched hard balls against Hillary Clinton, and the whole nation fell for them? And, now, how do you break it to them gently -- how do you convince a nation they have been duped into hating Hillary?
   By the Russians, the very people Americans have disdained all these years. By Russians, they of the nation that spawned communism and socialism? Even as our opposing nation (America) warned itself of those evils of socialism and communism, was it being duped by the same Russians into hating Hillary? Add this to the storyline: Could Russia's influence have contributed in some way to persuade our leaders to drag the hated Hillary through Congressional inquiries? Did the Russians plug into our hatred of Hillary and feed it and ride it like a bloated horse to an election victory for the unlikely Donald Trump?
   Try that on for a story line. It would be a good one, even in a world of fiction, but to think it might be playing out in real life . . .
 




 

Our Care of Seniors is a Scandal in the Waiting

   Consider how all this sexual misconduct among our celebrities quietly went on for all this time, but only now is breaking as scandal. Sometimes, terrible wrongs go on without much notice until suddenly someone says, Hey, wait a minute, what is going on here?
   I tell you there is another scandal waiting to break: Our treatment of the elderly. As life expectancy has increased, the number of seniors in invalid condition has increased. And, we no longer live in a day where there as so many of their children who can care for them in their senior years. With more people to care for, and fewer family members able to care for them, these days, the senior center is a necessary norm.
   And, an expensive one. In order to qualify, you must pay by forfeiting all the resources you have -- meaning, your life savings. If you have property, the nursing home requires you sell it off to pay them.
  Is this not scandal, that we rob them of their life savings to place them in senior living housing?
  Nor, is this the full of the scandal. We have hospice workers who pledge to be available for them 24/7, who are not. And, can the families sue? Commonly, the care givers have you sign an agreement forgoing your right to sue.
   In some ways, hospice has become a way to get this expensive care paid for when no one else is willing. If you can get on hospice, there can be a way to pay for the care. In some cases, though, this means renouncing your right to curative care in order to qualify, since hospice is primarily for those who do agree not to pursue treatments that might restore their health.
   Is that not sort of a scandal, as well?
   The scandal got a little bit of an unveiling this past week, as Time Magazine carried some articles in the Nov. 27 issue.

The Authority Must Come from Christ

   No more issue is more important than how to get back to heaven. Donald Trump, the national deficit, climate change -- none of these are so important as what we should do in this life to ensure that we end up in a good place in the hereafter.
   And, what church to ascribe to is a large part of that.
   I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I have often thought that the world should be studying this church, as there are stark indications it is God's church. Now, a person can start a church, and if he or she is intent on honoring God, I would think that starting a church is a good thing. And, belonging to any church that sincerely seeks to serve God is a good thing
   But, even with all these churches started of men, God should be free to start his own. And, if belonging to any Christ-centered church is good, how much better is it to belong to the one Christ, Himself, started?
   The Church of Jesus Christ teaches that there are certain things you must do to get to heaven, or to attain the highest degree of exaltation. You must be baptized, you must repent and keep the commandments, you must be married eternally, you must be sealed to your parents -- who are sealed to their parents, who are sealed to their parents in a chain going back to Adam and Eve.
   I should probably go back to the first requirement I mentioned: being baptized. If a member of a biker club were to say, "Oh, they say you need to be baptized? I can do that for you. Come on over and I'll dip you in the river out back," would that count as being baptized?
   Obviously not. Obviously, if you are being baptized into a group of followers of Christ, the person doing the baptizing needs to be authorized to do so by Christ, which makes this Church of Jesus Christ so important. Is it the only one that says God sent down angels giving authority to baptize? I know of no other such church, other than, perhaps, off-shoots of this Church of Jesus Christ.
   It is almost as if there is not even another church on the face of the whole earth that even claims to have the authority necessary to perform baptism. If baptism is necessary, and if authority is needed to baptize, there might be but only one church that even claims that authority has been been transferred from those of old to those of our day. And, how about the Catholics, you ask? They, too, might claim a line of authority, I do not know. I think to study on it, but it is late. But, the point remains this: You either need to have an unbroken line of authority from Christ's day to ours, or you need a restoration: an angel who held the authority bestowing it upon someone in a later day.

The Freedom to find Truth is the Greatest of Freedoms

   No freedom stands greater than the freedom to pursue truth. Stack all of them up next to each other: freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, freedom to move about, and so forth. None is so basic, so essential, as the freedom to pursue truth.
   And, none yields such rich reward. After a long search, when truth is found, the finder is ecstatic.
   Yes, it should be noted, the freedom to pursue and find truth encompasses or overlaps many other freedoms. The freedoms of speech and religion both are partially within this circle. The freedom to invent, the freedom to philosophize, the freedom to read, the freedom to discuss issues -- these also fall either entirely or partially under the umbrella of pursuing truth.
   Truth is the world's greatest prize. It follows, then, that to pursue it is the greatest freedom.

I am Grateful for God and the World He Provides Me

 I am grateful there is a God, for where there is a God, there is hope. I am grateful for the Father's son, that he died for me. I am grateful that earth life is not an end, but that that there is a hereafter. I am grateful -- hopeful -- that I am not near the end here on earth. I am grateful that I am able to study the world around me, to analyze it, and to wonder on things that would make it better.
  I am grateful for the goodness of so many people, for though there is wickedness, there is also goodness. I am grateful to be living in a day of such scientific advancements.
  Though I do not like health problems, I am grateful to experience things that are part of the human experience. I am grateful when maladies are made better. For those things, I acknowledge my God. I am grateful for health that I do have, and for the ability to think.
   I am grateful for family, for friends, and for work.
   I am grateful for freedom, and to be able to pursue truth.

Can Chiropractors Heal Bad Backs?

   Can a back be healed -- even by a chiropractor?
   I think on what I was taught this week, that healing cannot come from pills, potions and surgeries. No, diseases come from within and they must be healed from within.
   The body must correct itself.
   Do I believe that? I tell you, I am a fan of modern medicine. I am grateful for all that it does. While I have known those who underwent surgery and did not have good results, I have also known those who have had pleasant results.
   But, healed? I should study on the different types of back problems, and what the surgeries do.
   Does even a chiropractor heal a bad back? Is it ever as good as new? That would be healed. Anything short of that would be something less than fully healed. I asked one of my chiropractors if patients continue to need care throughout their lives, and he indicated they do. That would indicate, then, that those backs never were completely healed.
   So, when it is said that healing cannot come from pills, potions and surgeries, but only from within, must we not consider that surgeries might come as close to correcting the problem as does chiropractic? If so, full healing cannot come from pills, potions and surgeries -- nor from chiropractic.

If you judge a person by his weakness, 
while you will not always judge him falsely,
 you will always judge him unfairly.

Spine-crushing Football is Just One Part of Our Culture

   If you would reduce the number of murders in America, start by making football safer.
   I only say violent crime in America is partially due to our attitudes, to our culture, to our entertainment, and to our values. Rock'm, sock'm football is part of that. We hoot and holler when someone knocks the block off someone in a football game. Love it. I think back a couple weeks or so ago when an NFL player was reprimanded for a hard hit. His response? Something along the lines of, If I can't do that anymore, it's time for me to get out of this game.
   He gloried in being a rock'm, sock'm, spine-crushing football player.
   I do not know what intentionally hard hits have to do with winning the game. A simple tackle means as much as a hard one. The goal is to win the game, not injure the other team's players. On the scoreboard, a good, clean tackle means as much as one packing the power of a sledgehammer blow.
   We live in a society that glories in violence. Our TV shows and movies are violent. Our comic books are violent. Our video games are violent.
  In how many other nations is ultimate fighting so big? I do not know, but I know it is big here. In how many other countries are dark heroes popular? Who knows, but I know we certainly love them here in America.
   These things add one to another in making America's values, America's entertainment, as violent as any on earth. Tell me of another nation with so many violent movies, or with so many violent video games.
   If you would reduce the number murders, start by reducing how you glamorize and revel in them as you watch TV. Change your attitudes. Change your values. If your entertainment is violence, and you love it, don't tell me it isn't your value.
   If you would rid yourself of violent crimes, rid yourself of violent attitudes. Yes, you could start in a number of places. But, as good a place as any to start is in your football game. Change your attitude there, and it is a start in changing your attitude in other places.

We Shouldn't be Shaking Our Heads, Wondering Why

   I listen to Jamie Mcfarland on KSL, learning that the U.S. is the clear leader in producing mass killers and serial killers.
   Is there something about our culture that leads to this, maybe something in our culture? A gun-culture, maybe? A culture where more people own guns than in any other advanced nation? Or is it because our culture offers so much violence on TV and movie screens? No, maybe we should attribute it to our culture of violent video games.
   No, you say? Then, what? Should we trace it to our own attitudes? We often say if someone wanders through our door in the middle of the night, we will blow him right back out that door with the Magnum handgun waiting on the nightstand.
   What about ultimate fighting? We have as much of that as any nation. And, our love for violence can be traced even into football, where players boast of their hard hits, and suppose the game cannot be played properly without them. We as fans? We find ourselves screaming with joy and applauding those hard hits.
   I do not know how our nation compares to others in all these factors. I only know we are a nation  glorifying violence, and reveling in it. I only know that all our love of guns, and violence, and physically hurting others surely must have some kind of negative impact.
  I only know, if we do end up number 1 in producing mass killers and serial killers, we shouldn't shake our heads and say, Where does that come from? What's up with that?

Is Yemen Worse than the U.S. in Mass Shootings?

   It is said, there is one country having more mass shooting per capita than the United States: Yemen, which happens to have the second-largest gun-owning population per capita.
   But, before you read too much into it, consider that Yemen is a nation at war with itself, rebels fighting government forces. I believe those figures, or at least some of them, are being included. 

We Might be Close to the Day of Automated Genealogy

  We have entered the age of  driverless cars, and of computers taking over our jobs in the workplace. So, could we be on the verge of automated genealogy? Will the computer search out all our genealogy, sending us notices, saying, Do you want to attach this to your family tree? Do you want to go to the temple for this person?
  Are we entering the age of automated genealogy, when the computer does all the work, and we simply sign off on it?
   What, then, of the endeavor of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? It has long been considered an impossible task, to go back and connect the family trees of those now on earth, and trace all the names back to Adam and Eve. And, surely, it must still seem impossible. But, if artificial intelligence is employed, we might be somewhat closer to the goal.
   What if the computer took every name ever entered in it? And, through automatic searches, connected the names in a genealogy tree? Of course, this would be limited by how much information is placed on the Internet. And, there is nowhere near enough names and information on the Internet to allow us to do genealogy all the way back to Adam and Eve, at least not for the vast majority of linage lines.
   But, perhaps that could change. Perhaps the day will come when you simply scan page after page of names and records and data, and the computer sorts it all out. It takes the bad handwriting, and figures out what was meant to be written. It takes the names and sorts out where they came from and searches out birth records and grave records for the names, being every lick as accurate as a human could be.

(Slightly edited 11/20/17)
 

There are no perfect people,
only ones who are charitable.
If you have a person
who is charitable towards others,
that is all the perfection you can expect.

The Gun Seeks a Society, and the Society Seeks a Crime

   The gun seeks a society, and the society seeks a crime.
   Perhaps, we should say it is the gun owner who seeks friends to play with, for the gun is but an inanimate tool. But, the gun defines its owner --not all of them, but many. Their world revolves around the gun -- or guns, plural, for many have arsenals.
   Not all of them seek friends to share their love of guns with, but many do. Some join militias. Some just talk guns with other gun owners.
   Now, not all those who get together to talk guns are out looking for crimes. But, I will say this: Of those who own arsenals, many --maybe even most -- do so with an eye towards the day their tools will be useful.
   Some are wary of government, and hold that the day might come that they need to rise up in rebellion against it. Some already feel the government is corrupt and in need of a cleansing. I suppose I do not agree that our government has reached such a stage. And, I am much less sure than they that it ever will.
  So, I say, the gun seeks a society, and the society seeks a crime.

They Give of Their Abundance

   As public debate rages on the tax bill, and the richest 10 percent are given accolades for paying 75 percent of the taxes, I think of a person making, say, $12,000, and of how if that person puts in so much as $10, it is giving up money needed for food and rent. And, I think of a rich person, and of how he loses nothing needed for necessities when he places money out of all the extra he has into the tax coffers.
   And, I think of Mark 12:41-44.
   "And Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much.
   "And there came a certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which make a farthing.
   "And he called unto him his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into the treasury:
   "For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living."

Real Health-Care Reform Lies with the Public, not with Congress

   Maybe we will never get true medical reform because we are looking to the wrong people to do the reforming.
   It isn't those in Congress who should be turning the switch. It isn't the president.
   But, since we are all sitting around waiting for Congress and the president to do the modifying, it isn't occurring to us that it is we who hold the keys to change.
   Real reform -- to me -- would be to knock insurance out of the equation -- or at least to knock it out somewhat, get rid of a lot of it. Ironically, the reform measures on Capitol Hill deal with how insurance should fit into the health-care system, not whether it should.
   What if doctors started not accepting insurance, not asking for it?  A doctor's visit might cost, say, $30 and that wouldn't be the co-pay; It would be the full pay.
   What if doctors offices expanded on their services, offering as much testing (maybe even MRIs) in-house? Simple surgeries? Bring them in-house, as well. Get as much of the service and as much of the surgeries and procedures to fit under the $30 fee (or $60, or however much) as possible.
   If medical care of this fashion became a movement, prices would come down.
   What if you put the doctor back in charge of his (or her) own practice? Instead of insurance making the call on which tests, procedures, and treatments were allowed, what if we let the doctor make the call?
   What if you offered one-stop doctoring? What if an oncologist, a cardiologist, a spine specialist-chiropractor, and so forth were all in the same practice? Then, when a patient came in to see the general practitioner, he (or she) could taken down the hall to a specialist the minute a question came up about a specialty concern. Surely, medicine would be quicker, better and more thorough.
   The more care you could fit under one hat (meaning, into one doctor), the better. And, since one person can't know everything, the more care you could fit under one roof, the better. Integrating health care this way would surely improve the quality of the care.
    We don't need Congress to bring about these changes. We just need to inspire more doctors to open such practices. And then, we, the public, need to go to such doctors' offices. I know I would be inclined to patronize them. If I'm going to get more comprehensive care, and it is going to cost less, of course I am going to go that route.

It Seems it is the Chiropractors Who have Science on their Side

  In the battle between chiropractors and medical doctors, I wonder if it isn't the chiropractors who stand on firmer scientific ground. They have more reason, common logic, and science behind them more than do the medical doctors.
   The medical doctor will fuse your spine, basically cementing it. Tell me the solution to a inoperative back is to cement the flaw in place, to cement over the crushed disc so it cannot be repaired.
   They will tell you a crushed disc is permanent. What really is permanent is the locking of the back in place through fusion. Tell me -- speaking scientifically and logically -- how repairing a back is best accomplished by cementing it from working as well as it should?
   The chiropractor, on the other hand, seeks to restore the disc to health. If there needs to be more spacing between the vertebrae, the chiropractor does a series of adjustments to get it there. Each session, the bones are moved a little more towards where they need to be, till at last they are where they belong, and there is spacing between the vertebrae.
   I think of it as being kind of an on-going surgery, or a series of surgeries, since each chiropractic session moves the disc a little more towards its goal.
   The medical doctors might say it is impossible to heal the disc, but I've seen before-and-after x-rays. I have no reason to believe they were fraudulent. I've signed up for chiropractic care. My lower back is in the third of four phases of degeneration. I'm hoping the before-and-afters for my back will also show that recreating spacing between vertebrae is possible.
   Here is my thought: How is it possible that well-practicing chiropractors have been correcting backs while medical doctors have continued to say it is impossible? Either the chiropractors are frauds, and it isn't happening, or the medical doctors are not taking enough time to step over to the chiropractors' offices to see for themselves. Hasn't it ever been that when advancements in medicine take place, the medical field welcomes and hails them and encourages doctors to practice them?
   Medical discoveries just don't go unnoticed, especially for so many years. If the chiropractors are right, there must be many accounts of backs being rejuvenated.
   So, what gives? Why have chiropractors not been welcomed in to the mainsteam of medical practice?
   It might well be the chiropractic efforts will not benefit me significantly. The old adage says a fool and his money are soon parted. Perhaps, my $2,700 will be to the wind. But, I hope that will not be the case. It makes more sense to adjust the spine, to recreate the spacing between the vertebrae than to seal them from moving. If you want to correct something, you correct it. You don't make it so the correction can't be made. In this respect , the chiropractors' way of correcting the problem is more scientifically sound than that of the medical doctors.

(Edited and altered a little 11/20/17)

 

Take the Company out of the Doctor's Office

   Take the company out of the doctor's office, and you'll take the crisis out of health care. Or, in the words of the great philosopher, Simplify, simplify, simplify.
    Do you ever wonder if we shouldn't return to the pre-insurance days? They were simpler. And, they weren't so long ago. That was a day when you went in, paid a fee and the fee covered much of what was done, if not all.
    Nowadays, you get a bill from the hospital, and it might have a hundred items listed.
    If we removed as many accountants and insurance people as possible, and left the doctor to run his own business, we most likely would have a better medical world.
    If we didn't have an accountant dictating a minimum number of visits per hour, that would make for a better medical world.
    Fewer surgeries in hospitals, and more in the doctors' offices, that would help.
    Some wise businessmen cut every unnecessary expense. If we believe in this, why don't we adhere to this business practice more in the field of medicine? Don't have surgeries in the hospitals if they can be performed in the doctors' offices because the hospital is the most expensive of medical settings. Cut unnecessary expenses and simplify, simplify, simplify. 

Let the Law Simplifying the Tax Code to be Simple

   How ironic is it that the proposal to simplify the tax code is, itself, too complicated to understand? What is this about how tax rates might go down for a few years, then increase a number of years down the road?

   What?

   I want the law that simplifies the tax code to be simple, as well. I don't want wiggle room for a politician to fool me into thinking I'm getting something when I'm not.

Doctors like Dr. Bradley would do more for Medicine than Congress

  If I can make a point with a story I came up with.
  Quinn Bradley opened practice on the west side of town. He chose not to hire an appointments clerk, a nurse, or any of the other full-time medical assistants that often come with a doctor's office.
   He shunned most appointments, just telling his patients to drop by and see him when they had time.
   He didn't accept insurance, but that didn't matter much to his patients, since a visit was only $40, anyway.
   Word of mouth came to make a difference. Right from the start, he was thorough with each patient, wanting to discover everything medically he could about them every time they visited. He'd query them forward and backward, and examine them inside and out, anxious not to miss a thing.
   Word got around about how thorough he was, and from that time on, he didn't have a shortage of patients. People knew that if Dr. Everything examined them, they couldn't do better.
    Did I tell you why they called him Dr. Everything? Well, he took a little longer getting through medical school than most because he got a few specialty degrees in order to make him a more well-rounded doctor. He didn't want to diagnose one thing while not even knowing another problem existed. He wanted to be an expert in as much of medicine as humanly possible.
   And, there were a number of surgeries he could perform. It was in those instances that he would take appointments, and schedule his part-time nurse to come in and assist him.
    In an age in which our medical system is struggling, a few more doctors like Dr. Everything couldn't do America harm. Right now, everyone is waiting for Congress to come up with medical reform. I'm not sure that is needed. Instead, just inspire a good share of doctors to be like Dr. Quinn Bradley.

(Note: It occurring to me that some might not realize this is a fictitious story, the first sentence was added 11/20/17.)

We can Learn from History, So what of LDS History and Militias?

   With history as our guide, we could look back at militias in early LDS history, wondering about their effects.
   It was a militia group that committed the Mountain Meadows Massacre. It was the Carthage Greys who attacked Carthage Jail. It was a militia that committed the Haun's Mill Massacre.
   I wonder on militias. I wonder if sometimes when you create one, they start looking for reason to justify their existence. If a group comes in from Arkansas, the militia might see it as its prerogative to protect against them. If a militia sees a Mormon prophet as false prophet, they will find in killing him a reason for their existence.
   A militia is somewhat worthless if it doesn't have something to do. So, it finds something to do.
   Today's militias? If they are set up as a defense against government gone bad, they will be quick to find government gone bad.
   There is a danger there.
   I think of the words of the Second Amendment. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." I think it ironic that instead of being there to defend our government, many of today's militias consider rising up against it.
   If we can learn from history, what do we learn from LDS history and militias? That if today's militias see their duty as defending us against our own government, they eventually could rise up against it.

If not in the House, then Keep a Sheriff Next Door

  Keep a sheriff next door, for the lawless peer down from hotels, wander into churches, and spray lead into school yards. Sometimes, you might want to have the sheriff right in the house. But, if you don't, at least have him within shouting distance.
   With so many mass murders, law enforcement should be evolving, becoming equal to the threats we're facing. If no place is safe, then no place should be left unguarded. It has ever been, has it not, that if you need more officers, you hire more officers.
   Law enforcement almost needs to be everywhere these days, a cop on every corner.
  Others might argue for arming the populace, getting guns in the hands of as many people as possible. And, when the lawless one steps up, a gun-totting member of the public is there waiting, shooting him down in his tracks.
   But, rather than saturating your crowds with guns that might be misused, it seems wiser to have no more guns than you need, and to try to direct them into the hands of those least likely to misuse them. Civilized societies have traditionally turned to law enforcement officers for law enforcement needs, and it seems the wiser choice, to me.

Good Coaches Don't Over Coach

   Sometimes, you can over coach, attempting to control the things you can't control. Maybe it's that you want to shield your players from certain pressures, but the pressures are not going to go away. Better to deal with the pressures than try to sidestep them.
  Sometimes, you can over coach. You institute an offense, or whatever, and you don't want to back down from what you're doing, so you stick doggedly to it. Your pride rises up, and you keep pushing your program.
   Sometimes, you can over coach. You insist your players do certain things, when they just aren't capable. Better to adjust your coaching to the talents you have than to demand the players play with talents they don't have.
   Sometimes, you can over coach. You call timeout and draw up a play, just because you figure that is what coaches do. But, your play isn't anything special, and if you had just let your star player do his thing, he would have found a way to get the basket and you would have won.
   Sometimes, you can over coach. You bench a player because you're the boss and he is giving you a little grief. If he's the player who can lead you to victory, swallow your pride and let him play. This is not to say coaches shouldn't bench players for insubordination, just to say they can be too touchy.
   The best coaches aren't the ones who over coach. They are the ones who know their limits. Coaches tell their players to no try to do too much, to let the game come to them. They ought to realize that that is advice they should keep, themselves. 

Let us not Falter in the Search for Solutions

   I turn to the latest online article on the Patrick Harmon shooting, finding only seven comments, and wonder that people tire of the discussion. I think of how many tire of discussing guns in the wake of so many mass murders.
  Violence in America has its saturation point.
   I would we would not tire. These issues are important. Let us not abandon hope. Let us not falter in the search for solutions.

Those Opposed to the Shooting should Perhaps Protest Again

   A review board reviewed the police shooting of Patrick Harmon, concluding that the shooting was justified. That follows District Attorney Sim Gill's having concluded the same.
   I respect Sim Gill. If he exonerates the officer, and the review board does the same, perhaps the shooting was justified. Just the same, many of us have watched that video time and time again, and read as much as we can of what happened, and we remain mystified that the shooting should be called just. If the officer acted within policy, perhaps it is a matter that the policy is bad. If officers are trained this way, perhaps we should be concerned with the policy and with the training and that our laws allow for unjust killings.
   There was some protesting following the shooting. I cannot help but wish there would be more now, coming in response to the review board's decision. If those of us who feel the shooting was wrong do not lift our voices, wrongful policies and wrongful laws will never be overturned.

Sugar Plumbs, and Old Prunes, and Automation, and Artificial Backs

    Darance Thomdancer slid his car into a narrow parking spot, exited the vehicle, and gazed at the sign. "Surrerio Senior Living," it said, and he imagined there must be 200 people there he could help.
   He hit every room in the place that day, telling each resident he wanted to move as many of them as possible over to a hospital he had contracted with. "It's the old Brickhaven Medical Center," he said. "I've arranged for as many beds as we will need. You will all have your backs replaced -- well, as many of you as need your backs replaced will have them replaced."
   Modern medicine had never seen anything like this before. Knee replacements and heart transplants? Ah, yes, we know about them. But, spine replacements? Such an idea. Oh, perhaps no one dared try them before, what with nerves being such a tender thing. I mean, how to you separate the nerves from the spine during the operation? How do you delicately remove the bad parts of the spine -- the crushed discs and all -- without disturbing the nerves?
   Back in the 20th Century, this might have been impossible. But, enter the age of automation. These days, more and more things are computerized. Actually, a hospital to the south had already started offering automated back surgeries, although they didn't offer anything nearly so radical as this.
   Spine replacements? No way! Or, so they said.
   The robotic surgeons could sense what parts would need to be replaced, what parts better go untouched, and where to sever the tissue and bones -- with micro meter precision. The hands of a human surgeon would never be equal to this surgery, but the bionic fingers of a robot would not fail.
   Some of the patients from Surrerio Senior Living never went back. After their surgeries, they were able to walk, many for the first time in years. And, I'm not talking just walking, I'm telling you they had all the spring in their steps that a 15-year old would have.
   There have been a lot of advancements in medicine in our life times, but I'm not sure anything was more dramatic than the miracles achieved by Darance Thomdancer and his medical wonder workers at Brickhaven Medical Center that Christmas season in 2017. If sugar plumbs could dance, they would, and so did a lot of old prunes.

Blanding Remains Dry

   Blanding, Utah, bills itself as "Base Camp to Adventure."
   Evidently, adventure doesn't begin with alcohol, as the town voted today to remain dry. No alcohol sales have been allowed for more than 80 years, marking Blanding as one of about a half dozen Utah communities not allowing alcohol sales.
   Nationwide, nine states have counties that are dry, and at least a dozen states have municipalities that ban alcohol sales.

Back to the Days of Christopher Robin and One-Stop Medical Care

   As the nation turns its attention to the tax issue, I would have your ear on another matter: our health-care system.
   If only we would return our system to what it was between the 1900s and the 1940s, all might be well. While Republicans are searching for a replacement for Obamacare, I cannot help but wonder if the real answer lies in returning to the prepaid physician groups practiced in the first half of the last century.
   I get my information from Christy Ford Chapin, author of "Ensuring America's Health: The Public Creation of the Corporate Health Care System," and from an article she wrote more than a year ago for DailyMail.com.
   Health care was inexpensive in those days because doctors provided their own insurance. They practiced as a group of doctors, with perhaps only one general practitioner, but various specialties under the same roof. Besides the economic benefit, there was this organizational benefit, as well: The doctors could compare notes on patients, filling each other in on needs each were not familiar with since they were not part of his (or her) specialty. Doctors today tend to treat and prescribe within the blinders of their own specialty. Not so, then. Maladies were less likely to go overlooked as the malady in question did not receive all the attention. You received one-stop medical care that tended to be more comprehensive.
   The financial benefits? Being self-insured, the doctors damaged their own financial interests if they either over supplied or under supplied services. They would drain their profits if they overspent, but risk losing customers if they did not provide adequate services.
   If we are to leave our medical system in the hands of private enterprise, perhaps this model that we abandoned in favor of insurance is something we should return to. We should consider doing an about-face and abandon traditional insurance in favor of the old prepaid physician groups.
   The tricky part of this would be how to gradually dismantle our current insurance-based system. With 18 percent of our gross domestic product going to health-care today, and with so many employed in the insurance industry, you don't just tear it apart without risking severe economic trauma.

Link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3821750/Why-American-healthcare-expensive-efficient-world.html

Conveyor-Belt Medicine is not Good Medicine

   One problem with our medical system, is that it doesn't give adequate time with doctors. You want to properly diagnose an illness, you have to allow adequate time to diagnose. We don't do that. You have perhaps 15 minutes with the doctor, and then he (or she) is on to the next customer.
   Whether he's had time to diagnose the problem or not.
    And, we wonder why we have so many misdiagnoses? Limit your doctor to 15 minutes. Tell him that's all the time he has. He'll likely zero in on the most popular malady with those symptoms and not have time to consider other possibilities. Sure as anything, you are going to have misdiagnoses. We wonder why there are so many malpractice lawsuits? I would guess part of it is due to the number of misdiagnoses.
   Just as bad, if a problem comes up during a procedure, and the doctor is on a time schedule for completing the procedure, he is going to have a tendency to rush through the problem, not addressing it adequately. Once again, we wonder why there are so many malpractice suits? If your brush over the problems, you're going to stumble from time to time, and with a stumble comes a lawsuit.
   If we would heal our health-care problems, one thing we must do is to take the doctor's visit off the assembly line. Conveyor-belt medicine is not good medicine.

  If you would know how good of a person 

you are, measure it by 

how many times you speak evil of others.

The more you speak evil, the eviler you are. 

Blood is spilled where rumors are spread

   Too often, we knife others by speaking ill of them. Do not suppose that truth is excuse for doing so, for we justify for truth that which is often untrue. We thrill in having some dirt on others, and we attack because we enjoy the attack. If only we would see the damage that is done, the blood that is spilled. If only we determined not to be a part of such a blood sport.  

A General was Sent to Prison without it Making the News Much

   A U.S. general was send to prison in the past week, and it didn't even ripple the news much. The story didn't get much play. Marine Brigadier General John Baker was sent to prison in Guantanamo Bay for standing up for lawyers in the USS Cole bombing case.
   The lawyers were allegedly placed under surveillance simply because they were representing the USS Cole bomber. In protest, the lawyers quit, but the military judge, Air Force Col. Vance Spath, rejected their resignations.
   Baker, as chief defense counsel in military commissions, sided with the lawyers right to resign, and, for that, Spath on Wednesday sentenced him to 21 days in prison.
  Another military judge stepped in, freeing Brigadier General Baker from serving much of the sentence, but one has to wonder at what happened. In a land of freedom and a land where injustice is shielded against, was Baker's imprisonment just?
 

Arbitrary power

is most easily established

on the ruins of liberty

abused to licentiousness.

-- George Washington

Many of you have libertarian views. It is wonderful of you to have opinions. I guess I do not share in much of the libertarian ideology, however. I find that many of the things allowed under libertarian practice amount to licentiousness.

Joe de Casa's Snake Bite should have Led to an Arthritis Treatment

   I'm considering the case of Joe de Casa, and thinking there is something that could be done about arthritis.
   And, wondering why nothing is done.
   Back in 2002, BBC ran a story on Joe de Casa. He was bitten by an adder while working in his garden. A sufferer of arthritis, de Casa said the months following the bite were the only time in five years that he had not suffered from arthritis. de Casa quite wished scientists would look into the anti-inflammation properties of snake venom.
    And, what do we have to show for it, 15 years later?
   de Casa's case does not stand alone. Other arthritis sufferers have been bitten by snakes and bees and experienced a pause in their suffering. Somehow, it sure seems there is some medical relief that should have been delivered from snake venom by now.
   Why have we seen nothing come of this?
   I don't know if snake venom cream is the answer -- I do see that marketed for anti-aging. I don't know but what you would have to place the patient in a carefully watched hospital setting and inject him with the venom while he was comatose.
   Experiment on animals first, of course. But, has that even been done, after all these years?
   Tens of millions of Americans suffer from arthritis, perhaps one-quarter of all adults. Arthritis accompanies us toward death. The bee stings and snake bites perhaps wouldn't be cures, for the benefit might only last months, instead of being permanent.
   But, it would still be a big step towards ending one of the biggest maladies of the human race. I do not understand why the medical world has not found medicine in this, why we are not using snake bites and bee stings to relieve 40 million Americans.

The Shooting Near the U of U Might have been Averted

   I've posted on how I would handle the homeless. Tonight, in light of the shooting up by the U, my thoughts drift back to what I once wrote:
   "To some extent, you cannot help someone if you do not identify them, So, the first step would be to place workers on the streets, talking to each person, identifying and cataloging them. Call them homeless remediation specialists, perhaps. They would document each homeless person they came in contact with and start each of them on a program, hoping to remedy their homelessness."
   The accused shooter, I believe, went to the homeless district before going east into the hills. What would have happened, if there had been workers there to meet him when he arrived? What if there were so many remediation specialists that they didn't miss a soul, mixing with the homeless, talking to them, ferreting out each one.
    And, what if they ran background checks on each -- and checked them against the lists of those wanted for alleged crimes? Perhaps Austin Boutain would have been apprehended for the crime in Colorado before the shooting near the University of Utah could take place.
   Helping the homeless is important and wonderful, but so it ferreting out the criminals among them. And, if you want to find the lawless, there is no better place to go looking than in the homeless districts.

Russians Seek Only to Divide; 

How Will Americans Respond? 

   We read how the Russians sought to sow discord in not only our election, but on issues such as immigration and gun control. The article says they didn't cease attempting to rile us up and divide us just because the election was over.
   This all should give us pause. Do we really want to give the Russians the satisfaction of dividing us? Or, will we reflect on what they are doing, and resolve to not be so partisan, so divided, so hateful of each other? 
   I wish the morning paper had a banner headline proclaiming: Russians Seek Only to Divide; How Will Americans Respond? I wish all America reflected on this news article, that we might see whose interest we serve when we hate each other. 

Never give an opinion 

without taking one first 

   That's a motto I'm trying to keep. And, of course, I often fail to keep it. But, perhaps if I keep trying, I will turn the corner, and keep the rule more often than not. A corollary is to always show respect for the other person's opinion. Don't just listen to it, waiting for the opening and chance to tear it apart. Instead, listen reflectively and acknowledge any good points and praise the other person for their opinion.