Hello, thank you. I have kitten pictures behind me because when you're debugging things sooner or later you need something nice to look at. They will be relevant later on.  What? No, sorry I didn't listen. Kittens make you feel better. Yeah. This is something I got really stuck with and I just used PlaceKitten to put some kitten pictures in there to make you feel better about it. So we're probably going to run like 10 minutes up. We'll try to be quick. So scenario, you've written some code or actually someone else probably has. He does everything. Layout isn't what you want it to be. What do you do? What is this even about? Introduce the topic. What is debugging CSS? To me it seems fairly broad. You've got a visual problem basically. Something's not rendering quite how you'd expect it to render. Your development browser of choice is probably the one that you're looking at at the time. You might be further on in the dev process.  Something's not quite right. So what do you do? Right click on it and it's back. That's a good start.  So you're looking at what the browser thinks it's rendering and what's actually going on. The code looks wrong. Then it's easy enough to go fix it. If the code looks right and you think it's something else is wrong, what do you do now? I have something. I don't want to start because I'll just keep talking. Usually why right click inspect and then change something in the browser to see until it's fixed. Then I fix that in the actual code sometimes through copy and paste. Why that works for me very well is because I rarely use CSS in multiple places on the same page. I don't create massively deep inheritance stacks of CSS. Meaning my componentization of CSS re-use it, or however you want to call it, is rather minimal. Usually you can just fix that CSS and you're going to be fine. You're not breaking much else. That's how I do it. I'm rather careful with which CSS rules I reuse or inherit through my DOM tree in that sense. That makes it, I guess, a bit easier. Actually if you can close the JavaScript bit because we don't need that. Just get rid of that whole thing. Just scroll to the top so we don't see the kittens anymore. The kittens will always be there. Here's a scenario. Basically you want to constrain the width of this input field.  Just restricting the parent. Actually the first one's got no constraints so you might put a max width on the thing. I'm using inline block to actually make sure it will have a width because normally form fields are inline. It's not rendering correctly. It's not at the width it's expected to be. What do you do now? This is when things get hard in CSS. Use this as an arbitrary example because it could be pretty much anything. My approach, I don't have an exact answer for this. CSS is rather complicated language. I don't think anybody can just look at something and go, obviously just without looking at the CSS and not looking at how the DOM has constructed itself. You can't easily diagnose what that issue is. Whenever I'm trying to figure out what the hell is going on in CSS, and I assume that this is pretty much how everybody does CSS, just trial and error. You open the panel, turn things on and off again. Change stuff out of this? Sometimes one of the things which happens is you'll change stuff and nothing happens. That's usually when you start to get a bit worried. If you're looking at sizes, you usually want to look at the bottom model panel when your inspector, also because it forms a nasty. Forms are nasty because forms are nasty. No, because your browser has its own user agents, style sheets, and that one for forms is quite extensive. Things like box sizing, for example, is different for forms, usually for legacy reasons. So if you want to check your normalizations, style sheets are check statements. The box sizing is reset locally for forms. And then your box model panel, obviously. Wasn't there a good talk on forms by somebody called Chris from two years ago? I've been writing forms for longer than anyone should, and you see that switch kind of developing. It's not fun. Another thing which I'll try to do is make sure I actually understand what's going on. So like if I open that panel and, you know, sure, maybe it looks visually correct, but if when you start inspecting things, you've got bits poking out of other bits, and like... It says it's awesome. Yeah, exactly. If you've got containers which are being exploded and all this kind of stuff, this is usually... It's very difficult to work in an environment where it's being rendered messy. So I usually try to understand what's going on, make sure it's sort of nice and clean before I go any further. Can I do a quick survey? Anybody using BEM? One, two, three. Come on, let me shy. You really put your hand up. You'll have happy Russian friends. It was good. It was created by Yandex, so I'm just a fan of that. Did they steal it from the Democrats in the US? No. Who's using any kind of componentization assistance that kind of tries to, through post-CSS or any kind of pre-compiler, componentize CSS? Like CSS modules maybe being the most popular one these days. One, two, three, four... Five, six... Okay, who doesn't use CSS? It's got a face level here. Okay, what does everybody else use? Just freestyling? That's one more for not using CSS. Do you want to join the panel? Because you might have unique answers on how to debug CSS. There might be violence if you join the panel. Because I've never used Bootstrap and I'm not quite sure I'll never will because I fear debugging CSS with Bootstrap. Okay, I can talk first-hand at debugging CSS with Bootstrap. What you do is you work out what's going wrong, you fix it, and then you realize that Bootstrap is actually doing something completely contrary to good sense. So you end up fixing the thing for Bootstrap and writing your own custom code on top of it.  That's my first-hand experience. I slowly understand why the creator of Bootstrap doesn't do talks anymore. My experience with Bootstrap is that the whole thing is because we're going to pick and choose what to use.  If I was able to hit the buttons, I just comment out the line that you pause the buttons there on my own, that's fine. It's all the same with good size, not really that much, but yeah.  That means you don't want to override Bootstrap's styles. Instead you want to customize variables. I think that's sort of a good practice overall. If you've got some kind of, if you're using some system to help you and then you end up overriding large amounts of that system or even just once, that's sort of where broken windows. Anytime you're overriding stuff, that's bad news. I've had a Bootstrap project where there was more code undoing what Bootstrap was doing than Bootstrap was actually doing. Just do the variables. If you find yourself overriding, then you probably want to comment at line calls and then just spread it on the styles because it's not mind-fighting Bootstrap. The problem with a lot of CSS modules is namespacing or lack thereof because everything in CSS is global unless you're Sebastian using CSS modules.  Because generally speaking CSS is global. If you have a framework and it does something in a global namespace, you have problems. Bootstrap does things in a global namespace.  Can I pick you up on the web components? If you want to reuse a bit of CSS from one web component in other web components, is there a way to do that? No. Let's say you have a style on how a header looks like or a header font looks like in a web component and you want to reuse that in another web component to have a standard header style in different components. How would you do that in web components? I generally avoid that completely, that pattern of reusing across files. I just have a very particular way of writing CSS where I take all the HTML elements and write an equivalent selector and then write the properties so you never share across the whole namespace by selector now by element. Say you didn't want that, it would be like you're including a CSS library in multiple components. You would do it across multiple pages and have to do it as a page for it. You can use imports as well if you've got a file that you want to share stuff. But again, the same thing applies as before, it's better to use variables than to pull stuff in that way. I only know the way out to do it in CSS modules, which I like, which is the Composers keyword, where for those that have used CSS modules that you might be familiar with, for those that you aren't, you can in any CSS class definition say Composers and then you reference a class from a different file. And because it's all pre-compiled, it will assign both classes from that one file and from the one file you're currently in at the element in the end. So that still makes it super easy to debug because you can kind of see from which file it's applying the styles in the output because they have two classes now and that makes it really quite nice to work and pull in styles. So we have shared CSS module files that just have stuff that you want to use in other components. And you just put all of those variables. You could use it like variables, right? You just have a color font in a shade of blue and wherever I want that font color applied, you compose from that file into any other CSS module that you want. So what's the difference with CSS modules doing that and just applying multiple classes directly? Right. You can do that. You need to import the different files though. And I was just wondering how that works. Conceptually. I think the answer is that CSS modules, I believe, has the order that you compose them in is the order the styles are applied. And that's not true for normal CSS. So the order that styles are applied with CSS is totally dependent on the order that they appear in the CSS file. Well, I imported. Yeah. So this can lead to confusing non-deterministic things happening as well. Whatever you're using, you plug some other plugin in or you require things in a different way. Something can end up in a different part of the file and then suddenly everything's red and you don't know why. And that's one thing that CSS modules does solve. I have a question for people who don't seem to use any BEM or anything along those lines if anyone can answer. When things go pear shaped how do you actually work it out? I'm curious because I've been using known spacing for a very long time. Are you using specific space ringers? It's not BEM. There are lots of variations. If you listen to Jonathan Snook who's written SMAC's Harry Roberts with his basic known spacing Yandex, they're all basically doing the same thing and they all say that about each other. None of them will say bad things about each other other than basically, well this is my way that's more or less the same. I mean even pause for a moment and say something good about Bootstrap they actually use a decent naming structure within their system so it's pretty easy to work out what's going on if you try and override it or make it work properly. A good one I find is star, space open curly bracket outline colon, space 1BX, solid blue semi-colon, closed curly bracket as in apply everything on the page and this can be a good way of going that's what's going on. The reason why we use outline as opposed to border is because border adds an additional pixel if you're in the default box sizing mode which adding that additional pixel can completely change the layout so outline is a really good way of having a read-only way of analyzing where the edges of everything is without having to go in and manually inspect everything. Wasn't there also this 3D inspector in Firefly? Oh yeah, that makes me think. You can look at the DOM depth in 3D and it's got the Facebook button and it's like 20,000 items deep. The tower of Facebook. This is what we're going to talk about, pixel. What if you're going to design for different screen sizes? Ah pixels versus RAM versus everything else. The quick answer is a pixel is now a variable unit of measure. It used to be not but now it is so you can just use pixels and resizes anyway. There wasn't one that you ever tested. It doesn't matter what you're going to use, you just have to test it. Back to our scenario. We have something that we think we know should work. It doesn't and it's really number 2 that we're looking at because the code is more or less the same between these. The first one has nothing on it so it's going to take out the full width. The second one's got a max width of 90% within its block. It's not working. The third and fourth are, what do you do now? What are we supposed to be doing? Look at it on this screen because I think they want to put it into the grey box that you don't see on this screen. Okay, I got it. I'm going to ding somewhere along here. That would make more sense. I was wondering what was wrong with it when I was looking at it. Okay, but it seems that this screen doesn't stretch with the full width. It's not as plain as the full width. It's contrast, really. Can you change the colour of the background? Just invert the colours. I'll change it. Just to form that ground. Dark brown. Why don't you just make it sandy brown? Sandy brown. Sandy brown. That's the name and the colour. There we go. Accessibility lesson, everyone. Yes. One technique you could use to isolate where the problem is. It should be working so that you could delete all of your CSS and see if it stops working and then, first, you know... I've done that. Reordering CSS includes also really good. This is really useful when you're on third-party code as well. I've got a site I've inherited which is nasty. I basically ended up commenting pretty much everything just to work out what on earth the particular thing was. It's not good. CodePen is awesome, though. Especially if you're going to ask someone for help. There's JS Fiddle, but JavaScript is not that exciting. So we want CodePen instead. When you're asking for help, if you can isolate it even for yourself just to recreate the problem away from your other influences, if you had bootstrap in place and you saw the situation, how do you know it's bootstrap doing it? How do you know it's something else? How do you know it's using some library to do some form thing? And form, sooner or later, you're probably going to use a library. Dropping that same code into pure isolation like this is really, really helpful for that. In this situation, it still didn't help. Yeah. This is a size defined on HTML which probably won't be a result because usually it's not good to define your element styles in HTML. You can start like this. Size. That's a standard CSS property. Sorry, an HTML property. Yeah, it is quite simple. It's a good thing to have in forms and trust me because I know way too much about forms because it basically gives the user an indicator of how much information they should be filling out on the form. Look, so just double-check in here and it says here that size is actually visual size, not size in the sense of features. Well, it's... What's your site for that? Yeah, it is a visual. Max length is the one that actually gives you a proper restriction. The visual and the max length can be two very different things. If you've got an email field, you might have a max length of 100 characters. In practice, you probably only want to have size of about 30. So the two are very important still. Visual is very significant. Yeah, MDN. But in this case, I'm actually overriding anyway because this is basically a test to have something that's responsive. When my screen is wide enough, I just want the thing to take up whatever size it is. When it's not, I want to actually restrict it and this is where we're running into this problem. How do we proceed from here? We've isolated it, it's still not working. We haven't opened the DevTools and just turned everything on and off again. This is the only way to do it. Just scroll down the HTML path. Re-written in CodePen at this point? Yeah. Just scroll down. It's not so fast. If you've got a laptop, you can play along at home. If you look on CodePen, the IR is much cleaner. You're trying to find the solution? I didn't get too fast. I didn't get too fast. I just didn't get the problem. Just scroll down a little bit. That's very hard. There we go. The fields, as far as anyone's concerned are one and the same, basically.  Has anyone actually had a bug where they've isolated and it's still failing? What do you mean? At this point, you know what it's meant to be doing. You've probably checked on MDN which is a really good way of having a look. It's still not actually behaving correctly. You've got an isolation and it's still failing. So what do you do now? As in it is definitely you. It's not somebody else's fault. Well, this is a good question though because you've probably stuffed up somewhere. At this point, what I'd usually do is I'd have it in CodePen. I'd check every other browser and see if they're actually consistent. Because sometimes you're going to come across a browser bug. And if it's a browser bug, it's a relief because at least it's not me. It's not a relief because then I need to actually possibly submit a bug or something like that. Sometimes it's just like a missing prefix or something. Yeah. I'm pretty sure I went through that with several lines of disreleasing. I was wondering if there's any other problem ever in CSS other than that one where like, oh, this is supposed to work but it somehow doesn't. This one's actually been submitted as a browser bug. It is a browser bug. If we scroll down now to the kittens. Kittens. We're actually seeing exactly the same markup. There are any difference instead of a form field we're looking at an image. And example two is exactly the same code where it's doing the right thing. You tricked us. Yeah. Okay. So your next step from here do you pick up your laptop and throw it out the window? Do you gaze into the eyes of the kitten until everything's okay? What do you do? If it's something like that, usually there's something like you just change display mode or put it, set it to position relative or anything like that. Add a Z-index. These things, seriously, like sometimes adding that can convince the browser to do the right thing. Translate. Z. Seriously. That was a fix. Yeah, there's so many fixes with IE. We're not talking about that. IE's dead, IE6 is gone. My favorite CSS debugging is animations and transitions. When they start flickering or not doing what you wanted. That's a whole different story. Oh no, not performance. It's just genuinely good. My favorite is when in Safari the font starts becoming bolder and thinner. When it transitions between graphics card memory and CPU. It's anti-aliasing. It's just flickering. Whereas you don't have the correct transform origin and something will half animate three dimensionally into the background. One good one the other day where the thing just became 100% transparent. I'd set a blend mode on it. But instead of blending it just disappeared until the transition was over. Once the transition was over then it was there. I think in anything, trying to determine the state of something when it's sitting there is one thing. It's a whole lot more difficult. It's also the browser bugs are much more common there and inconsistencies in how the rendering of transitions and animations works is super different in the browsers. In this situation we've got our browser bug. We've confirmed that the behavior is inconsistent. Our next step is to jump on to the various browser bug sites and pretty much every browser's got their own these days. We've got one which is good. If you find it then that's great if not you submit the bug as I did with this one. What do you do now? Because that's great that your thing might actually get fixed or not. What's your solution? I'll do my own patch on the normalize sheet. But you can't fix the browser out in a few users. I mean you can do like a hacking second thing like the index and stuff and I think she's still trying to do like patch stuff. But your behavior is basically... Yes this is usually the half window on the fields. Yeah, but you don't want to. Usually there's another solution that works. That's your answer. You basically have to completely rethink. That's all the other examples are there for. Completely rethink how you're actually trying to do that. Well that's how you debug CSS. You have any other questions? The cat's not cute enough. That's showing that behavior with nothing else on it. The next one is showing the behavior. Six is the one that's correct. Five is correct also. But if you scroll up... The second one is wrong. Yeah, number two is wrong. Well the second one you have to put a display block on the key and fix it. Well inline... But you shouldn't have to. You should be able to just set an inline block and it works. Because if you have an image with the same properties it works. It's a default disclaimer. Inline block is the child itself that's inline block. The parent is inline, the paragraph is inline block. Oh yeah, you're right. But it should work. It works on the image, it works on any other element except for a form field. What's actually happened with this one and this is the really frustrating thing about what happens when you submit a browser bug is there's an old South Park episode The Simpsons did it. Basically everything the South Park creators came up with they found it was a Simpsons episode that already covered what they wanted to do. And the browser world works exactly the same way except it's Chrome did it. If Chrome has the behaviour you'll get it replicated in every other browser. If Chrome doesn't have the behaviour it's not going to happen. This is not going to get fixed as far as... My bugs are rejected in every single browser. Because Chrome just didn't want to fix it because they said oh it's always been like that so why should we bother? There's one thing we have to do because you see if you have been consistent if right between share and yes you find that they are not consistent then you can get the Simpsons. This is the classic inconsistency because number two and number six are in direct contrast with each other the only difference is the type of element. There are no CSS properties different between them their behaviour should be absolutely identical but they're just not. You have to use the Simpsons. Everything is exactly the same. Did your Edge bug also go close? Everything. Even Edge exactly the same comment where Chrome haven't done it. I know Edge there are statistics on how much stuff is used in a certain way so they could look at data on how often people actually implement it. It's an Edge case because most forms are terrible. I was going to say I was going to say most forms are terrible. We watched Chris's talk from 114 CSS has come about forms. That's true. Very good talk. You'll find me crying in a bar somewhere and talk to you about forms. Thank you very much.


What's up everybody, Jason here with jasperjasecasebreak.com, 2223 hip parade basketball autograph limited edition series 11 just sold out. This is a dual case break random teams number one where it's just 20 total boxes guys. So we're only a hundred hand numbered boxes produced and we managed to get two cases here and I think we have two cases in the back. So we almost got almost half the product run. So potentially seen some of these hits here as a sell sheet. Now here's the dice roll, here's the customer name, Sean at the top and then of course down to Michael that bought it straight up. Carlos won that with Tristan. And then you got the Hawks down to the wizard. So here we go guys roll it. We got a six and a two eight times. Good luck. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven and eight. Eight times six to eight Nick down to Terry. And there you go here on the nine numbers or sorry teams one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Eight times eight times. Got Philadelphia 76ers down to the Memphis Grizzlies. So they get the 76ers Tristan with the Spurs bucks right there for Nath. And then you have John with the Jazz, Dan with the Sons, Carlos with the Thunder, Dilo with the He, Nath with the Cavs. Michael with the Mavs, Eugene with the Celtics, Dilo with the Wizards as well as the Pistons Bulls and Clippers. Terry with the Hawks, Sean with the Magic. We have Dilo with the Kings, Roy with the Knicks, Zachary with the Nuggets. B. Johnson there with the Pacers, Eugene with the Trailblazers, Dilo with the Lakers. Kion with the Nets, Dan with the Hornets, Dan P, Dan G as Pelicans. Dylan with the Raptors, Nath with the T-Wills, Michael P. Warriors, Sean with the Rockets and then Terry with the Memphis Grizzlies. So if anybody wants to trade, I'll give you guys a quick minute. I guess close the trade window then. Nobody else is replying, Nick. I guess let's just close it. And the City. Oh, that's right, Brody. I know. I forgot about that during London. I got a 25. Yeah, usually this product, you could probably see some Allen Iverson's, probably Jolin Beads. You know, 76ers. I have a decent amount of players that you can get. I wasn't trying to do that, but all right. Select rookie about a little pony back when he was on the Knicks. Long, long time ago, right? 49 out of 49. New York Knicks with that first hit. That is Roy. And let's quickly show you guys the list really quick. We have for the Wizards, good gold. John Wall to 25, two-color patch and autograph. Washington Wizards, that's Dilo. We have for the Pistons, Isaiah Thomas. Out of 35 for Detroit. Detroit, that's going to Dilo. We have for the Super Sonics, Gary Payton to 49, Marks of Greatness. Of course, that's still going to the Thunder currently. And Carlos with the Oakley Sea Thunder. And how about Back to Back Hits for the Thunder? This time it's Josh Giddy. He's having a great season. Fresh paint, autographs to 49. Another one for Carlos and the Thunder. That's all a hit there, buddy. All right, halfway through the first case. We have Obi-Tapin, number 299 for the Knicks. New York Knicks, that's going to Roy. So a couple of repeat hits so far. We have a retrospect, Manu Genobli from Spectra. That's really nice. Five out of five. Nice one there for the Spurs. Tristan with that one, man. There you go. And look at that. I think that's one of the sell sheet hits. How about my boy, S-G-A. Now, of course, he has a clipper, unfortunately, as a rookie, but nice hit right there. Rookie ticket, Shea Gilgis Alexander. That's going to the Clippers and Dilo. Nice hit right there, buddy. So that was one of the sell sheet hits there. Then we got our Frenny Simons. Nice Prism rookie signature. Sensational signatures from 1819. Nice one for the Blazers, Eugene. Good question. True. He has to be, right? I mean, if he's not inducted yet, he will be soon. It's been more than five years since he's played in the league, right? I mean, he should be eventually if he's not like a first ballad, but I mean, he will be, I think. Then a little car on Anthony Towns, hot rookies, signatures for the T-Wolves. Put that one very nice. All right. So there's the first case, guys, but wait, guys, there's more. There's another case. I think the Cardogs. This was a two-caser. This was a one-caser, that would have been very sad for a lot of people. Hopefully we get a fresh crop of new hits for teams that haven't hit much yet, but again, obviously every case is different. Every team is represented in a hip parade, but sometimes some teams have a little bit more. Oh, is that right, Nick? You're in Minnesota? That would have been awesome for you. All right, well, who knows, man? 76 is right here, man. Let's go. We'll get a little Charles Barkley or something. Little Chuck. Brandon Clark, flawless RPA to 25. Great player there for the Memphis Grizzlies. Memphis Grizzlies, that is Terry. Jonathan Kaminga, up-and-coming rookie autographs from Optic Contenders. 17 out of 25, Golden State Warriors, Michael P. RJ Barrett for the Knicks. That's a fresh paint on card at 125. That was the last year that Crown... Yeah, Court Kings was on card. Sucks. Now they made it all stickers. Here we go, box four. And Frans Wagner. Choice signature from Optic or Donner's Choice, I should say. That's number... PSA nine, not numbered though, but very nice hit there for the Magic and Sean. Looks like we're getting some new teams. All right, after this box here, guys, we're halfway through the second case. Good luck. Little Bones Highland OptiGraphs. That's from Choice Edition as well. Nice one there for the Denver Nuggets. Denver Nuggets is Zachary. All right, guys, five more to go. There we go, 76ers, Joelle Embiid. And that is a variation prism, short print, PSA 10. And there you go, man, Sixers. That is going to Nick. Dennis Rodman. Top signatures auto for the Bulls to 12.99. Bulls, that's going to D-Lo. We have our Frenny Simons. On-car from Revolution, 18.19. Another one there for the Portland Troll Blazers and Eugene. Two more to go. We have a Hall of Fame signature, James Worthy, from Timeless Treasures. That is numbered at 10 from 2010, Timeless Treasures. Lakers, D-Lo. And last box here, we go. Let's pick up this one here, because if we didn't get a cell sheet in this one, then I wanted to see who else was the cell sheet hits. And we've got a BAM Adebayo rookie ascent. That is Miami Heat to 2.99. So, of course, Miami Heat with that one is going to D-Lo. And also, Nick, just to let you know, you know what's funny is that this is hip-rape autographed edition. Yours technically wasn't autographed, but I just went on to the cell sheet. And actually, your hit is actually a chaser. So that means that, technically, this is actually the top hit in the break. So I think it's funny, because every other one is an autograph, minus this one. But of course, I mean, this is probably better than some autographs of Jorlin Beat in general. But that was a cell sheet right there, too, as well, from this hip parade. So Nick only put up about, like, six of them. But those are the cell sheets from other cases, just in case we do some more later today. But I just wanted to show you that, because I thought that was kind of funny. So there you go, man, that's probably a pretty big hit. And there you go, folks. That was the break. A lot of nice stuff. So the Jorlin Beat was the big hit on this side. Opti-graphs there. Very, very nice stuff, guys. So again, I think we do have two more cases, so we can probably run it back. Jasbeasecasebreaks.com.


Who is a provider? What is a provider? Am I a provider? Welcome back to the channel, everybody. For those of you who are new around here, my name is Michael, aka Dr. Chilini, and I am a board certified diagnostic and interventional radiologist. I came across an interesting topic the other day when I was browsing the current medical topics, which is something I definitely do, however nerdy it may be. And I came across something I've actually been thinking about for a little while now. So let's go ahead and just jump right into it. So I came across this article and the title of this article was, we are no longer called physicians. Are we now called providers? Sounds interesting. And as always, I will put the link in the description box below. Now, so just by seeing this title, my ears and eyes kind of perked up, or maybe just my ears, because I don't think your eyes can really perk up so to speak anyways. The first time I ever heard the word provider was in residency. And at first I didn't know exactly what it meant or what people it was referring to or what groups of people it was referring to. I remember thinking, who is a provider? What is a provider? Am I a provider? I provide stuff. Does that make me a provider? What are they providing exactly? I was confused to say the least, but over the last five years, it has evolved to become kind of normal lexicon about the hospital. But without going too far into this topic, let's go ahead and do a dive into this article so we can discuss some of the specifics and provide a nice framework going forward, if you will. So the author starts this article by talking about the name you are given since birth and how important it is to you. Your parents must have spent hours and hours going through many, many books and whatever to find the perfect name that matches you perfectly. And just like the title and name that we are given has so much meaning, so does our professional title or the physician title that me and the author both share. She states that as physicians, our title has been taken under the Hippocratic oath, making it just as important as our given name, meaning it is important and powerful. And this states that we as physicians do no harm or injustice for our patients. And if we carry out this oath, we may gain, I quote, But if we break it down, it may have the opposite effect. So to summarize all of this, she's basically saying that the physician title is earned and it has its sacred, powerful value. However, she goes on to say that our physician title has been eroded over the years and we are no longer called physicians, but now we are called providers. Okay, so stay with me here. This is where it is interesting. She then goes on to talk about how the all-encompassing term providers is a way to dehumanize physicians. And because of that, we will no longer know who we are as physicians. And when you no longer know who you are, you will be lost. This is, yeah, very dramatic, but I know where she's going with this. When we do not know who we are as physicians and when we do not know how to use our title that was anointed to us, when we assume this role, we will be left confused, delirious, and lost without a sense of purpose. And when you're confused about who you are, how can you honor who you are? How can you be a healer and advocate for a patient or be a teacher? If you don't know where you are going, you will be lost. Okay, this is getting a little out of hand now with the drama here, but let's see how this ends. Let's hear it out. She then goes on to conclude by saying that it is important for us as physicians to rise up and come together and remove this confusing veil upon us and take back our title as physicians. In the final bit of text at the end of the article is perfect. It is hashtag, not a provider. How cheeky. Okay, so this was a very short article and it was dramatic as you can obviously see here, but I see her point. So let's break it down a little bit and see what I think about this all-encompassing term provider. What do I think a provider is? Do I want to be called a provider? Do I think this is a play to dehumanize physicians? Let's answer these three questions. What do I think a provider is? Well, for me personally, when I originally heard the term provider, I thought it was talking about a physician assistant or a nurse practitioner. I thought it was a way to combine both of those titles into one all-encompassing provider title. Therefore, you didn't have to call the floor and say, hey, is there a nurse practitioner or a physician assistant around to take my call? You could shorten it and just say, hey, is there a provider around? And usually the person answering the phone would know what you meant. And by the way, I am very, very guilty of doing just this. I call up floors all the time when I have an important finding that I see on the radiograph or CT or whatever. And I always ask, is there a provider around? And I never really thought about doing that until I read this article. I just sort of assumed that that's who I was referring to and everybody else knew that as well. And again, I just thought it was a shortened version of the title I've heard in the past, mid-level provider. And now they were just being called providers because I've seen some things where people didn't like being called mid-levels and all that kind of stuff. So I thought it was just shortened to providers. This was a little bit of ignorance on my part. However, as a radiologist who is cranking out many, many studies all day long, every single day at work, if I have a critical finding that I have to tell the PA, the NP, or the doctor about something stat, I call the floor and say, hey, can I speak to a provider? And what I realized when I used to just be referring to nurse practitioners or physician assistants, when I called the floors and asked to speak to a provider, what I really meant by that was, can I speak to a nurse practitioner, physician assistant, or a doctor? I have no idea why I thought this or why I even use the term provider, but I am definitely guilty of this. I am the problem. But to be honest, I'm not really into titles. I don't really ever pay attention to them that much. It's just not something I really am into. Titles aren't that important to me. And I don't need people to call me Dr. Jolini all the time. My patients, sure. And when my colleagues are talking in front of patients referring to me or whatnot, they should call me Dr. Jolini. But in respect to my other colleagues, co-workers, other physicians, MPs, PAs about the hospital, when you refer to me as Dr. Jolini and I worked with you and see you all day long, all the time, I feel like it's kinda weird. Just tell me, Michael. The people I work with know I'm a doctor, so I don't really think they need to reinforce it every single day, all day long, every time they talk to me. Like if I saw one of the nurses I worked with or one of the PAs at a restaurant that's like two blocks outside of my hospital, I would expect them to say, hey, Michael, not hey, Dr. Jolini. It is weird because that's only a two block distance. So in the confines of the hospital you have to be referred to as Dr. Jolini, but if you go outside, you don't have to be referred to as Dr. Jolini anymore. I don't know, it's a weird black or white kind of thing, but I hope the people I worked with would not call me Dr. Jolini if they saw me out at a restaurant. Just call me Michael. Also, I don't really want everybody in the restaurant to know I'm a doctor. Is that weird? And I especially don't want them to know I'm a doctor on a plane. So if you ever see me on a plane, don't say Dr. Jolini, just say Michael or Jolini or if you wanna whisper Dr. Jolini, that's fine too. Because the last thing people want on a plane when there's a medical emergency is a radiologist, sad truth. Now, I mean, to be honest, if there was a medical emergency, I could probably get through it. Like I can dig back deep, remember my whole like ACLS protocol, that kind of stuff. Like I still got it in me, but I would much rather have like an emergency physician do that stuff instead of a radiologist. I'm a little out of practice when it comes to that stuff, but I'm not gonna sell myself short. I can still handle it, but I just wouldn't prefer to. Okay, I'd address. So yeah, the whole title thing is not my thing. I always introduce myself to my co-workers as Michael and this may be a generational thing. My old program director in residency used to always introduce himself by his first name. And anytime you called him doctor last name, he would always correct you and say, no, call me by my first name. Even as a resident, he does that with all the staff, everybody. But again, I guess I do kind of care about titles because I always introduce myself to patients as Dr. Cellini. So here I am being hypocritical, sweet. I would never walk into a room and say, hey, I'm provider Cellini. That just sounds weird. And the patient probably like, what? What are you providing me? So I clearly see the author's point on this that it can be confusing. Labeling PAs, NPs and doctors promotes more confusion around the workplace and especially patients. And for that reason, anything that promotes more confusion amongst patients in the workplace, I'm against.  There's already enough confusion between titles and who's wearing what code. Why promote more confusion? And yes, I know that I'm being a little contradicting here by saying I don't care about titles, but then I also care about titles. But at the end of the day, it's just about decreasing global confusion, which makes me have to care about the title. So I don't care about the title, but I also don't want people to be confused, which forces me to care about the title. I'm probably not making like any sense at this point, but hopefully you're all sticking with me here. So I kind of answer the second question. Do I want to be called a provider? The answer is no, I want to be called a physician. That's my title. I don't need to be called something else or another title that someone wants me to be called. I'm a physician and that's what I should be called. However, if someone called down to my radiology department and asked, is there a provider around? What am I supposed to do? Like act like I didn't hear it. Tell them a doctor is around, but not a provider or just pick up the phone and say, there is no provider around. You know what I mean? I don't want to be called a provider, but I will answer to it if I am called a provider. What kind of backwards world and video is this? I'm just making no sense. So hopefully you all are following along. Hopefully you haven't turned off the video yet. We're almost done. So the final question here is, do I think being called a provider is dehumanizing to physicians? The answer is no, I think that's a little dramatic and a little excessive. I don't feel dehumanized if I'm called a provider. I usually just answer it and don't even think twice about it. I don't think it completely devalues everything I've worked for and done the last decade or so of my life. I will say though, it is kind of strange how integrated it is amongst the hospital lexicon already. I used to hear it all the time and I'm personally guilty of saying it myself. I told you, I'm just as guilty as the next person and I am the problem. So in conclusion, I personally don't care about being called a doctor in general amongst my colleagues, coworkers and all that stuff. However, I am against anything that promotes more confusion amongst the hospital setting and more specifically patients. So for that reason, I think physicians should be called physicians and the rest of the healthcare team should be called by their specific titles or their names or whatever they prefer. After all, do we really need an all-encompassing term to classify everybody on the healthcare team? Don't we just call them just that, a team? Like why don't I just call the floor and ask for someone on the team? Why do I ask for a provider? Those are things I'm going to change going forward. So I will replace provider with team. I don't wanna promote more confusion in the workplace. So goodbye to the word provider. You've had a good run. Let me know in the comments what your thoughts on this topic are. Do you like the term provider? Do you not like the term provider?  Let me know your thoughts as well.  I'm curious to know your thoughts, seriously. So as always, make sure you subscribe to my channel, follow me on Instagram and TikTok if you don't already. And as always, I'll see you all on the next video. Bye.


Arreo Ono Kakamfu of Yoruba Land Iba Gani Adams has knocked politicians playing the ethnic card and failing to abide by the rules of the electoral process. He was speaking at a virtual international conference attended by participants from six continents, Iba Adams said the INEC is currently facing global condemnation for failing to ensure smooth conduct of elections. He noted that the failure of the BVAS to transmit election results electronically betrayed the hope and trust of Nigerians. Meanwhile, the Oraneze Ndibu in Lagos State, chapter of the All Progressive Congress APC, has appealed to Nigerians over the statement credited to Chief Emmanuel Mayong and Reverend Father Ibube Monso, denigrating the Yoruba's and members of the house community. Addressing the press in Lagos, the apex leader of Ndibu and APC in Lagos, Jo Ibube, was also the special advisor to the Lagos State Gov. Babajide Sanwaru on Drinities and Water Resources, appealed to the two to withdraw their statements and apologize to the entire country. The press conference is all about Reverend Father Ibube Monso and Chief Emmanuel Otrances that can cause trouble for our people who are living in other cities, in other states, we want them. Our final message is that those two, those two personnel who have to withdraw their statements and apologize to come now, they are hitting up the policy, they are hitting up the policy and it's not good for us. We are coming from this land, 31 hours, because we are a big brother, big senior brother, and a priest. On behalf of Nigerians, we are also happy that we won't take the news words too seriously.


Hello there, today we are doing a bit of bug fixing because I have been sent not this but this bug which is normal let's say pop up of widgets place on desktop have a visual glitch so okay what is this visual glitch it looks like this and here bottom right and we can see that these weird line should not in fact be there so the user is indeed right this is a bug steps to reproduce add users which are widget to desktop and click on it so let's go for it step one try to see if you can actually reproduce the bug it's a pretty important thing so users which are as we've set and then we just click on it and there is indeed a bug I had already checked so I knew about it so we have this vertical line that should not be there so in theory in theory I just look at this and say okay someone screwed up but it's not my fault so it's fine but I received a message and we can see here David Edmondson saying it's this compact applet draws a line between the applet dialogue and the panel blah blah blah I did that it's my line which means that it is indeed my fault and I screwed up which also means that I should fix this so let's try to do that so let's open up that particular line that apparently according to David Edmondson and I do trust David Edmondson on this these things is causing the bug so it's in KD source frameworks if I remember correctly plasma framework source and it was somewhere let's just compact no what was it again compact applet let's just run fine grab compact with capital C compact applet.qml where are you and what I got the wrong repository I was pretty sure it was there maybe it's KD workspace and plasma workspace okay let me say that it's been quite some time since I system tray what now this can't be it must be something else plasma desktop it has been some time since I last like work for KD and stuff oh it's this one so I don't remember like anything forgive me so what is going on CD desktop package consents applet right I need to go here and then we can open up compact applet the line is 202 look how pretty is the new we I think we need to revert something about this but in general how pretty is the new thingy with you know touch touch support so pretty I like it okay so let's get back to work draws a line okay so what is going on what is this line saying why is everything so first of all sorry first of all I'm saying top is either undefined or parent top depending if you're on the bottom edge in general what is this line the concept is if you open up this thingy you can see that there is a very small line between the widget and the panel which was recently added by me which is why I am here trying to fix stuff and apparently if none of the plasma location fit these such as when you were my when you have a widget on the desktop let's add it back kickoff also we called it launcher kickoff also have this bug so it's pretty big and let's see how to fix so the concept here is there's nowhere to actually draw the line between the applet and the panel which means that it draws a giant line on top of everything I guess let's try if this is let's check if it this is actually the bug we're if this is actually the fix so let's just hide the line all together if this fixes it well it means that David Edmondson here is right we could avoid this step entirely because I'm sure he already tried this and that's why he is saying that that line is at fault but let's just indeed see that something is wrong where is it caddy workspace plasma desktop desktop and then it was desktop I just need to make it stop so it will take potentially a while because it's compiling so and it's done it too a while like half an hour but we're back so maybe sorry about that so let's see if it works so we source the prefix and restart plasma shell like this but anyway are you still watch these little recording and stuff yes seems like so so that's gone nice as we were saying we should have restarted plasma shell by now well it's working on it no hurry whatsoever plasma okay okay but did it also restart the wallpaper stuff well I mean the bug is gone so it was clearly that so yes David was right this is the problem now of course we can just get rid of the line because it was supposed to be there but we can see in what case should we hide it and well we should hide it when there's no panel attached to it and the question therefore is how do we know when a panel is not attached to the line thankfully we don't have to like work it out ourselves completely because David Edmondson also suggested a solution here which is potentially just needs a visible plasmid location equals left or top and what does that mean so basically plasmid location has a value that could be like bottom left top and right depending on the panel position plus another value which I think is floating or something like that we'll check when it's on the desktop or something else so let's immediately check out what kind of values do we have in plasmid location again we've got these things in theory there should be another so plus my core types we'll just Google the documentation usually that works really well and we've got it here we are expecting left edge right edge top edge bottom edge and floating so left edge location yes floating desktop full screen makes sense and then top edge both okay so we've also got floating desktop full screen top edge okay so what we can do at this point is only show the line if we are in a edge so how do we know that what values are this where is it this is an enum so I guess it's what is this we can what's a pretty way to do that we could say I think it's so we only show this if plasmoid location has the flag plasmacore types bottom edge or plasmacore types top edge or you got idea plasmacore plasmacore types right edge or plasmacore type left edge this is messing with flags but I think it should work I don't remember the default behavior of enumeration so honestly I'm not a big C++ guy sorry about that and let's see if we can find this left edge okay so it just takes the default values floating in zero desktop then must be like one full screen two four eight sixteen something like that I don't remember though or is it just zero one two three four five and then I'm messing up mmm it must be zero one two three four five so I am not supposed to use flux here so is there a better way to do this it was also suggesting the form factor and let's see form factor form factor planner medicine horizontal vertically application is this this one is there a property form factor from the plasmide which I never used it so and KDA plasmide I think it's something like this form factor let's see if we get anything out of it mm-hmm applet interface sounds about right which indeed uses form factor variable so that makes sense and the values are planner that the applet lives in a plane and has two degrees of freedom to grow okay media center which is a weird value then horizontal vertical and the application I don't think this helps at all because just according to the documentation documentation sorry the applet should be planner both when it's on the desktop and attached to the panel so that probably doesn't help much and how can we so I mean I guess the only way is literally the very ugly but I mean if it works it works and plasmide gation equals plasma core dives left edge or this thing four times there's probably better with that honestly I can figure figure out right now I don't know if you have some suggestions I'll be open to your them right edge top edge and bottom edge let's see if this works right away so not that I need to compile first compile please do not take up an hour again okay that work then let's restart plasmash on yet again sorry about that plasmash on don't hit on me and let's wait for the panel to actually appear to know that everything is still working just fine and then if we pop up this thing there's no ugly line so that's good but is there a line if I open the calendar yes there is so this looks like it worked hopefully nothing's broken but I don't think there's like a chance that anything is broken this is such a small change that surely I won't have to do another video fixing other stuff about this and then we just take this and put it in the KD chat and we're done I was probably not supposed to put it in the VDG chat it's not that important and it's just a bug this but let's pretend it's actually meaningful and we're done so it only took like I think 15 minutes or so it was a small bug and David Edmondson had already done a great job finding it finding the issue there but I will try to do another devlog very soon so stay tuned subscribe blah blah blah blah it's compiling so


This is Think Tech Hawaii, Community Matters here. Hey, welcome to Out and About on Think Tech Live streaming network series broadcast from our downtown studio at Pioneer Plaza at the core of downtown Honolulu. I'm your host, Winston Welch, and delighted you are joining us today, where every other week we explore a variety of topics, organizations, events, and the people who fuel them in our city, state, nation and world. As a disclaimer, any views or opinions expressed by me are strictly my own, and then sometimes it stops at the top of my head, but they're not connected with any organization that I might be affiliated with. Joining me in the studio today, I am delighted to have Christopher Garth, and we are going to be talking about the Hawaii Dispensary Alliance, which is a patient-centered group of businesses, individuals, and political leaders, educating and advocating on behalf of medical cannabis. And so with that, I'd like you to welcome you to the show today, Chris, and thanks for being here. Winston, thanks so much. It's an honor. It's a privilege not only to be here, but to work with you. It's just been a little while since we've been acquainted with one another, but we've got a lot of things in common and a lot of common goals, and it's good. It's real good to be here. That's true. It's nice to meet people who are on the same page in so many different areas of life. What you're doing, I think, is just really exciting and important and necessary, and you're fighting a battle against almost 100 years of public perception, or 75 years of public perception, and then you're fighting the state, lethargy, and that's probably harder than public perception according to a recent newsletter that you put out. So tell me, what is the Hawaii Dispensary Alliance, and what are your goals and aims in the organization? So you pegged it with the intro, almost as if you read it off of our website, or got it off the website, but congratulations. It's right off the top of your head, and I appreciate that. But we are a patient-centric organization that really looks to create a cannabis marketplace for medical marijuana, or medical cannabis, and the dynamics of the ecology that create an economy based on medical cannabis are pretty simple, pretty straightforward and very similar to any other marketplace, or essentially a Chamber of Commerce, if you will, and that's what we're working to do. We want to promote the ancillary services that make access to cannabis much easier, that make cannabis healthier, safer, and ultimately give back to the community and create a sense of acceptance for medical cannabis as we move forward. And how long have you been established in what you've been doing? Hawaii Dispensary Alliance was founded in 2015, just after the bill was signed to have dispensaries. Just after the bill was signed to have dispensaries. So we had a lot of hubba-vallu about that, because since 2000, was it that we became the first state in the nation to pass medical marijuana laws, but had no way to get it to the patients, no legal way to grow it, or sell it, or buy it, or is that right? Yeah, that's accurate. And I think one of the most important caveats of this point is that Hawaii was the first state to legislate the acceptance of medical cannabis, to program it and be part of the Constitution or part of the state function. And there were other states that passed by referendum or voter initiative earlier, but our legislators took a bold stance in the early 2000s, late 90s, and said, hey, this is real, this is medicine. Let's not criminalize those who actually need it and give them the go-ahead. That being said, for the next 18 years, they didn't really do anything or provide the legal ability or availability of cannabis to get in the hands of those patients who need it most, but that's what happened in 2015. And so in 2015, the law was passed and said, we're going to create a mechanism where people can go into a store and say, here's my medical marijuana card. Let me buy the medicine that I would like to have. Absolutely, that's correct. And we were kind of following on the coattails of some other states on the mainland or even other countries that had really worked out the kinks in one sense or another of what a dispensary should be. And the laws that ultimately govern access to a dispensary. But yeah, that's what happened in 2015. And in the three years since then, there has been slow progress, but progress nonetheless. Very slow progress, because I would say what we have three dispensaries that are functionally open now, is that what it is? That's correct. Four of the licensees have been given the green light to sell. Three of those are open for business on a daily basis. And the fourth one, which is on Maui, is open, but in more of a private consultation capacity. So how many patients are we talking about that are actually being served versus the market that should be being served? Good question. So of the three that we have open, we have the state sees about 500 patients going to essentially each one of those a month. So 1,500 patients are going to three dispensaries. 1,500 out of a population of 1.4 million. Correct. Now, we can tailor that down a little bit by recognizing that there are only 20,000 registered patients by the state of Hawaii in Hawaii. But still, 1,500 out of 20,000 is not a way to support an industry or to create that economy. That's incredible. So you've got 20,000 that have actually said, I'm going to go to the doctor. I'm going to pay some money. I'm going to get a card for my ailment. And it's not a whole bunch of ailments that are actually covered, is it? Well, the Hawaii Dispensary Alliance, along with our allies, have done a really good job over the past three years in educating not only the legislature, but the administration as well to improve the number of qualifying conditions. So in the four years, in the three years that we've been about, we have improved the number by at least six qualifying conditions to make us or to bring us up to speed with the majority of the more progressive medical cannabis states across the nation. Okay. So there you can definitely count some progress towards at least recognizing some conditions, although I'm sure there's a lot that still absolutely need to be recognized. It may not be recognized at this case. But why is there such a difference between the 1,500 and the 20,000 that you've got that have insurance, that have the medical marijuana cards, but that are not going to these dispensaries? Why are they not going to dispensaries? Well, part of it is location. Two of Oahu's Open Dispensaries are about 100 feet away from each other in the central core of Honolulu. And we see, well, previously we had seen the majority of our patients on the Big Island or on Maui. So it's just a matter of maybe location? Location and convenience is one component, but beyond that, as each of these institutions does the best that they can to grow and manufacture and provide their customers or the patients with the best quality of product, they're limited in the availability of the product that they can actually produce. And that's not necessarily because of the law, although it is part of it. It's ultimately because it's cost prohibitive for a single institution to create the entire scope of what's needed to help and aid every single patient's qualifying condition in a form that agrees with their lifestyle. So you mean, are you talking that these companies, let's say these three companies, do they have to literally plant the seeds in the ground, follow them all the way to the store and then only offer them in a smokable form? You have the first part of it correct. This, our medical program is designed as a vertical operation where each licensee has to track from seed to sale. So they grow it, they cure it, they manufacture it, and then they retail it. And they can sell it in smokable flour. There is an opportunity to have oils and other tinctures. We don't have edibles yet, we don't have vape cartridges, but we have workarounds that the legislature has been very accommodating in a more grand sense to allow the availability of different products to come to market. But in the end, the lack of resources and the lack of variety in these dispensaries comes down to the simple fact that they themselves are responsible for the production of the entire array of everything that they want to sell. So if they don't make it, then they don't sell it? That's correct. So your group is a group of a lot of different kinds of businesses, and maybe they want to be involved in maybe manufacturing different types of things. Maybe people would rather have a lozenge or some gum or some brownies as a cliche. It is cliche, but it's appropriate. And it's not only the brownies, if you will, or the lozenge or the gum, but it's the different varietals, the different strains, the different cultivars, which is the new term of what a patient needs. Right now, each dispensary at any given point has somewhere between five and seven different cultivars, different strains that they turn into different product. But if you go into a dispensary in a medical state or into even an adult use or rec state where they have a horizontally operated program, you have hundreds, if not thousands, of different strains, different THC, different CBD content, different ways, again, product to imbibe. And we've actually limited ourselves in an incredible fashion by limiting the number of players. And the way that those players are responsible for essentially creating their own destiny. So it would be a similar situation might be likened to, although because we're talking medical use, I don't want to go to the obvious one of alcohol, but let's say alcohol, where you are allowed two bars in the city and those bars sell three kinds of beer. And that's it. That's it. If you don't like those three kinds of beers in those two locations, then what do we do? What are some of the obstacles that we're really looking at here that we need to overcome that are just clear and obvious? There are a lot of considerations with that. And none of them are wildly popular with, we'll call it the oligopoly. The eight licensees who host those licenses and their investors want to see and ultimately need to see a return on their investment. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. They should be encouraged to do their best not only for their bottom line but for the patients. And there's a balance to it. However, in their determination to keep that market, the cannabis market in Hawaii as small and limited as possible, they're ultimately tripping over their own feet. In response to that, it's been our experience and the experience of our cannabis community as a whole. The legislators ultimately want to see these eight licensees get that return on their investment. They don't want to see them fail. I can't imagine that there are a lot of people out there that want to see a business fail. The only people who may are those who would rather have received that license or that accreditation to play in the market. That's unfortunate. All eight of these licensees should be encouraged to prosper. But in their short-sighted attempt to control the market and to keep other competition or other interests at bay, they're shooting themselves in the foot, plain and simple. So maybe some actions that you have about this, I know you've created a super pack here in Hawaii that's going to help advance the agenda by contributing to specific legislative campaigns. That's not quite exactly it. So a super pack is a non-candidate direct program. So the super pack doesn't actually go to a campaign and say, hey, we want to contribute. That is illegal. That's definitely not what the super pack does. That's what a 501C4 usually does or a 501C3, which is a candidate direct spending organization. Super pack doesn't. They're issue-focused and they say, hey, this is the issue. People should get involved. And so it's an educational form as it's what it's going to be. And what is the name of that super pack if people want to know more about that? You can check it out at www.hi as in hi, the number four and cann.org. www.hi. Number four. Number four. Cann.org. And that's short for Hawaii for responsible cannabis use. Hawaii for responsible cannabis use. Absolutely. Okay, we're going to take a short break. I'm Winston Weltson. We're having a very interesting discussion out and about on Think Tech Live Streaming Network series. We'll be back in just a moment. Aloha. I'm Keeley Ikeena and I'm here every other week on Mondays at 2 o'clock p.m. on Think Tech Hawaii's Hawaii Together. In Hawaii Together we talk with some of the most fascinating people in the islands about working together, working together for a better economy, government and society. So I invite you into our conversation every other Monday at 2 p.m. on Think Tech Hawaii Broadcast Network. Join us for Hawaii Together. I'm Keeley Ikeena. Aloha. Planning all week for the day of the big game. Watching at home just doesn't feel the same. What on the list is who's going to drive? It's nice to know you're going to get home alive. Planning for fun and responsibility. Choose the DG. Captain of our team. It's the DG. For every game day, assign a designated driver. Aloha. And we're back. We're live. I'm Winston Welton. This is out and about on Think Tech Live streaming network series. We're talking with Chris Garth, dedicated and passionate. I'm going to call you even a public servant from the Hawaii Dispensary Alliance. Even though you don't work for the state, you work for a group of organizations promoting responsible use of, can we say cannabis or is it just medical cannabis? Are we talking recreational as well? Okay. So great question. The issue at hand is medical cannabis, right? But recognizing the shortfallings of the industry, the failings of it essentially, patients aren't getting the access that they need. We only have 20,000 out of 1.4 million. Now, I don't expect everybody to use cannabis. It's just for whatever ALSM and a therapeutic manner in a medicinal manner, that makes perfect sense. But we should be significantly higher as a patient population. Maybe 2 to 3% of the patient population is a medical user registered and accounted for. Here we have 20,000 registered patients out of our vast population, general population in Hawaii. 1,500 we've established are essentially going to the dispensaries. At least of the registered patients, an incredible number in the lurch because they're not getting their cannabis. The only way that we see fit as the Hawaii Dispensary Alliance, that we see fit for them to get their cannabis is to encourage an adult use or a recreational market. It levels the playing field, allows for more competition, provides diversity and ultimately inclusion in that market. And inclusion is a huge component to seeing any market or any economy actually survive or thrive. If you have an oligopoly or just a few people at the table, they're the only ones that are calling the shots and they're the only ones that see any benefit from it. That limited amount of power really doesn't play well for the people who need access to it or desire an opportunity to participate in that. And as a trade association, that's really what we're all about. How do we get the patients what they need and how do we encourage the businesses to provide what they need? Because you're essentially a business Chamber of Commerce, are you not? We are. We're a self-declared 501C6. You're C6. Right? So we're a Chamber of Commerce. We're a business league. We're a trade association much like the Rainbow Chamber of Commerce. Rainbow Chamber of Commerce. So you're really trying to promote business here in a responsible, legal, safe manner. Exactly. And as we've seen in other states, some of them have shockingly legalized marijuana. You can buy marijuana. You can walk into a store like walking into a store. Just buy your recreational marijuana in whatever form you see fit. And somehow the sky has not fallen. In fact, we're seeing, I think if we look at some of these states, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, the numbers are staggering with the revenue that they're getting. And also with the other side where people say, well, if we start legalizing this, Chris, there's going to be reefer madness. Kids aren't going to go to school. Everyone's going to be laying in the streets. You know, all of these kind of myths that are stuck in our heads somewhere. But you have lots of evidence to the contrary on this. I think a really excellent newsletter that you just put out that came out. And let's see, what's the title of your... Is it just part of the newsletter that you sent out in January? This is... We always call it the cannabis insider. And we have a staff member, Kevin Whitten, if you're out there listening. You do an incredible job for us. Thank you very much. We couldn't be who we are without you. So Kevin Whitten, formerly of Green Magazine, puts this together, works with us in the office every day. And he really hits the pavement making sure that we have the best coverage from across the industry, not only locally, but nationwide and internationally as well to make sure that the perspective is covered, that the information is there, that the facts are correct. Yes. And when you read this, it's very clear, simple, direct. It's an excellent summary of where we're at in Hawaii and where we need to move toward to in the direction and how we need to do it. It's a good roadmap about advocacy, education, policies that need to be changed. So given that these other states have already done this, our Western brothers and sisters, California, I think, Alaska. In fact, I guess it's all the West Coast. Every single West Coast state, aside from us, has gone with an adult use recreational program. And in this next year coming up, we're seeing this across the nation, not just in the West, but maybe in the Northeast and in the Midwest. Absolutely. And in the South as well. And even in the South. So we're seeing a groundswell of reality hitting that says, people want to use POD. It's safe, non-toxic. You don't get spikes in emergency room admissions. You know, when we compare this, I mean, it's an adult product that people may choose or choose not to use. But when we don't legalize it, of course, we're criminalizing what percent of the population that does actually use cannabis. Do you have any statistics? I don't know the statistics, but it's incredible, right? And let's go back to something that you pointed out. While everyone may be, well, while certain sectors of society may be afraid of what could happen with an adult use program, people lying in the streets, Winston, they're already in the streets. The United States as well as Hawaii are in the throes of an opioid epidemic. If you haven't noticed, that's what's happening. Every single neighborhood has vagrancy. They have new shopping carts that disappear out of nowhere. That's not because of cannabis. It's not because of some strange thing that's happening in Hawaii or in your neighborhood. That's opioid addiction. That is, it's sweeping across our communities. Cannabis has been effective as an exit drug for people who have opioid addiction disorder. There's actually a bill that's coming out in this legislative session that aims to address that to say, hey, if you do suffer clinically from opioid addiction disorder, let's allow you to access cannabis as an exit drug. Really, it's some forward thinking that in these bills, and this year you said there's over 90 bills that are in the legislature and you're tracking several of the more important ones, that like this, I mean obviously it has to start somewhere, what can we do as ordinary citizens who would be calling our legislators or how do we even track these bills and know what's important? Where do we look? So Hawaii Dispensory Alliance keeps everybody up to speed on what's happening legislatively. Being involved in politics as long as I have at the local level, it's kind of a passion of mine. So we nerd out and we post here and there and we encourage everyone to read up on what's out there and we provide hearing notices. We share that with our membership or on social media and we even help you provide or draft testimony if you choose to engage. Definitely calling your representative, calling your senator, is a huge part of it, but keep in mind, ladies and gentlemen, this is an election year, so get out there and make sure that you ask the questions appropriately to people running in your neighborhood, for your neighborhood board or for your city council seat, for your house seat or for your senate seat, even the lieutenant governor and the governor seat are up for reelection or if not change. That opportunity is all yours and do your due diligence. If you have questions, don't hesitate. Reach out to the whole dispensary alliance. If it's cannabis related, we're happy to help and provide you with as much information as possible. I think that's really important to have people realize it's their responsibility, it's their duty as citizens to become involved in issues that are important, not just to them, but to the community. And as you say, we need to be looking at cannabis. It's not a problem, but it's a solution. We need to be looking at this as a way to turn around our economy or enhance our economy that is based on tourism. We could have a can of tourism economy here very easily. I mean, it's already, we have that reputation, I think, in some sense anyway of Maui Waori and Kona Gold, but if we could just say, yeah, this is safe, it's legal, it's available, it's easy, it's locally sourced, it's organic, this is this trade. You're talking huge numbers of jobs and businesses that are going to be created and attacks revenue as well. Right. So, I mean, the arguments in favor of cannabis are huge, right? Through a well-regulated, robust, and diverse program. They're phenomenal. As far as returns for the state are financially, it's unmatched. Well, I guess the only thing better would be government dollars and actual tourism itself in its heart, right? That's where most of the money comes from for a state. But as far as job creation goes, as far as education goes, specifically with cannabis, there's so much that can benefit everyone in Hawaii if they want to get involved. And again, this is the business community leader in me that says, hey, let's come together, let's create these other institutions around cannabis and that's our avenue, that's our opportunity as a whole. Convincing everyone to participate is a little bit more trying than it should be and that's the reality that's facing the Hawaii Dispensary Alliance right now, as well as the cannabis industry as a whole. People want to coast. They think that somebody else is going to do it for them. And as you mentioned, it's up to them. And we're taking a good stance right now, very firm in our commitment to bringing medical cannabis to Hawaii. Unfortunately, we've been blocked in several capacities. So, hey, let's flip the script. If you want cannabis, let's make it legal. And do something about it. And just know right that if, you know, if you're having any quandaries about this and you're thinking, well, I'm not sure about this. Is this, is this, is this, no, so someone else is going to do something if it's important. No, we are the ones that need to do something about it. We need to be involved with whatever topic it is. But I really urge people and our viewers today or that watch us online later to go to your website, which is HawaiiDispensaryAlliance.org. That's correct. And Hawaii is spelled out. Or you could probably Google the same thing and you'll pop up right at the top and read your really excellent opus treatise of January of this year. We'll call it a trade publication. A trade publication. So the simple fact that every Chamber of Commerce trade association, 511c6 Business League should be providing this kind of information, this caliber of information that's deep, that's insightful, that provides direction and asks all of its participants the question, what can we do better? How can I be better as a business owner or as I get involved? How can I empower this community to be successful? I think it, and that's just a perfect way to end this. I do recommend that people go there and find out some really good information about your terrific organization, the work that you've been doing passionately and that could really bring a lot of benefits which we haven't gone into this time so I hope you will come back another time and talk some more in the future. Absolutely. We got a lot to talk about. And I really appreciate you being here today and shedding some light on this.  And for others, pretty clear, but you've given us a lot of insight and I appreciate that. Thank you, Winston. So we are out of time and we will have to wrap it up here. I'm Winston Welch and this is Out and About on ThinkTech live streaming network series. We've been talking with Christopher Garth of the Hawaii Dispensory Alliance and sincerely appreciate you being here. Thanks for tuning in. We welcome your feedback and we want to thank our broadcast engineer, Ian Davidson, our technical producer, Ray Sangaling, our floor manager, Robert McLean, who's back from the flu this week, and to Jay Fidel, our executive producer, who's put this all together and thanks especially Jay and Carol Monley for being such great supporters of the community and a diversity of ideas. I'll see you here every other Monday at 3 p.m. for more of Out and About on ThinkTech. Hawaii, aloha everyone.