12 Oct 2008

中风的六种类型及说明

中风的六种类型及说明
www.cnkang.com 2007-6-19 10:26:26 中华康网

中风,人们虽熟悉它,却并不真正了解它,其中最普遍的误解是把它当成一种病。其实,中风是一个有着六个兄弟的大家族,是急性脑血管病的总称,是一类病。这一类病又分为两个性质不同的类型,即出血性中风和缺血性中风。出血性中风包括脑出血和蛛网膜下腔出血,缺血性中风包括脑血栓形成、脑栓塞、腔隙性脑梗塞和短暂性脑缺血发作。

脑出血 是脑内的血管破裂、血液溢出,是中风六兄弟中最凶狠者,死亡率和致残率最高。它多发生在四十岁以上患有高血压、动脉硬化的病人身上,以起病急、来势凶猛为特点。先是剧烈头痛、频频呕吐,而后迅速转为言语不清,意识模糊,昏睡乃至昏迷不省人事。同时,会出现一侧肢体运动失灵,继而半身不遂。重者鼾声如雷,呼吸深大,大小便失禁,这是预后不良之征兆。治疗脑出血,过去内科疗法领先,近年来采用外科手术治疗,尤其是在CT的配合下,进行立体定位(准确查出出血的部位和出血量)手术清除血肿的方法,既简便又较安全,而且疗效也较满意,挽救了许多脑出血病人的生命。

蛛网膜下腔出血 是颅内血管破裂后血流入到蛛网膜下腔所致。常见的病因是颅内动脉瘤、颅内血管畸形、高血压和动脉硬化等引起的脑动脉血管破裂,以青壮年多见,其表现为起病急、剧烈头痛、恶心、呕吐等。此病预后比脑出血好,大多可治愈。若反复发生可进行手术治疗。

脑血栓形成在中风六兄弟中发病率最高,占全部中风病例的半数以上。本病多发生在55—65岁的中老年身上,男性多于女性。多在安静状态下发病,进展缓慢,逐渐出现一侧肢体失灵,但神志清楚,部分病人可有语言障碍。脑血栓形成预后比脑出血为好,死亡率较低,但一部分病人会留有偏瘫等后遗症。好复发是本病的一大特点。

脑栓塞是身体其他部位(多为心脏与四肢血管)形成的“栓子”,随血流入脑,堵塞了脑血管,引起脑组织的某部位局部组织缺血所致。患此病者多有心脏病史、外科及妇产科手术史(尤其是风湿性心脏病人)。病人多表现为起病急,头痛,呕吐,意识不清,一部分病例可 出现偏瘫。发病年龄较轻,以20—40岁的中青年为多。

腔隙性脑梗塞是中风家族的新成员。这是因为在CT问世前,很难对它确诊。它的特点是病灶多,且病变小而深,小的病灶还不到小米粒大,一般医疗器械是很难查出的。它是在高血压和动脉硬化的基础上,脑深部的微小动脉发生闭塞,引起局部脑组织发生缺血性病变。由于病变范围小,其临床表现多不明显或相当轻微,多数病人甚至“自我感觉正常”。一般人可出现注意力不集中和记忆力下降等容易被忽视的症状。因此发现此病主要是依靠脑部的CT检查。治疗方法与治疗脑血栓形成相近,但预后更好。

短暂性脑缺血发作,俗称“小中风”。它的病理基础与脑出血、脑血栓形成一样,也是在脑血管动脉硬化的基础上发生的,只不过病变程度轻一些。它多发生在有高血压或动脉硬化病史的中老年人身上。主要表现是:手中拿着的物品突然落地,一侧肢体不灵或瘫痪,单眼视力障碍,或有眩晕、耳鸣、吞咽困难、语言障碍等。但持续时间仅数分钟至数小时不等,最长不超过24小时,症状便消失,并恢复常态。正因如此,很多人对它并不太介意,当成小病对待。其实,它虽名为小中风,却不是什么小病。因为其病理基础与脑血栓形成和脑出血一样,常常是这两种严重疾病的先兆。因此,一旦发生小中风切莫大意,应及早去医院进行全面、系统的检查和治疗。

不能忽视小中风


小中风,这个几年前人们尚陌生的词汇,现在日益受到医生们的重视。这是因为它是中风的一个极为重要的先兆。调查研究表明,患过小中风的人患中凤的可能性,要比未患过小中风者高16倍。每百名中风患者中,竟有25人曾患过小中风。可见它与中风的关系何等密切。

什么是小中风?它的学名是短暂性缺血发作,是大脑一时性缺血引起的一种局部脑微小血管的栓塞,或脑血管发生痉挛,或因阵发性心律失常,排血量的一时性降低,进而使已狭窄的脑动脉发生短暂的一时性脑缺血。

小中风的临床表现是:
1、近期出现原因不明的手脚麻木或软弱无力,手中拿的物品有时忽然落地;
2、突然出现短暂的双目失明或复视或视物模糊;
3、突然失语或吐字不清或说话困难,但“心里明白”(意识清楚),而且很快恢复正常,不留任何痕迹;
4、时常头痛,有时甚至突然晕倒,但迅速清醒;
5、近期内出现记忆障碍,尤其是近期记忆;
6、原因不明的智力减退,注意力不集中,工作效率下降,常无缘无故地“出差错”;
7、上述表现都是在无任何诱因情况下,不知不觉发生的,而且历时短暂,仅几秒甚至几分钟。

调查统计资料表明,下列6种人比一般人更容易发生小中风,应特别注意:
1、有动脉硬化病史者;
2、血脂、血压和血液粘稠度明显增高者;
3、体胖、缺乏运动者;
4、滥用降压药的高血压病人;
5、有中风、冠心病或糖尿病家族史者;
6、长期大量吸烟或酗酒者。

特别应该提出的是,最近的研究成果还发现,小中风不仅是中风的先兆,与其它疾病的关系也密切,其中主要的有急性心肌梗死和糖尿病。美国有关资料报道:1982年小中风患者发生急性心肌梗死的是一般人的13倍。有人曾对225例小中风随访了6年,结果有23%的小中风患者死于心肌梗死。同时,又有人在调查中发现,小中风患者竟有19.3%并发了糖尿病,是一般人的7-9倍。为什么小中风患者易发生心肌梗死和糖尿病?主要是心肌梗死的病理基础和小中风是一致的,均为动脉粥样硬化,以及血液流体动力学或凝血机制的改变。许多学者认为,糖尿病患者的凝血机制的改变,血液流体动力学弄常,导致微血管血流变慢,因而容易引起血栓形成而发生小中风或中风。有人统计过,糖尿病人发生中风的是一般人的3-21倍。因此,许多学者认为中风、冠心病和糖尿病是姊妹病,属于同类。

当人们认清上述道理之后,就应该特别重视小中风的发作。中老年人更应警惕小中风。一旦发现小中风,既不能粗心大意,也不能惊慌失措。正确的态度是:立即到较大的医院去做进一步检查,着重检查血脂、血粘稠度、心脑血管状况、血糖、尿糖等指标,以便及早地发现疾病,针对原发病进行认真的治疗,并戒除烟、酒等不良嗜好,做到生活规律,饮食合理,切忌过劳,讲究心理卫生,保持愉快、稳定的心情。如能坚持做到上述各点,一定会防止或减少中风、冠心病和糖尿病的发生。


hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


中风病人常见有哪些后遗症_中风
www.cnkang.com 2007-4-9 17:04:00 中华康网

偏瘫是最常见的中风后遗症。它是指一侧肢体肌力减退、活动不利或完全不能活动。偏瘫病人常伴有同侧肢体的感觉障碍如冷热不知、疼痛不觉等。有时还可伴有同侧的视野缺损,表现为平观前方时看不到瘫痪侧的物品或来人,一定要将头转向瘫痪侧才能看到。以上这三种症状,总称为“三偏”。

失语也是中风的主要后遗症,有多种不同类型。其中,运动性失语表现为病人能听懂别人的话语,但不能表达自己的意思,只能说一些简单而不连贯的单字,别人无法理解。感觉性失语则无语言表达障碍,但听不懂别人的话,也听不懂自己所说的话,表现为答非所问,“自说自话”。若同一病人存在上述两种情形,则称为混合性失语。命名性失语则表现为看到一件物品,能说出它的用途,但却叫不出名称。

较大范围或复发多次的中风,可留有精神和智力障碍。表现为记忆力和计算力下降、反应迟钝、不能看书写字,最后发展为痴呆。甚至连吃饭、大小便均不能自理。还有的病人会出现胡言乱语、抑郁狂躁、哭笑无常等病态人格。

^O^

8 Oct 2008

2008-May-12: Interview with Lee Kwan Yew

Interview with Lee Kwan Yew, Minister Mentor, Government of Singapore

Date: 12 May 2008 - 20:27

By Central News Agency of Taiwan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lee Kwang Yew the elder statesman of Asia discusses issues ranging from Taiwan-China relations rendering support to China's views on Tibet&Taiwan. He reiterates his view of importance of economic growth and stable society over political aspirations

We have just concluded our presidential election and in the United States, they will have their elections later in the year. In Beijing, final preparations are being made for the summer Olympics. Taking all these factors into consideration, what do you think are the new opportunities and challenges being presented in our region, particularly in the situation across the Taiwan Strait?

Opportunities for co-operation in an improved Cross-Straits relations are in economics, culture, sports, science and technology. Taiwan had imposed economic isolation on itself its no policy to the Three Links. Taiwan made Cross-Straits relations hostile when ex-President Li Teng-hui talked about 2 countries and he becoming a Moses to lead Taiwanese to a promise land back in the 1990s. President Chen Shui-bian made relations worse when he goes back on his words like “Four No’s Plus One (四不一没有)”.

After the election of the KMT, Presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou and Vice-President Vincent Siew, I sense a certain relaxation of tension. Both sides want to settle the Three Links to increase trade, investments, and tourism. Both can increase cultural exchanges, sports, and other social activities.

Do you think that Beijing might be more forth-coming in trying to work with Taiwan’s next president than with President Chen Shui-bian? What’s the next step that both sides should take?

Do you think that the 1992 consensus with different interpretations of the one-China concept should be a basis for the PRC and Taiwan to move forward?

I think Beijing will be forthcoming on the Three Links and tourism and businessmen to and fro. In Boao, President Hu Jin-tao used “four continuations” – agreeing to continue to promote cross strait economic, cultural and other cooperation, continue promoting direct flights and PRC tourism to Taiwan, continue caring for and safeguarding the appropriate rights of the Taiwanese people, and continue to encourage the resumption of cross strait negotiations, in response to Vice-President Vincent Siew’s 16 characters proposals for more liberal economic ties, 正视现实, 开创未来,搁置争议,追求双赢,setting out Beijing’s basic principles. President Hu repeated to former KMT Chairman a similar 16 character policy, 建立互信,搁置争议,求同存异,共创双赢. The next step is to commence official talks between the SEF (Straits Exchange Foundation) and ARATS (Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits).

On the possibility of the PRC withdrawing at least some of the missiles aimed at Taiwan…

I do not think it is a critical issue. They can be withdrawn; they can be replaced in a few days or weeks.

The question to ask is under what circumstances will they fire them. I do not see the Chinese, for no rhyme or reason, destroy Taiwan when they intend to have Taiwan grow, and to benefit from that growth.

They have many differences with the Japanese. Yet Hu Jintao is in Tokyo today. Why? Because he wants economic co-operation, trade, markets, investments, technology, transfer of skills and knowledge. China wants to grow. By growing for the next 20, 30, 40 years, he will solve his internal problems and external problems become manageable. If China does not grow fast enough to generate jobs for their people, he’s in trouble immediately at home and his international troubles be compounded.

Taiwan’s politics in the last few years, from the time of President Lee Teng-hui was about Taiwan’s international status, national identity of its people and emphasising separateness from the mainland. I’m not saying these are not important issues. But by concentrating on these issues you have taken your eyes off your crucial need, that is growth and development of the economy. You cannot change China, it will change by itself at its own pace and for its own reasons. China is content to leave you alone for the time being provided you don’t make a dash for independence. They are concentrating on growth, catching up in GDP, technology, knowledge, skills and increasing their capabilities, just grow.

Would it be sufficient then for President Ma to just shelve the issue of unification versus independence?


If I were him, I would shelve it for the next four years. Don’t talk about it. You have read President Hu Jintao’s answer to Vice President elect Vincent Siew’s sixteen characters and he more or less repeated it in another 16 characters to former KMT chairman Len Chan. What’s their meaning? Let’s put aside our differences, and grow.. In four years, you will bring about a big change in Taiwan.


What about the reaffirmation of the goal of unification?

I don’t see the KMT moving in that direction, do you?

And that would be good enough for Beijing to move on to the economics?

For the next four years. Maybe even for the next eight years, but not forever.

Do you see any signs that Beijing might be willing to put something on the table that is more appealing to the people of Taiwan than “one country, two systems”?


I see no signs that either side is eager to discuss the “one country two systems”. Both sides want to concentrate on economic co-operation. “One country two systems” is political and can be set aside for the next four years. President Ma wants to concentrate on Taiwan’s economy to catch up with the other NIEs, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore.

I believe Taiwan will not have much more international space in the next four years. Beijing will have to take into account that a successor DPP President may exploit this increased space.

Before former President Li Teng-hui shifted Taiwan’s position from eventual reunification to the “two countries theory”, Beijing was quite relaxed. They even agreed to Taiwan joining Apec as an economic unit, together with Hong Kong. Beijing became wary and suspicious after former President Li spoke to the Japanese writer about leading Taiwan to the “promise land” and he as “Moses”.

President-elect Ma’s position is “no independence, no reunification, no use of force”. This has eased and improved the situation. But President-elect Ma has not re-affirmed the original position of the KMT of eventual reunification.

Meanwhile President Chen Shui-bian has dismantled re-unification agencies like the Straits Exchange Foundation and the Mainland Affairs Council. Until there is a clear-cut return by both major parties to the original ROC position of eventual reunification, Beijing will be wary of conceding more international space.

Taiwan now is less isolated because President-elect Ma Ying-jeou is not seen as a trouble-maker.

Political reforms on the Mainland are not because China wants to be more homogenous with Taiwan. Reforms in China are to improve the governance of its new market economy that had resulted in a more diversified society. Changes in governance are needed to ensure social stability and economic growth.

There has been a growing awareness of a separate Taiwan identity on the part of the people of Taiwan. Do you think that it would be better to accommodate than to try to suppress it? What if the people of Taiwan no longer want to be unified with the mainland under the concept of one China?


People of Taiwan will decide whether they want to emphasize their separateness from the Mainland by redefining Taiwan’s identity. The DPP has changed the teaching of history of Taiwan. Taiwan has also altered the accent of standard Mandarin by giving it a Minnan accent

Singapore and Malaysia use the Mainland’s jianti script (simplified script). That does not make us a part of China. The rest of the world find it easier to understand us because the world is learning Chinese language used by 1,300 million people. They set the market standard. Staying with “Guoyu” does not make Taiwan a part of China.

The wishes of the people of Taiwan will not be decisive on the issue of reunification. The decisive factors are the economic and military strength and determination of China and America. Are Americans prepared to back Taiwan if it goes for independence? The US government has made it clear that they will only support the status quo of the ROC - no independence and no reunification by force.

Human rights activist, pro-democracy, NGOs, and the western media spread the belief that in democracies people can decide their own future. This is not the case. A recent example: Albanians in Kosovo do not want to be ruled by Serbia. Kosovo has become separate from Serbia because the Americans bombed Serbia into withdrawing their forces from Kosovo. At present EU troops are in Kosovo to prevent the Serbs from retaking Kosovo. Kosovo’s independence has been recognised by America and several EU countries, but not by all EU countries. Russia and China, both permanent members of the UN Security Council, oppose independence. Most countries in the world including Singapore, have not recognised the independence of Kosovo. If the EU troops leave, Serbia will re-absorb Kosovo.

Georgia, a former Soviet Republic has problems with Russia. The Russians have increased their military forces in Abkhazia, a minority area on the northern border of Georgia abutting Russia. Georgia wants to join NATO. President Bush supports Georgia, and also Ukraine, to be members of NATO. France and Germany, two important members of the NATO, have opposed this. They do not want to have to go to war with Russia over Georgia or Ukraine, both former “republics” in the Soviet Union.

Based on your discussions with the Chinese leaders, do you think the use of military force is an option for the Beijing leadership eventually? In other words, do you think China could use military force against Taiwan simply because they want to solve the issue once and for all? Should Taiwan purchase more advanced military weapons to prevent a war?


China’s economy has been growing at 9% to 12% yearly. It will grow at least 8% yearly for the next 10 - 20 years. In another 20 or 30 years, China’s military capabilities can achieve an asymmetrical power capability that will make it costly for America to intervene in any cross straits conflict. China is building up its forces primarily to deter any intervention by America or Japan, not to attack Taiwan. China does not want to attack and inflict damage on Taiwan. A thriving Taiwan is good for the Mainland. Through peaceful development of China’s economy, and improvements in both civilian and military technology, China can deter any American aircraft carrier group from sailing near Taiwan in a crisis.

Of course, if Taiwan’s pro-independence leaders make a dash for it, China will attack.


And what about the desire not just on the part of the Taiwan government but also the people to have more international space?


You think they’re going to give you more international space when they are not sure which way you’re going? They gave you that international space in APEC. Like Hong Kong, you were admitted as an economic entity, not for the political and security matters, just for the economy. Then when Lee Teng-hui moved Taiwan’s position and they changed their attitude. They want to make sure Taiwan does not go for independence.

And you don’t think a Ma administration will make any difference.

I have not discussed this with Beijing’s leaders…But if the intention is eventually to go for independence, why should they allow you the international space? If both parties in Taiwan are agreed on eventual reunification, that would be different.

President-elect Ma is going to be inaugurated in two weeks, I’m wondering whether through your past visits to Taiwan you had any contacts with him…

I knew him when he was English secretary of President Chiang Ching-kuo. I had written the president Chiang in English. Ma would translate it for the president and he would draft the reply in Chinese for Chiang’s approval. So he knows all my exchanges with President Chiang. He has read every letter between the two of us.


What kind of president do you think he will make?

We have to wait and see how he responds to crisis, that’s when a leader is tested. I have not lived under his mayorship of Taipei so I do not know. He has said as president he wants to represent all the people of Taiwan. We must assume he will want to win over the light Greens who did not vote for him.

The other important duty of the presidency is how to get the country out of its present stagnation?

I believe he’s got a good vice president who can manage the economy and get the Taiwan economy to move ahead. I hope he will give Vincent Siew full scope to push ahead.

From the appointments of the experienced people into key economic and finance portfolios they will get going without losing time learning on the job.



On the question of having an FTA between Taiwan and Singapore…

We cannot go faster than your relations with the mainland. That’s the position. Once you improve your relations with the mainland, that’s no problem.

You mentioned that you believe it will be conflict-free between big powers because it is too costly but between big powers against small powers—the squeezing of small powers will go on. Will the economical and political competition between China and US squeeze Taiwan out?

Economic and political competition between China and US will go on regardless of Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Singapore or other countries in Southeast Asia. Singapore is not being squeezed out, because we keep good relations with both America and China. There is no reason for Taiwan to be squeezed out if Taiwan maintains steady relations with the Mainland and avoid confrontation.


Taiwan has been on the sidelines while the ASEAN expands and its members work toward closer integration. Do you see a way for Taiwan to participate in, and contribute to, that process?

The Asean group/units stopped at borders of North Vietnam. Hong Kong was never invited to join Asean. What Taiwan needs is good economic relations with the Asean countries. You can use your status in WTO as a territory and negotiate trade and investments agreements with as many of the Asean countries as possible.

Asean works by consensus, ie all Asean members must agree to any Asean-Taiwan agreement. This is unlikely. So an Asean-Taiwan agreement is not easy. There are several members of Asean who have strong ties with China. They will not want to displease China. Taiwan is not likely to be added into the Asean dialogues. Such dialogues discuss political and security matters besides economic matters. There will not be a consensus among the 10 Asean members to have an Asean-Taiwan dialogue.


On our bilateral relations, what are the prospects for increased cooperation? In what areas in particular should both sides try to have closer cooperation between Singapore and Taiwan?

So long as you maintain stable and friendly relations with China, increasing co-operation in trade, investments, and tourism, Singapore and Taiwan can also increase co-operation in trade and investments and tourism. Do not bring any politics into the Taiwan-Singapore relationship. Singapore has always stood by its One-China policy, from the 1970s when the ROC had Chiang Ching-kuo as President.


As one of the international financial centres, Singapore’s first casino will be open for business by 2009. What will the government do to attract tourists while preventing Singapore from becoming a place for money laundering? What are your views on adding this new sector to Singapore’s economy?



We have clear procedures and supervision over banks in Singapore for money laundering. We are a member of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an inter-governmental body that focuses on combating money laundering and terrorist financing. We have also set up the Casino Regulatory Authority headed by a senior Police officer. We have high quality casino investors in two integrated resorts, each over US$4 billion because they are confident there will be no mafia, no prostitution rings, no money laundering.

My views on casinos have had to change. I was opposed to casinos from the 1950s to the 1990s. The world has changed. There are now casinos in every major European city, even in Swiss cities. America has casinos. Casino cruise ship call regularly on Singapore. Singaporeans also fly to Macau, Las Vegas, Perth, Melbourne, Sydney, and Brisbane for casinos. So we decided on two casinos, one ready by 2009 and the other by 2010.

Singapore has done very well in creating an environment conducive to international economic activities. If there is one lesson that Taiwan should learn from your country, what would it be? An incorrupt government or a meritocratic government will be more successful in terms of efficiency?

In Singapore, the key issues with political debates and contests between the PAP and the Opposition are about promoting and generating economic growth for jobs, housing and health for the people. In the past 8 years, Taiwan’s politics especially in the last 8 years have been about independence and separateness from the Mainland by Taiwanisation or “Ben Tu Hua”. Those debates have dampened investments and economic activity and increased unemployment. Taiwan blocked trade and investments with China. Taiwan lost sympathy and support internationally when President Chen Shui-bian was seen as a trouble-maker even by the American President. With new President-elect Ma Ying-jeou, I hope Taiwan’s intra party politics will be about promoting trade, investments and economic opportunities, not more sterile arguments over independence, or separateness from the Mainland, and redefining Taiwan’s history, identity and language.

Are you planning on attending the 2008 summer Olympics? Do you think that the Beijing leadership might be putting too much hope on the Games?


I will be attending the opening ceremony of the summer Olympics on the 8 August 2008. The Chinese leaders have made great efforts to make it a success. People of China are angry at these protests that they view as intended to sour the Beijing’s Olympics. The Chinese are confident that after the games and protests have ended, China will continue to grow stronger year by year. And all major countries want to participate in this growing economy.

When Lee Hsien Loong was Deputy Prime Minister, he visited Taiwan. The Taiwanese media made big play of his visit. Beijing objected and suspended all government to government negotiations with us. Our Free Trade Agreement with Beijing has still not being signed after four years. New Zealand that started this negotiations after Singapore, have concluded the Free Trade Agreement. Beijing uses its economic and political clout to counter acts it sees as against its interests. Boycotting the Beijing Olympics will not be cost-free unlike boycotting the Moscow Olympics. The Soviet economy was of no interest to the rest of the world.

On the issue of Tibet, do you see any chance of the Beijing leadership adopting a truly conciliatory attitude? If so, what might that be?


Beijing has shown a conciliatory attitude by resuming talks with the personal representatives of the Dalai Lama. But President Hu Jin-tao has made it clear that the Tibet issue is not an ethnic, religious or human rights issue. It was an issue of having the country split or united, a question of the sovereignty of China. The bottom line is Tibet is a part of China.


Do you have any plans to visit Taiwan in the near future?

If cross-straits relations become friendly and cooperative again, and if there is no media publicity on my visits as in 1970s, ‘80s and early ‘90s when I frequently visited Taiwan, I will be able to visit Taiwan. But when such visits are used by Taiwan’s media to provoke Beijing, they set back Taiwan-Singapore interactions. It has made Singapore repeatedly re-affirm its one-China policy. If you return to the earlier practice of no publicity, our interaction will be quiet but more productive.

This article has been brought to you in conjunction with the Central News Agency of Taiwan



^O^

5 Oct 2008

帆船手: 如何解開散戶屢買屢套的魔咒

如何解開散戶屢買屢套的魔咒
‧帆船手 2008/06/30

如果以散戶投資人買股票時最常選用的方法來做個分門別類,價值分析當屬其中的最大宗,然後技術分析次之,心理分析再次之…

如果以散戶投資人買股票時最常選用的方法來做個分門別類,價值分析當屬其中的最大宗,然後技術分析次之,心理分析再次之。毫無疑問的,價值分析最受到歡迎,至於心理分析則恐怕連「門派」都稱不上。然而台股這波慘跌下來,受傷最慘重亦是價值分析派,技術分析派次之,而心理分析派則多半卻能夠逃過一劫。

這三種分析工具的運用全憑個人,其實很難就其好壞分出高下。但是對於大多數的散戶投資人而言,這三種工具於使用上的難易程度卻是極其分明的:散戶投資人多半認為價值分析最為明確簡單好用,技術分析太過複雜,至於心理分析則完全不知該如何運用。散戶以上的認知明顯存有盲點,依我的看法,我倒認為價值分析的工程最為浩大,層次也最高,我甚至認為這是資本家才玩得起的遊戲;至於技術分析則是功力見高低,的確是複製了點;再至於心理分析就再單純不過了,只須儘管違反自己的心意就對了。


事實上,問題出在散戶一直都未把買賣股票的本質作出清楚的定義,是「投資」還是「交易」於事先沒有定調;或者說從頭至尾都沒有誠實的對待過自己,買進股票賺了就當成交易,賠了就當是投資。據我所瞭解,別說是散戶,就連主力大戶都一樣,是沒有人在一開始就抱著投資打算的,「投資」是不得已的事,若在買進股票後已有所斬獲,沒有人會笨到去當公司的股東等著領配息。因此長期當股東只是下下策,那只是在套牢後不得不的選擇!


也因此在買進股票時,就會把公司的「價值」因素列為買進策略的最優先考量,因為這至少可做為買進失利後的最後灘頭堡,這樣在做買進決策的當下,感覺就會覺得扎實多了----萬一買進後即使被套也無須太過擔心,因為價格最終一定會來反應這個「價值」的;就算沒有,每年等著領配息,總有一天還是可以解套的。


於是價值分析法普遍為散戶所樂用,價值分析派的投資人當然也就在市場大行其道,並佔為最大族群。這種現象對那種向來被媒體吹捧的投資大師看在眼裡,不啻是有利可圖的大好機會,於是乎這些大師就投其所好,迎合其口味,開口價值閉口亦是價值的,若剛好遇到市場處在明顯的多頭時,這些大師就可受到虔誠地膜拜,也因此使得大師的名氣更加響亮,同時也更加使得這些散戶對價值分析這一套方法深信不疑。可惜好景不長,風雲變色後,目前國內最出名的三大價值名師已成為經常被某投資論壇拿來冷嘲熱諷的對象。在我看來,他們的確是很擅長畫大餅,唬得信徒如癡如醉的。

為什麼我會說散戶存有屢買屢套的魔咒呢?

那是因為習慣以「價值因素」為首要考量,因而買進股票的時機都傾向選擇在價格下跌時,在自認為價值高於價格時,因此在買進時態度從容,完全沒有後顧之憂,下跌的幅度越大就越有信心。

不可否認的,這種買股票的方法運用在漲漲跌跌的多頭市場,有時確實是挺管用的,但一旦碰到長時間連續下跌的空頭市場來臨時,恐怕就會屍骨無存了!雖有「價值的神主牌」護身,但最好祈求老天保佑,所買進的股票真的物超所值,真的是價值非凡,否則將來是怎樣離開市場的,都不知道!


然而如何才能解開屢買屢套的魔咒?首先你得抬起頭,然後將眼光的焦點放在高處,順著趨勢買進市場當前最強的強勢股,但若市場當前的強勢股從缺時,就算你不習慣去作空,但也請不要以搶便宜的心態貿然去買進市場的弱勢股。學習這套交易模式並不是很難,但要克服先天上人性的弱點卻十分困難,通常只有那些曾經在市場上吃過大虧的人,並在經過痛定思痛以及大澈大悟之後,才能開始具備獨立思考的能力,才可通過內心天人交戰般的拉扯考驗,才敢逆著自己的心意反群眾之道而行。這個魔咒不是別人所下的降頭,而是跟隨人性早已自我存在了,因此想要解開這個魔咒你也無法請求別人代勞,僅能憑藉自己的意志去加以克服而已。




^O^

3 Oct 2008

Mark Sellers: So You Want To Be The Next Warren Buffett? How’s Your Writing?

So You Want To Be The Next Warren Buffett? How’s Your Writing?

By Mark Sellers

First of all, I want to thank Daniel Goldberg for asking me to be here today and all of you
for actually showing up. I haven’t been to Boston in a while but I did live here for a short
time in 1991 & 1992 when I attended Berklee School of Music. I was studying to be a
jazz piano player but dropped out after a couple semesters to move to Los Angeles and
join a band. I was so broke when I lived here that I didn’t take advantage of all the things
there are to do in Boston, and I didn’t have a car to explore New England. I mostly spent
10-12 hours a day holed up in a practice room playing the piano. So whenever I come
back to visit Boston, it’s like a new city to me.
One thing I will tell you right off the bat: I’m not here to teach you how to be a great
investor. On the contrary, I’m here to tell you why very few of you can ever hope to
achieve this status.
If you spend enough time studying investors like Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett, Bruce
Berkowitz, Bill Miller, Eddie Lampert, Bill Ackman, and people who have been similarly
successful in the investment world, you will understand what I mean.
I know that everyone in this room is exceedingly intelligent and you’ve all worked hard
to get where you are. You are the brightest of the bright. And yet, there’s one thing you
should remember if you remember nothing else from my talk: You have almost no
chance of being a great investor. You have a really, really low probability, like 2% or
less. And I’m adjusting for the fact that you all have high IQs and are hard workers and
will have an MBA from one of the top business schools in the country soon. If this
audience was just a random sample of the population at large, the likelihood of anyone
here becoming a great investor later on would be even less, like 1/50th of 1% or
something. You all have a lot of advantages over Joe Investor, and yet you have almost
no chance of standing out from the crowd over a long period of time.
And the reason is that it doesn’t much matter what your IQ is, or how many books or
magazines or newspapers you have read, or how much experience you have, or will have
later in your career. These are things that many people have and yet almost none of them
end up compounding at 20% or 25% over their careers.
I know this is a controversial thing to say and I don’t want to offend anyone in the
audience. I’m not pointing out anyone specifically and saying “You have almost no
chance to be great.” There are probably one or two people in this room who will end up
compounding money at 20% for their career, but it’s hard to tell in advance who those
will be without knowing each of you personally.
On the bright side, although most of you will not be able to compound money at 20% for
your entire career, a lot of you will turn out to be good, above average investors because
you are a skewed sample, the Harvard MBAs. A person can learn to be an above-average
investor. You can learn to do well enough, if you’re smart and hard working and
educated, to keep a good, high-paying job in the investment business for your entire
career. You can make millions without being a great investor. You can learn to
outperform the averages by a couple points a year through hard work and an aboveaverage
IQ and a lot of study. So there is no reason to be discouraged by what I’m saying
today. You can have a really successful, lucrative career even if you’re not the next
Warren Buffett.
But you can’t compound money at 20% forever unless you have that hard-wired into your
brain from the age of 10 or 11 or 12. I’m not sure if it’s nature or nurture, but by the time
you’re a teenager, if you don’t already have it, you can’t get it. By the time your brain is
developed, you either have the ability to run circles around other investors or you don’t.
Going to Harvard won’t change that and reading every book ever written on investing
won’t either. Neither will years of experience. All of these things are necessary if you
want to become a great investor, but in and of themselves aren’t enough because all of
them can be duplicated by competitors.
As an analogy, think about competitive strategy in the corporate world. I’m sure all of
you have had, or will have, a strategy course while you’re here. Maybe you’ll study
Michael Porter’s research and his books, which is what I did on my own before I entered
business school. I learned a lot from reading his books and still use it all the time when
analyzing companies.
Now, as a CEO of a company, what are the types of advantages that help protect you
from the competition? How do you get to the point where you have a wide “economic
moat”, as Buffett calls it?
Well one thing that isn’t a source of a moat is technology because that can be duplicated
and always will be, eventually, if that’s the only advantage you have. Your best hope in a
situation like this is to be acquired or go public and sell all your shares before investors
realize you don’t have a sustainable advantage. Technology is one type of advantage
that’s short-lived. There are others, such as a good management team or a catchy
advertising campaign or a hot fashion trend. These things produce temporary advantages
but they change over time, or can be duplicated by competitors.
An economic moat is a structural thing. It’s like Southwest Airlines in the 1990s – it was
so deeply ingrained in the company culture, in every employee, that no one could copy it,
even though everyone kind of knew how Southwest was doing it. If your competitors
know your secret and yet still can’t copy it, that’s a structural advantage. That’s a moat.
The way I see it, there are really only four sources of economic moats that are hard to
duplicate, and thus, long-lasting. One source would be economies of scale and scope.
Wal-Mart is an example of this, as is Cintas in the uniform rental business or Procter &
Gamble or Home Depot and Lowe’s. Another source is the network affect, ala eBay or
Mastercard or Visa or American Express. A third would be intellectual property rights,
such as patents, trademarks, regulatory approvals, or customer goodwill. Disney, Nike, or
Genentech would be good examples here. A fourth and final type of moat would be high
customer switching costs. Paychex and Microsoft are great examples of companies that
benefit from high customer switching costs.
These are the only four types of competitive advantages that are durable, because they are
very difficult for competitors to duplicate. And just like a company needs to develop a
moat or suffer from mediocrity, an investor needs some sort of edge over the competition
or he’ll suffer from mediocrity.
There are 8,000 hedge funds and 10,000 mutual funds and millions of individuals trying
to play the stock market every day. How can you get an advantage over all these people?
What are the sources of the moat?
Well, one thing that is not a source is reading a lot of books and magazines and
newspapers. Anyone can read a book. Reading is incredibly important, but it won’t give
you a big advantage over others. It will just allow you to keep up. Everyone reads a lot in
this business. Some read more than others, but I don’t necessarily think there’s a
correlation between investment performance and number of books read. Once you reach
a certain point in your knowledge base, there are diminishing returns to reading more.
And in fact, reading too much news can actually be detrimental to performance because
you start to believe all the crap the journalists pump out to sell more papers.
Another thing that won’t make you a great investor is an MBA from a top school or a
CFA or PhD or CPA or MS or any of the other dozens of possible degrees and
designations you can obtain. Harvard can’t teach you to be a great investor. Neither can
my alma mater, Northwestern University, or Chicago, or Wharton, or Stanford. I like to
say that an MBA is the best way to learn how to exactly, precisely, equal the market
return. You can reduce your tracking error dramatically by getting an MBA. This often
results in a big paycheck even though it’s the antithesis of what a great investor does.
You can’t buy or study your way to being a great investor. These things won’t give you a
moat. They are simply things that make it easier to get invited into the poker game.
Experience is another over-rated thing. I mean, it’s incredibly important, but it’s not a
source of competitive advantage. It’s another thing that is just required for admission. At
some point the value of experience reaches the point of diminishing returns. If that wasn’t
true, all the great money managers would have their best years in their 60s and 70s and
80s, and we know that’s not true. So some level of experience is necessary to play the
game, but at some point, it doesn’t help any more and in any event, it’s not a source of an
economic moat for an investor. Charlie Munger talks about this when he says you can
recognize when someone “gets it” right away, and sometimes it’s someone who has
almost no investing experience.
So what are the sources of competitive advantage for an investor? Just as with a company
or an industry, the moats for investors are structural. They have to do with psychology,
and psychology is hard wired into your brain. It’s a part of you. You can’t do much to
change it even if you read a lot of books on the subject.
The way I see it, there are at least seven traits great investors share that are true sources
of advantage because they can’t be learned once a person reaches adulthood. In fact,
some of them can’t be learned at all; you’re either born with them or you aren’t.
Trait #1 is the ability to buy stocks while others are panicking and sell stocks while others
are euphoric. Everyone thinks they can do this, but then when October 19, 1987 comes
around and the market is crashing all around you, almost no one has the stomach to buy.
When the year 1999 comes around and the market is going up almost every day, you
can’t bring yourself to sell because if you do, you may fall behind your peers. The vast
majority of the people who manage money have MBAs and high IQs and have read a lot
of books. By late 1999, all these people knew with great certainty that stocks were
overvalued, and yet they couldn’t bring themselves to take money off the table because of
the “institutional imperative,” as Buffett calls it.
The second character trait of a great investor is that he is obsessive about playing the
game and wanting to win. These people don’t just enjoy investing; they live it. They wake
up in the morning and the first thing they think about, while they’re still half asleep, is a
stock they have been researching, or one of the stocks they are thinking about selling, or
what the greatest risk to their portfolio is and how they’re going to neutralize that risk.
They often have a hard time with personal relationships because, though they may truly
enjoy other people, they don’t always give them much time. Their head is always in the
clouds, dreaming about stocks. Unfortunately, you can’t learn to be obsessive about
something. You either are, or you aren’t. And if you aren’t, you can’t be the next Bruce
Berkowitz.
A third trait is the willingness to learn from past mistakes. The thing that is so hard for
people and what sets some investors apart is an intense desire to learn from their own
mistakes so they can avoid repeating them. Most people would much rather just move on
and ignore the dumb things they’ve done in the past. I believe the term for this is
“repression.” But if you ignore mistakes without fully analyzing them, you will
undoubtedly make a similar mistake later in your career. And in fact, even if you do
analyze them it’s tough to avoid repeating the same mistakes.
A fourth trait is an inherent sense of risk based on common sense. Most people know the
story of Long Term Capital Management, where a team of 60 or 70 PhDs with
sophisticated risk models failed to realize what, in retrospect, seemed obvious: they were
dramatically overleveraged. They never stepped back and said to themselves, “Hey, even
though the computer says this is ok, does it really make sense in real life?” The ability to
do this is not as prevalent among human beings as you might think. I believe the greatest
risk control is common sense, but people fall into the habit of sleeping well at night
because the computer says they should. They ignore common sense, a mistake I see
repeated over and over in the investment world.
Trait #5: Great investors have confidence in their own convictions and stick with them,
even when facing criticism. Buffett never get into the dot-com mania thought he was
being criticized publicly for ignoring technology stocks. He stuck to his guns when
everyone else was abandoning the value investing ship and Barron’s was publishing a
picture of him on the cover with the headline “What’s Wrong, Warren?” Of course, it
worked out brilliantly for him and made Barron’s look like a perfect contrary indicator.
Personally, I’m amazed at how little conviction most investors have in the stocks they
buy. Instead of putting 20% of their portfolio into a stock, as the Kelly Formula might say
to do, they’ll put 2% into it. Mathematically, using the Kelly Formula, it can be shown
that a 2% position is the equivalent of betting on a stock has only a 51% chance of going
up, and a 49% chance of going down. Why would you waste your time even making that
bet? These guys are getting paid $1 million a year to identify stocks with a 51% chance
of going up? It’s insane.
Sixth, it’s important to have both sides of your brain working, not just the left side (the
side that’s good at math and organization.) In business school, I met a lot of people who
were incredibly smart. But those who were majoring in finance couldn’t write worth a
damn and had a hard time coming up with inventive ways to look at a problem. I was a
little shocked at this. I later learned that some really smart people have only one side of
their brains working, and that is enough to do very well in the world but not enough to be
an entrepreneurial investor who thinks differently from the masses. On the other hand, if
the right side of your brain is dominant, you probably loath math and therefore you don’t
often find these people in the world of finance to begin with. So finance people tend to be
very left-brain oriented and I think that’s a problem. I believe a great investor needs to
have both sides turned on. As an investor, you need to perform calculations and have a
logical investment thesis. This is your left brain working. But you also need to be able to
do things such as judging a management team from subtle cues they give off. You need
to be able to step back and take a big picture view of certain situations rather than
analyzing them to death. You need to have a sense of humor and humility and common
sense. And most important, I believe you need to be a good writer. Look at Buffett; he’s
one of the best writers ever in the business world. It’s not a coincidence that he’s also one
of the best investors of all time. If you can’t write clearly, it is my opinion that you don’t
think very clearly. And if you don’t think clearly, you’re in trouble. There are a lot of
people who have genius IQs who can’t think clearly, though they can figure out bond or
option pricing in their heads.
And finally the most important, and rarest, trait of all: The ability to live through
volatility without changing your investment thought process. This is almost impossible
for most people to do; when the chips are down they have a terrible time not selling their
stocks at a loss. They have a really hard time getting themselves to average down or to
put any money into stocks at all when the market is going down. People don’t like shortterm
pain even if it would result in better long-term results. Very few investors can
handle the volatility required for high portfolio returns. They equate short-term volatility
with risk. This is irrational; risk means that if you are wrong about a bet you make, you
lose money. A swing up or down over a relatively short time period is not a loss and
therefore not risk, unless you are prone to panicking at the bottom and locking in the loss.
But most people just can’t see it that way; their brains won’t let them. Their panic instinct
steps in and shuts down the normal brain function.
I would argue that none of these traits can be learned once a person reaches adulthood.
By that time, your potential to be an outstanding investor later in life has already been
determined. It can be honed, but not developed from scratch because it mostly has to do
with the way your brain is wired and experiences you have as a child. That doesn’t mean
financial education and reading and investing experience aren’t important. Those are
critical just to get into the game and keep playing. But those things can be copied by
anyone. The seven traits above can’t be.
Ok, I know that’s a lot of information and I want to leave time for questions so I’ll stop
there.

Copyright, Mark Sellers, 2007


^O^