“I wish I could go to bed”

14 02 2014

This came in via Medscape, which a Medical Education/Newsportal most of us subscribe to. It’s a compilation of reflections from the Medscape panel on “Why we practice Medicine”

If you have a subscription, you can see the rest of the slides here.





Every Pre-Med should read this

15 10 2013

While at the infinity pool at school, I had this discussion with my friend about what the philosophical basis of Medicine is. What exactly is Disease and how do or can we know for sure? There are no easy answers to that, though I get the inclination that the boundaries of the question and the lenses we use to look at it, change slightly depending on the problem at hand. I went around looking for answers and discovered that there is an entire field called the Philosophy of Medicine. I bumped into an article at the Internet Encyclopedia of Medicine discussing these perspectives. I felt that it gives a good overview on the theory and practise of Medicine and the fact that I am now more familiar with the subject, it is easier to understand the philosophical jargon. I feel that the article gave me a better philosophical foundation to understand both the evolution of ideas in Medicine and added some colour and structure to thinking about the field. I’m planning to read around the subject, with more content to come!





#archive Healthcare spending may reach 3.5% of GDP in 2030

10 08 2013

This is the one article that talks about how much of it’s GDP Singapore spends on healthcare. Granted that we have “better outcomes”, I am not sure if we should be spending only 1.6% while we spend 24% on Defence.

He said Singapore is currently spending about 1.6 per cent of the GDP on healthcare.

By 2016, it would go up to two per cent of GDP and by 2030 when the rapidly ageing population will be the biggest driver of rising expenditure going forward, healthcare spending may reach around 3.5 per cent of GDP, taking into account demographic changes and higher medical inflation.

Mr Tharman stressed that Singapore should focus on achieving international standards for healthcare outcomes rather than simply on increasing spending.





#archive Repudiating scientism, rather than surrendering to it

9 08 2013

Despite the shit storm that is engulfing the freethought community, PZ gives scientism a good
beating in this thorough essay.

Which is why I was disappointed with Pinker’s article. I expected two things: an explanation that science is one valid path to knowledge with wide applicability, so simply applying science is not the same as scientism; and an acknowledgment that other disciplines have made significant contributions to human well-being, and therefore we should not pretend to be all-encompassing.

He’s committing the fallacy of progress and scientism. There is no denying that we have better knowledge of science and engineering now, but that does not mean that we’re universally better, smarter, wiser, and more informed about everything. What I know would be utterly useless to a native hunter in New Guinea, or to an 18th century philosopher; it’s useful within a specific context, in a narrow subdomain of a 21st technological society. I think Pinker’s fantasy is not one of informing a knowledgeable person, but of imposing the imagined authority of a modern science on someone from a less technologically advanced culture.

Oh, fucking nonsense. Humanities scholars are just as interested in making new discoveries as evolutionary psychologists, and are just as enthusiastic about pursuing ideas. What I’ve seen is that university presidents and provosts are typically completely clueless about what scholars do — does anyone really believe Larry Summers had the slightest appreciation of the virtues of knowledge? — so it’s bizarre in the first place to cite the opinions of our administrative bureaucrats. What this anecdote actually translates to is that a scientist stops by with an idea that needs funding that will lead to big grants and possible patent opportunities, and president’s brain goes KA-CHING; humanities scholar stops by with a great insight about French Impressionism or the history of the Spanish Civil War, asks for travel funds (or more likely, pennies for paper and ink), and president’s brain fizzles and can’t figure out how this will bring in a million dollar NIH grant, so what good is it? Why can’t this deadwood get with it and do something with cancer genes or clinical trials?

Heart, soul, poetry, beauty are not grist for the analytical mill of science, but they really are the core, and if you don’t appreciate that, the breadth of your education is lacking.





#archive Dangerous Ideas : Productivity is overrated

4 08 2013

Been getting a couple of wake up calls. Cal Newport cautions about being a productivity tips junkie here and reminds readers to focus of intensity.

Spoiler warning

The key to really getting ahead has nothing to do with productivity. From my experience with successful young people (and, as I writer, I have quite a bit of exposure to this crowd) what you need, put simply, is a drive to keep working, with a laser-like intensity, on something even after you’ve lost immediate interest. Tenacity. A grating thirst to get it done. These are the precursors of accomplishment.

Having good productivity habits compliment this crucial skill. They take this intensity and place it in a schedule. They keep small things from crowding your mind. They eliminate the stress of what appointment you might be forgetting or what vital errand has to be done. But productivity is not a substitute for this work.

This is a mistake I sometimes intuit is being made by young people with an interest in this community. There is a belief that if you get just the right system, with just the right calendar technology, and to-do notebook, and task management philosophy, accomplishment will come automatically. You can just turn the system on and watch it churn out what needs to get done.





#archive George Saunder’s Graduation Speech

4 08 2013

Don’t read further if you don’t want the spoiler. I thought of using the blog/tagging format to keep track of the important stuff I read. You can read the full article here.

Each of us is born with a series of built-in confusions that are probably somehow Darwinian. These are: (1) we’re central to the universe (that is, our personal story is the main and most interesting story, the only story, really); (2) we’re separate from the universe (there’s US and then, out there, all that other junk – dogs and swing-sets, and the State of Nebraska and low-hanging clouds and, you know, other people), and (3) we’re permanent (death is real, o.k., sure – for you, but not for me).

Now, we don’t really believe these things – intellectually we know better – but we believe them viscerally, and live by them, and they cause us to prioritize our own needs over the needs of others, even though what we really want, in our hearts, is to be less selfish, more aware of what’s actually happening in the present moment, more open, and more loving.





Perspective I

19 07 2013

While I was trying to channel my anger into something constructive, I ran into a bunch of pictures in a feature by FSTOPPERS on Tom Hussey’s Reflections. It’s an eye opening look at the elderly staring back at a reflection of their younger selves. Hussey has a great portfolio on his website and you can see the entire collection here.

This something I ponder about a fair bit, in conjunction with reflections on Death, partly because that seems to be the next stage.  I’m surrounded by the elderly at work, so I am rather surprised/ashamed that I haven’t had the Old Age and Death conversation with anyone. Perhaps it’s the language barrier, perhaps I’m just caught up with the routine. I’ll do that the next time I see someone who might be willing.

That’s probably me in 40+years. If I live that long.