Pages

Friday, April 17, 2020

HANDSHAKE | How COVID Killed a Grand Gesture

Tomb of the Verboten Handshake.
Epitaph by JT Marlin.
April 18, 2020–Before the arrival of Covid-19, the handshake was associated from the first extant written words with the idea of mutuality and peaceful intent. The Egyptian hieroglyphic of the extended hand is associated with giving. Handshaking seems to have been part of religious ritual in Babylon long before 850 BC, when the earliest recorded handshake partners were two kings—Assyria’s Shalmaneser III and Babylonia’s Marduk-Zakir-Shumi I.

Yet a few days ago, Dr Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said that when the plague of the coronavirus has passed, we should not only keep washing our hands, we should not go back to hand-shaking.

So the handshake is dangerous, now? What happened to its great reputation as the sign of friendship and gentlemanly mutual commitment? How did the royal handshake get and lose such a good name?

The two kings are displayed in about 850 BC, staff in the left hand and right hands clasped, on a bas-relief in sandstone on Shalmaneser's throne pedestal (see photo of detail at right). About 7 feet high, the relief was found in Nimrud and is in the Iraq Museum in Baghdad.

Royal shake: Assyria's Shalmaneser III
 extends hand of friendship in c 850 BC
to Babylon's Marduk-Zakir-Shumi I.
Babylon was a good friend to Shalmaneser in his two-year war in the area. Shalmaneser later returned the favor to Marduk by defending himself against a rebellious younger brother.

In the United States, Quakers are credited with the spread of the handshake, as a mark of equality. The "gentlemen's agreement" was a hand-shaking ceremony associated with the signing of covenants of all kinds.

The handshake became a vehicle for transporting the Trojan Horses of droplets carrying the microscopic SARS-CoV2. In this way, Covid-19 destroyed the gentlemanly handshake's reputation and has made it verboten, even when neither side has symptoms of the disease, because the virus can be transferred by a carrier without symptoms.

Elbow-bumping or fist-bumping don't really work as a substitute for a handshake, because they both require two people to get close enough to each other for the virus to be transferred by droplets from the carrier. Social distancing requires a minimum distance between people of at least six feet (two meters), some say even more.

Asian bowing from six feet away, a practice made amusing in The Mikado, is looking a lot more sensible. We might now wonder why has it taken us so long to figure out the wisdom of that—along with, when a flu is about, regularly wearing a cloth face covering in public? We should have a public mourning of the end of the handshake... but not until the deadly disease that it has helped to spread has abated!

(Hat tip to RDA.)

Sunday, April 5, 2020

BIRTH | "Wash Your Hands" Joseph Lister

Joseph Lister (1827-1912)
April 5, 2020 – This day in 1827 was born Joseph Lister, the man who first preached "wash your hands, wash your hands" to prevent the spread of disease. He is called the father of antiseptic medicine and was born in Upton, England.

As the world confronts the pandemic COVID-19 disease, the importance of antiseptic hygiene is becoming widely known as a life-and-death daily matter. Soap and hot water, over a vigorous 20 seconds.

The theory behind this was first outlined in an article on antisepsis published in 1867. It outlines the discovery of antiseptic surgery in the august British journal The Lancet.

The author was Joseph Lister, or Lord Joseph Lister of Lyme Regis (1827-1912). His contribution to surgical methods is so fundamental he is also referred to as the Father of Modern Surgery. He would be Dr. Lister in the United States, but British surgeons like to acknowledge barbers as their professional ancestors by calling themselves just "Mr."

Born in 1827, Joseph Lister attended University College Hospital for his training, the only place he could go as a non-conforming Quaker. He became a professor of surgery at Glasgow University in 1860. In 1861 he was appointed to the Glasgow Royal Infirmary, which had just built a new surgical wing to reduce the high 45-50 postsurgical mortality rate (operation successful, patient died).

The theory at the time was that putrefaction following an operation because of a miasma in the air. But Lister noted that the mortality rate from "ward fever" didn’t drop in the new Glasgow infirmary building. Lister theorized that the infection was caused not by a miasma but by an invisible dust, like pollen. Since the new building didn't improve the post-operative mortality rate,  he thought the solution might be to put a barrier between the patient and the surrounding air.

Lister moved to Edinburgh in 1869, marrying the daughter of an Edinburgh professorial colleague, James Syme, bringing with him the putrefaction puzzle. Why didn't the Glasgow hospital building's cleanliness help reduce post-operative mortality? Lister read Louis Pasteur's study of the cause of fermentation in beer and milk (the first pasteurization test had been completed in 1862) and speculated that this might be the cause of wound putrefaction.

Authorities in nearby Carlisle were using creosote to clean bad-smelling sewage because it reduced the odor. They discovered it also reduced disease amongst cattle and humans. Lister applied Pasteur's study as an explanation of carbolic acid's effectiveness in stopping the putrefaction. He experimented with dressings soaked in carbolic acid to cover wounds. The outcome was that the rate of infection was vastly reduced. He experimented with hand-washing, sterilizing instruments and spraying carbolic in the operating theater. He developed a carbolic spray. His antiseptic treatment of wounds improved surgery survival rates. His first article appeared in The Lancet in March 1867, soon before his 40th birthday. The last of his six articles appeared in July.

Between 1864 and 1866, before the use of antiseptic treatment, 46 percent of Lister’s surgical patients died. In contrast, from 1867 to 1870, only 15 percent died, and he eventually got the mortality rate down to 5 percent. Yet Lister was initially a prophet without honor in his own country. His idea of invisible germs was mocked. His work was accepted in Germany, where it was seen to work, but it was ridiculed in London.

To be fair to the European medical profession (h/t to E.P.), Hungarian Ignaz Semmelweis was the first to preach handwashing, based on his obstetric work in the 1840s when he noticed that the patients managed by doctors did much worse than those managed by midwives despite the doctors being more scientific and carrying out post-mortems on the mothers that died. He decided the doctors were carrying something lethal on their hands from the dead to the living and, sensibly enough, recommended they wash whatever it is off their hands.

Doctors didn't want to believe that they had been violating their Hippocratic oath by carrying illness from one patient to another and they dismissed Semmelweis as crazy (he did spend time in a mental institution), so it is fair to give Lister the credit for being the first not only to preach handwashing but to get others to listen. To answer his London critics, Lister put his head on the mouth of the British medical lion and accepted a post as Professor of Clinical Surgery at King's College Hospital in 1877.

Lister's breakthrough in convincing the English medical establishment of his theories occurred when he performed a successful "open" operation for fracture of the patella (kneecap). The patient, Francis Smith, had fractured his patella a fortnight earlier. Lister wired together the separated fragments of his bone, a complicated process that showed how the antiseptic system “had removed for ever the threat of hospital disease”. Smith survived the operation and walked out of the hospital 3 months later. Lister’s fame spread.

Many people came to the hospital to watch him operate, and notices requesting no smoking in the hospital had to be posted in three different languages. In 1883, Lister was made a Baronet. In 1897 he was the first surgeon to become a peer, the 1st Baron Lister of Lyme Regis.

Monday, March 30, 2020

U.S. PRESIDENT, NY GOVERNOR | One Weak, One Strong

March 30, 2020—The President denied the gravity of the crisis and stuck with his free-market message. The Governor of New York State understood the crisis and took action at once. The Governor was a stronger leader than the President, or any other Governor. The President tried to squash the New York Governor, and failed. Aghast at looking like a wimp, the President took decisive action against a vulnerable group that desperately needed help. The President's callousness backfired and from then on, the President's reelection prospects were doomed.

Hoover (L) and FDR, March 1933
The context, of course, was October 29, 1929. After dropping 5 percent the day before, the NYSE index dropped another 20 percent on what is called Black Tuesday. GOP President Herbert Hoover announced that this was a temporary blip and that the economy was “sound and prosperous.” 

However, the market persisted with its decline  and by mid-1932 it was a mere 17 percent of its September 1929 peak. By early 1933, 45 percent of all farm mortgages and 40 percent of home mortgages were in default. 

Hoover's excessive optimism and lack of action was noted in early 1930 by New York State's Labor Commissioner, Frances Perkins. When Hoover said the job market was rebounding, she observed that the Bureau of Labor Statistics data did not support this statement, and the January 1930 job numbers had deteriorated. Governor Franklin Roosevelt believed Perkins, and told her so, and in March 1930, he created the first state commission on employment in the country. He then became the first Governor to support the idea of unemployment insurance. Hoover said in May that the worst was over, but Governor Roosevelt told Democrats at their annual dinner at the Commodore Hotel (now the Grand Hyatt Hotel) that he disagreed and that Hoover's crowd just didn’t care about the impact of the crisis on vulnerable members of the public. The next speaker called for FDR's reelection as Governor.

Hoover (L) and FDR, March 1933
In 1930, the GOP put up racket-busting Charles Tuttle to oppose FDR's reelection as Governor (until the Constitution was revised in 1938, New York's Governors were elected every two years). Tuttle attacked FDR for not repudiating Tammany Hall. Hoover sent three Cabinet members—(1) the Oklahoman Secretary of State, (2) a New Yorker who was Secretary of War, and (3) the Undersecretary and later Secretary of the Treasury, New Yorker Ogden Mills—to support Tuttle and attack FDR. 

FDR ignored Tuttle's attacks and instead stuck with promoting his programs for unemployment insurance and old-age pensions. Not until three days before the election did he address Tuttle's attacks on him for being too close to Tammany Hall. He said he would address the charges in the courts, where they could be proven, and not in the newspapers. He attacked one of the visiting spokesmen for Hoover as a carpetbagging outsider and the other two as defeated candidates for Governor who had already been rejected by the State. “We of the Empire State can take care of ourselves,” said FDR. Tammany’s Jim Farley meanwhile delivered the most lopsided victory of any New York Governor.

So FDR had some momentum in 1932 when he took on Hoover, who botched his reelection effort by looking savage when he should have looked kind, and vice versa. Having shown himself as a ditherer on the economy, Hoover decided to look strong by sending in the U.S. Army to rout the unarmed veterans who were assembled to ask for early payment of World War I bonuses. At the order of Secretary of War Patrick Hurley, General Douglas MacArthur led cavalry and tanks to force with tear gas the decampment of unemployed World War I veterans. The troops burned the makeshift shelters. The Capitol's Republican newspaper said: “If the Army must be called out to make war on unarmed citizens, this is no longer America.”

Meanwhile, Hoover was gentle where he should have been tough. To calm the financial markets, he needed to reassure the financial community that his Treasury policies would continue whether or not Hoover himself was reelected. He therefore asked FDR to commit himself to certain free- market and sound-money principles, though he knew that such a commitment would be incompatible with FDR’s New Deal proposals. FDR waited more than a week to respond, and then coolly replied to Hoover that it was too late for “mere statements,” showing Hoover up as too weak to take needed action. FDR stuck to that line right up to the inauguration, despite Hoover's rising panic as banks folded, gold flowed out to Europe, and unemployment rose, making the runup to the election and inauguration as disruptive as it could be. A good administrator, but not a leader, Hoover was helpless as tragedy washed over the country.

FDR beat Hoover in a huge landslide in 1932. The day before the inauguration, Hoover  told FDR, who had suggested calling on someone, “You will learn that the President of the United States calls on nobody.” FDR and Hoover famously rode together to FDR's inauguration. Hoover asked a favor of the President, to keep on a member of his staff. FDR was mostly silent. The two of them never again met.

After his first press conference, FDR paid a call to the I Street home of retired Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, whose birthday it was, and asked Holmes for advice, thereby ignoring Hoover's advice. FDR took the advice of Holmes, who said, as a veteran of the Union Army: “Mr. President, you are in a war. Form your battalions and fight.”

The Great Depression, but not poverty, ended within weeks of the arrival of FDR, as the nation recognized that someone was in charge and people started going back to work. Key elements were: (1) Treasury Secretary William H. Woodin’s commandeering of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to produce greenbacks, pack them up for the banks, send off the trucks to the banks, and film the entire process for the newsreels in movie theaters during the following weeks, all across the country. (2) President Roosevelt’s Fireside Chats, which showed that someone competent was in charge and that people could be confident that the country would get through the crisis. 

FDR showed public relations genius as well as an acute understanding of the nature of the problem the country faced and how it could be. He put a Republican CEO in charge of implementing the practical steps to address the panic and then rebuild the country. He told Will Woodin to handle the task of getting money out to the banks, while he crafted his Fireside Chats. The financial system they created lasted for 70 years. FDR's social safety net is still with us.

The story resonates today, as we watch President Donald J. Trump interface with Governor Andrew Cuomo. History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes

P.S. (May 16, 2020) ProPublica, a nonprofit investigative news source, argues that in crucial days in early March, Governor Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio were slow to listen to their health experts. The story contrasts New York State with California, which had a friendlier relationship between Governor and Mayor (or San Francisco) and lost fewer lives to the coronavirus. The story is long and full of details. It succeeds most effectively at conveying the difficulty of trying to make the right decision about something unexpected when there are legitimate arguments on both sides about how best to proceed (the health experts did not always agree).  https://www.propublica.org/article/two-coasts-one-virus-how-new-york-suffered-nearly-10-times-the-number-of-deaths-as-california

PANDEMIC | Best Trend Tracker

I am following this Tableau wizard, Jonas Nart. Hat tip to Domenick B.

https://public.tableau.com/profile/jonas.nart#!/vizhome/COVID19_15844962693420/COVID19-TrendTracker

Monday, March 16, 2020

SURGERY | Lister's first antisepsis article, March 16

Lord Joseph Lister of Lyme Regis (1827-
1912), Father of Modern Surgery
March 16, 2020 – As the world confronts the pandemic COVID-19 disease, antiseptic hygiene is becoming widely stressed. Wash your hands, wash your hands – soap and hot water, in a vigorous 20-second routine.

The theory behind it was first set forth in an article  published on this date in 1867 by the august British journal The Lancet. The author was Joseph Lister, later to become Lord Joseph Lister of Lyme Regis (1827-1912).

He is called the Father of Modern Surgery. He would be called Dr. Lister in the United States, but British surgeons like to acknowledge barbers as their professional ancestors by calling themselves just "Mr."

Born in 1827, Joseph Lister attended University College Hospital, London for his training, the only place he could go as a non-conforming Quaker. He became a professor of surgery at Glasgow University in 1860 and moved to Edinburgh in 1869, marrying the daughter of an Edinburgh professorial colleague, James Syme. He was 40 when he published his first installment of a now-historic series of six articles on antiseptic surgery.

At that time, putrefaction commonly followed operation, leading to the common report that "the operation was successful but the patient died." Lister read Louis Pasteur's study of the cause of fermentation in beer and milk and speculated that the same cause might lead to putrefaction in wounds. Authorities in nearby Carlisle were using creosote to deal with bad-smelling sewage because it reduced the odor. They discovered it also reduced disease amongst cattle and humans. Lister theorized that it was the carbolic acid in creosote that stopped the putrefaction, and that Pasteur's study provided an explanation.

Ridiculed at first, Lister experimented to prove his theory. He used dressings soaked in carbolic acid to cover wounds. The practical outcome of his work was that the rate of infection in his own operations was vastly reduced. After trying combinations with different emphasis of hand-washing, sterilizing instruments, spraying carbolic in the operating theater (he developed a carbolic spray) and antiseptic treatment of wounds, he steadily improved surgery survival rates. His first article of six appeared in The Lancet on this date in 1867. The last appeared in July.

Between 1864 and 1866, before his experiments and remedies, 46 percent of Lister’s surgical patients died; during the next three years, he brought the average down to 15 percent. Yet Lister was initially a prophet without honor in his own country. His work was accepted in Germany, but continued to be ridiculed in London (Scotland's science was still fair game for London opinion-shapers).

To promote his work, Lister accepted a post as Professor of Clinical Surgery at King's College Hospital, London in 1877. His teaching was finally accepted after his astonishingly successful "open" operation for fracture of the patella, the kneecap. A patient, Francis Smith, had fractured his patella a fortnight earlier. Lister wired together the separated fragments of his bone, a complicated process that previously might have been avoided because of the likelihood of "hospital disease." Lister showed how his antiseptic system “removed for ever the threat of hospital disease.”

Smith survived the operation and walked out of the hospital three months afterwards. Many people came to the hospital from far and wide to watch him operate (notices were posted in three different languages requesting no smoking in the hospital). In 1883, Lister was made a Baronet. In 1897 he was the first surgeon to become a peer, the 1st Baron Lister of Lyme Regis. Lyme Disease is indirectly named after the town attached to his title, since Connecticut's Lyme was named after the British one.

Saturday, February 29, 2020

GYM MEMBERSHIPS | Disclosures, Cancellations

NY State Senator
Brad Hoylman
 (D-Chelsea, Manhattan)
February 29, 2020–I was pleased to see that New York State Senator Brad Hoylman (D-Chelsea, Manhattan) succeeded yesterday in getting his bill to protect users of commercial gyms through the State Senate.

Hoylman chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee.

His legislation is called the "I Wanna Quit The Gym" bill. It will protect New Yorkers who sign up for gym memberships from Roach Motel-type contracts that you can get into easily but can't get out of.

The contracts automatically renew until you figure out the magic words that get you released from them. This curse is not restricted to gyms, but you have to start the remedies somewhere.

I remember how easy it was for me to sign up for a gym membership years ago in Chelsea. They had a card table outside the front door with balloons tied to the table and warm, welcoming signs. Anyone could sign me in. A signature and a check and I was a member. Smiles and welcomes all around. Same thing when I signed up for a trainer.

Years later, when my job and daily routine changed and I decided to exit, the situation was very different. I handed in my reservation the same way I signed up, at the membership desk. But the monthly bills continued to come.

I went back to the branch and I talked to several people. The membership manager looked puzzled about how on earth to make this happen, as if I was the first person ever to ask for this. She even called a meeting together with several other people from the branch, to see if together they could figure out how to address this challenging request. In retrospect, forgive me for my thinking that she was showing them all how to talk to people who want to resign. Chat them up without giving them the information they need.

It turned out that I could not resign at the branch where I was gladly signed up. I had to follow a complex sequence involving a registered letter to an address that no one could remember.  

By the time I discovered what to do, in stages, several months had passed and I never was refunded the money for the months when I was no longer using the gym and was still paying for it. I still remember vividly at being rankled at the asymmetry of joining versus resigning.

"Exercising regularly is tiring enough," Hoylman said in promoting his bill. "New Yorkers shouldn’t have to jump through hoops simply to quit their gym and join another." You can say that again.

Senator Hoylman's bill will require gyms to disclose details about pricing and provide easy ways to cancel service.

At the very least, there should be symmetry between signing up and cancelation. If you can sign up at the branch, you should be able to cancel at the branch. If you have to send a registered letter to an obscure address to resign, they should make it just as difficult to sign up so you remember the drill.

As Hoylman said: "Too many gyms, subscription boxes and other companies use misleading offers and promotions to lock unwitting customers into long-term contracts that are ridiculously difficult to get out of. I’m grateful to Leader Andrea-Stewart Cousins for passing this strong consumer protection legislation that will help save New Yorkers money."

Bravo, Senator. It's about time. Now the bill goes to Assembly Member Dinowitz to push through the Assembly.