HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: basturk@nebin.cica.fr (Erol Basturk)
Newsgroups: sci.med.occupational
Subject: Nearsightness. Solutions
Date: 11 Sep 92 20:57:50 GMT
Organization: Telecom Paris, France

There is mainly 3 ways of considering nearsightness.

1) Wearing of glasses or contact lenses
 This seems not to correct nearsightness at all, but on the contrary, tends to
 make myopia go worst, up to a stable situation. Sometimes, it just goes on
 worst and worst up to blindness.

2) Cornea surgery
 When this stabilization is reached, cornea surgery is then a solution to
 fix the problem, and then get rid of glasses or contact lenses

3) Alternative methods.
 There is a numerous amount of studies which have been made on the eyes.
 The point 1) and 2) are mainly proposed by classical medicine, with 3) is
 been proposed by optometrist or ophtalmologist who have tried to go a little
 bit further than glasses or surgery.
 These studies have been used to developp a few technics in order to remove
 eyesight problems such as myopia. Books have been printed and instituts on the
 subject have been open.
 Myopia removal is a rather big subject, but referring to all this litterature,
 it's seems really possible to reduce significantely myopia.




-- 
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
 Erol Basturk                                       
 Student, computer networks and telecommunications 
 Marniere 71, CH-2068 HAUTERIVE ; Tel. [++4438] 33 66 81
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
From: wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: wisdom teeth removal
Date: 7 Sep 92 18:11:54 GMT
Organization: Alpha Science Computer Network, Denver, Co.

In article <AedCCUy00WB2M6FqMG@andrew.cmu.edu| lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Lawrence Curcio) writes:
|
|A dental surgeon once confided to me that he and his colleagues get
|about 80% of their revenue from wisdom tooth extraction. Now THAT'S a
|piece of wisdom for you. I admit that health care professionals are not
|the only professionals (or people, for that matter) who would like to
|see their incomes increase, and this point has been made in this very
|group. That fact does not make it immoral for the patient to look out
|for his/her own best interests as well.

That actually makes me feel better. 80% from wisdom tooth extraction
means that there is 20% revenue from oral cancer treatment, gum 
disease treatment, and useful teeth extraction.

-- 
Bruce Watson (wats@scicom)  Tumbra, Zorkovick; Sparkula zoom krackadomando.  
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: NLP-Discussion
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 23:12:51 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


Some here, in an attempt at self-justification suggest that science is
normally argumentative.

Not in the way those are speaking here. The arguments in science are
conducted according to a set of rules of civilized discourse, and
the nature of some language and attacks here would be laughed out
of the scientific community.

That some use such rhetoric, and then justify it in the above fashion
shows that they don't know the first thing about scientific discourse.

Check the correspondence columns of Science and of Nature for details.
Acerbic wit and subtle negation are sometimes used. Rude language
and personal attacks are not.
From: doyle+@pitt.edu (Howard R Doyle)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Doctor's hours
Date: 10 Sep 92 19:32:34 GMT
Organization: Pittsburgh Transplant Institute

In article <BuBE9K.9LE@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Rubin Herman) writes:
>
>I am not in any of these categories.  However, I am a consumer of medical
>services, and I perceive what I consider the effect of this type of 
>"training" on the practitioners; regardless of the disclaimers presented
>here, it is next to impossible to find a physician who does not essentially
>practice stimulus-response medicine instead of thinking.  
>


I sometimes wonder if you read your own postings. Being the thinking man
that you are, they must be, no doubt, an endless source of amusement.

_________________________

Howard Doyle
doyle+@pitt.edu
From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Rising health care costs. Was: Mercury in fillings
Date: 8 Sep 92 22:48:25 GMT
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

In article <Bu0M4L.CIr@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>
>What you're saying is that malpractice is the major problem 
>because many doctors believe that malpractice is the major 
>problem.  Yet the fact remains that the cost of liability 

Among other things.  Being sued is extremely unpleasant.  
Every doctor has either been sued or knows someone who
has been sued *unjustly*.  Every doctor.  Every single
doctor.  What I am saying is that this has an effect
on the behavior of every doctor.  More or less effect
depending on the doctor, but I can't think of a single
doctor who hasn't ordered some test because of fear of
being sued who wouldn't have ordered it otherwise (for
example if they lived in Canada).  Ken mentioned the
CT in headache, which is a great example.  It is *extremely*
unusual for me to see a headache patient referred in
without having had a CT (or now, the more expensive
MRI).  In a suit-free environment, (and yes, an environment
where doctors don't own shares of MRI scanners, although
most of my referring physicians don't) probably only
5% of these patients really should be getting a CT or MRI.
The vast bulk of these patients have common, ordinary, migraine
that are so typical that the diagnose is obvious.
For the cost of one MRI, the patient can see me about 30 times,
which is enough to last the average headache patient for
about 20 years.  That is where Consumer Reports has no
idea what is going on.  

>You're skeptical of naive folks who think that doctors are somehow
>involved in some sort of giant, evil conspiracy.  And rightly so.
>Perhaps we should be just as skeptical of folks who think that
>lawyers are responsible for our social ills.   Ralph Nader didn't
>make exploding Pintos, Gordon.  He merely blew the whistle that
>warned consumers of their lethal defects.

Actually, the exploding Pinto stuff was crap too.  Apparently
the latest studies showed that all small cars had the same
rate of explosions.  But it was the Corvair that made Nader
famous, not the Pinto.  I believe that stuff was bogus also.
I didn't say lawyers were responsible for all our social ills.
They are just parasites on the corpse of a bad legal system
for handling civil cases.  Politicians are probably more
responsible, but then they are mostly lawyers, aren't they?
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon." 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Weight loss => arthritis?
Date: 15 Sep 92 22:20:08 GMT
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

In article <auwen.716335811@starman> auwen@convex.com (John David Auwen) writes:
>Since rheumatoid arthritis is an "auto-immune" disease, why do
>some people go along fine and then suddenly come down with it?  
>Is it possible that certain things trigger the immune response?
>
It is not known.  Stress can do so, infection, immunizations, 
lots of things.  Could a radical diet?  Don't know.  I'd
guess it was coincidence, since if it wasn't, diet clinics
would report lots of arthritis starting up in dieters, and they
don't.



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon." 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Weight loss => arthritis?
Date: 15 Sep 92 22:18:04 GMT
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

In article <18toldINN8vu@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> kjell@cse.ucsc.edu (Kjell Post) writes:

>I have.  He found that the sedimentation rate in my blood was 11 times
>higher than normal and then diagnosed it as arthritis.  He now wants me
>to eat Methotrexate.  Needless to say, I am more willing to try alternative 
>treatments first.
>
I'm sure he found more than just an elevated sed rate before prescribing
methotraxate.  This is prescribed for people with serious rheumatologic
disease due to autoimmune reactions.  Any toxins you might have
released from fat cells would be far more likely to retard your
immune system, helping your symptoms of arthritis, rather than
causing it.  But there is no evidence, as I said, that people get
sick from toxic release from fat cells.  If you are crazy enough,
have a fat biopsy and get it analyzed for toxins (although I'll
be damned if I could tell you what toxins to tell them to test for).
That is, if you can find anyone who will humor you with a biopsy.
If you go for the alternative treatments, I hope you won't stick
with them until you suffer permanent damage to joints or other
tissues such as kidneys that can happen with some of these diseases.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon." 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Eric Zorrilla)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Xanax
Date: 11 Sep 92 23:01:30 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <#zvn4x#.strnlght@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:

>I believe that Eric Zorrilla's statement that Freud is rapidly becoming
>a figure of mainly historical interest reflects wish fulfillment
>rather than evidence. Psychoanalytic psychotherapy was alive and
>well, last time I checked.

Alive - perhaps.  It's never been well.

>It is as if a physicist had said that Newton was mainly of historical
>interest, when many of Newton's theories and methods still work
>quite well today.

I think it's more like an astronomer saying that geocentrism and retrograde
motion are still viable theories.


[--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------]
| Eric Zorrilla - Dept. of Psychology  | zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu     |
| University of Pennsylvania           | 3815 Walnut, Philadelphia, PA 19104  |
[--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------]
From: n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Weight loss => arthritis?
Date: 13 Sep 92 21:07:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: henson.1992Sep13.210742.14264
Organization: Western Washington University

kjell@cse.ucsc.edu (Kjell Post) writes:

>I have.  He found that the sedimentation rate in my blood was 11 times
>higher than normal and then diagnosed it as arthritis.  He now wants me
>to eat Methotrexate.  Needless to say, I am more willing to try alternative 
>treatments first.

	Sediment?  What, like sand and mud?   Alternatives like dredging?
What is sedimentation rate in this context?   I've never heard it.

Jim Del Vecchio
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: ohumukin@spectra.com (Kawika Ohumukini)
Subject: Re: Xanax
Organization: Spectragraphics Corporation
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 18:26:57 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.152258.28377@news.eng.convex.com> cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes:
>In article <1992Sep4.185731.8543@equator.com> jod@equator.com (John Setel O'Donnell) writes:
>...
>lots of blather
>...
>
>>(Overall, psychotherapy has a lousy track record precisely because many
>>psychotherapists are also invested in denying parental abuse.  
>
>You know, there's something oddly pathological about this insistence that
>"parental abuse" is the source of all mental illness. It's as though there
>were a vast conspiracy of parents everywhere to abuse their children--and
>an even vaster conspiracy to cover up this "abuse". Yes, even the
>psychiatric profession is in the service of this evil conspiracy--nay, one
>can see that they are the very high priests of this cult of abuse and
>denial. 
>
>I guess part of the motivation to see the world this way comes from a deep
>desire (and need) to be able to claim title to the role of "victim". It's
>sooo "empowering".

Hi,

It may be beneficial to look at it from a different perspective.
All parents, teachers, friends, colleagues have beliefs and values 
that they live by everyday.  These values have levels of importance
that are constantly being shifted.

For example, let's say a parent values Love highly and outrageousness
is low on their list or at least not as high as love.  Suddenly they
are given the opportunity to make a large sum of money for themselves
and their family by doing something outrageous.  Now they may develop 
a belief that by doing this outrageous act they will provide for their
family which cause their family to give them more love.  Is it possible
that they may sacrifice the current level of love for their family in
order to "gain more love" by being outrageous?  Absolutely.

This works in many ways and one of them is that to abuse a child in
that moment the parent may think that by doing this they will give their
child greater discipline and will somehow better their lives and 
"eventually give them more love", crazy right?  Ask any abuser and they
will either deny it or tell you that they were doing it for the childs
benefit.

I am not condoning this only stating that this may happen and I know
of several people that came from an abusive family including mine.

Have a great day!
From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: [Prescription Privileges]
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:29:03 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

In article <88720@netnews.upenn.edu> zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Eric Zorrilla) writes:
>
>Suppose the training was specialized to a particular class of drugs (or
>drugs appropriate for specific DSM-III-R disorders and possible side
>effects).  I agree with the residency requirement, but it seems that
>one to two years of directed schooling could fulfill that role.  It seems
>unreasonable to ask a psychologists to go through a complete MD/PhD curriculum
>enduring rotations which are quite tangential to their real interests
>(e.g., dermatology, ob/gyn).  Clearly, the relatedness of these body systems
>and medications which act on them to psychotropic drugs and the brain are
>necessarily understood, however.
>
I disagree.  One of the more common (and ominous) signs of drug reaction
is a rash.  Some drug rashes are relatively benign.  Others can
rapidly lead to skin sloughage, infection and death.  It helps to
have some idea of which is which.  OB/GYN is a good place to learn
about pregnancy and the effects of various teratogenic drugs on
the fetus when given at various stages of fetal life.  It would be
excellent training even for a psychologist who never gives drugs
because you would get the opportunity to observe the problems of
pregnancy and know what exactly these women go through (although
I suppose being a mother or watching your wife go through it a few
times might help, too.)  

Two years of medical school might suffice, but no class room
situation by itself is sufficient.  The residency (apprenticeship)
is needed because having the book knowledge is far different from
being able to apply it when Mrs. Jones collapses in your office
after a test dose of Elavil.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon." 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: molnar@Bisco.CAnet.CA (Tom Molnar)
Subject: Allopurinol
Organization: UTCS Campus Access
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 15:51:51 GMT


I have a propensity for gout, and as a result, my physician has prescribed
Allopurinol (sp?) tablets.  Apparently this drug will reduce or eliminate the
chance of a gout attack so long as I continue to take them.  I asked him
about the side effects of taking this drug (I assume for the rest of my
life!) and he said he didn't think there were any in a round about
way.  I guess he doesn't really know.  He doesn't think I can stop
taking it. Is anyone familiar with this drug?  Does it have long term side
effects (like reduced kidney function or something)?

Thanks,
Tom
From: n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Acne. What can be done?
Date: 7 Sep 92 17:36:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: henson.1992Sep7.173629.5916
Organization: Western Washington University

karlth@rhi.hi.is (Karl Thoroddsen) writes:

>I have had a acne problem for 8 years, I'm 23 now, and think that nearly
>a decade would be enough to satisfy whoever put this curse on me.  The acnes
>have never been a major problem, but they have always been there and enough is
>enough.  So my question is this:  What can be done?

>Should I stay of sweets?  Eat fruits?  Reduce my in-front-of-monitor worktime?
>Try Sodium-X2341FG?  Wash my face with soap?  Dance naked ontop of Cray
>computer singing 'Off, Off, Off, you vermins'?

>Thanks in advance.

Try Accutane.
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Does masturbation reduce intelligence? (Was Re: Is it correct th
From: Robin.Salmansohn@f715.n273.z1.fidonet.org (Robin Salmansohn)
Date: 1 Sep 92 04:51:27 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:273/715 - Alternative Lifesty, Wyndmoor PA


 To: lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Lawrence Curcio)
 
 LC> A phenomenon first noted at public hangings and 
 LC> later investigated under
 LC> controlled conditions: when a male's brain is deprived of oxygen, an
 LC> erection occurs. 

 LC> Much more familiar phenomenon: The above process works in reverse.
 
Males also have ejaculations if beheaded.
All politicians also have a lack of oxygen to the brain, male or female. 
 
(Controlled conditions????) My data comes from medical medical lore
(A book). Have you been running you own studies? <GRiN>


 

--  
Internet: Robin.Salmansohn@f715.n273.z1.fidonet.org
From: brian@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: the invasion of the NLP droids (was Re: Xanax)
Date: 10 Sep 1992 15:33:25 GMT
Organization: The Avant-Garde of the Now, Ltd.
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

<6=tna=g.strnlght@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>I'm outta here.

And there was great rejoicing...
	- Brian
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: Xanax
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 16:43:24 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


Eric Zorrilla properly corrects me for misspelling his name. As Mark Twain
once said, "I don't care what you say about me as long as you spell
my name right." (from memory).

I am in some difficulty, though, about his comment that "who gives a
damn if we understand how it works as long as we empirically know who
it potentially hurts and who it potentially helps."

I find that very odd coming from someone who signs himself with
an academic label ("Department of Psychology"). Is Eric speaking
personally, or as a scientist/academic? If personally, perhaps
he might wish to remove the academic credit line from such messages.
If as a scientist/academic, then standards in Psychology departments
of universities have changed dramatically since I studied that
subject at MIT.

Is this another effect of multiculturalism in academe?  :-)

David
From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Back Surgery and Alternatives
Date: 11 Sep 92 20:08:46 GMT
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

In article <1992Sep9.212400.6481@zehntel.com> greg@zehntel.com (Greg Boyd) writes:
>My wife suffers from degenerative arthritis in her spine.  We have tried
>several varieties of physical therapy, massage, heat/cold treatments,
>electrical stimulation, and anti-inflammatories, but now find ourselves
>considering surgery.

Before anyone can answer your question, you need to tell us
what kind of surgery is contemplated.  Degenerative arthritis
can lead to spinal stenosis, which is the most common cause
requiring surgery, to which there is no alternative other
than continued progression of the problem.  But when you talk
about "replacing shriveled disks" it is clear that your 
surgeon has not spent enough time with you to inform you
about what is contemplated.  The problem in degenerative arthritis
is not shriveled disks.  There are other problems that require
surgery such as nerve root impingement by osteophytes in degen.
arthritis too.  You need to be more specific, and you really should
address these to a good neurosurgeon.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon." 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: werner@soe.berkeley.edu (John Werner)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Phobias, NLP, etc (was Re: Xanax)
Followup-To: sci.med
Date: 15 Sep 1992 18:07:53 GMT
Organization: UC Berkeley School of Education
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: tol7mac19.soe.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Sep15.032257.19732@spdcc.com>, dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
wrote:
> David, I'm simply lowering myself to your level.  You're not tolerated here
> because _nothing_ you write is useful.  You're a distraction and a waste
> of time.  Now scram.
> [...]
> The sooner you disappear the sooner we'll be finished with this.

Actually, David _is_ useful.  He has inspired me to try to add kill file
support to NewsWatcher, the news reader I use on my Mac.

--
John Werner                         werner@soe.berkeley.edu
UC Berkeley School of Education     510-642-9651
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: NLP a psychoactive drug here?
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 20:22:52 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


I've just returned from reading Sci.psychology, as a result of
a pointer posted here. I note that there is an extended discussion
of aspects of NLP there, and I've seen no name-calling, ad hominem
attacks, or any of the nastiness that's present here. In fact,
I've seen some writers who here occasionally slip into nastiness
behave in a respectful and serious way over there.

I refer not only to some responses to my messages here, but also
to responses to the messages of others here, so the above observation
is neither personal nor specific to conversations I've participated in
here.

Presumably, some who follow Sci.psychology are more well-qualified
to recognize charlatanism in that field than some over here, yet
there hasn't been any formation of a lynch mob there--not even
one ad hominem expert has popped up in the threads I've read there.

I'd be interested in notions about why this is. I have an initial
working hypothesis, which like most such may be inaccurate--it
is that some who give rein to behavior here which reflects their
own situation rather than the substance of the discussion know
(consciously or unconsciously) that over there such behavior
would be spotted instantly as evidence of the problems of the
writer rather than the substance of the discussion. Just a
thought.