I’ve always wanted to advise a friend of mine (who can finish a carton of beer in one night) to drink bottled beer instead of canned beer. With the option to order online nowadays, one can easily order heavier bottled beer and have them delivered.
Why is bottled beer cheaper? I shall try to answer that without proper training - something for which people who have taught me never liked me. Bottles, if unbroken, need only be washed before reuse. Aluminium cans, on the other hand, have to be melted and cast before they can be reused. I remember the good old days when bottles could be returned to the provision shops for a rebate. The karang guni men of yesteryears also collected bottles apart from newspapers. Why don’t the beer companies send people out to collect empty, undamaged bottles with which they can reuse? Unfortunately, that is one question which I can’t answer without proper training.
Another question I can’t answer without proper training is this: why can’t mobile breweries hit the streets and let the folks with empty bottles bring them down for refills. Not only will that solve the problem of collecting bottles and refilling at the plant, the consumers can actually go to the suppliers directly for refills. A lot less trash. A lot less mess. And if the beer could be dispensed to the nearest ml for immediate consumption, then any receptacle will do. They are already doing it in China. Or maybe I should say that they are still doing it in China. Remember the good old days when the soy sauce man would come down on his bicycle and top up our empty soy sauce bottles?
These mobile breweries can do late night, weekend or public holiday runs when the ERPs are turned off and most people are at home. Guzzlers can register for SMS alerts when the beer truck is approaching their home. They can go online to check the truck’s schedule. Everybody would be happy except for the retailers.
We sure have a lot to learn from the past. You don’t need someone who’s paid a million bucks a year to come up with these solutions. But what about the retailers? Well, their beer sales will certainly be affected, but they can still cater to consumers who are not at home most of the time. In time to come, these shops may even house a few barrels of beer and buying beer could soon be a matter of topping up at the nearest minimart. That’s your solution coming from someone without the proper training.
I just read an article full of advice on what to do and what not to do to avoid litigation. A lot of it is actually commonsense. The main message the writer was trying to convey is: “less is best”. Sure. If you don’t want to get killed on a mountain, don’t go climb it. In other words, be conservative. But the realities of running a practice aren’t that simple.
Take my medical colleagues for instance. Let’s say the patient suffers from a mild infection. You prescribe something mild and try to treat it while informing the patient that you would bring out the big guns only when the small ones don’t work. How do most Singaporeans react to that? Well, most likely, they’ll react in a kiasu way. i.e. It’s better to overkill than to go in a second time. One thing is for sure, they will not thank you for being conservative with them. They want instant results and if you can’t give it to them by using the most kiasu big guns to kill the smallest bugs, they’re going to go to someone else. Doctors know what is best for their patients, but less is often not best as patients grow smarter and more impatient. “Why didn’t you use this wonder drug [I read about from the internet] that this other clinic is using?”. It’s not entirely the doctor’s fault when doctors overkill.
Going back to the article the writer advises dentists to consider whitening root canal treated teeth that have turned black before even considering crowning. To the writer, enamel is precious and crowning is riskier than bleaching. But we all know that root canal treated teeth are quite fragile. What if the (front)tooth breaks (over the weekend!)? The patient may turn around and ask the dentist why he hadn’t done the crown. In doing 2 procedures (bleaching and crowning) instead of just one, won’t that raise suspicions in the mind of the cynical patient?
I’m not trying to discredit the writer, but trouble can come to you whether you do something or decide not to do something first. Are we really playing safe when we do less?
I just had my first pair of progressive lenses fitted a couple of weeks ago and they only cost me a little more than my regular glasses. According to rumours, quite a number of people cannot adapt to them. I also heard some wonderful things about these lenses and so decided to try them out for myself.
A progressive lens is basically a trifocal lens without the lines. The top part of the lens allows the wearer to see distant object. The power gradually decreases towards the middle which is idea for viewing objects at arm’s length and finally, the bottom of the lens does what reading glasses do. Using the correct part of the lens would require the wearer to tilt his head or move his eyes. The concept is pretty cool. You don’t have to take off your myopic glasses and put on reading glasses when someone gives you something to sign.
When I first put my progressive glasses on, I had a bit of trouble going down the stairs. That’s because the bottom of the lens is for reading and unless you tilt your head to look downwards, the stairs will not be in focus. Another problem is poor peripheral vision. With progresssive lenses, you can’t see things with the corner of your eye. You always have to look straight, turn your head to accommodate the narrow field of vision. So when you sit back on a sofa with your head tilted backwards, you may have problems seeing things directly in front of you. When running, I would also prefer to have my myopic glasses on. With progressive lenses, rapid movement of the head can also cause images to be blurred.
Of course, the requirement to look straight also provides some disincentive for discreet ogling. Progressive lenses may expose a lot of dirty old men.
