Started a little earlier tonight than usual.

How is everyone doing?

I love you all...

In the '70's the Democrats elected Jimmy Carter, a kind, intelligent man of unimpeachable moral character.

The Republicans, evidently horrified by all this, elected, with the help of the ludicrously-named Moral Majority, a divorced Hollywood actor who cloaked his vicious racism behind a facade of twinkling warmth and an apple-cheeked smile.

In the '90's, the Democrats elected Bill Clinton, who had all of Carter's intelligence, but less of his moral character. He appealed to younger voters, and steered the nation through a period of unprecedented economic growth.

The Republicans, evidently horrifed by a President who appeals to younger voters and speaks with Oxford-honed erudition, elected the bumbling ne'er-do-well eldest son of President George H. W. Bush. The younger Bush, born in Connecticut, fancied himself an urban cowboy, and spoke with the halting words and tangled sentences of the functionally illiterate. Viewing war as a grand adventure and a sure-fire election winner, he took the nation into two disastrous wars that we still haven't recovered from.

In the 20-oughts, The Democrats elected an intelligent, hard-working, gracious, visionary, appealing man who happened to be African-American. He repaired much of the damage to America's reputation caused by the feckless younger Bush, and became renowned worldwide for his gentle, but powerful statesmanship.

The Republicans, driven absolutely berserk by the idea of a Black President, scoured the sewers, septic tanks, and sump-pumps of America until it found the most revolting, disgusting, characterless, vulgar, backward, racist, misogynist narcissistic monster imaginable, and collaborated with a Russian dictator to elevate this feculent squdge of human offal into the White House.

If we elect our usual Democrat, capable, intelligent, hard-working, personable (and possibly gay, a POC, or a woman), how will the Republicans seek their revenge?

"Ah, it's fine. Take this as directed, and it'll make you feel better. But you're going to be all right."

Loungers, check in!

Helped along with a little Sativa...

I love you all...

I have a very large Hispanic patient population, not all of whom speak English. I use a Spanish interpreter for their visits, and I'm working on improving my own Spanish, as well.

My Hispanic patients all seem to demonstrate a peculiar anomaly that doesn't feature in patients of other ethnicities: they invariably refer to any symptom they come in complaining of as 'dizziness'. When I question them as to the symptoms and the history of their current problem, the symptom tends to be the furthest thing from dizziness; headache, stomach pain, diarrhea, whatever.

Any idea why everything is described as 'dizziness'?

One of my staff assistants told me that Hispanic patients are instructed (by whom? Friends? Family members?) to tell the medical provider that they have dizziness, regardless of the actual medical complaint. But my assistant isn't Hispanic herself, and I wondered if this was misinformation, or prejudice, or what.

I want to be better at evaluating and treating my patients, especially if there is a language barrier.

Anyone have any answers for this?

Unless it has been going on for sixty seconds. All right?

I know "about a minute" is a current idiom for " a while now, a bit". But when I'm trying to fix your medical problem, please be a little more specific.

Argh!