Franklin Lum wrote:The Tom Stone column in 6/09's issue was an interesting (and useful) way to think of misdirection, but the description of the physiology seems a bit too sweeping; while certain elements are correct, I'm not sure I've ever heard things put quite the way he did in over 10 years of doing Neurology.
Richard, does Mr. Stone have any medical references that he based his write-up on? I'd find the reading interesting.
Nope, I've got no medical references at all. Zero, Zilch, Nada.
It's all approximations, guesswork and pseudo science.
I didn't aim for a correct description, as it would become too abstract, the aim was to get an approximation that actually could be used hands-on. Whether that goal was reached or not is open for debate.
You are most welcome to point out the flaws and errors. If you read the intro to my February column, you see that I say quite plainly that I desire to be refuted :)