I’m continuing to read about technology and its relationship to the propagation of ideas. An excellent source in this regard is “Content” by Cory Doctorow. I originally thought the following quote was written by Mr. Doctorow regarding digital rights management and contemporary intellectual property concerns. Imagine my surprise when I discovered the actual author. QUOTE:

“If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.” — Thomas Jefferson
Sent from Onyeije’s BlackBerry Storm

Posted via email from onyeije’s posterous

It’s official. I’m in love with Prezi!

Prezi is something like PowerPoint except simpler, fancier and based on Flash.  Embedding video into my presentations was quantum leaps easier than with PowerPoint.  Prezi also represents a completely different way of looking at presentation software, since Prezi is a service delivered entirely online.

You can learn more about Prezi here. And you can see my other Prezi presentations here:

These lectures can also be found at http://preeclampsiaonline.net in a post which I’ve placed here:

The presentations below are for medical students at the Morehouse School of Medicine.  Any lecture of this nature is always a work in progress.  These unfortunate students will be my guinea pigs.  I’m sure the lecture it self as well as the audio/visual presentation will improve, since a new set of students will be getting this lecture every 6 months or so.

I’m also glad to finally spruce up my old preeclampsia lecture which is (gasp) about 5 years old.

Please enjoy and feel free to comment.

Posted via web from onyeije’s posterous

I found this image while reading “What Matters Now” by Seth Godin.

Seth Godin writes about marketing, the spread of ideas and managing both customers and employees with respect. “What Matters Now” is a collaborative effort by a number of social media and marketing experts. The e-book and the above image represent a fascinating perspective on marketing but I think it is an even more appropriate metaphor for how to view medical communication in the information age. I also recently had the opportunity to review an article in the British Medical Journal in which C.O. Hawthorne takes issue with a plea by another physician ( Dr. Hempson) to conform to accepted practices. In his correspondence to the journal, Dr. Hawthorne states:

The suggestion implied in these warnings (by Dr. Hempson) plainly is that somewhere within the province of medicine there exists a recognized and authoritative standard of ” orthodoxy ” – that is, a body of doctrine and practice presented by authority and received and adopted as true and valid on the word of authority, with, as a corollary, and for the contumacious, the penialty of exclusion from the ranks and communion of the faithful. Possibly there are professions to which these propositions apply. But most certainly they do not apply to the profession of medicine.

This was written in 1926; but I completely agree with Dr. Hawthorne as we enter 2010. Many of the discussions on this blog have detailed the dangers that can result when we in the medical field accept things “as they are” and do not question how we can improve them or make them work better for patients.

This is true for reform efforts, specific procedures live VBAC, communication technology and the participation of patients in their own care. Given the drastic changes in technology and the ability these provide us to radically change what we do for the best; we owe it to ourselves to question everything and seek to optimize patient care rather than do what we have done in the past.

Posted via web from onyeije’s posterous