時間真是很殘忍的東西,無情地在我們生命中碾過,馬上就是22嵗了,可是還是覺得自己什麽都沒做就走到今天這個地步了.

渺和金都觉得我跟他们越走越远了，我也知道，我能清楚地感受到自己变得麻木。

现在的我是一个完全没有兴趣爱好的人：
我不停的回忆曾经那些为乔丹退役痛苦整天，为格拉夫连续多少周蝉联排名第一而欢声雀跃，为了明知道不可能赢得什么名次的排球队而每日训练、为阿根廷世界杯小组不出现和狐狸自虐式打排球、为看一本书每天上课与老师游击战，为买一本喜欢的漫画而省吃俭用的日子。而如今，无论姚明、火箭如何受关注都不关心，多少人在耳边谈论休伊特等人都毫无兴趣，世界杯钟爱的捷克淘汰不过是淡淡的皱一下眉，懒得看除了课本和作项目相关书籍之外的任何文学性书籍，也不再疯狂跟某一部漫画或是动画。

有人说我在忙学校的事情，可惜现在对学校的事情也不过是能推就推，只做分内的事情而已。连大二那会儿想干点事情的闯劲都没有了。

我也想知道为什么，但是，我不知道，真的，想不明白……也害怕去想……
我想改变，却无能为力。

有个师兄跟我说，我从来没有真正的在山大活过，一直活在堆满记忆的壳子里，然后背着壳子行走。我不能允许有人在我面前说JFLS不好，但对那些关于山大负面评论平静异常，也许真的是没有归属感的缘故吧。生活是不断的回忆然后向前看不是么？为什么我清楚地明白这个道理却爬不出来呢?

记得小乔说过生命中总要有一些时间去让我们挥霍，让我们把所有的痛苦埋葬进去。
那这段时间会使多久呢？一年两年、四年？或是一辈子都很难爬出来呢？

不喜欢现在的自己，十分不喜欢，谁能告诉我如何改变？

P.S.
考邓论那会儿,被什么社会主义初期阶段理论弄得很郁闷,真不是到这么没有逻辑\莫名其妙的东西怎么会成为理论.后来遇到一专业学科学社会主义的同学一聊才知道敢情人家专业人士从来不承认什么社会主义初级阶段,业内人士称中国现阶段为"四民"主义革命阶段,就是民主、民权、民生的三民主义，再加上一个“民智"，也就是说，现在中国的国情在这帮研究社会主义的同志开来，就是“民智未开”的阶段。这么震撼的理论是不能广泛提，提了起步时民怨不可平？

如今放假过年，唯一值得开心的事情就只剩下同学聚会了……也许也只有这些时候我才能拥有好心情希望提笔记录下这些所剩无几的快乐。

 

情人节跑去跟高中一帮依然独身的同志们去打牌，7个人的保皇，规则乱七八糟，场面极其混乱；特别怀念上中学那会儿考试后等成绩的时大家在教室里打牌的日子，也是那时侯练就了够级保皇升级——凡是扑克牌打法通吃的功力，可惜现在完全没有用武之地了。记得还曾跟班主任打过对门，现在想想班主任老师跟班长对门带着一帮人打牌这种事情也就可能在JFLS发生。牌打得相当不过瘾，因为是情人节缘圆源四点之后就开始不允许打牌了，不过心情还是很不错的。其实，现在能和他们玩在一起也挺不可思议的。虽然不愿意承认，但是高中里面老外国语生和外来生的差距还是非常明显的（好像学校也意识到这点，我们后面的年级都停止了高中招生和老生混编），上学那会儿派系就相当明显，那时候也没少头痛过。再加上一班又是继13班之后又一个“特别”的班级，活跃得有点不像话尤其跟我初中所在的高反差极大。不过，这样的生活也给我带来了很多崭新的东西，比如：有了一点幽默感，懂得了可以让自己在适当的时候适当的发一点疯，也学会了更多与人交往的方式。从小被长辈们要求如何做个好孩子，但是束缚在那些好孩子的标准中的自己却从未真正的快乐，怎么活都是这么些年头，应该享受不同的人生，不是么？

 

 

生命中第21个没有情人的情人节，过得很得开心——虽然跟情人节完全无关。情人节本身给我留下的印象仅仅是缘圆源莫名其妙的4点以后就不让打牌，还有就是出租车怎么就那么难打呢？

 

后天约了人去看张大山好心情应该可以继续，前些日子他结婚，虽然接到了通知，因为学校那些破事儿也没去成，挺可惜，这回把庆祝给他补上……

 

比赛终于尘埃落定，已经忘记了当时为什么会被他们说动而参加，但是当很多人问有什么奖励的时候才发现自己一无所知，没有前因后果好像仅仅是好奇就头脑一热就从信用卡上付了$75算是报名了……十分不像我做事的风格。但是当把国际快递寄出去的那一刻，突然明白了，这也许只是我潜意识的选择，我曾经那样热爱过数学，如今真正面对他们的时候心情竟一点点变得苍白，甚至有些许的失望；失望并不代表绝望，仍然寄望于一种方式让我可以与我所向往的数学劈面而遇，于是我选择了这场自己知之甚少的比赛。

 

仅看现有成果来说，自己是满意的，不敢说我所做到的比别人好，但可以问心无愧地说我尽了全力。用经济学方法解决器官移植网络问题很多人看来可能很可笑，但却是我们多方衡量之后所认为的最优方法。队友说我思维诡异才会想到这种思路，我不知道，对我来说学经济所付出的时间与精力远小于数学，但似乎更深入我心……可笑而不公的结果……但是， 经历过这一次大学生活算是完整了。

寄完快递和大家一起去看了马老师，恍然发现似乎981的各位和初中那会儿似乎都没有什么变化，爱学习的依然成绩卓越两耳不闻窗外事，能折腾的依然是那几个。和这些人在一起对我来说注定是最温暖而舒服的，丢丢单纯的快乐，妖9年来无私的帮助，萝卜的热情爽朗，陈哲神话般的传奇，白的玩世不恭一切的一切似乎都和外国语一起成为了我生命中最珍贵甚至是宁愿失去一切也不希望忘记的记忆。于是，当每每被问起如果可以回到过去愿意回到那一年时，都会毫不犹豫地回答1998。

一起回忆外国语的时光，男生们西服配球鞋独一无二的“帅气”装扮——当时对那套材质低劣的蓝色西装有极强烈的抵触情绪，现在再看似乎济南市再也找不出更有型的校服了；印着校名的不锈钢盆和暖壶、花色极像监狱设施的床单被罩；无止境而苛刻的内务检查，甚至连锁不锁柜子都在检查范围之内——也是那时养成的习惯使现在的我无法忍受床铺杂乱；外语小教室上课的感觉……连当年把外国语骂到一无是处的盖浩都说，如今再也不会说外国语不好了……是我们成长了还是时光变得残忍了？

 

虽然谁都没说，但我们都很清楚，明年这个时候大家似乎很难像现在这样聚在一起了，大四的我们将各自为前途奔波。虽然不愿意相信，但不得不认清的现实。陈哲要出国继续他的神话，白选择考研，丢丢可能留在广东，萝卜大概会重返韩国？

对于我来说，不得不做出新的抉择，原本似乎一切早已在计划中，托福、GRE一步步走下来，最难捱的日子都过去了，本应该像多年前所计划的那样子在遥远的大洋彼岸申请一所学校待到完成PHD之后回来；如今改变选择是无奈的，也是必然的。如果一切顺利9月份提前结束自己的大学生活赴英，2年之后Master归来，可以节省太多时间。节省时间，这对我来说诱惑力太大了，不是希望早踏入社会——第一次工作后发过誓能读多少年书读多少年，但是当不久前给妈妈庆祝50岁生日时我第一次感到恐惧，害怕自己来不及用自己的力量给她带来幸福，二十多岁的我可以有足够的理由和精力去再花5年甚至是10年时间去读书去挥霍青春，但是年过半百的妈妈又可以等我多久呢？

 

终于了解自己要的是什么——不过是要她幸福。

不晓得美国人怎么想的，去年出艾滋病今年竟然还出器官移植，么有人性。还有三天不知道能不能啃下这块硬骨头。兄弟姐妹们救命呀……

2007 ICM Problem C
Organ Transplant: The Kidney Exchange Problem
Transplant Network: Despite the continuing and dramatic advances in medicine and health technology, the
demand for organs for transplantation drastically exceeds the number of donors. To help this situation, US
Congress passed the National Organ Transplant Act in 1984, establishing the Organ Procurement and
Transplantation Network (OPTN) to match organ donors to patients with organ needs. Even with all this
organizational technology and service in place, there are nearly 94,000 transplant candidates in the US waiting
for an organ transplant and this number is predicted to exceed 100,000 very soon. The average wait time
exceeds three years—double that in some areas, such as large cities. Organs for transplant are obtained either
from a cadaver queue or from living donors. The keys for the effective use of the cadaver queue are cooperation
and good communication throughout the network. The good news is that the system is functioning and more
and more donors (alive and deceased) are identified and used each year with record numbers of transplants
taking place every month. The bad news is that the candidate list grows longer and longer. Some people think
that the current system with both regional and national aspects is headed for collapse with consequential failures
for some of the neediest patients. Moreover, fundamental questions remain: Can this network be improved and
how do we improve the effectiveness of a complex network like OPTN? Different countries have different
processes and policies, which of these work best? What is the future status of the current system?
Task 1: For a beginning reference, read the OPTN Website (http://www.optn.org) with its policy descriptions
and data banks ( http://www.optn.org/data and http://www.optn.org/latestData/viewDataReports.asp ). Build a
mathematical model for the generic US transplant network(s). This model must be able to give insight into the
following: Where are the potential bottlenecks for efficient organ matching? If more resources were available
for improving the efficiency of the donor-matching process, where and how could they be used? Would this
network function better if it was divided into smaller networks (for instance at the state level)? And finally, can
you make the system more effective by saving and prolonging more lives? If so, suggest policy changes and
modify your model to reflect these improvements.
Task 2: Investigate the transplantation policies used in a country other than the US. By modifying your model
from Task 1, determine if the US policy be would improved by implementing the procedures used in the other
country. As members of an expert analysis team (knowledge of public health issues and network science) hired
by Congress to perform a study of these questions, write a one-page report to Congress addressing the questions
and issues of Task 1 and the information and possible improvements you have discovered from your research of
the different country’s policies. Be sure to reference how you used your models from Task 1 to help address the
issues.
Focusing on Kidney Exchange: Kidneys filter blood, remove waste, make hormones, and produce urine.
Kidney failure can be caused by many different diseases and conditions. People with end-stage kidney disease
face death, dialysis (at over $60,000/yr), or the hope for a kidney transplant. A transplant can come from the
cadavers of an individual who agreed to donate organs after death or from a live donor. In the US, about 68,000
patients are waiting for a kidney from a deceased donor, while each year only 10,000 are transplanted from
cadavers and 6,000 from living individuals (usually relatives of the patients). Hence the median wait for a
matching kidney is three years—unfortunately, some needy patients do not survive long enough to receive a
kidney.
Page 2 of 3
There are many issues involved in kidney transplantation—the overall physical and mental health of the
recipient, the financial situation of the recipient (insurance for transplant and post-operation medication), and
donor availability (is there a living donor willing to provide a kidney). The transplanted kidney must be of a
compatible ABO blood type. The 5-year survival of the transplant is enhanced by minimizing the number of
mismatches on six HLA markers in the blood. At least 2,000 would-be-donor/recipient pairs are thwarted each
year because of blood-type incompatibility or poor HLA match. Other sources indicate that over 6,000 people
on the current waiting list have a willing but incompatible donor. This is a significant loss to the donor
population and worthy of consideration when making new policies and procedures.
An idea that originated in Korea is that of a kidney exchange system, which can take place either with a living
donor or with the cadaver queue. One exchange is paired-kidney donation, where each of two patients has a
willing donor who is incompatible, but each donor is compatible with the other patient; each donor donates to
the other patient, usually in the same hospital on the same day. Another idea is list paired donation, in which a
willing donor, on behalf of a particular patient, donates to another person waiting for a cadaver kidney; in
return, the patient of the donor-patient pair receives higher priority for a compatible kidney from the cadaver
queue. Yet a third idea is to expand the paired-kidney donation to 3-way, 4-way, or a circle (n-paired) in which
each donor gives to the next patient around the circle. On November 20, 2006, 12 surgeons performed the firstever
5-way kidney swap at Johns Hopkins Medical Facility. None of the intended donor-recipient transplants
were possible because of incompatibilities between the donor and the originally intended recipient. At any given
time, there are many patient-donor pairs (perhaps as many as 6,000) with varying blood types and HLA
markers. Meanwhile, the cadaver queue receives kidneys daily and is emptied daily as the assignments are made
and the transplants performed.
Task 3: Devise a procedure to maximize the number and quality of exchanges, taking into account the medical
and psychological dynamics of the situation. Justify in what way your procedure achieves a maximum. Estimate
how many more annual transplants your procedure will generate, and the resulting effect on the waiting list.
Strategies: Patients can face agonizing choices. For example, suppose a barely compatible—in terms of HLA
mismatches—kidney becomes available from the cadaver queue. Should they take it or wait for a better match
from the cadaver queue or from an exchange? In particular, a cadaver kidney has a shorter half-life than a live
donor kidney.
Task 4: Devise a strategy for a patient to decide whether to take an offered kidney, or to even participate in a
kidney exchange. Consider the risks, alternatives, and probabilities in your analysis.
Ethical Concerns: Transplantation is a controversial issue with both technical and political issues that involve
balancing what is best for society with what is best for the individual. Criteria have been developed very
carefully to try to ensure that people on the waiting list are treated fairly, and several of the policies try to
address the ethical concerns of who should go on to the list or who should come off. Criteria involved for
getting on or coming off the list can include diagnosis of a malignant disease, HIV infection or AIDS, severe
cardiovascular disease, a history of non-compliance with prior treatment, or poorly controlled psychosis.
Criteria used in determining placement priority include: time on the waiting list, the quality of the match
between donor and recipient, and the physical distance between the donor and the recipient. As a result of recent
changes in policy, children under 18 years of age receive priority on the waiting list and often receive a
transplant within weeks or months of being placed on the list. The United Network for Organ Sharing Website
recently (Oct 27, 2006) showed the age of waiting patients as:
Page 3 of 3
Under 18: 748
18 to 34: 8,033
35 to 49: 20,553
50 to 64: 28,530
65 and over: 10,628
One ethical issue of continual concern is the amount of emphasis and priority on age to increase overall living
time saved through donations. From a statistical standpoint, since age appears to be the most important factor in
predicting length of survival, some believe kidneys are being squandered on older recipients.
Political issues: Regionalization of the transplant system has produced political ramifications (e.g., someone
may desperately need a kidney and is quite high on the queue, but his or her deceased neighbor's kidney still can
go to an alcoholic drug dealer 500 miles away in a big city). Doctors living in small communities, who want to
do a good job in transplants, need continuing experience by doing a minimum number of transplants per year.
However, the kidneys from these small communities frequently go to the hospitals in the big city and, therefore,
the local doctors cannot maintain their proficiency. This raises the question, should transplants be performed
only in a few large centers, by a few expert and experienced surgeons? Would that be a fair system and would it
add or detract from system efficiency?
Many other ethical and political issues are being debated. Some of the current policies can be found at
http://www.unos.org/policiesandbylaws/policies.asp?resources=true For example, recent laws have been passed
in the US that forbid the selling or mandating the donation of organs, yet there are many agencies advocating
for donors to receive financial compensation for their organ. The state of Illinois has a new policy that assumes
everyone desires to be an organ donor (presumed consent) and people must opt out if they do not. The
Department of Health and Human Services Advisory Committee on Organ Transplantation is expected to
recommend that all states adopt policies of presumed consent for organ donation. The final decision on new
national policies rests with the Health Resources and Services Administration within the US Department of
Health and Human Services.
Task 5: Based on your analysis, do you recommend any changes to these criteria and policies? Discuss the
ethical dimensions of your recommended exchange procedure and your recommended patient strategy (Tasks 3
and 4). Rank order the criteria you would use for priority and placement, as above, with rationale as to why you
placed each where you did. Would you consider allowing people to sell organs for transplantation? Write a onepage
paper to the Director of the US Health Resources and Services Administration with your
recommendations.
Task 6: From the potential donor’s perspective, the risks in volunteering involve assessing the probability of
success for the recipient, the probability of survival of the donor, the probability of future health problems for
the donor, the probability of future health risks (such as failure of the one remaining kidney), and the postoperative
pain and recovery. How do these risks and others affect the decision of the donor? How do perceived
risks and personal issues (phobias, irrational fears, misinformation, previous experiences with surgery, level of
altruism, and level of trust) influence the decision to donate? If entering a list paired network rather than a direct
transplant to the relative or friend, does the size n of the n-paired network have any effect on the decision of the
potential donor? Can your models be modified to reflect and analyze any of these issues? Finally, suggest ways
to develop and recruit more altruistic donors.