phobosanomaly

I recently worked as a physician in a Labor and Delivery unit at a county hospital where there is an extremely high rate of methamphetamine and fentanyl use among patients, I would like to provide a counter-point that I have never heard of anything like this happening. Even in patients who are admitted actively withdrawing from fentanyl we go out of our way to treat them with dignity and respect. Social work will be consulted following delivery, but I have never seen police get involved, and there will never be physicians and nurses present during CPS' discussion with parents.

Again, just from what I have seen at county where substance use is a pretty banal, common occurrence and CPS often placed children in foster care straight from the newborn nursery.

I'm sorry that you had such a negative experience. Maybe it was at a hospital that doesn't deal with substance use issues much?

This group has put so much effort into the open letter, but it's probably not receiving particularly widespread circulation.

Perhaps it would be more effective if this group gathered the detailed knowledge of all the people who signed the letter and published a really detailed book on the current political, social, and economic state of Iran with all the juicy details that they have insider knowledge of included? Surely it would be a richer source of information than the trickle of articles from the single journalist they're upset with.

If it provided deep insights into the nature of the regime, and wasn't just a screed about how the government is awful, this hypothetical book could have a significant political and cultural impact outside of Iran.

Isn't this just basic antitrust regulation? I don't like to use the word 'propaganda' unless it's tongue-in-cheek, but ... "Ma’s assets have been stripped, shorn, and degraded" ... come on, give me a break.

I've tried breaking textbooks down into Anki cards, and it takes forever and afterwards I'm left feeling underwhelmed. But, if you're going to do it, I've found that my favorite method of review is TTS on the Anki app with swipe gestures, and I just go for loooong walks while grinding my flash cards, just holding the phone at my side and swiping with my thumb '1' or '3'.

One thing I tried that I liked was reading the entire textbook out-loud into a set of bluetooth headphones chapter-by-chapter. I then process the raw audio file using Audacity's 'truncate silence' tool, as well as increasing the tempo of the audio file by 1.5-2x speed. I read it mechanically, straight-through as quickly as I possibly can on the first run. Then I make 1-2 passes back through the entire book using the audio file of my own recorded voice sped up in order to pace myself.

That way I go through the entire book like 3 times. Once slow, twice fast. I might do my second or third pass months or years later. Doing it mechanically means that I can grind through nonfiction technical books that are hundreds of pages long pretty quickly, and I know exactly how long my reviews will take, since it's the length of my audio file. The largest book I've pulled it off with was 900 pages. It was a sufferfest, but if you smoke a little pot while you're doing it, you can get into a nice rhythm and it's kind of fun.

I don't remember every single detail of the book using this method, but I've found cranking through them relentlessly with some time in-between to be very, very effective from a practical perspective. It scratches the 'done is better than perfect' itch, and when I need a specific detail I know exactly where to look.

I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that the database guy actually implements things in an environment that can be manipulated at will.

Doctors don't implement things in an environment that they control. Patients come to them with a chief complaint, and the doctor tries to resolve or manage it to the best of their ability with a minimal intervention according to a set of guidelines someone else wrote down.

A doctor can't sit there and play with the diagnostic/treatment process in the same way a database guy can go play with the database software. At best the doctor can sit there with a textbook or medical journal and try to memorize more facts, or take notes, but it's not the same as pulling apart code, running it in different ways, and seeing how it behaves.

Medical school is a continuous process of memorizing shit off of flash cards culled from a textbook. You don't actually build anything, or implement anything, or do anything in a real-world sense that would make you an expert in the same way as someone who was working with a system that they were able to take apart and play with and manipulate. There's no real way to develop the kind of deep knowledge you're talking about in that environment.

A diesel mechanic can pull apart and engine. Hold every part in their hand. Drive a diesel-engine vehicle. Observe all the things that go wrong. Simulate, and innovate. An individual doctor can't really do any of that. Medical schools are even axing dissections, so med students are lucky if they get to see what the hell peritoneum actually looks like.

'Easy access' is scary for hospitals because it means increased possibility of HIPAA violations.

They can have multiple free-of-charge parking garages on the outskirts that are associated with a light rail system.

So you park, hop on the metro, and head into the city without having to worry about the nightmare of parking or the stop-and-go traffic.

I never, ever drive into LA. I use the free parking at an outlying metro station and ride the train in (20 min). You can even leave your vehicle overnight so you can go out for drinks and crash at a friends place (even if you don't train runs until 2am). It's a night-and-day improvement on having to sit in traffic on the freeway, spend 40 minutes finding street parking, worry if someone is going to steal your catalytic converter, etc.

An added benefit is that I go into the city much more often than I otherwise would because I know that the whole process is pretty stress-free.

You'd need boats in the area anyway to gather up the crew when the vessel started taking on water.

The sources in the linked article seem to suggest that the San Francisco Walgreens are not being driven from business due to an overabundance of middle and working-class white girls shoplifting for fun. Although the parent to your comment did seem to be generalizing quite a bit from the article at hand, and so perhaps your response deviated in kind. Fair enough, I'm making the argument anyway.

I have no doubt that the phenomenon you mention certainly exists. I do, however question whether its prevalence is enough to be noticeable on an income statement.

There seems to be something else at work in San Francisco, and the question is how we should contextualize it morally (which will influence our preferred policy approach as voters). Is it people stealing because they are desperate for the necessities that one would encounter at a drugstore (something we should feel sorry about). Or, are they organized crime rings making a quick buck at someone else's expense due to loopholes in the legal system (something we should be pissed off about).

I alternate between the two perspectives based on my own experiences viewing urban poverty up-close, the discussions shared in the HN Walgreens threads, as well as some of the videos shared of organized groups of people clearly looting high-value items. It's something I don't really have a solidly-formed opinion on, and there seems to be an abundance of nuance.

You provided the example of the First Nations in Canada, which would be taken by any reasonable person as an implication that the United States is a better country to be impoverished in.

When combined with your refutation of the earlier poster's comments regarding the similarity of the poor in the United States to those in the developing world and your statement that the poor in the United States aren't worse off than the poor in other developed countries, it paints an argument that the poor in the United States are somehow in a better position than in other developed countries.

The totality of your statements would be interpreted by a reasonable person as implying that the poor in the United States are better off than in other developed countries.

If your point is simply that the poor in all developed countries are in the same position, and that the poor in the United States are in the same position as the poor in Denmark, that's an interesting take. I mean, you could have just dropped "poverty in the US isn’t unique among developed countries" in the first post where you brought up the First Nations.

I'm just out here trying to have a productive debate with strangers on the internet.