Appendicectomies have sometimes been performed on nervous patents with tummy-aches worried that they swallowed some egg-shell with their bacon and eggs.
Possible Treatment: Inplace of dissecting the nervous patient, could the diagnoseis be treated with an injection into the patent's appendix: Some penicillin? Some `Anesthetic with gentle non-corrosive acids to dissolve the CaCO3 with some antibiotics to heal the infected inflammation' In some cases?
Please show me where such surgeries have been performed on nervous 'patients' who believed they had swallowed egg-shell. By the way chickens eat egg-shells every day.
I swallowed a handful of glass, and the doctor told me to "sleep it off". 
@moderator: Sorry! I pressed the 'report' button on accident.
@moderator: Sorry! I pressed the 'report' button on accident.
Could kidney stones and Gall-Bladder stones be gently dissolved based on their substance composition (presumably some type of calcification build up)
Could chemical additives be designed to prevent/limit such calcium based stones in kidneys and gall-bladder without affecting bones
(the previous poster ingestion wont dissolve, however a solution of hf could frost his joke whilst soaking though his skin damaging his bones)
(However he `meant' `asort of sleep' with your mouth off joke.)
Could chemical additives be designed to prevent/limit such calcium based stones in kidneys and gall-bladder without affecting bones
(the previous poster ingestion wont dissolve, however a solution of hf could frost his joke whilst soaking though his skin damaging his bones)
(However he `meant' `asort of sleep' with your mouth off joke.)
[QUOTE] . Could kidney stones be dissolved based on their chemical composition?[QUOTE] The answer is yes. Small stones identified earlier are dissolved. Much though is done to prevent their formation. Patient immobilized for months on end e.g. Those on skin or skeletal traction to allow union of fractured bones stand a risk therefore measures are taken early. One way to prevent long stay in the surgical or orthopaedic ward is to opt for internal fixation.
kidney stone is a serious disease , and we must be take seriously ,but there aren't any effective treatment , if you have , please tell me !
Kidney stones do have effective treatments, and have had so for decades.
The medical treatments are not much fun and not Star Trek Doctor Magic, nor should you expect that.
The medical treatments are not much fun and not Star Trek Doctor Magic, nor should you expect that.
Hello
I talked to a doctor about my anxiety and depression issues, and recommended anti-anxiety and depression medication.
Thanks!
I talked to a doctor about my anxiety and depression issues, and recommended anti-anxiety and depression medication.
Thanks!
QUOTE (rpenner+Jul 8 2010, 04:39 AM)
Kidney stones do have effective treatments, and have had so for decades.
The medical treatments are not much fun and not Star Trek Doctor Magic, nor should you expect that.
Assuming that the same quality of answer was given in the context of one of the physical sections - I am afraid that You as a moderator would have to ban yourself - for giving useless and misleading comments and answers. (This section is probably not meant as a section where you are allowed to: "Discuss here the most attractive and mysterious areas. Post here your ideas and thoughts, which might look weird at the moment. Who knows how it's going to be 100 years from now!")
"Kidney stone" is a very very broad palette of conditions - and saying that there exist effective treatments is near to being meaningless - which kind of conditions are you more specifically referring to, and which are the success rates in order to be referred to as "effective" - and which are the medical treatments that you find "effective" -
Ignorance is no sin - and lets hope that the future will demonstrate a lighter attitude when ignorance is being aired in this Forum -
Read or die: "If you do want to supply a medical opinion, then you had better support it with links to neutral medical news sites and/or journal articles of good repute.
These rules are just common sense and common courtesy, enforced with an iron fist."
The medical treatments are not much fun and not Star Trek Doctor Magic, nor should you expect that.
Assuming that the same quality of answer was given in the context of one of the physical sections - I am afraid that You as a moderator would have to ban yourself - for giving useless and misleading comments and answers. (This section is probably not meant as a section where you are allowed to: "Discuss here the most attractive and mysterious areas. Post here your ideas and thoughts, which might look weird at the moment. Who knows how it's going to be 100 years from now!")
"Kidney stone" is a very very broad palette of conditions - and saying that there exist effective treatments is near to being meaningless - which kind of conditions are you more specifically referring to, and which are the success rates in order to be referred to as "effective" - and which are the medical treatments that you find "effective" -
Ignorance is no sin - and lets hope that the future will demonstrate a lighter attitude when ignorance is being aired in this Forum -
Read or die: "If you do want to supply a medical opinion, then you had better support it with links to neutral medical news sites and/or journal articles of good repute.
These rules are just common sense and common courtesy, enforced with an iron fist."
I have just a layman's knowledge of the subject, and yet I could name (or describe) all but two of the treatments on this page. All would have high success rates (in that the stone is physically removed) . The fact that freebase says there is no effective treatment indicates that he is giving (wrong) medical advice in lieu of seeing a doctor, while my claim that there are effective treatments is not only backed up by common knowledge, but by calling them medical treatments is implicitly advice to see a doctor.
http://www.webmd.com/kidney-stones/kidney-...atment-overview
http://www.webmd.com/kidney-stones/kidney-...atment-overview
The following poster's "ignorance" (bukh's poorly thought-out sarcasm) is illustrated in italics:
QUOTE (bukh+Jul 11 2010, 02:53 AM)
"...Ignorance is no sin - and lets hope that the future will demonstrate a lighter attitude when ignorance is being aired in this Forum -...
...Read or die: "If you do want to supply a medical opinion, then you had better support it with links to neutral medical news sites and/or journal articles of good repute...
...These rules are just common sense and common courtesy, enforced with an iron fist..."
No bukh, these rules keep the "ignorants" (those uninformed, yet boisterous) from spouting off "fire!" (ignorant medical BS) in a crowded "theater" (forum), where other "ignorant innocent" (newbies) are lead to believe something which may "harm them physically" (even get them killed).
In this instance, the forum has it's liability protection in place:
Does one see any other possibilities in the moderator's perceived intent?...bukh?
Keith
IMO, Kidney stone is a stone formation disease of the urinary tract - it is not the stone as much as it is the tendency to create stones, that is the disease.
There exists a wide variety of diagnostics and surgical / medical procedures how to get rid of the stone - in order to ameliorate the symptoms of the disease - but there exist not many good and effective treatments to effectively reduce the incidence of stone formation. And the recurrence rate is high.
I see the comment by freebase in this light - and I think it is a valid and relevant comment - and I am all ears if anyone can come up with effective treatments as proposed by rpenner.
This is why I reflected on rpenners post, I find it a very dubious comment to say:
"Kidney stones do have effective treatments, and have had so for decades.
The medical treatments are not much fun and not Star Trek Doctor Magic, nor should you expect that."
From a medical point of view I find freebase as the wise guy and rpenner as the less considerate guy. "Read or die" is specifically formulated by our moderator - for good reasons - and my sarcasm shall be seen in this light -
I have no doubt about our moderators perceived intent - but as I said - to me it could easily be misleading and useless.
Perhaps my cultural background coming from Scandinavia - makes me less prone to believe in the so called "American Disclaimer Circus" - and I am not overtly convinced about the value of telling everyone "to see a doctor"
...Read or die: "If you do want to supply a medical opinion, then you had better support it with links to neutral medical news sites and/or journal articles of good repute...
...These rules are just common sense and common courtesy, enforced with an iron fist..."
No bukh, these rules keep the "ignorants" (those uninformed, yet boisterous) from spouting off "fire!" (ignorant medical BS) in a crowded "theater" (forum), where other "ignorant innocent" (newbies) are lead to believe something which may "harm them physically" (even get them killed).
In this instance, the forum has it's liability protection in place:
QUOTE ((from "terms of use" at bottom right corner of page)+)
"...CONTENT
Physforum.com ordinarily does not review messages before they are posted to its message boards. Opinions expressed on a Physforum message board are those of the message author and not of Physforum.com. Likewise, Physforum.com makes no representations or warranties concerning the truth or falsity of any assertion of fact made by message authors (other than Physforum) on a Physforum.com message board...
...PHYSFORUM.COM SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES YOU MAY SUFFER AS A RESULT OF ANY MESSAGES POSTED BY THIRD PARTIES OR YOU TO ANY PHYSFORUM.COM MESSAGE BOARD.
One like bukh (who evidently finds ignorance a virtue--since they don't find it a sin),
might chortle a sarcastic (unthought-out) reply, such as, "Then why doesn't the forum just let us say what we want. Who cares what happens to those who follow dangerous advise. The forum can't be held liable."
It would not be my place to answer that question, except as I would personally "think it out to mean" (as seems the only possible reason left to rational conclusion):
That PhysForum cares for their readership's health and well-being, of their confidence in viable and accurate information collected here, and their continued return for a source of accurate data...what ever level of IQ allows them to use a link, to reach this site.
Does one see any other possibilities in the moderator's perceived intent?...bukh?
Physforum.com ordinarily does not review messages before they are posted to its message boards. Opinions expressed on a Physforum message board are those of the message author and not of Physforum.com. Likewise, Physforum.com makes no representations or warranties concerning the truth or falsity of any assertion of fact made by message authors (other than Physforum) on a Physforum.com message board...
...PHYSFORUM.COM SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES YOU MAY SUFFER AS A RESULT OF ANY MESSAGES POSTED BY THIRD PARTIES OR YOU TO ANY PHYSFORUM.COM MESSAGE BOARD.
One like bukh (who evidently finds ignorance a virtue--since they don't find it a sin),
might chortle a sarcastic (unthought-out) reply, such as, "Then why doesn't the forum just let us say what we want. Who cares what happens to those who follow dangerous advise. The forum can't be held liable."
It would not be my place to answer that question, except as I would personally "think it out to mean" (as seems the only possible reason left to rational conclusion):
That PhysForum cares for their readership's health and well-being, of their confidence in viable and accurate information collected here, and their continued return for a source of accurate data...what ever level of IQ allows them to use a link, to reach this site.
Does one see any other possibilities in the moderator's perceived intent?...bukh?
QUOTE (keith*+Jul 11 2010, 07:15 PM)
Does one see any other possibilities in the moderator's perceived intent?...bukh?
Keith
IMO, Kidney stone is a stone formation disease of the urinary tract - it is not the stone as much as it is the tendency to create stones, that is the disease.
There exists a wide variety of diagnostics and surgical / medical procedures how to get rid of the stone - in order to ameliorate the symptoms of the disease - but there exist not many good and effective treatments to effectively reduce the incidence of stone formation. And the recurrence rate is high.
I see the comment by freebase in this light - and I think it is a valid and relevant comment - and I am all ears if anyone can come up with effective treatments as proposed by rpenner.
This is why I reflected on rpenners post, I find it a very dubious comment to say:
"Kidney stones do have effective treatments, and have had so for decades.
The medical treatments are not much fun and not Star Trek Doctor Magic, nor should you expect that."
From a medical point of view I find freebase as the wise guy and rpenner as the less considerate guy. "Read or die" is specifically formulated by our moderator - for good reasons - and my sarcasm shall be seen in this light -
I have no doubt about our moderators perceived intent - but as I said - to me it could easily be misleading and useless.
Perhaps my cultural background coming from Scandinavia - makes me less prone to believe in the so called "American Disclaimer Circus" - and I am not overtly convinced about the value of telling everyone "to see a doctor"
QUOTE (bukh+Jul 11 2010, 03:44 PM)
...there exist not many good and effective treatments to effectively reduce the incidence of stone formation...
I see the comment by freebase in this light - a..."effective treatments" as proposed by rpenner....
...This is why I reflected on rpenners post, I find it a very dubious comment to say:
"...treatment..."
...Perhaps my cultural background coming from Scandinavia -...
Define "treatment" for Scandinavian:
Swedish- "behandling"
Finnish- "hoito"
English-"treatment"- cure procedure for disease already contracted.
As opposed to "prevention":
Swedish-"förebyggande"
Finnish-"ehkäisy"
English-"prevention"- health habits to avoid disease from being contracted.
Having enough drinking water in the day (note: we are having this conversation at mid-summer) can prevent the onset of many health issues, including kidney stones.
And lastly, from the National Institute of Health:
"...Your doctor may ask you to eat more of some foods and to cut back on other foods. For example, if you have a uric acid stone, your doctor may ask you to eat less meat, because meat breaks down to make uric acid.
If you are prone to forming calcium oxalate stones, you may need to limit foods that are high in oxalate. These foods include rhubarb, beets, spinach, and chocolate..."
I see the comment by freebase in this light - a..."effective treatments" as proposed by rpenner....
...This is why I reflected on rpenners post, I find it a very dubious comment to say:
"...treatment..."
...Perhaps my cultural background coming from Scandinavia -...
Define "treatment" for Scandinavian:
Swedish- "behandling"
Finnish- "hoito"
English-"treatment"- cure procedure for disease already contracted.
As opposed to "prevention":
Swedish-"förebyggande"
Finnish-"ehkäisy"
English-"prevention"- health habits to avoid disease from being contracted.
Having enough drinking water in the day (note: we are having this conversation at mid-summer) can prevent the onset of many health issues, including kidney stones.
And lastly, from the National Institute of Health:
"...Your doctor may ask you to eat more of some foods and to cut back on other foods. For example, if you have a uric acid stone, your doctor may ask you to eat less meat, because meat breaks down to make uric acid.
If you are prone to forming calcium oxalate stones, you may need to limit foods that are high in oxalate. These foods include rhubarb, beets, spinach, and chocolate..."
QUOTE (bukh+)
"...I am not overtly convinced about the value of telling everyone "to see a doctor..."
About as much as you seemly are not overtly convinced about the value of doing a little research on your own. Sinking in there a little, airhead?
About as much as you seemly are not overtly convinced about the value of doing a little research on your own. Sinking in there a little, airhead?
Being a layman, I can't tell a uric acid stone from a calcium oxalate stone -- especially before the stone has passed. I would suggest you go to some sort of trained professional for the distinction. Oh, wait. Aren't doctors exactly that type of trained professional, even in Scandinavia?
Obviously not everybody is a fan of rpenner. This is O.K as long as it's on academic matters backed by sound researched arguments. But when it's fired by rank envy it is just embarrassing. To say the least.
Pharmaceutical Companies have much incommon with Tablet Companies.
Sell it! don’t smell it!, the product is irrelevant, pitch the produce, make as much money from third party misrepresentational testimonials, deceptive claims
Tablet Companies pitch produce to sound the best, to look the best, contracting the buyer to a 3 year fixed plan to prevent say a lap top fan from ditching their super-hyped produce when they begin to notice the glitches. Those glitch/side-effects in both industries are down played with deliberate misinformation to make as much profits as possible from the buyer locked into legal contract course which they have to complete before free without penalties clauses. Tablet Companies with flaws foot the blame to a miteglowsoftware glitch. Then design misinformation/glamorous patches to cover up the flaws in the product
Pharmaceutical Companies design just as many side-effects `invalid medicautions’ as much as noside-effect `valid medicautions’
Pharmaceutical Companies claim all medications have some side-effects if taken incorrectly. They deliberately claim some glitches `in the basis of production’, lead to with produce inferior quality, but cheaper so hey; Sell it! Don’t smell it! Beat your cash register tills, That’ll….Huh? Buy it, because you’ll never get better, it a bargan.
GSK associated with avandia will be shown as the beginning cover-ups exposed (Just as `Beep***E sort of cover-ups’ are being exposed in the Gulf Gulf) of massive biological-anatomical damage caused by Pharmaceutical Companies produce side-effect)
Pharmaceutical Companies do their own substance trials, the misrepresent side-effect as diseases, If they damage your liver function with their produce, they would say you are genetically prone to developing diabetes.
[Moderator: Suspended 10 days for paranoid claims without evidence. In case you missed it the very next post after you started this thread was for evidence to support your claims, so you aren't acting as part of the community.]
Sell it! don’t smell it!, the product is irrelevant, pitch the produce, make as much money from third party misrepresentational testimonials, deceptive claims
Tablet Companies pitch produce to sound the best, to look the best, contracting the buyer to a 3 year fixed plan to prevent say a lap top fan from ditching their super-hyped produce when they begin to notice the glitches. Those glitch/side-effects in both industries are down played with deliberate misinformation to make as much profits as possible from the buyer locked into legal contract course which they have to complete before free without penalties clauses. Tablet Companies with flaws foot the blame to a miteglowsoftware glitch. Then design misinformation/glamorous patches to cover up the flaws in the product
Pharmaceutical Companies design just as many side-effects `invalid medicautions’ as much as noside-effect `valid medicautions’
Pharmaceutical Companies claim all medications have some side-effects if taken incorrectly. They deliberately claim some glitches `in the basis of production’, lead to with produce inferior quality, but cheaper so hey; Sell it! Don’t smell it! Beat your cash register tills, That’ll….Huh? Buy it, because you’ll never get better, it a bargan.
GSK associated with avandia will be shown as the beginning cover-ups exposed (Just as `Beep***E sort of cover-ups’ are being exposed in the Gulf Gulf) of massive biological-anatomical damage caused by Pharmaceutical Companies produce side-effect)
Pharmaceutical Companies do their own substance trials, the misrepresent side-effect as diseases, If they damage your liver function with their produce, they would say you are genetically prone to developing diabetes.
[Moderator: Suspended 10 days for paranoid claims without evidence. In case you missed it the very next post after you started this thread was for evidence to support your claims, so you aren't acting as part of the community.]
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.