Wednesday, March 22, 2017
First, they found the fear of losing a job to a robot is real. This is a "substantial portion" of the American population--37%--identified as technophobes.
Technophobes, according to this study, are very afraid or just afraid of robots in the workforce, decision-making robots, and technology they don't understand, such as artificial intelligence.
--Women, non-whites, and women report being most phobic.
--Technophobes are three times as like to fear losing their jobs, and three times as likely to fear not having enough money in the future.
--Technophobes also are 95% less likely to be able to stop or control worrying.
All this is published in the Social Science Computer Review.
But isn't automation going to cause unemployment? Mark Cuban said it was. Bill Gates, also no dummy, said robots should be taxed and the money used to retrain people (presumably for jobs robots don't want--notice how intelligent I made them there?).
Fear of automation is not new, of course. People said cars would not catch on.
But it's coming on a scale we have not seen.
Visionaries may see blue skies ahead with more leisure time and fabulously fulfilling, non-routine jobs for people.
But--the fear remains--and maybe it is realism and not mental illness. Think?
Tuesday, March 21, 2017
|Just another day for someone with afib.|
But over a decade ago, a doctor discovered I had irregular heartbeat--known as atrial fibrillation. One in five Americans have it--my brother does, also a maternal aunt. For once, this is not related to being fat!
Basically, this is when a clump of regulating cells near the heart go off track somehow and cause the heart to beat funny. One doctor kept referring to mine as my "hippety-hoppety heart."
This funny beat, in turn, can cause blood in the upper chamber of the heart to get sort of churned up into a clot that can travel to other parts--and cause a stroke. People with afib, as they call it, have a greater chance of a stroke as those with "normal sinus rhythm."
Some people get a fluttery feeling and are "in" afib for a time, then revert to normal. Others--like me--are always in afib. My pulse is sort of like BEAT BEAT...Slidy slurry BEAT...PAUSE...BEAT....
At first, they put me on a med called amiodarone to regulate the beat. This drug made me so sick I ended up ion the hospital and later they said they didn't know if I was coming out alive. I did!
Then they put me on blood thinners--a blood thinner--warfarin. Every month, I had to go to a lab and get a blood test...they would call and say eat a spinach salad--vitamin K in spinach affects your blood thinness. It was wacky...then my intestine bled, leading to a terrible hospitalization for a colonoscopy. Can't have that with thinners on board, so they tried to counteract the thinner with blood plasma. The colonoscopy could not be completed.
I stayed on thinners. They said to. Eventually, I experienced another bleed--in my right eye, leading to terrible clots, a fully detached retina, four surgeries, and now a blind eye.
I quit warfarin. Now I am on an aspirin only and have been for 10 yrs.
There are two other approaches to afib--ablation (try to kill the rogue cells with radio waves or heat) or the "paddles"--shock you into proper rhythm. I refused both
Long story longer, research from the Intermountain Medical Center Heart Institute in Salt Lake City now says there is an effective way to tell if someone needs thinners. First, you do a questionnaire called the CHA2DS2-VASc (see what I mean by "weeds"?) and then a second scoring--the Intermountain Mortality Risk Score.
The first is not predictive of outcomes, but has been used for years anyway. It is oversinmplified, the researchers say--a woman over 65 would automatically get a thinner, even though this is not a comprehensive way to tell is she needs one.
The new Intermountain score adds more variables.
Well, fine and dandy...I am seeing my ninth cardiologist next week--to see if I can withstand hernia surgery. Wonder if he will recommend this.
As I peer into the screen with my one remaining eye--I have no idea.
Monday, March 20, 2017
More parents were confident of getting same-day phone advice (60%) than a same-day appointment (53%).
In other words, the researchers said, many parents are frustrated about getting timely advice when they have a sick child.
While retail clinics (in stores) or urgent care clinics may seem convenient, they may not have the child's history and can be expensive. And don't even ASK about the ER--see below.
Most doctors' office have a limited number of "sick" visits a day. I remember my daughter's pediatrician gave out a booklet of when to call or make an appt. I about had it memorized.
Discuss this with the doctor before deciding on a provider--the researchers recommended.
Most often, for a number of reasons, the primary care doctor's office is your best bet.
I will admit I often consider other venues. I even got so desperate with stomach pains two weeks ago, I went to the ER, knowing I could get imaging, testing, and an opinion in one place...and not be shuffled one day to a lab, the next to an x-ray place.
But the bottom line for that six hours...$11,600!!! My part was way less, of course, but someone thought that was what the services were worth,
I think the entire health care system is hardly worthy of the name system these days.
Friday, March 17, 2017
The youngest group surveyed, the Millennials are the healthiest. In fact, they utilize health care less often than previous generations did at their age. Only 35% of these even have a primary care provider. One in four say they use an alternative facility--say an urgent care center--when sick.
The Millennials, however, tend to have a high degree of trust. Also, they tend to be over-sharers (social media) and favor a more open doctor-patient relationship. They are not afraid to engage authority--their parents have taught them their voice matters. Millennials also use digital media--such as doctor reviews. They also tend to trust institutions with their health data.
These are in their late 30s and 40s. They don't trust doctors or the system. They tend to believe doctors are more about money than helping. They hate to open up with their doctors. They are less likely to follow up on advice--and only 56% have a primary care doctor. In fact, one in four say they have lost trust in a doctor or institution in the last two yrs--more than any other generation.
This generation, being oldest, is the unhealthiest. They have a high rate of chronic disease, more disability, and lower self-rated health than any previous generation at the same age.
Therefore--83% of Boomers have a doctor. They prefer a team approach, though. They value a doctor who will discuss treatment options in detail. They also expect doctors to work at least a 50-hour week like they do and keep up on medical information. To find a doctor, Boomers rely more on recommendations from friends and family than the internet.
This seems to track with what I have observed. What do you think?
Thursday, March 16, 2017
The quality of sleep, the researchers pointed out, was more important than the length or number of hours.
They even quantified the benefits--equal to winning 200,000 pounds in the lottery.
Moreover, positive changes in quality of sleep, over time, using less sleep medication, improved scores on the General Health Questionnaire, used to determine mental well-being.
A person's physical health is also improved. And lack of sleep, and bad sleep quality lead to worsened states.
Bottom line: The benefits of sleep are accessible to everyone.
Some general principles:
--No devices or blue light
--Limit liquids at night to cut bathroom runs, don't eat after 8 PM
--Alcohol before bed can make you fall asleep but then rebound awake
--Comfortable mattress, bedding, and night clothes
--Maybe separate room from spouse who snores
--Pets in or out of bed depending on your preference
See? You didn't even need to buy a lottery ticket.