(no subject)
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/medicine/article/0,12543,605627,00.html
SHOULD WE BE TREATING NONMEDICAL CONDITIONS WITH EXPENSIVE AND POTENTIALLY HARMFUL THERAPIES? WHAT ARE THE ETHICAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS OF THESE THERAPIES? ANY OTHER EXAMPLES YOU KNOW OF IN WHICH MEDICAL TREATMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR A NONMEDICAL CONDITION?
I'm reminded of watching the news a few weeks ago. They were talkin' to a guy who's in court, tryin' to get "under God" taken outa the pledge of the flag. And this revolved around his daughter having to recite the pledge in school. The interviewer asked, "Do you worry about the impact to your daughter, being at the center of this controversy?" And the man deadpanned, "No, I don't care about my daughter..." Then gave a "You're So Stupid" look and said, "Of course I worry about the impact to my daughter!"
"ANY OTHER EXAMPLES YOU KNOW OF IN WHICH MEDICAL TREATMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR A NONMEDICAL CONDITION?" This question is so stupid it din't even warrent comment from the one answering. Probably about 90% of cosmetic surgery would fall into this category, for Pete's sake! One huge difference, though, which makes this question particularly irrellevant to the topic is that in most cases, the patient is the one who decides whether-or-not they'd like to undergo cosmetic surgery. In this particular case, with hGH, the patient has no say. It's another who decides whether they will feel insecure about a certain aspect of their appearance.
Even more disturbing to me than that thought - although I'm not sure what to do about the need for such things in the name of medical advancements - is that there were parents willing to subject their children to a double-blind study without knowing what health effects they'd cause.
*Sigh*
"Research designed to examine beliefs about stature is typically conducted by assessing participants' perceptions in a controlled setting, i.e., analogue studies."Back to my ramblings about the MP theory and how it can be used in better education...
This sentence and it's focus on preception pulled to mind something I'd been considering lately. The Mapp Motivational Test."Know What Truly Motivates You
The MAPP Assessment reveals the real you: your natural motivations, interests and talents for work."When I took it, I felt it gave a mostly-accurate representation of what aspects of jobs I enjoy and how to manage me effectively. I tend to be very self-analytical and can usually tell you exactly what I need. The problem lies in the fact that few tend to listen or care. And I tend to be very good at certain aspects of jobs, which get piled on me even though I hate performing these duties and try to refuse. I often become terribly frustrated and stressed out by people's desire to pressure me into certain things because of aptitude - no matter how much I try to convey lack of desire in that direction. As an example, the boss who wanted me to teach seminars - even though he knew I hate public speaking - just because he knew I'm competent at it. And wanted to set up a video-camera in my office to train others because he "liked my style" - although he was fully aware I'm completely uncomfortable being the center of focus. And wanted to change my duties to corporate headhunting, because I'd done it before and can attain the level of aggressiveness necessary - while he was fully aware I'd pointedly refused to apply to any headhunting jobs due to the fact that being so agressive is fully outside of my personality-type and makes me sick with stress. There seems to be a big theme in my life of people pushing me to "reach my potential" - which usually means they put me in positions where I become more and more resentful because they are piling more and more I hate on me, just because I'm "competent" and they need that duty fulfilled.
Which, when applying my own experiences to considering how to best help find how children learn and apply the results, seems to indicate a need not only for aptitude testing, as well as for preferences, desires, and perceptions to be determined.
At which point I get myself onto slippery ground with my own control issues. If I don't believe companies should be able to insist on psychological testing in certain ways before hiring an individual, do I believe schools should have the right to insist children be subjected to personality typing? Is this invasive to their privacy? We would need to avoid things like administering the equavalent of the "Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory Test". And especially determine who should have access to any results of the tests.
Holy flippin' poo! I just did a search on the Minnesota Multiphasic and found this:"The ‘Good’ Way
The proper course is to invite the employee to consent to the employer obtaining a medical report from a clinical psychologist (not a psychiatrist if malingering is seriously suspected).
Psychologists can administer a number of tests which give an indication of whether somebody is exaggerating the degree of mental illness. The best known is the Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory Test (MMPI-2), which contains 567 true-false questions and is said to be able to identify faking in the majority of cases. Other tests are Lee-Haley’s Fake Bad Scale, the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms and the M Test)."I'm building even deeper anger about employer control than I had before! This is suggesting, then, that to protect itself from liability, a company should be able to ask it's employees to submit to and turn over results of the Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory Test?!?! And considering if someone is stressed out enough by the job to warrent consideration of this step, yet stays in the job, they probably are feeling they are seriously trapped there and afraid of losing the job due to lack of options. Which means they would most likely feel they had no choice but to acquiesce under duress...
I really hate this world. There seem to be no "good ways" that really are good. No solutions that take it all into consideration because there's too much to consider.
SHOULD WE BE TREATING NONMEDICAL CONDITIONS WITH EXPENSIVE AND POTENTIALLY HARMFUL THERAPIES? WHAT ARE THE ETHICAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS OF THESE THERAPIES? ANY OTHER EXAMPLES YOU KNOW OF IN WHICH MEDICAL TREATMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR A NONMEDICAL CONDITION?
I'm reminded of watching the news a few weeks ago. They were talkin' to a guy who's in court, tryin' to get "under God" taken outa the pledge of the flag. And this revolved around his daughter having to recite the pledge in school. The interviewer asked, "Do you worry about the impact to your daughter, being at the center of this controversy?" And the man deadpanned, "No, I don't care about my daughter..." Then gave a "You're So Stupid" look and said, "Of course I worry about the impact to my daughter!"
"ANY OTHER EXAMPLES YOU KNOW OF IN WHICH MEDICAL TREATMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR A NONMEDICAL CONDITION?" This question is so stupid it din't even warrent comment from the one answering. Probably about 90% of cosmetic surgery would fall into this category, for Pete's sake! One huge difference, though, which makes this question particularly irrellevant to the topic is that in most cases, the patient is the one who decides whether-or-not they'd like to undergo cosmetic surgery. In this particular case, with hGH, the patient has no say. It's another who decides whether they will feel insecure about a certain aspect of their appearance.
Even more disturbing to me than that thought - although I'm not sure what to do about the need for such things in the name of medical advancements - is that there were parents willing to subject their children to a double-blind study without knowing what health effects they'd cause.
*Sigh*
"Research designed to examine beliefs about stature is typically conducted by assessing participants' perceptions in a controlled setting, i.e., analogue studies."Back to my ramblings about the MP theory and how it can be used in better education...
This sentence and it's focus on preception pulled to mind something I'd been considering lately. The Mapp Motivational Test."Know What Truly Motivates You
The MAPP Assessment reveals the real you: your natural motivations, interests and talents for work."When I took it, I felt it gave a mostly-accurate representation of what aspects of jobs I enjoy and how to manage me effectively. I tend to be very self-analytical and can usually tell you exactly what I need. The problem lies in the fact that few tend to listen or care. And I tend to be very good at certain aspects of jobs, which get piled on me even though I hate performing these duties and try to refuse. I often become terribly frustrated and stressed out by people's desire to pressure me into certain things because of aptitude - no matter how much I try to convey lack of desire in that direction. As an example, the boss who wanted me to teach seminars - even though he knew I hate public speaking - just because he knew I'm competent at it. And wanted to set up a video-camera in my office to train others because he "liked my style" - although he was fully aware I'm completely uncomfortable being the center of focus. And wanted to change my duties to corporate headhunting, because I'd done it before and can attain the level of aggressiveness necessary - while he was fully aware I'd pointedly refused to apply to any headhunting jobs due to the fact that being so agressive is fully outside of my personality-type and makes me sick with stress. There seems to be a big theme in my life of people pushing me to "reach my potential" - which usually means they put me in positions where I become more and more resentful because they are piling more and more I hate on me, just because I'm "competent" and they need that duty fulfilled.
Which, when applying my own experiences to considering how to best help find how children learn and apply the results, seems to indicate a need not only for aptitude testing, as well as for preferences, desires, and perceptions to be determined.
At which point I get myself onto slippery ground with my own control issues. If I don't believe companies should be able to insist on psychological testing in certain ways before hiring an individual, do I believe schools should have the right to insist children be subjected to personality typing? Is this invasive to their privacy? We would need to avoid things like administering the equavalent of the "Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory Test". And especially determine who should have access to any results of the tests.
Holy flippin' poo! I just did a search on the Minnesota Multiphasic and found this:"The ‘Good’ Way
The proper course is to invite the employee to consent to the employer obtaining a medical report from a clinical psychologist (not a psychiatrist if malingering is seriously suspected).
Psychologists can administer a number of tests which give an indication of whether somebody is exaggerating the degree of mental illness. The best known is the Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory Test (MMPI-2), which contains 567 true-false questions and is said to be able to identify faking in the majority of cases. Other tests are Lee-Haley’s Fake Bad Scale, the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms and the M Test)."I'm building even deeper anger about employer control than I had before! This is suggesting, then, that to protect itself from liability, a company should be able to ask it's employees to submit to and turn over results of the Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory Test?!?! And considering if someone is stressed out enough by the job to warrent consideration of this step, yet stays in the job, they probably are feeling they are seriously trapped there and afraid of losing the job due to lack of options. Which means they would most likely feel they had no choice but to acquiesce under duress...
I really hate this world. There seem to be no "good ways" that really are good. No solutions that take it all into consideration because there's too much to consider.