i'm taking pills but at the same time i want to take multi vitamins, is there any side effect for this?
Answer:
There might be an interaction. Certain medicines and certain supplements can interfere with each other. Tell your doctor or pharmacist what you are taking.
It depends on the actual pills and the actual vitamins. Ask your pharmacist and read the prescription info you were given!
it would really depend on what kind of pills i cant think of any but talk to your doctor or a pharmacists he will he able to help you out.
you can take both at the same time., there are no side effects for this.But dont take the vitamin pills continuously; take the vitamin pills for 15 days then stop taking the vitamin pills for 15 days , go on like this.
water sluble vitamins as ( C and B complex ) have no side effect
but others do
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Is nano-technology something to get very excited about with regard to it's use in medicine?
Answer:
Good question. Check out :
http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/nanotechan...
As long as it's not used to Borgify us all!
Well, to me everyone is excited about nanotech, but it really has some interesting application. However, I'm not sure the potential in Medcine.
is nanotechnology better or medicine?
Answer:
Obviously nano tech is far better than medicine. The future lies in the hands of nano technitions. After 15 years the estimated nano industry is more than $15,000,000,000,000
Your question assumes nanotechnolgy and medicine are two different things. However nanotechnology is an important part of medicine.
Well they are poles apart.
As such for small diseases medicines are definitely better and nanotechnology cannot be used to cure common simple diseases.
One more thing to be noted if there is a disease like AIDS nanotechnology cannot take all the virus out on a large scale.
On the other hand for operations nanotechnology is not better than medicine it is better than surgery.
If i am unable to answer your question please do tell me in which context you are referring these terms to.
Thanks
If you are suffering then obviously medicine is more better then nanotechnology. If u die, then what is the use of nanotechnology.
ofcourse nanotechnology is better...the less pain and the more gain...
You did not elaborate. I do believe you want to decide between studying nano-tech and medicine, I think you are not decided and want to make decision on the bases of scope in future, both have lots of frontiers to explore, money is usually is dependent on supply and demand.So make up your mind multidisciplinary is aways possible.
how can you compare or replace nanotechnology with medicine.these are two entirely different things.the possible relation between these can be : "nanotechnology could help improove and discover new medicines,ways they act,ways of their administration,etc."
For Biotech u need to study Bionanotechnology. U can make an Honours course in any field of biology. Like Biochemistry, Zoology, Human Genetics etc. For this U will have to study medical 11 and 12 standard and take a course later in Bionanotechnology.
Nanotechnology is a non medical field. For this you will have to take non med 11 and 12 standard. Ur stronge subjects have to be physics.
I hope it helps u!
nanotechnology is better. in 11 th std u cannot choose biotech bcz no universities are offering .u can join bsc biotech or btech- biotech only after the completion of intermediate. all the best
NANO is full of that Engg stuff with equations and calculations,. BIO TECH, NANO, done beiile in these stuffs... and BEWARE HYPES are created thru MEDIA.. Jus analyse the following?1. Whats your potential.2. How far u can go in one feild,,3. The failures u overcame during ur academics.. 4. The place u live and the Support From ur Family (eg: a farmers son (its difficuilt) cant become a ROCKET SCIENTIST.. 5. Belive in . HARD work... DOne u are a _____________ and what u want to be
nano technology might one day involve molecule or cell sized programmable computer chips with zappers(maybe tiny lasers) to do in toxins chemicals, and invading pathogens.medicine is one application for nanotechnology.it doesn't look like either or
Is Mylan just like a Valium?If not what is it and what are the side effects?
Answer:
I have never heard of Mylan and googled it. There is a drug company called Mylan Laboratories but I found no drug called Mylan. You might want to check the name again.
Mylan is a generic company that makes drugs, not an actual drug. Valium belongs to a family of antianxiety drugs known as benzodiazepines that includes alprazolam (Xanax), chlordiazepoxide (Librium), diazepam (Valium), and lorazepam (Ativan).
Is my rapid heartbeat normal after Prednisone??
I have just finished a short-term 11 day course of Prednisone. 40mg for 5 days, 30mg for 3days, etc. The heartbeat thing didn't start right away, maybe the 4th day or so. It increased with each day. I took my last dose, 10mg, yesterday, and now am unable to do normal routine things around the house like washing dishes. My heartbeat is so pronounced and feels like its coming out of my chest. It's a sort of watery kind of raspy beat. Very scary. I called my heart doctor and she assured me it was normal. Somehow I just don't feel convinced. How long does it take for the Prednisone to leave the body? Has anyone experienced the same condition and what was the outcome?
Answer:
Prednisone may cause side effects. Tell your doctor if any of these symptoms are severe or do not go away: headache
dizziness
difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep
inappropriate happiness
extreme changes in mood
changes in personality
bulging eyes
acne
thin, fragile skin
red or purple blotches or lines under the skin
slowed healing of cuts and bruises
increased hair growth
changes in the way fat is spread around the body
extreme tiredness
weak muscles
irregular or absent menstrual periods
decreased sexual desire
heartburn
increased sweating Some side effects can be serious. If you experience any of the following symptoms, call your doctor immediately: vision problems
eye pain, redness, or tearing
sore throat, fever, chills, cough, or other signs of infection
seizures
depression
loss of contact with reality
confusion
muscle twitching or tightening
shaking of the hands that you cannot control
numbness, burning, or tingling in the face, arms, legs, feet, or hands
upset stomach
vomiting
lightheadedness
irregular heartbeat
sudden weight gain
shortness of breath, especially during the night
dry, hacking cough
swelling or pain in the stomach
swelling of the eyes, face, lips, tongue, throat, arms, hands, feet, ankles, or lower legs
difficulty breathing or swallowing
rash
hives
itching If you experience a serious side effect, you or your doctor may send a report to the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program online [at http://www.fda.gov/MedWatch/re... or by phone [1-800-332-1088].
If your uncomfortable, call your doctor again and tell him. I will tell you though that after taking a 6 day course of methylprednisone I was all jacked up for days and am still trying to get my body back to normal. My heart isn't racing but I feel like my eyes are bouncing in my head.
Symptoms of an overdose include obesity (especially around the stomach); a round face; increased hair growth (especially around the face); acne; bruising; increased blood pressure; swollen hands, feet, or ankles (fluid retention); and sore or weak muscles
Prednisones main problem is it does have many side effects, but as it leaves the body the symptoms go away.
I experienced this side effect with Prednisone, but after 3-4 days off the meds, they went away. Different people react different ways, but if your doctor isn't worried then you probably need not worry either.
However, if it continues or gets worse, insist on a check.
Oh yeah, this is normal. Feels terrible when it is happening but normal. I take it for asthma when it gets bad. If you noticed it probably made you have more energy and not feel so bad. It gives you a feeling of false wellness. That is why people get addicted to it. You feel better than you actually are. Since you took the last pill yesterday you should start feeling better soon. It makes me shakey towards the end and kinda mean! rofl This is normal too and the tachycardia, fast heart beat will go back to normal. Drink plenty of liquids unless you are fluid restricted and it will help. Feel better soon.
I guess that my first question is why do you have a heart doctor? What kind of underlying medical conditions do you have? As for the tachycardia (rapid heartbeat), it is a somewhat uncommon side effect. Although, if you have an underlying heart disease you may be predisposed to arrythmias. Your age may also play a role in how well you tolerate the fast heart rate. If at any time you get short of breath, light headed, or have chest pain you should seek emergency care immediately. CALL AN AMBULANCE--DO NOT DRIVE!! The half-life of prednisolone (the active part of prednisone) is about 3-4 hrs/dose, but if you are at the end of your course, it may take a few days to completely clear your system. Hope you get feeling better soon.
Answer:
Prednisone may cause side effects. Tell your doctor if any of these symptoms are severe or do not go away: headache
dizziness
difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep
inappropriate happiness
extreme changes in mood
changes in personality
bulging eyes
acne
thin, fragile skin
red or purple blotches or lines under the skin
slowed healing of cuts and bruises
increased hair growth
changes in the way fat is spread around the body
extreme tiredness
weak muscles
irregular or absent menstrual periods
decreased sexual desire
heartburn
increased sweating Some side effects can be serious. If you experience any of the following symptoms, call your doctor immediately: vision problems
eye pain, redness, or tearing
sore throat, fever, chills, cough, or other signs of infection
seizures
depression
loss of contact with reality
confusion
muscle twitching or tightening
shaking of the hands that you cannot control
numbness, burning, or tingling in the face, arms, legs, feet, or hands
upset stomach
vomiting
lightheadedness
irregular heartbeat
sudden weight gain
shortness of breath, especially during the night
dry, hacking cough
swelling or pain in the stomach
swelling of the eyes, face, lips, tongue, throat, arms, hands, feet, ankles, or lower legs
difficulty breathing or swallowing
rash
hives
itching If you experience a serious side effect, you or your doctor may send a report to the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program online [at http://www.fda.gov/MedWatch/re... or by phone [1-800-332-1088].
If your uncomfortable, call your doctor again and tell him. I will tell you though that after taking a 6 day course of methylprednisone I was all jacked up for days and am still trying to get my body back to normal. My heart isn't racing but I feel like my eyes are bouncing in my head.
Symptoms of an overdose include obesity (especially around the stomach); a round face; increased hair growth (especially around the face); acne; bruising; increased blood pressure; swollen hands, feet, or ankles (fluid retention); and sore or weak muscles
Prednisones main problem is it does have many side effects, but as it leaves the body the symptoms go away.
I experienced this side effect with Prednisone, but after 3-4 days off the meds, they went away. Different people react different ways, but if your doctor isn't worried then you probably need not worry either.
However, if it continues or gets worse, insist on a check.
Oh yeah, this is normal. Feels terrible when it is happening but normal. I take it for asthma when it gets bad. If you noticed it probably made you have more energy and not feel so bad. It gives you a feeling of false wellness. That is why people get addicted to it. You feel better than you actually are. Since you took the last pill yesterday you should start feeling better soon. It makes me shakey towards the end and kinda mean! rofl This is normal too and the tachycardia, fast heart beat will go back to normal. Drink plenty of liquids unless you are fluid restricted and it will help. Feel better soon.
I guess that my first question is why do you have a heart doctor? What kind of underlying medical conditions do you have? As for the tachycardia (rapid heartbeat), it is a somewhat uncommon side effect. Although, if you have an underlying heart disease you may be predisposed to arrythmias. Your age may also play a role in how well you tolerate the fast heart rate. If at any time you get short of breath, light headed, or have chest pain you should seek emergency care immediately. CALL AN AMBULANCE--DO NOT DRIVE!! The half-life of prednisolone (the active part of prednisone) is about 3-4 hrs/dose, but if you are at the end of your course, it may take a few days to completely clear your system. Hope you get feeling better soon.
Is my ibuprofen dosing schedule fine?
I recently had a tendon injury near my heel and today have started taking ibuprofen. I plan to rest my feet until the 27th or the 1st, around 2 weeks. During this time I will take ibuprofen. I plan to take 200mg 4 times a day for a week, and then maybe stop a few days, and restart for the remainder until the deadline. Is this okay?Also, would my body adapt to that dosage in these 1-2 weeks?
Answer:
Ibuprofen can be used to treat a fever, at which case your dosing is ideal, or to treat inflammation, for which your dosing is inadequate. Without knowing your vitals, it would be imprudent to tell you what to take, so I really think you should speak to your doctor or go to a pharmacy and ask a pharmacist (free advice usually). Hope you feel better. All I will say is that I don't think you'll get the relief you're seeking with the dose you're on now.
400mg every 6 to 8 hours is the recommended dosage
.also be carefull not to get hooked on them!
.You are recommended to take ibuprofen every 4-6 hours as needed for pain.Check with your Physician
Med student needs some more classes!
Assuming you are an adult then 200mg is inadequate. Minimum adult dose is 400mg three times per day. You can even go higher but should talk to your doctor.
Your body will not adapt to Ibuprofen, nor is it habit forming/addictive.
Answer:
Ibuprofen can be used to treat a fever, at which case your dosing is ideal, or to treat inflammation, for which your dosing is inadequate. Without knowing your vitals, it would be imprudent to tell you what to take, so I really think you should speak to your doctor or go to a pharmacy and ask a pharmacist (free advice usually). Hope you feel better. All I will say is that I don't think you'll get the relief you're seeking with the dose you're on now.
400mg every 6 to 8 hours is the recommended dosage
.also be carefull not to get hooked on them!
.You are recommended to take ibuprofen every 4-6 hours as needed for pain.Check with your Physician
Med student needs some more classes!
Assuming you are an adult then 200mg is inadequate. Minimum adult dose is 400mg three times per day. You can even go higher but should talk to your doctor.
Your body will not adapt to Ibuprofen, nor is it habit forming/addictive.
Is my doctor on drugs? Xanax confussion!?
My doctor gave me xanax to help me cope with panic attacks. He said only take it when your having one. But i heard you cant just take one pill and stop or you will go in seizures and get withdrawrls. HOW THE HELL am i supposed to just take it when I need to and then stop?. Also im on coreg to slow my heart rate, and dosnt xanax SLOW DOWN your heart? I think its time for me to get a new doctor..this is clearly not right. Or im just reading too much on the internet. Any ideas?
Answer:
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Taking a Xanax is a lot like taking a shot of booze. It will slow down your heart if you're anxious and calming to helps you past the adrenaline surge that has your heart racing, but it has no direct cardiac effects. If you're an alcoholic and stop drinking you can have seizures and go into DT's. The way to avoid this mess is to take the Xanax only when you need, and don't get hooked on them.
Does your doctor know about the other medications you are taking? If so, he shouldn't have prescribed you something that could have a possible interaction. There are websites (sorry I don't know the names, but you can browse and find them easily) where you can enter in the med and how many mgs you take with another and it can give you POSSIBLE interactions. If you are worried, call the pharmacist and ask also - they are totally underrated, and are aware of possible drug interaction that could happen. You also will get out of having to pay for a visit just to ask a question.
If you feel that you aren't being taken care of with your current doc, then you need to find one that you are satisfied with. No one is ever happy in the end if they put up with a mediocre physician.
Take care.Edit: Here, I'm leaving you a link to one of the drug interactions search sites I found. I hope this helps. :)
http://www.medscape.com/druginfo/drugint...
You are reading too much into the info on the internet. Taking an occasional Xanax will not cause seizures or withdrawl symptoms. That happens when someone has been taking large doses for a long time; they can't quit cold turkey.
I don't think Xanax has an effect on your heart rate. Double check with your pharmacist to see if it does or if there is a known interaction w/ Coreg - I'm pretty sure there isn't.
Rather than dumping your doctor, why not ask him more questions. Find out if he can/will address your concerns. After you've tried to had your concerns addressed, then decide if this is the doctor for you. You can't expect any doctor to be mind reader - you need to tell him what you need from him. If he can give it - great. If he can't address your needs, then look for another doctor.
You heard wrong. Xanax is an ideal drug to take for panic attacks and where you heard this junk about seizures and withdrawal, well it isn't true.
I also take xanax. I take it when i feel an attack coming on. Not when the attack gets here. If you take it only when you need it you will not get dependent on it like some people do. People that get addicted usually do not take it like they should. I have never had a seizure nor have I ever went through withdrawals either and i have quit taking them when i had my youngest daughter so i would not worry about either of those just take them when you feel an attack coming on.
GOOD LUCK!
Your doctor should certainly be aware of the other drugs you are taking. I can't imagine a doctor not looking at your chart BEFORE prescribing a medication for you. You should have asked that question when you were in his office. I have been on Xanax for years for panic attacks. I am also on other meds. You could have problems getting off Xanax if you are taking it daily and large doses. If you take it only when you feel an attack coming on or during an attack, you are not addicted to it. Prepare a list of questions on paper for your next doctor's visit. As someone else said, you can check with your pharmacy too. And they are free.They are very helpful. Any time I have a drug question I ask my pharmacist.
Answer:
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Taking a Xanax is a lot like taking a shot of booze. It will slow down your heart if you're anxious and calming to helps you past the adrenaline surge that has your heart racing, but it has no direct cardiac effects. If you're an alcoholic and stop drinking you can have seizures and go into DT's. The way to avoid this mess is to take the Xanax only when you need, and don't get hooked on them.
Does your doctor know about the other medications you are taking? If so, he shouldn't have prescribed you something that could have a possible interaction. There are websites (sorry I don't know the names, but you can browse and find them easily) where you can enter in the med and how many mgs you take with another and it can give you POSSIBLE interactions. If you are worried, call the pharmacist and ask also - they are totally underrated, and are aware of possible drug interaction that could happen. You also will get out of having to pay for a visit just to ask a question.
If you feel that you aren't being taken care of with your current doc, then you need to find one that you are satisfied with. No one is ever happy in the end if they put up with a mediocre physician.
Take care.Edit: Here, I'm leaving you a link to one of the drug interactions search sites I found. I hope this helps. :)
http://www.medscape.com/druginfo/drugint...
You are reading too much into the info on the internet. Taking an occasional Xanax will not cause seizures or withdrawl symptoms. That happens when someone has been taking large doses for a long time; they can't quit cold turkey.
I don't think Xanax has an effect on your heart rate. Double check with your pharmacist to see if it does or if there is a known interaction w/ Coreg - I'm pretty sure there isn't.
Rather than dumping your doctor, why not ask him more questions. Find out if he can/will address your concerns. After you've tried to had your concerns addressed, then decide if this is the doctor for you. You can't expect any doctor to be mind reader - you need to tell him what you need from him. If he can give it - great. If he can't address your needs, then look for another doctor.
You heard wrong. Xanax is an ideal drug to take for panic attacks and where you heard this junk about seizures and withdrawal, well it isn't true.
I also take xanax. I take it when i feel an attack coming on. Not when the attack gets here. If you take it only when you need it you will not get dependent on it like some people do. People that get addicted usually do not take it like they should. I have never had a seizure nor have I ever went through withdrawals either and i have quit taking them when i had my youngest daughter so i would not worry about either of those just take them when you feel an attack coming on.
GOOD LUCK!
Your doctor should certainly be aware of the other drugs you are taking. I can't imagine a doctor not looking at your chart BEFORE prescribing a medication for you. You should have asked that question when you were in his office. I have been on Xanax for years for panic attacks. I am also on other meds. You could have problems getting off Xanax if you are taking it daily and large doses. If you take it only when you feel an attack coming on or during an attack, you are not addicted to it. Prepare a list of questions on paper for your next doctor's visit. As someone else said, you can check with your pharmacy too. And they are free.They are very helpful. Any time I have a drug question I ask my pharmacist.
Is motrin the best pain bill?
I have been taking motrin 800 three times a day for pain but is there a better pain reliever that won;t make me so sleepy?
Answer:
different meds react differenly to different people. I could tell you advil realives all of my pain, but then you can take it and it could have no effect on you. Just try different ones until you find one that works well with you.
NO GENEBS{PAIN RELIEVER,FEVER REDUCER}
Answer:
different meds react differenly to different people. I could tell you advil realives all of my pain, but then you can take it and it could have no effect on you. Just try different ones until you find one that works well with you.
NO GENEBS{PAIN RELIEVER,FEVER REDUCER}
is mixing alcohole with Paracetamol can be deadly ?
the question says it all...
Answer:
Paracetamol, called acetaminophen or Tylenol, has no known interactions with alcohol--specifically, ethanol, the particular alcohol in intoxicating beverages. Both ethanol and acetaminophen/paracetamol are known to be hard on the liver, but you have to take both fairly regularly at a significant dose over prolonged periods of time for there to be any trouble--unless you take a huge dose of either or both, which is poor judgement with anything.On the whole, mixing booze with any medication is potentially asking for trouble, for an assortment of reasons.The really "killer" combinations with alcohol are barbiturates, benzodiazepines and the small group of drugs, including disulfiram and metronidazole, that inhibit the last step of alcohol metabolism...
You answered your own question. But mixing alcohol with any drug can be very dangerous especially depending upon your health history and if you are taking any other medications. This is not a smart thing to do.
Answer:
Paracetamol, called acetaminophen or Tylenol, has no known interactions with alcohol--specifically, ethanol, the particular alcohol in intoxicating beverages. Both ethanol and acetaminophen/paracetamol are known to be hard on the liver, but you have to take both fairly regularly at a significant dose over prolonged periods of time for there to be any trouble--unless you take a huge dose of either or both, which is poor judgement with anything.On the whole, mixing booze with any medication is potentially asking for trouble, for an assortment of reasons.The really "killer" combinations with alcohol are barbiturates, benzodiazepines and the small group of drugs, including disulfiram and metronidazole, that inhibit the last step of alcohol metabolism...
You answered your own question. But mixing alcohol with any drug can be very dangerous especially depending upon your health history and if you are taking any other medications. This is not a smart thing to do.
Is methadone treatment (when taken how its prescribed) safe for the rest of your life?
Please, this is a serious question. Only serious answers please
Answer:
Methadone treatment is nothing more than legalized addicition. If you want to fool yourself into thinking it is going to help you, then you have that right. No, you are going to be addicted to the methadone for the rest of your life. Be proud. (I was recently a juror in a criminal trial involving the robbery of a methadone clinic...I learned more than I ever wanted to about methadone and the clinics that dispense it.)You could, instead, get some REAL help, and clear yourself of whatever addiction you are suffering from (pain killers or heroin, presumably) within just a few months. Yeah, it's going to be a very difficult few months to go through. But that's a far better prospect for your future than allowing some quackpot (with all good intentions) to tell you that replacing your current addicition for a life-long addiction to methadone is going to actually help you.Clear your head...take your life back.
You are only replacing one drug for another. They say it's harder to get off methadone than other drugs..try cold turkey, if you can. These drug centers are a lot of bull. It's the money they care about, not the people!!
Answer:
Methadone treatment is nothing more than legalized addicition. If you want to fool yourself into thinking it is going to help you, then you have that right. No, you are going to be addicted to the methadone for the rest of your life. Be proud. (I was recently a juror in a criminal trial involving the robbery of a methadone clinic...I learned more than I ever wanted to about methadone and the clinics that dispense it.)You could, instead, get some REAL help, and clear yourself of whatever addiction you are suffering from (pain killers or heroin, presumably) within just a few months. Yeah, it's going to be a very difficult few months to go through. But that's a far better prospect for your future than allowing some quackpot (with all good intentions) to tell you that replacing your current addicition for a life-long addiction to methadone is going to actually help you.Clear your head...take your life back.
You are only replacing one drug for another. They say it's harder to get off methadone than other drugs..try cold turkey, if you can. These drug centers are a lot of bull. It's the money they care about, not the people!!
Is melatonin bad for the blood pressure?
Melatonin is a chemical that helps you want to sleep.
Answer:
Can react with certain alpha and beta blockers. Can kill you if you overdose in combo with blood pressure meds and other prescription meds if you are not very careful. Also, buying over the counter foods (and that is what it is considered - as St John's Wort) aren't regulated by FDA.Your body provides seratonin and that is all you need without a real doctor prescribing for you.
i dont know but it helps me sleep lol
Answer:
Can react with certain alpha and beta blockers. Can kill you if you overdose in combo with blood pressure meds and other prescription meds if you are not very careful. Also, buying over the counter foods (and that is what it is considered - as St John's Wort) aren't regulated by FDA.Your body provides seratonin and that is all you need without a real doctor prescribing for you.
i dont know but it helps me sleep lol
is melatonin an over the counter medication or a prescription drug?
Or can you name an alternative medication to take to help fall asleep. NOT Valagen
Answer:
over the counter and cheap. just don't expect too much. it helps a little. i use it because i have always had insomia problems and any little nonaddictive thing helps. some things like nytol will damage your heart. melatonin is harmless as far as i know. but that reminds me i aint the sharpest pencil in the box. lol
Try Sheepacountin鈩?
Over the counter and it really works!
I thought it was something you could get at a health store. i take sublingual melatonin and it helped my insomnia. Just be careful to never take it unless you will be in bed for the next few hours as sunlight can cause damage to your eyes from it.
You should not put any substance in your mouth to help you sleep. Not because of morality but because it is bad for your body's normal system. Maybe you should rethink your lifestyle choices. I did. Less work, more relaxation, and I sleep like a baby!
It is definitely over the counter, it is don-dependent (so you can't get addicted to it and it won't hurt you if you stop taking it) and it doesn't technically help you sleep... it helps you relax. Melatonin is a substance your brain makes that relaxes your muscles and your mind. Sometimes your brain doesn't make enough and you can't sleep, and so to remedy this you can take Melatonin. It also works great for jet-lag. Once your body and mind are relaxed, you'll sleep like a baby... I wouldn't recommend taking anything else.
This is over the counter. Helps to regulate sleep cycles. I believe it is a natural herb.
You can find it at Walgreens, Walmart, etc.
Answer:
over the counter and cheap. just don't expect too much. it helps a little. i use it because i have always had insomia problems and any little nonaddictive thing helps. some things like nytol will damage your heart. melatonin is harmless as far as i know. but that reminds me i aint the sharpest pencil in the box. lol
Try Sheepacountin鈩?
Over the counter and it really works!
I thought it was something you could get at a health store. i take sublingual melatonin and it helped my insomnia. Just be careful to never take it unless you will be in bed for the next few hours as sunlight can cause damage to your eyes from it.
You should not put any substance in your mouth to help you sleep. Not because of morality but because it is bad for your body's normal system. Maybe you should rethink your lifestyle choices. I did. Less work, more relaxation, and I sleep like a baby!
It is definitely over the counter, it is don-dependent (so you can't get addicted to it and it won't hurt you if you stop taking it) and it doesn't technically help you sleep... it helps you relax. Melatonin is a substance your brain makes that relaxes your muscles and your mind. Sometimes your brain doesn't make enough and you can't sleep, and so to remedy this you can take Melatonin. It also works great for jet-lag. Once your body and mind are relaxed, you'll sleep like a baby... I wouldn't recommend taking anything else.
This is over the counter. Helps to regulate sleep cycles. I believe it is a natural herb.
You can find it at Walgreens, Walmart, etc.
Is Male Birth Control Pills Out Yet?
I have heard alot about them, but are they really out yet.
Answer:
Here is one undergoing clinical trials. It is taken a few hours before sexual activity when necessary rather than daily regardless of sexual activity.
Not yet wait for about 2 years.
no
i wish theyd come out. id love to see my boyfreind gain 20 pounds :-D
well i bet they'd be deemed only 40% effective, since i bet only 40% of the guys out there would be dedicated enough to take the pill every single day (especially if they're not married and irresponsible)
This is a follow up to Carl.
Yes, clinical trials are going on.
I did a search on Medline (medical literature) and came across a few articles..
--A May 2006 review article [Hormonal approaches to male contraception: approaching reality. ] concludes that temporarily stoppingsperm development through taking hormones (as in a pill) is the most likely form of male birth control in the future...early phases of clinical trials in these areas point to high efficacy and few side effects (I think the clinical trial described by Carl is one of these clinical trials)--Another May 2006 article [New approaches for male fertility control: HE6 as an example of a putative target.] describes a non hormonal approach which targets specific proteins which have specific roles in male fertility...however no drug as yet has been formulated based on this approach.And now...a digression.back in the early 80's I was a lowly lab technician in a pharmacological research lab [focus on membrane properties of mitochondria] at our local medical
college...one of the post docs was extremely interested in a male birth control pill...and I seem to recall him talking about some
plant product from India [I could be wa..a..y off].Anyways, out of curiousity, I did a search on the Internet...
and now he's VP of Strategic Development at a company in Baltimore called ReProtect http://www.reprotect.com/contact.shtml,... whichh develops products to protect reproductive health...nothing about male birth control pills, tho'.but who knows?
There should be no news stories on this. Maybe there will be in a couple years, maybe not. Premature news stories like those that hit the web a few days ago are all too common. It's very normal for drugs to look like the best thing since sliced bread in the early stages, only to find that they're not so great with further experience. Think Vioxx. I wouldn't hold my breath on this one.
And a major part of the debacles that came from Phen/fen, Vioxx, and others is laypeople pressuring their doctors for the latest. Once there was an old doctor's saying, "Be not the first by whom the new is tried, nor the last by whom the old is cast aside." There's a lot of wisdom in that.
Answer:
Here is one undergoing clinical trials. It is taken a few hours before sexual activity when necessary rather than daily regardless of sexual activity.
Not yet wait for about 2 years.
no
i wish theyd come out. id love to see my boyfreind gain 20 pounds :-D
well i bet they'd be deemed only 40% effective, since i bet only 40% of the guys out there would be dedicated enough to take the pill every single day (especially if they're not married and irresponsible)
This is a follow up to Carl.
Yes, clinical trials are going on.
I did a search on Medline (medical literature) and came across a few articles..
--A May 2006 review article [Hormonal approaches to male contraception: approaching reality. ] concludes that temporarily stoppingsperm development through taking hormones (as in a pill) is the most likely form of male birth control in the future...early phases of clinical trials in these areas point to high efficacy and few side effects (I think the clinical trial described by Carl is one of these clinical trials)--Another May 2006 article [New approaches for male fertility control: HE6 as an example of a putative target.] describes a non hormonal approach which targets specific proteins which have specific roles in male fertility...however no drug as yet has been formulated based on this approach.And now...a digression.back in the early 80's I was a lowly lab technician in a pharmacological research lab [focus on membrane properties of mitochondria] at our local medical
college...one of the post docs was extremely interested in a male birth control pill...and I seem to recall him talking about some
plant product from India [I could be wa..a..y off].Anyways, out of curiousity, I did a search on the Internet...
and now he's VP of Strategic Development at a company in Baltimore called ReProtect http://www.reprotect.com/contact.shtml,... whichh develops products to protect reproductive health...nothing about male birth control pills, tho'.but who knows?
There should be no news stories on this. Maybe there will be in a couple years, maybe not. Premature news stories like those that hit the web a few days ago are all too common. It's very normal for drugs to look like the best thing since sliced bread in the early stages, only to find that they're not so great with further experience. Think Vioxx. I wouldn't hold my breath on this one.
And a major part of the debacles that came from Phen/fen, Vioxx, and others is laypeople pressuring their doctors for the latest. Once there was an old doctor's saying, "Be not the first by whom the new is tried, nor the last by whom the old is cast aside." There's a lot of wisdom in that.
is lumbosacral spondylosis thesis a disability?
i had a mri and several other tests i was diagnosed properly DRS. cannot give me shots or do surgery it wont help.It was found too late.I am44 yrs old,white,female,also i have fibromyalgia was diagnosed with that 5yrs ago.I also have sciatica neuralgia neuritis and osteothrosis arthiritis i am always in pain and i cant sleep and my nerves are a wreck and im also highly claustrophobic and have panic attacks , i have medicine but it only works for me sometimes so please if there is anyone out there can help me medically or legally i would be very grate ful.
Answer:
SPONDYLOLISTHESIS is the correct spelling. When it (slipping or bulging of the intervertebral disc) occurs at the level of L5S1 it is responsible for pressure on the corresponding nerve roots ..and this is responsible for the sciatica. You will have pain and numbness in the area of distribution of the sciatic nerve.You have several other pathological problems .My suggestion is : keep your confidence in your doctors and keep taking your medication regularly.Best of luck.
Maybe these will help, just click on them and go through them.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/pain_manage...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_secu...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/list_of_dis... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/disabilitie...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/invisible_d...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_secu...
Truthfully, some in the medical profession don't believe in fibromyalgia. Not to say you don't have pain, but there is an extrinsic source and there is no such thing as "fibro" so your doctor basically gave up on you. If you did have an MRI and it was examined by both a radiologist and a neuro I'd say you have a chance. Once again, I am going to reiterate I don't doubt your pain.
But, the problem is so many are on disability for back pain or fibro that you will get rejected the first time I've heard.Also, I'd say it depends on severity, simply because other people live with the conditions you do have to a lesser degree.
Basically you have inflammation and pinching of your back nerves. Where did you work before? How much do you weigh?
Are you in therapy? Do you exercise (probly not too much with those back problems, but if you do kudos).You should be on prednisone or at the very least NSAIDS.
Get a lawyer for your disability claim, and it should be a good one.
Answer:
SPONDYLOLISTHESIS is the correct spelling. When it (slipping or bulging of the intervertebral disc) occurs at the level of L5S1 it is responsible for pressure on the corresponding nerve roots ..and this is responsible for the sciatica. You will have pain and numbness in the area of distribution of the sciatic nerve.You have several other pathological problems .My suggestion is : keep your confidence in your doctors and keep taking your medication regularly.Best of luck.
Maybe these will help, just click on them and go through them.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/pain_manage...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_secu...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/list_of_dis... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/disabilitie...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/invisible_d...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_secu...
Truthfully, some in the medical profession don't believe in fibromyalgia. Not to say you don't have pain, but there is an extrinsic source and there is no such thing as "fibro" so your doctor basically gave up on you. If you did have an MRI and it was examined by both a radiologist and a neuro I'd say you have a chance. Once again, I am going to reiterate I don't doubt your pain.
But, the problem is so many are on disability for back pain or fibro that you will get rejected the first time I've heard.Also, I'd say it depends on severity, simply because other people live with the conditions you do have to a lesser degree.
Basically you have inflammation and pinching of your back nerves. Where did you work before? How much do you weigh?
Are you in therapy? Do you exercise (probly not too much with those back problems, but if you do kudos).You should be on prednisone or at the very least NSAIDS.
Get a lawyer for your disability claim, and it should be a good one.
is laughter the best medicine?
i have a reserch parer work. and i really need to get some details about it. can somebody help me out?
Answer:
Laughter, it's said, is the best medicine. And there's lots of evidence that laughter does lots of good things for us.It reduces pain and allows us to tolerate discomfort. It reduces blood sugar levels, increasing glucose tolerance in diabetics and nondiabetics alike. It improves your job performance, especially if your work depends on creativity and solving complex problems. Its role in intimate relationships is vastly underestimated and it really is the glue of good marriages. It synchronizes the brains of speaker and listener so that they are emotionally attuned.
Laughter is awesome. It makes us feel better about our environment, ourselves, and each other. Laughing with someone about something in common means a shared interest. Not to mention, laughter is good for us. It is, in a way, exercise for the midsection.
o yea laughing is so good for you even if you just smile it sends a message to your brain that your happy even if your arent so keep laughing and smiling. lol GOOD LUCK!!
May be. And yes according to the Deen of the medical college in the movie munna bhai MBBS.
This is a hoot!!http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/0...Stress has been seen a hinderance to performance. We all have stress and with that comes physical reactions to stress. In the military we used laughter to reduce stress and improve performance. Implementing comedy into training to take a break from the stress of the physical and mentally demanding task. When I am in a good mood I treat people better, feel stronger and healthier, and perform well. I believe strongly that you are how you feel. So laugh it up! LOL
Answer:
Laughter, it's said, is the best medicine. And there's lots of evidence that laughter does lots of good things for us.It reduces pain and allows us to tolerate discomfort. It reduces blood sugar levels, increasing glucose tolerance in diabetics and nondiabetics alike. It improves your job performance, especially if your work depends on creativity and solving complex problems. Its role in intimate relationships is vastly underestimated and it really is the glue of good marriages. It synchronizes the brains of speaker and listener so that they are emotionally attuned.
Laughter is awesome. It makes us feel better about our environment, ourselves, and each other. Laughing with someone about something in common means a shared interest. Not to mention, laughter is good for us. It is, in a way, exercise for the midsection.
o yea laughing is so good for you even if you just smile it sends a message to your brain that your happy even if your arent so keep laughing and smiling. lol GOOD LUCK!!
May be. And yes according to the Deen of the medical college in the movie munna bhai MBBS.
This is a hoot!!http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/0...Stress has been seen a hinderance to performance. We all have stress and with that comes physical reactions to stress. In the military we used laughter to reduce stress and improve performance. Implementing comedy into training to take a break from the stress of the physical and mentally demanding task. When I am in a good mood I treat people better, feel stronger and healthier, and perform well. I believe strongly that you are how you feel. So laugh it up! LOL
Is lasik surgery permanent?
Answer:
the surgery is only permanent for certain ages which are old people about 30-60yrs, however for young people its not recommended because their eye sight changes with time because they are not fully grown and developed.hope i answered u benefically!!
Yes, and you also answered us visually!
DEATH IS PERMANENT
Is Lasik Eye Surgery Safe?
Is Lasik Eye surgery safe? Does it have any bad side effects? How is the vison quality? And the cost?
Thanks
Answer:
It is generally safe. However, there are certain side effects that you should be aware of.The surgeon will make small selected slits in your cornea -- the outer surface of the eyeball -- to change the way light is directed to your retina. If your cornea is thin, you might have some trouble because the surgery will make your cornea even thinner. This can result in changing vision during the day, or other car lights on the road at night might appear fuzzy and out of focus.Get a second opinion, since some surgeons are willing to do the surgery, even when your cornea is too thin.Likewise, if the surgeon makes a mistake, you might have some of the side effects discussed above.
totally safe ,and is expensive ,no side effects ,very rare ones.
YA but there a lot of precautions. The operation may take around $2000-4000 and other hospital charges.
Yes it is safe. Apart from the 45% that get side effects (pain in eye, blindness etc)
One Error Of The Machine/Human and U Toast Your Eyes.If It is Not A Major Correction ..i would not recommend it .. wear the Lenses Instead.
Many years ago when the surgery was first offered to the public people often experienced a halo affect around lights at night, and people had to wear special contacts over their eyes after the surgery for a few weeks. Now I think both of those problems have been corrected. I know several people that have had the surgery, and the only problem encountered was my sister. They over corrected her eyes, so for a while she had better than 20/20 vision. It has been about 5 years since she had the surgery, and now she is going to need glasses again, but it is just a very slight correction. She had terrible vision before, and now it is so much better after the surgery. Like any surgeries though, their are risks. Research the different providers in your area before you choose one.
Yes,I have it done a year ago, and i believe that it was the best thing that i have ever done to my self! It doesn't have any side effects, but you will have red spots in the white area of the eye for about two weeks, and that comes from the pressure during the surgery!(not all people get it, but i did)the surgery is about 5 min long! the vision quality will take stages of improvement! i didn't need my eye glasses from day one, but it takes between 1-2 months for final results! you will have problems reading for the first 2 weeks, and dryness! you must not look into bright lights during the 1st week! and must not rub your eyes, they will give you all the instructions!the cost depends where you get it, it can be from $600-$2000.If you are thinking about getting it i urge you to do so!
Good luck to you!
Laser surgery is safe in the hands of an experienced ophthalmologist, and the ones who have had it are happy. The cost varies too much to say.
Lasik and Laser eye surgery is very safe nowadays. My cousin got her dental implants and lasik surgery in India by a company called Forerunners Healthcare. The Price for dental and lasik surgery is very less in India. She paid 25% of the price she was quoted in America.Forerunners Healthcare is very famous in India They arrange Dental surgery, jaw surgery, lasik eye surgery, Dental Implants etc for foreign patients in India. I read a lot about them in the Newspapers and magazines- about their patient stories.
They arrange financing for USA, Canadian, UK and other international patients who plan to have surgery abroad for low cost, as dental and eye surgery is not covered by insurance. They also have photos pasted of their International patients. You can checkout their website. There are huge cost savings. As a doctor I personally believe that surgery can be easily handled in India, as the quality of healthcare available In India is simply best in the world. The surgeons are USA/UK trained and facilities are 5 star.http://www.forerunnershealthcare.com...
Hope this helps.
Thanks
Answer:
It is generally safe. However, there are certain side effects that you should be aware of.The surgeon will make small selected slits in your cornea -- the outer surface of the eyeball -- to change the way light is directed to your retina. If your cornea is thin, you might have some trouble because the surgery will make your cornea even thinner. This can result in changing vision during the day, or other car lights on the road at night might appear fuzzy and out of focus.Get a second opinion, since some surgeons are willing to do the surgery, even when your cornea is too thin.Likewise, if the surgeon makes a mistake, you might have some of the side effects discussed above.
totally safe ,and is expensive ,no side effects ,very rare ones.
YA but there a lot of precautions. The operation may take around $2000-4000 and other hospital charges.
Yes it is safe. Apart from the 45% that get side effects (pain in eye, blindness etc)
One Error Of The Machine/Human and U Toast Your Eyes.If It is Not A Major Correction ..i would not recommend it .. wear the Lenses Instead.
Many years ago when the surgery was first offered to the public people often experienced a halo affect around lights at night, and people had to wear special contacts over their eyes after the surgery for a few weeks. Now I think both of those problems have been corrected. I know several people that have had the surgery, and the only problem encountered was my sister. They over corrected her eyes, so for a while she had better than 20/20 vision. It has been about 5 years since she had the surgery, and now she is going to need glasses again, but it is just a very slight correction. She had terrible vision before, and now it is so much better after the surgery. Like any surgeries though, their are risks. Research the different providers in your area before you choose one.
Yes,I have it done a year ago, and i believe that it was the best thing that i have ever done to my self! It doesn't have any side effects, but you will have red spots in the white area of the eye for about two weeks, and that comes from the pressure during the surgery!(not all people get it, but i did)the surgery is about 5 min long! the vision quality will take stages of improvement! i didn't need my eye glasses from day one, but it takes between 1-2 months for final results! you will have problems reading for the first 2 weeks, and dryness! you must not look into bright lights during the 1st week! and must not rub your eyes, they will give you all the instructions!the cost depends where you get it, it can be from $600-$2000.If you are thinking about getting it i urge you to do so!
Good luck to you!
Laser surgery is safe in the hands of an experienced ophthalmologist, and the ones who have had it are happy. The cost varies too much to say.
Lasik and Laser eye surgery is very safe nowadays. My cousin got her dental implants and lasik surgery in India by a company called Forerunners Healthcare. The Price for dental and lasik surgery is very less in India. She paid 25% of the price she was quoted in America.Forerunners Healthcare is very famous in India They arrange Dental surgery, jaw surgery, lasik eye surgery, Dental Implants etc for foreign patients in India. I read a lot about them in the Newspapers and magazines- about their patient stories.
They arrange financing for USA, Canadian, UK and other international patients who plan to have surgery abroad for low cost, as dental and eye surgery is not covered by insurance. They also have photos pasted of their International patients. You can checkout their website. There are huge cost savings. As a doctor I personally believe that surgery can be easily handled in India, as the quality of healthcare available In India is simply best in the world. The surgeons are USA/UK trained and facilities are 5 star.http://www.forerunnershealthcare.com...
Hope this helps.
Is Kaiser Permanente an excellent Hospital?
If so would you recommend it?
Answer:
Kaiser was the original 'managed care' provider in the country. I grew up with them. I used to call it "The Kaiser revolving door". In the patient goes, hours of sitting and waiting, a few minutes with a doc, and out the patient goes. With nothing productive happening to improve the patient's health. I changed to private insurance as an adult. My mother died under Kaiser's care and my elderly father is suffering under their care. Sorry, I do not recommend them. Note: their system REWARDS doctors for NOT treating patients.Best wishes.
No, I've had many relatives and friends die in Kaiser when they were doing just fine. They are crooks.
Answer:
Kaiser was the original 'managed care' provider in the country. I grew up with them. I used to call it "The Kaiser revolving door". In the patient goes, hours of sitting and waiting, a few minutes with a doc, and out the patient goes. With nothing productive happening to improve the patient's health. I changed to private insurance as an adult. My mother died under Kaiser's care and my elderly father is suffering under their care. Sorry, I do not recommend them. Note: their system REWARDS doctors for NOT treating patients.Best wishes.
No, I've had many relatives and friends die in Kaiser when they were doing just fine. They are crooks.
Is it wrong to drink coffee if it increases my motivation and domestic effectiveness?
Are there actually any ethical issues here?
Answer:
Obviously somebody told you not to drink too much coffee. Ask them why? Is it a fair trade thing? You'll soon know when you've drunk too much when you get the shakes. Other than that, I can't see what the problem is. It tastes great, perks you up in the morning and bestows certain health benefits. Unless your doctor tells you otherwise, of course...
I can't think of any ethical reasons, but there are medical ones, that suggest that you don't drink too much of the stuff.
Coffee is a legal stimulent so go with the flow and get motivated.
Not that i know of!
you could make sure you only buy fair trade coffee,
and if you are unsure on the ethics I would avoid a certain fat cat coffee chain who won't allow Ethiopia their due rights on labelling
in my country we drink tea, tea has the same effect like coffee, i heard sometime in news that drinking tea prevents from heart attack, maybe coffee is the same...
no, you can drink it once a day in the morning no more than
300c.c. if you drink too much your motivation will get hyper and will cause damage to your brain
Not, if you do not drink excessive quantity. Caffein raises the blood tension, and is an stimulant. It is not good in case you suffer of hypertension.
No ethical issues there. Besides, as I remember, coffe in U.S.A. (I am assuming your write from that country) is very soft, compared to the one we drink here in Spain or in Italy, or even in South American countries.
No, coffee in a drip pot is safe. I would not have survived without it on my 24-48 shifts.
Really they all hit it above. Drink up if it mentally or emotionally helps you if you think the negatives are not overwhelming. I drink it every now and then but I also drink tea. They hit all the con's really except one. Coffee contains caffiene which is a known diuretic. Diuretics are things that can make you pee alot. This means that depending on what you are doing, be careful not to become dehydrated.
Answer:
Obviously somebody told you not to drink too much coffee. Ask them why? Is it a fair trade thing? You'll soon know when you've drunk too much when you get the shakes. Other than that, I can't see what the problem is. It tastes great, perks you up in the morning and bestows certain health benefits. Unless your doctor tells you otherwise, of course...
I can't think of any ethical reasons, but there are medical ones, that suggest that you don't drink too much of the stuff.
Coffee is a legal stimulent so go with the flow and get motivated.
Not that i know of!
you could make sure you only buy fair trade coffee,
and if you are unsure on the ethics I would avoid a certain fat cat coffee chain who won't allow Ethiopia their due rights on labelling
in my country we drink tea, tea has the same effect like coffee, i heard sometime in news that drinking tea prevents from heart attack, maybe coffee is the same...
no, you can drink it once a day in the morning no more than
300c.c. if you drink too much your motivation will get hyper and will cause damage to your brain
Not, if you do not drink excessive quantity. Caffein raises the blood tension, and is an stimulant. It is not good in case you suffer of hypertension.
No ethical issues there. Besides, as I remember, coffe in U.S.A. (I am assuming your write from that country) is very soft, compared to the one we drink here in Spain or in Italy, or even in South American countries.
No, coffee in a drip pot is safe. I would not have survived without it on my 24-48 shifts.
Really they all hit it above. Drink up if it mentally or emotionally helps you if you think the negatives are not overwhelming. I drink it every now and then but I also drink tea. They hit all the con's really except one. Coffee contains caffiene which is a known diuretic. Diuretics are things that can make you pee alot. This means that depending on what you are doing, be careful not to become dehydrated.
Is it wrong for a Doctor to have consensual sex with a patient, if so should it be reported?
Answer:
yes, it is wrong, and should be reported. THe doctor is violating the doctor/patient relationship.
Mind your own business.
Yes, it is absolutely and categorically wrong, and should be reported to both the police and the medical authorities in your area.Best to you.
Yes it is wrong - consensual or not, because the relationship between a patient and a doctor is one of absolute trust, and the doctor has taken advantage of that. Report it - AMA and Police.
Why would a doctor be any different than any other person?Consensual means you willingly participated in the act. The fact that you are also his/her patient is irrelevant (at least it should be). Doctor/patient relationship only refers to the patient's medical information and does not extend to who he is sleeping with...Would you not date your accountant, lawyer, maid, postman, grocery clerk or unemployed neighbor? What does someone's occupation have to do with sex?(except maybe if you are a member of the CIA and sleeping with Al Kaida officers...)
I think it depends on the situation.
yes it is wrong if the patient still has to pay for their visit!
It is ethically wrong, and if found out, the Physician can lose his license to practice medicine forever. It doesn't matter if it's consensual or not. A patient would have to be discharged from the practice for one year before being able to have sex with the Doc. This happened in the practice I worked in for 23 yrs, and the Physician has lost his license forever. Hence, everyone at the Clinic lost our jobs as well. This was also a consensual situation. ~~~~
YES. AND IF IT HAPPENS, TELL THE AUTHORITIES.
Not only is it wrong but it is illegal. If the doctor is interested in seeing a patient they should terminate the professional relationship and then make an open invitation that they would like to see them socially. The doctor in question should not hound nor use private information to contact the person (mediacl files have address, phone number etc.) It should be just a case of here is my private number give me a call if interested. But it is most concerning if the doctor is dealing with mental health issues. The doctor knows the person's weakness and knows what buttons to push. Especially dangerous if the person is battling any type of drug depenancy as the doctor could abuse the relationship by becoming a dealer of sorts.Any good doctor would never take a professional relationship to a social one. He risks being sued and losing his liscense.
it would seem that there are many details (that i really don't want to know) missing.for example, do we need to report every Dr that has married one of his/her patients?
no
no
Is it worth it to become a docotor these days?
You see so many doctors in the phone book, just like attorneys. Do doctors these days make good money and have a good job market?
Answer:
If you just want to make money, then no you shouldn't be a doctor. There are many other well paid professions out there that are much easier. If you want a rewarding profession, one that you can be proud to get up every day and go do, then yes you should be a doctor.
It really depends on what field you get in to and how good you are at your job. Good ones, of course, make quite a bit of money. If you are just looking to get into it for the money, the I would suggest not doing it because it doesn't seem like your interest lies in medicine. You need to really love what you're learning to get the grades you need to make it to and through med school.
Of course, why would having there names in the phone book along with many others doesn't mean there losing business. In fact there getting customers by advertising.
Depends on the field and location you go to. In some places you stand the chance of making more money b/c a particular specialty is in high demand so much so that they will pay your med school off to get you to come practice. Some docs pass that option and go to more highly populated areas to make more money. Mainly location and reputation, but they are definitely making money.
Doctors are still one of the best paid professions out there. The salaries are not a high as the once were, but it is anticipated that they may rise as the population ages, provided there are no more medicare funding cuts. It is also predicted that there is an impending shortage of physicians for the same reason.Doctors as a whole are more frustrated now than ever before.Many of the decisions that they made in the past are over-ruled or outright taken away by insurance companies.Malpractice is more out of control than ever for several reasons. One of causes is outrageous litigation. The other is due to gouging by mal-practice insurance companies who are required to make a profit (their revenue comes from premiums paid by doctors and by investing a strategic reserve against catastrophic loss - so when the market goes sour, premiums go up).Physicians are also troubled by the need to crack through the day and see as many patients as possible to keep their salaries from shrinking. Most physicians would love to spend more time with their patients and explore all of the avenues that lead to a happy, healthy patient, but can't since they are limited to 15 mins including paperwork.While the population as a whole is more educated about their health than ever before, physicians are still troubled by poor patient compliance with medication and life style changes (exercise, seat belt use, quitting smoking, risky behavor, obesity, alcohol and drug abuse).The profession also requries a significant investment of time. 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school and 3-10 years of residency (+/- fellowship). The typical work week is still over 60 hours with some topping 80 hours or more as an attending (I won't mention what happens in residency - but offcially they are limited to an average 80 hour work-week). So lifestyle is a concern of many (would be/current) physicians.Also be prepared. The new mantra is that the learning never stops. It is estimated that 5 years after one leaves medical school 25% of what you learned will have changed. The progress is rampant and sorely needed, but also unrelenting. Don't think that you can rest on your laurels after medical school is over.Two words:
School loans. The average physcian accumulated $75,000 to $100,000
in debt even with grants and family contributions. Some will top $250,000 or more in debt.But that's all the negatives.Physicians also still maintain a high respect with the public. While this is not as high as it once was, and several spectacular events have chipped away at the respect, they are still highly respected.As noted the salary, while not what is was, is still healthy.There are not other job in the world where you can make that much of difference in someone's life (ok, ok nurses are right up there too).
The (uncommon) moments where you impact someone's life in a way that noone else can, make it a job with the greatest rewards.The end answer is a question: are the benefts worth it to you? If you are not sure, make some contacts and ask if you can shadow a physician or help out in their office.Don't go into the profession just for the money. You will hate it. Go into because you want to work hard, make a difference, and that you genuinely give a damn about people. Your patients will know and apprecate it.
THye indeed make more money and are filthy rich
doctors are in NO way "just like attorneys"
Answer:
If you just want to make money, then no you shouldn't be a doctor. There are many other well paid professions out there that are much easier. If you want a rewarding profession, one that you can be proud to get up every day and go do, then yes you should be a doctor.
It really depends on what field you get in to and how good you are at your job. Good ones, of course, make quite a bit of money. If you are just looking to get into it for the money, the I would suggest not doing it because it doesn't seem like your interest lies in medicine. You need to really love what you're learning to get the grades you need to make it to and through med school.
Of course, why would having there names in the phone book along with many others doesn't mean there losing business. In fact there getting customers by advertising.
Depends on the field and location you go to. In some places you stand the chance of making more money b/c a particular specialty is in high demand so much so that they will pay your med school off to get you to come practice. Some docs pass that option and go to more highly populated areas to make more money. Mainly location and reputation, but they are definitely making money.
Doctors are still one of the best paid professions out there. The salaries are not a high as the once were, but it is anticipated that they may rise as the population ages, provided there are no more medicare funding cuts. It is also predicted that there is an impending shortage of physicians for the same reason.Doctors as a whole are more frustrated now than ever before.Many of the decisions that they made in the past are over-ruled or outright taken away by insurance companies.Malpractice is more out of control than ever for several reasons. One of causes is outrageous litigation. The other is due to gouging by mal-practice insurance companies who are required to make a profit (their revenue comes from premiums paid by doctors and by investing a strategic reserve against catastrophic loss - so when the market goes sour, premiums go up).Physicians are also troubled by the need to crack through the day and see as many patients as possible to keep their salaries from shrinking. Most physicians would love to spend more time with their patients and explore all of the avenues that lead to a happy, healthy patient, but can't since they are limited to 15 mins including paperwork.While the population as a whole is more educated about their health than ever before, physicians are still troubled by poor patient compliance with medication and life style changes (exercise, seat belt use, quitting smoking, risky behavor, obesity, alcohol and drug abuse).The profession also requries a significant investment of time. 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school and 3-10 years of residency (+/- fellowship). The typical work week is still over 60 hours with some topping 80 hours or more as an attending (I won't mention what happens in residency - but offcially they are limited to an average 80 hour work-week). So lifestyle is a concern of many (would be/current) physicians.Also be prepared. The new mantra is that the learning never stops. It is estimated that 5 years after one leaves medical school 25% of what you learned will have changed. The progress is rampant and sorely needed, but also unrelenting. Don't think that you can rest on your laurels after medical school is over.Two words:
School loans. The average physcian accumulated $75,000 to $100,000
in debt even with grants and family contributions. Some will top $250,000 or more in debt.But that's all the negatives.Physicians also still maintain a high respect with the public. While this is not as high as it once was, and several spectacular events have chipped away at the respect, they are still highly respected.As noted the salary, while not what is was, is still healthy.There are not other job in the world where you can make that much of difference in someone's life (ok, ok nurses are right up there too).
The (uncommon) moments where you impact someone's life in a way that noone else can, make it a job with the greatest rewards.The end answer is a question: are the benefts worth it to you? If you are not sure, make some contacts and ask if you can shadow a physician or help out in their office.Don't go into the profession just for the money. You will hate it. Go into because you want to work hard, make a difference, and that you genuinely give a damn about people. Your patients will know and apprecate it.
THye indeed make more money and are filthy rich
doctors are in NO way "just like attorneys"
Is it unusual for a M.E. to list the cause of death as unknown?
Answer:
No it is not because our bodies are so complex and begin to break down the moment we pass making it difficult to determine cause of death in quite a few cases. It can also be that there are more than one competing causes where it can't be distinguished as in a suicide/homicide/accidental death case. However the main causes of undetermined death is when a person has had work done by EMS or Doctors that have muddled up the original cause due to treatment and medications given. I hope this helps you out a little.
no
if someone's body has been through a lot of perimortem trauma, it might be difficult to identify what among the evidence was actually the cause of death.
is it true you cant mix welbutrin with an antianxiaty drug?
if so what could happen if you do?
Answer:
i work in a pharmacy and i constantly see people prescribed some type of SSRI, selective seretonin re-uptake inhibitor, along with some type of benzodiazepine, which ares anxolytics.SSRIs such as
Prozac - Fluoxetine
Zoloft - Sertraline
Wellbutrin - Buproprionin combonation with benzodiazepines such as
Xanax - alprazolam
Valium - Diazepam
Ativan - Lorazepamthese combonations occur quite frequently, you should definately ask your doctor or local pharmacist if there are any certain reactions you should know about, but from my experience in a pharm, those 2 mixes occur all the time.
actually welbutrin enhances the effect of xanax and they are often perscribed together. But of course check with a medical professional.
turtle Is this your story?
鈥烩€çƒ©€?http://www.osoq.com/funstuff/extra/extra...
Answer:
i work in a pharmacy and i constantly see people prescribed some type of SSRI, selective seretonin re-uptake inhibitor, along with some type of benzodiazepine, which ares anxolytics.SSRIs such as
Prozac - Fluoxetine
Zoloft - Sertraline
Wellbutrin - Buproprionin combonation with benzodiazepines such as
Xanax - alprazolam
Valium - Diazepam
Ativan - Lorazepamthese combonations occur quite frequently, you should definately ask your doctor or local pharmacist if there are any certain reactions you should know about, but from my experience in a pharm, those 2 mixes occur all the time.
actually welbutrin enhances the effect of xanax and they are often perscribed together. But of course check with a medical professional.
turtle Is this your story?
鈥烩€çƒ©€?http://www.osoq.com/funstuff/extra/extra...
Is it true they employ vampires to take your blood at the hospital?
Answer:
mm the people who take your blood love to be called 'vampires' NOT, I collected blood for many years in a hospital, and everyone thought saying 'here come the vampires' was the first time you had heard ti, but after 20 or 30 times a day it gets a bit boring to say the least, so we all used to wear fangs, and then smile a lot.
yeah! they've taken 8 pints away from me already.
Why are the rose gardens so healthy and nice in the hospital grounds...work that one out..before asking about vampires
no, thats not true. if they were vampires they would drink your blood on the spot, they wouldn't go through the trouble extracting it though a needle either. they would use their fangs
B. are you crazy vampires don't exist.
No because they'd drink it all and the lab wouldn't get any samples.
Yes, remeber to take your crucifix with you or make sure the room is sunlit.
No
Don't know about vampires but i have seen worse and that is accident and injury lawyers they drink everyone dry !
naa can't be, their aim would be better lol
when B+ive blood group increases they employ the vampires to suck their blood as they become useless for the others .
No. However leeches are used to cure bloody sores.
Where do you people come up with this stuff? NO, NO, and many more times NO!!!!!!!!!!...
yeah! of course it's true!!by the way..where did you get this insane idea??
Yes, that is correct.
As a doctor and a vampire, yes.
lol! well they certainly dont use their teeth if they are vampires!
Most definitely, when I was in hospital, a rather dashing young man came into my room, smiled and showed me his name badge, it said Dracula on it. He tried to pretend that someone gave it to him, but we all knew who he really was...
Yes! I saw that job advertised once and nearly went for it just because it was different! There is a special medical name for the job of the person who extracts blood but I cant remember what it was now. If bloodsucking is your thing why not do what you love and get paid for it to!
Yes, but blood banks have a lot of problems with "drinking on the job."Have a nice day.
WE call them "sophisticated vampires", because they collect blood through state of the art equipment and not by sucking through the mouth, and they are highly trained to perform their jobs.
No but they employ them to take your money.
The correct term for someone who takes blood samples is a phlebotonist - but to be fair some of them look like vampires
phlebotomist :)
No the correct term is phlebotomist
Is it true that you can't drink alcohol whilst taking a course of antibiotics?
I always thought that the antibiotics didn't work properly and that you also got drunk more easily if you did this but now someone has told me it's a myth (although doctors tell you it's true)
Answer:
You should not drink alcohol while taking any medication. Alcohol has a tendency to alter the way medication is absorbed in the body.
its true...
It is so true. Alcohol and medication do not mix. You may actually end up getting an allergic reaction.
i heard that it is true. it neutralizes the effect of the drug.
Although the effect varies with the antibiotic, virtually all of them are degraded to some extent by adding alcohol to the body. Some of them are sensitive to other chemicals and patients are warned off other beverages including caffine containing soda and coffee. In some cases the effect occurs in the stomach when the medicine is taken in pill form, in other cases in the blood stream.
As for getting drunk more easily, that part sounds a little strange (how would you measure "drunk" - balance, vision, coordination, "buzz", judgement), since some drugs are disorienting with alcohol you might be more so.
A widespread myth holds that you shouldn't drink alcohol while taking antibiotics, but in fact, drinking doesn't lessen the effects of the drugs. However, alcohol can lower your general energy and delay your recovery so it is best to minimize drinking until you've finished the prescribed course of antibiotic treatment. (Beyond that, chronic liver damage from excessive alcohol consumption can affect the metabolism and toxicity of antibiotics.)
Just as it's true that oral contraception is not as effective whilst on medication, but the main thing with antibiotics is to make sure you finish the course.Where did you get them from? I thought doctors were under strict instructions not to provide them these days, sounds like your realy sick so what are you doing drinking alcohol?
won't hurt you but it won't help you either, it cancels out whatever dose is in your system at the time. So it doesn't make sense is all- if you must drink skip a dose and resume at your next dose like you do when you accidentally forgot to take it. Also Dr's don't like it because not only do they want you to take all your medication properly and on time, but drinking lowers your immune system- which if your on meds means your already compromised.
Nope! You are correct that it is a myth!The widespread myth holds that you shouldn't drink alcohol while taking antibiotics, but in fact, drinking doesn't lessen the effects of the drugs. However, alcohol can lower your general energy and delay your recovery so it is best to minimize drinking until you've finished the prescribed course of antibiotic treatment. (Beyond that, chronic liver damage from excessive alcohol consumption can affect the metabolism and toxicity of antibiotics.)
The VD Clinics of the 1950s and 1960s gave the somber and serious advice that alcohol should absolutely not be used while taking penicillin. But there were no significant chemical interactions between penicillin and alcohol. The real reason that this advice was given was for moral reasons, not pharmacological reasons. The medicos of the day were worried that alcohol would reduce the inhibitions of the sufferers, and that, while under the influence, they might get a little "frisky" and pass on their infection to another person, before the penicillin had a chance to cure the sexually transmitted diseases. That's how the mythconception that alcohol should never be taken with antibiotics arose.Even so, it's well known that alcohol can interact quite nastily with a small number of modern drugs such as tinidazole (Fasigyn) and metronidazole (Flagyl), potentially causing nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, headaches, fast heart rate and flushing. And alcohol can reduce the absorption of other antibiotics such as the doxycyclines and tetracyclines. But these few interactions are well known to both medical doctors and pharmacists.Mind you, alcohol can put an extra load on your liver and immune system, can impair your judgment, liberate aggressive tendencies, reduce your energy state - and can be associated with staying up late, behaving recklessly, and not getting all the rest that your body needs to heal itself. So half a glass of an alcoholic beverage of our choice would be fine with most antibiotics.
TOTALLY TRUE
MY DOCTOR ALLWAYS TOLD ME
DRINK 1 BEER A DAY LESS THAN HIM
AND I WOULD ALWAYS BE IN GOOD HEALTH!!
HE WAS AN ALCOHOLIC
With some antibiotics you can drink, but it works quicker if you don't.
For a very small number of antibiotics, alcohol inhibits their action. It is likely your doctor would tell you if you were on these, but you should ask if you are unclear. However for other antibiotics, as alcohol causes diuresis (i.e. makes you urinate more) it speeds up how fast the antibiotics are processed so would slightly reduce their effectiveness. With these, the antibiotics are more effective if you don't drink alcohol but they can still work.
If you are taking flagyl (metradiazole) and you drink you will feel very ill. that's because chemically it is very similar to antabuse - the drug they give alcoholics - it reacts with the alcohol to make you feel sick.Most antibiotics will work with alcohol.The reason for the myth is that antibiotics were first used in numbers to treat venereal disease n the 1950's. Doctors thought that if people went to parties and got drunk they would have more sex and spread the disease before it had been cleared, so people were told to abstain from both sex and alcohol.
its not always true. It depoends what medication you are taking.
best to ask ur doctor whether u can or not.
even though people say you shouldnt i dont thionk its true because alcoholics still have to take antiboitics some times and its not as though they will stop drinking so yeh..#best to ask your doctors.
It all depends on which antibiotics you are on,some of them react with alcohol resulting in the positive effects being cancelled out therefore being a waste of time taking them which is a waste of money %26 one of the reasons doctors will tell you not to drink on them since the NHS is already throwing away millions every year on medications that are wasted.Read the packet/leaflet with th tablets-they have to put the truth on them (side effects/do's %26 don'ts) by law.
it is true, booze lessons the effect of the meds, not the effect of what your drinkin
As a general rule, a glass of wine with dinner isn't going to make any difference, but there's much to take into account. Some antibiotics, for instance, will make you quite alcohol-intolerant, and you'll throw up an unbelievable amount.
Doctors, knowing more about drugs, tend to have a much greater respect for their ability to do bad things to you than is the case with the general public, and like to keep things conservative with any drug, and even moreso with mixtures of drugs, and that includes alcohol.
As far as I know the only antibiotics which specifically warn you not to drink are the dental ones.
my dear it is for ur liver. liver has to deal with the antibiotics and the alcohol. if u take both the liver will clear them out slowly and this will not be good for u and ur liver. this may result in prolonged activity of drugs and when u take the next dose the last dose mite still high leading to an ova dose.
so ur doctors are right u shud not do it. and just becoz sumone said nothing happened to them when they did it does not mean u can do it and get away with it becoz our bodies are different and react differently to situations.
well physically one can do whatever they like lol ,would i recommend it naaaaa, but i am not a dr. so if you are not sure i would take your drs advice and not risk any problems
Read the label!!!
Answer:
You should not drink alcohol while taking any medication. Alcohol has a tendency to alter the way medication is absorbed in the body.
its true...
It is so true. Alcohol and medication do not mix. You may actually end up getting an allergic reaction.
i heard that it is true. it neutralizes the effect of the drug.
Although the effect varies with the antibiotic, virtually all of them are degraded to some extent by adding alcohol to the body. Some of them are sensitive to other chemicals and patients are warned off other beverages including caffine containing soda and coffee. In some cases the effect occurs in the stomach when the medicine is taken in pill form, in other cases in the blood stream.
As for getting drunk more easily, that part sounds a little strange (how would you measure "drunk" - balance, vision, coordination, "buzz", judgement), since some drugs are disorienting with alcohol you might be more so.
A widespread myth holds that you shouldn't drink alcohol while taking antibiotics, but in fact, drinking doesn't lessen the effects of the drugs. However, alcohol can lower your general energy and delay your recovery so it is best to minimize drinking until you've finished the prescribed course of antibiotic treatment. (Beyond that, chronic liver damage from excessive alcohol consumption can affect the metabolism and toxicity of antibiotics.)
Just as it's true that oral contraception is not as effective whilst on medication, but the main thing with antibiotics is to make sure you finish the course.Where did you get them from? I thought doctors were under strict instructions not to provide them these days, sounds like your realy sick so what are you doing drinking alcohol?
won't hurt you but it won't help you either, it cancels out whatever dose is in your system at the time. So it doesn't make sense is all- if you must drink skip a dose and resume at your next dose like you do when you accidentally forgot to take it. Also Dr's don't like it because not only do they want you to take all your medication properly and on time, but drinking lowers your immune system- which if your on meds means your already compromised.
Nope! You are correct that it is a myth!The widespread myth holds that you shouldn't drink alcohol while taking antibiotics, but in fact, drinking doesn't lessen the effects of the drugs. However, alcohol can lower your general energy and delay your recovery so it is best to minimize drinking until you've finished the prescribed course of antibiotic treatment. (Beyond that, chronic liver damage from excessive alcohol consumption can affect the metabolism and toxicity of antibiotics.)
The VD Clinics of the 1950s and 1960s gave the somber and serious advice that alcohol should absolutely not be used while taking penicillin. But there were no significant chemical interactions between penicillin and alcohol. The real reason that this advice was given was for moral reasons, not pharmacological reasons. The medicos of the day were worried that alcohol would reduce the inhibitions of the sufferers, and that, while under the influence, they might get a little "frisky" and pass on their infection to another person, before the penicillin had a chance to cure the sexually transmitted diseases. That's how the mythconception that alcohol should never be taken with antibiotics arose.Even so, it's well known that alcohol can interact quite nastily with a small number of modern drugs such as tinidazole (Fasigyn) and metronidazole (Flagyl), potentially causing nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, headaches, fast heart rate and flushing. And alcohol can reduce the absorption of other antibiotics such as the doxycyclines and tetracyclines. But these few interactions are well known to both medical doctors and pharmacists.Mind you, alcohol can put an extra load on your liver and immune system, can impair your judgment, liberate aggressive tendencies, reduce your energy state - and can be associated with staying up late, behaving recklessly, and not getting all the rest that your body needs to heal itself. So half a glass of an alcoholic beverage of our choice would be fine with most antibiotics.
TOTALLY TRUE
MY DOCTOR ALLWAYS TOLD ME
DRINK 1 BEER A DAY LESS THAN HIM
AND I WOULD ALWAYS BE IN GOOD HEALTH!!
HE WAS AN ALCOHOLIC
With some antibiotics you can drink, but it works quicker if you don't.
For a very small number of antibiotics, alcohol inhibits their action. It is likely your doctor would tell you if you were on these, but you should ask if you are unclear. However for other antibiotics, as alcohol causes diuresis (i.e. makes you urinate more) it speeds up how fast the antibiotics are processed so would slightly reduce their effectiveness. With these, the antibiotics are more effective if you don't drink alcohol but they can still work.
If you are taking flagyl (metradiazole) and you drink you will feel very ill. that's because chemically it is very similar to antabuse - the drug they give alcoholics - it reacts with the alcohol to make you feel sick.Most antibiotics will work with alcohol.The reason for the myth is that antibiotics were first used in numbers to treat venereal disease n the 1950's. Doctors thought that if people went to parties and got drunk they would have more sex and spread the disease before it had been cleared, so people were told to abstain from both sex and alcohol.
its not always true. It depoends what medication you are taking.
best to ask ur doctor whether u can or not.
even though people say you shouldnt i dont thionk its true because alcoholics still have to take antiboitics some times and its not as though they will stop drinking so yeh..#best to ask your doctors.
It all depends on which antibiotics you are on,some of them react with alcohol resulting in the positive effects being cancelled out therefore being a waste of time taking them which is a waste of money %26 one of the reasons doctors will tell you not to drink on them since the NHS is already throwing away millions every year on medications that are wasted.Read the packet/leaflet with th tablets-they have to put the truth on them (side effects/do's %26 don'ts) by law.
it is true, booze lessons the effect of the meds, not the effect of what your drinkin
As a general rule, a glass of wine with dinner isn't going to make any difference, but there's much to take into account. Some antibiotics, for instance, will make you quite alcohol-intolerant, and you'll throw up an unbelievable amount.
Doctors, knowing more about drugs, tend to have a much greater respect for their ability to do bad things to you than is the case with the general public, and like to keep things conservative with any drug, and even moreso with mixtures of drugs, and that includes alcohol.
As far as I know the only antibiotics which specifically warn you not to drink are the dental ones.
my dear it is for ur liver. liver has to deal with the antibiotics and the alcohol. if u take both the liver will clear them out slowly and this will not be good for u and ur liver. this may result in prolonged activity of drugs and when u take the next dose the last dose mite still high leading to an ova dose.
so ur doctors are right u shud not do it. and just becoz sumone said nothing happened to them when they did it does not mean u can do it and get away with it becoz our bodies are different and react differently to situations.
well physically one can do whatever they like lol ,would i recommend it naaaaa, but i am not a dr. so if you are not sure i would take your drs advice and not risk any problems
Read the label!!!
Is it true that you can get lead poisoning if...?
you don't wash your hands after handling Christmas lights that have a tag that says"
Prop 65 Warning:
Handling the coated electrical wires of this product exposes you to lead, a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects and other reproductive harm."
WASH HANDS AFTER USE
Answer:
Lead in trace amounts and with limited exposure time will not harm you The reason lead became such a problem was beacause it was everywhere. It was in paint, pipes, furniture and so on. This exposed people to more than trace amounts all the time, which caused the negative health impact. It can't hurt to wash your hands after contact with lead though.
I would say yes. Why else would they write that on the tag?
That should be illegal to sell stuff like that but if you are if-y about it wear gloves! MAN THAT IS CRAZY!
Prop 65 Warning:
Handling the coated electrical wires of this product exposes you to lead, a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects and other reproductive harm."
WASH HANDS AFTER USE
Answer:
Lead in trace amounts and with limited exposure time will not harm you The reason lead became such a problem was beacause it was everywhere. It was in paint, pipes, furniture and so on. This exposed people to more than trace amounts all the time, which caused the negative health impact. It can't hurt to wash your hands after contact with lead though.
I would say yes. Why else would they write that on the tag?
That should be illegal to sell stuff like that but if you are if-y about it wear gloves! MAN THAT IS CRAZY!
is it true that when you sneeze that you stop breathing for one second?
Answer:
Yeah, I died like 6 times yesterday!Aaaaaaaaachooooooooo
yes, your heart stops when you sneeze
yes its true
yep its true.
Actually your heart stops...thats why we say bless you
yeah heart attack
A sneeze is a forceful exhalation (part of breathing).We ALL stop breathing in between each inhalation and exhalation - it's not a constant process.In order to really STOP breathing, you'd have to go for at least 30-60 seconds without taking a breath. We don't do that when we sneeze.
yep
Yup it true. and also did you know your heart also stops when you have a "he-cop"?
yes its true and your heart stops too. and we say bless you not becuase our heart stops its because they used to believe that your soul would escape when you sneeezed henses the bless you. another useless fact is we all close our eyes when we sneeze and if we dont our eyes would pop out
Yes it is true, and also why it was the one of the most horrible and dangerous semptoms of the Black Death, because if one got the Black Death sneezing was the last semptom, as the person's heart would stop beating and the lungs would stop beating for a long time because of constant sneezing, eventually killing the person by suffocation and lack of blood flow
no your heart stops beating
Not only breathing, heart also stops for a moment, as due to excessive pressure created by lung to sneeze and if heart tries to pump blood at same time, there is chance of capillary hemorrhage...Hence christian says 'God bless you' and Muslim says 'Allhamdullilah', as person has reviewed his / her heart beats and breath..
I believe you have this confused with the MYTH that your heart stops beating for a second when you sneeze. It doesn't.
well yeah its kinda true.
next time you sneeze try to inhale at the same time!
and no your heart doesn't stop beating!
Yes, webmd.com
is it true that they have found a gene in the human DNA that if they removed it, the aging process will stop?
think about it, our whole world would be redifined. Im up for it, or you?
Answer:
No it is not true. Ageing is a natural process of decay. We live in a decaying world and as with all equipment our bodies decay. If we were to even slow the proces of aging the world would be a mess and over populate at a rate that could not be substrained thus the balance of the natural order would cause even greater poverty and hunger in the world. So why would we want to even try and slow the ageing process.
NoImpossible. Aging occurs because of faults, not as a command from a single gene in the DNA sequence.There may be a gene associated with the symptoms of ageing in one specific area that has been targeted, but even then it can't be removed, it would need to be changed or replaced.You don't want to throw a sequence off (:
Answer:
No it is not true. Ageing is a natural process of decay. We live in a decaying world and as with all equipment our bodies decay. If we were to even slow the proces of aging the world would be a mess and over populate at a rate that could not be substrained thus the balance of the natural order would cause even greater poverty and hunger in the world. So why would we want to even try and slow the ageing process.
NoImpossible. Aging occurs because of faults, not as a command from a single gene in the DNA sequence.There may be a gene associated with the symptoms of ageing in one specific area that has been targeted, but even then it can't be removed, it would need to be changed or replaced.You don't want to throw a sequence off (:
Is it true that someone can actually die while dreaming of being killed or falling down from a high place?
what i've heard that the brain may actially dies if not waken up from the dream
Answer:
The brain doesn't just die, but it would be possible to suffer a heart attack in that circumstance, especially if the heart was already weak. Obviously there's no way to tell if it actually happened or not.
Of course it is. So many people have died, at leats one probably died while having such a dream.
Hmmm... In my opinion I think that's very unlikely to be true.
There is no evidence of this, since nobody who died in this manner can report what they were dreaming of, however I have dreamed many experiences that would be lethal and not died from them.
Very rarely. It does happen but think about it. It's just a dream? Normally you wake up when i gets bad.
And how would they know, unless they survived the dream?Anyway, one would think that someone with a weak heart might indeed suffer a heart attack during such a dream, but otherwise, everyone else wakes up normally.
Um..no...but if you're dreaming of suffocating and you're actually suffocating, like if your head is on the pillow and you can't breathe but you tihnk it's just in the dream, then I guess you could actually "die in your dream"
Yeah cuz it can feel so real that the person can go into a shock and self induse a heart attack of the shock!!
yes, normaly due to heart faliure or stroke.
If you can begin any question with, "Is it possible..." then chances are it is possible. The likeliness is a different story.
Yes. That is absolutely possible. A feasible (but unlikely) scenario would involve a sleeping person being shot dead at the same moment that the person is dreaming of being killed for falling. Likewise, a person could actually die while dreaming about flamingos or winning the lottery.
nope. died in a dream car accidentstill here
Good question. Blessings
It's possible, but not for the reason you imply. A person could have a nightmare and have their heart give out. They wouldn't have to even die during the dream. All they would have to do is stress their system over it's limits. And, their limits would have to be pretty low.I've died during a dream so many times I can't count. The most memorable was the time I had my head blown off with a shotgun. I didn't wake up dead then, so I guess nothing in a dream would do it for me.
I've had a few nightmares where i died, but luckily i didnt die in real life. I havent heard any cases of people actually dying from a dream.
no
Think hard. How many dead people have told you what they were dreaming about when they died?
i, myself, have died in my dreams many times. and at the end, it's just blank. and i wake up after a while.
however, i dont know if it is possible for someone to die if they die in their dreams. maybe i'm just lucky all these times. i know that it is possible to live even though you die in a dream, but i dont know if it's actually possible to die. i hope my answer is understandable.
Answer:
The brain doesn't just die, but it would be possible to suffer a heart attack in that circumstance, especially if the heart was already weak. Obviously there's no way to tell if it actually happened or not.
Of course it is. So many people have died, at leats one probably died while having such a dream.
Hmmm... In my opinion I think that's very unlikely to be true.
There is no evidence of this, since nobody who died in this manner can report what they were dreaming of, however I have dreamed many experiences that would be lethal and not died from them.
Very rarely. It does happen but think about it. It's just a dream? Normally you wake up when i gets bad.
And how would they know, unless they survived the dream?Anyway, one would think that someone with a weak heart might indeed suffer a heart attack during such a dream, but otherwise, everyone else wakes up normally.
Um..no...but if you're dreaming of suffocating and you're actually suffocating, like if your head is on the pillow and you can't breathe but you tihnk it's just in the dream, then I guess you could actually "die in your dream"
Yeah cuz it can feel so real that the person can go into a shock and self induse a heart attack of the shock!!
yes, normaly due to heart faliure or stroke.
If you can begin any question with, "Is it possible..." then chances are it is possible. The likeliness is a different story.
Yes. That is absolutely possible. A feasible (but unlikely) scenario would involve a sleeping person being shot dead at the same moment that the person is dreaming of being killed for falling. Likewise, a person could actually die while dreaming about flamingos or winning the lottery.
nope. died in a dream car accidentstill here
Good question. Blessings
It's possible, but not for the reason you imply. A person could have a nightmare and have their heart give out. They wouldn't have to even die during the dream. All they would have to do is stress their system over it's limits. And, their limits would have to be pretty low.I've died during a dream so many times I can't count. The most memorable was the time I had my head blown off with a shotgun. I didn't wake up dead then, so I guess nothing in a dream would do it for me.
I've had a few nightmares where i died, but luckily i didnt die in real life. I havent heard any cases of people actually dying from a dream.
no
Think hard. How many dead people have told you what they were dreaming about when they died?
i, myself, have died in my dreams many times. and at the end, it's just blank. and i wake up after a while.
however, i dont know if it is possible for someone to die if they die in their dreams. maybe i'm just lucky all these times. i know that it is possible to live even though you die in a dream, but i dont know if it's actually possible to die. i hope my answer is understandable.
Is it true that some people have woken up in thier coffins back in the 1800's?
Answer:
This is precisely why I want to be cremated!!
WOW!!! I've never heard that, but that would suck!!
yes - because they were really in a coma - and woke up - so they put a string tied to a bell above the ground - hence
a dead ringer !!!
yes
yep, happened all of the time. They did not have EKG machines and if someone was in a coma and had suppressed life signs they were often buried alive only to wake up later. they used to put a pipe in the casket to allow air to get in through the ground and to check for life signs and after a couple of weeks remove the pipe if no one yelled out from the hole. They have dug up coffins with the insides scratched up with victims trying to claw their way out.
yeah happened many times ,they had no way of hearing a heart beat or pulse..many of the people had certain diseases that you can appear to be dead and not be..its almost impossible to tell..they have moved coffins many of them that were opened from that time period that this happened and actually the people passing by graveyards would hear the screams of the people thus giving the legend of vampires a boost and also of ghouls and ghost..
YES DEFIANTELY! Ive heard of about 10 cases where someone "died" and woke up and tried getting out of the coffin and couldnt and in one case he actually did get oyut and the entire town thought he was something akin to a zombie and there was pure chaos
my mother told me that one of our great relatives did that, some grave robbers dug her up. when they cut her finger to get her ring. she woke up. and walked home. really
I think that is true. In the old days, medicine was not as advanced and the diagnosis of death was sometimes wrong. People were in coma-like conditions. This comes from the fact that some coffins that were exhumed had scratch marks on the inside. For a while, in Europe at least, some coffins were buried with a string that led up through the ground to a bell. The dead person, if not really dead, would pull on the string to call for help.Of course a few years ago I recall reading a story about a woman attending her mother's open casket funeral in England. In the middle of the ceremony her mother sat up and awoke, evidently she was not dead. Unfortunately her daughter than had a heart attack and died.
THERE ARE THE TALES OF THIS, THE EERIE EFFECT CAUSED BY SOME PLANTS CAN GIVE DEATH LIKE SYMPTOMS, AND THE STORY WENT THAT IT STARTED PEOPLE BUILDING COFFINS WITH AIR LINES UP TO THE SURFACE AS TO AID SOMEONE WHO WAS BEYOND THE GRAVE, LOT OF OPIUM AND MEDICINE MAN STUFF HAD IMPORTED DRUG THAT I FORGOT BUT CAN RENDER U TO PASS AN AUTOPSY AND COME BACK LATER IN THE DAY
seems so! check out wiki for "safety coffin" and "premature burial"!
ugh!
Yes, and in more recent times peole have woken up in the freezer. Once the mortuary gets done with you you have nothing to worry about because if you weren't dead before you'll be dead after.
Since there is no such word as WOKEN, I am confused by your question.
It's certainly recorded earlier
yes, this was prevalent in new england in the 1600s during the salem witch trials..In fact, there are scratch marks from the victims who tryed getting out.
Yes i was not there but the stories are real even happens today.Hope i don`t see one tho
is it true that some medicines?
can make your teeth yellow
Answer:
There's really only one drug that causes you teeth to turn Yellow.
It's Tetracycline (not sure where the other guy got amoxicillin)It's generally only seen in children under 12 that's why it's only given to children if it's the last resort.
yes, there are also medications that can give really visible yellow-brown bands on your teeth like tetracycline, it happens during the development of the teeth while the baby is still in the womb.
no, but years ago if a pregnant woman took certain anti biotics during pregnancy the babies teeth would be yellow as they lost their enamel,once the tooth has developed and broken through it wont turn yellow
I have taken a lot of medecine and have had not this effect but saying that i way it could turn your teeth yellow
it depends on the med..the person...
This is true some medicines make your teeth yellow because i know someone who has had the medicines and the teeth went all bright yellow. the medicine is called AMOXOCILINE
yes it is a friend of mine in high school had just that problem. she was perscribed 2 medications which the mix of the 2 caused her teeth to yellow but it was strange because it was just the 2 front teeth. one medication weakened the enamel and the other reacted with the exposed portion of the under layer enamel to make a yellowish brown tint appear on the teeth. there are also medications(not sure the names) that will turn your fingernails and toenails yellow. these are much more common than are the teeth medications. if you are worried about a medication turning any part of your body yellow you might want to consult your doctor at the time of perscription.
Yes. Docs gave antibiotics to preemies years ago. It damaged their teeth permanently. Usually, their teeth are either yellow or in a stage of rotting. No amount of brushing can stop it. Bleaching would only help for a couple of days, if at all.
I think so
Answer:
There's really only one drug that causes you teeth to turn Yellow.
It's Tetracycline (not sure where the other guy got amoxicillin)It's generally only seen in children under 12 that's why it's only given to children if it's the last resort.
yes, there are also medications that can give really visible yellow-brown bands on your teeth like tetracycline, it happens during the development of the teeth while the baby is still in the womb.
no, but years ago if a pregnant woman took certain anti biotics during pregnancy the babies teeth would be yellow as they lost their enamel,once the tooth has developed and broken through it wont turn yellow
I have taken a lot of medecine and have had not this effect but saying that i way it could turn your teeth yellow
it depends on the med..the person...
This is true some medicines make your teeth yellow because i know someone who has had the medicines and the teeth went all bright yellow. the medicine is called AMOXOCILINE
yes it is a friend of mine in high school had just that problem. she was perscribed 2 medications which the mix of the 2 caused her teeth to yellow but it was strange because it was just the 2 front teeth. one medication weakened the enamel and the other reacted with the exposed portion of the under layer enamel to make a yellowish brown tint appear on the teeth. there are also medications(not sure the names) that will turn your fingernails and toenails yellow. these are much more common than are the teeth medications. if you are worried about a medication turning any part of your body yellow you might want to consult your doctor at the time of perscription.
Yes. Docs gave antibiotics to preemies years ago. It damaged their teeth permanently. Usually, their teeth are either yellow or in a stage of rotting. No amount of brushing can stop it. Bleaching would only help for a couple of days, if at all.
I think so
Is it true that shotting self point blank in the head kills painlessly?
...
Answer:
No.People have shot themselves in the head and survived.Those who could still function and talk later said it hurt.
People say they want to die painlessly. I say, what does it matter? Either way (pain or no pain) you're still going to die!
there are not really that many survivors from this... so how could anyone answer it.i'd say it would happen quickly...
not known.all the poor folks who know are not able to tell us.
I don't think that anyone alive would know the answer to that.
See... thats just it! nobody lives to tell about it. The ones that do can't tell us either! And it's SHOOTING
yes, and it kills the pain of life too
I guess if it killed you instantly it would be painless, quite how you prove that is a different matter!
I think you'd have to ask someone who died that way, however... I wouldn't recommend trying it.And why would you even ask? I sure hope that you have more faith in yourself, and in life, than that!
only if you do it right, i know a kid who shot himself in the head and didnt die for like 30 minutes while he was on the way to the hospital
Why don't you ask the people that tried but didn't succeed and are now vegetables for the rest of their lives. Ask them if they could take it all back would they. How it really wasn't worth trying to end it all. And how life is so much more precious then you could ever imagine.
Might not even kill you. You could end up a vegetable, or with a major mental disability. Depends on where you point the gun, what type of gun it is, how thick your skull is.My uncle was a doctor and has told many stories of people that failed.
Pretty much. The shock wave created by the bullet passing through the skull (and the expanding muzzle gasses following behind it) makes a pulp out of all the neurons (and the synaptic interconnections between them) in about a millisecond. Since it takes the 'conscious' about 20 milliseconds or so to recognise anything, it never has a chance to register 'pain' (or anything else) before it is destroyed.
Doug
no, it's not. shooting yourself in any way hurts! it doesn't matter if it's point-blank or 10 feet away, it still is painful.
I tried it last week and it really stung.
It is possible but highly unlikely. The probability of hitting yourself in the exact right spot to cause a painless instant death is extremely low. From working in an ER I have witnessed someone who probably thought it would be painless, but they were wrong. They shot theirself point blank through the temples, and they lived for about 3hrs while we worked on him. The next morning they were collecting his organs. Definitely not the way I'd want to go. So painless, I highly doubt it, unless you hit that spot right on. Shot in the head doesn't mean instant death.
Obviously, no one can really tell you from life experience. I think there are a few things to think about ... When you shoot yourself in the head, you'll have to shoot through your skin, muscle and bone. If you feel pain, it would be the shot through the skin, muscle and bone that cause most/all of the pain. Since your brain itself doesn't feel pain. This would obviously hurt very very badly. And you would feel it rather instantly. It is uncertain whether you would die immediately. There is also the possibility that the adrenaline would be so high that you'd feel nothing at all.There have been cases where people have been stabbed through their head and lived. (through the back and out top of the mouth and upper lip, missing the brain completely.) Other people have been able to survive without half a brain. The body is an amazing thing, there is no way to say what could happen. And living after failing at suicide would probably hurt very badly.
Answer:
No.People have shot themselves in the head and survived.Those who could still function and talk later said it hurt.
People say they want to die painlessly. I say, what does it matter? Either way (pain or no pain) you're still going to die!
there are not really that many survivors from this... so how could anyone answer it.i'd say it would happen quickly...
not known.all the poor folks who know are not able to tell us.
I don't think that anyone alive would know the answer to that.
See... thats just it! nobody lives to tell about it. The ones that do can't tell us either! And it's SHOOTING
yes, and it kills the pain of life too
I guess if it killed you instantly it would be painless, quite how you prove that is a different matter!
I think you'd have to ask someone who died that way, however... I wouldn't recommend trying it.And why would you even ask? I sure hope that you have more faith in yourself, and in life, than that!
only if you do it right, i know a kid who shot himself in the head and didnt die for like 30 minutes while he was on the way to the hospital
Why don't you ask the people that tried but didn't succeed and are now vegetables for the rest of their lives. Ask them if they could take it all back would they. How it really wasn't worth trying to end it all. And how life is so much more precious then you could ever imagine.
Might not even kill you. You could end up a vegetable, or with a major mental disability. Depends on where you point the gun, what type of gun it is, how thick your skull is.My uncle was a doctor and has told many stories of people that failed.
Pretty much. The shock wave created by the bullet passing through the skull (and the expanding muzzle gasses following behind it) makes a pulp out of all the neurons (and the synaptic interconnections between them) in about a millisecond. Since it takes the 'conscious' about 20 milliseconds or so to recognise anything, it never has a chance to register 'pain' (or anything else) before it is destroyed.
Doug
no, it's not. shooting yourself in any way hurts! it doesn't matter if it's point-blank or 10 feet away, it still is painful.
I tried it last week and it really stung.
It is possible but highly unlikely. The probability of hitting yourself in the exact right spot to cause a painless instant death is extremely low. From working in an ER I have witnessed someone who probably thought it would be painless, but they were wrong. They shot theirself point blank through the temples, and they lived for about 3hrs while we worked on him. The next morning they were collecting his organs. Definitely not the way I'd want to go. So painless, I highly doubt it, unless you hit that spot right on. Shot in the head doesn't mean instant death.
Obviously, no one can really tell you from life experience. I think there are a few things to think about ... When you shoot yourself in the head, you'll have to shoot through your skin, muscle and bone. If you feel pain, it would be the shot through the skin, muscle and bone that cause most/all of the pain. Since your brain itself doesn't feel pain. This would obviously hurt very very badly. And you would feel it rather instantly. It is uncertain whether you would die immediately. There is also the possibility that the adrenaline would be so high that you'd feel nothing at all.There have been cases where people have been stabbed through their head and lived. (through the back and out top of the mouth and upper lip, missing the brain completely.) Other people have been able to survive without half a brain. The body is an amazing thing, there is no way to say what could happen. And living after failing at suicide would probably hurt very badly.
is it true that salina, the singer who was shot by her manager die due to the lack of a blood transfusion?
did salina's parents refuse a blood transfusion, which caused her to die?
Answer:
I dont think that was the case. Selena was married, so her husband would have been the one to make a decision like that. I dont believe he would have denied her of proper medical treatment.
It didnt say anything or refer to anything like that in the movie they made about her either.
No! They loved her, they wouldn't have been that ignorant.. I believe she died on the spot.
No that was all just a rumor.
No. If I remember correctly, she was shot in the shoulder, and died after a few minutes from the blood loss. Hypothetically, she could have been saved if she had an immediate transfusion, because no internal organs were hit. However, she was at a hotel at the time, and sadly she died from her wound. I think that her parents were not nearby at the time.
No. Selena was rushed to the hospital and was given a blood transfusion, but it was already too late.Later when her father showed up at the hospital, he said she wouldn't have wanted a blood transfusion because of her faith (they were Jehovah's witnesses).At that point she had already received the transfusion.
Her name is spelled Selena and NO they didn't refuse. Besides that she was married and that decision would be left up to her husband Chris, not her parents.
Answer:
I dont think that was the case. Selena was married, so her husband would have been the one to make a decision like that. I dont believe he would have denied her of proper medical treatment.
It didnt say anything or refer to anything like that in the movie they made about her either.
No! They loved her, they wouldn't have been that ignorant.. I believe she died on the spot.
No that was all just a rumor.
No. If I remember correctly, she was shot in the shoulder, and died after a few minutes from the blood loss. Hypothetically, she could have been saved if she had an immediate transfusion, because no internal organs were hit. However, she was at a hotel at the time, and sadly she died from her wound. I think that her parents were not nearby at the time.
No. Selena was rushed to the hospital and was given a blood transfusion, but it was already too late.Later when her father showed up at the hospital, he said she wouldn't have wanted a blood transfusion because of her faith (they were Jehovah's witnesses).At that point she had already received the transfusion.
Her name is spelled Selena and NO they didn't refuse. Besides that she was married and that decision would be left up to her husband Chris, not her parents.
Is it true that most medicine makers don't want you cured but instead want you to be treated so they can ...
maximize profits ?
Answer:
Ethically: NO.
Commercially: More inclined to YES than NO (partial).
It depends on the type of disease or syndrome they are catering to.
Example: If it is fever, flu or common cold, the answer is yes, because they dont want to lose customers (getting customers itself is rarity). If it is Diabetes or cancer, the answer is NO, as they know customers cannot be cured completely and once one gets it, he/she will become a life-time customer.
I believe that.
Yes, though they would never publicly admit this. The money is in the disease, not the cure.
I believe that can be a reasonable assumption. To prove it might take "an act of congress" because if someone where to prove such an accusation, there would be the biggest lawsuit in world history to follow. The charge: Fraudulent medical claims of a general nature. It would be the accuser's role to list everything.
yes. i was watching this special on fox one day and this guy was on and was describing his book where he went around the world to different countries, researching special medicines. and there are many cures for many diseases that "dont have a cure" , and he was also explaining how in the US it is illegal to treat cancer without chemo. and that there is a cure for cancer but it is not released in the US because of the same reason marijuana isnt legal. because it is an herb and can be grown anywhere, in other words the government just cant tax it and make there money.
In league with the "doctors" of the world, the mega-corporate pharmaceutical companies encourage, indeed almost force, the treatment of disease rather than the cure of it.
An example is the "treatment" of type 2 diabetes in which the medication causes weight gain which in turn increases insulin resistance which inturn requires more medication.
It is a vicious circle, kept in motion by the greedy.To find the root cause of most problems in this world, follow the money.
well, there are certainly a lot of conspiracy theorists that would like everyone to think that. of course there are probly a lot of med. companies that dont want you to think that. corruption among the pharmasutical companies has been an issue for a while. there are plenty of medicines that work effectively and thats how most of them are. i think the problem isnt meds that dont work, but meds that are over perscribed. some pharmacutical companies will pay doctors to perscribe more medicine than people actually need or even assign it if the person dusnt really need it at all. the whole business has become a sticky one...one where such corruption is easily able to fester, but im not sure its as bad as a lot of people make it out to be
Maybe. some of them, but i don't think they are so cruel.
No.
Two reasons why this paranoid view of the world is wrong:
- Oversimplification. You think that for any disease there should be a pill, preferably in five different flavours, which, once swallowed, cures you instantly.
Unfortunately, deceases are not like that. Bacteria and parasites are rarely killed 100%, they become immune to drugs, etcetera.
Cancercells are too much like normal cells to just kill them off without harming normal cells.
Damaged cells, as in Parkinsons or dementia, can not be replaced by an injection or a pill.
It's not an exact science. Your flaw is thinking that it is.- Capitalism. If my company purposely made a drug that doesn't work, and another company could make a drug that DOES work.
How long do you think people will buy my medicine when they know it doesn't cure, and they know there's another medicine that works?
Which do you think they'll buy?
Which company do you think will make the most money?
All companies are in business to make (rather than lose) money. As such drug companies are constantly on the lookout to buy smaller companies with useful drugs and also may expend millions of stockholder dollars researching new drugs (few of which succeed). There are many human ailments that have long-lasting effects such as diabetes and drug companies certainly would favor drugs with long term treatments. You can always refuse to take any drugs. Your doctor is your adviser not your dictator. There is some strange notion that modern medicine would be somehow better today without drugs. Go figure. When my doctor prescribes drugs or over-the-counter medication they have always helped. Instead of worrying about bad drugs worry about finding a good doctor you trust.
They will maintain your health but not cure, to big of a loss if they do. =)
Answer:
Ethically: NO.
Commercially: More inclined to YES than NO (partial).
It depends on the type of disease or syndrome they are catering to.
Example: If it is fever, flu or common cold, the answer is yes, because they dont want to lose customers (getting customers itself is rarity). If it is Diabetes or cancer, the answer is NO, as they know customers cannot be cured completely and once one gets it, he/she will become a life-time customer.
I believe that.
Yes, though they would never publicly admit this. The money is in the disease, not the cure.
I believe that can be a reasonable assumption. To prove it might take "an act of congress" because if someone where to prove such an accusation, there would be the biggest lawsuit in world history to follow. The charge: Fraudulent medical claims of a general nature. It would be the accuser's role to list everything.
yes. i was watching this special on fox one day and this guy was on and was describing his book where he went around the world to different countries, researching special medicines. and there are many cures for many diseases that "dont have a cure" , and he was also explaining how in the US it is illegal to treat cancer without chemo. and that there is a cure for cancer but it is not released in the US because of the same reason marijuana isnt legal. because it is an herb and can be grown anywhere, in other words the government just cant tax it and make there money.
In league with the "doctors" of the world, the mega-corporate pharmaceutical companies encourage, indeed almost force, the treatment of disease rather than the cure of it.
An example is the "treatment" of type 2 diabetes in which the medication causes weight gain which in turn increases insulin resistance which inturn requires more medication.
It is a vicious circle, kept in motion by the greedy.To find the root cause of most problems in this world, follow the money.
well, there are certainly a lot of conspiracy theorists that would like everyone to think that. of course there are probly a lot of med. companies that dont want you to think that. corruption among the pharmasutical companies has been an issue for a while. there are plenty of medicines that work effectively and thats how most of them are. i think the problem isnt meds that dont work, but meds that are over perscribed. some pharmacutical companies will pay doctors to perscribe more medicine than people actually need or even assign it if the person dusnt really need it at all. the whole business has become a sticky one...one where such corruption is easily able to fester, but im not sure its as bad as a lot of people make it out to be
Maybe. some of them, but i don't think they are so cruel.
No.
Two reasons why this paranoid view of the world is wrong:
- Oversimplification. You think that for any disease there should be a pill, preferably in five different flavours, which, once swallowed, cures you instantly.
Unfortunately, deceases are not like that. Bacteria and parasites are rarely killed 100%, they become immune to drugs, etcetera.
Cancercells are too much like normal cells to just kill them off without harming normal cells.
Damaged cells, as in Parkinsons or dementia, can not be replaced by an injection or a pill.
It's not an exact science. Your flaw is thinking that it is.- Capitalism. If my company purposely made a drug that doesn't work, and another company could make a drug that DOES work.
How long do you think people will buy my medicine when they know it doesn't cure, and they know there's another medicine that works?
Which do you think they'll buy?
Which company do you think will make the most money?
All companies are in business to make (rather than lose) money. As such drug companies are constantly on the lookout to buy smaller companies with useful drugs and also may expend millions of stockholder dollars researching new drugs (few of which succeed). There are many human ailments that have long-lasting effects such as diabetes and drug companies certainly would favor drugs with long term treatments. You can always refuse to take any drugs. Your doctor is your adviser not your dictator. There is some strange notion that modern medicine would be somehow better today without drugs. Go figure. When my doctor prescribes drugs or over-the-counter medication they have always helped. Instead of worrying about bad drugs worry about finding a good doctor you trust.
They will maintain your health but not cure, to big of a loss if they do. =)
is it true that left-handed people have inverted cerebral hemispheres?
Answer:
I don't think that is true, left handers have a dominant right hemisphere, or whatever the right side of your brain is called. There is a theory as well that left handedness is an evolutionary step, thousands of years ago it was a survival trait, left handed fighters would have the element of surprise when fighting right handers.
That's a very polite way of asking if they are freaks..
i doubt it.i am a lefty.explain inverted cerebral hemisphere to me at brerocks25@hotmail.com or im me at brebrerocks25@yahoo.com
Some do and some don't.
If you mean is a left handers brain right side dominant, yes. Also explains why lefties are often very creative. Right handed people are left lobe dominant being generally more logical.
Some is that and some is not .. and the left handed people is n't freaks . but they have a really good handwriting . and the left handed people have the centre of writing in their cerebrum in the right side . that's all
Is this a good thing or bad ?,I am left handed.Or as they say round here Coggi hander.
The left handers brain is very different from the right handers brain. As a left hander, I find that there are a vast number of things that I can do and ways that I think that are very different from those of my RH contemporaries. I read on a higher level, I use words when I write that others don't usually use, I write backwards and upside down, which, believe it or not, is much easier than writing "normal". LH people are generally more creative, more intuitive, more emotional, and compassionate. I have had my share of problems with being LH. As a child I lived in Germany, needless to say, I had a teacher that was NOT fond of the left hand and used a ruler on the palm of my hand to "change" my handedness, it DIDN'T work, and I started acting like an "ssa" in class to annoy her. I love being the only person in my family as a dominate lefty, so for those of you who have heard that handedness is hereditary, it's not. Oh, just to be fair, some "scientists" believe that left handedness is due to some sort of brain damage that occured at birth. Whatever! So, that's my two cents.
AND:Left-brain/right-brain proponents in popular culture will find substantial support for the idea that brain hemispheres are indeed functionally specialized. Moreover, there is significant, repeatable lateralization of the human brain along numerous dimensions. The left and right hemispheres can even perform as independent minds when their intercommunication is severed as in the rare commissurotomy procedure. However, there is significant empirical evidence to refute the idea of hemispheric dominance in the "on again, off again" sense which these proponents presume. Instead researchers continue to affirm the constant, subtle, and profound interplay of the two hemispheres; we do not posses two, limited brains that vie for control, rather we posses an almost transparently unified mind of much greater ability then merely the sum of the two parts. These are exciting times for all those interesting in the brain and how it works. Still, there are so many questions, seemingly contradictory experimental results, and hyperbole. The truth is, contrary to pop-psychology, we simply don't understand enough about cerebral dominance, brain lateralization, the causes and effects of left/mixed handedness, and how these things interact, to be able to make short, quick, easy-to-digest, blanket statements. It's even a little sad, because the truth is so much more profound, exciting, and interesting
Left handed people are in their right minds.
no
The human brain makes an excellent beach ball.
no of course not. it is true that brain functions are different in the left and right hemispheres. being left handed, being a recessive trait doesn't mean that cerebral hemispheres are already inverted. It only means that the brain functions more efficiently on the other hemisphere.
If you are left handed, that does not mean that you are smarter than right handed people. The hand you write with is just different. If you are smarter that someone else who writes with a different hand, the just means that you are smarter than them. It doesn't catagorize a whole group of people.
.I hope this doesn't seem like retaliation...
Among the right handed people:
99% have dominant left hemisphere and 1% have dominant right hemisphere.Among the left haned people:
85% have dominant left hemisphere and 15% have dominant right hemisphere.Left handed people are neither dumber nor smarter than their right-handed counterparts. IQ has nothing to do with cerebral dominance. If the motor (i.e., part that moves the limbs) function of your brain is dominant on one side, that does not necessarily mean that the other functions (i.e., cognitive, etc) are also dominant on the same side. You many not be aware of this, but apart from a dominant hand, you (and I, and all the rest of the world) also have a dominant eye and a dominant ear. These things don't have a bearing on intellectual or creative abilities (or disabilities) of a person.
They dont' REALLY have inverted hemispheres. What happens is that there is a tissue (like a cable) that joins the brain's hemispheres, but this "cable" is like an X, so the left hemisphere is connected to the right part of your body and the right to the left. This happens in all vertebrates. Because right-handed people use more the right part of their bodies, that part of the brain is more active. Anatomically, there is no difference between them.
no
yes it is true that for a left handed person the right side of the brain is the dominant hemisphere. But it has nothing to worry about they r as sane as a person should be.
There is scientific evidence to suggest that some left-handed individuals are a surviving "mirror-image" twin. The non-surviving (probably right-handed ) twin succumbed to the "disappearing twin" syndrome whereby one twin dies in-utero and is re-absorbed into the mother. Mirror image twins can have internal organs, such as the heart, on opposite sides of the body. Is there such a thing as an inverted brain?
some may and some may not
yes the left handers have the right side cerebral hemisphere functional
and i am also a left hander in fact i write with both hands but my right cerebral hemisphere is more developed and left handers are also good artists as i am
Is it true that it is possible to produce human insulin by using bacteria?
Answer:
YES!!Human insulin protein molecules produced by bacteria are gathered and purified. The process of purifying and producing cow and pig insulin has been greatly reduced or eliminated.
Yes. The modern day insulin analogs are produced by using recombinant DNA technology. Insulin glargine is an example of this. This is a long acting insulin analog that is typically dosed for diabetics once daily. It is commercially available through prescription as Lantus. Lantus is produced using a safe version of E. coli bacteria. More can be researched on this topic by searching these specific terms.
Yes. E.coli is used. Human insulin made this way only is widely used .
Is it true that if your maternal grandfather never went bald, you have no genetic chance of going bald?
Answer:
no you have more than 50% chance...baldness is dependen to a X-linked gene, since womens sex chromoses are XX and mens are XY.. when your maternal grandpa is bald; he gives his baldy X to your mother, but she also takes another X from her mother; so she becomes XX... and she gives her son, to you, one of these X chromosomes. If your X chromosome came from maternal grandma; you may not turn to bald. but you have to check your uncles also... maybe your maternal grandma also has a baldy X chromosome, it is seen in some uncles..
I always thought it was the paternal grandfather.but anyway, not necessarily. There's always a possibility, I think, even if it is slight.
no because sometimes genes skip a generation. If that was true, the same could be said of those who have a maternal grandfather who lived to be 100. It's a chance you might too, but no guarantee set in stone.
Genetics is a big factor in baldness but the sad fact is any guy can go bald for whatever reason. Don't fight it, lot of women love bald men and you save money on the haircuts!-:) We should all thank Michael Chikliss for bringing dignity to bald, fat WHITE guys! Peace and Merry Christmas!
Vin
Is it true that if you run a gold band across your forehead...?
and it leaves a black streak, it means you are deficient in iron? How does this work?
Answer:
OK, this is sort of true but it has nothing to do with gold. Gold is completely non-reactive as a chemical - that's why everybody likes it in jewelry, right? Because it doesn't tarnish. But if you rub yourself with a hard piece of metal it could cause a bruise. Bruises come from tiny broken blood vessels in your skin. The vessels and the blood in the vessels are dependent on the presence of iron to be healthy. If you are iron-deficient then you are more like to have bruising when you rub a ring or coin on a delicate section of skin over a bone - like your forehead.
People who are iron deficient tend to bruise more easily. It is not magical and it has nothing to do with the kind of metal you use.
works anywhere on your skin doesn't need to just be forehead. Yes this means you are deficient in iron. Will work with a coin too
Yes. It is true. Rub gold anywhere on your face and it will tell you if you are lacking iron in your blood. The more pure the gold is the better it will work. I do not know the technical reasoning for it though.
I don't know how it works but it does. You don't have to run it across your forehead though any part of your face, jawline, will do.
I find that my gold rings leave black circles around my fingers when my iron is really low.
I suppose this explains the marks people can get on their skin if they wear real gold
Answer:
OK, this is sort of true but it has nothing to do with gold. Gold is completely non-reactive as a chemical - that's why everybody likes it in jewelry, right? Because it doesn't tarnish. But if you rub yourself with a hard piece of metal it could cause a bruise. Bruises come from tiny broken blood vessels in your skin. The vessels and the blood in the vessels are dependent on the presence of iron to be healthy. If you are iron-deficient then you are more like to have bruising when you rub a ring or coin on a delicate section of skin over a bone - like your forehead.
People who are iron deficient tend to bruise more easily. It is not magical and it has nothing to do with the kind of metal you use.
works anywhere on your skin doesn't need to just be forehead. Yes this means you are deficient in iron. Will work with a coin too
Yes. It is true. Rub gold anywhere on your face and it will tell you if you are lacking iron in your blood. The more pure the gold is the better it will work. I do not know the technical reasoning for it though.
I don't know how it works but it does. You don't have to run it across your forehead though any part of your face, jawline, will do.
I find that my gold rings leave black circles around my fingers when my iron is really low.
I suppose this explains the marks people can get on their skin if they wear real gold
Is it true that drinking cow's milk is beneficial for a patient with peptic ulcer?
Answer:
The calcium will actually cause increased acid production, but the scientific evidence overall is, "we dunno." If it feels good, it's probably OK, and it was a mainstay of treatment in the first half of the twentieth century, when there was a general idea that white things felt good and red things bad for your ulcer, It sounds crazy in the world of $3-a-pill proton pump inhibitors and routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy, but to a large degree it still holds fairly true.
most ulcers are due to high amounts of stomach acid. milk is a base, and should therefore neutralize some of the acid.
Yes and no..it (as well as Mylanta or other ant-acids) helps with the symptoms a bit but the cause of peptic ulcer is parasitic/bacterial.so it makes sense to cure it rather than mask it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/peptic_ulce...
http://glycob.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/con...
Is it true that breakthrough medical research has proved that doing research on rats causes cancer in rats?
Answer:
Yes and no. For example, some kinds of cancers that ONLY occur in rats have been found. It was widely believed that saccharin or cyclamates (I forget which one) caused cancer, but the fact was that rats digest, process and eliminate it differently than we do. When it is concentrated in their urine, it forms crystals, which it does not do in our urine because our urine contains a higher percentage of water. (A human with water levels in the urine as low as a rat's would already be dead of dehydration.)The sharp-edge crystals in the rats' bladders repeatedly cut them and caused bleeding, required healing, and eventually led to a breakdown of the healing process, with uncontrolled cell growth and reproduction, called cancer-- because the bladders were continually being cut by the sharp-edged crystals and needing to be healed...! So it was not that the sweetener caused cancer. ANYTHING that crystallized in their urine like that would eventually have caused cancer. The rats just couldn't tell us, that's all. Stop medical experiments on mute animals-- experiment on PETA members, instead. THOSE WORTHY OF OUR RESPECT WOULD VOLUNTEER.11 DEC 06, 1851 hrs, GMT.
this is probly a joke question(?)but--having had many rats and mice over the years,i can tell u that EVERY-and i do mean 100% of them-rodent that i ever had,died of cancer in its old age.u could see the tumours,and they'd have to be put down.in the wild,they are predated by almost everything-owls,foxes,u name it.they dont live long enough to develop the disease.but 3 year old mice and 5 yr old rats are extraordinarily prone to cancer in my opinion.ive often wondered if those tests are skewed-i mean,was it the diet they were fed.or the chemicals they ingested in the lab-or,like my pets,was it just that rodents are cancer prone to begin with??
is it true that ayurveda and yoga can cure otherwise incurable disease?
Answer:
Ayurvedic medicine is a form of alternative medicine in use primarily in the Indian subcontinent. The word "Ayurveda" is a tatpurusha compound of 膩yus "life" and veda "knowledge", and would roughly translate as the "Science of Life". Ayurveda deals with the measures of healthy living, along with therapeutic measures that relate to physical, mental, social and spiritual harmony. Ayurveda is also one among the few traditional systems of medicine involving surgery. Even now aurveda is practiced by many persons in India and they sometimes cure cronic diseases like cancer, Diabetes and heart ailments aprt from minor diseases. Yoga is a family of ancient spiritual practices originating in India. It is one of the six schools of Hindu philosophy, in which it is often paired with Samkhya, and they are referred together as the Samkhya-Yoga school.
Today in India and across the World, Yoga is a vibrant living tradition and is seen as a means to both physical health and spiritual mastery. Karma Yoga (yoga of Action), Jnana Yoga (yoga of Knowledge), Bhakti Yoga (yoga of Devotion), and Raja Yoga (yoga of Meditation) are considered the four main paths of Yoga.
Outside India, Yoga has become primarily associated with the practice of asanas (postures) of Hatha Yoga, a system of Yoga that developed from - and in order to prepare students for the practice of - Raja YogaYoga is not a medicinal treatment and by severe practice of Yoga we can keep our body healthy and also cure problems like constipation, blood pressure, obesity, and very many diseases-.
I believe that they can. I'd like to hear some experiences regarding these powerful healing techniques.
Theoretically, yes it is. Practically the chances are rare. However they help lessen the intensity of disease. But one should go for these options because there is no other choice anyway. Yoga is also a good defence against any future possible diseases.
wouldn't everyone like to believe that...but in true fact it does not...maybe it can help to alleviate some of the symptoms associated with diseases but it does not in any way cure the disease
Ayurveda is Sanskrit for knowledge of living. Ayurvedic herbs etc help in keeping one healthy .Yoga is Sanskrit for a state or stature. Yoga helps muscles,bones and joints healthy and functional. Curing otherwise incurable diseases is claimed but not proved.
Is it true that aspirin can affect our liver?
please tell me... i want to know about how serious is the effectness...
Answer:
It is very rare that Aspirin can cause any damage to the liver. There have been only a handful of cases of hepatotoxicity (liver damage) but these have been primarily in either YOUNG rheumatoid arthritis patients or lupus patients, and even then it was reversible.Sometimes Aspirin is mistaken for acetaminophen, which in high doses can cause liver damage, but even this is rare.Keep in mind that Aspirin still needs a somewhat healthy liver to function properly! Aspirin is broken down into the active salicylate partially by the liver. The salicylate in Aspirin is then broken down into smaller components, primarily by the liver, so it can be easily removed from the body in the urine.
ye it duz, but in the long term, it starts to get eatn away shall we say!
yeah if you take the whole bottle
I don't know specifically, but a lot of drugs do IF you take them for a long time or abuse them. For most people, I don't think it would be a problem.
Your body needs ways of getting rid of harmful chemicals, and the liver is very important in this process. Any time you take medicine, even an aspirin, it's your liver's job to later remove the medicine from your bloodstream. If your liver isn't functioning correctly, the medicine may stay in your bloodstream longer than it should, and that can cause problems. :-)
Aspirin is ok.. stay away from Acetominephen (tylenol)
Yes, Aspirin can affect our liver.Aspirin causes insignificant gastrointestinal bleeding that can over time, however, cause iron deficiency; gastric ulcers may also occur with long-term use. Complications can be avoided by using enteric-coated aspirin, which does not dissolve until reaching the intestine. Aspirin should not be given to children who have chicken pox or influenza, because it increases the risk of contracting the rare and frequently fatal Reye's syndrome, a disease of the brain and some abdominal organs.
You can get more information on Encarta 2006
Answer:
It is very rare that Aspirin can cause any damage to the liver. There have been only a handful of cases of hepatotoxicity (liver damage) but these have been primarily in either YOUNG rheumatoid arthritis patients or lupus patients, and even then it was reversible.Sometimes Aspirin is mistaken for acetaminophen, which in high doses can cause liver damage, but even this is rare.Keep in mind that Aspirin still needs a somewhat healthy liver to function properly! Aspirin is broken down into the active salicylate partially by the liver. The salicylate in Aspirin is then broken down into smaller components, primarily by the liver, so it can be easily removed from the body in the urine.
ye it duz, but in the long term, it starts to get eatn away shall we say!
yeah if you take the whole bottle
I don't know specifically, but a lot of drugs do IF you take them for a long time or abuse them. For most people, I don't think it would be a problem.
Your body needs ways of getting rid of harmful chemicals, and the liver is very important in this process. Any time you take medicine, even an aspirin, it's your liver's job to later remove the medicine from your bloodstream. If your liver isn't functioning correctly, the medicine may stay in your bloodstream longer than it should, and that can cause problems. :-)
Aspirin is ok.. stay away from Acetominephen (tylenol)
Yes, Aspirin can affect our liver.Aspirin causes insignificant gastrointestinal bleeding that can over time, however, cause iron deficiency; gastric ulcers may also occur with long-term use. Complications can be avoided by using enteric-coated aspirin, which does not dissolve until reaching the intestine. Aspirin should not be given to children who have chicken pox or influenza, because it increases the risk of contracting the rare and frequently fatal Reye's syndrome, a disease of the brain and some abdominal organs.
You can get more information on Encarta 2006
Is it true that all the bad things that the government tells us about weed are false and the only reason that?
it is not legal is because we can't find a good way to tax it?
Answer:
TLC ? Leandro? Hahahaha...Weed has "Tender Loving Care"...Hahahahaha your right but wrong that's THC
Alcohol is at least 20 times worse for you than liquor and the "Government" taxes and allows IT. So the answer is the YES the Government is full of crap about this.
Some of the things are true to an extent such as mental problems caused by marijuana do happen but they arent permanent. I think the taxing thing might one of the reasons but probably no the only one
Well I don't think so since Marijuana does contain TLC which makes people hallucinate and three's short term effect and long term effects and these areShort-term Effects
Short-term effects of marijuana include problems with memory and learning, distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch), trouble with thinking and problem solving, loss of motor coordination, increased heart rate, and anxiety. Long-term Effects
Marijuana smoke contains some of the same cancer-causing compounds as tobacco, sometimes in higher concentrations.Studies show that someone who smokes five joints per week may be taking in as many cancer-causing chemicals as someone who smokes a full pack of cigarettes every day.
Weed is safer than an antidepressant, trust me.
Leandro L is funny as hell! "TLC" HAHAHAHAi think he means thc. he obviously knows nothing but what the government has told him.i will say that while it is not exactly good for you.. it is wayyyyy better for you than alcohol... and thats a fact. so if the potential harm of a substance should dictate its legality, then it should be legal. hell, there are already legal stores that sell pot in california if u got a doctors signature.
You find a good summary of when and why marijuana was outlawed at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/...You can find a funny short history of the subject at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/... In short, most state marijuana laws were first passed in the period 1913-30. There were two major reasons for the laws.The first reason was racial prejudice against Mexican immigrants. The second was the fear heroin addiction would lead to the use of marijuana -- exactly the opposite of the modern gateway myth. It was outlawed at the national level in 1937. You can find the full transcripts of the hearings for the law at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/tax... The reasons the law was required -- it was said, was because marijuana causes insanity, criminality, and death. It should be noted that the head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics said that there was no connection at all between marijuana and heroin. In short, the reasons for the law were racism, ignorance, and nonsense. The primary economic interests associated with making it illegal were the newspapers which made money with sensational journalism and the people within the Federal Bureau of Narcotics itself. Since then, entire industries have grown up that benefit from marijuana prohibition.Taxation was not an issue. Hemp was grown throughout the country and taxed just like any other crop.Taxation was the means they used to create the law. At the time, everyone agreed that the US Government had no constitutional power to prohibit drugs. Therefore, they achieved prohibition by putting a tax on drugs, and then making the amount of the tax so much that no one would pay it. They also required a license, and then didn't issue any licenses. Therefore, when people got arrested, they didn't really get arrested for marijuana. They got arrested because they didn't pay the tax on marijuana and have the license. It was a "tax violation."Harry Anslinger, who was head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics from 1930-1962 knew from the very beginning that the marijuana laws were completely unenforceable. He knew because, shortly after the law was passed, he walked out on a bridge over the Potomac and saw before him a field of wild cannabis that stretched as far as the eye could see. Therefore, he reasoned that the only way to approach the prohibition was with a campaign of Reefer Madness. That is, he would tell such stupendous lies that no one would dare touch the stuff. For example, his own US Official Expert on marijuana testified in court, under oath, that marijuana would make your incisors grow six inches long and drip with blood. He went on to say that, when he tried it, it turned him into a bat. The lies have gotten a little less ridiculous since then, but the US Government still maintains an openly admitted policy of lying about drugs. You can find numerous histories by different authors and hundreds of original historical documents at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer... under Historical Research.
Answer:
TLC ? Leandro? Hahahaha...Weed has "Tender Loving Care"...Hahahahaha your right but wrong that's THC
Alcohol is at least 20 times worse for you than liquor and the "Government" taxes and allows IT. So the answer is the YES the Government is full of crap about this.
Some of the things are true to an extent such as mental problems caused by marijuana do happen but they arent permanent. I think the taxing thing might one of the reasons but probably no the only one
Well I don't think so since Marijuana does contain TLC which makes people hallucinate and three's short term effect and long term effects and these areShort-term Effects
Short-term effects of marijuana include problems with memory and learning, distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch), trouble with thinking and problem solving, loss of motor coordination, increased heart rate, and anxiety. Long-term Effects
Marijuana smoke contains some of the same cancer-causing compounds as tobacco, sometimes in higher concentrations.Studies show that someone who smokes five joints per week may be taking in as many cancer-causing chemicals as someone who smokes a full pack of cigarettes every day.
Weed is safer than an antidepressant, trust me.
Leandro L is funny as hell! "TLC" HAHAHAHAi think he means thc. he obviously knows nothing but what the government has told him.i will say that while it is not exactly good for you.. it is wayyyyy better for you than alcohol... and thats a fact. so if the potential harm of a substance should dictate its legality, then it should be legal. hell, there are already legal stores that sell pot in california if u got a doctors signature.
You find a good summary of when and why marijuana was outlawed at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/...You can find a funny short history of the subject at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/... In short, most state marijuana laws were first passed in the period 1913-30. There were two major reasons for the laws.The first reason was racial prejudice against Mexican immigrants. The second was the fear heroin addiction would lead to the use of marijuana -- exactly the opposite of the modern gateway myth. It was outlawed at the national level in 1937. You can find the full transcripts of the hearings for the law at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/tax... The reasons the law was required -- it was said, was because marijuana causes insanity, criminality, and death. It should be noted that the head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics said that there was no connection at all between marijuana and heroin. In short, the reasons for the law were racism, ignorance, and nonsense. The primary economic interests associated with making it illegal were the newspapers which made money with sensational journalism and the people within the Federal Bureau of Narcotics itself. Since then, entire industries have grown up that benefit from marijuana prohibition.Taxation was not an issue. Hemp was grown throughout the country and taxed just like any other crop.Taxation was the means they used to create the law. At the time, everyone agreed that the US Government had no constitutional power to prohibit drugs. Therefore, they achieved prohibition by putting a tax on drugs, and then making the amount of the tax so much that no one would pay it. They also required a license, and then didn't issue any licenses. Therefore, when people got arrested, they didn't really get arrested for marijuana. They got arrested because they didn't pay the tax on marijuana and have the license. It was a "tax violation."Harry Anslinger, who was head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics from 1930-1962 knew from the very beginning that the marijuana laws were completely unenforceable. He knew because, shortly after the law was passed, he walked out on a bridge over the Potomac and saw before him a field of wild cannabis that stretched as far as the eye could see. Therefore, he reasoned that the only way to approach the prohibition was with a campaign of Reefer Madness. That is, he would tell such stupendous lies that no one would dare touch the stuff. For example, his own US Official Expert on marijuana testified in court, under oath, that marijuana would make your incisors grow six inches long and drip with blood. He went on to say that, when he tried it, it turned him into a bat. The lies have gotten a little less ridiculous since then, but the US Government still maintains an openly admitted policy of lying about drugs. You can find numerous histories by different authors and hundreds of original historical documents at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer... under Historical Research.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)