HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Starting an alternative medicine newsgroup
Date: 4 Oct 92 15:53:11 GMT
Reply-To: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

In article <BvEv2z.Fx2@cmptrc.lonestar.org> neal@cmptrc.lonestar.org (Neal Howard) writes:
>
>Since the discussions of medicine and health care can get so diversified
>so quickly, wouldn't it make sense to make "med" a category of its own?
>i.e. "med.cardiology", "med.orthopedics", "med.home-remedies", "med.voodoo",
>"med.general", "med.politics",  "med.sci", "med.NOT", etc. What do y'all
>think?

That would require major surgery to the net structure, I think, and
so is not feasable.  Also, what if one speciality has no representive
on the net?  Quacks could reign there with no counter.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "I have given you an argument; I am not obliged
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  to supply you with an understanding." -S.Johnson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: exudnw@exu.ericsson.se (Dave Williams)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Alternatives to Beconase, Vancenase
Date: 2 Oct 92 02:02:00 GMT
Reply-To: exudnw@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems
X-Disclaimer: This article was posted by a user at Ericsson in North America.
              The opinions expressed are strictly those of the user and
              not necessarily those of Ericsson.

In article 14223@spdcc.com, dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>In article <BvGH8n.CuD@news.cso.uiuc.edu> magdi@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Magdi N Azer) writes:
>>I have heard that there are alternatives to Beconase and Vancenase.  One such
>>alternative in Nasalchrone (or NasalChrome?).  Can anyone give me info on this
>>and pointa me to the appropriate literature.  Thank you
>
>Nasalcrom is a nasal preparation of cromolyn sodium, a drug which
>appears to prevent mast cells from releasing their various nasties
>(histamine, other autacoids) in response to exposure to allergens.
>
>It can be quite useful, though I get the sense that more people get
>relief from using a topical corticosteroid like Beconase.
>
>-- 
>Steve Dyer
>dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer

There is also Nasalide, a nasal topical form of the steroid Flunisolide.
Also available as Aerobid for asthma. Very potent.

---
= exudnw@exu.ericsson.se                                                =
= David Williams              "You can't win, you can't break even,     =
= Ericsson Network Systems     and you can't quit"                      =
= Richardson, TX 75081                                  my opinions...  =
Xref: sparky sci.med:18020 rec.scuba:5265
From: km@cs.pitt.edu (Ken Mitchum)
Newsgroups: sci.med,rec.scuba
Subject: Re: Diving and cardiac problems?
Date: 27 Sep 92 00:53:58 GMT
Reply-To: km@cs.pitt.edu (Ken Mitchum)
Followup-To: sci.med
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

In article <1992Sep23.221817.16087@nosc.mil> derion@VAX309.NOSC.MIL writes:
>In article <1992Sep22.181535.20902@watson.ibm.com>, rlehman@watson.ibm.com (Robert C. Lehman) writes:

>THere is an "opening" between the right and left artia in fetuses
>and in a fair percentage of the general population called a "patent
>foramen ovale".  In some people this opening never closes.

The incidence of an ANATOMICAL patent foramen ovale (one that you
can pass a probe through at autopsy) is fairly high. However, the
incidence of FUNCTIONAL patent foramen ovale is much lower, as
demonstrated by the low incidence of "paradoxical emboli" (clots
from the legs and pelvis which bypass the lungs, go through the
patent foramen ovale to the left side circulation and cause strokes
or other embolic event. I don't know the exact numbers, and I
certainly don't know the incidence of paradoxical air emboli in
scuba divers. You would have to know these numbers to figure out
whether cardiac catheterization in potential scuba divers should
be done on a routine basis. This is an expensive procedure with a
definite morbidity and mortality that should not be done without
good reason.

In most people, small air emboli cause no problems. This is
usually discovered early in medical training when a medical student
or intern doesn't clear a syringe completely and injects a small
amount of air in a vein. The student is usually panic stricken,
based on information presented in his basic science courses, as
he assumes he has just killed the patient! The patient does just
fine. It actually takes quite a bolus of air to do damage, 
although I'm not sure Agatha Christie knew about this. A functionally
patent foramen ovale would make this more dangerous.

There used to be some radiologic based studies in which CO2
was injected to help measure ventricluar size, I believe. The
CO2 was resorbed and caused no problems.

This is an interesting area, and I certainly am not an expert in it.
This is what sci.med should be for. Anyone else out there have some
information?

-km
From: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: low thyroid levels, but not hypothyroid
Date: 29 Sep 92 21:24:47 GMT
Reply-To: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Distribution: sci
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

In article <BONNIE.92Sep28130759@aigyptos.nmsu.edu> bonnie@nmsu.edu (Bonnie Hargrave) writes:
>
>My doctor says my thyroid levels (T2 and T3, I believe she said) are
>low, but that the TSH level (the signal from the brain to the thyroid)
>is normal, which means I do _not_ have a hypothyroid condition.
>
>Then she explained that with true hypothyroids, the brain sends
>excessive signals to the thyroid in an effort to stimulate it.  This
>part makes sense to me.
>
>But can someone explain to me why, if the brain part of me is working,
>the thyroid gland part of me is not up to par?  My doctor seems to
>have no knowledge of these workings -- either your thyroid produces or
>it doesn't and no other factors affect it.  Sounds bogus to me.
>

Your doctor is right.  The right level of thyroid hormone varies
from person to person.  Your brain is a far better judge of what
it should be than any test.  If the TSH is normal, your brain
doesn't want you to make any more thyroid and therefore giving
you extra thyroid would be a mistake.  The thyroid does not just
"produce or it doesn't"  it is completely controlled by the brain,
unless it goes wild and starts making too much, in which case you
have to have treatment.  If it fails to produce, the brain will
increase the TSH to astronomical levels trying the spur the thyroid
on.  That's the signal that you need to be given thyroid pills.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "I have given you an argument; I am not obliged
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  to supply you with an understanding." -S.Johnson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: kja@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (krista.j.anderson)
Subject: Re: Treatment for Mononucleosis
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 18:01:18 GMT

In article <1992Oct02.145341.129903@watson.ibm.com>, yozzo@watson.ibm.com (Ralph Yozzo) writes:
> I've been told that the only treatment for mononucleosis is
> plenty of rest in bed.  That is, no medicine is prescribed.
> 
> Is this true?

When I had mono as a college freshman, the doctor gave me some
little white pills that he said were a "miracle drug".  I never did 
find out what they were but suspect they were some kind of steroid.

They did do the trick.  Instead of having to stop and rest 2 times
while climbing a flight of stairs, I was able to bound up several
flights 2 steps at a time.  I felt so terrific, I believed I was
well and quit taking the pills only to have the symptoms return in
full force.  And then when they ran out he wouldn't give me any
more.  It was a couple of years after having that disease before I
felt like myself again, but the pills did help with the worst time
and I was able to complete the semester.

(That doctor got into trouble in later years for prescribing
psychoactive drugs for the students, so I guess it's possible that
the pills were amphetamines.  I have subsequently taken cortisone
and didn't feel the euphoria I did with the mono pills.)
-- 
Krista Anderson, att!ihlpf!krista
From: Michael.Bohl@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Michael Bohl)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: MRI
Date: 5 Oct 92 00:33:29 GMT
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service

In article <1992Oct2.025320.21757@news.columbia.edu> stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Glenn Stone) writes:
>Someone with knowledge/experience with MRI on the lower back please
>tell me: what kinds of problems is MRI best at revealing?  What
>problems does it not reveal?
>
>Is there very much variation in the cost of an MRI (I'm in Manhattan)?
>
>Finally, why is the lower back such a disaster area?  (I know the
>answer to that one: we're basically jerry-rigged quadrupeds).
>
>
>
	I've performed MRI's since 1987 and have performed thousands of
exams.  While I'm no doctor I may be able to shed some light on your
questions.  The easy ones first, The cost is quite likely to vary within a
few hundred dollars.  I would guess that 90% of all MRI's will fall in the
range of $900 to $1200, depending on your location and some protocol
dependent charges like extra series or IV contrast.  As far as we being
prone to low back injuries, many causes come to my mind as I'm sure come
to yours.  Improper care of the back would be the catch-all phrase and
covers most of the injuries (lifting, posture, loss of muscle strength,
etc.) But then again, you could have done everything right and still had
trouble.  Your first question is difficult to answer.  MRI is a fantastic
tool and is VERY good at detecting bulging or herniated disks between the
vertebrae.  It is excellent at detecting tumors, bleeding, abnormal fluid
collections, and many other abnormalities.  It can detect many bony
abnormalities, but MRI is not quite so adept at resolving very fine bony
fractures, but this is usually not a concern with lower spine exams.  If
you have low back pain or buttocks, hip, leg, or foot numbness or
tingling, then see your doctor about getting an MRI.  It is absolutely the
easiest and best imaging tool available.


--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Cost Concerns in Med School?
Organization: WP Group
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 20:11:06 GMT

From article <BvEFtJ.94J@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, by hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin):
> I would be in favor of abolishing the stupid idea that the manufacturer
> of widgets is responsible for any problems in using the widgets in ways
> the manufacturer does not claim are safe.  In return for this protection,
> the manufacturer must make the relative safety and effectiveness information
> available to the users.
> 
> It is essential that incompetent government bureaucrats, and under the 
> present setup there will be few who are not, do not dictate what people
> can and cannot do.  Everything has risks and benefits, and those taking
> sports medicine were probably more knowledgeable about what they were
> doing than the regulators.  The increased cost of medically approved
> products is at least partly due to the stupidities enforced by the
> regulators.  With the movement to essentially public payment of at
> least a substantial part of medical costs, it is us taxpayers and
> consumers who are stuck with the bill.

I've spent the whole week reviewing the testimony of TMJ patients
whose natural joints had been replaced in the mid-80's by artificial
appliances coated with Teflon.  Thanks to a grandfather clause in the
Pure Food and Drug Amendment, these devices weren't subject to 
FDA approval.  They were misrepresented to the patients from the 
beginning by a small group of doctors who owned a financial stake 
in the manufacturing company, Vitek, Inc. in Houston, Texas.  
What's worse, Vitek failed to properly notify the FDA, 
participating oral surgeons, and patients after evidence of 
adverse effects began to pour in.  Vitek subsequently declared 
bankruptcy and the president of the company (Dr Charles Homsey) 
is now alleged to be in Switzerland, living on former profits.  
If FDA authority were curtailed across the board, what would 
prevent this sort of scenario from becoming commonplace?  

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
From: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: NATURAL ANTI-cancer Remedies
Date: 4 Oct 92 14:46:56 GMT
Reply-To: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

Could we get this crap off sci.med.  It has nothing to do with
science.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "I have given you an argument; I am not obliged
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  to supply you with an understanding." -S.Johnson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Neurological curio
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:08:38 GMT
Reply-To: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

In article <1992Sep23.190359.19316@kestrel.edu> king@reasoning.com (Dick King) writes:
>
>I recall reading that nerves can heal at a millimeter or so per day, which is
>why i expected to get back sensation after a couple of weeks, but what has been
>happening that has taken over a year?  Has new wiring been run all the way from
>the spine or the brain?

Possibly from the spinal cord, but never the brain.  If the axon
died all the way back to the spinal ganglion, it could take a couple
of years to grow back.  The axons from the brain do not die from
peripheral nerve injuries.  But I don't know what took so long in
your case.  I think that it does take longer than you would expect
from the axon growth rate in most cases.  I've had two operations
in the past and I found the same thing, full reinnervation taking up
to two years distal to the cut.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "I have given you an argument; I am not obliged
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  to supply you with an understanding." -S.Johnson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Subject: FDA (was Re: Cost Concerns in Med School?)
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 22:05:24 GMT

In article <BvIExn.A7r@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>The FDA wasn't created to protect people from themselves, Herman.  Its
>purpose, from day one, was to protect consumers from incompetent and/or
>unscrupulous purveyors of foods and drugs.  If you'd like to abolish
>the FDA and replace it with super-stringent labeling requirements, that's
>fine with me, but to simply abolish it, while relying on the benevolence
>of product manufacturers, wouldn't be a wise idea.

In fact, the original rationale for so-called "legend drugs", i.e.,
those whose label must include the legend "Caution: Federal law
prohibits dispensing without prescription", was that it was impossible
for such drugs to include a label on the packaging which would allow a
consumer to use the product safely without supervision.

As Russell says, the FDA's role has always been as a regulator of those
who manufacture and sell drugs, and does not control the consumer directly.
That was the idea at least.  You don't have to be one of these anti-FDA nuts
to realize that history and precedent has changed this somewhat.  Just look
at their regulations on the import of drugs by private individuals from
outside the US.  Or the fact that some states classify all Rx-only drugs as
"controlled substances".  That's right, folks, in Massachusetts, you
could be arrested for posessing a few high-dose ibuprofen if you got them
from a friend and they weren't prescribed for you.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
From: userGR25@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (unknown)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Test
Date: 1 Oct 92 03:39:24 GMT
Organization: MTS Univ of Alberta

This is a test
From: rind@binoc.bih.harvard.edu (David Rind)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Pap smear results
Date: 26 Sep 92 17:31:14 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Beth Israel Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston Mass., USA

In article <1992Sep23.214925.13747@nosc.mil> derion@VAX309.NOSC.MIL writes:
>In article <1992Sep16.140113.29954@relay.nswc.navy.mil>,
 kcables@k30b.nswc.navy.mil (k30b) writes: 
>>	I was just informed that my Pap smear came back with a Class IV
>>result.  My doctor wants me to have an orthoscopic biopsy done to check
>>for pre-cancer cells.
>Before you panic or get treated, I'd suggest getting a second and
>even third smear done-- by another doctor/lab.  Yours could, I say
>COULD, be a false positive.

This is terrible advice.  A Pap smear is a screening test.  A second
or third Pap smear could be normal, simply having failed to pick up
exisiting cancer cells.  Cervical cancer is virtually 100% curable if
caught early.

Once you have a significantly abnormal Pap smear, the next step is
to have the cervix examined through a magnifying device called a
colposcope, and to have any abnormal areas biopsied.  If no abnormal
areas are seen, then multiple random biopsies are usually taken.

-- 
David Rind
rind@binoc.bih.harvard.edu
From: km@cs.pitt.edu (Ken Mitchum)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: "Problem Patient"
Date: 3 Oct 92 13:02:18 GMT
Reply-To: km@cs.pitt.edu (Ken Mitchum)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

In article <1992Oct1.235834.19874@athena.cs.uga.edu> mcovingt@aisun3.ai.uga.edu (Michael Covington) writes:
>In article <16692@pitt.UUCP> geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks) writes:
>
>>This is really minor compared to say, a patient who has
>>pseudoseizures (phoney seizures that mimic epilepsy).
>
>Phoney seizures?
>
>Sounds like a story worth telling...

Pseudoseizures are not at all uncommon. They are one of the
greatest attention-getting mechanisms among some patients.

I have had only a couple of patients with Munchaussen's syndrome,
but they are the absolute worst patients to take care of - worse than
people who somaticize. Munchaussen's patients go from hospital
to hospital, faking complaints and screwing up tests, and become
quite indignant when confronted with what they are doing. They
can easily spend half a million of your tax dollars a year
getting worked up for God knows what, all totally unnecessary.

It takes some courage to put this diagnosis on the chart, but
once you do it, you can save a lot of people down the road some
real grief. And some money.

 -km
From: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Yet another Lyme question
Date: 29 Sep 92 17:33:49 GMT
Reply-To: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

In article <1992Sep28.182852.21540@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu> odp@ldgo.columbia.edu (carl brenner) writes:

>	Afterthought: you know anything about Treponema? Do syphilis
>spirochetes hang out in CSF during "dormant" periods?
>
The answer is yes, although they aren't dormant.  Higher doses of
penicillin are needed to cure syphillis in the nervous system
(not just the CSF) than systemically, due to lack of penetration
of penicillin though the blood brain barrier.  However, there
has yet to be discovered a strain of syphilis that can't be wiped
out with sufficient antibiotic.  The third generation cephalosporins
also penetrate the bloodbrain barrier quite well.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "I have given you an argument; I am not obliged
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  to supply you with an understanding." -S.Johnson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Glenn Stone)
Subject: MRI
Reply-To: stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Glenn Stone)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 02:53:20 GMT

Someone with knowledge/experience with MRI on the lower back please
tell me: what kinds of problems is MRI best at revealing?  What
problems does it not reveal?

Is there very much variation in the cost of an MRI (I'm in Manhattan)?

Finally, why is the lower back such a disaster area?  (I know the
answer to that one: we're basically jerry-rigged quadrupeds).



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Glenn Davis Stone                                BITNET: stone@cunixf
  Columbia University            INTERNET: stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.med,sci.bio
From: wade@ucs.ubc.ca (Doug Wade)
Subject: Re: Eliminating the need to sleep?
Organization: University Computing Services, UBC, Canada
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 18:39:42 GMT

NOVA (PBS science documentary) had an episode several years ago
on the topic of sleep. They even interviewed a guy who as I remember
NEVER slept. Sorry I don't remember exactly when this was produced.
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: women in science
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 06:58:29 GMT

stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Glenn Stone) writes:

>I do have some numbers, from the May 1991 Science.  Data are from an
>NSF survey of employed PhD's.

>                % white    % female

>psychology         95.4        36.0
>medical            88.9        29.1
>biology            89.8        23.4
>social science     90.7        21.2
>computer sci       86.0        11.6
>chemistry          86.6        10.7
>math               88.7         8.7
>environment        91.8         8.4
>agriculture        92.8         7.7
>physics/astr       89.8         4.7
>engineering        79.1         3.1

>Psychology is the whitest and "femalest" field, but it's hard to know
>what to make of this in a discussion of women in "science" --
>psychology comprises everything from neurobiology to Jung.

>It doesn't look to me like the orthodox view, as expressed by the
>usually heterodox Ken Mitchell, that girls get their interest in
>science drummed out of them, holds up very well.  Why would we drum
>out interest in physics and astronomy, but not interest in medicine
>and biology?

	Looking at the above, "science" does not seem well-defined.
Perhaps we'd do well to differentiate between the "hard" sciences
and the "social" sciences."  If one does that, the gaps become
more understandable.  What causes this?   I'm not sure what makes
for the jump between the "hard" computer science and the "soft"
social science, but I'd be a fool not to recognize it, or that there
might be more than one cause for the difference.

<Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 |"I see angels on Ariels in leather and>
<z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu | chrome, Swooping down from heaven to >
<viking@iastate.edu      | carry me home."   ---    R. Thompson >
<ISU thinks I need more education, which they provide for a fee.>