The thoughts of citizen Mo

Search This Blog

on June 14, 2010

Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps

Oh yes - we stopped to admire the Fairly Outsize Mango at Bowen

Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps

Comments

Search This Blog

Cupcakes and a little philosophy

New cupcake successfully attempted, see picture on CC page. Recipe and ingredients list didn't match but luckily I love a challenge and pulled it off with an Easter Nest Special. On another note, I spent the morning reconsidering Christopher Boorse and his thoughts on illness and disease with their associated moral attachments. Although he wrote this in (1975), 20 years after Talcott Parsons I think that he was essentially saying the same thing, and much more of course. Boorse (1975) suggested that a disease must have 3 distinct properties to be an illness - it is serious enough to be incapacitating so 1) it is undesirable for it's bearer 2) it is a title to special treatment and 3) it is a valid excuse for normally critisisable behaviour (Boorse 1975 p61). The last point reminds me of Parson's seminal sick role of course, which, I think is still a useful notions despite being considered outdated by some. There is still and expectation to try to get ...

Cupcakes, cupcake

On a completely different note..... having been inspired by julia and Julie - the movie - i have purchased a collection of 90 cupcake recipes in a little known book by a little known author - indeed it just states 'text by Sara Bedford' -and I intend to make my through each and every creation. I may not provide an indepth, moment by moment blog of my emotional experience but may simply post pictures of the successful ones - the others will go to the dogs who i suspect will be pleased. Here is one from last weekend - PCB (pre cupcake book).

The myopia of 'Evidence Based Practice'

I have had a few conversations with people on blogs and on twitter but i still don't get the somewhat narrow approach to 'evidence based practice' that is prevalent. I attended a presentation recently where the presenter outlined all of the evidence that she had ruled out leaving herself with a myopic pile of RCTs. Why do we, and i refer to many disciplines of health professional here, subscribe to the myth that is the 'positivist', 'hierarchy of evidence'. This narrow approach that disregards the grey literature and, indeed, most qualitative research, misses out on the richness of data that can be synthesised to answer many clinical and other questions. why is the nature of what is construed as 'knowledge' so so rigid and narrow? Why are so many wedded to the notion that the hierarchy of evidence creates ontological certainty when, of course - it can't - it just creates another expression of probability? Of course there are many critiques of EB...

Powered by Blogger

Comments

Post a Comment