WHAT in the world is CZY? +
News stories now use an amazing number of abbreviations. AWS, TNG, TTY, and you name it ,are in these stories and often no explanation is given. Full stop. I leave the story and go on with my life. I can live for years not knowing what they think they’re communicating.
I don’t use any except the most common, like FBI and CIA. I don’t even use POTUS, though I do know what it means, because there are more respectful ways to talk about the highest office in the land.
All I’m saying is “STOP IT.” I don’t carry around an unabridged copy of “Acronyms.” I’m also not going to look up something YOU should have included in your story (even if your name is AI).
Many assume the reader is acquainted with the internal workings of some agency, or gaming, or the music business. I don’t, nor do I want to. More importantly, YOU don’t, nor do YOU want to.
These articles do a grave disservice to their readers. Plus, the authors are planning for non-readership. I think that may often be the goal. Write something that no one will understand, and therefore won’t do anything about. It is a great plan to write about poor Republican/Democrat decisions if you are a Republican/Democrat…make sure few have a clue of that which you speak. I see how that could be used. But I don’t understand why it is used so casually everywhere, all the time, for everything.
Want samples? Sure. The Verge writes: “Amazon’s trying to turn its massive shipping operation into another AWS.” No explanation. I could guess … Awful Wizard Service? Probably not! It makes too much sense. The Amazon truck races down our street up to three times a day to deliver no more than three products (Lug nuts for a 1982 Chevy? Discount sabre saw blades? Monkey brain soup mix? Or other “important” stuff made in China). Apparently home owners no longer have the physical energy to drive to the store (less than 2 miles) to get the same thing for about the same price after shipping and handling. You do get a nifty new cardboard box with your order. So, why can’t the author tell you what the abbreviation stands for? State secret? It costs more to post the article?
Another? Well, I read lots of things about lots of things. I was trying to read a story about new gaming hardware (because, why not!): “A standalone listing for The Order of Giants DLC says this add-on content is estimated to require 4.4GB of free space.” I’m not familiar with any gaming acronyms. What is “DLC?” (I don’t want to know because I’ve now left the article and have gone back to living a normal life.) But I wonder what it would have hurt for the author to mention what it was at some point in the article. Obviously if EVERYONE already knew, I would have known. So, I’m guessing it is some way to blow up your neighbor’s apartment.
COLORECTAL SCREENING
Time to schedule a scope! If you’re over 45 but younger than 75 and have NORMAL risk for colorectal cancer you need to schedule them regularly. Two questions:
How do you know if you have NORMAL risk?
Why does it no longer matter if you are over 75?
You are going to hate the second answer more than the first. After 75 you are just as likely to die from something other than colorectal cancer, so it is a “waste of time” to have that checked. Oooh! That doesn’t sound right. In fact, they seldom do scopes after age 85 even if requested by the patient or have evidence there may be a problem. Here’s the truth: The insurance industry doesn’t want to waste money on older people, but they don’t mind wasting it on 45 year olds. That’s ageism, folks! And we allow it. In Europe and Canada it is worse by a kilometer. Sometimes they don’t even perform cancer treatments on older folk in those places (and some people think the USA should do what THEY do!). It’s not that you can’t get colorectal cancer after age 75, its just that they don’t care if you do.
The problem with that is … I know 90 year olds who are sharper than your child’s grade school teacher. They feed themselves, too! (sarcasm)
Now about NORMAL risk: How you feel has NOTHING to do with it. The risk comes from being in a family which has had problems with colorectal issues. Or, if you have experienced any cancers before. Or, if you are overweight, have diabetes, or have other issues which sensitize your guts to cancer cells (smoke anything, drink alcohol, or eat poor little baby lambs). [The last statement about lambs was a joke.]
Reading about cancer does not raise your risk, nor does getting a screening. However, I wonder if having loads of dental x-rays might be a risk factor. (After all of the dental charges in the last two years I have begun to wonder why some dentists overdose their clients on those things. It is beginning to make me nervous and it is emptying my checking account faster than “Go-Lightly.”)
My most recent scope? It was a private event involving at least 8 “professionals” who think it is normal for a naked man to be lying on a gurney while they hang around. I’m sure it was on the CCTV in the waiting room, too. At my age stuff like that doesn’t bother me like it did when it mattered. However, I was hoping they would rate my performance. One has to prepare, you know. It takes skill and balance.
I got the message: Just don’t live beyond 75 if you’re going to get that cancer. Nice to know!
Copyright 2026 Donald Whelpley
[PLEASE NOTE that Don is always open to discussing the thoughts and opinions he shares here and welcomes comments as shared in the comment section. He doesn’t use other social media platforms and won’t see whatever you’d like to share with him if you post it elsewhere.
ALSO, Don is always open to offer his thoughts on various topics. If you have a specific request, you can let him know in a comment; he reads – and replies to – them all. ~ Sherry]
See more GUEST POSTS from Don
Comments