When I have a dog that needs to be put to sleep, I talk to the vet the day before. I don't even take my dog with me, I explain to them (if they are a new vet to me... my usual vets know the routine) that I want the dog to have a tranquilizer, for me to have a few minutes with them like that, and when they put them to sleep, for them to leave me alone with the body for at least ten minutes. The reason for that is because they claim that the brain is alive for 4-6 minutes after the heart stops, and I don't want my pet thinking at any time that I had abandoned them at the end of their life. Valium will just relax them and make them feel good, propofol will put them into what is called a twilight sleep... will tell you more about that in a bit. I also sign the consent form on the day before.
But when you go in, hold them, talk to them and just love on them. Let kitty know that she isn't entering this alone, or surrounded with strangers. That you, the great love of her life is there with her.
I am going to ask you to not think about death while going into this. This is going to sound nuts, but on more than one occasion, I have caught my dogs reading my mind (can tell you specifics about that later as well if you want), but just in case she can read your thoughts, think about a benign procedure. Maybe a teeth cleaning, or nail trim.
Anyhow, go, hold her and talk to her.
I don't know of a vet anywhere that will demand that you put kitty to sleep before you are ready. They will allow your pet to die in great pain and naturally, if that is what you so desire. And just because they make a suggestion doesn't mean you have to follow their suggestion. They are medical professionals, not prison wardens. You very much will have free will in the process. But if a suggestion is made (which is unlikely), you are free to say "I am not ready to do that right now". And more often than not, they won't even say that, they will ask you "what do you want to do". About the only way I've been able to elicit suggestions from my vets is by asking "if this were your dog, what would you do", and they would tell me what they would do, if this scenario happened to their pet.
from
Friday, March 29, 2013
Thursday, March 28, 2013
The Reasons for Brown and Orange Clothes in the 70s
Fashion often changes in broad, pendulum-like swings, and this is a good example of the phenomenon. But while the question is deceptively simple, the answer is complex, because it involves explaining several social and historical convergences. Bear with me, if you will, and I hope all will become clear:
In the early 70's, there came about, pretty abruptly, a strong visual backlash against the electric, high-chroma,"psychedelic" colour palette that was such an iconic feature of the late 60's hippie culture; in short, the style got old very fast. The reasons were multiple: America was now deep in a quagmire of war; thousand were being drafted and returning home in coffins, mere weeks after their induction; protesters were being beaten and jailed; every day, the newspapers revealed our leaders to be ever more egregiously stupid crooks, liars and fools. Madness and anarchy seemed to lie around every corner.
Somehow all that celebratory, fun, acid-saturated colour now seemed silly and self-indulgent. It became as inappropriate as wearing a "Smile" t-shirt to a schoolbus rollover. And all the gentle social upheaval and genial questioning of institutional values that those bright colours once cheekily promised? Well, they no longer carried much appeal. In fact, they seemed frightening - just more uncertainty and conflict, in already uncertain and conflicted times.
People were suddenly in the visual mood for something more muted, contemplative and restrained. The faintly mournful "autumn" colour palette - dark orange, oxblood, copper, brown, harvest gold, avocado green - filled that need so well that, as you point out, it literally became symbolic of the decade. Perhaps simply because it reminded folks of a less complex time, when subtle, visually digestible, vegetable-based dyes coloured our surroundings, rather than incomprehensible, knock-your-eyes-out chemical pigments.
Concurrently with the shift in colour preferences, smaller, meticulously repeated patterns once again began to appear on fabrics and wallpapers, as sharp stylistic counterpoint to the free-form, Yellow Submarine-esque, "supergraphic rainbow" visuals that had overwhelmed every available wall surface during the previous decade.
Those autumn colours also thematically supported, and were cross-fertilized by, the decade's nascent "natural" movement. Still inspired by the lofty ideals of their older siblings' recently failed hippie paradigm, and boosted by the first vague stirrings of the modern ecology movement, '70s boomers forsook (at least temporarily) their parents' blatant consumerim, and instead embraced the generationally dormant, homespun handicrafts of their grandparents: macramé, crochet, bargello, weaving, leatherworking, cutting down old beer bottles into drinking glasses. The handicrafts they created and proudly decorated their homes with were mostly made from organic materials, so they just looked better when surrounded with earth-tone colours.
Chromatic colour was out, because it detracted from the workmanship - which was, after all, what differentiated handmade-and-unique from factory-extruded and common.
This attitudinal shift towards muted, "homemade" colour and texture, and away from slick, obviously industrial colours and finishes was, at least in part, probably a subconscious side-effect of the 70's generation's fast-growing resentment of both the politician-buying industrial complex, and its ongoing material support for a war they despised. The war ended in '75, but resentments lingered. It was, if you will, a form of protest, or boycott: a generation's tentative, somewhat pathetic attempt to re-exert control over their own visual destiny, and to wrest whatever tiny part of their environment they still could, away from the overbearing and apparently malignant industrial and commercial forces that were threatening to overwhelm them socially, financially and politically.
At the same time as these color and design changes took hold in home decor, people began gradually shifting their wardrobes back to natural wools and cottons. After a decade and a half of collecting increasingly slinky, shiny, uncomfortable, odiferous and obviously synthetic garments - which were themselves a pendulum-swing away from the ossified white-cotton-shirt, gray-flannel-suit ethos of the two decades following WWII, the fabric-choice pendulum was again swinging back. And in clothing, as in interior design, autumnal, natural colours were generally seen to be more complementary to natural materials than chromatic colours.
That all being said, the prevalence of the autumnal palette wasn't really as all-encompasing as retro media like That 70's Show would have us believe. Designers frequently go kind of over-the-top when they try to recreate a period look, a generation or more later. Frankly, even Mad Men, though certainly very well researched, is visually a little overbearing in its representation of the period; after all, not everything in the Sixties was of the Sixties; some of it hailed from the Fifties and Forties, even the Thirties.
Just as we still occasionally see an 80's wood panelled Buick land-shark station wagon in the Walmart parking lot, or a suitcase-sized VCR parked under a friend's tube TV, I long to see a cheap postwar suit on some poor agency schlub who supervises the steno pool. Instead, everybody wears Brooks Brothers. All the time.
It is also instructive to realize that within any fashion era "look" you'd care to examine, competing visual ideas constantly jousted with one another for dominance. Visual style is a roiling river, not a still pond. Remember that the "natural, homespun" 70's were also the era that gave birth to platform boots for men, polyester lounge suits, "designer" jeans, disco, the New York Dolls, foil wallpaper, smoked glass coffee tables, naugahyde sofas, spherical stereo speakers, shag carpet, gold-veined mirror tiles, chrome overhead lamps, and pink Christmas trees. For further proof, take another look at Goodfellas, with an eye to the set decoration and costumes; it is a veritable omnibus of questionable 70's design.
from
In the early 70's, there came about, pretty abruptly, a strong visual backlash against the electric, high-chroma,"psychedelic" colour palette that was such an iconic feature of the late 60's hippie culture; in short, the style got old very fast. The reasons were multiple: America was now deep in a quagmire of war; thousand were being drafted and returning home in coffins, mere weeks after their induction; protesters were being beaten and jailed; every day, the newspapers revealed our leaders to be ever more egregiously stupid crooks, liars and fools. Madness and anarchy seemed to lie around every corner.
Somehow all that celebratory, fun, acid-saturated colour now seemed silly and self-indulgent. It became as inappropriate as wearing a "Smile" t-shirt to a schoolbus rollover. And all the gentle social upheaval and genial questioning of institutional values that those bright colours once cheekily promised? Well, they no longer carried much appeal. In fact, they seemed frightening - just more uncertainty and conflict, in already uncertain and conflicted times.
People were suddenly in the visual mood for something more muted, contemplative and restrained. The faintly mournful "autumn" colour palette - dark orange, oxblood, copper, brown, harvest gold, avocado green - filled that need so well that, as you point out, it literally became symbolic of the decade. Perhaps simply because it reminded folks of a less complex time, when subtle, visually digestible, vegetable-based dyes coloured our surroundings, rather than incomprehensible, knock-your-eyes-out chemical pigments.
Concurrently with the shift in colour preferences, smaller, meticulously repeated patterns once again began to appear on fabrics and wallpapers, as sharp stylistic counterpoint to the free-form, Yellow Submarine-esque, "supergraphic rainbow" visuals that had overwhelmed every available wall surface during the previous decade.
Those autumn colours also thematically supported, and were cross-fertilized by, the decade's nascent "natural" movement. Still inspired by the lofty ideals of their older siblings' recently failed hippie paradigm, and boosted by the first vague stirrings of the modern ecology movement, '70s boomers forsook (at least temporarily) their parents' blatant consumerim, and instead embraced the generationally dormant, homespun handicrafts of their grandparents: macramé, crochet, bargello, weaving, leatherworking, cutting down old beer bottles into drinking glasses. The handicrafts they created and proudly decorated their homes with were mostly made from organic materials, so they just looked better when surrounded with earth-tone colours.
Chromatic colour was out, because it detracted from the workmanship - which was, after all, what differentiated handmade-and-unique from factory-extruded and common.
This attitudinal shift towards muted, "homemade" colour and texture, and away from slick, obviously industrial colours and finishes was, at least in part, probably a subconscious side-effect of the 70's generation's fast-growing resentment of both the politician-buying industrial complex, and its ongoing material support for a war they despised. The war ended in '75, but resentments lingered. It was, if you will, a form of protest, or boycott: a generation's tentative, somewhat pathetic attempt to re-exert control over their own visual destiny, and to wrest whatever tiny part of their environment they still could, away from the overbearing and apparently malignant industrial and commercial forces that were threatening to overwhelm them socially, financially and politically.
At the same time as these color and design changes took hold in home decor, people began gradually shifting their wardrobes back to natural wools and cottons. After a decade and a half of collecting increasingly slinky, shiny, uncomfortable, odiferous and obviously synthetic garments - which were themselves a pendulum-swing away from the ossified white-cotton-shirt, gray-flannel-suit ethos of the two decades following WWII, the fabric-choice pendulum was again swinging back. And in clothing, as in interior design, autumnal, natural colours were generally seen to be more complementary to natural materials than chromatic colours.
That all being said, the prevalence of the autumnal palette wasn't really as all-encompasing as retro media like That 70's Show would have us believe. Designers frequently go kind of over-the-top when they try to recreate a period look, a generation or more later. Frankly, even Mad Men, though certainly very well researched, is visually a little overbearing in its representation of the period; after all, not everything in the Sixties was of the Sixties; some of it hailed from the Fifties and Forties, even the Thirties.
Just as we still occasionally see an 80's wood panelled Buick land-shark station wagon in the Walmart parking lot, or a suitcase-sized VCR parked under a friend's tube TV, I long to see a cheap postwar suit on some poor agency schlub who supervises the steno pool. Instead, everybody wears Brooks Brothers. All the time.
It is also instructive to realize that within any fashion era "look" you'd care to examine, competing visual ideas constantly jousted with one another for dominance. Visual style is a roiling river, not a still pond. Remember that the "natural, homespun" 70's were also the era that gave birth to platform boots for men, polyester lounge suits, "designer" jeans, disco, the New York Dolls, foil wallpaper, smoked glass coffee tables, naugahyde sofas, spherical stereo speakers, shag carpet, gold-veined mirror tiles, chrome overhead lamps, and pink Christmas trees. For further proof, take another look at Goodfellas, with an eye to the set decoration and costumes; it is a veritable omnibus of questionable 70's design.
from
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
What is Dandruff?
Dandruff is a form of seborrheic dermatitis, which is also classically found in the eyebrows and on the sides of the nose. The condition itself is not fully understood, but is thought to be a reaction to varying types of Malassezia, yeast that resides in pretty much everyone's sebaceous glands (which cluster in the affected areas). Although pretty much everyone has the yeast, only certain people seem to react to it regularly. On the scalp this is known as dandruff.
Importantly, there are also forms of psoriasis which can be isolated to the scalp and can cause flaking, which can be indistinguishable on clinical exam but respond to treatment differently as it likely is not secondary to the yeast implicated in seborrheic dermatitis. Tar and salicyclic acid compounds (Tsal and Tgel) have shown mild relief in the improvement of psorasis, and can help people with mild scalp psoriasis. These will have limited effect in seborrheic dermatitis.
Now as for seborrheic dermatitis, there are two treatment options. One is to reduce the burden of the yeast and the second is to try to damp down the body's abnormal immune response against it (which is causing the inflammation and scaling).
Ketoconazole (Nizoral) cream and shampoo tend to work fantastically for this with limited side effects. Prescription strength is 2%, over the counter is 1%. People usually start 2-3 times weekly, leaving in form fives minutes, for a few weeks dropping to once weekly when under control. This alone often solves the problem. Alternating with selenium sulfide shampoos (ie Head and shoulders) can also help.
Alternatively, mild topical steroids can be prescribed (we usually give hydrocortisone 2.5% cream, although the 1% is over the counter) to reduce inflammation, but there can be long term side effects to its use such as skin thinning, hypopigmentation and telangiectasia so I usually stick with ketoconazole given the paucity of side effects.
Once you understand the condition, you might ask why cool water showers helps control it versus hot water. Short answer, it likely doesn't. Hot water can dehydrate our skin more, make you itchier and in particularly cause flaring with eczema, but does not plan a major role in the pathogenesis of seborrheic dermatitis.
Importantly, there are also forms of psoriasis which can be isolated to the scalp and can cause flaking, which can be indistinguishable on clinical exam but respond to treatment differently as it likely is not secondary to the yeast implicated in seborrheic dermatitis. Tar and salicyclic acid compounds (Tsal and Tgel) have shown mild relief in the improvement of psorasis, and can help people with mild scalp psoriasis. These will have limited effect in seborrheic dermatitis.
Now as for seborrheic dermatitis, there are two treatment options. One is to reduce the burden of the yeast and the second is to try to damp down the body's abnormal immune response against it (which is causing the inflammation and scaling).
Ketoconazole (Nizoral) cream and shampoo tend to work fantastically for this with limited side effects. Prescription strength is 2%, over the counter is 1%. People usually start 2-3 times weekly, leaving in form fives minutes, for a few weeks dropping to once weekly when under control. This alone often solves the problem. Alternating with selenium sulfide shampoos (ie Head and shoulders) can also help.
Alternatively, mild topical steroids can be prescribed (we usually give hydrocortisone 2.5% cream, although the 1% is over the counter) to reduce inflammation, but there can be long term side effects to its use such as skin thinning, hypopigmentation and telangiectasia so I usually stick with ketoconazole given the paucity of side effects.
Once you understand the condition, you might ask why cool water showers helps control it versus hot water. Short answer, it likely doesn't. Hot water can dehydrate our skin more, make you itchier and in particularly cause flaring with eczema, but does not plan a major role in the pathogenesis of seborrheic dermatitis.
Purpose
Everything having a purpose/reason/function is sort of a human concept that's more applicable to human affairs rather than natural or scientific affairs.
You're not going to understand it and feel will unsatisfied because you're a human, you think like a human, and to humans everything has purpose, everything has a cause. But this is not always true.
We are annoyed and cannot understand non-medium-speed objects. We can't fathom the size of quasars. We cannot fathom the speed of light. We can't fathom or understand gravity or the many physical forces. We cannot fathom the slowness of evolution.
These are flaws in our brain because we are use to only seeing medium-speed, medium-sized objects in our whole ancestry. We are not perfect, we are a work-in-progress, still evolving, and still choking on food.
You're not going to understand it and feel will unsatisfied because you're a human, you think like a human, and to humans everything has purpose, everything has a cause. But this is not always true.
We are annoyed and cannot understand non-medium-speed objects. We can't fathom the size of quasars. We cannot fathom the speed of light. We can't fathom or understand gravity or the many physical forces. We cannot fathom the slowness of evolution.
These are flaws in our brain because we are use to only seeing medium-speed, medium-sized objects in our whole ancestry. We are not perfect, we are a work-in-progress, still evolving, and still choking on food.
Why Boredom is Good
Boredom teaches patience and acceptance.
There you are, with nothing to do but wait. Maybe you're stuck somewhere, with nowhere to go. Maybe there are things to look at, but there's nothing new. It's just an eternity of monotony.
But the truth: There's no eternity of monotony.
Sit there, and eventually you'll get to where you're going, through no action of your own. Things change if you do nothing. Things change if you be patient, quiet down, and simply wait.
You get what you want, that is, to get to your destination, through doing an action: wait in silence while nothing happens.
Want to avoid knee-jerk reactionism? Spend five hours driving without a radio to listen to.
Want to think rationally after a fight? Sit in a room with your anger and stare at a wall until you fall asleep.
Meditation is little more than letting the nothingness of what is happening to you overtake you. Boredom is resistance to that nothingness.
There you are, with nothing to do but wait. Maybe you're stuck somewhere, with nowhere to go. Maybe there are things to look at, but there's nothing new. It's just an eternity of monotony.
But the truth: There's no eternity of monotony.
Sit there, and eventually you'll get to where you're going, through no action of your own. Things change if you do nothing. Things change if you be patient, quiet down, and simply wait.
You get what you want, that is, to get to your destination, through doing an action: wait in silence while nothing happens.
Want to avoid knee-jerk reactionism? Spend five hours driving without a radio to listen to.
Want to think rationally after a fight? Sit in a room with your anger and stare at a wall until you fall asleep.
Meditation is little more than letting the nothingness of what is happening to you overtake you. Boredom is resistance to that nothingness.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
How to Prevent Mattress Mold
Mold spores are damn near everywhere and they are nigh impossible to get rid of. Also, mold needs two things to grow: moisture and food. Mold feeds on damn near anything, so the best way to prevent mold is to prevent moisture.
But where is the moisture in a bed coming from? At first I thought it may have been residual 'chemical' moisture from when it was new and we may not have allowed it to 'dry' enough before covering it in all our sheets. On further thought, it seems much more likely that the moisture is coming from our own bodies via transpiration and/or perspiration (water vapor and sweat from the skin).
Now, why is the mold on the bottom and not on the top? My guess is that this is similar to condensation on window-sills during the winter. When air hits a cold surface such as the window glass, it may reach the dewpoint allowing the water vapor to condense into liquid water. A similar phenomenon may be happening with a bed because the bed absorbs water vapor moisture from your body at night and it encounters the cooler surface, maybe reaching the dewpoint, at the bottom of the bed.
Another point to note is that a waterproof mattress covering will not prevent the bed from absorbing water vapor from your body. Water vapor freely passes through breathable waterproof materials.
Alright, so what can you do to prevent this from happening?
- Cover the top or the entirety of your mattress with a gas-impermeable mattress protector. This would prevent water vapor from absorbing into the mattress. Here is a good example that even advertises that it prevents mold and mildew.
- If you don't have a gas-impermeable mattress protector, then don't sleep in a cold environment. Optimal sleep temps are 60-68 deg fahrenheit. A colder sleep environment may promote more moisture condensation on the underside of your bed.
- If you don't have a gas-impermeable mattress protector, then you need to keep your bed well ventilated. For instance, keep it on box-springs and a metal frame without any bedskirt or anything underneath the bed to inhibit airflow. Sleep with your window cracked open or your bedroom door open to allow airflow. Uncover your bed during the day to allow it to breathe (there's some evidence to suggest this may prevent dust mites as well).
- I called Sealy and asked them how to prevent mold growth on memory foam and they could not give me any meaningful advice.
- House plants are great mold breeders. Consider getting rid of them, especially if you have a problem with mold gnats.
- If you have a bathroom that connects close to or directly to your bedroom, make sure it is well ventilated with a roof fan. Imagine the amount of moisture that could come from a poorly ventilated bathroom if you have just two people showering every day.
- Basements, even daylight basements, are notorious for mold because moisture is drawn in from the ground through cracks, joints, and porous materials. If you have a memory foam bed in a basement, then definitely get a dehumidifier!
- Check your home for other sources of mold and water-leaks/moisture. Check under carpets, behind dressers, inside dressers, all surfaces inside cupboards, etc. If you want to take it a step further and spend some money, you can test your air for mold to see how bad the problem is and what types of mold are present in your home.
Why Electronic Arts Sucks
EA represents a lot of what is so wrong with the industry these days. The problem is that their focus is more on getting instant gratification for their stockholders. Games are no longer about fun, they are about min-maxing. What's the least amount of effort we can put into a game, and still come out on top in terms of dollar signs? See, from EA's point of view, it doesn't matter if people enjoy your game or hate your game. As long as in the end they make a profit, they are perfectly content.
The worst thing about this is that they will never change. No matter how much controversy SimCity or the next disaster stirs up, EA will only be putting in the minimum amount of effort that it takes to bring their numbers back up. The only real hope anyone has is to start backing real game developers, people who actually enjoy games.
I'm tired of seeing F2P, microtransactions, and other forms of money-grabbing gimmicks. I don't care about how it can benefit certain types of games, how it's destroying games, or how developers design the game to push players to put money into a game touted as "free." I really don't. What I do care about is the fact that nobody seems to care anymore that games have gone from, "How enjoyable is this game" to "How much money can I squeeze out of this?"
Games used to be about having fun. The fun of development, to do something nobody else has done before, of creating the mechanics around it to make it playable. The absolute elation of seeing a growing fanbase of people enjoying your hard work.
Sure there are a few games out there that are plenty popular without necessitating crudely thought up systems to coerce a few extra dollars from you, but as a gamer, can you really say that you like the direction that the industry is headed? I've seen a lot of games that I played growing up ruined by people who simply don't understand what games are, and why you can't just inject money into the formula without consequence.
Personally, I'm done. After the abysmal embarrassment that was Command and Conquer 4 and seeing what they're doing to Generals 2 (sorry, I mean "Command and Conquer"), I'm honestly done. I'm not buying any more EA games. I've realized that game hype is another spawn of the PR machine that works to mask the crap that EA represents, and not playing the next Super-Fantastic-Mega-Ultimate-Shooter-Strategy-Alien-Cowboy-Nukes 6 isn't going to kill me.
I'm not encouraging anyone to go for a refund and never buy another game from EA again, but I am encouraging free thought. I encourage people to get back to the roots of gaming, and to stop defending those who would turn one of our last escapes into a no-fun zone. Games should be about creating something for people to enjoy. It is my firm belief that if a game is made with honest effort and in good faith, success will flow.
source
The worst thing about this is that they will never change. No matter how much controversy SimCity or the next disaster stirs up, EA will only be putting in the minimum amount of effort that it takes to bring their numbers back up. The only real hope anyone has is to start backing real game developers, people who actually enjoy games.
I'm tired of seeing F2P, microtransactions, and other forms of money-grabbing gimmicks. I don't care about how it can benefit certain types of games, how it's destroying games, or how developers design the game to push players to put money into a game touted as "free." I really don't. What I do care about is the fact that nobody seems to care anymore that games have gone from, "How enjoyable is this game" to "How much money can I squeeze out of this?"
Games used to be about having fun. The fun of development, to do something nobody else has done before, of creating the mechanics around it to make it playable. The absolute elation of seeing a growing fanbase of people enjoying your hard work.
Sure there are a few games out there that are plenty popular without necessitating crudely thought up systems to coerce a few extra dollars from you, but as a gamer, can you really say that you like the direction that the industry is headed? I've seen a lot of games that I played growing up ruined by people who simply don't understand what games are, and why you can't just inject money into the formula without consequence.
Personally, I'm done. After the abysmal embarrassment that was Command and Conquer 4 and seeing what they're doing to Generals 2 (sorry, I mean "Command and Conquer"), I'm honestly done. I'm not buying any more EA games. I've realized that game hype is another spawn of the PR machine that works to mask the crap that EA represents, and not playing the next Super-Fantastic-Mega-Ultimate-Shooter-Strategy-Alien-Cowboy-Nukes 6 isn't going to kill me.
I'm not encouraging anyone to go for a refund and never buy another game from EA again, but I am encouraging free thought. I encourage people to get back to the roots of gaming, and to stop defending those who would turn one of our last escapes into a no-fun zone. Games should be about creating something for people to enjoy. It is my firm belief that if a game is made with honest effort and in good faith, success will flow.
source
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)