The Doctor Is In. Co-Pay? $40,000

http://ift.tt/2s4ivJS

SAN FRANCISCO — When John Battelle’s teenage son broke his leg at a suburban soccer game, naturally the first call his parents made was to 911. The second was to Dr. Jordan Shlain, the concierge doctor here who treats Mr. Battelle and his family.

“They’re taking him to a local hospital,” Mr. Battelle’s wife, Michelle, told Dr. Shlain as the boy rode in an ambulance to a nearby emergency room in Marin County. “No, they’re not,” Dr. Shlain instructed them. “You don’t want that leg set by an E.R. doc at a local medical center. You want it set by the head of orthopedics at a hospital in the city.”

Within minutes, the ambulance was on the Golden Gate Bridge, bound for California Pacific Medical Center, one of San Francisco’s top hospitals. Dr. Shlain was there to meet them when they arrived, and the boy was seen almost immediately by an orthopedist with decades of experience.

For Mr. Battelle, a veteran media entrepreneur, the experience convinced him that the annual fee he pays to have Dr. Shlain on call is worth it, despite his guilt over what he admits is very special treatment.

“I feel badly that I have the means to jump the line,” he said. “But when you have kids, you jump the line. You just do. If you have the money, would you not spend it for that?”

Increasingly, it is a question being asked in hospitals and doctor’s offices, especially in wealthier enclaves in places like Los Angeles, Seattle, San Francisco and New York. And just as a virtual velvet rope has risen between the wealthiest Americans and everyone else on airplanes, cruise ships and amusement parks, widening inequality is also transforming how health care is delivered.

Money has always made a big difference in the medical world: fancier rooms at hospitals, better food and access to the latest treatments and technology. Concierge practices, where patients pay several thousand dollars a year so they can quickly reach their primary care doctor, with guaranteed same-day appointments, have been around for decades.

But these aren’t the concierge doctors you’ve heard about — and that’s intentional.

Dr. Shlain’s Private Medical group does not advertise and has virtually no presence on the web, and new patients come strictly by word of mouth. But with annual fees that range from $40,000 to $80,000 (more than 10 times what conventional concierge practices charge), the suite of services goes far beyond 24-hour access or a Nespresso machine in the waiting room.

Indeed, as many Americans struggle to pay for health care — or even, with the future of the Affordable Care Act in question on Capitol Hill, face a loss of coverage — this corner of what some doctors call the medical-industrial complex is booming: boutique doctors and high-end hospital wards.

“It’s more like a family office for medicine,” Dr. Shlain said, referring to how very wealthy families can hire a team of financial professionals to manage their fortunes and assure the transmission of wealth from generation to generation.

Only in this case, they are managing health, on behalf of clients more than equipped to pay out of pocket — those for whom, as Dr. Shlain put it, “this is cheaper than the annual gardener’s bill at your mansion.”

There are rewards for the physicians themselves, of course. A successful internist in New York or San Francisco might earn $200,000 to $300,000 per year, according to Dr. Shlain, but Private Medical pays $500,000 to $700,000 annually for the right practitioner.

For patients, a limit of no more than 50 families per doctor eliminates the rushed questions and assembly-line pace of even the best primary care practices. House calls are an option for busy patients, and doctors will meet clients at their workplace or the airport if they are pressed for time.

In the event of an uncommon diagnosis, Private Medical will locate the top specialists nationally, secure appointments with them immediately and accompany the patient on the visit, even if it is on the opposite coast.

Meanwhile, for virtually everyone else, the typical wait to see a doctor is getting longer.

A survey released in March by Merritt Hawkins, a Dallas medical consulting and recruiting firm, found it takes 29 days on average to secure an appointment with a family care physician, up from 19.5 days in 2014. For some specialties, the delays are similarly long, with a 32-day wait to see a dermatologist, and a 21-day delay at the typical cardiologist’s office.

And some patients are willing to pay a lot to avoid that. MD Squared, an elite practice that charges up to $25,000 a year, opened a Silicon Valley office in 2013 and within months had a waiting list to join.

“You have no idea how much money there is here,” said Dr. Harlan Matles, who specializes in internal medicine and joined MD Squared after working at Stanford, where he treated 20 to 25 patients a day and barely had time to talk to them. “Doctors are poor here by comparison.”

Doctors as Asset Managers

Nowhere is the velvet rope in health care rising faster than here in Northern California, where newfound tech wealth, abundant medical talent and a plethora of health-conscious patients have created a medical system that has more in common with a luxury hotel than with the local clinic.

In fact, before founding Private Medical, Dr. Shlain, 50, worked as the on-call doctor at the Mandarin Oriental hotel here, an experience he said taught him about how to provide five-star service as well as good medical care.

Private Medical started 15 years ago with a single location in San Francisco, and has since opened practices in nearby Menlo Park, in 2011, and Los Angeles, in 2015. Dr. Shlain is now eyeing an expansion into New York, Seattle and Santa Monica, Calif.

The annual fee covers the cost of visits, all tests and procedures in the office, house calls and just about anything else other than hospitalization, as well as personalized annual health plans and detailed quarterly goals for each patient.

Although Private Medical provides its patients with doctors’ cellphone numbers and same-day appointments, like more conventional concierge practices do, Dr. Shlain does not like the term “concierge care.”

“When I’m at a country club or a party and people ask me what I do, I say I’m an asset manager,” Dr. Shlain explained. “When they ask what asset, I point to their body.”

“We organize health care for the entire family,” he said, sitting in his hip-but-not-too-fancy office in a nondescript building in upscale Presidio Heights. Dr. Shlain and his team will coordinate treatment for grandparents in a nursing home and care for their middle-aged children, as well as provide adolescent or pediatric medicine for the grandchildren.

For example, when a teenage patient with a history of depression or anxiety moves across the country to Boston for college, Private Medical will line up a top psychiatrist near the school beforehand so a local professional is on call in case there is a recurrence. Or if a middle-aged patient is found to have cancer, Dr. Shlain can secure an appointment in days, not weeks or months, with a specialist at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston or Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

“It’s not because we pay them,” he added. “It’s because we have relationships with doctors all over the country.”

‘We Can Get You In’

As with the ever more rarefied tiers of frequent-flier programs or V.I.P. floors at hotels, the appeal of MD Squared and Private Medical is about intangibles like time, access and personal attention.

“I am able to give the time and energy each patient deserves,” said Dr. Matles, the MD Squared physician in Menlo Park. “I wish I could have offered this to everyone in my old practice, but it just wasn’t feasible.”

So in addition to providing immediate access to specialists, concierge doctors also come in handy when otherwise wealthy, powerful people find themselves flummoxed by a health care system that is opaque to outsiders.

“If you need to go to Mass General, we can get you in,” Dr. Matles said. “We are connected. I don’t know if I can get you to the front of the line, but I can make it smoother. Doctors like to help other doctors.”

But for all their confidence about the advantages of their particular brand of concierge medicine, these physicians are quick to admit they struggle with the ethical issues of providing elite treatment for a wealthy few, even as tens of millions of American struggle to afford basic care.

Dr. Shlain founded a software start-up, HealthLoop, that aims to “democratize” his boutique approach by allowing patients to communicate directly with their doctors through daily digital checklists and texts.

He sees no reason that the medical world should not respond to consumer demand like any other player in the service economy. “Whenever I bump into a bleeding-heart liberal, which I am, I mention that schools, housing and food are all tiered systems,” he said. “But health care is an island of socialism in a system of tiered capitalism? Tell me how that works.”

Dr. Howard Maron, who founded MD Squared, is similarly candid about the new reality of ultra-elite medical care.

“In my old waiting room in Seattle, the C.E.O. of a company might be sitting next to a custodian from that company,” he recalled. “While I admired that egalitarian aspect of medicine, it started to appear somewhat odd. Why would people who have all their other affairs in order — legal, financial, even groundskeepers — settle for a 15-minute slot?”

It’s a fair question — but the new approach does not sit so well with veteran practitioners like Dr. Henry Jones III, one of Silicon Valley’s original concierge doctors at the Palo Alto Medical Foundation’s Encina Practice. He charges $370 a month, a fraction of what newer entrants in the area like MD Squared and Private Medical do. “It’s priced so the average person in this ZIP code can afford it,” he said.

A third-generation doctor from Boston, Dr. Jones offers a version of concierge medicine that is a way of providing more personalized service — the way doctors did when he graduated from medical school more than four decades ago — rather than delivering a different standard of care.

“Encina is like a Unesco World Heritage site — we practice medicine the way it has been traditionally practiced,” he said. “Just because you’re an Encina patient doesn’t mean you can go to the front of the line, unless you need to because of your case.”

Plusher Quarters

Not far from Dr. Jones’s office in Palo Alto, the new wing of Stanford’s hospital is taking shape. Designed by the star architect Rafael Viñoly, it will feature a rooftop garden and a glass-paneled atrium topped with a 65-foot dome. And unlike the old wing, all of the new building’s 368 rooms will be single occupancy, a crucial amenity for hospitals competing to attract elite patients from across the United States and overseas.

Stanford raised a significant portion of the project’s $2 billion cost by cultivating wealthy patients — a funding model used by university hospitals around the country, which is especially effective among the millionaires and billionaires of Silicon Valley.

Not to be outdone, Lenox Hill Hospital in New York recently hired a veteran of Louis Vuitton and Nordstrom, Joe Leggio, to create an atmosphere that would remind V.I.P. patients of visiting a luxury boutique or hotel, not a hospital. “This is something that patients asked for, and we want to go from three-star service to five-star service,” said Mr. Leggio, the hospital’s director of patient and customer experience.

In its maternity ward, the Park Avenue Suite costs $2,400 per night, twice what a deluxe suite at the Carlyle Hotel down the street commands, but that’s not a problem for well-heeled new parents. Beyoncé and Jay Z welcomed their baby, Blue Ivy, into the world at Lenox Hill, as did Chelsea Clinton and her husband, and Simon Cowell and his girlfriend.

With a separate sitting room for family members, a kitchenette and a full wardrobe closet, the suite overlooking Park Avenue is a world away from the semiprivate experience upstairs at the hospital, where families share an old-fashioned room divided by a curtain. Slightly less exalted but still private rooms in Lenox Hill’s maternity ward range from $630 to $1,700 per night.

As the stream of celebrity couples suggests, there is plenty of demand for these upscale options, crowding out traditional maternity wards. Lenox Hill is replacing some of its shared maternity rooms with private rooms, a far more profitable offering for hospitals since patients pay for them out of pocket, not through insurance plans that can bargain down rates.

Hospital executives argue that giving the well heeled extra attention is a way of keeping the lights on and providing care for ordinary middle- and even upper-middle-class patients, as reimbursements from private insurers and the federal government shrink. “I need to succeed to pay for the children we are bringing in from all over the world and treat for free,” said Dr. Angelo Acquista, a veteran pulmonologist who leads Lenox Hill’s executive health and international outreach programs.

Then there are the red blankets that some big Stanford benefactors receive when they check in as patients. For doctors and nurses, it is a quiet sign of these donors’ special status, which is also noted in their medical records.

“You don’t get better care,” Dr. Jones said. “But maybe the dean comes by, and if it’s done well, it’s done invisibly. It’s an acknowledgment of a contribution to the organization.”

Valuing Relationships

Rex Chiu, an internist with Private Medical in Menlo Park, spent more than a decade as a doctor on Stanford’s faculty. “I loved my time at Stanford, but I was spending less and less time with patients,” he said. “Fifteen or 20 minutes a year with each patient isn’t enough.”

“We all say we should get the same care, but I got sick and tired of waiting for that to happen,” he added. “I decided to go for quality, not quantity.”

Besides more money, the calmer pace of high-end concierge medicine is also a major selling point for physicians — Dr. Matles said he never made it to an event at his children’s school until he joined MD Squared. But for Dr. Sarah Greene, it wasn’t really the money or the lifestyle that led her to Private Medical.

“I really have time to think about my patients when they’re not in front of me,” said Dr. Greene, a pediatrician who joined the company’s Los Angeles practice in October. “I may spend a morning researching and emailing specialists for one patient. Before, I had to see 10 patients in a morning, and could never spend that kind of time on one case.”

Getting in the door as a new hire isn’t easy. When it comes to credentials like college, medical school and residency, Dr. Shlain said, “at least two out of the three need to be Ivy League, or Ivy League-esque.”

In many ways, today’s elite concierge physician provides the same service as the family doctor did a half-century ago for millions of Americans, except that it is reserved for the tiny sliver of the population who can pay tens of thousands of dollars annually for it.

“I didn’t know this level of care was possible,” said Trevor Traina, a serial entrepreneur here who is a patient of Dr. Shlain’s. “I have a better relationship with my veterinarian than the doctors I went to in the past.”

What about everyone else? Mr. Traina doesn’t see much future for the conventional family doctor, except for patients who go the concierge route.

“The traditional model of having a good internist is dying,” said Mr. Traina, a scion of a prominent family here that arrived with the California Gold Rush. “Even the 25-year-olds at my company either have some form of concierge doc, or they’ll just go to an H.M.O. or a walk-in clinic. No one here has a regular doctor anymore.”



from Hacker News http://ift.tt/YV9WJO
via IFTTT

Snapchat Spectacles are now available in Europe

http://ift.tt/2rLxxEl


Snap is bringing Spectacles to Europe nearly seven months after debuting them in the US. The camera-equipped sunglasses will be available online through spectacles.com or through the company’s Snapbot vending machines, which will be in London (under the London Eye), Paris, Berlin, Barcelona, and Venice starting today. A pair will cost £129.99 / €149.99.

Snap says more than 55 million people use Snapchat daily in Europe for at least 30 minutes a day. I’m going to assume they all won’t rush out today to get a pair, thereby recreating the insane hype of the US release. But still, never forget that pairs once went for hundreds of dollars on eBay.

Snap hinted at releasing Spectacles abroad in February after it launched its US online store and filed with the SEC for its IPO. The company said at the time that it planned “to make substantial investments” in marketing and distribution this year. We’ll hopefully see how successful this strategy is when Snap issues its next earnings report.



from The Verge http://ift.tt/1jLudMg
via IFTTT

"Facetime Is Bulls***": Jefferies CEO Explains 20 Things We Wish We Knew When We Were Summer Interns

http://ift.tt/2rvjDp9

Leucadia National CEO Richard Handler and Executive Chairman Brian Friedman sent a letter to this year's crop of Jefferies summer interns advising them that they shouldn’t linger in the office for even a second longer than is necessary. The letter, which was published by Yahoo Finance, reflects Silicon Valley’s impact on the Wall Street recruitment process – a cultural shift that has led some of the biggest investment banks, including Goldman Sachs, to bar interns from the office after midnight while encouraging them to take at least one day off over the weekend. 

Novice bankers should spend more time out enjoying New York City, the letter says, and less time competing to be the last person to leave, because securing a full-time offer at the investment bank “isn’t a zero-sum game. “If you have free time, get out of the office.  Facetime is bulls***.  We don’t want people who are proud that they have no life outside of the office.”

Interns should prioritize their health by finding time to exercise, eat well, get enough sleep - anything that helps them to keep from burning out. And while nobody should shy away from asking questions, interns should also be considerate enough to recognize when full-time staff are too busy to accommodate them.

Regardless of whether they intend to pursue a career on Wall Street, Jefferies interns hoping to get the most out of their experience should treat their internship like it’s a full-time job, not just a “try out.” Every intern should find time during the middle of a difficult task to take a step back “and THINK and UNDERSTAND what you are doing and what it means."

Here’s the letter in full:

It is that special time of year again when our Jefferies’ offices swell with super talented, ambitious, hard-working and youthful interns from college and graduate schools.  This year, we hired 163 potential future superstars from thousands of qualified candidates.  Thinking (way) back to our intern days just a few years (decades) ago, we thought we would share with all of you some of the wisdom and perspective we wish we had back then.  Yes, the financial markets, technology, and the entire world has changed tremendously since then, but we believe that the more some things may change, the more other things may stay the same.  By the way, you might not need to be a summer intern to perhaps pick up a useful tip or two.

What We Wish We Knew When We Were Summer Interns On Wall Street (Yes, a long, long time ago, but still relevant):

1. This is not an easy internship to get. You have worked really hard for many years and made many sacrifices to get to this opportunity. Give yourself a moment to congratulate yourself and be proud of your many accomplishments.

2. Be appreciative of your family, friends, mentors and all loved ones who supported you throughout your youth and helped you get to this milestone. Nobody gets here alone. You are still youthful, by the way.

3. Regardless of whether you think you just want to give finance a try, think you want a certain stamp on your resume or aren’t even sure why you were offered and accepted this internship, act from day one as if this is your chosen career and apply yourself in a manner that is reflective of someone who is striving for a 40+ year career on Wall Street. You may hate it, love it, consider it a stepping stone or just want to live in NYC for a summer… but if you treat this job as if it is the beginning of your chosen career versus a “try out,” you will get much more out of your experience. By the way, it might be the start of your 40+ year career, so why not start right!

4. This is a very demanding summer position. You will have an enormous amount of work to do and much of it will be brand new to you. It will feel at times that you are drinking from a fire hose. One of the most important things you can do while working so hard is to also take the time to step back, reflect on what analysis/task you are performing and ask yourself (and others) why you were asked to perform this analysis and what important conclusion you should be learning from the final product.  Hard work just for work’s sake is not good enough. You need to step back and THINK and UNDERSTAND what you are doing and what it means.

5. Don’t be intimidated by anyone you meet at Jefferies. We are all fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, sons and/or daughters. We were all interns at one point in our lives and we all felt the insecurity and unease with trying to find our way in the early days of our career. We all remember the mentors that made a difference and the jerks who did not. Give everyone the benefit of the doubt and make the outgoing effort.

6. Remember that we are all incredibly busy at Jefferies, so there are times to make the effort to meet people and there are times to politely stay away and let us do what needs to be done. Pay attention and be aware and sensitive.

7. If there is one thing that will matter in your career, it is your integrity. There are no short cuts.  You will get caught. You know within your body if you are even thinking about doing something wrong.  Everyone in our industry (and all others) is judged by their character, honesty, and morality.  Embrace this reality and live by it, and you will be unstoppable.  Bend the truth or mislead by omission or commission and you may get away with it at first, but the end will be imminent and you will regret your bad decision for the rest of your life.

8. If you do make a mistake or even think you might have (we are all human), bring it to your supervisor and the compliance department immediately.  The cover-up is always worse than the crime.  People can survive and thrive after mistakes if they are handled properly.  If you dig the hole deeper, you might as well lay down in it.

9. Your career is not a zero sum game.  Your fellow interns are not your competitors.  Teamwork and getting along with your peers is as important as hard work and smarts. You never know who the peer working in the bullpen next to you may be. They may become:  Future bosses, employees, partners, clients or lifelong friends. If you help make them better, you will do better. We can extend full-time job offers to everyone in the class if you all deserve it, or none of you if you don’t. Get with the teamwork program from day 1 and live it for your entire career. You will advance faster. You will also be a lot happier.

10. We deal with big numbers and small mistakes multiplied by big numbers can create real problems, especially since the numbers all have dollar signs before them.  Accuracy is very important and you need to check and re-check your work.

11. It is OK to make a mistake and learn what you did wrong.

12. It is not OK to repeat the same mistake.

13. If you don’t understand what is being asked of you, get clarification.  It is always good to ask all the questions you need to have answered to accomplish your task.  Don’t nod and act like you know what is needed when you don’t.  You will save an incredible amount of time for yourself and have a quality work product if you ask all the questions up front.

14. Our clients are our lifeblood.  You will get exposure to them whenever possible.  Always treat them professionally and with respect.  Our future depends on them.  So does yours.

15. Our firm has made it a priority to improve the diversity of the Jefferies team.  We need everyone’s help, including yours.  You are either helping us through your actions, intentions, and behavior, or you are making it harder for us.  We will notice.

16. Be smart, thoughtful, and mature about your social media posts.  You never know who may be “following” you. (We never had to worry about this one but you do).

17. Hard work and long hours, unfortunately, go with the territory in our industry and at Jefferies.  You will be asked to make sacrifices and some days you will run out of hours to get important work done.  Here is what you should remember:

a. Sometimes you will need to make significant sacrifices to achieve objectives and it is what it is.
b. If you have free time, get out of the office.  Facetime is bull$—.  We don’t want people who are proud that they have no life outside of the office.
c. You must take care of your health. Exercise. Eat well. Get enough sleep. You must find balance, as hard as it may seem.  Prioritize.
d. If anyone at Jefferies is making unfair demands of you, we want to know – our emails are open 24/7.  We always answer our phones and our doors are also always open if there is a problem.
e. Don’t neglect your family and friends.
f. Don’t burn yourself out.
g. We fully understand balancing all of these demands is hard and unavoidable conflicts will arise.  That said, you need to work on this and we want to help.  This is important.

18. If you think you have a product, industry or geographic preference - speak up. We cannot promise we can make it happen, but we want to know and will try to accommodate as many people as possible.  There are no bad “assignments, groups, or geographies.”

19. We greatly value and work hard at our culture at Jefferies and are very proud of it.  Add to it by bringing your originality, personality, humor, passion, smarts, and hard work.

20. We are not doctors or nurses in the emergency room triage center.  We are not soldiers in the line of fire to protect the American way of life.  We are not firemen or policewomen putting their lives at risk to save innocent people.  What we are doing (while very important and personally satisfying) is not life or death and there are many other positions that are more vital to humanity.  We are just saying to work hard, be serious, but have fun and keep things in perspective.

We look forward to meeting every one of you and welcoming you as a member of our 2017 Summer Intern Class.

Rich and Brian



from Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/qouXdu
via IFTTT

Study shows why children with ADHD should be reevaluated each year: Attention problems perceived by teachers are far less stable than we imagine

http://ift.tt/2rufnGv

While the study below was published a few years ago, it makes an important point that I think is worth revisiting.

In the study, published in the Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, my colleagues and I looked at how frequently teacher ratings of inattentive symptoms persist in children from one grade to the next. We felt this was an important issue to examine because recognition that ADHD is often a chronic condition can obscure the fact that attention problems do not always reflect an enduring child characteristic, and that important changes are possible when children move to a new classroom.

As you will see below, clinically-elevated attention problems as perceived by teachers are less stable than you may have imagined. Our findings highlight the importance of carefully reevaluating children each year so that children do not continue to carry a diagnosis that may no longer apply and to be treated for problems at school that are no longer evident.

Summary and Implications

Data from 3 diverse samples indicates that more than 50% of elementary school children rated by their teacher as having clinically significant inattentive symptoms one year do not show similar problems the following year. This was true even for children with a carefully confirmed diagnosis of ADHD, i.e., those from the MTA Study, who had not started medication treatment between the 2 ratings.

Why might cross-grade stability of elevated teacher ratings of attention difficulties be so modest? Various explanations are possible including positive change in the child associated with maturation, the resolution of a significant life stressor, or perhaps improved nutrition and/or sleep. Teachers may also use rating scales differently, with some teachers prone to assign higher ratings than others.

However, it is also possible that for some children, a change in classroom context is an important factor. This echoes findings obtained with middle school students, where ratings of ADHD symptoms between teachers often do not show strong agreement. This difference has been attributed by some researchers to the unique characteristics associated with different classrooms.

Because elementary school children typically have only a single teacher, however, it is easier than with middle school students to overlook classroom context as a possible factor in a child’s attention difficulties. To the extent that this is the case, it may inadvertently lead some children to be diagnosed with ADHD.

We believe these findings have several useful clinical implications for the use of teacher ratings in the assessment and management of ADHD.

First, as is already widely recognized, our findings underscore the importance of not over-relying on symptom counts in making an ADHD diagnosis; doing so may identify many children whose difficulties at school are likely to be transient. This was evident in the fact that a reduction to the normative range of attention problems was somewhat less frequent for children from the MTA Study – who had been carefully diagnosed with ADHD – than for children from the other 2 samples.

The importance of reevaluating children annually to learn whether inattentive symptoms reported by one teacher are evident in the child’s new classroom is also highlighted. For children who have been taking medication, this should be done when the child has been off medication for a brief period. In the absence of such a procedure, some children are likely to be maintained on medication to address difficulties that may no longer be present.

If ratings made by the child’s new teacher indicate that attention difficulties are no longer prominent, it must be recognized that this does not necessarily mean that a child’s problems have resolved in an enduring way. In such instances, a more extensive assessment would be warranted to better understand the reason for the apparent change so that well-informed decisions about possible treatment modifications can be made.

Our study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the number of children in each sample is relatively small. Second, because we did not have good data on medication treatment for children in samples 1 and 2, we do not know how many may have shown normalized symptoms in year 2 in response to such treatment. Finally, we have no information for why symptom reports often declined so substantially. Although we believe that a change in classroom context may have played an important role, we did not examine this directly.

Two final points are important to make. First, current diagnostic criteria for ADHD enable the diagnosis to be made even if a child’s symptoms have only been evident in a single grade. Our findings suggest that requiring symptoms to have been evident in multiple grades might help prevent diagnosing with ADHD children whose attention problems at school have a good chance of being transient.

Finally, these data should not be construed as undermining the validity of ADHD as a disorder or as indicating that ADHD is simply in the ‘eye of the beholder’. In each sample, a significant percentage of children showed attention problems that persisted across grade. In addition, we did not follow children long enough to determine how often such problems may reemerge in children for whom substantial declines were evident.

Thus, while our findings highlight the importance of not treating children based on the assumption that ADHD symptoms will persist, they also indicate that such problems cut across grades for many children. However, the fact that this is frequently not the case underscores the value of carefully reevaluating children with ADHD when they have transitioned to a new classroom.

The Study in More Detail

How stable are teacher reports of clinically elevated attention problems in children? The answer to this question has important implications about the necessity of reevaluating children with ADHD on an annual basis.

Because ADHD is often a chronic condition, it can lead parents and professionals to assume that children with significant attention problems at school will display these difficulties the following year. However, attention problems do not always reflect an enduring child characteristic and may be exacerbated by aspects of the child’s classroom context in a particular year.

For example, when placed in a disorganized classroom with a teacher who struggles with behavior management issues, some children may display elevated attention problems. However, when placed in a better organized classroom the following year with a teacher who consistently rewards attentive, on-task behavior, these same children may show far fewer difficulties.

In a study published in the Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, my colleagues and I examined the simple question of how frequently clinically elevated teacher ratings of attention difficulties persist from one grade to the next. We felt this was an important question to examine because if such ratings are frequently not stable across grade, it would highlight the need for careful annual reevaluations for children diagnosed with ADHD. Otherwise, some children could continue to carry a diagnosis that may no longer apply and to receive medical treatment for problems at school that are no longer evident.

We examined this question in 3 samples of elementary school children with clinically elevated teacher ratings of attention difficulties, i.e., ratings that fell in the top 10% of the population for children their age. Participants in Sample 1 were 27 first graders, those in Sample 2 were 24 4th graders, and those in Sample 3 were 28 7- to 9-year-old children from the Multimodal Treatment Study of ADHD (MTA Study).

Children in samples 1 and 2 did not have a formal ADHD diagnosis but were identified simply by having elevated teacher ratings of inattentive symptoms. Those from the MTA Study had all been carefully diagnosed with ADHD Combined Type; the children we selected were those who had been randomly assigned to the Community Care condition and who did not receive any medication treatment during the initial study period.

As noted above, all children had elevated teacher ratings of inattentive symptoms at baseline. These ratings were obtained the following year from children’s new teacher so that the cross-grade stability of elevated ratings could be computed. On average, follow-up ratings were obtained 12-14 months later.

Summary Results

In all 3 samples, fewer than 50% of children were rated with clinically-elevated attention problems by their new teacher. The percentages were 37% of children in the 1st grade sample, 33% of children in the 4th grade sample, and 46% of children from the MTA sample. The percentage of children whose ratings of attention difficulties had declined to the normal range was 44% for the 1st grade sample, 50% for the 4th grade sample, and 25% for the MTA sample.

In the 1st grade sample, for example, 14 children had at least 6 inattentive symptoms rated at the highest level at baseline. At follow-up, 10 had 2 or fewer symptoms (70%) including 5 who were reported to show 0 symptoms (36%); only 2 children (14%) were still rated with 6 or more symptoms.

These findings highlight the importance of carefully reevaluating children each year so that children do not continue to carry a diagnosis that may no longer apply and to be treated for problems at school that are no longer evident.

Rabiner_David– Dr. David Rabiner is a child clin­i­cal psy­chol­o­gist and Direc­tor of Under­grad­u­ate Stud­ies in the Depart­ment of Psy­chol­ogy and Neu­ro­science at Duke Uni­ver­sity. He pub­lishes the Atten­tion Research Update, an online newslet­ter that helps par­ents, pro­fes­sion­als, and edu­ca­tors keep up with the lat­est research on ADHD, and helped prepare the self-paced, online course How to Navigate Conventional and Complementary ADHD Treatments for Healthy Brain Development.

Related articles by Dr. Rabiner:



from SharpBrains https://sharpbrains.com
via IFTTT

Annotated Algorithms in Python

http://ift.tt/1UpwkH9


Annotated Algorithms in Python

With applications in Physics, Biology, and Finance

The complete book in PDF is now available under a [Creative Commons BY-NC-ND License](http://ift.tt/14W8vSI nc- nd/3.0/legalcode):

DOWNLOAD BOOK IN PDF

The book is also available in printed form from Amazon:

Amazon

The nlib library

The book builds a numerical library from the ground up, called nlib.py. It is a pure python library for numerical computations. It doesn't require numpy.

Usage

>>> from nlib import *

Linear algebra example

>>> A = Matrix([[1,2],[4,9]])
>>> print 1/A 
>>> print (A+2)*A
>>> B = Matrix(2,2,lambda i,j: i+j**2)

Fitting

>>> points = [(x0,y0,dy0), (x1,y1,dy1), (x2,y2,dy2), ...]
>>> coefficients, chi2, fitting_function = fit_least_squares(points,POLYNOMIAL(2))
>>> for x,y,dy in points:
>>>     print x, y, '~', fitting_function(x)

Solvers

>>> from math import sin
>>> def f(x): return sin(x)-1+x
>>> x0 = solve_newton(f, 0.0, ap=0.01, rp=0.01, ns=100)
>>> print 'f(%s)=%s ~ 0' % (x0, f(x0))

(ap is target absolute precision, rp is target relative precision, ns is max number of steps)

Optimizers

>>> def f(x): return (sin(x)-1+x)**2
>>> x0 = optimize_newton(f, 0.0, ap=0.01, rp=0.01, ns=100)
>>> print 'f(%s)=%s ~ min f' % (x0, f(x0))    
>>> print 'f'(%s)=%s ~ 0' % (x0, D(f)(x0))    

Statistics

>>> x = [random.random() for k in range(100)]
>>> print 'mu     =', mean(x)
>>> print 'sigma  =', sd(x)
>>> print 'E[x]   =', E(lambda x:x,    x)
>>> print 'E[x^2] =', E(lambda x:x**2, x)
>>> print 'E[x^3] =', E(lambda x:x**3, x)
>>> y = [random.random() for k in range(100)]
>>> print 'corr(x,y) = ', correlation(x,y)
>>> print 'cov(x,y)  = ', covariance(x,y)

Finance

>>> google = YStock('GOOG')
>>> current = google.current()
>>> print current['price']                                                                          
>>> print current['market_cap']                                                                
>>> for day in google.historical():
>>>     print day['date'], day['adjusted_close'], day['log_return']

Persistant Storage

>>> d = PersistentDictionary(path='test.sqlite')
>>> d['key'] = 'value'
>>> print d['key']
>>> del d['key']

d works like a drop-in preplacement for any normal Python dictionary except that the data is stored in a sqlite database in a file called "test.sqlite" so it is still there if you re-start the program. Kind of like the shelve module but shelve files cannot safely be accessed by multiple threads/processes unless locked and locking the entire file is not efficient.

Neural Network

>>> pat = [[[0,0], [0]], [[0,1], [1]], [[1,0], [1]], [[1,1], [0]]]
>>> n = NeuralNetwork(2, 2, 1)
>>> n.train(pat)
>>> n.test(pat)
[0, 0] -> [0.00...]
[0, 1] -> [0.98...]
[1, 0] -> [0.98...]
[1, 1] -> [-0.00...]

Plotting

>>> data = [(x0,y0), ...]
>>> Canvas(title='my plot').plot(data, color='red').save('myplot.png')

nlib plotting requires matplotlib/numpy for the Canvas object only plots are chainable. methods: .plot, .hist, .errorbar, .ellipses

Complete list of functions/classes

CONSTANT
CUBIC
Canvas
Cholesky
Cluster
D
DD
Dijkstra
DisjointSets
E
Ellipse
HAVE_MATPLOTLIB
Jacobi_eigenvalues
Kruskal
LINEAR
MCEngine
MCG
Markowitz
MarsenneTwister
Matrix
NeuralNetwork
POLYNOMIAL
PersistentDictionary
Prim
PrimVertex
QUADRATIC
QUARTIC
QuadratureIntegrator
RandomSource
StringIO
Trader
YStock
bootstrap
breadth_first_search
compute_correlation
condition_number
confidence_intervals
continuum_knapsack
correlation
covariance
decode_huffman
depth_first_search
encode_huffman
fib
fit
fit_least_squares
gradient
hessian
integrate
integrate_naive
integrate_quadrature_naive
invert_bicgstab
invert_minimum_residual
is_almost_symmetric
is_almost_zero
is_positive_definite
jacobian
lcs
leapfrog
make_maze
mean
memoize
memoize_persistent
needleman_wunsch
norm
optimize_bisection
optimize_golden_search
optimize_newton
optimize_newton_multi (multi-dimentional optimizer)
optimize_newton_multi_imporved
optimize_secant
partial
random
resample
sd
solve_bisection
solve_fixed_point
solve_newton
solve_newton_multi (multi-dimensional solver)
solve_secant
variance

License

Created by Massimo Di Pierro (http://ift.tt/2rzH0P9) @2016 BSDv3 License



from Hacker News http://ift.tt/YV9WJO
via IFTTT

How to Sleep

http://ift.tt/2gJ3AM4

During residency, I worked hospital shifts that could last 36 hours, without sleep, often without breaks of more than a few minutes. Even writing this now, it sounds to me like I’m bragging or laying claim to some fortitude of character. I can’t think of another type of self-injury that might be similarly lauded, except maybe binge drinking. Technically the shifts were 30 hours, the mandatory limit imposed by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, but we stayed longer because people kept getting sick. Being a doctor is supposed to be about putting other people’s needs before your own. Our job was to power through.

The shifts usually felt shorter than they were, because they were so hectic. There was always a new patient in the emergency room who needed to be admitted, or a staff member on the eighth floor (which was full of late-stage terminally ill people) who needed me to fill out a death certificate. Sleep deprivation manifested as bouts of anger and despair mixed in with some euphoria, along with other sensations I’ve not had before or since. I remember once sitting with the family of a patient in critical condition, discussing an advance directive—the terms defining what the patient would want done were his heart to stop, which seemed likely to happen at any minute. Would he want to have chest compressions, electrical shocks, a breathing tube? In the middle of this, I had to look straight down at the chart in my lap, because I was laughing. This was the least funny scenario possible. I was experiencing a physical reaction unrelated to anything I knew to be happening in my mind. There is a type of seizure, called a gelastic seizure, during which the seizing person appears to be laughing—but I don’t think that was it. I think it was plain old delirium. It was mortifying, though no one seemed to notice.

No matter what happened to my body, I never felt like it was dangerous for me to keep working. I knew I was irritable and sometimes terse, and I didn’t smell the best, but I didn’t think anything I did was unsafe. Sleep experts often liken sleep-deprived people to drunk drivers: They don’t get behind the wheel thinking they’re probably going to kill someone. But as with drunkenness, one of the first things we lose in sleep deprivation is self-awareness.

In a high-school science-fair experiment in 1964, a 17-year-old stayed awake for 11 days. Since then, standards for science-fair safety have changed.

It’s this way of thinking—that you can power through, that sleep is the easiest corner to cut—that makes sleep disturbance among the most common sources of health problems in many countries. Insufficient sleep causes many chronic and acute medical conditions that have an enormous impact on quality of life, not to mention the economy. While no one knows why we sleep, it is a universal biological imperative; no animal with a brain can survive without it. Dolphins are said to sleep with only half their brain at a time, keeping partially alert for predators. Many of us spend much of our lives in a similar state.

Since my residency, I’ve become sort of obsessive about sleep—how much we really need, how to optimize it, whether there are ways to game the system. What can be said definitively about sleep and wakefulness? What I’ve found is a perpetual divide between what’s known to scientists and what most people do.

How much sleep do I actually need?

One 2014 study of more than 3,000 people in Finland found that the amount of sleep that correlated with the fewest sick days was 7.63 hours a night for women and 7.76 hours for men. So either that is the amount of sleep that keeps people well, or that’s the amount that makes them least likely to lie about being sick when they want to skip work. Or maybe people who were already sick with some chronic condition were sleeping more than that—or less—as a result of their illness. Statistics are tough to interpret. Isolated studies are tougher. That’s why the American Academy of Sleep Medicine and the Sleep Research Society convened a body of scientists from around the world to answer this question through a review of known research. They looked at the effects of sleep on cardiovascular disease, cancer, obesity, cognitive failure, and human performance, vetting each paper based on its scientific strength.

The consensus: Most adults function best after seven to nine hours of sleep a night. Going to sleep and waking up at consistent times each day is valuable too. When we get fewer than seven hours, we’re impaired (to degrees that vary from person to person). When sleep persistently falls below six hours per 24, we are at an increased risk of health problems.

Can I train myself to need less sleep?

As an experiment for his high-school science fair in 1964, a 17-year-old San Diego boy named Randy Gardner stayed awake for 264 hours. That is 11 days. Since 1964, the standards for science-fair safety have changed.

The project attracted the attention of the Stanford sleep researcher William Dement, among others. Dement and other researchers took turns watching and assessing the young man’s consciousness. By all accounts, he took no stimulant medications. Nor did he seem to suffer any permanent deficits. Dement said that on day 10, Gardner even beat him at pinball. The boy later said of his experiment that the key to staying awake was “just talking yourself into it.”

I asked David Dinges, the chief of the division of sleep and chronobiology at the University of Pennsylvania, how many people could do anything close to that without dying. He replied that “when animals are sleep-deprived constantly, they will suffer serious biological consequences. Death is one of those consequences.”

That said, cases like Gardner’s—of people who suffered great sleep deprivation without major setbacks—are well documented. A small number of people, sometimes called “short sleepers” and commonly thought to make up perhaps 1 percent of the population, seem to thrive on only four or five hours a night. Dinges said that “we probably do have people among us—and not necessarily 1 percent; there may be many more than that—who can actually tolerate sleep loss better than others.” This proposition has been borne out in studies of participants in transoceanic sailing races, which did not afford them the luxury of long blocks of sleep. The winners tended to be the people who slept the least, often in multiple short bursts.


From Our January/February 2017 Issue

Try 2 FREE issues of The Atlantic

Subscribe

The concept of sleeping in short bursts has spread since those races began, in the 1960s. Today, a small global community of people practices “polyphasic sleeping,” based on the idea that by partitioning your sleep into segments, you can get away with less of it.

Though it is possible to train oneself to sleep in spurts instead of a single nightly block, Dinges says it does not seem possible to train oneself to need less sleep per 24-hour cycle. And he notes that even for the 1 percent (or so) who can survive on less sleep and function well cognitively, we still don’t know how the practice might be affecting metabolism, mood, and myriad other factors. “You may be cheerful, but not cognitively fit. Or you may be cognitively fit, but hard to be around because you’re pushy or hyperactive.”

Around the time of Gardner’s historic science project, the U.S. military got interested in sleep-deprivation research: Could soldiers be trained to function in sustained warfare with very little sleep? The original studies seemed to say yes. But when the military put soldiers in a lab to make certain they stayed awake, performance suffered. Cumulative deficits accrued with each night of suboptimal sleep. The less sleep the soldiers got, the more deficits they suffered the next day. But as with my own residency experience, they couldn’t tell that they had a deficit.

“They would insist that they were fine,” said Dinges, “but weren’t performing well at all, and the discrepancy was extreme.”

This finding has been replicated many times over the intervening decades, even as many professions continue to encourage and applaud sleep deprivation. In one study published in the journal Sleep, researchers kept people just slightly sleep deprived—allowing them only six hours to sleep each night—and watched the subjects’ performance on cognitive tests plummet. The crucial finding was that throughout their time in the study, the sixers thought they were functioning perfectly well.

Effective sleep habits, like many things, seem to come back to self-awareness.

I drink coffee instead of sleeping, so I’m fine.

Caffeine is the most consumed stimulant in the world. The chemical induces reactions throughout the body that normally occur in intense situations. When we sense danger, for example, the pituitary gland activates the adrenal glands to secrete epinephrine, or adrenaline, into our blood. Adrenaline is the hormone that’s meant to be released when we are under stress and need to muster energy to, say, outrun a bear or lift a fallen boulder off our climbing partner. (He’s probably not alive anymore, but it’s worth checking.) Caffeine increases adrenaline levels in the blood. It has repeatedly been shown to improve athletic performance in the short term, from how high a person can jump to how fast a person can swim.

The hormone surge also creates a buzz. To lift that boulder we need a flood of energy to fuel our muscles, but first we need to think we can lift the boulder. The “psychoactive” component of caffeine is what makes anything seem possible when brainstorming during your third hour in a coffee shop.

Mauricio Alejo

Caffeine works primarily by blocking the action of a chemical called adenosine, which slows down our neural activity, allowing us to relax, rest, and sleep. By interfering with it, caffeine cuts the brake lines of the brain’s alertness system. Eventually, if we don’t allow our body to relax, the buzz turns to anxiety.

Thanks to caffeine, many of us stimulate that fight-or-flight response not just occasionally, under dire circumstances, but daily, in our offices. Eighty-five percent of U.S. adults consume some form of caffeine most days, with an average daily dose of 300 milligrams (roughly 27 ounces of coffee). Strategic use of small amounts of caffeine can be cognitively advantageous, but at such a high dose, caffeine is likely to throw off our sleep and energy cycles in the long term, altering the body’s internal clock. At that point, many people go in search of products to help them sleep.

But there’s no real danger in consuming a lot of caffeine, right? Can’t caffeine make you live longer?

We frequently hear that drinking a small amount of coffee can be healthy. This always comes back to the evidence that some coffee-drinking is a common behavior among long-lived, healthy people across populations. News stories tend to interpret this evidence optimistically, reporting that coffee may be good for you. In reality, it might just be an interesting correlation. Randomized, controlled trials on nutrition are extremely difficult to conduct, as the effects of dietary changes are complex and often take years, if not a lifetime, to reveal themselves.

Those who claim that coffee is healthful tend to point to its high level of antioxidants. But antioxidant supplements have not been proved to correlate with health or longevity. Antioxidants represent a vast spectrum of substances. Vitamin E is an antioxidant, and taking vitamin-E supplements has been shown to increase men’s risk of prostate cancer.

If coffee does have an effect on longevity, it is likely a result of something more global than the potential effect of antioxidants—such as the fact that constant exposure to caffeine, even at low levels, suppresses appetite (in a world where most people eat more than is ideal). Or that it encourages social interaction—it inclines us to go out and do things with people—which itself is generally beneficial to health. These are legitimately positive results. But as with all chemicals, the comprehensive effect of caffeine on our health depends on how, and how much, we use it.

In 2013, a 24-year-old advertising copywriter in Indonesia died after prolonged sleep deprivation, collapsing a few hours after tweeting “30 hours of working and still going strooong.” She went into a coma and died the next morning. A family acquaintance wrote on Facebook, “She died because too much of overtime working, and too much kratingdaeng attacks her heart.” Kratingdaeng is the Thai name for the product known elsewhere as Red Bull.

Sleep deprivation is clearly linked to heart disease and strokes. Beyond that, the vitamin/caffeine/amino-acid concoctions known collectively as energy drinks have been implicated in thousands of emergency-room visits in recent years; energy-drink-related ER visits doubled from 2007 to 2011, according to the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. For now, this is simply a correlation, with a plausible explanation that one could be causing the other; it is not proof of harm. And yet, notes Michael Jacobson, the head of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, “there are several fatalities possibly related to energy drinks, and several lawsuits. In some people, it appears to be due to underlying heart defects—when they get this dose of caffeine, they succumb.”

Although the FDA warns us rather unambiguously that “caffeine overdose is dangerous and can kill you,” I’ve not seen that happen, and Jacobson, a public-health advocate, confirms that except at extraordinarily high levels, caffeine isn’t known to kill otherwise healthy people. It may not be the sole culprit in hospitalizations related to energy drinks. After all, many of the people who have been hospitalized after consuming energy drinks are presumably also coffee drinkers, notes Jacobson—but few, if any, have been made acutely ill by coffee.

I can’t sleep. Is my phone really keeping me up? Should I seriously not be reading my phone in bed? That seems impossible.

The United Nations declared 2015 to be the International Year of Light and Light-Based Technologies. That summer, the New York Blue Light Symposium brought together experts who are trying to reckon with the invasion of all this new light into our lives. A keynote speaker was the Japanese ophthalmologist Kazuo Tsubota, the president of the International Blue Light Society, which aims to “promote public awareness of pertinent research on the physical effects of light.” Its founding followed a 2012 report by the American Medical Association titled “Light Pollution: Adverse Health Effects of Nighttime Lighting.”

Of all the things to have health concerns about, nighttime lighting? Well, yes. When light enters your eye, it hits your retina, which relays signals directly to the core of your brain, the hypothalamus. The size of an almond, the hypothalamus has more importance per volume than any other part of your body. Yes, that includes the sex organs—you would have no sex drive without the hypothalamus. This almond is the interface between the electricity of the nervous system and the hormones of the endocrine system. It takes sensory information and directs the body’s responses, so that the body can stay alive.

Among other roles in maintaining bodily homeostasis—appetite, thirst, heart rate, etc.—the hypothalamus controls sleep cycles. It doesn’t bother consulting with the cerebral cortex, so you are not conscious of this. But when your retinas start taking in less light, your hypothalamus assumes it’s time to sleep. So it wakes up its neighbor the pineal gland and says, “Hey, make some melatonin and shoot it into the blood.” And the pineal gland says, “Yes, okay,” and it makes the hormone melatonin and shoots it into the blood, and you become sleepy. In the morning, the hypothalamus senses light and tells the pineal gland to stop its work, which it does. Test your blood for melatonin during the daytime, and you will find almost none.

All of this is why we’re told to minimize screen time before bed. Phones and tablets emit light that’s skewed heavily toward the blue end of the visible spectrum, and some research suggests that these frequencies are especially influential in human sleep cycles. Using a “night mode,” available on some phones, is supposed to minimize that effect. That’s probably worth doing—so long as you don’t end up canceling out any benefit by spending more time looking at the lit screen.

Can’t I just take a melatonin supplement if I can’t get to sleep?

Melatonin is one of the very few hormones that you can purchase in the United States without a prescription. It is considered a dietary supplement and therefore held to essentially no premarket standards of quality, safety, or efficacy. The pharmacist can’t give me the eye drops that help control my glaucoma without a prescription. The pharmacist can’t give insulin to a diabetic person without the recurring order of a doctor, to which not all people have easy access. But melatonin, which tinkers with the work of the most crucial part of your brain? It’s over there in Aisle 5. Buy as much as you like. It’s next to the caffeine pills.

In 2015, Ben Yu, who’d dropped out of Harvard to form a biotech start-up, launched a product called Sprayable Sleep, which contains melatonin. Spray it onto your skin, and it’s supposed to put you to sleep. (Sprayable Sleep is the company’s second product. Its first was the perfect complement: Sprayable Energy, or topical caffeine.)

When I spoke with Yu, he referred to melatonin not as a hormone but as a “biological signaling molecule.” I asked him whether he did this because customers might be averse to spraying themselves with a hormone. “I thought that might be a loaded word,” he agreed, “but it turns out, people don’t seem to care.”

In a sleep-deprived culture, the promise of sleep can lead people to abandon caution. In its initial crowd-funding campaign on Indiegogo, Sprayable Sleep raised $409,798. (That’s 2,106 percent of what the company set out to raise, collected from nearly 5,000 people.)

Unlike melatonin pills, which are absorbed into and eliminated from the blood before the night is over, Sprayable Sleep is supposed to keep you asleep through the night, as the hormone gradually percolates through your skin and into your bloodstream. I tried it for a couple of weeks, and I did sleep, but it was tough to tell what effect the product was having: I sleep most nights. That said, I can confirm that it didn’t burn my skin. Also, that people don’t like it when you pretend you are going to spray it on them.

Melatonin supplements have been shown to make some people fall asleep more quickly, but they aren’t proven to increase the total time or quality of sleep. And of course, as with most things sold as supplements in the United States, the effects of long-term use are unknown.

What is clear is that supplement overuse can be dangerous. Melatonin is crucial to the functioning of the most finely tuned apparatuses in the body, and David Dinges is especially concerned about its use by young people. As he put it, “No child should have a melatonin supplement—or a caffeinated drink—without a doctor being involved.” Adults, he says, “at least might make informed decisions.”

The delicate word there is informed. Many people seem engaged in a daily arms race between wakefulness and unconsciousness, using various products to mask and manage poor sleep habits, and ultimately just needing more products. Spray-on caffeine followed by spray-on melatonin. Or alcohol, which only further messes with our physiological rhythms.

So how does one break that cycle? Factors outside of our control—jobs and families and light pollution, to name a few—can make this hard to do. But when possible, here are a few simple ideas that many experts recommend. Try to keep a somewhat constant bedtime and wake-up time, even on weekends. Keep caffeine use moderate, even if you don’t feel like a nighttime coffee affects you. The same goes for nightcaps. (Not necessarily a joyless suggestion—maybe you can meet a friend for a beer at 4 p.m. instead of 10 p.m.) Use screens judiciously, too. Remember that even on night mode, a phone is shooting light into your brain. Have sex with someone instead. Or, sometimes preferable, read something on paper.


This article is adapted from James Hamblin’s new book, If Our Bodies Could Talk: A Guide to Operating and Maintaining a Human Body.


Related Video



from Hacker News http://ift.tt/YV9WJO
via IFTTT

Lawyers, Not Ethicists, Will Solve the Robocar ‘Trolley Problem’

http://ift.tt/2rbLESD


People seem more that a bit freaked out by the trolley problem right now. The 60s-era thought experiment, occasionally pondered with a bong in hand, requires that you imagine a runaway trolley barreling down the tracks toward five people. You stand at a railway switch with the power to divert the trolley to another track, where just one person stands. Do you do it?

This ethical exercise takes on new meaning at the dawn of the autonomous age. Given a similar conundrum, does a robocar risk the lives of five pedestrians, or its passengers? Of course, it isn’t the car making the decision. The software engineers are making it, cosseted in their dim engineering warrens. They will play God. Or so the theory goes.

Giving machines the ability to decide who to kill is a staple of dystopian science fiction. And it explains why three out of four American drivers say they are afraid of self-driving cars. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration even suggested creating something of an “ethical” test for companies developing the technology.

But the good news is, that point might be moot. In a paper published in Northwestern University Law Review, Stanford University researcher Bryan Casey deems the trolley problem irrelevant. He argues that it’s already been solved—not by ethicists or engineers, but by the law. The companies building these cars will “less concerned with esoteric questions of right and wrong than with concrete questions of predictive legal liability,” he writes. Meaning, lawyers and lawmakers will sort things out.

Solving the Trolley Problem

“The trolley problem presents already solved issues—and we solve them democratically through a combination of legal liability and consumer psychology,” says Casey. “Profit maximizing firms look to those incentivizing mechanisms to choose the best behavior in all kinds of contexts.” In other words: Engineers will take their cues not from ethicists, but from the limits of the technology, tort law, and consumers’ tolerance for risk.

Casey cites Tesla as an example. Drivers of those Muskian brainchildren can switch on Autopilot and let the car drive itself down the highway. Tesla engineers could have programmed the cars to go slowly, upping safety. Or they could have programmed them to go fast, the better to get you where you need to be. Instead, they programmed the cars to follow the speed limit, minimizing Tesla’s risk of liability show something go awry.

“Do [engineers] call in the world’s greatest body of philosophers and commission some grave treatise? No,” says Casey. “They don’t fret over all the moral and ethical externalities that could result from going significantly lower than the speed limit or significantly higher. They look to the law, the speed limit, and follow the incentives that the law is promoting.” By that, he means that if policymakers and insurers decide to, say, place the liability for all crashes on the autonomous cars, the companies making them will work very hard to minimize the risk of anything going wrong.

The public has a say in this too, of course. “[T]he true designers of machine morality will not be the cloistered engineering teams of tech giants like Google, Tesla, or Mercedes, but ordinary citizens,” writes Casey. Lawmakers and regulators will respond to the will of the public, and if they don’t, automakers will. In January, Tesla pushed an Autopilot update that lets cars zip along at up to 5 mph over the limit on some roads, after owners complained about getting passed by everyone else. The market spoke, and Tesla responded.

Ethics in Self-Driving Cars

Still, thought exercises like the trolley problem helps gauge the public’s thoughts on autonomous vehicles. “When you’re trying to understand what people value, it’s helpful to eliminate all the nuance,” says Noah Goodall, a transportation researcher with the Virginia Transportation Research Council who studies self-driving cars. The thought experiment can provide a broad overview of what kinds of guidelines people want for those cars, and the problems they want addressed. But it can confuse them, too, because they are the fringe case at the fringe of fringe cases. “Trolley problems are pretty unrealistic—they throw people,” says Goodall.

The trolley problem also assumes a level of sophistication from the technology that remains quite some way down the road. At the moment, robocars cannot discern a child from a senior citizen, or a group of two people from three people–which makes something like the trolley problem highly theoretical. “Sometimes it’s hard to come to a fine-grain determination of what’s around [the car],” says Karl Iagnemma, who used to head up the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Robotics Mobility Group and is now the CEO of the self-driving software startup nuTonomy. “Typically the information that’s processed by a self-driving car is reasonably coarse, so it can be hard to make these judgments off of coarse data.”

Helping people feel comfortable with autonomous vehicles requires “being upfront about what these vehicles really do,” Goodall says. “They prevent a lot of crashes, a lot of deaths. Fine-tuning things are difficult, but companies should prove they put some thought into it.” More than 35,000 people die on American roads every year; over 1.25 million people die worldwide. Worrying about the ethical dilemmas of something like the trolley problem won’t save lives, but honing autonomous technology might.

But in addition to hiring more engineers, all these companies developing robocars might want to hire a few smart lawyers. Turns out they’ll have a hand in the future of mobility, too.

Go Back to Top. Skip To: Start of Article.


from WIRED https://www.wired.com
via IFTTT

Chipotle Hacked In Massive Breach - Customer Payment Data Stolen From Thousands Of Restaurants

http://ift.tt/2qntfTo

Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

Chipotle announced late Friday that Hackers used malware to infiltrate Chipotle Mexigan Grill Inc's ($CMG) payment system over a three week period beginning in late March - stealing sensitive customer banking information, including account numbers and internal verification codes that could be used to drain debit-card linked bank accounts.

The announcement was made following an investigation into an incident first reported on April 25th of "unauthorized activity" detected in some of their Canadian restaurants.

The malware searched for track data (which sometimes has cardholder name in addition to card number, expiration date, and internal verification code) read from the magnetic stripe of a payment card as it was being routed through the POS device.

No word on how many customers are affected, however Chipotle said most of their 2,250 or so restaurants were hit between March 24th and April 18th. Click here to see the list of affected restaurants by state.

Chipotle refused to upgrade to chip readers in 2015

The malware used in the attack steals data found within the magnetic stripe of payment cards. Although it is not clear if EMV (chipped) payment cards would have been susceptible to the hack, Chipotle notably declined to use them in 2015 - citing inefficiencies caused by delays in the authentication process in a fast paced food service environment.

The breach could mean big trouble for shares of Chipotle, which have only partially recovered from an E.coli outbreak in late 2015. According to Reuters, security analysts say Chipotle will likely face a fine based on the size of the breach and number of records compromised.

"If your data was stolen through a data breach that means you were somewhere out of compliance" with payment industry data security standards, Julie Conroy, research director at Aite Group, a research and advisory firm.

 

"In this case, the card companies will fine Chipotle and also hold them liable for any fraud that results directly from their breach," said Avivah Litan, a vice president at Gartner Inc (IT.N) specializing in security and privacy.

It is uncertain if and how Chipotle's decision not to adopt chipped card payments will factor into fines levied against the company by credit card companies.

Poor $CMG just can't catch a break!

Notice



from Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/qouXdu
via IFTTT

Zelda: Power Up The Awesome Master Sword Beam

http://ift.tt/2rs8LsZ

The Armor of the Wild is a legendary Armor set in The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. It is comprised of the classic green tunic, hat, and boots that Link has almost always been seen wearing - but with a new woodland twist on the design.

This armor set is incredibly hard to obtain - as you will only be able to get it once you have completed all 120 Shrines in the game. After completing every shrine, you will be invited to a new area to receive a gift from all the monks that have tested you with their trials.

Equipping all three of the armor pieces when upgraded twice will grant you a unique bonus: Master Sword Beam Up - which will let you fling blasts of energy from the Master Sword much farther when at full health than ever before.

The Armor of the Wild is comprised of the following pieces:

Wearing these three items together does trigger a set bonus (Master Sword Beam Up). Each item can be upgraded at Great Fairy Fountains.

EditArmor of Wild Upgrades



from IGN Video Games http://ift.tt/1a4Rbxe
via IFTTT