The fire community suffered a tragic loss this last year when a firefighter was killed by a falling snag. This event was a sobering reminder of a serious hazard that we work under on a regular basis. The incident response pocket guide addresses the concern we have for snags and hazard trees under the section called Hazard Tree Safety. Please refer to this as we go back to the 2003 fire season and listen to a division supervisor that was on the B&B complex in Oregon. He's going to talk about an injury he had to deal with regarding hazard trees. Yesterday we had an incident where an individual was working and mopping up in this division, Division Delta. And he was mopping up under a tree that was a fork tree. It had about a five inch top on it at the fork. And one side of the fork had burned out, the other side was still standing. And the other side was about three inches or so in diameter. And that side of that fork, while he was working on that tree, when he was working he apparently jarred the tree somehow or something happened and made that fork kick out of it. The other side of that fork kicked out.  And it knocked him down and he had some real severe pain in his right leg. Oftentimes when people and crews go look in the forest and they're always talking about hazards in a general sense, it's not the big thing that's going to kill you. It's the load of things in my opinion because most folks can see big things. But most people walking through the woods can't see the load of things that's falling out of a 120 foot dump fur. The things that we try to look for while we out here, especially in the mop up stage because we're going in the interior, is stuff like this. When you're working around this and you've got to go mop up, it's kind of hard to, when people get really focused on what they're doing as opposed to looking up. And if you've got wind, like we had these winds today, this stuff blows out of a tree and you may hear it and you may not.  And if the wind's blowing and the tree's been uprooted for some reason during the fire or ate out what they call a cat face where you can't see, can't see it because you're on the backside of it and that's a problem. So we try to make sure that all the crews are aware of the hazards that are out here and how to look for them and how to recognize them so that we won't continually have the accidents like we had yesterday. You know, I referenced this book here that talks about hazard tree indicators and environmental conditions and tree defect and bug kill trees. So that even a person that doesn't really have a whole lot of knowledge in terms of timber or trees, they can recognize when they're in a hazardous situation or next to a hazardous tree. Once a hazard tree is identified, some people say you get a tree link on a half way but I take out the half and I say two tree links away.  You're not in that path of that woodmaker and it could get you. So I feel like two tree links away is a fair distance, a safe distance for one to be able to stand back and watch and see what happens. For this next exercise, we're going to show you a video clip of a burned out area with numerous hazard trees. Let's assume that you've just been asked by your supervisor to mop up this section. Now watch closely because after viewing this clip, you're going to be asked to get into your groups and explain whether or not you would accept this assignment and if so, how are you going to mitigate the obvious hazards. Assume that your supervisor has just approached you and wants this area to be mopped up 100% because of its close proximity to residential houses. This video clip was taken the previous day and your supervisor is showing it to you so that you'll have a good idea of what you're walking into. He notes that the weather forecast calls for variable southwest winds between 3 and 5 miles per hour with occasional gusts up to 10 miles per hour. Now let's get into our groups and complete the exercise in your student workbook.


Hello everyone, this is Mr. P. On today's lesson, we're going to look at how to write a myth and some writing tips So let's get started Before writing, what is a myth? A myth can be that of creation or a heroic one A creation myth is an imaginary story that explains the existence of the world A heroic myth instead is based on the quest of a hero to defeat a monster Myths often include animals that talk, gods, goddesses, monsters and other supernatural characters Who have the power to make extraordinary things happen So step number one, brainstorming Myths are stories that explain some kind of natural phenomenon or human behavior Our ancestors found an explanation for incomprehensible things or events in these stories In order to start writing your own myth, try using the following warm-up tips They could help you begin to plan your story So tip number one Decide on writing either a creation or heroic myth Step number two, if you decide on a creation myth, decide what your myth explains Answer why or how of something, for example the creation of the sun Why does the moon appear at night? Why does it rain, etc?  Why does your hero have these special talents, if any? Did the gods bless the hero? Did the hero train hard or was the hero just born that way? It would be better if you added some flaws to your hero so that it seems more realistic Number six, brainstorm magical characters Example witches, gods, monsters, magical items and imaginary places all make a myth entertaining and larger than life Think about its setting. Your myth can be set in ancient Greece, China, Italy, etc Myths are mainly set in the past since they told stories about the beginning of time Step number two and here is your writing So number one, write in simple direct language Use the past simple, past continuous or past progressive and past perfect tenses Indent the first sentence and double-space your work Avoid long sentences, don't include your personal opinion Number two, write in mythological style Imitate the style of real myths, use iconic symbols such as numbers, animals, characters, etc Use the same structure for several sentences in a row For example, five days he went up into the sky and five days he walked down to the to go to Gulag Five days he was transformed into a snake Give people a short descriptive epithet Example Dionysius the wolf repeller or Apollo carrier of the Bay branches Number three, introduce the setting and protagonist that will be your main character Important again set the myth in the distant past or a distant land Use expressions such as once upon a time, long long time ago, far away in Describe the protagonist, age, body, height, etc Number four, create a reason for the protagonist to do something For example, seeing all the people dying, Beowulf decided to kill Grendel Step number five, continue the story This is done by introducing a new character or a new situation or a challenge to create interest in the story Number six, finish the myth Often a myth ends with a sentence explaining why the story is related to the present day Number seven, edit your myth. This is very important. Do not forget to edit your story Go through it and correct spelling and grammar mistakes as well Then have a friend take a second look in case you missed something Add to your work literary devices such as personification, onomatopoeia, metaphors and similes to make your story more captivating Step number three, hand in. Give it a final revision before handing it in Hand in your work to your teacher to give you a final mark So let's recap Step number one, we talked about brainstorm Step number two, we talked about writing and the third Most important part is to hand in your work to your teacher So, I hope you enjoyed the lesson. If you have some questions, please write them under this video lesson. If you haven't subscribed to my channel, please do If you liked the lesson, please click on the like If you want to share the lesson, please do Then have a great day and till next time. Bye. Bye


I definitely was the kid who was overly nervous for my high school speeches that were like two minutes long and I definitely hated being in front of crowds. I want him to succeed to the level that he wants to succeed to. We'll get there. There's just countless times where people have been like, man, I saw that video you did. It's definitely inspired a lot of people, I can tell. Everything's been really good.  Since the last CDC, I've played about 150 shows. We're here at the Playdium. We're going to have the best show ever tonight. We just got to go check out the stage earlier and it's the craziest stage. I heard that we were playing the shows and I've almost been trying to not go there until like, until we get on stage even just because I know I've done that once or twice at venues where I don't see the crowd until I walk up on stage and it's always just an amazing view and amazing experience. Just the fact that we booked one show to play there was amazing for us. We sold the first one out in 14 minutes and when we saw that, like I called Derek and I was like, dude, we should do a second show. So, you know, now we have two nights back to back. It's definitely going to be in terms of like production and like lighting and like visuals, like way better than any of the other shows we've done together. So I'm really, definitely really excited for that. I think the pinnacle or the moment where I kind of realized like I was just at the next step, I guess, and my career was at EDC this year, especially because contrasting with last year, you know, I was playing the first set. This year I played 11-30 to 12-30 on like one of the biggest stages and yeah, it was just insane. Recently, I've just been focusing on collaborations, a little outdone one with Dylan Francis, Flux Pavilion, you know, me and the Slander guys have worked on a few more things together.  Like we're doing these two LA shows, we just did EDC, which is in Las Vegas. We both have, it's called, like, the Vibrations Tour and it's going to be 36 dates. It's been cool to be able to communicate with those types of kids who are where I was, you know, kind of like share a little bit of inspiration and kind of motivate them to keep going. It's just really rewarding to see that the beliefs that Derek and I shared are now the same beliefs that everyone else is having about Tyler. Just to see, like, where his career is taking off now and how fast everything has come to him, it's just a really rewarding experience to be a part of it.


And then we're going to ask Frank to speak on, or we're going to give a presentation, or he's going to give a presentation on body cameras now. Let me give you a little bit of context. So body cameras are now the latest and greatest in the world. We are probably the leading city of size in the state of Washington. So I'm wrestling with body cameras every day and actually even as I'm sitting here I'm wrestling with body cameras and I'll tell you about that in a minute. So much of the emphasis on body cameras is really to catch the police doing bad things because we all know that that's what we do. We get up in the morning and we do bad things and we continue to do bad things and I'm obviously being facetious. And so there are very broad perspectives on what should be happening with body cameras. The far left position is that an officer should come to work. They should put on their body camera. Their supervisor should activate the body camera because we can't trust the police officer to do so. And at the end of their shift their supervisor should turn off the body camera. Well think about what you do in the course of your day. You go to the bathroom. You talk to always in a loving manner your significant other. You have conversations with your children always again in a very loving manner. You interact with your boss. You interact with your coworkers. Well that extreme believes that every one of those conversations and every one of those activities in the course of your day because you're a public official are fodder for public release and public disclosure. So as I said in the state of Washington there would be really no ability to protect that. The other extreme is that officers should have discretion personal discretion to turn on or turn off body cameras depending on the circumstance. All well and good until we start to realize on the public side that body cameras record both sides of the interaction both audio and video. So in the state of Washington this is a perplexing problem because as I said we have very broad public records laws. So if you are having a fight with your next door neighbor about the height of the rose bushes in between your property and the police come to your neighbor's house for a heart attack a kid that's out of control whatever the call may be within probably about five days you will have that body camera footage in its entirety and so you get to see the innermost workings of your neighbor's house. Once you have it you have the ability to put it on YouTube. So I'm a proponent I'll just put that out there of body cameras but we are treading on very dangerous waters and we will end up with Supreme Court of the United States cases. It is inevitable. The other problem is human error and last Saturday at about I guess it was about seven o'clock one of my officers shot somebody. Fortunately did not kill the individual and I have to be somewhat careful because it's an ongoing investigation. He failed to activate his body camera. We've only had the body cameras up since September 1st. My conjecture probably is that that was the last thing he was thinking about. He was with a partner they were looking for an individual who had been involved in stalking who had an extensive violent criminal history and the car actually came past them. They ended up hitting the car as a way to stop it. The details as we know them right now was that the individual then tried to hit the officer with the vehicle and that caused him to fire the rounds that he did. One of the articles that I read yesterday when I was flying out here and my wife is part of the language extremely pissed off that I can never let my job go was from a group who was saying this is intolerable. This is unacceptable. We have to hang the police officer for not activating the body camera. He is an outstanding police officer who took action to preserve the safety of the community that he serves and so when I get back I'll be back in the media again Charles because we'll have a little bit of a dialogue. But let me show you this film and then I'll talk a little bit more about it and answer some questions you may have. So that's part of the problem. Body cameras actually it's kind of it's funny. So we're dealing with technology right. And as we all know sometimes technology works and sometimes it doesn't work. Since we've rolled out the camera we have had public forums with an excess of probably about four or five hundred people. We brought them out to the police academy. We've had them wear body body cameras in our interactive simulator. This is actually footage being shown from the body camera. And it's not bad in terms of clarity sake. Later on in the newscast we actually did a demonstration and we do this for the public where you think you're getting a perspective from the body camera because the body camera picks up in real life the noise that's generated and so on and so forth. And it sounds like the person in the demonstration is getting a crack beat out of them. As it turns out there was no violence associated at all with the arrest. But the body camera was picking up the friction on the officers uniform. It was picking up the friction in the contact as they were handcuffing the individual and magnifying it to the point like it. It sounded like the individual in the demo was getting really as I said severely beaten. I think the big thing that I would urge is anybody contemplating body cameras and really it's kind of the theme of the whole presentation is intensive community dialogue. We still think in this business that we know all the answers to everything. And one of the most interesting things that came out of our body camera project was our law legal department said that because of fourth amendment rights and our requirement to do two party consent New York is a one party consent state in Washington you need two party consent that if we went into somebody's home we couldn't activate the body cameras unless we had affirmative consent from them to activate the cameras. So I'm doing a presentation and this woman raises her hand and says well if you come to my house and my husband has beaten me and so now you're responding to a domestic violence call and my husband says don't record the body camera. My interview what are you going to do because clearly I'm going to want the incident recorded my interview recorded my injuries recorded. And so I actually made the decision to have full recording if we get one party consent in the house over the objection of my law department. In another incident in speaking to a victim's advocacy group a woman stood up and we have a great relationship.  What do you do with the victim says don't record the body camp you know the interview. And so there we're giving our officers discretion that if they think that that would prevent the victim from giving us a statement. They're to not use the body cameras. My wife is an attorney and a judge said well I disagree with that I think you should try to record everything because sometimes in those first moments of a critical incident that's where you get your best testimony and so why would you want to lose that.  And again remember we have to warn you or advise you that we're recording. So if I have somebody on the ledge of a bridge my officer who has a body camera on has to say sir ma'am I am audio and video recording this interaction. Well we have a person in crisis on the bridge. So that has become a real sticking point. I'm giving my officers the discretion to not activate the body camera in that situation. Individuals on the far left are saying they shouldn't have that discretion. They have to record the interaction regardless of the person jumps off the bridge because of the advisement and we exacerbate the crisis. So I would ask you to watch this watch the media conversations watch the conversations that are going to go on here in New York. We are now taking government into the most private areas of your life. We're in your bathrooms. We're in your bedrooms. We're talking to victims at their worst state. And again in the state of Washington just like we did with marijuana we put the body cameras out first and now we're trying to create the laws around them. And it's similar to what we've all talked about about the 911 tapes. It's similar about building buildings in today's day and age and not putting repeaters in there so that radios work. We have to do a much better job on the front end and not always be trying to correct problems after the fact. So we legalize marijuana and now we're trying to figure out how to regulate it. We didn't think about the public health consequences of legalized marijuana.  Believe me I've been in this business 30 years I've seen it all. Well I can't say that because every day they do something that I never thought of. I'm wrong when I say that but we have to do a better job. We have to be more thoughtful. We have to be more precise in developing the laws developing the policies and procedures vetting these things with the communities we serve or else we end up with disastrous situations. We're at the end of the day police officers get victimized and victims get even further traumatized because we weren't thoughtful about the process.  If you have any body camera questions real quick I'll be happy to answer them. You know I keep on thinking about what Steve was saying about you know so many of these births you know these these accidental giving birth at home and I'm thinking of you know you call 911 and the police rush in to help this woman who's giving birth. Who would want that to be a matter of public record and put on YouTube. So I think if there's really a privacy issue and it's I think it's great that this has to be publicized more. There's two sides to every proposal. My question is about people in the public who also videotape on their phone and how does this extend their rights extend or how the rights of their videos extend from what you're talking about. Well it's pretty much a free for all right. You know I had another police shooting it's a whole different part of the country there we shoot a lot of people unfortunately. I'm doing my best to stop that but so we had an incident where a guy had done a series of armed robberies our officers confronted him. I was told when I arrived a few minutes after the shooting that we had negotiated with him on the porch. As it turned out we hadn't negotiated with him on the porch we had negotiated with him through a screen door. Well somebody in the neighborhood had the video of the shooting and before I was even on the scene and it already been put on YouTube. I mean that's that's the problem right is that there is no ability to control much of anything anymore and these things go viral so quickly. And I agree 100 percent with the release of the 911 tapes. I think the country is going to hear just horrific conversations. That's it. That's a very unique circumstance to some degree. The movement now is to get rid of street cameras automated license plate readers. Because that's an intrusion on people's privacy but yet I can walk up with my cell phone and record anything I want and put it on mass media. So this this struggle that we're talking about here in terms of privacy and private rights and what do we do with these very sensitive communications. This will become I think one of the biggest national discussions that we're going to have. Hold on. Are there other jurisdictions that have the body cameras that have already gotten some experience a little more like a year or two years into it. Yeah. And so there are there are a number of big small medium sized departments throughout the country that have them. It is a very much an evolving process regardless of how long you've had them. It's an evolving process around technology. It's evolving process around privacy rights. It's an evolving process around redaction. And the problem will be is that there will never be a national policy because every state is very unique in terms particularly of the privacy piece of it and the redaction requirements. So people that are talking on a global scale and saying well there needs to be a model national policy. There can be it's at some level. But when we get to the privacy issues that's going to go state by state by state. And so it's it's a very difficult thing to deal with. OK great. It's been very thoughtful Frank. We're going to take one last question. We're not done yet. One last question then we'll play the video while people are queuing up for lunch. OK. Yeah thank you. I understand that you're a proponent of body cameras.  And arguments always made that you know perhaps there was creative recording you know they you know it's it's different angles because you know you're not as close and that can also be an issue. So you know I can see how body cameras can also help give that you know a more direct perception of what actually is going on. I do see the privacy issues. But what would you offer a suggestion to counter that because I mean people are still going to there's nothing that's going to stop people from recording with their own stuff. And they will lease it anyway. It'll just look bad on the police officer's part. You know it's not showing the whole story showing part of the story. So what would you suggest to replace body cameras of anything. I wouldn't suggest anything. As a matter of fact my my officers now won't leave and go out on post without their body cameras. And other jurisdictions around us that are much smaller. It's the same thing because 99 percent of the time you're seeing very good police work. Right. On officer involved shootings or officer involved use of force. The officers want that footage to be there to explain why they did what they did. And one of the things that we're looking at now in terms of use of force in addition to body cameras. And again this goes maybe from learning from things like 9 11 is that use of force incident starts at the point that the call was dispatched. And ends after the force has been used. And the person is transported to a hospital or whatever the case may be. And we have to look at these events holistically. What are all the things that led up to that event happening. And then how was it immediately dealt with. So those recordings right now were freezing the initial call taker the dispatch the body camera footage. Because that's the only way we're going to get the complete story of what happened and why it happened. And whether failures in the system that put that officer or did they put themselves in a situation where they had no alternative. And so this whole lessons learned piece becomes critically important. So I think you're going to see police officers wearing body cameras. I think what we have to do is wrap our arms around how do we control the release of data. And how do we do it in a manner that's respectful to victims to victims families to the officers so on so forth. Eventually the information goes. But I think yes we want body cameras for short.


Welcome, everyone, to another crisis conversation live from the Better Life Lab. We're thrilled to have a great panel and we're really excited to hear from you all in the chat, hear your perspectives. Today we're going to be talking about something that is pretty much something we haven't really talked about or really confronted in the United States and that is elder care, long-term care. We talk about we're having this aging population, we're going to have this elder care boom and a crisis, and yet there's very little that we're talking about it aware of it and the pandemic has just brought it crashing center stage. And so now we're talking about how we're not prepared, how the nursing home population makes up less than 1% of the United States population and they make up a disproportionate share of the fatalities from COVID-19. We're going to be talking about home health. That's what we're focusing on today, which was seen as an answer to nursing homes. And that's an incredibly difficult job. Most home health workers make very little money. They are sort of the working poor in many ways, don't have access to benefits or paid vacation or paid sick time. And yet what we're focusing on today is that it's very different in one place and that's Washington state. And so I think what I'm excited about today is that we'll be talking about a real challenge, but through the lens of a place that's really working hard to try to figure it out and maybe has lessons for all of us. So what I want to do is start with Brittany Williams. Brittany, thank you so much for being on the on the panel today. What I'd love for you to do your home health worker. What I'd love to do is start with let you introduce yourself, tell us where you tell us where you are and and then tell us your tell us your story tell us about being a home health worker where you are in Washington. Yes. So hi everybody. My name is Brittany Williams. I am a home care worker in Seattle, Washington. I work as an agency care provider and also through DSHS as an individual provider. And so it's really interesting I've been doing this for six years now. I also serve on our executive board for our union. So I get the opportunity to see the situation from the viewpoint of caregivers who are getting supplies and PPE through their agencies and caregivers who are having to fight the state for literally every single thing. So, Brittany, if we could, if I could interrupt you for just a second, you know, for the people who can't see, you know, on the on the YouTube video here. Where are you, you're sitting outside. Can you tell us a little bit about where you are right now. So right now I'm at one of my clients with one of my clients right now. She allowed me this time because she knew how important it was to share this story. And so I'm actually on the balcony of her apartment complex. And I just, I'm very grateful for her because, you know, it's clients like her who are supporting caregivers to make sure that not only the clients are protected but we're protected as well.  And you have some benefits that carry the home health aides and care care workers in other states simply do not have. Can you talk a little bit about that and what that means and in terms of helping you, you know, not only have good work but also support your life. So I'm a third generation caregiver and my mom and grandma does the same job in Arkansas where there are no unions for caregivers. They're up here we have we won a starting wage for $15 for caregivers. They don't have that we have health insurance for caregivers they don't have that we have We have the first of the first in a lifetime retirement plan for caregivers. We, we provide our caregivers with a free parachute. These are things that Arkansas caregivers don't get. Wow. And I'm very blessed and fortunate for that. So when you talk to your mom and your and your grandmother and you talk about what you know your situation there, you know, kind of what do they what do they think or what did they say, how do they react to the fact that you have sort of the beginnings of decent work if you will decent and dignified work. The conversation is more with my mom because my mom actually was used to live here. And she was here during the fight for 15 and March down to CTAC. And so when she moved back home to help my grandma with the planes down there. She literally went from almost $20 an hour back down to $11 an hour. And it was really heartbreaking to her to see the conditions that people are accustomed to working in. Wow. Well, thank you so much for sharing that Brittany. Peter, let me go to you. So, Peter, I want to make sure I get your title correctly you're with the Catholic Community Services of Western Washington, you're the director of long term care. So you've just heard from Brittany so you know she there in Washington state she makes a fairly decent way she gets paid time off she has retirement she has health insurance. She has paid training. You know that there's a really very unique relationship between management and the sort of the private sector as well as the state. I want to talk about you tell us more about Washington state and, you know, and if it if it's so terrible in Arkansas and other places how did, how did things get better in Washington state. Well it's, it's, I would say it's a 40 year overnight success story because for 40 years with DSHS Department of Social Health Services, the governmental entity that the interacts with the feds have taken a lead for 40 years. They've worked on planning this it's constant constant tinkering they've worked with nonprofit associations with unions, especially yes you use 775 they work with local area agencies on aging. And in our state. For our clients, we offer very similar services in many respects the same as what you see in a nursing home. Many clients are bed bound, any toileting bathing transfers. They have to have a high level of need to even get on the program. It's one on one care which is one of the bigger things we actually hire a lot of caregivers used to work safe for nursing home because they were tired of the eight or 10 or 20 people they saw every day. They just wanted to work for for one person. And it's also a fraction of the cost of nursing home so it's something people want it's it's that offers at, I think some pretty good employment opportunities as Brittany had mentioned all the benefits. And it's also much cheaper. So the, the, the states like the taxpayers like it. It also has all of our caregivers I mean when this, when this virus started. It was, we were set up really well to whether the pandemic because our caregivers, as Brittany can attest to. They are taught infection control is drilled into our heads. Every caregiver has 75 hours of training they have to go through. They have to become a certified home care aid, which is like a CNA certification that might be one of the few in the country that actually do that. And as part of that certification you actually have to have pass a written test and a skills test which includes proper hand washing. So when all of this came up. We simply sent a memo to all of our staff saying, remember what you're doing, keep on doing it, because it was almost exactly word for word what the CDC was saying that we should do. We ship a DSHS. I can't say enough about them. They have been incredibly nimble.  They informed us right away when there was deaths in the nursing home. I think it was 10 o'clock at night, all 50 home care agencies were notified. They set up a weekly meeting. Almost immediately, we change things around and stop things here. We stopped in person assessments in home visits with the clients, just to limit the amount of bodies that we're moving back and forth. We stopped taking clients to the store, which I know a lot of our folks that we serve did not like, but just like a lot of things, a lot of things that we're doing, nobody likes it, but we have to do it. Anyway, we've asked caregivers to take their temperature before they go in to ask the client their temperature, all of these things that we're all doing now. We've asked them to do local health districts if somebody did become ill. And at the beginning, I think everybody thought they had it. Because everybody with a fever or sniffles kind of panicking and we've, over time, I think we've got it down pretty well and how we handle it. The most important thing DSHS did was allow, I mean, most folks are working from home. Our caregivers can't work from home, except they change the rules to allow our caregivers to do things like do welfare checks to call up clients, maybe do, maybe do their laundry, maybe do things as much as they can possibly from their own home. You can't do personal care from home, but so DSHS has just been incredibly helpful in trying to change things. Well, that's great. Well, thank you so much, Peter.  So Peter said that because there is this training because you've got this, this sort of management and labor relationship in Washington State. It's pretty much up to speed. So what was that like for you transitioning from regular care into the pandemic?  And then did you all get the protective gear that you needed? You know, what was that like in terms of protecting your own house so that you could also protect others? So I'll talk about it from the two different aspects of it on the agency. Well, across the board, yes, we were already knowledgeable on how to protect ourselves. Like Peter was saying, we've been trained. We actually, every year we're required to go back and take 12 more hours. So we were up to part on that. Now on, and as far as the agencies have been amazing across the board, as I say, I sit on the executive board. So I'm able to see what each agency is doing. And they've been amazing. I wish that the people at the federal level could run the government. Like our agencies have been stepping up to the ball play. On the IP side, it was, it was a whole, it's a whole nother game. It's sad to say it took the state two weeks before they even acknowledged that we needed face mask for the independent caregivers, the IP caregivers, and they have slowly but surely started to roll out face mask to all the IPs. You see, I work for, they, like I said, they're just like Peter's agency, they stepped up, they made sure we had face mask. No, it wasn't a lot, but they did what they, what they could, and just they've been building up on it to now that you get a full PPE bag which consists of face mask hand sanitizers, a bar of soap paper towels, disinfectant spray to clean down surfaces and stuff. So this is what it looks like. Wow. Well, thank you, Brittany. Alright, so now Steven, let me bring you in at this point. So you're with PHI. It's a, where you really research and look at these elder care long term care issues you've just written a report I put the link of to it into the chat. Yeah, and it's, it's called we can do better. So what I'd love for you to talk about now we've had Brittany and Peter talk about their experience in Washington state, and even Brittany saying she wished the federal government was as effective as the state government which is, you know, we've got so many people who like love to hate on the government and public policy so here you've got people saying great things about how the government works. Can you put Washington state in this larger perspective. What is it that we're facing as a country. How are we facing it or not and kind of where does Washington state and what they're doing where did they stand relative to other people. In so many ways, Washington state is a national leader in job quality that's thanks. In part, as Peter mentioned to strong leadership in the state government, and also is as Brittany cited their strong leadership among caregivers in the union, working together with employers in the state to really build these decent high quality jobs with effective training and higher wages. Nationally these things are so lacking. This system is largely dependent on Medicaid, which unlike Medicare and Social Security has to compete with all of these other budget priorities and state legislatures every year. These programs are viewed as serving people who are living in poverty and people with disabilities who are largely undervalued society. And often these Medicaid programs are losing those budget battles and not getting the level investment that they need to support a quality job. But there's another societal aspect to it related to the people who do this work caregiving is viewed as part of the uncompensated domestic responsibilities of women and for these reasons these jobs are lacking in respect to the extent that they are deserved. These jobs are often performed by people of color and immigrants who are again society marginalized and these jobs again are undervalued and under compensated for those reasons. And then a third element to this is that this is a highly fractured system where we've seen this explosive growth in the home care field and unlike Washington state. Many other states might not even know who the agencies are that are delivering these services. So all of these factors combined mean that when we're facing this pandemic. All of these challenges are especially highlighted because we don't have the funding to afford these crucial things like personal protective equipment or training on assisting people during a pandemic or hazard pay, or any of the things that workers need to be successful in the field. And at the end of the day, go ahead, Bridget. Let me interrupt you there you say we can't afford it and I guess what I'm wondering is, is it a choice that we have chosen not to invest in it. And you know, because if we can, when you look at the size of the federal government and what we choose to invest in I guess that's, I just kind of wanted to interrupt you is that really that we don't have the funding for it or we have made the choice that it is not important enough to invest in. That's an important clarification. When I say we are referring largely to employers or to these government agencies who are running these programs. But again, the lack of funding the system is reflective of our values and how much we value this work, despite the fact that these services are so critically important to all of us because many of us will develop disability at some point in our lives and if we love will. And at those points in time we're going to have to turn to the the strong paid caregivers like Brittany and others. But because these jobs are so poorly structured and the system above them isn't supporting them well. It's very likely that when we need those workers the most, we're not going to be able to find them.  He was bedridden he'd had three strokes. My mother was also, you know, in her late 80s she couldn't do all of that work. And we relied on in home, a home healthcare, you know, in home aids. And you know, when he passed away, his final moments, thankfully my mother was there, but also his, his home health aid Priya from Ghana. So, you know, this work is so vital it helped him, you know, have quality of life it helped him stay alive and, you know, you develop these really intimate relationships and and she was there. You know, and it's final moments on earth. So, you know, when you talk about what we value, you know, it's, it's astounding to me that this is that that this incredible value is not reflected in our national policy or in our debates. You know, that this is seen as sort of this uninvisible labor of love, which, which really doesn't reflect the fact that so many people so many families are working. And that they just you just don't have that person to take care of everything at home in the way that maybe many families or some families did, you know, 4050 years ago. One thing I'd like to bring up at this point in the last few days, there's been sort of an explosion of news. There was a home health aid in New Jersey, who now faces criminal charges. She was apparently she tested positive for COVID-19. She went to give care. The elderly person she was taking care of then contracted COVID-19 and passed away. And so now she's facing criminal charges. So Peter, let me let me go to you. You know, is that a fair response? Is this a, you know, is this a fair thing to to blame on a home health aid? What does this say about our larger system? Well, it's it's interesting that this news is popping up about individual home health aids, perhaps getting a suit or in trouble. When you have the opposite end, which is many of the for profit nursing home industry is there being exempt from being held accountable from lawsuits and you've got one group individual people, all of us through this pandemic, I think our heads were spinning. First, it's one thing, then it's another. It's hard to figure out what, you know, what all the facts are. But what I do know is anybody in this business has good communication on what infection control is what you need to do. So the companies that own these for profit nursing homes, they're not being held accountable for something that they should know. And yet we're holding individual people accountable. And I find that to be very disturbing. What about what about you, Brittany, you know, when you heard that news, you know, you're on the front lines there, you know, you need to be thinking about your own health but protecting the people that you also work with, you know, what what do you think about that that, you know, the the state could charge a home health aid face criminal charges and the situation. I feel that it is very irresponsible. I totally agree with Peter on the this bias situation where the nursing homes are getting basically away with murder, but you want to, you want to point out caregivers. It has been scientifically proven that people can be asymptomatic, not even know that they have it, and they're walking around. So are you going to tell me so are they're going to tell me now that every single person that comes in contact with COVID is going to be charged our face murder charges. That is, I think their focus is way off, way off. Thank you so much for that Brittany is Stephen let me bring you into this and I neglected to introduce you last time properly so let me do that so you're Stephen Campbell. I'm a data and policy analysis with PHI and the author of we can do better how our broken long term care system undermines care. So Stephen, let me ask you that that same question because it is really quite disturbing to see that, you know, many of these caregivers. They don't have access to something like paid sick days or paid family leave. And so for many of them, if you're asymptomatic you don't know that you've got the virus. Many of them there were there like Brittany's mother, they're making poverty wages really $11 an hour and if you don't have access to benefits. You really have to make a choice do I do I go to work do I stay home and then how do I pay my bills. And then that does put the people who who rely on the care at greater risk so it seems that there's something really systemically wrong here. And you were saying that this is there are a couple other cases as well. You know, talk a little bit about what you're seeing happening during the pandemic that kind of really show the system isn't isn't really working. Right. Well, I mean certainly this the story is is a tragedy right I mean this is a death that could have been prevented. We're to prevent harrowing situations like that in the future we need to write, ask the right questions. And I don't think the right question is how could this person be so irresponsible to do this. You know, without more information I'm not going to make any sort of blanket statements about who's at fault, but I think the right questions are. So, for example, this individual wasn't wearing PPA PPE, the personal protective equipment, does she have access to personal protective equipment, and if she doesn't, why not I mean it's her agency not getting the equipment that they need. Maybe this person wasn't aware that they had paid time off available to them, or even if they did. And I'm not surprised that their employer was going to respect that right and not commit wage theft, and also was this individual confident that if she did take time off because of her positive coven diagnosis. Was she confident that someone would be there to take her place in the context of a nationwide workforce shortage. The job seekers being told it's not safe to leave your home. We're having serious pipeline issues and workforce supply issues that were already happening before this sort of narrative around home care workers and direct care workers as villains in the field as sort of widespread fraud and abuse is just not reflective of the truth the predominance of workers in this field are folks like Brittany who are really in this pandemic laying their lives on the line. On behalf of their clients and their loved ones and they may not have a choice around taking time off because of their own economic instability. There's so much broader context around these sorts of tragedies that are happening in the field. And if we don't ask those questions around what can we do better. We're not going to make the meaningful changes needed to support both consumers like the person who passed away and workers like the person who inadvertently was a conduit for the virus. Well thank you for that Stephen. Brittany let me go back to you. You know you talk to your mother and your grandmother in Arkansas so you know you know what you know the experience of home health workers are in other places. What would you hope that will learn out of this pandemic what would you hope that from either from your experience in Washington state what do you what do you hope or what do you think needs to change so that more home health workers would have the experience like you do where you do feel supported where you do have decent pay where you do have the equipment that you need to do your job to protect yourself but also to protect the people that you're caring for. What do you hope that will learn out of this pandemic. I appreciate Stephen and everything he's saying and I also want to make this note so that people will understand caregiving is a job that we have to be there. But if we don't have legitimate reason for not being there we can actually be charged with neglect with our clients we cannot leave this is a job that you cannot leave your clients uncovered. So that is one big thing that I feel like should have been put in that news report. The other thing is it is amazing to live in the state of Washington but at the same time we got to be better with the process we have to be more expedient with the process because with one caregiver I won't say her name but when the PPE finally got to her it was actually too late her and her son had already contracted it. Oh wow. So are they okay now. You know they have to go through the process. They're in our prayers and everything. But the thing is we have to we have to stop just assuming stuff. And like Stephen said we have to look at the broader picture caregivers are just as important as the frontline workers.  Yeah and as we are maintaining life. It's not fair just to protect the ones saving it you have to protect the ones maintaining it because we have to go to the stores we have to go to the pharmacies the laundry match. We have to go interact with all these places that our clients can no longer go. Wow. And you don't know who you're coming in contact with Bridget is it can be very scary. I can only imagine. And you have so many like it was said earlier 80% of our caregivers are female a large chunk of more people of color. A lot of them are like my grandmother are in that age group that is more susceptible to getting this disease. And so we have to just bring a more wider focus that we are the maintainers of life. If you want to know what a caregiver is that it in a nutshell we are the maintainers of life. Well I love that. Well, that is a probably the best place to end this conversation is that, you know that we need to be thinking and valuing not only those who save lives but those like Brittany, who maintain lives and those like we had Maryland, last week who is also a home health aide in, in Texas who doesn't have paid sick days, and that what you're doing is incredibly valuable and important work. So I'd like to thank all of the panelists for being on the part of this conversation today. Thank you so much Brittany Steven and Peter. We're so happy to have all of your perspective and experiences. Thank you to all the participants who have signed on. And I'd like to also thank my great better life lab team, New America, New America events and my producer David Shulman. We hope you'll join us again next week we're going to be looking at the emergency paid family and medical leave act that Congress passed, and looking at there are some, some people who have it and it's really helping their lives and their people who do not. And we'll be exploring that kind of have and have not attention next week so we hope you'll join us again. So thank you so much and stay healthy and safe. Wash your hands. We'll see you next week.


With such good influence of people do they feel that India has a better with such bad methods, they thinkешь capitalist people like them. This is because banks haveSpicy Congress andency. They think both of them are negotiate紋 to make government elections. They think only good solution option are left. By saying that country has better purse, money, equality, government to try to reach employment opportunities of India, that is why they believe in this thing? ᵆ ᵐᵉ ᶦᵍᵏᵉ ᵄᵉᵃᵃᵔᵏᵉ ᵈᶦᵈᵉ ᵄᵉᵉᵉ ᵈᵉᵉᵉᵉ. ᵃᵉᵉᵉᵉᵉ ᵘᵋᵉᵉᵇᵜ ᵈᵉᵈᵉᵉᵉ ᵘᶼᵉᵉ ᵐᵉᵉ ᵒᵊᵈᵉ ᵉᵉᵉᵉ ᶷᵍᵍᵉᵉᵗ. ताना रवीजो गर अलेटी करी सर्ची मूँ


And today, we are reacting to Bobby Chinookums, Wanky Winkerbean, it's probably just your crotch. You're going to have to scooch down. Yeah! Say goodbye to everybody at the top, and at the tops of you. Really well. Really, really well. Yeah, this... What's this? Nominate for an Oscar? Don't know. There's apparently a lot of US people saw it. If it was, it wouldn't surprise me, and I'd be really disappointed in myself for having missed it because we pay such close attention to the Oscars. Mm-hmm. So... Now, in 2015... Yeah, what's the synopsis? Because I think I've got to take on what it is, but... Erid. Erid. Oh, Erid. Yeah. Landscape of... What is that? Rajasthan? Rajasthan? Like, parts of it look like incredibly hard to watch because of what these women are going to be going through, and it's, I'm sure, an important story, but then also, you had these really fun upbeats, you know, like, you'd be really happy for them. So, I mean, it was beautiful, so I think they said the DP, was he an Oscar winner? Yeah, Oscar winner. Yeah, is that what they said? Yeah. Yeah, it is. Several involvement. The sound designer was an Oscar winner. Okay. Well, it looks fantastic. Yeah. So please let us know if it is as good as it looks. Oh. I'm guessing this wasn't, like, a blockbuster or anything like that. No, it was. She was. One-sixteen minutes. What did you think? Oh, yeah, Michael, you're here. What did you think, man? It was pretty good.


A különböző étnezzén poszíció de a felszíteni nagyon éranabb, azért, ha a szár, de a nagy négű operációé, amikor a métrik, és nem négű sébésé, és ez nem négű sébésének előtt hagymára egyújtos szár.  Ez az az álló alapított subjárt. Örgözöm, hogy amilag gondolom, hogy elbízva a magánal, hogy az igazából elbízja, ráöltem a csinálta, jövőgözõrm ton Finally grade-t odjárom. Foglalmas, akik olyan csennél, nem értem ezt. Amikor úgykül érültem, ha olyan csinálta, The very energy city away from the edge. There also, again, you can get bounds and its inverse. The precise forms of the bounds are not terribly important. These are the same type of analogs, natural analogs, that have similar bounds on the vector case. And most importantly, we know that the stability operator is bounded so this was the stability operator, where they're... So its inverse is bounded in the natural norm. a natural norm. This is an operator which maps, which is defined in a space of matrices. And on the space of matrices, as we discussed, the natural norm is the Hilbert-Schmidt norm. So this operator here is the operator norm acting on the matrices equipped with the Hilbert-Schmidt norm. It's a bit complicated, but if the space of matrices is equipped with a natural norm, then this norm naturally induces a norm on the space of operators acting on that space. And this is the, which I call the spectral norm here. And this guy in this norm is bounded again by something which is bounded as long as you are in the bulk. So as long as the density is away from zero, or you are far away from the bulk. And this power here, this 1000 power is just not completely serious. There is just a constant 1000 would do. The optimal bound is actually would be the two as in the previous case, but for that again you need further conditions. And this we didn't do yet. Okay, so let me try to indicate some proofs. So of course the main difficulty with everything is non-commutative, unlike in the previous case. But nevertheless I would try to mimic some of the ideas that we had in the proof before. And remember the key thing, the key equation was also in the vector case, is the equation what you get when you took the imaginary part of the equation itself. That led later on to an equation which revealed how this f-operator looks like. So here you have to do the same thing, but already when you take the imaginary part of my equation, so it's this like matrix equation, even when you take the imaginary part of the equation, you have to watch out what the commutativity means. I mean the imaginary part of 1 over m was just the imaginary part of minus 1 over m, as long as it's a complex number, it's just the imaginary part of m divided by m square. It's a triviality, but now if m is a matrix, then you have to be careful which order you do things. And the right thing to do is this one. So it's even not, you see, I'm trying to avoid taking the absolute value of the m, should have said that, that typically m here is even not a normal matrix. It's not just a self-adjint, even not a normal matrix.  I mean, there are two ways to define the absolute value. Typically, even if you take the mm star square root, or m star m square root, but if it's not a normal matrix, these two things are not the same. You can decide for one, and if you look it up in any book, which defines the absolute value of a matrix, usually they choose one of them, but they don't tell you that there's another choice, and there's always this ambiguity. So you have to try to avoid taking the absolute value. Okay, so this is what you do. This is one way of doing it. And then this is the imaginary part on that side, and on the other side you just take the, that's easier because taking the imaginary part that goes through the s operator, s is a linear operator. Okay, and if you start studying this equation, then you can try to deduce similar bounds as before. So, for example, the cheapest bound, which you get immediately, is that s is a positively preserving operator, imaginary part of m is positive, so this guy is positive. You can even neglect it as a lower bound, and then you get that the imaginary part of one over m is bigger than the imaginary part of z, and inverting that relation yields you at least a trivial bound, that m is bounded by one over eta. We had the same bound before in the vector case as well. But of course in general you have to get something much better. Now, let me not go through each of these estimates, but let me just emphasize or focus on one thing. The key question is that what is the proper analog of this operator f? That's because if you remember the huge part of the proof in the vector case relied on the fact that I created this f operator, and f operator had good properties, much better properties, than the s operator, it was bounded, it was self-adjoined, and so on. So how to do that? What is the right operator here? And so here is the goal. So the goal would be, with the help of this f operator, the goal would be to get some bound on the inverse of this stability operator, and the result is, I think it was already a previous transmission, so the claim is that the stability operator is invertible, at least as long as you are in the bulk. The key is to find this symmetrization. So here I just flashed up again, just remind you what was done before in the vector case.  And now what did we need about f? So f had two good properties, I emphasize that one of them is that it had to be symmetric, because at the end of the day you want to re-drew the spectrum, and it was useful, it was very important that the f had a real spectrum. So we needed that f is symmetric, this was needed when we did the spectral analysis, but it also needed this positivity preserving, because positivity preserving was needed for the Peron Frobenius argument, so f had these two good properties, it's even written here, and now we would like to mimic, we would like to find a corresponding f in the matrix case, but in the matrix case this f will be one level higher, because now I'm talking about an operator which acts on matrices, so my new f will be on the same level as this s operator, this script or calligraphic s operator, it has to act on matrices. So it has to be self adjoint with respect to the Hilbert Schmidt scalar product, that's the analog of the symmetry, and it has to be positivity preserving in a sense that if you feel in a positive matrix, then the outcome should be a positive matrix. Ok, and here is just reminding you this formula, when I took the imaginary part of this aspect of this equation, and I appropriately re-organized it, then this operator's MSM operator sort of popped up. So now let me try to do this in the matrix case, let me do it on the blackboard, because then you see it's slower, at least at the beginning. So I took the imaginary part of that equation, as I already took before, so imaginary part of m, and when you took the imaginary part, then you got this here, somewhere there was the imaginary part of m, so it was sandwiched between 1 over m star and m, but I can multiply through my m star from one side and m on the other side, so I write up the equation in that form, so let me write it up here, it's eta m star m plus m star s imaginary part m. So that's the imaginary part of the equation. Let me forget about that part, because this term is helping me with a positive term, but eta is tiny and it doesn't help much. But now I would like to do something like a polar decomposition here, because in order to do this f operator to smuggle in the m absolute value, so what I will do, but I don't know what the absolute value is, that's the problem, and also I know that even if I knew it, I have to be careful on which side I put it, because this is non-commutative, so what I will do here, I take a matrix Q, which I don't know yet, I just assume that there will be a matrix Q and I play with it. The intuition is that the Q absolute value will be something like the 1 over square root of m, but this doesn't quite make sense as it stands, but this is the intuition, that's what you should keep in mind. Okay? So now I take this 1 over Q mQ star and multiply from both sides this equation. So this is that. So again the 1 over Q plays the role of the 1 over square root of m. So this guy here altogether will be the amount of imaginary part of m divided by m absolute value in this guy, in this side. But this dividing by 1 over m absolute value I have to equally have to divide into two parts, one on the left square root of that on the left and the square root of that on the right. And this is what this, this Q will mimic at the end. Okay? So now let me, let me rewrite this term here, that term I neglect, this is not so important. So now I have the 1 over Q, because I multiply the equation by 1 over Q and 1 over Q star from the two sides, then I have the m star. So I'm just following my hands, multiplied by 1 over Q from the left. Now I'm, but I don't like something which looks like 1 over Q times m star. I want to get everything in a symmetric way. So the right way to put, to make it symmetric, I smag it in the 1 over Q star at that point, but then I have to compensate for that. Becomes a Q star. Okay? Now I have this S and in the argument of F, I have the imaginary part of M, but remember that the previous trick was here also that the argument of S was the imaginary part of M, but I wanted to see the imaginary part of M over M, and it is the same guy in the argument of S as it's on the right hand side. So on the left hand side. So on the left hand side I have this guy, but originally I have only the S acting on the imaginary part of M. So I smag it in the 1 over Q. Imaginary part of M and 1 over Q star on both sides, but then the price that I pay for it, I have to compensate. So again I divide and multiply. It looks like I'm not doing anything. And then on the other side, I will multiply the whole thing by the 1 over Q star that will hit the M over Q star. But again I don't like something looking at asymmetric. So I smag it in the 1 over Q and the Q. Yes, I didn't do anything, it's just an identity. But I claim that it looks much nicer than before. You may not agree, but that's the fact. This one looks much nicer, because now I should think of it in the following way that there is this operator, this part, which goes up only. So the operator which looks like Q star SQ acting on something in the middle and then Q star and Q. So now what are these some things? So let me call this guy X just so that you can see a little bit better what happens. So let me call this X and then let me call this guy Y. It's the operators. No, sorry, this was the Y. This is the Y, so Q, Q. I know that this is the Y. This is the Y and this is the Y star. I just defined the 1 over Q and 1 over Q star to be the Y. That's here. And then on the other side I see the star of the Y. OK, so now with these notations the equation looks like that X equals Y star. And now here you have this operator but the operator is this Q star SQ and that is the FQ star Q. So this operator will be our F operator, write that up in a minute. And this F operator acts on the guy in the middle and then you have the Y outside. That the F is defined exactly as this formula test that F on any matrix R is defined just by taking the Q star SQR Q star Q. So read it in the right way. Take a matrix R. First you put it here. You sandwich it between Q and Q star. You get another matrix. You let this S operator, the super operator act on that matrix. You get a matrix. And then you sandwich this matrix again by Q and Q star at the opposite order. OK, so this is the definition of F. And with this definition we got this equation. Now you can see immediately this F operator is a good operator because of the proper way of putting the stars in the right place. You can immediately see that this operator is actually a symmetric operator with respect to the scalar product. And it's also positively preserving. You know, once I tell you the formula, then it's not hard to check this properties. But the key was to get this formula. OK, now, but what do I do with the rest? So this is now my equation looks like that. But it's still not exactly in the form what I like. Remember, I would like to get a peromphrobeneus type equation. So I would like to get an equation that F acting on the operator is exactly that X is an eigenvalue, eigenmetrics in that case of that operator. So if these y's were not there, I would be happier. Then it would be exactly a peromphrobeneus like eigenvalue equation. So I have to get that. But fortunately I can do it if this y has some additional property. And notice first of all that the x and y are of course not, they are not unrelated to each other. So this is the x. This is the y. And then the only difference between the x and the y that in the x is an imaginary part. So actually the x is the imaginary part of y. Just by the formula. And now I don't want this y and y star on that side on here. Of course I can put it on the other side. I can put the y star inverse and the y inverse over there. That doesn't hurt much. But if y were unitary, then you could feel that this y and y star should cancel each other. Not on that side, it's other on the other side. It would cancel each other if they were commuting with x. In general it's not true, but it's true in this situation. So the fact is that if y is unitary, y star y is unitary, then in particular it commutes with its own imaginary part. That's an easy check. An x and y commute. So if y is unitary, then you can put the y's on the other side. And then you can commute through the x, so the y disappears. And then the equation would be exactly what I want. And that's exactly this pattern for a bemused type equation from which you would conclude. Among many other things you would conclude that the norm of f in this vector norm is bounded by 1. That's before. And then hold the whole term for bemused machinery would work. So now that's the goal. So this will be my f operator, but I still have to get this if. And of course I also don't, I didn't tell you what the Q is. You see the Q is just a dummy object in this whole calculation so far. But before that let me just finish how one does the proof. And at the end I will show you the Q operator. So once you have that, once you believe that there is such a good Q operator, then you can also rewrite. You can do the same calculation as before. You can rewrite the stability operator, which is basically a MSM operator. This guy here. You can rewrite it in terms of the f operator. And let me not go through the calculation details. It's just an identity. It's the same type of trick. You keep on smuggling in and out this Q's. So this calculation here is basically the analog of this calculation before which was much more visible when you had the stability operator. And you wrote the stability operator in terms of the f minus a unitary and then sandwiched by something harmless on both sides. It's the same calculation you can do here. Here is the stability operator. And it becomes something which involves the f operator on that side. Or maybe the next line is easier to see. So altogether you can write a stability operator in such a way that you have some decoration on the two sides. This is now this operator K of Q, which is operating on the space of matrices. It operates in this sandwiching way. That's not important. These two sides are not important. The important thing is the middle one. And the middle one is exactly its identity minus a unitary times the f. This cy is the sandwiching operator with the y. And if y was unitary as a matrix, then the operation of sandwiching with the y is also a unitary operation on one level higher. So altogether you will get stability if this guy is stable. And all we need, and then studying this guy basically goes back to the previous statement, previous stability lemma, which is a self-adjoint operator times a unitary operator and invert that, invert one minus of that. So all we need for that is we need to find what this Q is. So once what we need was assumed here rather here. It was assumed that there is a Q and a y in such a way that I can write the one over Q and one over Q star as a y, which is unitary. So in other words, what was assumed? We assumed or we used that the m, I'm just reading this line here in a different way. So the m is written like Q y Q star and this guy here in the middle had to be unitary. So now what is that? This looks like a polar decomposition.  Now as I already said before, if it's a non-normal matrix and the absolute value is not unique. So also you can write, you can have a polar decomposition such that it is absolute value times a unitary. You can write it the other way around that the unitary times an absolute value, but the two absolute values are not the same. So it's obvious that the standard polar decomposition has some kind of arbitrariness in it. It's not symmetric. Now this guy here is much more symmetric. The unitary is in the middle and the Q here should be thought of as sort of the square root of the absolute value if it had existed. Okay, so this is what we are after. And once you know what you are after, you can do it fairly easily. So we don't do it for every matrix m. Our m matrix has a good property. So this is the goal here. But our m matrix has a good property. It has positive imaginary part. So what we do is that, just write up one more line from that. So m has positive imaginary part. So you write m in such a way that it's a plus ib. Okay, so a is the real part, b is the imaginary part of that matrix. But now I continue this writing in such a way that I pull out the square root of b. B is the imaginary part of m, which is a self-adjent. It's a positive operator. So its square root exists. There is no ambiguity about the square root of a positive operator. So I take the square root of that and then I compensate for that b1 over square root of b plus i square root of b. This is just an identity. Okay, smuggling in and out things. Now this middle factor here is now a good guy. What is this guy? This guy, of course, a and b desider is our Hermitian object. So this guy here, 1 over square root of b, a is 1 over square root of b, is a Hermitian matrix plus i. So this whole thing here is a normal matrix. It's a self-adjent plus an i. It's a very simple object. So I would like to write m in such a way, something, a unitary time something else. So this guy in the middle, it looks like a good candidate for the y, except that it's not unitary yet. So I can make it unitary by dividing it by its length. And that's what I'm doing. That's what I'm doing next. So I'm defining the lengths of that object or rather the square of that. So I define the w as the length of that operator or rather the square root of that. So 1 over b1 over b square plus 1. This would be the length of that operator. But I take the one quarter of that in such a way that now the w square is exactly the length of that. And now I divide through by that. So this is this guy here. So this becomes that. a1 over b plus i divided by w square. This guy here will be my y. This is unitary. And then whatever is left, I just collect on both sides. W and then square root of b and square root of b. And this will be my guy. So this will be the y and this will be the q. OK, so in that way you can check the properties. So this gives me this polar decomposition. This is symmetrized polar decomposition. And if you know that b is the imaginary part is bounded away from 0 and from above. And a is also bounded. Then you can check that this q operator is now written explicitly. It's an order one operator in a sense that it's norm and it's norm inverse is also bounded. So this will make sure that all the sandwiching operators which are hanging around. It's taking 1 over q and q. That all these operations are harmless as far as the invertibility is concerned. Everything boils down to the invertibility of this guy as before. And for the invertibility of that guy is just again rewrote it in another way. The invertibility of that guy is basically can be done exactly the same way as previously I mentioned this lemma, this stability lemma. Because now it was formatted in a Hilbert space contact. This Hilbert space could be, doesn't have to be my original n dimension as cn space. It can be the space of matrices and by matrices equips with the Hilbert Schmidt norm. And in that setup the lemma looks exactly the same as before. Of course one has to check that the super operator also has a gap. And also I have to check what happens to the only critical eigenvektor, which here it's actually not an eigenvektor, it's an eigenmetrix because it's a super operator acting on matrices. It's an eigenmetrix which is this Roman F. And you have to check that this guy here is separated away from zero. Ok, so that's roughly what you do. And once you have that, then you can basically go back to the previous scheme. So here is finally our statement. So if you have back to the correlated random matrices, I think the theorem I already put it up there before. So this theorem is that the resolvent is approximated by the m, the solution of this matrix Dyson equation. Both in entrywise sense, so g x y is close to m x y, and also in trace sense. And typically m is not diagonal because g is a general equation. And also g has non-trival of diagonal components, so this is a general setup when the resolvent does not reduce the diagonal case. So let me not discuss this. Basically this part I already explained that once you have the original equation, the self-consistent equation, then you write up an equation for the resolvent, which has a small perturbation of that, and then using the stability you can get. You can get a good bound on g minus m in terms of the size of D. So let me just summarize in this little table. So we have studied various models of various generality, and in this table you see the models. There were four models. There was the original Wigner case, when S i j was 1 over n. There was a generalized Wigner case, and the row sum was 1. There was a Wigner type case, when the S i j was arbitrary, but it was still... The matrix elements were still independent, and then there was this marginal case, the correlated Wigner, the correlated situation. Here you see the disome equations. They all look the same, but the meaning of the terms is getting more and more complicated.  So there is a scalar equation, and the vector equation is a matrix equation, and then here the equation, but the meaning of m is in terms of random matrices, and here the stability operators. So everything looks the same, but every line, the next line is one level higher as the previous one. And what I would like to close the session with is that to emphasize that it looks like the correlated Wigner matrix is the only one which needs matrix equations. So far one could get away with the vector equations, but this is not really the right point of view. The right point of view is that the matrix equation is the true object. This last one is the true object, because eventually you really want to understand the resolvent, and the resolvent itself is a matrix. So this last one, the matrix equation is a good object, and in some cases, some simpler models, it can happen that the matrix equation is restricted to a diagonal matrix, everything becomes diagonal matrix, and then of course if you have a diagonal matrix, you don't want to describe it as a matrix, you just describe it as a vector in the diagonals. And if you have the diagonal matrix as a constant matrix, then you don't forget about even that it's for the vector, then it goes back to a scalar level. But the basic object is always a matrix. Behind it is a matrix hanging around behind all these things. So I'm not going to do any recapitulation. Let me just come to the summary. So we reviewed the local laws for various random matrix ensembles in increasing generality. I discussed before. I gave a quantitative analysis of the solution of the matrix descent equation, especially its stability. I emphasize again that the matrix descent equation is the correct equation in random matrix theory. It has many, many applications. I just showed the application for the correlated case. But actually if you take many other situations, for example, you take gram matrices or inhomogeneous circular law, you take non-hermitian matrices, you do the gear-cos formula, gear-cos trick, you hermitazize, hermitazize, and you do the gear-cos trick. Or you can do some structured matrices, some block matrices, and everything. All these models, all these models are all can be cast into the framework of the matrix equation. If you do that, then you can see that suddenly this nice structure emerges much easier. So sometimes it works. It works to rewrite a simpler problem into a more complicated matrix problem because the structure reveals itself. And then for the concrete case, the correlated random matrices with slow correlation decay will eventually prove the optimal localo and all these consequences just to vignal die some meta universality. Okay, so thanks for the attention. Everything else is in the notes. Is there maybe one quick question? Yes, everything is non-centered here. Actually this was, I'm not sure if I put it somewhere. I think at the very beginning I still put an A in it. But then I removed it. There was an A here. This was in the vector case. That's the expectation here. The same thing we can do also for the matrix level. I didn't put it in, but the question disappeared. But if you have a vector, so if you have a z plus a plus sm. So this A stands for the expectation. You can do that. That's actually the torque I explained is better in the previous talk. So you can include expectation. I mean certain answers will differ a little bit. I mean some of the bounds don't look exactly the same. But you can, but the final results will hold. So we have locality, we have universality, everything with a general expectation. Yes. At first implicit I didn't put it in this discussion, but I can do that. Okay, maybe we should leave over questions for lunch. And let's thank Lazulo for his nice lecture.


Medical school is not difficult. Well, not for the reasons you think. Here's why. Hey friends, in case you're new here, my name is Lakshman, internal medicine physician. And here on this channel, we make content to help people like you succeed on whatever journey you're on for doing it with less stress. Now, one of the first videos that I ever made on the channel was really how hard medical school was and giving us a breakdown while I was a first or second year medical student. That's video has gotten a lot of views. I'll link it down below in case you don't want to see my fun analogy that I used. But today I want to just break down three reasons of why medical school is not as difficult as people make it out to be. So whether you're in the midst of the journey or if you're somebody who's interested in medical school, you can think about these three pillars and ask yourself, okay, which one is currently applying that is making me think that it is hard? And before we dive in, I want to make it very clear. I don't want to make light of anyone's difficulty on their medical journey. I know for sure I struggled and I'm very open about that on the channel and the podcast, on the blogs. So if you're currently on your medical school journey, this is actually the video for you. Ask yourself which of these three segments are currently applying to you. If you completely disagree, let me know in the comments. But let's get to the breakdown. So number one is really what people talk about all the time, which medical school is a marathon not a sprint. Now in that video that I made initially for the YouTube channel, I use the analogy of the pancake analogy. This is much better than drinking out of fire hydrant. And it's essentially the idea that think about medical school as a stack of pancakes you have to eat every single day. The first day when you're really excited and motivated, you're gonna finish it off. Second day, same. But eventually you're going to get tired of pancakes. Even though you love pancakes, having it on your menu every single day is not going to be fun. The problem is, is that whatever you don't finish today, you're gonna have to add to your next stack. And if you're not motivated, if you're falling behind, it becomes harder and harder to keep up and eventually it's much easier to feel that burnout. And so the true difficulty, even using this analogy is not eating one pancake. It's being consistent with making sure that you're getting through your work. That doesn't necessarily mean that the material is all that inherently hard. For example, when I was in college, I took a entire biochem class in an entire semester. That was a difficult class. And I was taught essentially the same material when I was in medical school. Definitely at a much faster pace because they had to move to the next class. But there wasn't anything particularly that I learned because I was suddenly about to become a future doctor that made biochem more difficult. They made sure that I was learning biochem that was applicable to humans and not so much biochem of rats or plants, et cetera. But still it was biochem. When I learned physiology, a lot of it was what I learned in college. Again, faster pace, but more or less the same topics. A little bit more involved, definitely more diseases included to it. But it was overall the same things that I learned in college at a much quicker pace and more quizzes and tests that were where high pressure in the midst of it. So the thing we have to get clear about medical school is that the part that's hard is the amount of information at the pace that it comes and not necessarily the difficulty. And the way you counteract and deal with it is by having a study strategy and a study schedule that is simple to where you can see, okay, lecture one from Monday, I'm gonna cover here for the first time and here the second time. This is what we teach a lot of our students that we work on one with in our coaching programs on exactly how to do. To simplify the process, well, yes, you're going to be setting a lot. At least, you know, when you'll be setting the first time and the second time and everything starts to feel in control. As a personal example, I'm actually training for a marathon in 30 days that I have to run. And so while it is hard to sometimes go out and run when I'm not motivated to, on the days where I have a five mile run, I know I can do it because my training from the past has made me do it. I have a 20 mile run, I know I can do it because again, my training in the past allows me to get there. Are my runs for a marathon initially more difficult versus if I was running a 10K or a half marathon? Not really, I'm just training more consistently for a run that's longer, simply to it. That's simply how it breaks down with consistency and the pace that it comes at. If you have a plan on how to deal with it, it becomes much more manageable. Pillar number two that makes medical school so difficult is that time management is a key and most students suck at it. Now, there's two reasons that I find that students struggle with it. One, students just choose not to commit to it consistently. I used to be one of these students where I was like, eh, a study schedule, calendar. I don't really need this. I'm like on top of things. And usually you can figure things out. You know when you have a quiz, when you have a test and you can go with the flow. The problem is, is when you fall behind, you don't really have a game plan. If you were never used to using a study schedule or a calendar where you know roughly what you're gonna be doing on a daily basis, on a half day basis, what you're doing on the weekends, when you're covering your material, then when you're behind, you have really no idea how to catch up. And this is really where I have a lot of students that come to our coaching programs because they're like, I don't even know where to start. And the first thing we have to tell them is let's create a schedule where you can see yourself covering the material that you presently are giving as well as the material you're behind on. Once they start doing this, they feel in control because now they have a schedule that tells them what appointments to show up for. And the second reason that students struggle with time management is that even if they are actually using a calendar or having a plan, they just tend to overcommit. And so then they lead themselves to either being demotivated or just never feeling like they're on top of their schedule. When I was in medical school, my three priorities were more or less one workout per day just to keep myself fit. And then if I had a quiz or test coming, then doing something for that quiz or test. If I didn't, then I would switch it for an extra quick little project. Maybe your research project or going for shadowing or volunteering. And then finally making sure that I was up to date on the material that I learned for that day. If I was on top of my material for the day, I was making sure that I had least thought about studying for an upcoming quiz or test. And then I made sure my fitness was in check. I was both energized, focused, and on top of my schedule, everything made sense. If I got more things done, beautiful. If I didn't hit those three priorities and I have to ask myself where that setback happened and make those adjustments for future days, but this is the biggest key. Time management makes medical school difficult. So if you don't have one, you need to create a system. And if you do, you need to make sure that the system grows with you as you have successes and failures. Make adjustments on a daily and a weekly basis.  And then difficult number three is this plateau principle. Most medical students thinks that once they hit a stretch of difficulty, let's say your first year of medical school, you're just not having a good time. Classes, hard grades are not quite there. You just think that that's where you're gonna be. That's your status quo. If you're not making A's and you're making B's or C's, then that's like where you'll be. And people get stuck in that. And unfortunately, you don't realize that usually one or two things happen.  That's just the point of it. But the reality of medical school is two things are gonna happen. One, you're gonna have a flow when you're gonna have a stretch of hard classes and then easy ones. When I was on my psych rotation, it was great. I kind of knew what was going on. I knew how to take care of patients. It wasn't that challenging for me personally, but when I was on a surgery rotation, didn't make sense, didn't really like it. My enjoyment wasn't there. I struggled. When I was learning micro, boy, I was having trouble. When I was learning bio stats, easy peasy came very natural to me. Everyone is going to have a combination of classes and topics that they really gel with. And then on the other end, things that just give them a tough time. That doesn't mean that you're stuck at the status quo of being average. You may be a grade student for one specific class just because of interest or how well it takes you to learn it. In other classes, you're gonna struggle. That is okay. That doesn't mean medical school as a whole is completely difficult and unable to be done by you. This means you're gonna have some difficult stretches. And then number two, for this plateau principle, students think that if it takes me X amount of hours or X amount of effort for this class to get this grade, I'm stuck there. The reality is, is as you go through medical school, you become a better learner. You just kind of know how to piece together medical information. And that just happens with experience. It's like a musician who just able to play something and flow between one melody to the next without really thinking about it. They can't explain it, but that's just how it goes. The experience allows you to solidify your study methods without really being able to explain what you're doing and how you're thinking about things. But that's just because you've had so much experience of how to do it the wrong way. And eventually you'll learn, okay, these are the core ways that I study. This is more or less what the test will look like. This is how I need to think about information. And this is how I'll repeat it over and over again to show up for the quiz or the test. And so again, you're gonna have difficult stretches of tests and quizzes, but that doesn't mean in the whole it's going to be undoable. Now I know initially I said three, but the fourth one is actually something that I consider to be important after finishing medical school that I've realized. And that is that you choose your heart. If somebody was to put me in law school, for example, I would be a horrendous law student. I couldn't fathom coming up with the interest of being able to read all the material that a law student does. That would be excruciating more hard than going through medical school again. But again, for some people, law school is the way to go. You pick your heart. Medical school is hard, law school is hard, dental school is hard. Being a mechanic and going through that training is difficult. Whatever you want to do, there's going to be a level of difficulty and even within that journey, there's going to be hills and valleys of difficulty. You have to deal with it once you choose your heart. If being a physician, if taking care of patients, if going through all of those years of training for the salary that you were ultimately going to get, if all of that delayed gratification is worth it to you, you should do it. Don't let somebody else's description and definition of hard limit what you choose to go ahead and pursue just because you're saying this is going to be tough. Of course it is. But if it's worth having, it's worth going for. So remember these four difficult parts about medical school. The sheer amount of information that you can counteract by having a better and predictable study schedule, having a time management system that you actually stay with and actually flows with you, understanding that even within the difficult journey there are going to be places that you're going to excel at, others that you're not going to, that is okay. And then finally, choose your heart. If it's worth having, it's worth going for. That doesn't mean medical school won't be difficult, but it was doable and it's worth it for you. But that friends is my updated, more adult version of how hard medical school is. Hopefully you guys enjoyed the breakdown. Let me know in the comments section down below if you're watching on YouTube. If you listened to this on a podcast, hit that subscribe or follow in their favorite listening platform as well as leaving an honest review. And again, if you're watching on YouTube, hit that like button, really supports the channel, gets our message out to more people. So if you found it helpful, all I ask is you help me, help somebody else get that same message. And if you're new to our community, there are tons of free resources and some paid ones linked down below in the description. Make sure you check those out to see if a few could help you, especially if you're showing what's studying. There are tons of resources that we have for you down below. And if you enjoyed this episode, then just for last check out that episode on using the pancake analogy for medical school as well as all of the studies strategies that I used to get a 3.9 GPA in med school. Hopefully these will help you out. But as always, my friends, hopefully I was a little helped you guys on your journey. Thanks for always being a part of mine. I'll see you guys in the next one. Peace.


The governor of IMO State Hope, Uzorima, has signed into law a bill to establish the IMO security organization to work with other relevant security operatives to enhance security of lives and property. Speaking while ascending to the bill, Governor Hope Uzorima said the bill to establish the organization was signed into law as part of efforts of the state government to further enhance security following the security challenges confronting the state. The governor also signed into law the bill to establish the IMO State Land Administration and Geographic Information Service establishment to address the issues of land acquisition by previous administration. And today we came to present a bill or two bills for accents of the governor. One was dealing on security, the IMO security network organization and the second is an IMO Geographic Information Services. These two bills, the first one the security bill you all know, you are witnesses to the situation, the security situation of these states in the past two months. It became very necessary to enact this law in order to provide a good environment for IMO people, for the security of IMO people and their property and that the governor in his proactive nature brought this bill for IMO State to do justice upon and consequently the House of Assembly saw the necessity in making this law possible. The government has sent to all bills another by half a percent of funds through that responsibility and obligation. There are two incentive bills that were sent to the House and the House of Judicial Review for the law administration. There are six inventory law and order in these states and order in the state matters. Hello, hope you enjoyed the news. Please do subscribe to our YouTube channel and don't forget to hit the notification button so you get notified about fresh news updates.


Governor Mark Dayton and top Republican lawmakers have chosen an experienced mediator to help work out a constitutional impasse. The Minnesota Supreme Court ordered the two sides into mediation last week rather than make a definitive ruling on the case surrounding whether Dayton's use of a line item veto on the legislature's operating budget was constitutional. Court filings released Tuesday show they hired Rick Solom, a former Hennepin County judge with a history of mediation. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.