So, I was just about to head out to the Root Center to do some weeding , when Mizzen coughed a triple-length coughing session. @!!&#%!! She is already on the highest full strength dose of antibiotic we can give her. Now what? Of course it's happening on a Sunday when the vet's office is closed. Sigh. So I'm here observing Miss Mizzen, and getting ready for VT*Grand's weekly overnight, anticipating having to spend more big bucks at the vet this week. Egads.
A Jolting Message by Richard Rohr, OFM I am doing a short study of the Letter to the Ephesians on this lovely Sunday morning, and have had time to absorb some of its amazing insights. Paul, or whoever wrote it, says that the exact meaning of the cross is that "Jesus destroyed in his own person the hostility" between groups (In fact, he repeats it twice in both 2:14 and 2:16) Jesus did not take sides with his Jewish religion against the pagans, but instead he did a most amazing thing, which we have yet to comprehend. The author says that he destroyed the hostility "THAT WAS CAUSED BY THE RULES AND DECREES OF THE LAW". In other words, the very identification of his group (or any group) with its own customs and practices is what justifies their hostility toward another group, and maintains their own superiority system--which is always violent in maintaining itself.
Is this not the core historical problem that continues to justify most hostility to this day? My group versus your group thinking? We do it this way and you do it the wrong way? Think of the genocides of the last century, which were usually in Christian based cultures, to realize how we have missed the message. Ephesians says that Jesus "killed" or "destroyed" the very ground of this hostility by himself being killed "under the law" (with the blessing of both religion and state), and thus revealing the limitations, blindness, and often complicity in evil of what are usually nothing more than cultural customs passing for divine law. Our "sacred order" is usually maintained at someone else's expense. This is so much of a surprise that most of us still refuse to be surprised--and also disappointed in our capacity for missing the profound revelation from the cross of Jesus. Ephesians goes on to say that Jesus is trying to "create one single New Humanity" (2:15). We are still waiting for this new single humanity. It could still change history, and it eventually will, but probably we have to hit bottom first--and see how our sacralized beliefs and customs are themselves much of the problem.
Richard Rohr is a Franciscan monk and author known for his articulate challenges of both religious and secular group-think. I offer this in the context of our political conversation about groups (such as the Tea Party) who dangerously think they are right and all others are wrong. Seems we could all use a little more humility.
I just got Roger Ebert's book (Life Itself) out of the library. I was never entirely clear on the nature of his health issues, so I flipped though the book to look that up and came across something that shocked me--not about Ebert's ordeal, but one of those "I can't believe doctors used to do that!" He described the procedure for is radiation treatments, and the extreme care that was taken to avoid anyone else coming into contact with the dangerous radioactive iodine. He then notes that the radioactivity was only FIVE PERCENT the strength of the dosages that were given to children in the 50s, as treatment for acne or ear infections!
Because I had Grave's Disease, and radioactive iodine is one of three possible treatments, I came into the possession of the AEC's (NRC's) pamphlet -- flush twice when you use the toilet to rid it of any residual radio activity. . . . Don't sleep with your mate, or hold your children. Stay 48" away from coworkers, or any other living thing. . . . ,but it fer shur won't hurt YOU. . . . .
All that shows is what anyone who gave the matter half a thought already knew: They didn't know what the hell they were doing, and largely still don't. They play with radioactivity because it's cool. They don't actually give a thought to what it does.
Cheryl in Arizona, when I posted the above on Facebook, wrote about a former employee who was undergoing that treatment but had not seen fit to inform the people she worked with of this fact. Somehow, she *eventually* let it slip, and Cheryl sent her home immediately that day.
I always try to consider the other side--jobs can be hard to come by, and if you're dealing with serious illness, being forced to leave a job would be a terrifying option. But it sounds like this particular individual was quite the piece of work well before this point, and had something of a record of thinking only of herself while showing no consideration for others.
Radiation treatments now are extremely limited and very specifically targeted. They reduce the size of tumors such that they are operable, or at least permit better quality of life, and far less pain. I am grateful for modern radiation treatments. Chemo is far worse for the body, and weakens the heart.
Well, puddle, she's playful and purry, but as she's on a large dose of antibiotic, her little gut is pretty unhappy. Yet no complaints from her, the little sweetie. She only coughed twice all day.
So I wonder if the harshness of the antibiotic is dragging her down even while it's helping to quell the germ. Not sure whether to request a reduction in dose. We need to get this balanced, without losing ground.
It occurs to me to wonder if the kitty might like buttermilk. In the old (pre-antibiotic and pre-refrigerator) days buttermilk therapy was often given to people (particularly children) who came down with the typical summer gastrointestinal problems (due to eating spoiled or contaminated food). Antibiotics mess up the gut flora, and the bacteria in buttermilk (just like yogurt) are a decent substitute for normal flora. They also suppress the growth of most bacterial nasties.
Happy modem, puddle!
I had combined radiation and (relatively mild) chemo treatments--taken together they give the cancer a triple whammy. It's entirely possible that I was cured by the combination, and that my surgery was not necessary for curative purposes. But even if the chemoradiation treatments DID cure me, there's a substantial probability that the damage done to my extreme lower GI tract by the radiation would have required surgical treatment anyway. There WAS collateral damage, but it is tolerable; and three years later I am continue to recover from the side effects. Ain't half bad considering some of the alternatives... and way better than the standard therapy of even ten years before. I had no burns on my skin. A lady with appointments right after mine DID have an obvious superficial radiation burn on her neck, but they must not have been able to zap her tumor from different directions like they did mine. All in all, it was at times no fun, the greatest discomfort did not last long, it did the job, and the side effects continue to diminish noticeably. It's nothing to be afraid of.
Routine followup appointment with my oncologist day after tomorrow...
Howard's first, no matter how you look at it!
ReplyDeleteCan't see how that could be anything but Clematis!
Ah, how lovely, puddle! The clematis is a volunteer, growing beneath the hemlock trees out front. I'm sure it would prefer a nicer spot.
DeleteBeautiful flower and picture, though.
DeleteSo, I was just about to head out to the Root Center to do some weeding , when Mizzen coughed a triple-length coughing session. @!!&#%!! She is already on the highest full strength dose of antibiotic we can give her. Now what? Of course it's happening on a Sunday when the vet's office is closed. Sigh. So I'm here observing Miss Mizzen, and getting ready for VT*Grand's weekly overnight, anticipating having to spend more big bucks at the vet this week. Egads.
ReplyDeleteUnderneath, a little fear is growing...what if there are no more tricks up the vet's sleeve?
DeleteHaving trouble posting. So first here's a post, by Richard Rohr, then my comment on it.
ReplyDeleteTHE POST:
ReplyDeleteA Jolting Message
by Richard Rohr, OFM
I am doing a short study of the Letter to the Ephesians on this lovely Sunday morning, and have had time to absorb some of its amazing insights. Paul, or whoever wrote it, says that the exact meaning of the cross is that "Jesus destroyed in his own person the hostility" between groups (In fact, he repeats it twice in both 2:14 and 2:16) Jesus did not take sides with his Jewish religion against the pagans, but instead he did a most amazing thing, which we have yet to comprehend. The author says that he destroyed the hostility "THAT WAS CAUSED BY THE RULES AND DECREES OF THE LAW". In other words, the very identification of his group (or any group) with its own customs and practices is what justifies their hostility toward another group, and maintains their own superiority system--which is always violent in maintaining itself.
Is this not the core historical problem that continues to justify most hostility to this day? My group versus your group thinking? We do it this way and you do it the wrong way? Think of the genocides of the last century, which were usually in Christian based cultures, to realize how we have missed the message. Ephesians says that Jesus "killed" or "destroyed" the very ground of this hostility by himself being killed "under the law" (with the blessing of both religion and state), and thus revealing the limitations, blindness, and often complicity in evil of what are usually nothing more than cultural customs passing for divine law. Our "sacred order" is usually maintained at someone else's expense. This is so much of a surprise that most of us still refuse to be surprised--and also disappointed in our capacity for missing the profound revelation from the cross of Jesus. Ephesians goes on to say that Jesus is trying to "create one single New Humanity" (2:15). We are still waiting for this new single humanity. It could still change history, and it eventually will, but probably we have to hit bottom first--and see how our sacralized beliefs and customs are themselves much of the problem.
Wow! Right on!
DeleteMY COMMENT:
ReplyDeleteRichard Rohr is a Franciscan monk and author known for his articulate challenges of both religious and secular group-think. I offer this in the context of our political conversation about groups (such as the Tea Party) who dangerously think they are right and all others are wrong. Seems we could all use a little more humility.
I just got Roger Ebert's book (Life Itself) out of the library. I was never entirely clear on the nature of his health issues, so I flipped though the book to look that up and came across something that shocked me--not about Ebert's ordeal, but one of those "I can't believe doctors used to do that!" He described the procedure for is radiation treatments, and the extreme care that was taken to avoid anyone else coming into contact with the dangerous radioactive iodine. He then notes that the radioactivity was only FIVE PERCENT the strength of the dosages that were given to children in the 50s, as treatment for acne or ear infections!
ReplyDeleteThat's a double take maker!
DeleteBecause I had Grave's Disease, and radioactive iodine is one of three possible treatments, I came into the possession of the AEC's (NRC's) pamphlet -- flush twice when you use the toilet to rid it of any residual radio activity. . . . Don't sleep with your mate, or hold your children. Stay 48" away from coworkers, or any other living thing. . . . ,but it fer shur won't hurt YOU. . . . .
ReplyDeleteAll that shows is what anyone who gave the matter half a thought already knew: They didn't know what the hell they were doing, and largely still don't. They play with radioactivity because it's cool. They don't actually give a thought to what it does.
DeleteCheryl in Arizona, when I posted the above on Facebook, wrote about a former employee who was undergoing that treatment but had not seen fit to inform the people she worked with of this fact. Somehow, she *eventually* let it slip, and Cheryl sent her home immediately that day.
DeleteI always try to consider the other side--jobs can be hard to come by, and if you're dealing with serious illness, being forced to leave a job would be a terrifying option. But it sounds like this particular individual was quite the piece of work well before this point, and had something of a record of thinking only of herself while showing no consideration for others.
Radiation treatments now are extremely limited and very specifically targeted. They reduce the size of tumors such that they are operable, or at least permit better quality of life, and far less pain. I am grateful for modern radiation treatments. Chemo is far worse for the body, and weakens the heart.
ReplyDeleteHow's the baby pusscat doing? Hopes MUCH better! She's been on my mind all day.
ReplyDeleteWell, puddle, she's playful and purry, but as she's on a large dose of antibiotic, her little gut is pretty unhappy. Yet no complaints from her, the little sweetie. She only coughed twice all day.
ReplyDeleteSo I wonder if the harshness of the antibiotic is dragging her down even while it's helping to quell the germ. Not sure whether to request a reduction in dose. We need to get this balanced, without losing ground.
ReplyDeleteIt occurs to me to wonder if the kitty might like buttermilk. In the old (pre-antibiotic and pre-refrigerator) days buttermilk therapy was often given to people (particularly children) who came down with the typical summer gastrointestinal problems (due to eating spoiled or contaminated food). Antibiotics mess up the gut flora, and the bacteria in buttermilk (just like yogurt) are a decent substitute for normal flora. They also suppress the growth of most bacterial nasties.
ReplyDeleteHappy modem, puddle!
I had combined radiation and (relatively mild) chemo treatments--taken together they give the cancer a triple whammy. It's entirely possible that I was cured by the combination, and that my surgery was not necessary for curative purposes. But even if the chemoradiation treatments DID cure me, there's a substantial probability that the damage done to my extreme lower GI tract by the radiation would have required surgical treatment anyway. There WAS collateral damage, but it is tolerable; and three years later I am continue to recover from the side effects. Ain't half bad considering some of the alternatives... and way better than the standard therapy of even ten years before. I had no burns on my skin. A lady with appointments right after mine DID have an obvious superficial radiation burn on her neck, but they must not have been able to zap her tumor from different directions like they did mine. All in all, it was at times no fun, the greatest discomfort did not last long, it did the job, and the side effects continue to diminish noticeably. It's nothing to be afraid of.
Routine followup appointment with my oncologist day after tomorrow...
TTFN
I am continue = I continue
ReplyDelete--Alan