Autodesk ForceEffect bicycle simulation

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:55:45 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Assuming you live in the US, the real problem is that YOU ARE NOT
THE CUSTOMER. Your insurance company is, and they don't give a rosy
rat's ass about any data that you might have collected. If it might
make you healthier, they still don't care.

My insurance company is currently the US government. I'm on Medicare
A and B.

Most insurance companies do whatever it takes to have me continue
paying their exorbitant premiums. They take in as much as possible,
and pay out as little as possible. It's in the payout that the
problems start. Insurance companies require doctors to justify that a
procedure is necessary. That means tests, tests, and even more tests.
Like my testing, those tests generate plenty of paper and numbers but
with one critical difference. The doctor is responsible for
justifying a procedure, not the patient. Therefore, you're mostly
correct. The insurance company will ignore any tests ordered by the
patient, but require the same tests to be ordered by the doctor.

Actually, the insurance companies want to see me dead as soon as
possible. If I live long enough, chances are good that I'll contract
some non-fatal and expensive chronic illness that will require
substantial payments by the insurance company. It's better to
terminate the patient before he becomes a drag on the bottom line.

Incidentally, if something goes wrong and I end up in a malpractice
suit, none of the tests that I performed and ordered are admissible as
evidence because they were performed by an insufficiently qualified
individual.

How did we get from FEA software to here? Never mind... It's probably
my fault.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

John B. wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:02:45 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:
snip
One very common instance is the so called "White Coat Syndrome" where
many individuals exhibit higher, some times much higher, blood
pressure when the reading is taken in a clinic or hospital.

My wife was on medication for high blood pressure for a while until she
started testing it at the local supermarket. Her blood pressure was sky
high because she is a very punctual person and her doctor was habitually a
half hour late for every appointment.

Uh, I offered a moderate position on agreement with the general flow .

I was denied health care by a quasi government service last week, assaulted by the service and their associates.

But the diagnostics were prob relevant as are emails.

I will stop posting until you recover.

Hasta luego

..

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:55:45 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann writes:

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:37:48 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I suspect that there are numerious reasons for a doctor to ignore your
records. Probably the largest is that individuals seldom accurately
record things and secondly, it is likely that a single reading is not
very valuable data. So while YOU may have accurately recorded Your
readings the great majority of the patients a doctor sees will not
have done so.

Yep. However, I've been very careful to measure the BP, pulse, and
weight in a controlled manner. I take them at the same time of day,
with the same instrument, and in the position. If there are any
events that might affect the results, such as prescription changes,
taking pills at a different time, overwork, stress, overeating, etc,
those are noted on the spreadsheet. I've compared my results with
clinical studies doing roughly the same thing and find my graphs look
much like theirs.

Here's an old example from 2005 to 2009 with different smoothing
algorithms:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/blood-pressure-2005-2009.jpg
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/bp.jpg

While accuracy might be a problem for the doctor, he clearly stated
that his problem with patient supplied data was that he does not have
time to properly review the numbers. The lack of time seems to be so
bad, that I have to bring copies of lab tests and test reports from my
own online medical history because he doesn't have time to sift
through the file or online to find them. I think my last office visit
was an all time record, with me waiting about 90 minutes to see the
doctor, and getting all of 12 minutes "face time". Dumping more data
into this situation is not going to help (me).

Assuming you live in the US, the real problem is that YOU ARE NOT
THE CUSTOMER. Your insurance company is, and they don't give a rosy
rat's ass about any data that you might have collected. If it might
make you healthier, they still don't care.


Well, you may not call 'em customers but if you don't go to see the
doctor he don't get paid, so what would you call it?

One very common instance is the so called "White Coat Syndrome" where
many individuals exhibit higher, some times much higher, blood
pressure when the reading is taken in a clinic or hospital.

I'm built backwards. When they take my BP at the doctors office, my
BP usually goes down instead. I've demonstrated it to the doctor and
tested various combinations of equipment, nurse, doctor, and me doing
the test, with fairly consistent results. The only time it goes up
for me is when the doctor gives me really bad news. The doctor has no
explanation.
--

Cheers,

John B.

John B. writes:

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:55:45 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann writes:

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:37:48 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I suspect that there are numerious reasons for a doctor to ignore your
records. Probably the largest is that individuals seldom accurately
record things and secondly, it is likely that a single reading is not
very valuable data. So while YOU may have accurately recorded Your
readings the great majority of the patients a doctor sees will not
have done so.

Yep. However, I've been very careful to measure the BP, pulse, and
weight in a controlled manner. I take them at the same time of day,
with the same instrument, and in the position. If there are any
events that might affect the results, such as prescription changes,
taking pills at a different time, overwork, stress, overeating, etc,
those are noted on the spreadsheet. I've compared my results with
clinical studies doing roughly the same thing and find my graphs look
much like theirs.

Here's an old example from 2005 to 2009 with different smoothing
algorithms:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/blood-pressure-2005-2009.jpg
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/bp.jpg

While accuracy might be a problem for the doctor, he clearly stated
that his problem with patient supplied data was that he does not have
time to properly review the numbers. The lack of time seems to be so
bad, that I have to bring copies of lab tests and test reports from my
own online medical history because he doesn't have time to sift
through the file or online to find them. I think my last office visit
was an all time record, with me waiting about 90 minutes to see the
doctor, and getting all of 12 minutes "face time". Dumping more data
into this situation is not going to help (me).

Assuming you live in the US, the real problem is that YOU ARE NOT
THE CUSTOMER. Your insurance company is, and they don't give a rosy
rat's ass about any data that you might have collected. If it might
make you healthier, they still don't care.


Well, you may not call 'em customers but if you don't go to see the
doctor he don't get paid, so what would you call it?

If the lamb doesn't go to the slaughterhouse, the butcher doesn't get
paid either.

One very common instance is the so called "White Coat Syndrome" where
many individuals exhibit higher, some times much higher, blood
pressure when the reading is taken in a clinic or hospital.

I'm built backwards. When they take my BP at the doctors office, my
BP usually goes down instead. I've demonstrated it to the doctor and
tested various combinations of equipment, nurse, doctor, and me doing
the test, with fairly consistent results. The only time it goes up
for me is when the doctor gives me really bad news. The doctor has no
explanation.

--

On 4/14/2016 8:52 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
John B. writes:

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:55:45 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann writes:

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:37:48 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I suspect that there are numerious reasons for a doctor to ignore your
records. Probably the largest is that individuals seldom accurately
record things and secondly, it is likely that a single reading is not
very valuable data. So while YOU may have accurately recorded Your
readings the great majority of the patients a doctor sees will not
have done so.

Yep. However, I've been very careful to measure the BP, pulse, and
weight in a controlled manner. I take them at the same time of day,
with the same instrument, and in the position. If there are any
events that might affect the results, such as prescription changes,
taking pills at a different time, overwork, stress, overeating, etc,
those are noted on the spreadsheet. I've compared my results with
clinical studies doing roughly the same thing and find my graphs look
much like theirs.

Here's an old example from 2005 to 2009 with different smoothing
algorithms:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/blood-pressure-2005-2009.jpg
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/bp.jpg

While accuracy might be a problem for the doctor, he clearly stated
that his problem with patient supplied data was that he does not have
time to properly review the numbers. The lack of time seems to be so
bad, that I have to bring copies of lab tests and test reports from my
own online medical history because he doesn't have time to sift
through the file or online to find them. I think my last office visit
was an all time record, with me waiting about 90 minutes to see the
doctor, and getting all of 12 minutes "face time". Dumping more data
into this situation is not going to help (me).

Assuming you live in the US, the real problem is that YOU ARE NOT
THE CUSTOMER. Your insurance company is, and they don't give a rosy
rat's ass about any data that you might have collected. If it might
make you healthier, they still don't care.


Well, you may not call 'em customers but if you don't go to see the
doctor he don't get paid, so what would you call it?

If the lamb doesn't go to the slaughterhouse, the butcher doesn't get
paid either.

One very common instance is the so called "White Coat Syndrome" where
many individuals exhibit higher, some times much higher, blood
pressure when the reading is taken in a clinic or hospital.

I'm built backwards. When they take my BP at the doctors office, my
BP usually goes down instead. I've demonstrated it to the doctor and
tested various combinations of equipment, nurse, doctor, and me doing
the test, with fairly consistent results. The only time it goes up
for me is when the doctor gives me really bad news. The doctor has no
explanation.


"If the lamb doesn't go to the slaughterhouse, the butcher
doesn't get paid either."

I smiled on reading that, having just finished this month's
article by the always interesting Jigs Gardner.

Having abandoned academia for farming in the nearly desolate
Cape Breton, he contributed to various publications for
needed cash. One hippie newsletter ( his description) asked
him to write on practical advice for raising lambs, which he
did. The editor insisted that all the references to
slaughter and butchery be removed but of course Mr Gardner,
although sorely in need of the payment, noted that there's
no point to raise a lamb if no one's going to eat it. He
declined.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/15/2016 8:15 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/14/2016 8:52 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
John B. writes:

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:55:45 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann writes:

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:37:48 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I suspect that there are numerious reasons for a doctor to ignore
your
records. Probably the largest is that individuals seldom accurately
record things and secondly, it is likely that a single reading is not
very valuable data. So while YOU may have accurately recorded Your
readings the great majority of the patients a doctor sees will not
have done so.

Yep. However, I've been very careful to measure the BP, pulse, and
weight in a controlled manner. I take them at the same time of day,
with the same instrument, and in the position. If there are any
events that might affect the results, such as prescription changes,
taking pills at a different time, overwork, stress, overeating, etc,
those are noted on the spreadsheet. I've compared my results with
clinical studies doing roughly the same thing and find my graphs look
much like theirs.

Here's an old example from 2005 to 2009 with different smoothing
algorithms:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/blood-pressure-2005-2009.jpg
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/bp.jpg

While accuracy might be a problem for the doctor, he clearly stated
that his problem with patient supplied data was that he does not have
time to properly review the numbers. The lack of time seems to be so
bad, that I have to bring copies of lab tests and test reports from my
own online medical history because he doesn't have time to sift
through the file or online to find them. I think my last office visit
was an all time record, with me waiting about 90 minutes to see the
doctor, and getting all of 12 minutes "face time". Dumping more data
into this situation is not going to help (me).

Assuming you live in the US, the real problem is that YOU ARE NOT
THE CUSTOMER. Your insurance company is, and they don't give a rosy
rat's ass about any data that you might have collected. If it might
make you healthier, they still don't care.


Well, you may not call 'em customers but if you don't go to see the
doctor he don't get paid, so what would you call it?

If the lamb doesn't go to the slaughterhouse, the butcher doesn't get
paid either.

One very common instance is the so called "White Coat Syndrome" where
many individuals exhibit higher, some times much higher, blood
pressure when the reading is taken in a clinic or hospital.

I'm built backwards. When they take my BP at the doctors office, my
BP usually goes down instead. I've demonstrated it to the doctor and
tested various combinations of equipment, nurse, doctor, and me doing
the test, with fairly consistent results. The only time it goes up
for me is when the doctor gives me really bad news. The doctor has no
explanation.


"If the lamb doesn't go to the slaughterhouse, the butcher doesn't get
paid either."

I smiled on reading that, having just finished this month's article by
the always interesting Jigs Gardner.

Having abandoned academia for farming in the nearly desolate Cape
Breton, he contributed to various publications for needed cash. One
hippie newsletter ( his description) asked him to write on practical
advice for raising lambs, which he did. The editor insisted that all the
references to slaughter and butchery be removed but of course Mr
Gardner, although sorely in need of the payment, noted that there's no
point to raise a lamb if no one's going to eat it. He declined.

"Cute" is God's way of signaling "delicious."

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/12/2016 10:53 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

While accuracy might be a problem for the doctor, he clearly stated
that his problem with patient supplied data was that he does not have
time to properly review the numbers. The lack of time seems to be so
bad, that I have to bring copies of lab tests and test reports from my
own online medical history because he doesn't have time to sift
through the file or online to find them. I think my last office visit
was an all time record, with me waiting about 90 minutes to see the
doctor, and getting all of 12 minutes "face time". Dumping more data
into this situation is not going to help (me).

The problem is Santa Cruz. The health care situation there is bad
because of lack of competition. Neither Sutter nor Kaiser have hospitals
there. Sutter has medical offices (Palo Alto Medical Foundation), and
apparently Kaiser will have them soon:
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/article/NE/20151013/NEWS/151019896,
but neither will have a hospital there unless they buy Dominican Hospital.

I have a friend in Santa Cruz County who moved from Santa Clara to
retire but she still kept her house in Santa Clara and drove over the
hill for medical care at Kaiser. It's especially good for Medicare.

When I go to the doctor at Kaiser the wait time is minimal. I don't
think that I've ever had to wait more than five minutes past my
appointment time to be called, or more than five minutes for the doctor
to arrive in the examining room. They have all my records online in the
examining room. The only issue I have is trying to get an appointment by
phone. I've given up on this because of the long process. I just go over
there and make an appointment because it takes less time.

Frank Krygowski writes:

On 4/15/2016 8:15 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/14/2016 8:52 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:

[ ... ]

"If the lamb doesn't go to the slaughterhouse, the butcher doesn't get
paid either."

I smiled on reading that, having just finished this month's article by
the always interesting Jigs Gardner.

Having abandoned academia for farming in the nearly desolate Cape
Breton, he contributed to various publications for needed cash. One
hippie newsletter ( his description) asked him to write on practical
advice for raising lambs, which he did. The editor insisted that all the
references to slaughter and butchery be removed but of course Mr
Gardner, although sorely in need of the payment, noted that there's no
point to raise a lamb if no one's going to eat it. He declined.

"Cute" is God's way of signaling "delicious."

Hmmm. Monkfish are delicious. Amanita toadstools are cute.

--

On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 07:15:04 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 4/14/2016 8:52 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
John B. writes:

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:55:45 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann writes:

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:37:48 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I suspect that there are numerious reasons for a doctor to ignore your
records. Probably the largest is that individuals seldom accurately
record things and secondly, it is likely that a single reading is not
very valuable data. So while YOU may have accurately recorded Your
readings the great majority of the patients a doctor sees will not
have done so.

Yep. However, I've been very careful to measure the BP, pulse, and
weight in a controlled manner. I take them at the same time of day,
with the same instrument, and in the position. If there are any
events that might affect the results, such as prescription changes,
taking pills at a different time, overwork, stress, overeating, etc,
those are noted on the spreadsheet. I've compared my results with
clinical studies doing roughly the same thing and find my graphs look
much like theirs.

Here's an old example from 2005 to 2009 with different smoothing
algorithms:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/blood-pressure-2005-2009.jpg
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/bp.jpg

While accuracy might be a problem for the doctor, he clearly stated
that his problem with patient supplied data was that he does not have
time to properly review the numbers. The lack of time seems to be so
bad, that I have to bring copies of lab tests and test reports from my
own online medical history because he doesn't have time to sift
through the file or online to find them. I think my last office visit
was an all time record, with me waiting about 90 minutes to see the
doctor, and getting all of 12 minutes "face time". Dumping more data
into this situation is not going to help (me).

Assuming you live in the US, the real problem is that YOU ARE NOT
THE CUSTOMER. Your insurance company is, and they don't give a rosy
rat's ass about any data that you might have collected. If it might
make you healthier, they still don't care.


Well, you may not call 'em customers but if you don't go to see the
doctor he don't get paid, so what would you call it?

If the lamb doesn't go to the slaughterhouse, the butcher doesn't get
paid either.

One very common instance is the so called "White Coat Syndrome" where
many individuals exhibit higher, some times much higher, blood
pressure when the reading is taken in a clinic or hospital.

I'm built backwards. When they take my BP at the doctors office, my
BP usually goes down instead. I've demonstrated it to the doctor and
tested various combinations of equipment, nurse, doctor, and me doing
the test, with fairly consistent results. The only time it goes up
for me is when the doctor gives me really bad news. The doctor has no
explanation.


"If the lamb doesn't go to the slaughterhouse, the butcher
doesn't get paid either."

I smiled on reading that, having just finished this month's
article by the always interesting Jigs Gardner.

Having abandoned academia for farming in the nearly desolate
Cape Breton, he contributed to various publications for
needed cash. One hippie newsletter ( his description) asked
him to write on practical advice for raising lambs, which he
did. The editor insisted that all the references to
slaughter and butchery be removed but of course Mr Gardner,
although sorely in need of the payment, noted that there's
no point to raise a lamb if no one's going to eat it. He
declined.

Not necessarily correct. One can let them grow and shear them annually
and card, spin and weave. I would think that knitting one's own socks
and making one's own winter clothes would appeal to anyone that went
to Cape Breton :-)
--

Cheers,

John B.