2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

My fave recipe, enjoyed on a Middle Fork Salmon river trip in Idaho many years ago:

1 quart nalgene bottle filled with dried morels

1 pint heavy cream

1 bottle decent port wine

Add wine to Nalgene bottle to rehydrate morels.

Simmer the wine soaked morels gently with cream, serve over pasta. 

posted 2 years, 6 months ago
view in context

"Just to be sure" is doctorspeak.

It really means "So you won't try to sue me later if it turns out to something different."

Here's an idea:  Rather then ordering the MRI, the doctor asks the patient to simply sign a waiver/dicclaimer saying "I, the patient, choose not to get the MRI, and promise never to sue this doctor regarding my sore shoulder."

PROS:  The patient gets a good outcome, and avoids $600 in out of pocket costs.  The doctor is relieved because he/she knows they will never get sued.  Everyone else sees one less unneeded expensive procedure, thus incrementally lowering insurance costs for everyone.

CONS:  none that I can see.

posted 3 years, 1 month ago
view in context

Prozacme,

You are absolutely correct!!!!

posted 3 years, 1 month ago
view in context

Tort reform is a key element of lowering medical costs.

I say this a lifeling Democrat and spouse of a doctor.  My MD wife regularly orders additional tests, visits to specialists and such follow ups for her patients, not because it will result in better patient care, but, sadly, due ONLY to her fear of being sued.

For example, someone might have a 1% chance of a freckle being skin cancer.  Does the doctor explain this to the patient and send them on their way?  No.

The doctor will typically order a biopsy anyway for ALL patients she sees with the freckle.  If she does not do so, and a patient later gets skin cancer, she may be sued for "missing" it.  This means that 99 people will get a biopsy / uneeded treatment simpy because a MD is afraid of getting sued by one person.

This practice of Cover Your A** (CYA) medicine adds greatly to medical costs.  Tort reform for medical malpractice cases will result in lower rmedical costs for us all.

posted 3 years, 1 month ago
view in context

The Victory garden program in Eugene sounds great!

Is there something like this in Portland?  IS it free, or does it cost some $?  I could use a garden coach too.

Two excellent books to inspire you to garden:

The Omnivore's Dilemma

Animal Vegetable Miracle

Thanks!

posted 4 years, 1 month ago
view in context

In the discussion about foreclosures, there is much use of the term "losing your house".  Llet's be clear on something here:   being a foreclosed on is not "losing" your house.  Is foreclosure an emotional and financial loss?  Absolutely.  But for most people, you suck it up, put some things in the storage, move into an apartment, in which for the storm to pass.  Your house is not lost, it's returning to his rightful owner, the bank.Save your tears for the people who are really losing their houses: victims of hurricanes, earthquakes, forest fires.  Many these people had responsible homeowners insurance, but this insurance still did not cover a completely destroyed house.My family has a home in Southern California that was completely paid off.  It was completely destroyed in an earthquake, with no insurance coverage.  We rebuilt it at a cost of over $800,000.  That, my friends, is losing yout home. 

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Two reasons I will never subscribe to the Oregonian (or most any other newspaper): environmental impact and advertising.

to get that newspaper in your hands:
trees are cut down
trees are carried in a log truck to a pulp mill
pulp mill turns trees into newsprint
newsprint is carried by truck to newspaper
newspaper is printed and distributed by trucks

This is a truly absurd way to get your news.  news via the Inter- Web is a far greener and more sustainable model.

Advertising:  the Oregonian is absolutely crammed with ads for worthless crap that I will never buy.  There are far more advertisements than actual copy that I'm interested in, all of them printed on wasteful paper.  When I read news on the Web, usually on the excellent New York Times site, has skipped over the ads in an instant and read the substantive news that I'm after.

and, related to web sites, I agree with the Eugene woman this morning that Oregon live is a lousy web site.  For you Oregonian staffers that are reading this, I suggest you model your site after the New York Times.

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context