|
Post by NMA on Jul 24, 2006 22:41:53 GMT
AA, So heres a bit of a puzzler for you all to start off with... This happened a couple of years back, I think it was about late spring- it was warming up, but not too hot or bright yet. I was waiting for a train on the underground, and one eventually pulled into the platform. Like everyone else, I got onto the train. It wasn't packed, but full enough fro there to be few seats available, and plenty of people who needed them more than me. So I was leaning against a bit of a door, and the train started to move. I then observed one woman, who had found a seat take out and put on a pair of sunglasses. She had been waiting on the platform when I arrived, and remained fairly still after putting on the sunglasses. So the question is, why do YOU think she put on her sunglasses? Feel free to speculate, guess, whatever, and also to ask if you need any more info/ details. wslm NMA Edit: corrected spelling error
|
|
|
Post by rayan on Jul 25, 2006 5:49:56 GMT
Roughly how old was she?
differential
wanted to sleep was crying It was in fashion then (was it?) migraine systemic lupus erythematosis retinitis pigmentosa macular degeneration Was she wearing a hearing aid?... usher syndrome
probably completely missed the point and overcomplicated things in true medical-student-fashion but never mind..
ws rayan
|
|
|
Post by mrakhtar on Jul 27, 2006 14:27:39 GMT
did she have the sun in her eyes? or was she so tired of waiting on the platform, that she thought she catch a quick nap without anybody realising (by putting on the sunglasses ofcourse)?
|
|
|
Post by NMA on Jul 31, 2006 12:57:04 GMT
AA, Ah, how clinical medicine helps change the way people think. Making a differential list is a perfectly good and very reliable way to approach this problem. You then apply the knowledge you have of the situation to rule out as many of the options as possible, and work out what other knowledge you need to have to be able to prove or disprove the remaining options. In the case of why someone did something, I usually categorise my differential list into - Direct effects of the action
- Indirect effects of the action
- Other reasons I havn't considered here
- A combination of 2 or more of the above
You can then expand on each category. The last 2 categories are ALWAYS worth remembering, however combinations may not apply to mutually exclusive options. Try that. In answer to the question, she was probably in her mid- late 20's, maybe early 30's. wslm NMA
|
|
|
Post by yasmin on Aug 3, 2006 22:53:59 GMT
salam al alaikum, first i would just like to say lol, and also, thank you nadir! it is so refreshing to finally have an intellectual debate!! even if i do jus observe an chuckle to myself. i have been so bored with the lack of creativity and intellectual freedom and discussion first year preclin has provided! neways, theres only one thing that i can think of, and will allow myself to think of coz i think its the only and most obvious option which first comes into mind when u read the whole situation, excuse me for bein stubborn an narrowminded on this one. but i think she just wants to go to sleep! she didnt hav the sunglasses on beforehand and theres no sun on the underground, thus no need for protection from sun for health or rp. as for mac deg, do the bright lights hav an effect? but shes too young anyway? im jus guessin coz im no clinical student an may be wrong bout the condition etc. as for the crying, u said she didnt really move, so prob no to tht, she wud have maybe fidgeted or moved her head down. so the only conclusion i can think of is sleep, and she prob jus wanted bit of privacy and to be in her own world while sleepin without worryin tht anyone will b watchin her. i cant think of nethin else!? wasalam yasmin p.s. whats a differential list?
|
|
|
Post by smile on Aug 4, 2006 15:59:35 GMT
differential list = list of *different* things you think the diagnosis might be ie - problem = my chocolate is missing. differential diagnoses are 1) I ate it 2) someone else ate it 3) It is lost under the table 4) the tortoise is hiding it the diagnosis may actually be that I am hallucinating chocolate and never actually had any to loose which just goes to show that you shouldn't exclude a possible diagnosis just becasue it is not on your differential list as for the sunglasses - personally I think she was a closet blues brothers fan! "It's 106 miles to Chicago, we've got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses."
|
|
|
Post by yasmin on Aug 5, 2006 14:22:12 GMT
salam al alaikum
thanks for explaining that; lol, like your examples!
hmmm, whens NMA gonna tell us the answer!!?
ws
|
|
|
Post by NMA on Aug 5, 2006 20:47:30 GMT
AA, Not yet. Seems most ppl seem happy with the idea that this lady was catching some sleep. I agree that it is one possibility. BUT I don't think it is the most likely one. What information would you need to confirm your suspicion? If that information is not available, what information could you use to support your suspicion? And what assumptions have you made? Sometimes it is what is NOT said or done that gives the game away. Think about those for a while. On the subject of being narrow minded, I don't usually excuse people for that wslm NMA
|
|
|
Post by Shayan on Oct 8, 2006 19:16:44 GMT
AA,
Just thought I'd ask if there was any progress on this? Things seem to have quietened down - I was quite keen to know what the answer to this problem is?
Any chance of an update NMA?
WS,
Shayan
|
|
|
Post by Sajjad on Oct 9, 2006 11:33:42 GMT
At the risk of sounding really stupid, here's my far fetched explanation:
The woman you observed was actually an international spy working for a really obscure secretive branch of the uzbekistani intelligence service. The glasses she were wearing were actually some sort of infrared spectacles that allowed her to scan suspects for a secretive document the uzbekastani goverment had, had stolen from and wanted to reclaim that would, for some strange reason, glow in the infrared view.
|
|
|
Post by NMA on Oct 9, 2006 20:06:49 GMT
AA, Any chance of an update? hmm... Let me ask you this. How easy is it to stay still on the underground? Saj, lol, thats a fair attempt, but what evidence do you need to confirm/support your speculation, and what question could you ask to obtain that evidence? I'd still advise constructing a list of differentials, and then narrowing it down from there. wslm NMA
|
|
|
Post by Sajjad on Mar 10, 2007 22:30:51 GMT
I know its been months on this topic...but was she by any chance French? Apparently the French wear sunglasses to signify that they are ill even when indoors.
|
|
|
Post by NMA on Mar 11, 2007 20:55:36 GMT
AA, Thank you for attempting another answer. Was she French? was she wearing the sunglasses to signify illness? To the first, this cannot be answered. There is no indication that she was or wasn't French. There is evidence pertaining to the second, however. As she put the sunglasses on only once seated inside the train, it would have to be a very acutely onset illness. It is also difficult to correlate the stillness for the rest of the journey with illness, although that would be a possible response to some types of headache. So although I cannot disprove the theory, I would consider it rather less likely than the sleep theory ppl started discussing before. A good attempt none the less. wslm NMA
|
|
|
Post by Sajjad on Mar 13, 2007 12:40:20 GMT
AA
Lol a polite way of saying it was a load of old cobblers. Hmm....i'm wondering whether there is a relation between the fact she put on her glasses and her stillness. They seem to be two mutually exclusive events although this cannot be ruled out.
Another far fetched thought that has popped into my head...might she have a phobia of making eye contact? Perhaps then she put on the sunglasses so that she wouldn't have to look at anyone in the eye and she remained still to completely avoid making eye contact altogether through her sunglasses.
|
|
|
Post by NMA on Mar 14, 2007 21:25:13 GMT
AA, nope, not cobblers at all, and how dare you suggest I care about being polite? I was simply considering the suggestion in the light of the available evidence. I'll do the same with this one. If she didn't want to make eye contact with anyone then why not wear the sunglasses all the time? why only in the carriage? As to your other point, it is fair to assume the two actions are linked. The first important link is that both actions were carried out by the same person in a short space of time following an event (getting on the train). They may well, in that case, both contribute towards the same objective. If I may offer some advice, re- read the thread. There are many un answered questions here. Keep trying wslm NMA
|
|