Here is one of my first Google Voice transcriptions.
i'm using the local voice compose this blog to describe my first experience was using google voice as the transcription machine so far it seems wonderful i have my office phone forwarded to my cellphone and then i have my crew over the phone number forwarded to my office phone that way i can both yet and have tran scott message is for various reasons the transcription it's very very fast i've been involved with speech processing at the end of this is 50 state university institute for signal and information processing for several years and seeing how complicated and complex the test of speech recognition is the groom translation pants your chin does not do 100% but they promised that it's going to get better actually belch and like everything else moving i suspect that would be true the transcription so for the same to post no limits the battery on your cellphone may go up before you were possibility since have a message automatically terminated calling well that's the first try let's see what happens
Friday, July 10, 2009
Sunday, July 05, 2009
Thursday, June 25, 2009
End of Life Decisions
He was only a dog, but Fraggles taught us some important lessons that can also be applied to humans. Face it. Sometimes, unexpected things happen. Perhaps you will be a patient in the hospital leaving your loved ones to face the difficult decisions on your behalf, because you are unable to make them for yourself.
It may be difficult to talk about these things, because you don't want to think something tragic can happen to you. The obvious question is, "Why not you?"
Maybe you will not be able to talk about it to another person. Maybe you will have to just write your thoughts down, all by yourself. These instructions are termed a "living will" or "advanced directive," or something similar.
Based on our experience with our pet, I have some ideas. The first is, Don't go to a research or university hospital, if you have the choice. There are many reasons for this, but the basic one is that they exist partly to help and partly to learn, i.e., the patient is partly an experiment to help them gain knowledge about what treatments may work. Another reason to avoid the researchers is that many of the physicians are students or interns, still in their learning phase. Let them learn stuff on other people!
Another major decision we had to make with the dog was whether or not to have them resuscitate the patient if his heart stopped. With an animal, the decision-makers can not know what choice the patient would make for himself, and that puts a lot of emotional stress on the loved ones.
One woman in my Bible study group commented that her mother had told the family, "Don't let them put that tube down my throat. That thing hurt me so much when they did it, before." The family knew the mother's choice when the need arose the next time, and chose to honor her wishes.
The third major decision that needs to be made is financial. Dogs don't have Medicare or Medicaid, and most owners don't think about health/accident insurance for their pets (but it is available). Before every procedure, the Veterinarian would let my wife and me know the charge that would be involved. Three hundred dollars for a blood transfusion didn't appear too unreasonable, if it would give Fraggles a fighting chance. Resuscitation would be more than one thousand dollars. Beyond it all was the surgeries that would be needed to repair the broken bones, if he survived to that point, and those would also be in the thousands.
When one applies this logic to a human patient, the costs can erase all the family assets and leave the family penniless.
The other important issue for the family is the pain question. Is he in pain? For dogs, you just trust the Vet and hope. For humans, there is a tradeoff between being sedated and being cognitive. Is there something you would want to communicate to your loved ones? If he is overly sedated, the patient may not be able to tell you something important, but if he is under sedated, he may experience pain.
There you have some important lessons the death of our beloved Fraggles taught us about hospitalization.
For me, I know where I am going, next, so I don't want you to do something that will unnecessarily keep me here. For me, I don't want to have any experimental treatment, especially any treatments not covered by insurance. For me, experiencing quality time with family members is more important than minimizing pain.
What about you? Tell your loved ones.
It may be difficult to talk about these things, because you don't want to think something tragic can happen to you. The obvious question is, "Why not you?"
Maybe you will not be able to talk about it to another person. Maybe you will have to just write your thoughts down, all by yourself. These instructions are termed a "living will" or "advanced directive," or something similar.
Based on our experience with our pet, I have some ideas. The first is, Don't go to a research or university hospital, if you have the choice. There are many reasons for this, but the basic one is that they exist partly to help and partly to learn, i.e., the patient is partly an experiment to help them gain knowledge about what treatments may work. Another reason to avoid the researchers is that many of the physicians are students or interns, still in their learning phase. Let them learn stuff on other people!
Another major decision we had to make with the dog was whether or not to have them resuscitate the patient if his heart stopped. With an animal, the decision-makers can not know what choice the patient would make for himself, and that puts a lot of emotional stress on the loved ones.
One woman in my Bible study group commented that her mother had told the family, "Don't let them put that tube down my throat. That thing hurt me so much when they did it, before." The family knew the mother's choice when the need arose the next time, and chose to honor her wishes.
The third major decision that needs to be made is financial. Dogs don't have Medicare or Medicaid, and most owners don't think about health/accident insurance for their pets (but it is available). Before every procedure, the Veterinarian would let my wife and me know the charge that would be involved. Three hundred dollars for a blood transfusion didn't appear too unreasonable, if it would give Fraggles a fighting chance. Resuscitation would be more than one thousand dollars. Beyond it all was the surgeries that would be needed to repair the broken bones, if he survived to that point, and those would also be in the thousands.
When one applies this logic to a human patient, the costs can erase all the family assets and leave the family penniless.
The other important issue for the family is the pain question. Is he in pain? For dogs, you just trust the Vet and hope. For humans, there is a tradeoff between being sedated and being cognitive. Is there something you would want to communicate to your loved ones? If he is overly sedated, the patient may not be able to tell you something important, but if he is under sedated, he may experience pain.
There you have some important lessons the death of our beloved Fraggles taught us about hospitalization.
For me, I know where I am going, next, so I don't want you to do something that will unnecessarily keep me here. For me, I don't want to have any experimental treatment, especially any treatments not covered by insurance. For me, experiencing quality time with family members is more important than minimizing pain.
What about you? Tell your loved ones.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Book Review: The Noticer by Andy Andrews
I have trouble telling people things I think they don't want to hear, so I am uncomfortable writing this review of The Noticer by Andy Andrews. But I made a commitment to the publisher to write a review in my blog, so I will bite the bullet and write the thing.
As far as a work of fiction goes, the book was an enjoyable read and contained a little food for thought. Each chapter seemed take a concept and illustrate it, much in the style of Aesop's Fables.
Substantive content was lacking, except for the dozen or so unrelated, moralistic statements that seemed to form the skeleton of his work. If they came from any particular source, it appeared to be a collection of currently popular books, pop culture and e-mail chain letters. For example, Google searchs on some of his few pithy statements resulted in more than four hundred thousand hits. In short, there was nothing new in the book.
Andrews' unifying theme for his otherwise unrelated extended illustrations was a mystical character named Jones, from whose role the book's title was coined. Jones' role was to apply the pithy statements to various life situations and help the characters notice that the context of their situations was greater than their own selfcentered focus would allow them to see. Jones' identity was vaporous enough for the reader to apply his own interpretation of who he is. He could be a Humanist, an angel, a Shaolin monk, Jesus, Buddha, Jiminy Cricket, or any other self-effacing do-gooder of the reader's experience or imagination. Perhaps that is why the book normally receives such good reviews: the reader sees what he wants to see and thinks Andrews put it there. [Ambiguity may be the key to popularity.]
A preacher could value this book as a source of sermon illustrations. Andrews' ability to put flesh on the bones of his ideas is his strength. Each chapter of the book appears to come from his taking a moral, stating it clearly, applying it to a difficult life situation, and putting it into Jones' mouth.
In a culture that has lost its ties to the Bible, the book has some value, but it should not be considered a Christian book; it does not point people to the Bible or to Jesus. I give the experience three stars.
As far as a work of fiction goes, the book was an enjoyable read and contained a little food for thought. Each chapter seemed take a concept and illustrate it, much in the style of Aesop's Fables.
Substantive content was lacking, except for the dozen or so unrelated, moralistic statements that seemed to form the skeleton of his work. If they came from any particular source, it appeared to be a collection of currently popular books, pop culture and e-mail chain letters. For example, Google searchs on some of his few pithy statements resulted in more than four hundred thousand hits. In short, there was nothing new in the book.
Andrews' unifying theme for his otherwise unrelated extended illustrations was a mystical character named Jones, from whose role the book's title was coined. Jones' role was to apply the pithy statements to various life situations and help the characters notice that the context of their situations was greater than their own selfcentered focus would allow them to see. Jones' identity was vaporous enough for the reader to apply his own interpretation of who he is. He could be a Humanist, an angel, a Shaolin monk, Jesus, Buddha, Jiminy Cricket, or any other self-effacing do-gooder of the reader's experience or imagination. Perhaps that is why the book normally receives such good reviews: the reader sees what he wants to see and thinks Andrews put it there. [Ambiguity may be the key to popularity.]
A preacher could value this book as a source of sermon illustrations. Andrews' ability to put flesh on the bones of his ideas is his strength. Each chapter of the book appears to come from his taking a moral, stating it clearly, applying it to a difficult life situation, and putting it into Jones' mouth.
In a culture that has lost its ties to the Bible, the book has some value, but it should not be considered a Christian book; it does not point people to the Bible or to Jesus. I give the experience three stars.
Monday, June 08, 2009
Dog Death Distinction
When Fraggles died, we went through (are still going through) the Kubler-Ross grief stages. He was only a dog, but he was our dog.
In our case, the hardest part has been dealing with the guilt of responsibility. We were supposed to take care of him--we should have built a fence or kept him tethered. On the other hand, we also recalled that he loved his freedom and did not like being tied down, so we didn't have the heart to restrict his wanderlust. We live in the county; there are no leash laws. His playmates came and went, unrestricted. He would be the only dog in the neighborhood who was kept up. How would he feel about that?
It is much like God's giving Adam a free will: Adam's test would not have been a real test if his freedom to make choices was fatalistically determined, i.e., if his choice could have been only one of the two alternatives: to sin, or not to sin. That freedom to choose either alternative allowed Adam to sin and bring the death sentence on him and his posterity, just as Fraggles' freedom allowed him to wander to the wrong place at the wrong time, and get hit by the passing car and suffer death for himself. (His posterity had already been taken care of, before he came to us from the dog pound.)
During his brief time on this earth, Fraggles did teach us some things about relationships to a master. He depended on us to feed him and he always showed his gratitude with a wagging tail. He guarded our stuff and his territory. He showed devotion to a master, and even though he didn't always understand, he trusted us.
He demonstrated kindness and compassion. He shared his food with other dogs. He showed devotion, loyalty, fidelity and trust. As he related to us, his masters, it occurred to me that we could learn ways to approach our Master.
He was a good dog!
In our case, the hardest part has been dealing with the guilt of responsibility. We were supposed to take care of him--we should have built a fence or kept him tethered. On the other hand, we also recalled that he loved his freedom and did not like being tied down, so we didn't have the heart to restrict his wanderlust. We live in the county; there are no leash laws. His playmates came and went, unrestricted. He would be the only dog in the neighborhood who was kept up. How would he feel about that?
It is much like God's giving Adam a free will: Adam's test would not have been a real test if his freedom to make choices was fatalistically determined, i.e., if his choice could have been only one of the two alternatives: to sin, or not to sin. That freedom to choose either alternative allowed Adam to sin and bring the death sentence on him and his posterity, just as Fraggles' freedom allowed him to wander to the wrong place at the wrong time, and get hit by the passing car and suffer death for himself. (His posterity had already been taken care of, before he came to us from the dog pound.)
During his brief time on this earth, Fraggles did teach us some things about relationships to a master. He depended on us to feed him and he always showed his gratitude with a wagging tail. He guarded our stuff and his territory. He showed devotion to a master, and even though he didn't always understand, he trusted us.
He demonstrated kindness and compassion. He shared his food with other dogs. He showed devotion, loyalty, fidelity and trust. As he related to us, his masters, it occurred to me that we could learn ways to approach our Master.
He was a good dog!
Monday, June 01, 2009
Emergency Room Dog Story (updated)
A crisis! Unexpected hospitalization. May be terminal. This is what we are going through. Our family pet has been hit by a car. He is only a dog, but the emotions and practical considerations for family preparedness are as real as if he had been a human family member.
The first things we thought of were spiritual. Why is God mad at us? Have we paid all our tithe? What have we done wrong?
Then, there were financial considerations. How much is a mutt worth? He had been rescued from the dog pound. He apparently wasn't worth much to his original owner. The pound charges for shots and spaying, and you have to feed him, take care of his parasites, have him clipped, and treat his normal scrapes and strains. But the dog emergency room at the teaching veterinary hospital was estimated to cost us at least two thousand dollars, and up to four thousand, if heroic measures were needed.
I am sorry to admit that, when I heard those amounts, my inclination was to put him out of his misery. :( Another confession is that I don't have feelings. (Someone said I am not in touch with my feelings.) My Myers-Briggs personality type is INTJ. I made a logical choice and was ready to do what was logically necessary.
But all these other considerations paled into insignificance when a mother's love came into the picture. My wife does have feelings. Fraggles is really her brother's dog, but we adopted him when her brother took a job in Canada. Her brother also has feelings. She called him. Mr. Spock (what some people call me) just knows that all this sentiment over a dog is irrational. It does not compute. It is expensive.
Logic and emotion came to a compromise. We said, "Let him have a fighting chance--let him stay in the Emergency Room, tonight." Kaching! $1500. (I wonder if there are medical insurance policies for dogs.) "If his heart stops, should we intubate?" Illogically, we said, "Yes."
The phone rang. "He needs a transfusion," the voice on the other end of the line said, "It is $300." Kaching! He had internal bleeding, broken ribs, a broken leg and hip. "He is only a dog," I said to myself, but not out loud.
Another call just before midnight told us his heart had stopped and they had inserted the breathing tube and resuscitated him. We visited him. The vet was hopeful they had acted quickly enough to avoid brain damage. Fraggles lay there, panting and struggling against the breathing tube in his throat. He was alive. My wife rubbed his head and whispered sweet nothings into his ear. We were home again by 2:00am.
My wife answered the telephone the next morning about 8:00 am. They wanted permission to put him out of his misery. She asked for a call back in 15 minutes so she could discuss it with me. We prayed, but came to the conclusion that if they had asked, it must be serious, so we decided to give permission for euthanasia.
My wife said that Fraggles must have overheard the vet's and her discussing him, because when the vet called back, she was amazed that Fraggles had had an amazing recovery in those fifteen minutes. I keep telling her that Fraggles does not understand those big Greek words, but she is convinced the dog angel must have translated for him!
He is swollen because of the internal bleeding. The transfusion had enabled enough red blood cells to enter his system to keep the oxygen getting to his cells. He has a fighting chance. So we tell them to stay the execution. The Governor has said, "Clemency."
Are we allowed to pray for dogs? Do dogs have souls? My wife is full of questions. We pray as if the answers are affirmative. More telephone calls, more visits, and another transfusion. Kaching!
It has now been 48 hours. He is alive. He has been moved from the examination table to a cage where he is sleeping on a comfortable pad. He raised his head when my wife called his name. The doctor confessed she had never seen a dog whose heart had stopped, recover. Some had come back for a little while, but didn't make the full journey back to life.
Logic tells emotion she must be prepared to let him go. He insists if it were he, and not the dog, he would want to go on. But he didn't know if there was a heaven awaiting the dog. Mentally, he was writing in his living will, "DNR (do not resuscitate). Don't do anything insurance doesn't cover. Don't take me to a teaching hospital. (They might want to learn about a new procedure.)" Kaching!
Emotion uses some logic and calls a friend who has a back hoe. He listens to her tears and digs a nice hole in the cool spot under the trees where Fraggles likes to spend hot days. She says we can plant a memorial bush there if he makes it. The friend will not take payment for his services. Emotion is prepared for the worst.
We visit again, almost 48 hours from the time of the accident. Fraggles lifts his head when he hears Mama's voice. He is not so swollen as before. He may make it!
Another two days have now passed, and Fraggles is still hanging on, eating and improving.
-----------------
Another emergency call: He may have a blood clot in his brain. Pray!
-----------------
Fraggles was placed on a ventilator with 100% oxygen. He showed no improvement. He went to doggie heaven a little after 8:00 pm.
We will miss him!
The first things we thought of were spiritual. Why is God mad at us? Have we paid all our tithe? What have we done wrong?
Then, there were financial considerations. How much is a mutt worth? He had been rescued from the dog pound. He apparently wasn't worth much to his original owner. The pound charges for shots and spaying, and you have to feed him, take care of his parasites, have him clipped, and treat his normal scrapes and strains. But the dog emergency room at the teaching veterinary hospital was estimated to cost us at least two thousand dollars, and up to four thousand, if heroic measures were needed.
I am sorry to admit that, when I heard those amounts, my inclination was to put him out of his misery. :( Another confession is that I don't have feelings. (Someone said I am not in touch with my feelings.) My Myers-Briggs personality type is INTJ. I made a logical choice and was ready to do what was logically necessary.
But all these other considerations paled into insignificance when a mother's love came into the picture. My wife does have feelings. Fraggles is really her brother's dog, but we adopted him when her brother took a job in Canada. Her brother also has feelings. She called him. Mr. Spock (what some people call me) just knows that all this sentiment over a dog is irrational. It does not compute. It is expensive.
Logic and emotion came to a compromise. We said, "Let him have a fighting chance--let him stay in the Emergency Room, tonight." Kaching! $1500. (I wonder if there are medical insurance policies for dogs.) "If his heart stops, should we intubate?" Illogically, we said, "Yes."
The phone rang. "He needs a transfusion," the voice on the other end of the line said, "It is $300." Kaching! He had internal bleeding, broken ribs, a broken leg and hip. "He is only a dog," I said to myself, but not out loud.
Another call just before midnight told us his heart had stopped and they had inserted the breathing tube and resuscitated him. We visited him. The vet was hopeful they had acted quickly enough to avoid brain damage. Fraggles lay there, panting and struggling against the breathing tube in his throat. He was alive. My wife rubbed his head and whispered sweet nothings into his ear. We were home again by 2:00am.
My wife answered the telephone the next morning about 8:00 am. They wanted permission to put him out of his misery. She asked for a call back in 15 minutes so she could discuss it with me. We prayed, but came to the conclusion that if they had asked, it must be serious, so we decided to give permission for euthanasia.
My wife said that Fraggles must have overheard the vet's and her discussing him, because when the vet called back, she was amazed that Fraggles had had an amazing recovery in those fifteen minutes. I keep telling her that Fraggles does not understand those big Greek words, but she is convinced the dog angel must have translated for him!
He is swollen because of the internal bleeding. The transfusion had enabled enough red blood cells to enter his system to keep the oxygen getting to his cells. He has a fighting chance. So we tell them to stay the execution. The Governor has said, "Clemency."
Are we allowed to pray for dogs? Do dogs have souls? My wife is full of questions. We pray as if the answers are affirmative. More telephone calls, more visits, and another transfusion. Kaching!
It has now been 48 hours. He is alive. He has been moved from the examination table to a cage where he is sleeping on a comfortable pad. He raised his head when my wife called his name. The doctor confessed she had never seen a dog whose heart had stopped, recover. Some had come back for a little while, but didn't make the full journey back to life.
Logic tells emotion she must be prepared to let him go. He insists if it were he, and not the dog, he would want to go on. But he didn't know if there was a heaven awaiting the dog. Mentally, he was writing in his living will, "DNR (do not resuscitate). Don't do anything insurance doesn't cover. Don't take me to a teaching hospital. (They might want to learn about a new procedure.)" Kaching!
Emotion uses some logic and calls a friend who has a back hoe. He listens to her tears and digs a nice hole in the cool spot under the trees where Fraggles likes to spend hot days. She says we can plant a memorial bush there if he makes it. The friend will not take payment for his services. Emotion is prepared for the worst.
We visit again, almost 48 hours from the time of the accident. Fraggles lifts his head when he hears Mama's voice. He is not so swollen as before. He may make it!
Another two days have now passed, and Fraggles is still hanging on, eating and improving.
-----------------
Another emergency call: He may have a blood clot in his brain. Pray!
-----------------
Fraggles was placed on a ventilator with 100% oxygen. He showed no improvement. He went to doggie heaven a little after 8:00 pm.
We will miss him!
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
How to lose an argument even if you win it.
There are three mindsets with which people enter an argument.
1. I am going to show the other person the Truth.
2. I am going to find out the the other person's perspective.
3. I am going to let the other person know what my perspective is.
In the first case, you only have "winning" in mind. You are selfish, inflexible and arrogant. You demonstrate that your neither care that there may be another point of view, and you show that you do not value the relationship between you and the other person. You don't even listen to him or her. You immediately attack the other person before he or she has finished giving their opinion, showing your disregard and disrespect.
In the latter two cases, even though you believe in true truth, you also acknowledge that your understanding of it may be incomplete or flawed.
In the second case, you realize that point-of-view and perspective affect the understanding of a matter, so you value the other person's point-of-view and want to be certain you understand the other person's understanding of the matter. You value the relationship, so you give them time to fully express their point, without taking offense or "getting your feelings hurt."
You are able to separate your feelings from your argument even though feelings may be closely attached to the thoughts. You understand that it is possible for you to be wrong, and you are OK with changing your mind.
The third case was put third on purpose, because doing so shows that you respect the other person and it earns respect back from him or her.
If you only use the first case, you lose the argument, even if you win it, because you damage the relationship to the other person.
1. I am going to show the other person the Truth.
2. I am going to find out the the other person's perspective.
3. I am going to let the other person know what my perspective is.
In the first case, you only have "winning" in mind. You are selfish, inflexible and arrogant. You demonstrate that your neither care that there may be another point of view, and you show that you do not value the relationship between you and the other person. You don't even listen to him or her. You immediately attack the other person before he or she has finished giving their opinion, showing your disregard and disrespect.
In the latter two cases, even though you believe in true truth, you also acknowledge that your understanding of it may be incomplete or flawed.
In the second case, you realize that point-of-view and perspective affect the understanding of a matter, so you value the other person's point-of-view and want to be certain you understand the other person's understanding of the matter. You value the relationship, so you give them time to fully express their point, without taking offense or "getting your feelings hurt."
You are able to separate your feelings from your argument even though feelings may be closely attached to the thoughts. You understand that it is possible for you to be wrong, and you are OK with changing your mind.
The third case was put third on purpose, because doing so shows that you respect the other person and it earns respect back from him or her.
If you only use the first case, you lose the argument, even if you win it, because you damage the relationship to the other person.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
