Home The Book Dr Articles Products Message Boards Journal Articles Search Our Surveys Surgery ESWT Dr Messages Find Good Drs video

Sorry put the winner on the wrong board.

Posted by Dr,. Zuckerman on 10/02/00 at 18:42 (029631)

We have a winner- orbasone lotto View Thread
Posted by Dr. Zuckerman on 10/02/00 at 13:33

Mary L. Johnson
8201 Melody Lane
Dickinson Texas
77539


There was no phone number on the paper. No listing in the phone directory. Please call Dr. Zuckerman office at 1-856-848-3338 and ask for Katie

Keep sending cards this lotto continue for the 12 month. I will place the old cards back into the lotto
Category: Social / Support . . Other Heel Pain Categories




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Follow Ups To This Message:

Re: We have a winner- orbasone lotto Scott R 10/02/00

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post A Followup To This Message:
Name:

E-Mail: (optional)
The subject heading can be modified to summarize your response.
Subject:
Comments:

The purpose of this message board is to discuss plantar fasciitis and heel pain. Advertisers are limited to 6 advertisements per year unless it is to defend the reputation of their product. Advertisers should not commit fraud by pretending to be sufferers of heel pain. Posters are required to mention in at least their first post if there is a financial connection between them and a product they are discussing. Be nice. Posted messages become sole property of heelspurs.com.

Re: Sorry put the winner on the wrong board.

john a on 10/03/00 at 14:37 (029690)

Dr Z., this monthly lottery giveaway of ESWT treatment is an incredibly generous thing you're doing, and I can't sing your praises enough for it.

But, I do have an idea that could both give you some return on your generosity and give more people a chance to receive the treatment. The idea is this: allow anyone who wants to participate in the lottery to specify a maximum dollar amount that they would be willing to pay for ESWT. Their chances of winning would then be weighted by that amount. So, for example, if joe's limit is $500, mary's is $700 and lewi's is $100, their chances of winning the lottery would be 5/13, 7/13 and 1/13 respectively. The winner would be required to pay his stated amount to receive the treatment, or forfeit his portion of the probability pie and allow another winner to be chosen using the newly calculated odds. You could also impose minimum and maximum 'betting' amounts, say $100 - $1000, to increase the fairness.

I guess this could still be considered unfair to people who can't or don't want to pay too much, but it would definitely provide more benefit to Dr. Z and allow more PF sufferers to get ESWT (provided the lottery is held more often than once a month).

What do people think?

Re: lotto idea

Scott R on 10/03/00 at 18:04 (029709)

I like the idea that the amount someone's willing to pay will increase their chance of winning the lotto. The more serious someone is about being treated, the more they bewilling to pay. But instead of letting $500 buy 5 times the chance of $100, let's penalize the rich and let $500 buy only 3 times the chance of $100. (assuming Dr. Z is interested in this way of doing things - his objective may be to keep money out of it - in which case he could just donate the money to heelspurs.com!)

$0 - not an option unless finances are not available. People who do not take it seriously enough to be willing to pay something do not have it serious enough to be treated UNLESS they are extremely poor. I've chosen the following method because it 'penalizes' the rich.

$100 - buys 1.00 chance
$200 - buys 1.50 chances
$300 - buys 2.00 chances
$400 - buys 2.50 chances
$500 - buys 3.00 chances
$600 - buys 3.50 chances
$700 - buys 4.00 chances
$800 - buys 4.50 chances
Higher dollar amounts not allowed.

Re: Sorry put the winner on the wrong board.

SueS on 10/03/00 at 18:59 (029713)

It would be nice if the winner was a poster of this board so that we all might get to 'know' them and also to update the board on their results.

Re: Sorry put the winner on the wrong board.

Nancy S. on 10/03/00 at 19:10 (029714)

Hi SueS, I've been wondering how your PF is doing. Have you had any improvement? If so, what is working for you? As I recall, you're a nurse. Have you been able to keep your job? Do Birks work for you?
Nancy

Re: Sorry put the winner on the wrong board.

SueS on 10/03/00 at 19:53 (029717)

HI,Nancy, Thanks for asking. What helped me initally was orthotics.I would say 80%.But my feet get real tired and hot. I can only wear them in tennis shoes and I get real tired of them. I can't wear Birks. I have a new pair that I try every so often but it causes pain and swelling just below the heel. I am still a nurse but work on a research floor, so do alot less walking and time on my feet. I think I also had some posterior tibial tendonitis, but diagnosed myself and that is better. I have found a different shoe that I wear most of the time. It is by Dexter and has an arch. It is a open back, but I still get some discomfort, the feeling of not enough support in the arch. But compared to a lot of people here, I feel very lucky. I also have another foot problem that may be causing the trouble I now have. There is a bone around the ankle area that did not fuse or grow together, I guess they could do surgery and remove it and do something with the tendon, but I don't wnat that done now. Good luck to all here and do know that it does get better.

Re: lotto idea

john a on 10/04/00 at 09:33 (029755)

'Penalizing the rich' in the lotto is a democratic idea, to be sure, and I guess its a pretty good idea too :-) We could just multiply the chances bought by two with no effect on the probabilities, and say that $100 buys 2 chances, with each additional $100 buying one more. That way, we could still leave $0 buying 1 chance as it does now.

I'm kinda surprised no one else has commented yet...

Re: lotto idea

Barbara TX on 10/04/00 at 12:56 (029765)

OK, John, you drew me out! 'Penalizing the rich' is not a democratic idea but a socialist idea, aimed at the redistribution of wealth based not upon merit, but upon some other standard of equality. Whew! Perhaps reading Marx & Engles gave me PF! I wouldn't doubt it...

I don't think that anyone should be penalized for anything, especially the rich, because chances are they worked pretty darn hard to be rich. Scott's idea is interesting because it allows us some way to gauge a person's 'desperation' - that is, how much they are willing to sacrifice to get it. A lotto does not. A lotto, in fact, might cause someone who is of humble means to PUT OFF treatment they are deperate for, month after month, hoping they will win. It all depends upon what Dr. Zuckerman wants to do. I think that he assumes that 'rich' folks will be gracious enough not to join the lotto if they can easily afford ESWT, and really desperate people will find some way to swing it or arrange a private payment plan with him - patients do this all the time. Fairness in treatment is based upon a sort of personal integrity. The lotto is very simple, and a generous gesture - it doesn't complicate Z's life, I would imagine.
It also spreads the word about ESWT.

I am of modest means, but I really want ESWT pronto, and where there's a will, there's a way. I decided to wait for a month, but I can't wait any longer... and, as the free market determines price according to need, the price is right my friend!

Anyone else want to sound off? B.

Re: lotto idea

Scott R on 10/04/00 at 13:25 (029769)

Barbara's message makes the assumption that rich people in a democratic society become and are wealthy based on 'merit'. I believe a more accurate description for what happens in the U.S. is that people become wealthy based on their desire and ability to acquire money from others (assuming it wasn't inherited). For example, I dare say the inventor of the web (Tim Berners-Lee) 'merits' more money than Bill Gates, where I define 'merit' as how much he has benefited society.

Re: lotto idea

Scott R on 10/04/00 at 13:32 (029770)

On second thought, I think this would be more trouble for Dr. Z than it's worth. It would be more trouble than a regular treatment for which he gets a full fee. But speaking on choosing a winner, I guess I could set up a program (random number generator) to do it, and include any weighting averages based on what ever if Dr. Z wants it.

Re: lotto idea

Barbara TX on 10/04/00 at 15:22 (029777)

Scott - Another philosopher and economist! PF encourages a lot of solitary meditation does it not? You raise many good questions about whether a democracy is a meritocracy, and I would go even further and say that this may not be a democracy anymore at all... Aristotle describes democracy as ultimately degrading to a tyranny (e.g. the totalitarian state, multi-national business conglomerates, or a dictator). And what is merit, as you say? Is it altruism toward mankind, or any kind of hard work (that is, making money)? Trancendent values about the best sort of life to live for human beings must ultimately enter the picture. Here, economists must sometimes verge upon theology!

Behind all this is the fact that money buys a certain amount of comfort, but is absolutely unnecessary for happiness in the classical sense - that is, that happiness is the practice of virtue. Would Aristotle recognize that definition? Yes. It is his. Would modern Americans? No way, no how.

Is this really me or the Celebrex talking? SEND HELP NOW. B.

Re: lotto idea

john a on 10/04/00 at 15:54 (029779)

By refering to 'penalizing the rich' as a democratic idea, I was merely taking an election time jab at republicans, who are, of course, known for giving the (filthy) rich disproportionate tax breaks. :-)

[This reply would have been better not posted to the ESWT board, but there's no way to send a reply to a different board. Or is there? Can threads cross board boundaries?]

Re: lotto idea

john a on 10/04/00 at 16:02 (029780)

Right. This could be made to be no trouble for Dr Z at all. All the weightings could be easily done via javascript (or whatever), yet still giving Dr Z the final control of picking a winner by selecting a number between 1 and N.

Re: lotto idea -- warped rewards

Nancy S. on 10/04/00 at 21:20 (029805)

My thoughts on the money issue in society can probably be summed up this way:

I think people who pick up our garbage, people who serve and enrich others face-to-face (teachers, nurses, social workers, etc.), and people who inspire and uplift us creatively should be valued and rewarded a lot more than they are -- certainly more than many CEOs and politicians I can think of.

Nancy

Re: lotto idea

Kate on 10/05/00 at 12:09 (029845)

Scott,
That would be great...but then what would I get to do?
I'm the ESWT coordinator for Dr. Z, and I love seeing all of the great emails and faxes and postcards. I like that almost as much as getting to meet so many of ourgreat patients....you know who you are and I know you're out there!
Kate Jurman
ESWT Coordinator for Dr.Z

Re: lotto idea....it's not about an ism.......:)

Kate on 10/05/00 at 17:45 (029863)

Hi all,
Just a comment from the peanut gallery.
The lotto has nothing to do with capitalism, socialism, or any other ism or ideaology. It's about giving a treatment to the lucky person who is fortunate enough to have their name drawn out of a hat. It's about reaching out to help someone, whether they can afford it or not. It's about getting rid of pain for yet one more person, with a treatment that fits the bill.

Re: lotto idea....it's not about an ism.......:)

JudyS on 10/05/00 at 19:02 (029884)

Well said, Kate!

Re: lotto idea

john h on 10/06/00 at 13:49 (029944)

scott: you must be a democrat since you are against the rich,big oil,insurance companies,drug companies, big anything. what will you do when you become rich after selling your website? become a republican?

Re: lotto idea

Scott R on 10/06/00 at 17:11 (029958)

hmmm, I'm never thought about myself as being against 'big anything'. I'm not a republican or democrat. I would like to think I'm a physicist. I'm against oil companies only because oil is so cheap and therefore we will soon run out of it without learning how to cope without it. We can just say goodbye to these good old days in about 50 to 100 years. There's no technological solution in sight. At best, the world's population will be be like India in 200 years. I'm not against insurance companies. The best thing we have going for us is global warming because it's going to stop the next ice age for which we are overdo. Global warming is nothing compared to an ice age. The website is unlikely to be bought out. The site is worth more to me as it is than they can afford. I'm not against the rich. I have mixed feelings about drug companies, but it's not their fault.

Re: Sorry put the winner on the wrong board.

john a on 10/03/00 at 14:37 (029690)

Dr Z., this monthly lottery giveaway of ESWT treatment is an incredibly generous thing you're doing, and I can't sing your praises enough for it.

But, I do have an idea that could both give you some return on your generosity and give more people a chance to receive the treatment. The idea is this: allow anyone who wants to participate in the lottery to specify a maximum dollar amount that they would be willing to pay for ESWT. Their chances of winning would then be weighted by that amount. So, for example, if joe's limit is $500, mary's is $700 and lewi's is $100, their chances of winning the lottery would be 5/13, 7/13 and 1/13 respectively. The winner would be required to pay his stated amount to receive the treatment, or forfeit his portion of the probability pie and allow another winner to be chosen using the newly calculated odds. You could also impose minimum and maximum 'betting' amounts, say $100 - $1000, to increase the fairness.

I guess this could still be considered unfair to people who can't or don't want to pay too much, but it would definitely provide more benefit to Dr. Z and allow more PF sufferers to get ESWT (provided the lottery is held more often than once a month).

What do people think?

Re: lotto idea

Scott R on 10/03/00 at 18:04 (029709)

I like the idea that the amount someone's willing to pay will increase their chance of winning the lotto. The more serious someone is about being treated, the more they bewilling to pay. But instead of letting $500 buy 5 times the chance of $100, let's penalize the rich and let $500 buy only 3 times the chance of $100. (assuming Dr. Z is interested in this way of doing things - his objective may be to keep money out of it - in which case he could just donate the money to heelspurs.com!)

$0 - not an option unless finances are not available. People who do not take it seriously enough to be willing to pay something do not have it serious enough to be treated UNLESS they are extremely poor. I've chosen the following method because it 'penalizes' the rich.

$100 - buys 1.00 chance
$200 - buys 1.50 chances
$300 - buys 2.00 chances
$400 - buys 2.50 chances
$500 - buys 3.00 chances
$600 - buys 3.50 chances
$700 - buys 4.00 chances
$800 - buys 4.50 chances
Higher dollar amounts not allowed.

Re: Sorry put the winner on the wrong board.

SueS on 10/03/00 at 18:59 (029713)

It would be nice if the winner was a poster of this board so that we all might get to 'know' them and also to update the board on their results.

Re: Sorry put the winner on the wrong board.

Nancy S. on 10/03/00 at 19:10 (029714)

Hi SueS, I've been wondering how your PF is doing. Have you had any improvement? If so, what is working for you? As I recall, you're a nurse. Have you been able to keep your job? Do Birks work for you?
Nancy

Re: Sorry put the winner on the wrong board.

SueS on 10/03/00 at 19:53 (029717)

HI,Nancy, Thanks for asking. What helped me initally was orthotics.I would say 80%.But my feet get real tired and hot. I can only wear them in tennis shoes and I get real tired of them. I can't wear Birks. I have a new pair that I try every so often but it causes pain and swelling just below the heel. I am still a nurse but work on a research floor, so do alot less walking and time on my feet. I think I also had some posterior tibial tendonitis, but diagnosed myself and that is better. I have found a different shoe that I wear most of the time. It is by Dexter and has an arch. It is a open back, but I still get some discomfort, the feeling of not enough support in the arch. But compared to a lot of people here, I feel very lucky. I also have another foot problem that may be causing the trouble I now have. There is a bone around the ankle area that did not fuse or grow together, I guess they could do surgery and remove it and do something with the tendon, but I don't wnat that done now. Good luck to all here and do know that it does get better.

Re: lotto idea

john a on 10/04/00 at 09:33 (029755)

'Penalizing the rich' in the lotto is a democratic idea, to be sure, and I guess its a pretty good idea too :-) We could just multiply the chances bought by two with no effect on the probabilities, and say that $100 buys 2 chances, with each additional $100 buying one more. That way, we could still leave $0 buying 1 chance as it does now.

I'm kinda surprised no one else has commented yet...

Re: lotto idea

Barbara TX on 10/04/00 at 12:56 (029765)

OK, John, you drew me out! 'Penalizing the rich' is not a democratic idea but a socialist idea, aimed at the redistribution of wealth based not upon merit, but upon some other standard of equality. Whew! Perhaps reading Marx & Engles gave me PF! I wouldn't doubt it...

I don't think that anyone should be penalized for anything, especially the rich, because chances are they worked pretty darn hard to be rich. Scott's idea is interesting because it allows us some way to gauge a person's 'desperation' - that is, how much they are willing to sacrifice to get it. A lotto does not. A lotto, in fact, might cause someone who is of humble means to PUT OFF treatment they are deperate for, month after month, hoping they will win. It all depends upon what Dr. Zuckerman wants to do. I think that he assumes that 'rich' folks will be gracious enough not to join the lotto if they can easily afford ESWT, and really desperate people will find some way to swing it or arrange a private payment plan with him - patients do this all the time. Fairness in treatment is based upon a sort of personal integrity. The lotto is very simple, and a generous gesture - it doesn't complicate Z's life, I would imagine.
It also spreads the word about ESWT.

I am of modest means, but I really want ESWT pronto, and where there's a will, there's a way. I decided to wait for a month, but I can't wait any longer... and, as the free market determines price according to need, the price is right my friend!

Anyone else want to sound off? B.

Re: lotto idea

Scott R on 10/04/00 at 13:25 (029769)

Barbara's message makes the assumption that rich people in a democratic society become and are wealthy based on 'merit'. I believe a more accurate description for what happens in the U.S. is that people become wealthy based on their desire and ability to acquire money from others (assuming it wasn't inherited). For example, I dare say the inventor of the web (Tim Berners-Lee) 'merits' more money than Bill Gates, where I define 'merit' as how much he has benefited society.

Re: lotto idea

Scott R on 10/04/00 at 13:32 (029770)

On second thought, I think this would be more trouble for Dr. Z than it's worth. It would be more trouble than a regular treatment for which he gets a full fee. But speaking on choosing a winner, I guess I could set up a program (random number generator) to do it, and include any weighting averages based on what ever if Dr. Z wants it.

Re: lotto idea

Barbara TX on 10/04/00 at 15:22 (029777)

Scott - Another philosopher and economist! PF encourages a lot of solitary meditation does it not? You raise many good questions about whether a democracy is a meritocracy, and I would go even further and say that this may not be a democracy anymore at all... Aristotle describes democracy as ultimately degrading to a tyranny (e.g. the totalitarian state, multi-national business conglomerates, or a dictator). And what is merit, as you say? Is it altruism toward mankind, or any kind of hard work (that is, making money)? Trancendent values about the best sort of life to live for human beings must ultimately enter the picture. Here, economists must sometimes verge upon theology!

Behind all this is the fact that money buys a certain amount of comfort, but is absolutely unnecessary for happiness in the classical sense - that is, that happiness is the practice of virtue. Would Aristotle recognize that definition? Yes. It is his. Would modern Americans? No way, no how.

Is this really me or the Celebrex talking? SEND HELP NOW. B.

Re: lotto idea

john a on 10/04/00 at 15:54 (029779)

By refering to 'penalizing the rich' as a democratic idea, I was merely taking an election time jab at republicans, who are, of course, known for giving the (filthy) rich disproportionate tax breaks. :-)

[This reply would have been better not posted to the ESWT board, but there's no way to send a reply to a different board. Or is there? Can threads cross board boundaries?]

Re: lotto idea

john a on 10/04/00 at 16:02 (029780)

Right. This could be made to be no trouble for Dr Z at all. All the weightings could be easily done via javascript (or whatever), yet still giving Dr Z the final control of picking a winner by selecting a number between 1 and N.

Re: lotto idea -- warped rewards

Nancy S. on 10/04/00 at 21:20 (029805)

My thoughts on the money issue in society can probably be summed up this way:

I think people who pick up our garbage, people who serve and enrich others face-to-face (teachers, nurses, social workers, etc.), and people who inspire and uplift us creatively should be valued and rewarded a lot more than they are -- certainly more than many CEOs and politicians I can think of.

Nancy

Re: lotto idea

Kate on 10/05/00 at 12:09 (029845)

Scott,
That would be great...but then what would I get to do?
I'm the ESWT coordinator for Dr. Z, and I love seeing all of the great emails and faxes and postcards. I like that almost as much as getting to meet so many of ourgreat patients....you know who you are and I know you're out there!
Kate Jurman
ESWT Coordinator for Dr.Z

Re: lotto idea....it's not about an ism.......:)

Kate on 10/05/00 at 17:45 (029863)

Hi all,
Just a comment from the peanut gallery.
The lotto has nothing to do with capitalism, socialism, or any other ism or ideaology. It's about giving a treatment to the lucky person who is fortunate enough to have their name drawn out of a hat. It's about reaching out to help someone, whether they can afford it or not. It's about getting rid of pain for yet one more person, with a treatment that fits the bill.

Re: lotto idea....it's not about an ism.......:)

JudyS on 10/05/00 at 19:02 (029884)

Well said, Kate!

Re: lotto idea

john h on 10/06/00 at 13:49 (029944)

scott: you must be a democrat since you are against the rich,big oil,insurance companies,drug companies, big anything. what will you do when you become rich after selling your website? become a republican?

Re: lotto idea

Scott R on 10/06/00 at 17:11 (029958)

hmmm, I'm never thought about myself as being against 'big anything'. I'm not a republican or democrat. I would like to think I'm a physicist. I'm against oil companies only because oil is so cheap and therefore we will soon run out of it without learning how to cope without it. We can just say goodbye to these good old days in about 50 to 100 years. There's no technological solution in sight. At best, the world's population will be be like India in 200 years. I'm not against insurance companies. The best thing we have going for us is global warming because it's going to stop the next ice age for which we are overdo. Global warming is nothing compared to an ice age. The website is unlikely to be bought out. The site is worth more to me as it is than they can afford. I'm not against the rich. I have mixed feelings about drug companies, but it's not their fault.