Following Dr Harold Shipman's conviction in 2000, I wrote an article suggesting he was the secret patron saint of the medical profession, having done what many doctors would kill to do, namely murder their patients.
A month later, in a GP's surgery for a flu injection, I saw my article pinned up in a corner. She tried to laugh it off but plainly it had touched a sympathetic chord. Possibly many doctors keep scrapbooks of their murder successes, filled with obituary notices.
Certainly old women should never allow doctors to "helpfully" rearrange the pillows without first farewelling their family. Still, they can console themselves the good thing about being dead, as they're about to be, is they don't know they are. Perhaps the medical profession adopts a Darwinian survival of the fittest approach, namely if you defeat their attempts to kill you, then you deserve to live.
Shipman was the all-time champion British murdering doctor,
knocking off more than 250 Yorkshire old women, although others have been
charged but escaped conviction.
The British Medical Journal cited one of these, a Dr John
Adams, who was unsuccessfully prosecuted in 1957, as Shipman's role model. I
exclude the infamous Dr Crippen, who was hanged in London in 1910, as he was an
American.
But despite numerous cases worldwide of doctors gleefully murdering their patients, they're mere pikers compared with those who switched to politics, thereby giving them serious homicidal scale. For example, Haiti's Papa Doc Duvalier had an estimated 30,000 deaths on his scorecard, while Josef Mengele was responsible for thousands of Auschwitz killings.
There's also been mass-murdering African doctors-turned-politicians and, more recently, Radovan Karadzic, the so-called Butcher of Bosnia, who in fairness was also a poet, which was probably the primary homicidal inspiration factor. Today there's Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who's certainly no practitioner of the Hippocratic Oath.
Politicians are drawn from a variety of activities but where are the murdering architects, lawyers, accountants-turned politicians? One of the worst mass killers, Joseph Stalin, trained to be a priest, so no surprise there given clerics' obsession with the after-life.
We're all grateful to nurses, doctors and surgeons when we need them and survive their attempts to kill us. But I suspect that constantly seeing people at their worst induces a detached lack of human empathy, much as abattoir slaughtermen might develop towards life and death, a point, incidentally, made 500 years ago by Sir Thomas More in Utopia.
And don't think it's just the men; rather, feminine cunning enables the murdering women doctors to escape detection. But we frequently read of patient-murdering nurses; indeed, one had the honour recently of being the 500th to be executed in Texas since they restored capital punishment.
Other professions, particularly law and accountancy, hammer members who stray, banging them before tough tribunals which have no hesitation in defrocking them even though, unlike the doctors, they at least haven't killed their victims. Indeed, the accountants employ a QC to lead the prosecution and advertise the hearing as open to the public while we regularly read of lawyers losing their licences or going off to prison, so much so it would make sense to include a course in prison library management in law degrees. But not the medical profession, which serves up wrist-slapping cover-ups, obviously sympathising with colleagues who - unlike themselves, so far - have been nabbed.
But despite numerous cases worldwide of doctors gleefully murdering their patients, they're mere pikers compared with those who switched to politics, thereby giving them serious homicidal scale. For example, Haiti's Papa Doc Duvalier had an estimated 30,000 deaths on his scorecard, while Josef Mengele was responsible for thousands of Auschwitz killings.
There's also been mass-murdering African doctors-turned-politicians and, more recently, Radovan Karadzic, the so-called Butcher of Bosnia, who in fairness was also a poet, which was probably the primary homicidal inspiration factor. Today there's Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who's certainly no practitioner of the Hippocratic Oath.
Politicians are drawn from a variety of activities but where are the murdering architects, lawyers, accountants-turned politicians? One of the worst mass killers, Joseph Stalin, trained to be a priest, so no surprise there given clerics' obsession with the after-life.
We're all grateful to nurses, doctors and surgeons when we need them and survive their attempts to kill us. But I suspect that constantly seeing people at their worst induces a detached lack of human empathy, much as abattoir slaughtermen might develop towards life and death, a point, incidentally, made 500 years ago by Sir Thomas More in Utopia.
And don't think it's just the men; rather, feminine cunning enables the murdering women doctors to escape detection. But we frequently read of patient-murdering nurses; indeed, one had the honour recently of being the 500th to be executed in Texas since they restored capital punishment.
Other professions, particularly law and accountancy, hammer members who stray, banging them before tough tribunals which have no hesitation in defrocking them even though, unlike the doctors, they at least haven't killed their victims. Indeed, the accountants employ a QC to lead the prosecution and advertise the hearing as open to the public while we regularly read of lawyers losing their licences or going off to prison, so much so it would make sense to include a course in prison library management in law degrees. But not the medical profession, which serves up wrist-slapping cover-ups, obviously sympathising with colleagues who - unlike themselves, so far - have been nabbed.
I teased a GP friend about his profession's tolerance of quackery, citing, for example, the colonic irrigation racket that sucks in gullible Princess Di-type women with its bogus promise of eternal youth. The reason we don't, he said, is invariably they'll pull some lunatic medical lecturer from Massey University or suchlike, to swear it has benefits. Mind you, I have an anaesthetist friend, Graham Sharpe, who's furious about quackery, and especially colonic irrigation, but he struggles to engender much collegial support. In defence, it could be argued Reiki, foot-tickling plus pseudo-scientific naturopathy, homeopathy and other lunacies may have a placebo-effect, consoling madwomen with imaginary illnesses, and being cheaper than psychiatrists.
In fairness, the medical profession is not as mercenary as
some associated activities. Take the Opticians Association, who are the secret
sponsor and promoter of choral singing in New Zealand. Tune in on Sunday
mornings to the host of church choirs dirging away and you will see why.
They're all wearing spectacles, for it's a scientific fact that singing in
church choirs destroys one's sight - understandable, as short of killing the
choristers, it's God's only defence against this wailing directed at him other
than packing it in and taking up golf.
But here's the clear-cut evidence of the medical profession's nonchalance. Think how often we read of the detection of a bogus doctor who's been "working" in hospitals for years. The mind boggles at how many pseudo doctors are out there.
But here's the clear-cut evidence of the medical profession's nonchalance. Think how often we read of the detection of a bogus doctor who's been "working" in hospitals for years. The mind boggles at how many pseudo doctors are out there.
Contrast that with law. It would be impossible to pass
yourself off as a lawyer in the Western world because the profession maintains
highly diligent control standards. The nearest I've heard of this is with an
Auckland barrister who reputedly has an impeccably tidy and well-ordered
office. This is unbelievably suspicious behaviour, all barristers' offices
worldwide being appalling pigsties.
Last year, I wrote warning the Auckland Law Society president about the barrister, citing this damning evidence. She replied, acknowledging this worryingly unconventional behaviour, but advised that after checking, she's satisfied as to the validity of his Cambridge degree. I'm still sceptical.
Last year, I wrote warning the Auckland Law Society president about the barrister, citing this damning evidence. She replied, acknowledging this worryingly unconventional behaviour, but advised that after checking, she's satisfied as to the validity of his Cambridge degree. I'm still sceptical.
As a father of one son and three daughters, celebrity chef
Jamie Oliver deserves ridicule for idiotically naming them Buddy Bear, Petal
Blossom Rainbow, Poppy Honey Rosie and Daisy Boo. But Jamie gained partial
parenting respect when he made the news by confiscating his schoolgirl
daughters' cell-phones. They are now the only ones in their classes without
them.
I say partial as his expressed reason was to protect them
from cyber bullying. This seems mainly a girl thing, thus the prohibition
wasn't applied to his son. But my word, there are lots of other justifications
for keeping teens' cell-phones rationed, plus weaning them off computer
obsession, as epitomised by a letter I received recently from a now retired newspaper
editor friend.
It comprised a single line, "Albert was right. It's
here", and included eight captioned photographs. The first showed Albert
Einstein with his accompanying quote, "I fear the day that technology will
surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of
idiots".
The remainder showed groups of teens in different settings.
Two entitled "Out on an intimate date" showed couples in a
restaurant, all engrossed in their phones. Another captioned "Having
dinner with your friends" had four teens at the table, heads down, gazing
at their phones. "Cheering on your team" was a young man at a
football game staring at his phone, "A visit to the museum" had three
girls sitting on a bench in an art gallery with their backs to the paintings,
heads down reading their inane messages. "A day at the beach"
revealed four teenagers, similarly with backs to the sea, intent on their
phones and, finally, "Enjoying the sights", this four teens in a
coupe, all but the driver glued to their phones.
These photos came from America. I know that, as the male in
the restaurant shot was wearing a baseball hat, a barbarous practice prevalent
there, even in quality restaurants. Also, American art galleries, as on the
Continent, are called museums, plus the football match involved Michigan.
That said, they could easily be taken in New Zealand but for one key difference, namely none of the 22 individuals were sufficiently mindless enough to have sunglasses on top of their heads, as they certainly would here, whether indoors or at night.
We are developing a world of halfwits. Still, the fightback is under way. Of all people, Randi Zuckerberg, the 31-year-old sister of the Facebook founder, has written a children's book about a little girl called Dot who's obsessed with technology and pays no attention to anything else.
The story recounts how she learns to unplug and begin enjoying the world beyond computers, phones and social media. Hopefully, this will be a forerunner of a campaign on the inane escapism of such obsessions, and parents and teachers will do their bit in attacking this corrosion.
I received a letter last week from Christchurch identity Reg Garters. One of Reg's many hats is an annual lecturing stint at a German university. He wrote of his students taking him to a pub before his return home. On entering, one cried out "phones", whereupon out they all came and were placed in a pile. Apparently, on their own initiative they'd agreed the phones spoiled their social evenings. Our teens would be immensely the better by emulating these Germans and also taking cognisance of another, Einstein, and his warning, that is if they've heard of him, which is questionable.
In saying this, I am not decrying modern technology, which I find utterly mind-blowing. But there can be little doubt it has an addictive character, the most vulnerable being the young.
Much worse than cell-phones is computer addiction, which is turning many into zombies, living a lonely existence of marriage to a cyberspace world.
That said, they could easily be taken in New Zealand but for one key difference, namely none of the 22 individuals were sufficiently mindless enough to have sunglasses on top of their heads, as they certainly would here, whether indoors or at night.
We are developing a world of halfwits. Still, the fightback is under way. Of all people, Randi Zuckerberg, the 31-year-old sister of the Facebook founder, has written a children's book about a little girl called Dot who's obsessed with technology and pays no attention to anything else.
The story recounts how she learns to unplug and begin enjoying the world beyond computers, phones and social media. Hopefully, this will be a forerunner of a campaign on the inane escapism of such obsessions, and parents and teachers will do their bit in attacking this corrosion.
I received a letter last week from Christchurch identity Reg Garters. One of Reg's many hats is an annual lecturing stint at a German university. He wrote of his students taking him to a pub before his return home. On entering, one cried out "phones", whereupon out they all came and were placed in a pile. Apparently, on their own initiative they'd agreed the phones spoiled their social evenings. Our teens would be immensely the better by emulating these Germans and also taking cognisance of another, Einstein, and his warning, that is if they've heard of him, which is questionable.
In saying this, I am not decrying modern technology, which I find utterly mind-blowing. But there can be little doubt it has an addictive character, the most vulnerable being the young.
Much worse than cell-phones is computer addiction, which is turning many into zombies, living a lonely existence of marriage to a cyberspace world.
These extraordinary tools should enhance life but for many have become life itself, a vicarious ethereal faux existence creating Einstein's predicted "generation of idiots". Having said that, I am mindful of history's alarmism accompanying every new significant innovation.
In 1935, the legendary lyricist Irving Caesar, responsible for Swanee, Tea for Two and other famous songs, expressed fears at the consequences from every home now having a radio. Apart from moral turpitude arising from families sitting around listening to radios instead of doing things, Caesar's major worry was the economic impact.
It will destroy our car manufacturing industry with everyone indoors, he fretted. Furthermore, it will wreck our cattle industry as demand for shoe leather will collapse with no one wearing out their shoes.
Still it should be noted that Caesar's fears were greeted with mirth, whereas I suspect sensible people will recognise there are real concerns about computer addiction and so-called social media obsession. The teenage years are the foundation for one's life and wasting them this way is tragic.
Bob Jones: Even trees
can't grow for dullards' fear of change
There's an amusing bitter battle going on in Waikanae, an
affluent coastal town 60km north of Wellington. It involves two factions, one,
"The Friends of The Waikanae River" headed by an 86-year-old, and its
rival, led by a 76-year-old dubbed "The Lord of The River", who,
despite his relative youth, leads the conservative faction in the row.
And the issue in dispute? Damming the river? Drawing water
from it? Discharges into it? Brace yourself. It transpires that the dopey
district council has been ripping out long-standing native plants from the
river's banks on the absurd grounds that a century ago, those particular
species weren't there.
This has the whole-hearted support of the Lord of The River and his followers but brought cries of "eco-terrorism" and "botanical ethnic cleansing" from The Friends of The Waikanae River (I'm not making this up). Unsurprisingly, it's also backed by Te Papa's Curator of Botany, doubtless bearded, who has described The Friends as not true conservationists but gardeners.
Despite a recent public meeting attended by the warring parties, and even representatives of the regional council, no resolution was reached. Such is the depth of anger; the next step will be a full-scale shooting war with much loss of life which won't matter because the protagonists are not making much use of theirs anyway.
That said, if I was to bear arms and join in the bloodbath then it would be alongside The Friends, consistent with my life-long detestation of fanatical conservatism, whether in politics, religion or anything at all.
This has the whole-hearted support of the Lord of The River and his followers but brought cries of "eco-terrorism" and "botanical ethnic cleansing" from The Friends of The Waikanae River (I'm not making this up). Unsurprisingly, it's also backed by Te Papa's Curator of Botany, doubtless bearded, who has described The Friends as not true conservationists but gardeners.
Despite a recent public meeting attended by the warring parties, and even representatives of the regional council, no resolution was reached. Such is the depth of anger; the next step will be a full-scale shooting war with much loss of life which won't matter because the protagonists are not making much use of theirs anyway.
That said, if I was to bear arms and join in the bloodbath then it would be alongside The Friends, consistent with my life-long detestation of fanatical conservatism, whether in politics, religion or anything at all.
When some of our more adventurous simian ancestors first dropped from the trees and attempted to stand, you may be assured it would have been to a background gibbering protest from the tree-bound and always-present conservative elements that have dogged human progress ever since.
All human advancement has been marked by conservative resistance. The most stultified period in mankind's history; the thousand-years Dark Ages, was conservative church-prescribed while today ultra-conservative Islam fanaticism costs the world billions annually in holding its evil efforts at bay.
Political conservatism fought democracy, universal suffrage, votes for women, free education, weekend shopping, free trade and, indeed, every progressive step, big and small, towards our present civilisation. Fear of change, it seems, is a common human trait with those of light intellect, but accepted once installed.
For example, Rogernomics' sweeping reforms were opposed by National then advanced further when it took office in 1990. So, too, in Britain with Thatcherism, subsequently progressed by Tony Blair, and likewise in America with Reaganomics, opposed by the Democrats but enhanced by Clinton.
Our public parks and private home gardens are largely devoid of native flora, kowhais and a few others excepted and, instead, filled with more attractive imports from Europe, Central Asia and Africa.
The three New Zealand locales most noted for their arboreal beauty - Cambridge, Christchurch and Queenstown - are all characterised by solely European trees. All of this is heresy to the conservationists. They are unimaginative dullards although in their quest for pointless ecological purity, they hypocritically exclude themselves rather than return to the lands of their forefathers.
We see the same thing with buildings past their usefulness and without any aesthetic merit, but retained by the clamour from the heritage half-wits, simply because they're old.
When a new Wellington motorway was built a few years ago, these lightweights insisted some old ramshackle cottages in its path were shifted, tidied up and preserved. And so they were. Today they're occupied off and on by invading street-dwelling alcoholics and the like. No one else wants them.
Years ago, I fished a southern McKenzie country river each spring, staying in a cottage on a massive sheep station. Part was freehold and part perpetual government leasehold. The owner had planted its gullies and flats with copses of poplars, the region's most characteristic tree, eminently suited for the soil and climate.
One year I arrived to find him distressed. Like the Vandals sweeping in to destroy Rome 1500 years earlier, he had been invaded by similar latter-day bearded savages from the Conservation Department, who set about destroying the poplars on the leasehold land. Their crime; they weren't native.
"A very ugly and degenerate people," wrote the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus of the early barbarian invaders, words equally applicable to these Conservation Department dullards. I once tried to talk to Helen Clark into wiping out the department and incorporating its worthwhile elements (there are many) into the Environment Ministry.
So, returning to the Waikanae River, if it was my choice, I'd rip out all the native plants and replace them with aesthetically superior deciduous trees on the same rationale that I don't confine my reading to New Zealand books or refuse to play tennis because the racquets come from Taiwan.
Source: Bob Jones is a guest columnist for the NZ Herald
No comments:
Post a Comment