|
|
Home | Switchboard | Unix Administration | Red Hat | TCP/IP Networks | Neoliberalism | Toxic Managers |
| (slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix | |||||||
| Home | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 |
For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section
|
|
Switchboard | ||||
| Latest | |||||
| Past week | |||||
| Past month | |||||
 |
 |
 |
I got pushback on a post I put up yesterday critical of the health care reform bill from readers who pointed to the fact that folks like Paul Krugman and Al Franken were supporting it meant it must be at least OK.
Well, it isn't, and don't delude yourself into thinking that. Why did health insurance stocks rise to all time highs when the bill was passed?
This tidbit comes from reader Chuck S, and refers to the Senate version (the House version is pretty much certain to be made to conform to the Senate bill).
Top 10 Reasons to Kill Senate Health Care Bill
1. Forces you to pay up to 8% of your income to private insurance corporations - whether you want to or not. [So what -- 8% is not much -- NNB]
2. If you refuse to buy the insurance, you'll have to pay penalties of up to 2% of your annual income to the IRS.
3. Many will be forced to buy poor-quality insurance they can't afford to use, with $11,900 in annual out-of-pocket expenses over and above their annual premiums. [As if the current situation is different -- NNB]
4. Massive restriction on a woman's right to choose, designed to trigger a challenge to Roe v. Wade in the Supreme Court.
5. Paid for by taxes on the middle class insurance plan you have right now through your employer, causing them to cut back benefits and increase co-pays.
6. Many of the taxes to pay for the bill start now, but most Americans won't see any benefits - like an end to discrimination against those with preexisting conditions - until 2014 when the program begins.
7. Allows insurance companies to charge people who are older 300% more than others.
8. Grants monopolies to drug companies that will keep generic versions of expensive biotech drugs from ever coming to market.
9. No re-importation of prescription drugs, which would save consumers $100 billion over 10 years.
10. The cost of medical care will continue to rise, and insurance premiums for a family of four will rise an average of $1,000 a year - meaning in 10 years, your family's insurance premium will be $10,000 more annually than it is right now.
Background information on each point:
1. Hardship Waiver And Restrictions On Immigrants Buying Insurance Undercut Arguments For An Individual Mandate, by Jon Walker
2. What's in the Manager's Amendment by David Dayen
3. MyBarackObama Tax by Marcy Wheeler
4. Emperor Ben Nelson: All Your Uteruses Are Belong To Me by Scarecrow
5. The Senate Bill is Designed to Make Your Health Insurance Worse by Jon Walker
6. Best way to "Fix It Later" Is With No Individual Mandate Now by Jon Walker
7. The Senate Health Care Bill is Built on a Mountain of Sand by Jon Walker
8. The Devil in Anna Eshoo's Details by Jane Hamsher
9. Liveblog of the Dorgan Reimportation Amendment by David Dayen
10. Answering Nate Silver's 20 Questions on the Health Care Bill by Jon Walker
The Senate bill isn't a "starter home," it's a sink hole. It needs to die so something else can take its place. It doesn't matter whether people are on the right or the left - once they understand the con job that's about to be foisted on them, they agree. That's why Harry Reid and President Obama are trying to jam it through as fast as they can, before people get wise. So email the list to your friends and family, tweet it and spread the word.
Yves here. This list still misses a few very bad features. For instance, most have fallen for the "preexisting conditions" bit, that the new plan is better because it forces insurers to cover those with preexisting conditinos. Well first, if you recall, insurers have used the failure to report ANY preexisting condition, no matter how trivial, as a reason to deny coverage when someone gets a costly illness. So health insurers will be permitted to charge those with "preexisting conditions," again even if trivial, a 50% premium to the rest of the population. This not only defeats the idea of enlarging the pool, but also continues the abusive use of the notion of "preexsiting condition". And before you argue that including all those people is costly and needs to be recouped somehow, every other advanced economy has a form of government-supported medicine that covers all citizens, is cheaper than ours, and delivers no worse, and in many cases, better health outcomes. Covering these people is not the problem; the problem is the system we now have.
Second, insurers that cross state lines get to be regulated by the state with the least regulations. Just as we saw with financial services, this will lead to a race to the bottom. For instance, I have a plan regulated by New York State, and New York State allows me to appeal to the state if I think I have been denied coverage incorrectly. Every time I have used this option, I have prevailed (and once, the NYS response was quite a smackdown to my insurer, Cigna). I'd lose this very valuable right under a new plan.
Third, Obama has engaged in a massive bait and switch. As Marshall Auerback pointed out,
From a Washington Post interview:
Obama said the public option "has become a source of ideological contention between the left and right." But, he added, "I didn't campaign on the public option."Lots of links below the fold that appear to create a contradiction between the statement above and the actual facts.
- In the 2008 Obama-Biden health care plan on the campaign's website, candidate Obama promised that "any American will have the opportunity to enroll in [a] new public plan." [2008]
– During a speech at the American Medical Association, President Obama told thousands of doctors that one of the plans included in the new health insurance exchanges "needs to be a public option that will give people a broader range of choices and inject competition into the health care market." [6/15/09]
– While speaking to the nation during his weekly address, the President said that "any plan" he signs "must include…a public option." [7/17/09]
– During a conference call with progressive bloggers, the President said he continues "to believe that a robust public option would be the best way to go." [7/20/09]
– Obama told NBC's David Gregory that a public option "should be a part of this [health care bill]," while rebuking claims that the plan was "dead." [9/20/09]
Obama sees Reagan as one of his role models, but as my politically-minded buddies like to point out, Reagan sought to get and succeeded in winning 75-80% of what he wanted. Obama starts out with a much less ambitious ask and settles for at most 60%.
steve from virginia :
The overarching reason for rejection is that is too expensive as drafted. No attempts have been made to constrain the ever-expanding medical care bubble.
The medical business is at the same place the real estate business was in 2005. Deflation – not Congress – is calling the shots.
Deflation and Ali al- Naimi, Saudi Arabia's oil minister. What the current nonsense represents is a bailout of the medical insurance business. Too bad for them, the valve on the dollar pump is in the hands of the Saudis who have decided the dollar is now worth something. A oil- supported dollar opens a fierce competition for them, with finance possessing all advantages with insurance companies far downstream.
At bottom, reality rules; the gods destroy both the mad and the sane if they are all standing on the wrong street corner. I almost cannot blame Congress because they don't understand the new, deflationary ground rules. Most people in the developed West don't understand, even economists.
The mandate is un-Constitutional and will fail in court. At that point the plan will be pointless. What a waste of time …
jay22:
Those are valid reasons to dislike the bill or to wish the bill was better in those 10 areas….but it doesnt make a good argument to kill the bill.
If you had any chance of passing a bill that improved all of those 10 areas you could make a good argument. Since that wont happen, the kill the bill argument is poorly thought out.
If an employer offered you a job at $20/hour, 3 vacation days, bad benefits, required long hours, required odd hours and required you to be on call sometimes….you could probably come up with a long, long list of why that job is not the best job ever. But it is better than being unemployed.
It is an error to compare the bill to the best possible scenario. Make a comparison to current conditions. This list has valid issues, but was put together by someone who cant see the big picture.
Getting a staple punched through your toe is bad, but it looks awful good if you have 10 staples in your toe right now.
NOTaREALmerican:
How odd, liberals complaining about restrictions on health insurance. Liberal are living in some fantasyland that Obama is writing this legislation himself. His administration has to create something that will be acceptable to the insiders of a Political system split 50-50 between socialists and fascists; while the normal "citizens" look on (maybe, if there's nothing on TV).
And, in typical big-government manner, the liberals can't project themselves ahead 20 years and image what the resulting government subsidized health-care scam will look like after the "conservatives" have had their shot at ruining the country for a few political rounds (which, unbelievably to a liberal, WILL actually happen again).
Think there are limits on fornicating harlots and rules about proper male 5th appendage placement now, wait `till then.
T.Rex Bean:
Wrong, wrong, wrong. This bill isn't perfect but it's an historic advance and improvement on what we have now. I'm not prepared for a political discussion on this - and others, such as Krugman and Nate Silver, et. al. have done it far better than I could - but to to compare Obama's achievements with Reagan's (such as they were) neglects the traditional bias of the MSM toward Republicans (yes, you read that right), not to mention that Reagan had carte blanche after he was shot by a deranged would-be assassin. Reagan's bravery ('Honey, I forgot to duck") boosted his popularity enormously and helped ensure passage of legislation he backed.
Ted K:
I was thinking of attempting to play peace maker above, but based on my own history of rabble-rousing over at "baselinescenario" I'm not going down that road. I would argue though that if the person isn't using vulgarity, or using racist or sexist comments, it does NOT behoove blog hosts to deny guests ability to post. In the end almost all info presented on these blogs comes from places like New York Times, Bloomberg, WSJ, LA Times, Reuters, etc. The only special function blogs provide is a different lens to view already available data and an outlet for people's steam. A safety valve if you will.
That being said, I am right on the borderline myself. I probably support the health care reform bill as it stands, but I find myself wavering quite a bit. I think Yves Smith's arguments and point by point blows (with maybe the exception of abortion) are quite persuasive. And her post above gives me reason for pause to chew on this issue some more.
I rank Yves' post up there with one of the better posts I've seen on the issue, from Paul Krugman http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/08/why-the-public-option-matters/ He seems to be arguing in the post that without a public option there is ZERO leverage to get private insurers to lower costs. I think it's the most important point in this big mess. Also if you are looking for facts or substantive arguments on the health care issue, there is none better than Uwe Reinhardt. You can find his posts over at New York Times. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/author/uwe-e-reinhardt/
Wkaka:
Number 1 reason for passing the current health care bill: This is not the end, it is just the beginning. Modifying an existing program is much, much easier than trying to pass a new program. Every session, every budget bill will be an opportunity to change, modify, extend the existing program.
Bill Clinton told the Obama's that his biggest mistake on health care was that he made it an all or nothing deal. And we got nothing for 15 years. Clinton believes that if he had compromised on his original bill and allowed a flawed bill to pass that we would today have a better system today than his original bill tried to put into place and a MUCH better system than we actually have today.
Piss this one away and you will be waiting another 15 years for another chance. I am tired of waiting.
Yves Smith:
WKaka,
With all due respect, I believe you have been conned.
This bill bears absolutely no resemblance to a proper health care system, nor is it a credible bridge to one. A government requirement that citizens by health insurance or face fines bears no resemblance to government funded health care.
Given its fundamentally flawed design, that it further entrenches a health insurance industry that simply increases the cost of delivery (US administrative costs are in the double digit %, while in every other advanced economy, they are in the single digit %), this is in no way, shape or form a transition to a better plan. And as other readers have pointed out, more conservative Administration are certain to make it even more corporate, less citizen favorable.
Any plan to contain the cost of health care, at a minimum, has to be willing to put the health insurers out of business (save for oddball stuff like travel insurance) and arm wrestle with Big Pharma over prices. This plan not only takes no steps in that direction, it actually cedes ground.
Wkaka:
Andrew:I honestly do not believe that. I do not believe that this plan is worse than doing nothing. And that is your choice. This or nothing for the next 15 or 20 years. This is as liberal a plan as you can get at this time.
I know with 99% certainty that I will be buying insurance in the open market in the next 10 years. 60% chance of it happening in the next 5 years. I have done it before, several times and each time gets harder and more expensive. The next time me and my wife will be in our 50's.
My personal finances are good, house paid off, SEP IRA fully funded even after the market declines. I have worked my whole life to get to this point. One major illness without insurance and it is all gone. This matters to me. It is not some philosophical discussion. I dont really care about most of what you are talking about. What matters is if I will be able to purchase insurance at a reasonable rate. Without I face financial ruin. With it, I have a chance.
And I think I will be able to do that with this plan. Maybe you are right and I am wrong but I think if this does not work that it will be easier to fix this than to start over. And I absolutely know I will be better off with this plan than with nothing. And that is what we will get if this fails, nothing.
Yves, I'm a big fan of your writing on financial issues, but as someone who studies public health policy, I think you're dead wrong on this one.
Many of the things you cite are false. For example, the bills do NOT allow insurers to sell insurance from a low-regulation state to another state – the bill does allow the selling of insurance across state lines, but any policy that does so must meet the regulations in EACH STATE it sells in. Also, the point on taxes is false – the taxes kick in later, such as the excise tax kicking in 2013.
The mandate is more controversial, but the reason every health economist and health policy analyst endorses it is because without it there is no way to protect against adverse selection issues which would send the cost of insurance far higher for each individual. In MA, for example, though overall premiums have climbed since the reform (due, I might add, to the high cost of health CARE, not so much the insurance itself), in the individual and small group markets, premiums have DROPPED 40% since the mandate was imposed. Jonathon Gruber at MIT has calculated that without a mandate, insurance premiums per person would average $4400, versus $2700 with a mandate.
You complain that the bill allows insurers to charge older people 3x what they do younger people – yes, but compared to what? The current reality is that in some states, insurers charge up to 25 times what they charge younger people.
The >$11,000 claim you cite is a maximum – most people's out-of-pocket expenses wouldn't climb anywhere near that. And that again compares to today, where there is NO cap and someone would wind up in medical bankruptcy.
No insurers cannot drop you for not reporting a pre-existing condition because they are not permitted to ask about any pre-existing conditions due to guaranteed issue.
I know you've had issues with Nate Silver, but the graph he posts here is absolutely correct – yes, the system will still be overly expensive, but compared to today, costs will be FAR cheaper.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/why-progressives-are-batshit-crazy-to.html
I agree fully on the abortion issue and the pharmaceutical deal. In regards to the former, keep in mind this is the price of Ben Nelson's vote. Reconciliation, as has been pointed out multiple times, even by progressive senators like Feingold and Harkin, will not work for this, although you could conceivably use it for adding a public option or Medicare buy-in later. And so long as you need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, you need Nelson's vote unless Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins are willing to vote for it, which they aren't. It's best to deal with this through the courts.
The Pharma Deal is bad, but not worth sinking the whole bill over when, again, that is something that can be taken up again later.
You argue that only a bill that puts the insurance companies out of business is worth doing, but I have to ask where you are going to get the support in Congress to do that. I know you have issues with Obama, but I doubt any president could get a single-payer bill through Congress when even Bernie Sanders has said there are no more than 10 votes for single-payer in the Senate. Nor did either the House or Senate have anywhere near the votes for a strong, Medicare-rates public option. All that could have passed would have been a weak public option, which most estimates had putting almost no downward pressure on premiums due to its limited scale and need to self-support itself via premiums.
Moreover, the bill allows states to opt out and craft single-payer systems (if you're looking at single-payer, that's the most promising field, since CA, WA, and PA all have viable efforts). It vastly expands federally-funded community health centers for 25 million people (eventually up to 45 million), while allowing them to use Veterans Admin. prices for drugs.
The biggest failings are the slow implementation, the low actuarial value of "bronze" plans, the Senate bill's multiple, state-based exchanges instead of a single national exchange, and the low subsidies. The subsidies and low actuarial value of the bronze plan are things that can be very easily fixed and expanded through simple appropriations.
mark:
Hi yves,
Always enjoy your commentary. However, I do want a public health care option and it is not going to happen in one step. So it may take a few reveisions, but we will get there over time. THere are too many special interests to get it done any other way unfortunately. It's sickening, but the system is so corrupt we will not get there any other way.
mark
kievite:
Some random points for discussion:
- The decision who should live and who should not are implicit in any old age treatment. Keeping cost of insurance for older people high is one way to resolve this problem. There might be others but one need to demonstrate that they are better...
- I agree with Yves as for "Massive restriction on a woman's right to choose, designed to trigger a challenge to Roe v. Wade in the Supreme Court." That's a real shame and paint the country in very unfavorable light (blend of neo-theocracy with neo-plutocracy ;-)
- The current situation in medical insurance in the USA is not that horrific. Basic insurance (hospital coverage only ) is reasonably cheap. I think in most states it is around $200 a month. When you pay $40 for internet access per month and $100 for cable TV this in not that much. If you accept restriction on choice of doctors (in-network option) you payments are also not that high even in present system (say $500 a month per family).
- Good corporate plan provides for very high level of care at a reasonable cost. Especially dental care. I think that is competitive with any country on the globe including Germany.
- No matter what is the origin (public or private) the existence of insurance inflates the costs of treatment in the current system. Doctors milk insurance and that's a know fact. Similar situation exists in body shops for cars when the price paid by insurance companies inflates the cost of repairs quite dramatically (often 100%).
- I agree with Yves that public option is strategically important. But for a different reason. First of all not all waist in private insurance can be recovered in government option. We need to understand that government is wasteful in its own right: If in private insurance companies a lot of money are paid to top brass, in government they partially will be wasted in red tape. In my view the main value of public option is not what it provides but that it exists is a competitor and creates that possibility of arbitrage and rotation. I think the role that it plays should be similar to USPS vs FedEx and UPS. Moreover it is inevitable that without public option private insurers will milk the system much harder in ways similar to investment banks. I think there should be even some rotation of legislation (pro-anti government) over the time. May be 10 year is a period after which some private insurance companies which provide less efficient care by some metrics need to be nationalized for 10 year and so on. That will an effective put a ceiling of executive pay which is out of control. May be such periodic rotation can help to eliminate the excessive milking of population by private insurance providers.
- Absence of public option makes government jobs somewhat more attractive.
|
|
|
washingtonpost.com
Andrew Pekosz, an associate professor of molecular microbiology and immunology at Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, answers questions about H1N1 swine flu.
How can I tell if I have swine flu? And does it matter if it's that flu or the seasonal one?
Virtually all the cases of influenza occurring at this time are caused by 2009 H1N1. While individuals with severe flu-like illness are being tested to determine for certain which virus is causing the disease, there is no need for most people to get tested.
How do I know if I or someone in my family should go to the hospital?
Some key symptoms to watch for include rapid but shallow breathing, difficulty in breathing and lethargy or extreme weakness. A complete list of symptoms can be found at http:/
/ .www.cdc.gov/ h1n1flu/ sick.htm#3 What is the best source of information about the H1N1 virus?
There are couple of Web sites that provide good general information on the H1N1 virus; the one I like for information to the general public is http:/
/ , but be sure to check with your state or county public health department.www.flu.gov Who should get vaccinated? What are the priority groups?
There are several priority groups being targeted for vaccination while the vaccine is in short supply. The complete list is at http:/
/ but includes pregnant women, health-care and emergency medical personnel, household contacts or caregivers of children under the age of 6 months, anyone between the ages of 6 months and 24 years of age, and people age 25 to 64 who have underlying medical conditions.www.flu.gov/ individualfamily/ vaccination/ vprioritygroups.html What's the difference between nasal spray and injection? Who should get what kind?
The nasal-spray vaccine is a weakened form of the virus that does not cause influenza but does generate a good immune response. The injectable vaccine is an inactivated or "killed" form of the virus which is injected into the muscle of your arm. The nasal spray is only available to healthy individuals age 2 to 49, while the injectable vaccine is available to a wider range of the population. More information is available at http:/
/ . Yes. . . . We are not certain how long the flu season will last, or if we will have several flu seasons or "waves" this year, so when vaccine becomes available, everyone should take advantage of it.www.cdc.gov/ h1n1flu/ vaccination/ general.htm How quickly does the vaccination take effect? Is it possible to come down with the flu soon after getting vaccinated?
After three weeks, most people have an immune response that will protect them from infection with 2009 H1N1. The immune response begins to be detected seven to seven to 10 days after vaccination. The vaccines cannot cause the flu, but you certainly could catch influenza during the time after vaccination when your body hasn't developed a strong anti-influenza immune response.
Should everyone who comes down with the flu take Tamiflu or Relenza?
No. The CDC guidelines recommend that only individuals who are in high-risk groups should receive Tamiflu or Relenza at the first sign of symptoms. If you develop symptoms of severe influenza, then you should seek out medical treatment and begin to take Tamiflu and Relenza. For most people who will come down with the mild form of the disease, the use of Tamiflu or Relenza is not recommended in order to ensure enough of the drugs are available.
|
|
|
NYTimes.com
President Barack Obama has declared the swine flu outbreak a national emergency, allowing hospitals and local governments to speedily set up alternate sites for treatment and triage of any surge of patients, the White House said.
The declaration Saturday did not signify any unanticipated worsening in the United States of the H1N1 outbreak, officials said. It seemed likely, however, to increase concerns, disruptions and at times, panicky reactions, to a disease now affecting most parts of the world.
At some vaccination sites people have stood in line through the night; hundreds have been turned away. On Chicago's North Side, Mary Kate Merna, 28, a teacher, arrived too late. "I thought I'd be a priority, being nine months pregnant," she said. "You hear it's a national emergency and it scares you."
|
|
|
Shindig Blog
Snack Wisely
I've found that when I'm concentrating I like to be eating or drinking something at the same time. When I started programming from home, I used to make a 12-cup pot of coffee from espresso beans, and then follow it up over the rest of the day with Coca Cola, supplemented with Doritos. When I was feeling virtuous, I would switch to Smartfood Popcorn.I'm really glad that I never took up smoking, because I know that I would have a terrible two-pack-a-day habit.
A few years ago, I discovered a key thing: it doesn't actually matter what I'm snacking on. My brain just needs some idle fidgeting and consumption to work more smoothly, but it doesn't have to be junk food.
So, now I always have a pint glass of water (just tap water) on my desk, with some lemon concentrate for flavour. I still have coffee in the morning, but I use a French press, which not only makes tastier coffee, but less of it. For snacks, I've switched to carrot sticks - I'll eat a small bag of them every day.
This doesn't mean that I've cut the tasty things out of my life - I still eat cheeseburgers and drink beer and wine and all of that - but I don't eat unhealthy snacks, especially when I'm not paying attention anyhow.
Use Your Pauses
As computer users, we often have little bits of downtime in our work - waiting for uploads or downloads, compiling, running large database processes, or whatever. I used to just switch to Reddit or Slashdot or whatever in those pauses - and then get lost down a rat-hole of distraction. I've recently found a new thing for those distractions: push-ups. It takes less than a minute to do a few pushups - not enough time to be a big distraction in your day, and it's not like you're doing something else while you're downloading.The trick is to bypass your motivation. Getting up in the morning and saying "today I'm going to do 50 push-ups" is a setup for failure. I need my coffee first, and then usually there's a phone call with some kind of emergency, and then there's a lunch meeting, and I get caught up in programming - and then when I do have time, I'm too mentally exhausted to commit to that extra exertion. But there are always brief pauses in the middle of the day - and they're enough of a lull for me to do a few push-ups. Try to do an extra push-up each time. I started with 10 just a few weeks ago, and now I can do 50 without too much trouble.
Your mileage may vary if you work in an office with other people, but it's great if you have some privacy.
Walk
If you can, walk as much as possible. I know people who have lost an astounding amount of weight simply by walking to work in the morning. This won't work so well if you live way out in the suburbs and work downtown (or vice-versa, like I used to do), but seriously consider walking if you have a short trip to make. Also, with traffic the way that it is in many cities, walking may not be much slower than driving. Simply getting out of the house/office and walking around the block or the office complex can clear your head and help your programming. Longer walks can be a great way to tune back into the real world - something I often need to do if I've been working too hard. If you'd rather avoid reality, an iPod full of Audiobooks and podcasts can turn long walks into learning and enrichment opportunities.
|
|
|
Feb 18, 2007 | The Joel on Software Discussion Group
I had sore back neck problems after some 10 hours days. Until I learned that the top of the monitor should level with my eyes.
My keyboards are in the "okay" position but there is no "mouse tray" on my desk. So I just put the mouse on the desktop (no, I mean the physical one :) ). After a few years, plus the lack of exercises, I have mild thumb arthritis with my "mouse hand".
I remember in the university, some Unix guys were proud of programming almost without the use of a mouse. Perhaps I should remember all those Visual Studio short-cuts or use vi.
Do you have any tips or experiences to share?
Sam Wong
I started getting aches and pains after years of computing, and the following helped me:- Switched from a mouse to a trackball. Logitech Marble Mouse in my case. Love it, and I won't go back to a mouse.
- Lowered my desk. Didn't have a keyboard tray, so I just cut off several inches off my desk to bring the height down.
- I no longer rest my arms or wrists on the desk or keyboard. My hands now float above the keyboard while I'm typing. After years of resting my arms/wrists on the desk I had to see a doctor for ulnar nerve inflammation, which I'm still recovering from a year later.
- Stretching. I googled for various stretches, and found a combination that did wonders for me.
- Exercise. Strengthening my upper body muscles has made a HUGE difference. sloop
===
This is what I would suggest, having recovered from what could've been very bad RSI:
1) Get an ergonomic chair and sit up straight. Most software engineers have terrible posture.
2) Get an ergonomic keyboard, whatever works for you. I've used the Goldtouch but the newer versions are terrible compared to the old one that I currently use. Some people have worked well with the Microsoft keyboard.
3) Make sure that you take some time out during the day to take breaks, roughly 10-15 minutes or so at a time. This means getting up off your rear end and go outside for a walk, stretch your hands, arms and legs.
4) Make use of the tools like Intellisense, auto-complete, etc. that will make yo do much less typing over the course of a day. Same goes for using any macro-like software to help automate manually typed items.
5) Set a good mouse as well - as with keyboards, this is a personal taste. Also, make sure that you put it at the correct height. Your upper back, wrists and arms will thank you. QADude
Sunday, February 18, 2007 Deleting … Approving …Tai Chi: I've learned to regulate my posture (the curvatures of my back), and relax my shoulders.
I also have one of http://www.humanscale.com/products/keyboard_systems.cfm at home for my keyboard. Christopher Wells
===
Swap your mouse hand now and then. One shock that occurred to me was that my thought-processes actually change when using my nooby-esque left hand.
mynameishere
==
I find on Windows I have to use the mouse much more than I do on Linux. Windows is much more complex for requiring plenty of mouse activity all the time. On the plus side, maybe you get some productivity improvement due to that? :-) At least the sensation of increase of productivity must be there...
Seriously, if I could I would have as many different setups of posture as possible, just to avoid the stressing of trying to work from the same one all the time.
And that brings to mind: why do we have the same limitations of the physical world in the virtual world? For example, why do we have to use VS.NET with all the options enabled, instead of keeping things as straightforward as possible for our use of it? These big IDEs still haven't made the simple editors irrelevant, maybe because they are to stringent in the way they work. NetBeans, Eclipse, VS.NET, SharpDevelop, etc...
Haven't we learned to adapt things to our needs? Isn't the virtual world supposed to be more flexible? Why can't we script, adapt, etc, all the softwares we developers rely on? It should be simple, need only a scripting language, etc... If XML is all the rage for configuration files, it probably could handle versioning, plenty of options changes, from time to time, huh? :-)
I digress... Lostacular
===
Had severe headacahes and its defiantely posture related. So find the sweat spot in your monitor and chair height. Thats huge in fixing that.
The top two disks in your vertibrae in your neck under your skull are wired into controlling nerves that travel throughout and around your head. As your posture degrades over long programming cycles, you pinch these disks and that turns into a huge migraine headache.
For me removing this was simply to remove the risers I had used fro my monitors and now look down more on them than up. joe
Sunday, February 18, 2007 Deleting … Approving …Beware: A bad diet and a sedentary lifestyle, two things programmers are notorious for, lead to an increased risk of Type II Diabetes.
Rotate some fruits and vegetables into your diet and get some exercise. Avoid foods and drinks with a lot of simple carbohydrates, i.e., avoid the vending machines at work. At the minimum, go for a good walk at least four times per week.
Nick Hebb
Some very bad advice here for not resting your arms on the desk or the arm supports of the chair. It may help for some, but do not do this without consulting a specialist.
==
I have arthritus naturally, and found that the TENS machine ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TENS ) that I use for the pains in other joints works wonders for the strain of typing and mousing all day. Bit expensive though.
Arthur Itis
"Some very bad advice here for not resting your arms on the desk or the arm supports of the chair."
Pretty much every article I've read on ergonomics says that you're not supposed to rest your arms while typing. Microsoft's keyboards even come with warnings saying you're not supposed to do that. I didn't say anything about resting them when you're not typing. sloop
===
my whole body "hurt" after 8 hrs and sometime 8+ hrs of work. i recently join 24hrs fitness and hit the gym after work and workout for an hour. i don't know if the pain from workout beat out the pain from work but i feel better on the inside. i still feel the physical pain tho.
also try to use as much keyboard as you can. there are many short cut key in Windows. goolge it. notSure
===
Do not put the keyboard feet down. The back-end of keyboard should not be higher than the front. The legs up on the keyboard make you bend your wrists into an unnatural position. Your wrists should be as straight as possible.
XYZZY
===
An additional vote for both a bit of strength training and tai chi; my own arm and wrist pain have lessened considerably since I did both. Granted, I make no claims that one caused the other, but it is another datapoint.
In fact, when I started tai chi, there was a lot of pain in my arms after a class. 6 months or so after starting, my elbows and wrists were much more flexible, and that pinching agonizing wrist pain is extremely rare, going on 4 years now.
Taking a weapons form (sword, spear, sabre) helps a lot with flexibility in the wrist, provided you start with lighter weapons and move up to heavier ones only as you become comfortable. Fencing might accomplish much the same. Dan Fleet
===
Are you of average height? If not, you'll need to be especially careful in setting your environment up correctly. I've taken a lot of trouble in that regard, and it has helped a lot.
In my case (I'm tall) I now work with a raised desk, and an extra pad to raise the mouse even further, and some really tall monitor stands.
I also use a Kinesis sculpted keyboard.
You can probably get a professional, who specialised in assessing ergonomics, to come and give you some advice. John Rusk
===
We're programmers, not professional atheletes. Get off your ass and get an exercise program that includes both strength training and cardio. Stop drinking Mountain Dew and eating Hot Pockets. Jeremy Read
===
Shovelglove does wonders for the back/arms. Google for it.
And yes, go out for some walks, eat properly, etc.
Common sense, really. Jimmy Jones
===
I consulted with an specialist recently, she came to my office and checked everything: monitor position, desk, chair, etc. Her advice was:
1) To get a monitor support to make the monitor stand a little bit higher so I don't need to look down
2) To rest my arms completely on the table. I used to touch the table with the middle of my forearm, but she said it's not the correct position and that I should lay my forearms completely on the table. To do so I had to place my keyboard past the middle of the table.
3) To get a new chair that provides better support for my back.
4) To get a headset
5) To work less and to take vacations (It's been 7 years since the last one) Anon Anon
Monday, February 19, 2007 Deleting … Approving …"... Perhaps I should remember all those Visual Studio short-cuts or use vi. "
Why not both at the same time?
http://www.viemu.com
Highly recommended. JAG
Monday, February 19, 2007 Deleting … Approving …Once upon a time when I was working at home, I changed to a captain's chair with arms higher than the arms on a true office chair. After a while, my left elbow started hurting. I decided it was due to having to hold it in close to my body. It tooks some months after changing back to my original chair for the pain to subside. Peter Vanderwaart
===
> Shovelglove does wonders for the back/arms.
I tried shovelglove and it was terror on my joints. I still work out with a sledge hammer, but treat it more like a regular free weight doing curls stuff with it. ~~~x
===
@sloop
What helped you with recovery from that ulnar nerve inflamation?
I used to rest a lot on my left elbow while sitting at my desk and now I'm having one helluva time w/ the ulnar nerve inflamation. I'm just glad that it was not my mouse arm. Daemon
===
Trackball - get the big ones you maneuver with your hand, not the little ones that you wiggle with your thumb. You can get an RSI from those.
Keyboard shortcuts are good.
One thing I try to do is to not use same hand for multi-key combos. Like Ctrl-C, use the Control key on the right side, and hold down C with the left instead of the stretches to use one hand. frustrated
|
|
|
Slashdot
David H. Newman, M.D. has an interesting article in the NY Times where he discusses common medical treatments that aren't supported by the best available evidence. For example, doctors have administered 'beta-blockers' for decades to heart attack victims, although studies show that the early administration of beta-blockers does not save lives; patients with ear infections are more likely to be harmed by antibiotics than helped - the infections typically recede within days regardless of treatment and the same is true for bronchitis, sinusitis, and sore throats; no cough remedies have ever been proven better than a placebo. Back surgeries to relieve pain are, in the majority of cases, no better than nonsurgical treatment, and knee surgery is no better than sham knee surgery where surgeons 'pretend' to do surgery while the patient is under light anesthesia. Newman says that treatment based on ideology is alluring, 'but the uncomfortable truth is that many expensive, invasive interventions are of little or no benefit and cause potentially uncomfortable, costly, and dangerous side effects and complications.' The Obama administration's plan for reform includes identifying health care measures that work and those that don't, and there are signs of hope for evidence-based medicine: earlier this year hospital administrators were informed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that beta-blocker treatment will be retired as a government indicator of quality care, beginning April 1, 2009. 'After years of advocacy that cemented immediate beta-blockers in the treatment protocols of virtually every hospital in the country,' writes Newman, 'the agency has demonstrated that minds can be changed.'"
|
|
|
