|
|
the
new yorker: HEALTH CARE The liberal senior editor of the liberal New Yorker Magazine, suggests
in the current issue that liberals disillusioned by the health care
bill – MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann calls it a “betrayal”
– are too gloomy by half. In
part: ...
When Congress reconvenes a few days from now, it will be on the cusp of
enacting a sweeping reform of American health insurance and health care that
could be, as the President put it on Christmas Eve, just after the Senate
passed its version of the bill, “the most important piece of social
legislation since the Social Security Act passed in the nineteen-thirties and
the most important reform of our health-care system since Medicare passed in
the nineteen-sixties.” Perhaps he was exaggerating, but not by much.
Jonathan Cohn, the New Republic’s health-care
correspondent, calls the bill “the most ambitious piece of domestic
legislation in a generation—a bill that will extend insurance coverage
to tens of millions of Americans, strengthen insurance for many more, and start
refashioning American medicine so that it is more efficient.” Paul
Krugman, the Times’ resident Nobel laureate (and a frequent Obama
critic), calls the bill “a great achievement” that
“establishes the principle—even if it falls somewhat short in
practice—that all Americans are entitled to essential health care.”
Princeton’s Paul Starr, the author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning history
“The Social Transformation of American Medicine,” calls it
“the single biggest measure on behalf of low-income Americans in more
than forty years.” ... ☞ The piece certainly acknowledges the negatives,
too. But I’d urge you to read the whole thing if you share what he calls
“the subdued, sometimes even angry, mood among many of President
Obama’s wavering, if not quite erstwhile, supporters.”
Jim
Roberts:
“Jane Brody, New York Times personal health columnist, had an observation
(March 2006) similar to yours.” I’ll
start with the easiest of the three challenges to my current life: the daily
consumption of three capsules of glucosamine (1,500 milligrams) and chondroitin
sulfate (1,200 milligrams). I've been using this product, more or less
religiously, since it transformed my 11-year-old spaniel from an arthritic
wreck into a companion with puppylike agility, giving him nearly six more
active years. Since the dog had no idea what the capsules were for, or even
that he was getting them (they were hidden in a meatball he swallowed
whole), I knew there was no placebo effect. ☞
Well, I’ve been taking G&C for a long time, and as I wrote here, it seems to
have worked for me, too. Early results for the mussels are similar, but of
course there is a large element of voodoo in my analysis. But
at least as regards dogs and glucosamine, could it all be coincidence? Gil: “Several years ago
someone recommended Glucosamine for my daughter's large dog. She was having so
much trouble climbing the deck steps she was not eating. (Of course, they
started feeding her at the bottom of the steps.) After a couple of weeks of
the Glucosamine, she resumed climbing the steps. Dogs don’t understand
double blind studies.” DROPBOX
– AND SUGAR SYNC David
Davis: “I
absolutely love Dropbox. It is a dream
come true. I have three desktops and a notebook (all Mac) and an iPhone and it
is just what I have been looking for!” Mark
Knapp:
“Yes, Dropbox is great, but I don’t think I would ever rely on just
one service to protect my data. The Dropbox server goes down and your desktop
HD corrupts and your laptop is stolen. It COULD happen. What I’d say is
more likely to happen is Dropbox’s syncing logic decides an older version
of a file is the latest version and overwrites the current file with an old one
and propagates that out to all of your machines. Dropbox keeps previous
versions of files, but during this blip, it mis-recognized something and you
lose the current version of something. To protect against this, you can use
multiple services for backing up / syncing data. I use a combination of the
following to sync and back up data: Dropbox
for syncing and keeping backups of synced files; SugarSync for syncing and keeping backups
of synced files; Jungle Disk for
backing up files primarily. They all keep previous versions of files. And at
least twice, I’ve had one of the services hiccup and had to go back to
another service to retrieve a previous version of a file.” ☞ When I asked what could possibly require such
security – is he CIA? – and how glitchlessly the three systems play
together, Mark pretended not to be CIA (but why wouldn’t he?), and
elaborated: “My data’s not super secret or super important,
it's just important to me. If a file is lost, then I have to spend time recreating
that file (if that's even possible). I like my data to be (#1) accessible and
(#2) protected. “Any one of the services below can satisfy #1 by
syncing the files across multiple computers. I travel a fair bit and
like having current versions of files always on my laptop without having to
copy the files there before leaving. And then when I get back, the files
are immediately current on my workstation. No copying. Syncing in this
way has nearly completely eliminated any need I had for USB flash drives.
I currently use SugarSync as my primary syncing tool. It's a toss up between
Dropbox and SugarSync, but SugarSync offers some important advantages at
the moment: 1) I can specify folders to sync and 2) I can specify which folders
sync to which computers; it's not all or nothing. It works great almost all of
the time. I also use the free version of Dropbox for sharing folders with
friends and providing public download links to files I have synced.
|
Webdesign by Marc Fest
© Copyright Andrew Tobias