Berlin and the Brandenburg Gate: Conclusion

Note: If you’re new to this blog, or if you don’t remember details of my first experience at the Brandenburg Gate recounted in an earlier post, you may want to go back and read part one of this story before reading what follows.

 

My last trip to Berlin came nearly four decades after I first entered the city. I was living in Munich in 1993, keeping busy as a visiting professor in the Klinikum Innenstadt of the University of Munich, my support coming from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. One day I received an invitation to attend, along with other Humboldtians, a meeting in Berlin hosted by the Foundation. I accepted immediately.

As I had during my very first trip to the city, I traveled by train, this time with passport. My speedy express flashed out of Munich and clicked along the rails at a fine pace until we had covered roughly half the distance to Berlin. Then, without warning, the train slowed abruptly and slogged along at what I judged to be about thirty miles an hour. “Was ist los?” I asked a conductor. He explained that we had just entered the former East German sector and tracks there had not been properly maintained, so it was unsafe to travel faster, this being some two years after Germany had been reunited.

When we finally rolled into Berlin, I studied the place to see how it looked after the Wall had come down. (That monster had been pounded into clumps, fragments, and souvenirs some three years earlier; and only widely scattered segments remained.) Not surprisingly, I was able to spot places where it had been, obvious lines where Eastern dullness collided with Western vibrancy.

We Humboldtians were provided rooms in a Hilton located in what until recently had been East Berlin. At the welcoming reception on our first evening I reached for a tidbit just as another arm did. That arm pulled back as I retracted mine, and I found myself facing a slightly taller fellow with thick dark hair. We introduced ourselves. He was Russian, a physicist on a temporary Humboldt professorship in Augsburg. We chatted a minute, in English. He spoke quietly, his sentences considerate. I pegged him to be a thoughtful man.

I ran into the same fellow on another evening as our group boarded a bus taking us to browse in a museum. We took adjacent seats and made small talk as the bus moved out. I didn’t know that part of the city and had no idea where we were, being totally lost until the Brandenburg Gate popped up directly ahead of us and set me straight.

The unexpected sighting reminded my of the first time I’d seen the famous gate, and that memory prompted me to tell the Russian what I had experienced. I explained how years earlier I had stood before that massive structure, looking eastward and observing darkness and drabness, wondering about the people who lived there. His face took on an odd look as I talked, but he said nothing. I feared I had offended him. He remained quiet as our bus stopped some minutes later, and even as we entered the museum.

Shortly after we began investigating artifacts displayed, my Russian companion motioned me to a quiet corner and explained his silence. He had been surprised by my story, he told me, and now he would surprise me. He explained that he too had often come to this city. His wife was a ballerina who frequently performed in East Berlin, and he usually accompanied her. What struck him about my story, he said, was that he had done essentially the reverse. He too had stared toward the Brandenburg Gate during late hours, standing outside his hotel in darkness and looking westward, gazing at the brightness beyond, trying to imagine what was happening in that glittering scene.

The weight of his story struck me, and I sensed a bond forming between us, we having observed opposite sides of the same bitter coin. I think he felt much the same. Our conversation was short. We soon split up and went our separate ways through the exhibits. It was nearly an hour later when he approached me again, looking restless. He had seen enough for tonight, he said. Rather than waiting for our bus, he was going to walk back to our hotel. Would I care to join him? I hesitated, knowing I’d get totally lost after venturing beyond the Brandenburg Gate. I didn’t want to chance that. He assured me he knew the way from there on, so we walked into the night, American and Russian, toward the Brandenburg Gate.

 

 

I don’t remember precisely how it happened, or what prompted us to pause as we neared the famed gate. But I shall never forget that electric moment when we looked each other in the eye, straightened our shoulders, and marched arm in arm and in perfect cadence through the Brandenburg Gate, I realizing, as surely he did too, that our experiences had been markedly different, not because of our inclinations or abilities, but because of the governments under which we lived.

After passing through the gate and untangling our arms, we continued our way to the Hilton, guided by the confident Russian. We said goodnight, not goodbye, for we thought we would see each other on the city tour scheduled for the next morning, the final event of our meeting. But that didn’t happen. I bailed out.

After breakfast on the final day I stepped outside into amazingly bright and crisp air and saw our tour bus had already arrived. It stood waiting at the curb. At that instant I realized it was not for me, that I had no interest in seating myself inside that vehicle. What I really wanted to do was to put more miles on my shoes before heading back to Munich on a mid-afternoon train. So, with that decided, I proceeded along the now familiar path to the Brandenburg Gate and walked quickly through it and beyond, convinced I’d made the right choice.

I was well warmed up by the time I spotted the damaged spire of the Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church, a handy marker confirming I was nearing the Kurfürstendamm, the target I was shooting for. I had enjoyed countless walks along that famous street, admiring its spiffy shops and restaurants, always taking time to examine other features of interest. Now I was eager for an encore.

Soon I was breezing along that iconic street, seeing signs of its accelerating rejuvenation, checking out additions I hadn’t seen before. I hadn’t gone very far, only a kilometer or two, when I happened to turn my attention to the traffic and, as chance would have it, spotted the very bus I’d seen outside the Hilton. I paid close attention as it passed by and saw clearly, in a window near the front, the face of my Russian companion, his forehead touching glass as he stared at the famous boulevard. It was, I thought, a fitting final glance of the man who had become a friend, for he seemed to be fully enjoying his view of the glittering scene.

 

Christmas and Beyond

Christmas is rushing in and arriving tomorrow, the Covid-19 Christmas of 2020, that strange mutant promising to be different from any Christmas we’ve ever known. Tomorrow’s odd offshoot will be marked by smaller family gatherings, or none at all, by folks humming familiar carols rather than singing them (their closed mouths hidden behind masks, their shoulders properly distanced). It will be a day in which whopping numbers of friends and relatives greet each other not in person but from afar, their smiles conveyed by  Zoom, or FaceTime, or other fancy apps. But for you, reader of my blog, no matter how or where you spend your Christmas, I wish you a merry day.

Looking at the week ahead, I plan to write about a long-ago trip a friend and I took to Portugal. After our adventures there, we rode a train to Madrid, the city which provided high times and a troublesome secret I’ve shielded for all these years. I’ll reveal that embarrassment in a following episode, confessing at long last my roguish behavior while in the Spanish capital.

Housekeeping note: If you haven’t provided your email address here, please consider doing it now. I put mine in a few weeks ago, and it worked perfectly. I was notified immediately of my last few blogs as soon as they were posted.

Taking on South American Arrow Poison

This piece is a bit different from others I’ve written here. I wrote this one years ago and published it in the Kansas City Star. I dug out a clipping of it today, retyped it with minimal changes (it originally was written with a typewriter), and here it is, an old story revived. I hope it holds your interest.

Medical researcher takes 2 ½ times the lethal dose of South American arrow poison – and survives. That might have been the gist of a newspaper headline years ago, if the press had been notified of a dramatic medical experiment that received little attention at the time.

Consider this background. A purified preparation of the arrow poison, curare, became available for medical use in the 1940s, and small doses of the purified preparation (d-tubocurarine) proved to be extremely useful during surgical operations, because the drug caused muscular relaxation and eased the work of surgeons.

Claude Bernard, the great 19th century physiologist, had shown that curare causes paralysis by blocking nerve impulses just as they reach voluntary muscles at a site called the neuromuscular junction. That’s how the poison kills. It paralyzes the muscles of respiration and produces asphyxia. But no one knew whether curare had anesthetic effects on the brain.

Curare almost always was given along with a general anesthetic, but on rare instances it had been used as the sole agent during operations on infants and children. Did they feel pain? Nobody knew. They may have suffered needless pain during their operations.

Some scientific reports indicated that the drug did reduce or even abolish the electrical activity of brain cells in experimental animals, and one investigator believed his results with dogs demonstrated that curare caused complete unconsciousness or amnesia, but his conclusions were widely criticized.

A group of anesthesiologists in Salt Lake City decided to do what was needed, an experiment on a trained medical observer given large doses of curare. One of the group, Dr. Scott M. Smith, 34, volunteered to be the guinea pig.

The experimental plan was simple. When the paralysis from curare became so severe that it prevented Dr. Smith from talking, he would indicate affirmative answers by contracting whatever muscles he could still move. When paralysis was complete, he would make mental notes of his experiences. The team would keep him alive with artificial ventilation.

The experiment was performed one January afternoon at the University of Utah Medical Center in 1946. Electrodes were placed on Dr. Smith’s scalp and arms to record his brain waves and electrocardiogram. His initial blood pressure was 130/70; pulse 92; respiratory rate 16.

A catheter was placed into one of his arm veins, and an infusion of saline began flowing into his blood stream. Curare was injected through the catheter.

Dr. Smith reported feeling “a bit of a glow.” His jaw muscles weakened. He found it “hard to talk.” Swallowing was difficult. Keeping his eyes open was an effort. His legs felt weak.

Seven minutes after he began receiving the drug, he requested oxygen by face mask. “Can hardly bring teeth together,” he said. One hundred units of curare had been given.

Moments later he lost his ability to speak, though he could make sluggish movements of his hands and head. He signaled that he was clear mentally and that he could hear distinctly. Artificial respiration was started when his breathing weakened.

After receiving one hundred and fifty units of curare: blood pressure, 130/70; pulse, 106; respiration now maintained artificially.

Thirteen minutes into the experiment, strain as he might Dr. Smith no longer could move his head or open his eyes. He answered questions by wrinkling his forehead. Yes, he could see clearly when his eyelids were elevated manually by another member of the team.

He could barely move his limbs, yet he indicated he wanted the experiment to continue. Questions restated in the negative or double negative were answered correctly by appropriately wrinkling or not wrinkling his forehead.

A pin was jabbed into his skin. Yes, he felt the pain. Two hundred units of curare had been given.

Nineteen minutes into the experiment: blood pressure, 130/70; pulse, 100. Paralysis of his diaphragm and chest wall made him totally dependent upon artificial respiration. Secretions accumulated in his throat. These were removed with a suction tube. Wrinkling of his forehead grew weaker.

Dr. Smith indicated that he wanted the next 100 unites of curare rapidly, as planned. The drug was given; 300 units had been administered.

Slowly, inexorably, the curare sapped Dr. Smith’s remaining strength. His voluntary movement now consisted of a slight twitch of his left eyebrow. When his eyelids were manually elevated, he would report later, he saw double images. Paralysis of his eye muscles prevented him from aligning his eyes, thus causing the double vision. He perceived objects clearly when they were placed in his line of gaze.

Did he want an additional 100 units of curare? His left eyebrow twitched the answer. Yes.

His communication with the rest of the team was limited to an almost imperceptible movement of the inside portion of his left eyebrow. He indicated that he was perfectly conscious. He wanted an additional 100 units of curare. This final dose was given rapidly.

For the next 11 minutes, Dr Smith was unable to communicate with the rest of the experimental team. He was totally paralyzed, his life completely in the hands of the experienced team surrounding him.

He could not talk. He could not breathe. He could not open his eyes. He could not signal any discomfort or any need. Yet, as he was later to relate he was “clear as a bell” during this entire time. Blood pressure, 130/84; pulse, 120.

A co-worker removed Dr. Smith’s face mask and slipped a breathing tube into his throat, through his voice box and into his windpipe. This was a check of the subject’s perception of internal pain. The procedure caused less pain than anticipated, he later related, probably because of his extreme muscular relaxation. Several breaths of air were forced in and out of his lungs before the tube was withdrawn and artificial respiration was resumed through the face mask.

“I felt that I would give anything to be able to take one deep breath,” he said following the experiment. “The period of a few seconds taken for the tracheal intubation seemed unusually long, and I was awfully glad when artificial respiration was resumed.” Sensations of “shortness of breath” and “choking” troubled him during the period of paralysis even though he received adequate oxygen.

Neostigmine, a drug which counteracts the effects of curare, was injected into Dr. Smith’s blood stream. Blood pressure, 130/100; pulse, 100. He still could not move a single muscle.

More neostigmine was injected. As the antidote began to take effect, the subject was able to move the inside portion of his left eyebrow. The last muscle to become paralyzed was the first to recover.

Communication was now reestablished. Dr. Smith signaled he could hear and see normally. He indicated he wanted more neostigmine. Droplets of moisture formed on his forehead. His eyes watered.

Fifty minutes into the experiment: blood pressure, 140/90; pulse, 80. Weak breathing movements appeared.

Moments later he could open his eyes with difficulty. More neostigmine was administered. His breathing movements became more prominent. Large quantities of secretions collected in his throat. These were aspirated periodically by one of his colleagues.

Dr. Smith’s forehead began wrinkling vigorously. By a long series of questions it was finally discovered that the accumulating secretions were most annoying to him. He desired more frequent aspiration of the secretions.

One hour had elapsed since the first dose of curare had been injected. In spite of the frequent aspirations, he continued to experience a “choking” sensation. Rivulets of sweat ran from his forehead.

Even the briefest moment of discontinuing artificial respiration was most uncomfortable to him. He signaled that it be continued without pause. He regained some voluntary control of his tongue, but he could not yet speak. More neostigmine was injected at his request.

One hour and fifteen minutes into the experiment. With great effort, he was able to say several words, weak and slurred, but understandable.

His speech gradually became clear. “I probably could get by without artificial respiration, but still want it.” He could open his eyes more easily. He preferred to keep them shut.

“Will be glad when I can swallow.” He was able to cough weakly. Blood pressure, 120/70; pulse, 88.

Artificial respiration was stopped one hour and 20 minutes after it had begun. The subject could swallow with difficulty.

His use of voluntary muscles gradually returned. Two hours and 25 minutes after the initial dose of curare, he was talking freely, describing his unusual experience. A short time later he sat on the edge of the bed, with assistance.

He later complained of feeling drowsy (for the first time) and reported feeling “uneasy.” He also was nauseated for a brief time.

He improved progressively over the next several hours, but some muscle weakness persisted throughout the evening.

Dr. Smith’s keen awareness through the entire experiment clearly indicated that curare did not depress the brain. In fact he believed that his hearing may have been more acute under curare. He distinctly heard remarks whispered some 20 feet away.

He and his co-workers published their findings in the journal Anesthesiology, advising that “curare not be used alone in surgical procedures but that it be employed only as an adjuvant with agents capable of relieving pain and obtunding consciousness. This suggestion holds not only for adults but also for children in whom a painful experience, even though not reportable to the physician, may constitute a serious psychic trauma.”

After this report was published, Dr. Smith received many requests for additional information concerning his experience while under influence of curare, among them being psychiatrists who wanted to psychoanalyze him, presumably to determine what sort of person would volunteer for such an experiment, or maybe to learn whether his experience had any residual effect on him. Apparently it did not. Dr. Smith went on to a distinguished career in anesthesiology.

One on One in Kuopio Addendum

If you’ve read my previous post, the one in which I describe my energetic examination of a doctoral student in Kuopio, you know that story ended with a critical question unanswered, with a mystery unsolved. I have just received further intelligence pertaining to that story, as I describe below. However, if you haven’t read my previous post, and if you prefer to know the background of a mystery before putting a finger on its resolution, I suggest you check out the previous post (or even the one before that which begins the story), before you plunge into the clarifying depths below.

Martti, who lives in Kuopio, provided the new information.. Martti is a good friend of mine and the professor with whom I traveled by bus, on another occasion, to Leningrad, the notable trip I described in two earlier postings. Martti was present for all phases of my “One on One” story, and for good reason. He had served as the major professor of the student involved, and he was the man who appointed me to be his student’s opponent.

Here is what Martti wrote after reading my One on One account. “It is exactly as you wrote it. It is an old tradition that doctoral candidate offers to the opponent a drink in the evening celebration ceremony which is always arranged in honor of opponent.” (I had forgotten that the dinner was in my honor.) Martti continued, “Knowing [name of doctoral student] for many years the drink offered was a quite regular one. I guess that you might have met a gastroenteritis virus, which has been around of Kuopio that time in summer. [Student’s name] has always told me that defending his thesis has been one of the most remarkable happenings in his life.”

So it does appears that I was struck by a sneaky virus at the worst possible time of my Kuopio sojourn as an opponent, a timing so precise that it interrupted my celebratory dinner, and, unavoidably I think, raised suspicions as to what had triggered that obnoxious illness and deprived me of a festive evening.

One on One in Kuopio

After a refreshing night in my Kuopio hotel, I took on a hefty breakfast before getting down to the business I had come for. I opened the dissertation of the doctoral student I was to examine,  now being familiar with him as the young pilot who had ferried me from Helsinki the evening before. His thesis had been printed professionally; its bulk was roughly equal to a thick issue of Reader’s Digest, and its contents, I had discovered, were suitably encyclopedic.

I had read through his entire volume at least twice before, making marginal notes I might use as questions. Now, with the examination looming, I sharpened my approach. I began on page one and read each sentence carefully, perused each paragraph, and jotted detailed notes along the margins. After all, this was to be a significant public event with faculty, friends, and relatives of the candidate all in attendance. It would be a big deal, and I had agreed to do my part.

My attention to my duty waxed and waned during that weekend. I took breaks and strolled for hours through Kuopio’s streets on the Midsummer holiday. I enjoyed a lovely dinner in the home of my host professor and his wife, and I read a few chapters of a novel I had brought along. But I also completed my preparations. By Sunday evening I was soundly prepped, armed and ready, to perform my job as what the Finns call an opponent.

I knew the entire process would be noticeably formal, that the event required academic regalia. Since I had none, I borrowed cap, gown and hood from a good friend of mine, an academic pathologist. The outfit he provided came in a fine shade of Kelly green, the color denoting medical doctors, and it created a surprisingly majestic aura. After climbing into that costume, and evaluating my image in a full length mirror, I realized that never before had I looked so professorial, or so wise. I wasn’t surprised when the driver who took me to the auditorium called me “sir”.

The preliminaries went off without a hitch. At the appointed time, the candidate and I made our appearance, he stage left, I stage right, in the sizeable hall. I can’t say with certainty how many were in attendance, but I think a hundred or more filled the seats. The candidate and I were introduced to the audience by the chairman of the physiology department, the candidate gave his opening address, and then I was invited to begin my questioning.

We each were provided with a chair and small desk, along with tablet and pencil, and of course each of us had brought our marked copy of the all-important thesis. A number of experiments described therein had a flavor close to several performed in my own laboratory, and others described were sound as well. I don’t like being tethered to desk or lectern, so for much of the time I stood and wandered about the stage.

As I lobbed my questions to him, I took care to portray my positive impression of the work he had done, and I listened patiently to his answers, which at times were quite detailed. Nevertheless, in my role as his opponent, I thought it necessary to press him for further clarifications, thereby forcing him to put even finer points on his results. The audience remained attentive throughout.

And so we went, back and forth, and back and forth again, in English of course, not in the young man’s native tongue, for some ninety minutes. Long before the end, it was obvious to me, and I think to all present, that the candidate knew his stuff, that he deserved his doctorate. After I decided that enough had been covered, and in proper detail, I turned to face the audience.

I had been coached earlier on how to report, in Finnish, that the candidate had passed my examination, this to be done primarily so his grandmother and other older relatives, with no grasp of English, would know immediately of my decision. I had a hunch my joust with Finnish would not go well, for my practices had tangled my tongue. The Finnish language has more than the normal load of complexities, but when the time came I sputtered the multi-syllabic phrase with gusto (knowing the Finns never mumble as the Danes do), and then stepped over to congratulate the man I had grilled.

His grip shocked me. His hand could not have been colder had it been pulled from a snowbank, a clue that his performance on stage had been accompanied by substantial stress. We immediately were surrounded by a group of well-wishers, and after some moments I excused myself and returned to my hotel, thinking the entire affair had gone off smoothly. I had no basis for comparison, but signs suggested the afternoon had been successful, the only oddity being the temperature of the hand I shook.  I managed to catch a short nap before freshening up and making my way to a restaurant just across the street from my hotel, the site where a celebratory dinner was about to begin.

A sizeable group had already arrived when I entered the restaurant. My successful doctoral candidate/pilot was standing near the entrance, greeting his guests. He had a cocktail in hand and offered it to me. How kind of him, I thought, to have a drink ready for me. I passed into the room reserved for our dinner, chatting with a number of guests and feeling relaxed and pleased that all had gone well. Gradually we seated ourselves, and I was about to begin the first course when my stomach alerted me that certain parts of my internal machinery were slipping out of whack. I tried to ignore the message and focus on the delicacy before me, but my symptoms revved up rapidly, sending the distinct message that trouble lay ahead, that I was about to make a mess of my plate, and probably more.

With little grace, I excused myself and tumbled out of the restaurant feeling terrible. I rushed across the street to my room, barely making the bathroom before the eruptions began. That night went on and on, a thoroughly unpleasant interval, with the bathroom as my refuge. During this miserable time, as I passed through the various modes of emptying myself, questions naturally arose. I began to wonder whether the doctoral candidate thought my treatment of him had been unfair, or maybe even a bit rough. The frost on his hand certainly suggested he had suffered an ordeal. After having provided me with a fine flight the night before, did he presume he deserved to be treated gently as a form of repayment? (That made little sense to me, because I thought he had performed very well under my questioning, that with my help he had shone brightly all afternoon.) Still, considering my sudden and unexpected distress, I couldn’t avoid wondering whether he had concocted a clever method of revenge. Why did he have that cocktail for me at the ready? And what else could conceivably have brought on my abrupt distress? Wasn’t all of this quite suspicious?

Now, decades later, those questions remain unanswered. Were my suspicions justified? Who knows? Maybe some mysterious virus just happened to slip into my digestive tract at an inopportune time and trigger my set of erroneous suppositions. So, in conclusion, I have no answer. But even now the question lingers. Did he, or didn’t he?

Flying above Fire

When I landed in Helsinki, the middle leg of my previously-mentioned tour, I was met by the young pilot assigned to fly me to Kuopio. By odd circumstance that fellow was the very candidate I was to examine on the following Monday. Apparently those who arranged this scheme thought it would provide a pleasant avenue for us to become acquainted before we appeared together on a public stage (I’ll explain that later). I’d been assured the fellow was an accomplished pilot, so I settled myself comfortably in his single-engine aircraft, anticipating a pleasant flight, and having no inkling of the spectacle that lay ahead.

The day was June 19, 1987, an excellent time to arrive in Finland, for it was Midsummer Eve in that country, a special time I discovered, and one loaded with traditions. One colorful custom sends multitudes of folks hustling off to nearby lakes, almost all to gather timber and pile it into huge clumps. Then, just as daylight fades, to set all ablaze.

I knew none of this as I we taxied to our runway, I paying alert attention to the commercial jets lumbering tall around us. After receiving permission from the control tower, we accelerated with all the energy a single propeller can provide and gradually reached the speed necessary to ease us off the ground. Remembering those moments now, I’m sure everything had been carefully planned, for our airplane gained altitude just as light was fading.

Southern Finland, the part over which we flew, is awash with lakes, huge lakes, some of them snaking along for fifty miles and more. From our height we had superb views of those expansive stretches. Large areas of water gleamed like scattered puddles filled with rain. I quickly noticed other things were afoot along the waters’s edges. Sparks flared and rapidly grew into dots of fire along the shores. More and more fires appeared, all with orangish hues of burning timber. Fires exploded everywhere, hundreds of them marking the irregular intersections between land and water, and all of them sliding smoothly beneath us, their patterns changing constantly, each seemingly more incredible than the last.

We probably were some 1,500 to 2.000 feet above the earth for most of the flight, that height providing a broad view of the bonfires.  On and on we flew for a couple of hours, conversing over the drone of the engine, discussing what we were seeing below, and occasionally dipping down for closer observations, ever alert for new sightings.

Although I’ve flown in other small planes, none has gripped me like that singular flight into the dark. Night had taken over completely by the time we reached Kuopio. Bonfires still burned brightly along Lake Kallavesi as we landed, I realizing at that moment, as I suspect the pilot did too, that our next adventure together would play in a different key, for I would be the one with the wheel in my hands. I’ll unravel that story next time.

Second Thoughts on First Impressions

We all know the cliché, the one that usually goes something like this, “You won’t have a second chance to make a first impression.” There is of course irrefutable logic tied to that notion, but if one digs more deeply into the concept, thought-provoking flags begin to wave, at least they do if someone as accomplished as Amor Towles takes up the challenge.

In one scene in Towles’ novel, A Gentleman in Moscow, the Count (the gentleman of the title) is speaking with a woman who on first meeting little impressed him. But, as she reveals a telling detail of her background, the Count muses on the virtues of withholding judgement on first meetings..

“After all, what can a first impression tell us about someone we’ve just met for a minute in the lobby of the hotel? For that matter, what can a first impression tell us about anyone? Why, no more than a chord can tell us about Beethoven, or a brushstroke about Botticelli. By their very nature, human beings are so capricious, so complex, so delightfully contradictory, that they deserve not only our consideration, but our reconsideration – and our unwavering determination to withhold our opinion until we have engaged with them in every possible setting at every possible hour.”

I think it’s unlikely that many of us will meet someone new while celebrating tomorrow’s feast (with Covid-19 now as our Emperor), but I’ve tucked the Count’s pondering into a safe corner, just in case.

Update: While sorting through images of my 1987 adventures in Finland and turning them into words, I realized that my flight from Helsinki to Kuopio was so unusual, and so perfectly timed, that it deserves a post of its own. I’m nearly finished with that story. I’ll put that part of the story up later today.

Free Travel Addendum, and Note

After writing about my jaunt to Jerusalem, Kuopio, and Oxford, I dug back and discovered I had gone on eleven other trips in 1987, so I soared through more clouds that year than I would have guessed. Each journey brought back wisps of memory, one of which made me cringe. Below are the trips and a single memory from each.

For those interested in statistical trivia, I estimate my travels that year fell near the medial amount of jetting around done by other researchers in my field at the time. Now to the list.

January 14 – 15 to St Louis to lecture at Washington University. (I had fine conversations with the renowned pharmacologist I was collaborating with at the time.)

January 27 – 29 to Buffalo site visit to evaluate a grant application. (I caught up on the life of a friend, a graduate student I’d known at Wisconsin.)

March 23 to Montreal to lecture at University of Montreal. (First trip to the famous hypertension research unit there, and I was most impressed by how vibrant the city below the city was, the tremendous underground shopping centers and more.)

March 30 – April 3 to Washington D.C. to participate in scientific meeting (Presented data my colleagues and I thought strongly supported our points of view).

May 20 – 21 to New York City to participate in conference on hypertension. (I was surprised by the rather clear anatomy and actions shown on the hotel’s regular television channels, probably cable.)

June 8 – 9 to Buffalo to participate in Vasopressin Workshop. (Serious group of participants yet pleasant times throughout.)

June 15 – 30 to Jerusalem, Kuopio, Oxford trip. (Described earlier.)

August 3 – 7 to Smuggler’s Notch, VT to participate vasopressin conference. (I came to love that pleasant town.)

August 17 – 19 to Colorado Springs to participate in collaborative research at the U.S. Olympic Training Center. (Learned from an exercise authority that a single set of weight lifting produces little effect. One must do multiple sets.)

October 13 – 16 to New Orleans to participate in scientific sessions dealing with hypertension research. (Ate my first poor boy  sandwich.)

November 16 – 19 to Anaheim to participate in American Heart Scientific Sessions. (Having been to the convention center for several meetings, all I recall now is the huge acres of exhibits, including a number of women in leotards exercising on treadmills.)

December 15 -17 to Louisville to lecture at University of Louisville. (Exposed how little I know of horse racing and embarrassed myself at a dinner with three of my hosts. “Why does the menu have all these ‘Churchill’ specials,”I asked, before adding, “We’re a long way from England.”)

 

Additional Note:

A team is now working on rebuilding this website. I’ll keep you posted. Also, the Kuopio story will be up soon. Thanks for staying with me.

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

 

8 – Free Travel

Two decisions of mine, both made relatively early in life, provided means for me to travel a bit over the years, mostly on somebody else’s dollar. The first was my decision to enlist in the Air Force at age nineteen, a wise commitment that sent me zig-zagging through a number of states before being shipped off to Germany for three engaging years, that interval offering ample opportunity for me to poke around Deutschland from top to bottom, and even to spend months of my furloughs nosing through a dozen other countries, all courtesy of Uncle Sam.

My second path to cost-free travel opened widely when I adopted a physiological laboratory as my second home. When engaging in research, I soon discovered, junkets are part of the process, especially those important trips to national and international meetings, all often paid for by grants, or, in special cases, by those who organize a special meeting. This, of course, is not the only trigger that, in normal times, sends hordes of researchers into the skies. Colleagues at a distance often ignite similar sparks. Those folks, being interested in your work and eager to learn of your most recent findings, frequently send invitations for you to lecture in their department, or to demonstrate a certain technique you’ve developed, or possibly to offer value in other ways. The hosts, of course, almost always pick up your travel tab, and usually add a nice honorarium as well.

Such journeys not infrequently involve multiple stops. It’s fairly common for one to hop about while following an uneven route put together with little advanced planning. Here’s a simple example of my own from years ago. Early in 1987, I marked on my calendar the June days I was to be in Kuopio to examine a doctoral student at the university. This obligation prompted me to follow up on a conversation I’d had with an Oxford professor some time earlier.

That professor had introduced himself at a meeting of the American Heart Association in Dallas. While studying a poster of mine, he expressed interest in my data and urged me to notify him the next time I would be crossing the Atlantic, adding that he would be pleased to arrange for me to lecture at his university, providing I could find time for a stop in England. So, after my Kuopio event had been confirmed, I dutifully alerted the man, and he in turn scheduled my lecture for just a few days after my Kuopio obligation.

Not long after these developments, a third option came out of the blue when I was surprised by an invitation to speak at a symposium on catecholamines in Jerusalem, the dates of that symposium conveniently being only days before my Kuopio commitment.  Now, to be candid, I had done little investigation of catecholamines, and those compounds weren’t really a major interest of mine, but the opportunity appealed to me, for I had never been to Jerusalem, or even to the Middle East, historic grounds to be sure. The timing was good, the location appealing, so I sent my acceptance to the symposium’s organizers with considerable zest.

With all in place at last, my fluctuating flight plan was finalized to include stops in Tel Aviv (with bus to Jerusalem), Helsinki (with private plane to Kuopio), and London (with train to Oxford). It proved to be a eventful journey in many ways, but perhaps the most memorable event turned out to be my joust with the doctoral candidate in Kuopio. I’ll relive that incident next, but in the meantime here’s a hint of what’s to come. The person examining a Finnish doctoral student is called the student’s opponent. From the bulk of evidence, that’s exactly what I turned out to be.

Housekeeping Note

I’m sorry to have been away for a couple of weeks, which in Blog Land apparently is about equivalent to a cosmic year. I’ve been entangled in a string of urgent but not necessary important threads that have kept me away. I did manage to write the ending to the Brandenburg Gate story, but have decided not to post it quite yet. I’ll explain when it appears later. But a substitute is ready to go and will be up in minutes. It also deals with travel.

If all goes well in the next few days, I’ll have up and running a system that will alert to those wishing to be know when I post something new. I’ll let you know when that’s accomplished.

Thanks for your patience.