The MD Emperor Has No Clothes

The MD Emperor Has No Clothes

LINK https://tinurll.com/2tkPA4

It comes from a short story by Danish author Hans Christian Andersen which was first published in Copenhagan in April 1837 in Anderson's third and final installment of Fairy Tales Told for Children. Anderson's version of the tale is based on a German translation of a story first published in 1335 by Spaniard Juan Manel, Prince of Villena: Libro de los ejemplos del conde Lucanor y de Patronio (Book of the Examples of Count Lucanor and of Patronio). Manel attributed his collection of 51 cautionary tales to various sources including Aesop, other classical writers and Arabic folktales. Anderson's story differs from Manel's in that the latter has the king hoodwinked by weavers who claim that the suit of clothes can only be seen by men of legitimate birth, whereas in Anderson's story, the weavers play on the emperor's vanity by saying the suit is only visible to people who are clever and competent.Manel's version is similar to one found centuries earlier in Indian literature. The earliest known reference being in an anthology of fables from 1052 that tells of a dishonest merchant who swindles the king by pretending to weave a supernatural garment that cannot be seen or touched by any person of illegitimate birth. The complete works of Hans Christian Anderson, including The Emperor's New Clothes, can be found at The Hans Christian Anderson Centre.

As Shakespeare's Hamlet said, \"Outcomes are the thing wherein we'll catch the conscience of the king\". Perhaps Hans Christian Andersen stated it best when he concluded in his short tale, \"Without revealing clinical outcomes, the Emperors of healthcare clearly have no clothes or value.\"

\"The Emperor's New Clothes\" was first published with \"The Little Mermaid\" in Copenhagen, by C. A. Reitzel, on 7 April 1837, as the third and final installment of Andersen's Fairy Tales Told for Children. The tale has been adapted to various media, and the story's title, the phrase \"the Emperor has no clothes\", and variations thereof have been adopted for use in numerous other works and as idioms.

Two swindlers arrive at the capital city of an emperor who spends lavishly on clothing at the expense of state matters. Posing as weavers, they offer to supply him with magnificent clothes that are invisible to those who are stupid or incompetent. Theemperor hires them, and they set up looms and go to work. A succession of officials, and then the emperor himself, visit them to check their progress. Each sees that the looms are empty but pretends otherwise to avoid being thought a fool.

Finally, the weavers report that the emperor's suit is finished. They mime dressing him and he sets off in a procession before the whole city. The townsfolk uncomfortably go along with the pretense, not wanting to appear inept or stupid, until a child blurts out that the emperor is wearing nothing at all. The people then realize that everyone has been fooled. Although startled, the emperor continues the procession, walking more proudly than ever.

In 1968, on their Four Fairy Tales and Other Children's Stories\" album, the Pickwick Players performed a version of this story that is actually a version of The King's New Clothes\" from the film Hans Christian Andersen. In this version, two swindlers trick the Emperor into buying a nonexistent suit, only for a boy to reveal the truth in the end. There are several differences from the original Danny Kaye version, most importantly a new verse (\"This suit of clothes put all together is altogether / The most remarkable suit of clothes, that you've already said. The shirt is white, the cape is ermine, the hose are blue,/ And the doublet is a lovely shade of red!\"[17]To which the emperor replies \"Green! Glorious Green!\" and the Court asks \"How could we think it was red!\"

In 2019, Radioheads leaked and then self-released MiniDiscs (Hacked) featured an incomplete song by the name \"My New Clothes\", in which the lyrics \"The people stop and stare at the emperor\" and \"And even if it hurts to walk, and people laugh, I know who I am\" were included.

In 2020, FINNEAS released a song titled \"Where the Poison is\", featuring the lyrics \"I guess not everybody knows the emperor was never wearin' any clothes\". The song is presented as a criticism of Donald Trump and his administration's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.[23]

As an idiom, use of the story's title refers to something widely accepted as true or professed as being praiseworthy, due to an unwillingness of the general population to criticize it or be seen as going against popular opinion.[24] The phrase \"emperor's new clothes\" has become an idiom about logical fallacies.[25][26] The story may be explained by pluralistic ignorance.[27] The story is about a situation where \"no one believes, but everyone believes that everyone else believes. Or alternatively, everyone is ignorant to whether the emperor has clothes on or not, but believes that everyone else is not ignorant.\"[28]

The emperor has no clothes, and is looking more ridiculous than ever. Particularly when San Francisco Mayor London Breed just announced, San Francisco nonprofits will be allowed to manage supervised open drug injection sites.

Rick Howard: For the top five Fortune 500 companies - Walmart, Amazon, Apple, CVS Health and United Health Care Group - no CISOs are listed on the leadership team's webpage. For the top five financial Fortune 500 companies - JPMorgan Chase, Fannie Mae, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Citi - again, no CISOs are listed on the leadership team's webpage. For the top five security vendors by revenue - Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, Cisco, CrowdStrike and Zscaler - only Cisco and CrowdStrike list their CISOs on the company leadership team webpage - Brad Arkin for Cisco and Shawn Henry for CrowdStrike. Now, using leadership team webpages is not a perfect metric. I mean, it doesn't prove a trend or anything. But it's one data point that supports the theory that CISOs are mostly CISOs in title only. They really aren't wearing any chief clothes at all.

My devil's advocacy regarding this case has been misunderstood to signify that I have lost my own mind and am no longer a proponent of limitation of care in cases where care is of low, minuscule, or negligible value. Not so, by any means. But I am sympathetic to the notion that legal death based on a definition that was invented to enhance the supply of organs for transplantation may not comport with everyone's intuition about life and death; that individual value systems are sometimes markedly divergent and irreconcilable; and, most importantly, that if we are going to have any discussion that has a hope of understanding values that are divergent from ours, we need to open our minds. Here, there has been no open mind on the part of the medical establishment. It has been shouting \"SHE'S DEAD, GODDAMNIT! ACCEPT IT!\" Several questions I have not heard asked are: why did not the judge order life support to be withdrawn Why did not the practitioners simply exercise their legal rights and withdraw life support after the declaration of brain death What is the legal status of Jahi right now In what way does the law protect her or not protect her as a person or as a corpse Her existence appears to be legally ambiguous. Finally, if the proponents of \"brain death equals real death\" are so confident in their construct of brain death, which leads to real death within days or weeks, then why do they care so much about this case If reality is as they conceive of it, Jahi will rest in peace (assuming she's not already resting in peace on the basis of brain death) very soon. Why all the fuss I know only one thing for sure: in this Kafkaesque scene playing out before us, the emperor has no clothes. And I think you know what the emperor is. Scott Aberegg, M.D., M.P.H., blogs at Status Iatrogenicus and the Medical Evidence Blog.

My devil's advocacy regarding this case has been misunderstood to signify that I have lost my own mind and am no longer a proponent of limitation of care in cases where care is of low, minuscule, or negligible value. Not so, by any means. But I am sympathetic to the notion that legal death based on a definition that was invented to enhance the supply of organs for transplantation may not comport with everyone's intuition about life and death; that individual value systems are sometimes markedly divergent and irreconcilable; and, most importantly, that if we are going to have any discussion that has a hope of understanding values that are divergent from ours, we need to open our minds. Here, there has been no open mind on the part of the medical establishment. It has been shouting \\\"SHE'S DEAD, GODDAMNIT! ACCEPT IT!\\\" Several questions I have not heard asked are: why did not the judge order life support to be withdrawn Why did not the practitioners simply exercise their legal rights and withdraw life support after the declaration of brain death What is the legal status of Jahi right now In what way does the law protect her or not protect her as a person or as a corpse Her existence appears to be legally ambiguous. Finally, if the proponents of \\\"brain death equals real death\\\" are so confident in their construct of brain death, which leads to real death within days or weeks, then why do they care so much about this case If reality is as they conceive of it, Jahi will rest in peace (assuming she's not already resting in peace on the basis of brain death) very soon. Why all the fuss I know only one thing for sure: in this Kafkaesque scene playing out before us, the emperor has no clothes. And I think you know what the emperor is. Scott Aberegg, M.D., M.P.H., blogs at Status Iatrogenicus and the Medical Evidence Blog. 59ce067264

https://www.academiadesambo.com.br/group/grupo-sambo/discussion/337f2b90-b11b-4ca4-bb5e-be51eb9f59b1