It's tough, and I get that. I also know that as a person with neurological trauma that makes speech difficult at best, having to recall what amounts now to 50+ pages of chart every 4 hours is... BS. You might as well be telling someone with a broken ankle to run up and down a flight of stairs every so often while they try to recover.

There is also an argument that, unless there is some sort of ongoing peer review (they did this during my Oncological Adventure(tm)), you're increasing the number of moving parts, and thus the chances of a breakdown. Charting errors are a significant source of medical mistakes.

The problem as I see it is not the intent of the procedure, it's the while (1) do x; mentality. There should be some "ifs" and mitigating functions instead of a hardcoded 1

As a survivor of stage IV cancer, I can say my experience strongly mirrors that. I would go further to say that the assembly/widget mentality in a health care setting made it difficult for some of the staff to see me as a human. Abuse or care-full neglect (is that a thing? working on the words) is, in my experience at least, common.

It's not to say I don't appreciate being alive, but we can do better for those suffering.

This reminds me of Robert Anton Wilson's "Reality Tunnel" experiments. If you've not read him, I'd highly recommend his work - especially "Prometheus Rising".

I don't know if I can quite express how wonderful it was to read this. I'm not so naive as to believe it's not because it lines up with my notions, and as said in the article (or implied) there's no sense in talking past your expertise. All I can say is that the Dunning-Kruger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect) seems to be at play in most online discourse, and that certain subjects, especially in an environment of entitlement (i.e. everybody's opinion is "valid" - whatever that means).