Is there a lawyer in the house?

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=140910&ac=PHnws

Pity the 40 year old virgin! That was the basis of a funny movie. But life comes at you fast. In modern America, it may soon be "Pity the 12 year old virgin". Thank goodness the Portland School Committee is coming to the rescue. Those few older rugrats who have not yet experienced the joys of sex will now be able to get birth control pills without their parents ever finding out. This will remove at least the barrier of fear of pregnancy. Press the easy button and away you go! But Mom! Everyone's doing it!!

Regretably, DocBrain must point out the downside. Even the caring, uber-liberal Portland School Committee will not be able to prevent strokes. Birth control pills do increase the risk of strokes. I am sure that a pre-teen will understand the risk...not! And the uninformed parent, upon finding their precious little 11 year old girl thrashing in bed, incontinent, babbling and drooling like her baby sister will have no regrets and no anger either.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1172861&dopt=AbstractPlus

Kiss me, I'm a liberal

If you are a liberal, this should make sense to you. Just as in a community there are rich and poor, hard working and the less motivated, the prejudicer and prejudicee, so in the world there are countries of different ability and motivation. While the populations of some countries may be enslaved and oppressed, can this be any different than the enslavement and oppression of individuals either by external factors or by internal devils?

• There should be a one world government that overlies the individual countries. The OWG would see to it that the bounties of the earth are shared among all countries. To that end, the rich countries should be taxed to re-distribute money to the poorer countries. There should be a minimal GNP/citizen, that is subsidized by this tax on the rich countries.
• If new industries are to be developed, the OWG should give the underdeveloped countries priority in having these industries within their borders. It will help make up for the inequalities of the past.
• If an underdeveloped country attacks a developed one, we should try to understand their reason for aggression rather than respond to it. It is probably due to the oppression they have felt.
• Any attempt to control hostilities caused by underdeveloped/undercapitalized countries is probably due to prejudice against them.
• The leaders of each country will be required to attend a public education program at the OWG headquarters.
• Countries can make any kind of pacts and associations they want, and all, no matter what they are based on, will be celebrated.

Have any ideas for this post? Send them in!

The problem with Jews

Jews bring 3 problems to the table:

1. Jews killed Jesus. (Jews actually didn't do this. It was done by the Romans, but why should we quibble about "details". More importantly, how can mortals kill a God without the God's participation and consent? Even Darth Vader could not kill Obi-Wan without his consent, and Obi-Wan was mortal, just filled with "the force". And Obi-Wan's goal was to both serve as a motivation to Luke Skywalker to become his best and, in the long run, to reunite father and son. So, following the analogy, this modern tale would suggest that Jesus let himself be killed so that non-Jews would better themselves as Christians and, in the future, Jews and Christians could be united in love and peace. Nice story.)
2. Christianity has superceded Judaism. (Christianity is sort of like Judaism 2.0, so why would you want to run version 1.0 in your belief system? Sort of like, why would you want to keep windows XP on your computer when you now have Vista? Jews see Christianity crash every now and then, sort of like the windows blue screen of death. Roman Catholicism, less well known as Judaism 2.0.1, crashed with the crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. Protestantism, less well known as Judaism 2.0.5, crashed with pogroms and the Holocaust. Of course, the argument could be made that, now with Mormonism, why would you want to keep running Judaism 2.0 when we now have Judaism 3.0? And we also have another new religion, Abrahamism 2.0, better known as Islam. Jews are just waiting for all the bugs to be worked out and new service packs to be available before making any switch. I think many Christians look at Mormonism in the same way. You know, we should all just try to get along, like the mac guy and the windows guy in the commercials.)
3. Jews have a different set of rules. Jews, for example, can lend money. Money lending is a key component of capitalism; without it, we would have slower growth and limited opportunity for new start-ups. No pharma companies to make vaccines, antibiotics, or cancer-killing drugs. No big chain stores to buy stuff at a discount. No coffee chains...no lattes!! You get the picture! Life without Jews would be like living on an Amish farm, but without the hospital nearby to bring modern medical miracles to your door.

So, Jews are still part of some grand master plan of world-wide reconciliation and unity. You Christians and Muslims keep working on your moral software and, when you get it perfected, let us know. We are in no hurry, but really wish you would focus more on getting your code correct rather than focusing on us or on each other. In the meantime, we will continue to help move the world ahead.

Symmetry vs quid pro quo

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-10-10-court_N.htm

Jose Medellin raped and killed two young girls. No dispute there. However, as a Mexican citizen, he did not get the opportunity to meet with a representative of Mexico after being charged with the crime. So, like the un-Marandized person, he may get to walk on this one.

This case is confusing because, on one hand, we would like to believe that to punish a person for raping and killing young women would be a no-brainer, acceptable in any society. Having a representative of Mexico present should not have had any impact on the outcome. Symmetrically, this would imply that an American in Mexico who raped and killed two women there would (and should) suffer the same fate.

The concept of symmetry is a common one in the liberal mindset. You have money and someone else needs it? You give and they get.

The real issue, though, is quid pro quo. The heart of the issue is that various countries can have laws that are strange by our standards or legal systems that are unfair or corrupt by our standards. What we want is a quid pro quo. We want the opportunity to assist our citizens who are caught up in a legal system alien to our own on charges that would not be crimes here. So, we give that same privilege to other countries here, even in particularly heinous situations, such as this disgusting case.

The concept of quid pro quo is part of the conservative mindset. You have money and someone else needs it? For what? You give them the money and they do what they are supposed to do with it, and pay it forward, by doing good deeds for others within their means to do so, and so on.

The focus on symmetry rather than on quid pro quo is one of the most frustrating things about liberalism. Unwed and unemployed mothers get money for their children but where is the data that they spend it on the child and live up to their responsibilities in sending their children to school and in being good parents and good role models? The liberal belief in doing good for the extended group falls apart when gifts are squandered and quid pro quo is not realized.

One of DocBrain's liberal friends explains the quid pro quo as "We give them money so they won't riot." My reading of liberal diatribes and philosophy would suggest that this is not what the liberals really want their money to do, but I could be wrong. This could be all that is really under the surface. It certainly would explain the concept of "entitlement" as compared to the unused concept of "payment in advance for services you will render".

Ouch!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21257498/

Jews again are stuck in the middle.

One one side, there are the liberal, anti-religious elements and on the other, the conservative "true believers" who see one religion as the answer to world strife and human perfection. Many Jews believe that remarks such as Ann Coulter's represent the honest opinion of most Christian conservatives that political correctness has suppressed. This is the main reason why many Jews still vote Democrat and against their interests. I'm sure that if the primary religion in the USA was Muslim, we would be hearing someone proclaiming the imperfection of Jews as measured on the Islamic yardstick.

It goes without saying that Jews also harbor prejudices and passions. But, as a small group, all we can do is kvetch. And if we had more power, DocBrain hopes that the years of oppression would lead to a more tolerant approach.

Being a Jew is a choice. Is it a choice that should impact others? If so, what individual choice doesn't? So, we get to the slippery slope of choices. Do away with the individual's right to choose and you do away with the concept of individuality, one of the elements of freedom.

The founders of the United States declared pre-emptively that religious choice was acceptable, so this issue should be off the table. Yet, DocBrain has heard much worse than what Ann said from a Bible Belt Christian against Catholics just a few years ago. So, the flames of religious intolerance persist, both within and beyond religious communities. I doubt that a true Catholic would see all Christians as being equally "saved".

The key issue here is that politics require a coalition of voters and comments that marginalize or alienate groups based upon some basic right or attribute are just counterproductive and wrong on a practical level, if not a moral, ethical, legal or spiritual one.

Pharma Marketing

Many citizens are uncomfortable with pharma marketing, as it seems to be geared to influencing physicians to prescribe products that may raise their cost of health care and yet not be any better for the patient than a less expensive, generic product. Furthermore, the salaries of the reps and their supervisors must be offset by raising costs to the consumer.

DocBrain wants to reassure you that you have less to fear than you might believe.

Most of the glossy marketing pieces are done by marketing departments for information purposes only, and are less compelling and have less marketing value than the typical page of a mail order catalogue. After running through legal, these defanged detail pieces act mainly as something they can hand to a doctor (who then round-files it after the rep leaves).

Most reps are well trained in their products, but have little true marketing skills. The techniques used are often either right out of Maslow's basement ("Doctor, I made these cupcakes for you"[wink and nod to ex-rep Bob R.!]) or over the top incredible ("All the experts in this field only use my product!").

After several doses of rep a day, few physicians remain influenced by their presentations.

At the end of the day, few physicians are strongly influenced by the pharma marketing as it is currently done. However, it is the prisoner's dilemma. If one company has reps, the competitors must as well.

I have never seen a "generic drug" rep, so there is no real spokesperson for generics except for the heavy hand of the insurers.

The failure of reps to create ipod-like growth of products has led to all kinds of desperate actions from pharma companies, which I will not elaborate here. But, you know one already...direct to consumer marketing.


DocBrain thinks that health care would be better if the pharma companies and their reps understood marketing to physicians better. This would enable physicians to see the products as they really are, as they really should fit in their practice. Pharma marketing departments do understand marketing, but just don't understand physicians as well as they should.

Regretably, pharma does spin its wheels and spends its(our?) money. Smarter marketing is the answer. There are better ways.

If you are from a pharma company and are reading this and want some help getting your message to doctors, let me know. Perhaps, you need a dose of DocBrain!

Pins and needles

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/05/whats-on-a-lapel/

Obama decides to justify not wearing a flag lapel pin, and gets needled for it!

His explanation is that the pin is a substitute for real patriotism, which of course is an inane explanation, since there is no physical, moral, political, or psychological law that would prevent someone from having both real patriotism AND wearing a pin.

From the marketing of Obama standpoint, this is brilliant. This gets everyone talking about him, taking sides, debating. Free air time.

Symbols are, of course, important. Not as important as actions, but they can keep you focused on what is important. The whole debate about the pin is almost enough to make the other candidates laugh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlF12X1dCeo

How many wrongs make a right?

In Jena, La, six teenage boys beat up another teenage boy. When DocBrain was in high school, stuff like that occasionally happened, although the odds were usually less than 6 to 1. This is certainly reprehensible behavior and should be punished.

The actions of these six boys has been defended on the basis of other wrongs that have happened in Jena before this episode. The concept apparently is that, with the weight of these prior episodes, these six boys could only react as they did, with no free will to act differently. It is as if the weight of the prior episodes made it impossible for these six boys to act as rational and good human beings, impossible to care about the welfare of one other boy. This dehumanization of these six boys does a disservice to them and their families, and makes them seem no different than brute animals, a pack of hungry dogs.

The actions of the adults in the community in prosecuting these young men seems over the top, but perhaps not out of scale compared to other school-based actions such as the one that caused a 6 year old to be expelled from school for bringing a plastic toy hatchet to show-and-tell day several years ago.

It is probably time for some mercy and balance in the approach to teenage boy roughness, taunting, and goading. Teens will push the envelope. Parents and teachers need to step up to the plate and provide direction, correction, discipline, and at times punishment.

DocBrain does not live in Jena and has no idea whether or not there are systematic biases among the people who live there. Whether or not such biases exist, it is always the duty of each person to treat others with kindness, respect, and courtesy. And to temper justice with mercy, especially when free will, regret, and remorse are clearly acknowledged in unhardened, young offenders.