|
|||
|
Back to the Forum 2006
Archives I just had a long stay in our local hospital. Most folks would not think it was a long stay. I went in about 3 o'clock in the morning, stayed that night, and came home the next morning. For me that was too long. I should not have gone at all but I did. It was a mistake that I and Mrs. Gaffer made in something of a panic. We thought I might be experiencing a heart attack so Mrs. Gaffer called 911. Those fine fellows came right out in a few minutes and gave me a quick ride to the local hospital. It turned out, I did not have a heart attack. I had something much less serious but serious enough. After the hospital turned me out with negative result, Mrs. Gaffer and I thought about it and decided I was suffering from a severe ulcer. We were close. An Endoscopy revealed I had acid reflux disease. That is a chronic condition similar to an ulcer which is eminently treatable and controllable with a drug called Prevacid. Fine! Okay, but this essay is not about my problems, it is about hospital food. The very words make you shudder, do they not? I will say, the worst part of my hospital experience was the so-called food they presented to me, some of which I actually ate. Most of it was too awful to eat. I have found this to be a historical problem with hospitals. The food is usually awful. I have never had a hospital stay where I did not lose weight. In this particular case, in two days, I lost about four pounds. Now, this hospital has a nutritionist. I know they do because one came to my room and asked me if I had been able to eat anything. I just smiled weakly and nodded. I found long ago that it does not do to pursue the issue. The usual answer is, "Oh dear, that's too bad. Well try to eat something, won't you?" There is no sense telling this person I cannot eat the food because it is terrible. I don't know what a nutritionist in a hospital is supposed to do. I would have though it would be to make sure the food is healthful, but that is clearly not the case. The hospital food I have experience is anything but healthful. Let me give you one example. One meal I remember consisted of a piece of grilled chicken in a huge hamburger bun that was soggy from sitting in a rack somewhere. With it were a couple of packs of mayo. There was also a handful of lettuce with one cherry tomato, and some shredded carrot with a couple of packs of French dressing. The dessert was some artificially sweetened vanilla pudding and a cup of, for God's sake, Sanka. Perhaps they think throwing a piece of grilled chicken on a plate make it a healthy meal. I must ask, where is the roughage? A handful of wilted lettuce and some french dressing is all there was. Instead of piece of fruit for desert, I got sugar free pudding. It should have been an apple. That was not a healthy meal. I could have got a more healthy meal at Wendy's. Now, in addition to serving what amounts to unhealthy food, hospitals traditionally allow good tasting food to spoil and lose its flavor on carts that they wheel slowly around the hospital. All the food I received was at the wrong temperature to be appetizing. What should have been hot was room temperature and what should have been cold was warm. There is no good reason for that. It all has to do with how they prepare and serve the food. It is actually prepared in what amounts to a factory instead of a kitchen. They then attempt to deliver it to every rom in the building at the same time, a task which is clearly impossible. I'm sure they would explain they do this for reasons of economy. It's all nonsense. They end up throwing most of the food away because the patients cannot eat it. Is that economy? There is a better way. I saw that way in operation at one hospital. This is the Oakwood Hospital in Dearborn, Michigan. I was never in residence there, but my niece was. I visited her there. This hospital has a real nutritionist and a completely novel philosophy of food service. It is the only place I ever saw where the patients were pleased with the food. It is not a big deal and they claim it is actually more economical than the traditional method of one fits all. Instead of a daily sheet with two or three choices, all bad, Oakwood had a menu. Each patient had a copy of it in their room. I was more like a small short order restaurant menu that a hospital offering. In addition, there were no specified meal times. Instead, each patient could call the kitchen and order from the menu when they were ready to eat. The kitchen would then prepare the food and a delivery person would zip it up to the patient, still hot or cold as would be expected in a good restaurant. This saved money for two good reasons. One is that very little
food was thrown out. Also, the staff required to do this was
small, because they did not have to do it all at once. Just as
a small restaurant would, they responded to customer demand.
Just as a small restaurant would, they served a large number
of people in a short time, but they did not try to do it all
at once. The most important thing though is the patients actually
liked the food. I'll vote for that!
|