First things first, I checked my median BP off drugs at two different weights, and sure enough, the more I weigh, the higher the home BP. At 186lbs, median BP is 144/88, max was 165/98. 2/n
#UnEssentialHypertension
Having been placed on a SECOND blood pressure lowering drug a month ago, and reporting to the cardio some lightheadedness when I get up, and rather than discussing a dose or drug change being told to "stand up more slowly" has me working hard on 1/n
First things first, I checked my median BP off drugs at two different weights, and sure enough, the more I weigh, the higher the home BP. At 186lbs, median BP is 144/88, max was 165/98. 2/n
Second, sodium. I may be salt sensitive. I've added more sodium to my diet after reading a bunch on that and learning of some twitter peeps' 4/n
Third, NO. I've been using a UVB light, and before the seasons turned getting decent sunlight. 5/n
Will look into some alternative meds (e.g., L-Citrulline) if the weight/salt/caffeine change doesn't cut it.
Last, stress. Not chronic, but the acute 6/n
Couldn't be happier now that the stress of working for an income is over. 7/n
to be continued …
100mg Toprol at bedtime
50mg Losartin first thing in the morning
#UnEssentialHypertension 8/8
More from Legal
I have seen so many people (including folks on #lawtwitter) comparing what happened at the Capitol yesterday with the violence and property damage that happened in some cities during protests last summer.
Let me explain what is wrong with that analogy . . . . .
To clarify -- my disagreement is not with those who are pointing out that law enforcement didn't respond with the same level of force and arrests at the capitol as it did during BLM protests.
That comparison deserves to be drawn and it raises some very important questions.
My disagreement is with those who are saying that what happened at the Capitol yesterday is so similar to what happened during protests this summer, that people's reactions ought to be similar--a suggestion that those reacting more strongly now are hypocritical.
Here's one example of someone (a law professor) making the argument. But I've seen it plastered across the site all day, it keeps cropping up in my mentions, and so I want to respond.
There are a number of things that distinguish what happened at the Capitol from what happened during BLM protests. The most obvious is the reason that people protested---some protested about factually false claims about election fraud; others about real police shootings.
Let me explain what is wrong with that analogy . . . . .
To clarify -- my disagreement is not with those who are pointing out that law enforcement didn't respond with the same level of force and arrests at the capitol as it did during BLM protests.
That comparison deserves to be drawn and it raises some very important questions.
My disagreement is with those who are saying that what happened at the Capitol yesterday is so similar to what happened during protests this summer, that people's reactions ought to be similar--a suggestion that those reacting more strongly now are hypocritical.
Here's one example of someone (a law professor) making the argument. But I've seen it plastered across the site all day, it keeps cropping up in my mentions, and so I want to respond.
Very different reaction then. But kudos to those who\u2019ve consistently condemned riots. I hope, if nothing else, today\u2019s violence means we are all on the same page now. https://t.co/JhWadB80So
— Andy Grewal (@AndyGrewal) January 7, 2021
There are a number of things that distinguish what happened at the Capitol from what happened during BLM protests. The most obvious is the reason that people protested---some protested about factually false claims about election fraud; others about real police shootings.
Without jumping to conclusions, this is a strange coincident. Is someone trying to kill two birds with one stone?
If you don't get caught up in the noise of the media, you'll notice a few more things. The far-right Oath Keepers has been patrolling major cities with heavy weapons for weeks. They were present in numbers at the Capitol, but without weapons.
https://t.co/t7M1svIIMe
You find photos of the arrested vandals but strangely enough not of the one 70-year-old who allegedly had a truck full of weapons. And at least I couldn't find an image of that truck. But the old man was apparently very talkative to the police.
The most questionable aspect, however, is the FBI's search for a person who was apparently caught on a surveillance camera the previous night.
At that time, it was possible to predict a mass gathering, but not the riot.
If you want to know what really went on with last week's DC Protests, look at the role of the FBI and federal informants involved in the event.
— Patrick Henningsen (@21WIRE) January 11, 2021
This is fundamental, especially regarding the visible presence of masked provocateurs
Watch as more information emerges.
If you don't get caught up in the noise of the media, you'll notice a few more things. The far-right Oath Keepers has been patrolling major cities with heavy weapons for weeks. They were present in numbers at the Capitol, but without weapons.
https://t.co/t7M1svIIMe
You find photos of the arrested vandals but strangely enough not of the one 70-year-old who allegedly had a truck full of weapons. And at least I couldn't find an image of that truck. But the old man was apparently very talkative to the police.
The most questionable aspect, however, is the FBI's search for a person who was apparently caught on a surveillance camera the previous night.
At that time, it was possible to predict a mass gathering, but not the riot.
You May Also Like
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
Next level tactic when closing a sale, candidate, or investment:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) February 27, 2018
Ask: \u201cWhat needs to be true for you to be all in?\u201d
You'll usually get an explicit answer that you might not get otherwise. It also holds them accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
