Future

It was the farewell party of EL – our professor of rheumatology. The place was far away and JW gave us a ride. On his seven-seat limousine there were also KL, VW, WY and AK.

During the journey, KL shared his view on the future of our medical school.

“You know, patient-oriented studies – especially clinical trials – are getting more and more difficult,” our professor of gastroenterology began, “On one hand, the medical school needs a group of dedicated basic scientists to pursue cutting edge research and ensure an adequate number of high-impact publications.”

We all nodded. This concern has become the Sunday school truth to all of us working in the field of academic medicine.

“For the same reason, traditional clinical academic staffs, which need to accomplish clinical, teaching and research duties, are facing a foreseeable extinction,” our star teacher continued, “After all, it is a mission impossible to excel in all three aspects. Since research has been taken care of by basic scientists, all we need are what commonly known as clinical professors, who have no commitment for research and would focus on patient care and teaching.”

Opinion

No, I don’t want to discuss whether the Handbook is biased, or whether National Education is necessary. But, rather, let me take one step backward and ask a slightly more fundamental question: If we do not have the opportunity to read all those on-line materials, should we be impartial and remain silent, or should we follow some opinion leaders and take side?

As you notice, this very dilemma does not only happen in our problem of National Education, but also in the practice of clinical medicine and almost every aspects of our life. (For example, how many of you really go through all published literature before making a clinical decision?)

I do not have an easy answer.

*******************
At this moment, some of you may think of the famous quotation by Martin Niemöller:


First they came for the communists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.


Sounds convincing, eh? 


But, without the hindsight, how could Niemöller or anyone else justify his speaking out for the communist when the Gestapo first came?

Read

As you would expect, I read the entire Handbook as soon as I downloaded it from the web site.

My opinion?

I am sure the whole purpose of this document is to serve as a warning to all parents.

**************************
Going one step further, I actually download the full version of the Moral, Civic and National Education - Course Instruction (德育及國民教育科 - 課程指引) from the Education Bureau and read it through.

Yes, a 181-page text in itself.

"So, what do you make out of it?" After I finished with the whole volume, Vivian asked for my opinion - while preparing to join the parade with her friends.

"To be fair to our government, the document hardly says anything that could be considered brainwashing. It is quite a general description and over 80% of it is related to the cultivation of conduct and development of social responsibility," I smiled, "Nonetheless, if I were that autistic Mr. Ng, I would reject this document and fire whoever responsible for writing it."

"Why?"

"Alas, this is not an Instruction in Chinese, but an Eight-legged essay (八股文) written in Communist's Chinglish - I wonder who lives outside Castle Peak and Siu Lam (小欖) could understand what it says."

"But, you don't think it is brainwashing, do you?" My wife insisted.

"No, at least not on the face of it," I said, "I suppose the Instruction is written by Immanuel Kant after reincarnation - it is vague, non-committing, and incomprehensible in almost every aspect. And that comes once again the eternal dilemma: It could well be written by a complete idiot who could not express himself and merely tries to submit his homework by copy-and-paste and translate-by-Google without taking a second look on what he actually puts down. On the other hand, it could also have been written by an ingenious crook who carefully hides all devils between the lines of foggy description!"

Handbook

While I am pondering about the tactics of brainwashing and the core value of Chinese culture, DL - a university classmate of mine - shares his minority opinion on the National Education (國民教育) in his Facebook notes.

(See http://www.facebook.com/notes/david-lam/關於中國模式國情專題教學手册的意見/422546511122125)

I must say I may not agree entirely on what my friend says. Nonetheless I shall be humble with my opinion. After all, I have not read the full version of this very document, and, according to our senior government officials - if their words could be trusted - this Handbook is neither the only nor the essential teaching material for the teaching of National Education.

PS. While preparing this blog, I recognize the full version of this hot potato could be downloaded from http://accsweb.hkbu.edu.hk/index.php?contentpage=presentation_page.php&presentation_pageid=4

Virtue

When you come to think of it, the inclusion of Yi (義) as a virtue signify how Chinese differ from the western world.

You see? The virtues we learn from Confucius are being kind (仁), filial (孝), loyal (忠), credible (信), polite (禮), Yi (義), temperance (廉), and self-awareness (耻). Yes, loyal to our lord, filial to our parents, Yi to our close friends, credible to colleagues and business partners, polite to ordinary acquaintance, and kind to our juniors. Besides the very last two, our virtues concern exclusively on how we should treat other people.


In contrast, the four cardinal virtues put down by Plato are prudence, justice, courage, and temperance - all characters we demand and cultivate for ourselves.

義

Although we have two grandfathers of different meanings, my personal bias on the most representative word that characterizes Chinese is Yi (義).

Yes, I put up a phonemic translation, for there is no easy semantic method to turn this simple word into English - even though its meaning seems to be well understood by all descendants of the Yellow Emperor. To visitors not familiar with our culture, the meaning is a delicate mixture of uprightness, rectitude, impartiality, justice, righteous, morality, humanities, and decency. 


Oh, no, there's more. The core value - if I am allowed to use this western jargon - of Yi is an unfailing attitude and the special self-awareness of responsibility to our friend.


A virtue long lost in translation.

公

A related but distinctly different word is, again, grandfather (公).

Yes, the English translation is the same. For visitors who could not read Chinese, our word of the day means, in its literal sense, father of the mother.

But we use it with quite different an implication. While the paternal grandfather (爺) represents authority and we have to follow obediently, our maternal one is a cut lower and implies something local and public. It seems a good old humble figure that we can rely on, while, unfortunately, of whom other delinquent descendants can take the advantage without fulfilling their responsibility.

And there's more. When we say we’re doing something for our paternal grandfather, our back is straight and our face has confidence. There seems a special permit in our wallet and we can do anything we feel convenient. But, when we say we’re doing things for our maternal equivalent, our spine becomes crooked, our face is pulled long, and we feel tons of (others’) responsibility falling on our shoulder.

This is the real type of sexual discrimination.

爺

Another Chinese word that comes to my mind with a special meaning is grandfather (爺).

Once again, there is actually no satisfactory translation of this very word. It is definitely more than father of the father, which is supposed to be the literal meaning. In fact, the masculine implication of this word is faint, and is not infrequently used for powerful female leaders - for example, we all call Empress Dowager Cixi the Old Grand Buddha (老佛爺)

And, in addition to a close familial relation, there is in this word a hue of superiority, authority, governing, and being the lord for final appeal. To the citizens of an ex-colonial city, it means the ultimate jurisdiction from the Castle north to the Shenzhen river, behind the high walls of Zhongnanhai.

I must say our feeling to this phylogenetically direct but emotionally remote family member is more akin to the godfather of the Italians.

Words

My recent bedtime reading is The 100 Words That Make the English by Tony Thorne.

When I bought it some months ago, I must say I mistook it as a readable dictionary like Bill Bryson's Troublesome Words. But, in fact, this little paperback turns out to be a summary of the origin, change in meaning, famous quotes and funny stories on a hundred words selected by the author.

Not being a native English speaker, I must say this tiny volume is sometimes difficult to follow. Nonetheless, I don't really want to understand everything - pleasurable bits and pieces here and there are good enough.

And, I fancy what words and phrases we are going to include if we have to write a similar book on Chinese.

I believe the first one should be: 被.

PS. Unfortunately, this very word does not have a very satisfactory English equivalent.

For sure that's the case; this kind of event does not happen outside Chinese-speaking countries.

Swarm

My argument yesterday sounds appealing, eh?

Don't go that far. There are important differences between managing a forest (if it could be managed at all) and governing a large group of people. In the latter case, as the leader, you want to have all kinds of member - and not only those who think outside the box. Yes, our society need innovations and voices of opposition, but, to keep the momentum and get the swarm moving, you also need a good mass of obedient citizen who follow the rule and stay in the box.


You may ask: How to strike a balance between having the obedient majority and the creative few? Alas, there is now good evidence that a group of individuals would prosper best if 60% of them are timid followers of the leader, while 40% are imaginative and love to challenge the orthodox.

Go read The Perfect Swarm by Len Fisher.

PS. I always suspect there is a theoretical relationship between Len Fisher's findings and the 64%-majority rule proposed by Andrew Caplin and Barry Nalebuff (see http://ccszeto.blogspot.hk/2012/05/036.html), but I have no proof as such.

Forest

The analogy that proves the importance of having all kinds of people with various personality and opinion in a big organization – or in a society – is simple: Although it is entirely acceptable to have all members of a beehive or anthill to think and act unanimously, it would be a different ball game if you are in charge of a forest. You need plants and animals of all kinds; some high up to catch the sunlight, others provide juicy leaves and sweat fruit for rodents that could not climb tree; some spread pollens from one side of the forest to another, some clean up the body of dead animals. Yes, some species are more abundant than the others, but it is alright to be uncommon – because rarity is common, and every distinct species has its own unique role in the system. No species is really indispensable because their ecologic role could easily be taken up by one or several other creatures, but everyone is worthwhile for preservation.

And, if you have to follow the trend obsessively and allow only the most popular type of plant or animal to prosper, you turn the forest into a farm. Yes, it boosts up the productivity. But, nonetheless, it is not how the god creates this world.

Go read The Importance of Being Rare by Kevin Gaston, in the 5 July 2012 issue of Nature.

Heterogeneous

If you go one step forward and consider my argument that the desirable answer to any interview question is intrinsically different between a medical school trying to recruit hundreds of future doctors and a business firm hunting for a new employee, you may realize the latter scenario often depends on how big the company is.

Once again, let’s take medical school as an example: A small division of supra-tentorial dialysis would like to have everyone of the team have a similar personality and share the same value – in fact, such a similarity would promote team spirit.

However, for a voluminous department of, say, spiritual health, you don’t really want to have everyone thinking and behaving in a homogeneous manner.

Unless, of course, you are the Big Brother.

Variety

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying my answer is the correct or even the preferred one.

To go one step forward, the purpose of an interview question for secondary school children applying for admission to medical school is quite different from that you ask for a job interview. In general, in the latter scenario, the employer usually want to recruit just a few (often one) persons, and the aim of any question is to look for those with the suitable style and personality that fits the job and the organization as a whole. A specific type of answer is what they are looking for.

In contrast, admitting interview for potential medical students is quite different. The number of finally successful candidate is large, and, as I mentioned repeatedly in the past, it is not desirable to recruit people with just one type of personality - for example, in our example, we want some real scientist (to be, say, hepatologist) and some others with a convoluted mind (maybe as malicious nephrologist in the future).

Or, as what my friend NT told me, the admitting interview does not really aim to select students. All it does is excluding a small group of applicants with obvious psychiatric diseases - whom you would never be able to detect by looking at their examination result alone.

Outside

You may argue my conclusion was not scientific.

Of course not. There are in fact standard mathematical solutions to the question. (Interested visitors can search the Internet by these key words: prisoners light bulb puzzle.)

Nonetheless, my analysis of the question goes this way:

Assuming there is a mathematical way to determine reliably that all fellow prisoners have already been in Cell X at least once, their success depends on the reasonable chance of having each and every prisoner to stay in Cell X. If as few as one of them is never assigned to this very Cell, the whole plan would never bear fruit. Since the allocation of prisoner is conceivably done by the jail officer, who obviously has the conflict of interest and would not like to see his prisoners being released, the claim of random allocation is unlikely to be the truth, and, from the prisoners's side, therefore, unrealistic to plan their escape along this line.

Don't laugh. Doesn't McDonalds Monopoly - and thousands of other lottery games - use the same tactics?

Box

While thinking about the effect, or lack of effect, of brainwashing exercise, my friend VW outlined his story of light bulb in his blog. (See http://vwswong.blogspot.hk/2012/07/light-bulb.html)

The story is not new. I vaguely remember my friend actually described it some time ago in his blog and explained the mathematical solution in some detail. To a real scientist like him, it therefore comes no surprise to learn that he was slightly disappointed with the "outside-the-box" answers of his fellow trainees.


You may ask: What would I answer if I were asked this question in the interview?

Alas, maybe to your surprise, my reply would be very much similar to the second one of RL. In fact, my formal answer is: As a group of prisoners under the stated situation, there is no reasonable chance that we could be released if we play the game according to the rules provided.

I shall explain my conclusion tomorrow.

Brainwash

During another casual discussion, Vivian asked gravely, “Have you heard of the current National Education (國民教育)? It’s quite horrible!”

“Alas, I know it briefly. Brainwashing without any tactic. That’s all.” I nodded.

“I begin to worry about Euterpe and Adler…” my wife murmured.

“I know what you mean,” I said, “But, I must say the result of this kind of brainwashing exercise is often unpredictable. You know, I went through a similar program while I was in secondary school.”

“You!?” My wife was obviously surprised.

“Yes, me.” I laughed and explained, “For two consecutive years, my teacher of Chinese History was a certain Mr. Suen – and we all called him Scholar Suen (孫秀才). From all we knew, he was born and graduated from the mainland, and a die-hard fan of our Chairman Mao. Throughout that two years, twice each week, during his lessons he told us how great our home country is and what great leaders we have to guide the country through all international hassles. Remind you, it was in early 1980s - shortly after the end of the Cultural Revolution and the Gang of Four!"


"Oh... I can see what it ends up," my wife looked at me jokingly.


"It's not only me, but all our classmates," I added, "In fact, as delinquent students, we just kept talking about George Orwell and Liu Shaoqi all through the lessons of our Scholar Suen!"

Names

(Our discussion on English translation went on.)

“Not all Chinese names have a good English equivalent,” Vivian protested.

“Of course, but many do,” I smiled, “For example, Tseung Kwan O (將軍澳) could easily be called the General Bay, and Tiu King Leng (調景嶺) should really be the Hanging Height. Alas, I suppose you know the name of that latter place came along because so many unfortunate people hanged themselves in the 1940s and 50s.”

“Well, you may have a point,” my wife was forced to agree, “After all, it is more poetic to call a place Rainbow rather than Choi Hung (彩虹).”

“And more informative to say Huang’s Temple rather than Wong Tai Sin (黃大仙), or Tiger Rock instead of Lok Fu (樂富) – and, actually, Tiger Rock (老虎岩) was the original name of that valley.”

“In that case, maybe Diamond Hill (鑽石山) is the rare exception of appropriate English translation!” Vivian added with a smile.

“May be not,” I laughed, “The hill (山) has no diamond what-so-ever. All it had was stone (石) that could be drilled (鑽)!”

Translation

It was a busy Saturday. The next minute after I finished with the College meeting, I found myself hurrying to a small street in Jordan. It was the final examination of Euterpe’s singing class, and the time was just about right to pick up my princess.

 Vivian was also there. We eagerly thanked Miss Ki – the music teacher of Euterpe. Time flies; my daughter has been attending this weekend class for two years, and she certainly enjoyed it very much.

*******************************

On our way home, Euterpe pointed to a signboard and asked, “Daddy, why should the Chinese and English names of this place both pronounced as Lam Tin (藍田)?”

“My dear, that’s because the English name is merely the phonemic translation of the Chinese one.” I explained.

“That’s commonplace. For most of the places in this city, the English name is derived from the Chinese one.” Vivian added.

“But I must say this kind of translation is nothing but sloth,” I remarked, “It is to the least romantic, and also confusing for native English speaking people.”

“Alas, do you mean we should call this place Blue Field?” My wife smiled.

“How about Beryl Field?” I said to myself.

Change

Shortly after our discussion on the allocation of teaching hours, I attended a College meeting on the arrangement of membership examination.

I shall not elaborate what we did. It was a Saturday afternoon and many of us were only interested in finishing the discussion early. After some exchange in opinion on various matters, a senior consultant from a peripheral hospital remarked, "Don't you all find the questions we put up rather boring? There are no more than a handful of topics that we can examine!"

"Exactly. In fact, it is very easy for a pragmatic candidate to prepare for the examination," another consultant agreed eagerly, "One does not need to know very much about medicine; all he needs to be familiar with are a couple of scenarios!"

"That's why the College has to change the format of examination once every few years. It's not for improving the system, but, if we have to examine our candidates on different topics, we have to keep changing the system we use." The professor from the other side of the harbour said.

I consider that remark illuminating.

Hours

(Our lunch time discussion went on.)

It took me quite a while to pull myself together.

“That sounds an important topic,” I cleared by throat, “although I cannot quite imagine how anyone on earth knows this topic in such a great detail that he could continue to talk about it for two hours. It probably takes no more than 40 minutes to read out that particular chapter in Harrison’s. Well, maybe your best teacher is going to talk about the specific features of lipoma over the neck, back, arms, legs, and each and every specific site of the body!”

“Maybe, I’m not sure – nor could I say I’m interested,” my colleague was obviously not amused, “The real problem for me, as the coordinator of teaching matters of my division, is, if I agree to put up two hours for lipoma, how could I cut down the hours for sebaceious cyst, freckles, and wrinkles?”

“Quite true,” I nodded, “But I must say I tend to agree with your delinquent best teacher. After all, if our curriculum assigns seven hours for the physiology of prostaglandin, it is really difficult to justify not having two hours for lipoma!”

Cut

Met a colleague of mine during lunch.

“KL was looking for you the whole morning.”  One of us around the table told the late professor.

“What’s up?” I asked.

“Got to be the teaching hour business,” my colleague said calmly, “You know, KL was very eager to have every division cutting down the amount of seminar teaching, but not everyone of my team agree to cut short their own bit. And, you known, I am not in the position to order them what to do – after all, I’m just a small potato!”

I tried my best not to laugh – at least not aloud, “I could understand your difficulty. So, what’s the problematic topic?”

“Em… the one about lipoma…” my friend hesitated – I fancied my colleague’s face turned red, “Our best teacher insisted that he needs two hours for the topic.”

Thank goodness I had no food in my mouth – otherwise I’m sure I would have choked to death.

Conclusions

(My discussion with CB continued.)

“So, did you guys arrive at any conclusion?” I asked.

“Far from any,” my friend sighed, “How about yours some weeks ago?”

“Oh, we did. In fact, I’m afraid we have too many conclusions.” I put up a curious smile.

“What do you mean?”

“To me, the incident that I was asked to investigate was hopelessly simple, and the cause could be conveniently summarized into the name of one person.” I explained.

“Yes…?”

“However, after a four-hour investigation and questioning of each and every person involved, it is always possible for the chairman to find a dozen of other contributing factors and all parties seem to have a hand on the matter, directly or indirectly. As a result, the conclusion is always one full page – if not more – of single-spaced bullet points in the font Time New Roman #10. As Agatha Christie pointed out (in The ABC Murders), the best place to hide a pin is in a pin-cushion. To our friends outside the solar system, this book has become The ABC of Murders!”

Root

Some hours after our lunch, we met CB during our evening grand round.

He appeared desperate and exhausted.

"My friend, what's wrong with you?" I said, "By the way, I did not quite see you around since this morning."

"Alas, I was having a root cause analysis meeting for that medical incident since this morning," the consultant nephrologist put up a bitter smile, "Yes, it is 4 p.m. now - and I did not have my lunch yet!"

"Poor, poor," I tried to sooth my friend, "Do you need something to eat before the round? But, by the way, I must say I now realize our extra-terrestrials have been treating me very well. You know, when I was attending another RCA meeting last month, it only took four hours!"

My friend was not amused.

Learn

After AC gave her own account of the new house officers, I shared my own story on the lunch table.

"You know, I was seeing a consultation in the gynecology ward this morning, and the conversation I overheard between their on-call medical officer and the labour ward nurse really amazed me." I said.

"What's that all about?" The others asked.

"The poor doctor told the nurse that the on-call house officer does not know how to do stitches, and, if there is any, the nurses need to call the medical officer." I explained, "Remind you, it is almost a week after the new shift of houseman began!"

"How could that happen?" LS said, "But I don't think the medical officer was doing a right job either. She should teach the houseman on how to do the stitches, rather than doing it all by herself."

"Quite right," I nodded, "Nonetheless it illustrates the problem over the other side of the coin - the houseman obviously does not think that acquiring that skill of doing stitches is an essential part of his job, and he certainly holds the idea that if he does not know how to do something, you guys should find someone else to do it, rather than he has to learn how."

Attitude

During a casual lunch time discussion, AC - a little friend of mine - mentioned that she was slightly disappointed with the attitude of (some of) our new house officers.

"Since it was the first call day of theirs, I bought them some drinks as a friendly gesture," the budding nephrologist began.

"That sounds a good idea," we all agreed.

"But, you know what, when I took all the bottles to their call room and knocked on the door, the one who answered the door didn't even thank me - he only said if he knew it earlier, he would save the trouble of buying a drink for himself!"

I laughed, but made little comment - I have to declare conflict of interest related to both sides of the story.

Savings

Vivian appeared incredulous to my suggestion.

“My dear, if one does not control his desire and spends as much as he earns, it is a mathematical certainty that he will find he leaves for himself no asset or savings by the time he has to retire,” I explained, “That’s why a senior government official got mixed up with a billionnaire family, or a previous CEO of some prestigious bank has to become the chairman of a listed company with a suspicious balance book, or a retired professor of medicine could only afford a small apartment in Tin Shui Wai!”

“Oh, that’s horrible…” my wife gasped – I knew she was referring to the last example that I mentioned.

“But true,” I went on, “As Sima Guang (司馬光) said: It is easy to adapt from poverty to affluence, but difficult to other way round 《由儉入奢易，由奢入儉難》."

Stay

During a casual discussion on some sensational literature, Vivian asked, “Why does T stay on the post? He is not getting along very well with our new CE, and it must not be easy to accept his previous subordinate – and not a very capable one – becoming his immediate senior!”

“Em… I suppose our new CE could not find a better person within his own camp?” I said.

“That may be true,” my wife insisted on her point, “But that’s hardly the answer to my question: Why does T agree to stay? Given his heart problem and all these, he should retire.”


“Alas, he should, but I suspect he could not,” I smiled, “He may not have anything to live on.”

My wife was certainly surprised, “How could that be? His salary is as good as any!”

“Yes, but that doesn’t always mean he has a lot of savings. It really depends on how one spends his money.”

Prince

My little story between Christopher Columbus and the Queen of Spain was, of course, a fancy hallucination.

Nonetheless, the problem faced by Isabella and Fernando is real and all too common. When a leader has to rule a place that is physically separate from the home country – or simply when the country is so big that the tail is far away from the head – he would have to worry the new colony may go out of his grip. It happened in the Roman Empire (with its Constantinople), Victorian London (with its Bombay), Jack Welch's General Electric, and Stegosaurus.

According to Niccolo Machiavelli, there are two reasonable policies:

1.       The ruler should go and live in his new territories.

2.       Send colonies (rather than a standing army) to settle in the new territories.

Maybe, after all, our modern Queen Isabella has a point.

Go read The Prince.

Retire

(Cont'd)

Queen: Christopher, I don't quite see your point. We do not have enough work force in our home land. How could we boost up the unemployment?

Columbus: Your majesty, you do not have to cut down the number your staff as such. All you have to do is to make their job unpalatable - little prospect, idle for their own duty but filled with paper work and bureaucracy.

King: That sounds horrible.

Columbus: My lord, you can do more. How about having the salary of your staff paid by the West India Company? When your men see nothing but dead water in the Iberian peninsula and their bread and butter come from the new-found-land, they would be eager to go and start a new life.

King: But, wouldn't that desert our own country?

Columbus (with a wicked smile): My lord, I suppose you would not be the Queen of Spain forever? How about becoming the Duke of Peru after stepping down? There are a whole lot of silver mines in Lima...

Colony

(The discussion at the Royal Palace continued.)

Queen: Christopher, what kind of people do you think we should send to this new piece of land?

Columbus: Your majesty, we need a lot of work to explore and build up the place. I think we should send a good troop of young and middle-age people to run this colony.

King: Do you mean only the elderly and kids are left for our home country? In that case, who is going to run our own Iberian Peninsula?

Queen: Let's turn a blind eye to that problem at the moment. But, first, let's solve the problem that I know also faced by King Henry - how are we going to make our people move to the new colony?

Columbus: Your majesty, that could be simple - as soon as your people lose their job.

Both Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand jumped up from their seat. They could not believe their ears.

New

(Royal Palace, Barcelona, Spain, 1493.)

Christopher Columbus (bowing): Your majesty, I return from my voyage. As promised, I find a new piece of land - a gigantic piece indeed, and, essentially not yet occupied by human being.

Queen Isabella: Brilliant! That would be a gorgeous way to expand our empire! Let's send our people there.

King Ferdinand: My dear, we do not have enough people for our own country...

Queen: That's not a problem. We just began a new policy to encourage more babies.

King: Em... Isa, they won't grow up overnight.

Queen: But we cannot miss this chance of expanding! Henry VII is beginning to send his people to India.

King (murmuring): That's why many of his people do not agree to go...