Hospital hospitality

What would happen if McDonalds or The Hilton or Emirates or Ikea decided to show “hospital hospitality” to their customers?

You know, the universal user experience (UX) found in hospitals, doctor’s surgeries and health centres around the world.

Optimised for processing the sick rather than championing health.

Reactive or passive rather than intentionally designed to strategically facilitate specific impressions and actions.

And this is for everyone who is engaging with the healthcare system: patients, Medics, vendors etc.

Of course there are reasons that we can use to justify why things have to be the way they are.

But the strategic design of the “healthcare UX” is a powerful underutilised tool that should be treated like sterile technique in surgery:

Not optional.

Image: Gapingvoid

How far are you willing to go?

Image: Gapingvoid

How far are you willing to go in turning your dreams into reality?

How far are you willing to go in turning “nothing” into the “something” that you keep day dreaming about?

How far are you willing to go in changing your situation for the better?

How far are you willing to go in helping others change their situations for the better?

How far are you willing to go in having the greatest impact possible?

How far are you willing to go in reducing the stress in your life?

How far are you willing to go in feeling happy and fulfilled?

How far are you willing to go in becoming the best version of yourself today?

How far?

1%…4%…36%…53%…87%…92%…all the way?

There’s no right or wrong answer to this question, just the honest answer.

Killing sacred cows

Most of the breakthroughs in medical history are rooted in the willingness to challenge assumptions…to dare to kill the sacred cows.

Assumptions like:

  • Doctors could never unwittingly kill their patients (Ignaz Semmelweiss)
  • Bacteria could never survive the acidity of the stomach (Barry Marshall and Robin Warren on H.pylori)
  • Babies have to be grown in utero (Robert G Edwards on IVF)
  • Women can’t menstruate and think at the same time (Mary Putnam Jacobi vs Professor Edward Clarke)
  • Viruses can’t cause cancer (Peyton Rous on Rous Sarcoma Virus)
  • Diseases can’t be spread by a simple protein (Stanley Prussiner on prions)
  • You are the average of your parents traits aka (Gregor Mendel on heredity)
  • The immune system plays no role in Cancer (James Allison on Tumour immunology)
  • Being repeatedly kicked and beaten in the head causes brain damage (Bennet Omalu on chronic traumatic encephalopathy)

These were the assumptions supported, championed and staunchly defended by the medical establishment of the time.

You think you can treat cancer by just removing this negative signal on a T-cell?

“Everyone was against me. But I knew I was right.”

“There are times I wish I never looked at [former professional NFL player] Mike Webster’s brain. It has dragged me into worldly affairs I do not want to be associated with. Human meanness, wickedness, and selfishness. People trying to cover up, to control how information is released. I started this not knowing I was walking into a minefield. That is my only regret.”

These were some of the responses and reactions to the act of someone challenging a deeply held assumption.

A sacred cow.

This is a common pattern throughout human history.

Something is crazy, until it isn’t.

We ignore the new thing, resist the new thing, and then we celebrate the new thing.

Given that we know this, then it seems as if the limiting factor for our next breakthroughs isn’t knowledge, or technology or money…but ridicule.

Ridicule is the rate limiting step of your next breakthrough.

Being willing to be made fun of, have your mistakes pointed out and be opposed at every turn is the cost of entry for discovering a breakthrough.

Being willing to ask silly questions is at the heart of challenging assumptions, in order to discover what others have overlooked.

So rather than train Medics in how to milk our sacred cows, perhaps we need to empower them to try and kill them instead.

Those that survive the onslaught of intellectual challenge will be all the better for it.

And those that die will act as a beacon to show us what we didn’t know we were overlooking.

We don’t need you to milk the sacred cows. We need you to try and kill them.

Killing or milking sacred cows?

Image: Gapingvoid

Most of the breakthroughs in medical history are rooted in the willingness to challenge assumptions…to dare to kill the sacred cows.

Assumptions like:

  • Doctors could never unwittingly kill their patients (Ignaz Semmelweiss on hand washing)
  • Bacteria can’t survive the acidity of the stomach (Barry Marshall and Robin Warren on H.pylori)
  • Babies can only grow inside the womb (Robert G Edwards on IVF)
  • Women can’t menstruate and think at the same time (Mary Putnam Jacobi vs Professor Edward Clarke)
  • Viruses can’t cause cancer (Peyton Rous on Rous Sarcoma Virus)
  • Diseases can’t be spread by a simple protein (Stanley Prussiner on prions)
  • You are the average of your parents traits aka “blended inheritance” (Gregor Mendel on heredity)
  • The immune system plays no role in Cancer (James Allison on Tumour immunology)
  • Being repeatedly kicked and beaten in the head causes brain damage (Bennet Omalu on chronic traumatic encephalopathy)

These were assumptions supported, championed and staunchly defended by the medical establishment of the time.


You think you can treat cancer by just removing this negative signal on a T-cell?

“Everyone was against me. But I knew I was right.”

“There are times I wish I never looked at [former professional NFL player] Mike Webster’s brain. It has dragged me into worldly affairs I do not want to be associated with. Human meanness, wickedness, and selfishness. People trying to cover up, to control how information is released. I started this not knowing I was walking into a minefield. That is my only regret.”

These were some of the responses and reactions to the act of someone challenging a deeply held assumption.

A sacred cow.

This is a common pattern throughout human history.

Something is crazy, until it isn’t.

We ignore the new thing, resist the new thing, and then we celebrate the new thing.

Given that we know this, then it seems as if the limiting factor for our next breakthroughs isn’t knowledge, or technology or money…but ridicule.

Ridicule is the rate limiting step of your next breakthrough.

Being willing to be made fun of, have your mistakes pointed out and be opposed at every turn is the cost of entry for discovering a breakthrough.

Being willing to ask silly questions is at the heart of challenging assumptions, in order to discover what others have overlooked.

So rather than train Medics in how to milk our sacred cows, perhaps we need to empower them to try and kill them instead.

Those that survive the onslaught of intellectual challenge will be all the better for it.

And those that die will act as a beacon to show us what we didn’t know we were overlooking.

Your boss may have hired you to milk the sacred cows, to simply maintain the status quo.

But your patients, your community, your great great grandkids and your true potential need you to try and kill them as well.

HT: Gabriel Miller

Paid to stay sick

Image: Gapingvoid


If you could be paid to be infected with a curable disease…on the condition that you did NOT use the cure, only managed the symptoms…would you do it?

And if you’re quietly asking yourself “How much would they pay me” then I’ll count that as a “Yes, provided the terms and conditions are right.”

But consider this scenario.

If you could be paid to allow someone you love to be infected with a curable disease…on the condition that they didn’t use the cure, but only managed the symptoms…AND you would be paid as long as they stayed sick but FIRED and driven out of your career the moment they were cured…would you do it?

And if you were entrusted with the cure, how long would you wait before administering it…and losing your current means of making a living?

Sadly, the second scenario is the one most of us are currently signed up for.

Instead of being in the business of healthcare, our actions, protocols, hierarchies and business models map more accurately to being in the “sick maintenance” business.

Deal with the most severe and debilitating symptoms with the available medication and procedures.

Only react to what comes through the door.

Deal only with those who can access you (e.g relevant health insurance, transport, community support for seeking medical assistance etc).

Do your job the way you’ve been trained to do it.

But don’t you dare do anything that could solve the day to day problems and make your current job complete redundant and obsolete.

Of course, the immediate objection is the use of the word “curable”.

“There’s nothing we can do about disease X” some may argue.

Maybe there isn’t.

Or maybe you’re too busy being paid to keep people sick, that you’re wittingly or unwittingly ignoring solutions and actions that hold the key to curing the incurable.

The challenge then is to ask:If you were suddenly going to be paid for curing your patients…and FIRED and driven out of your career the moment they became sick…how would that change what you do each day?

Why are we still putting up with malaria?

“To ask the right question is already half the solution to the problem.” – Carl Jung
Malaria is a terrible disease.
Malaria kills 600,000 people every year, and incapacitates millions more.
Malaria kills more than a person a minute.
Malaria is the most devastating disease spread by Earth’s most lethal creature.
And yet, despite all of this, we still choose to do nothing about eliminating it.
Sure, we spend billions of dollars trying to find a cure for all sorts of things.
But as the gambling industry knows, trying is a powerful lure to get people to play a game that they have no intention of winning.
“Do or do not. There is no try.”
Perhaps Yoda had a point.
We go through elaborate scientific motions that look like progress but actually are just busywork designed to carve out our careers.
We glorify the power of the microorganism to mutate, evolve and evade all attempts to destroy it.
But what we don’t do is draw a line in the sand and hold ourselves accountable for continuing to allow millions of people to be killed by something we have the power to destroy.
So the question is: Why are we still putting up with Malaria?
The assumption is that we’re being forced to because we have no choice.
But if that assumption were proven to be false, then the truth behind our tolerance for malaria…is because it is of some benefit to us.
It’s a useful tool for controlling and destabilising millions of certain people groups.
The pursuit of a cure for malaria is worth more money than the deployment of a cure.
Malaria is a source of employment and revenue for millions of people.
Malaria research is a guaranteed cash cow for many companies.
Having people to help makes us feel better about ourselves.
If we cure Malaria, then what will we be left to do.
Our reputations and careers have been built for decades on fighting malaria. If we knock it out in the first round we’ll have to face the scary prospect of reinventing who we are.
We’re afraid of not being in charge if we allow “those people” to be empowered and come up from under the bondage of that disease.
These are questions that we Medics aren’t trained to ask.
But if we’ll be brave enough to ask different and difficult questions…And bold enough to respond to the answers we get…then we’ll discover the joy of annihilating problems that are impacting the lives of generations.
Btw, if you take out the word Malaria from this post and insert any other problem that we – or you personally – are tolerating, the same arguments hold true.
Remember, you can’t change what you choose to tolerate.