HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tony@compunet.uucp (tony)
Subject: Question re The Doctors Book of Home Remedies
Summary: Advice sought on how to approach an MD re self-care.
Keywords: remedies, book, research, consultation, question, help
Organization: CompuNet Systems, Louisville KY (502-231-5908 & 5910)
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 10:23:36 GMT

        I have been reading The Doctors Book of Home Remedies.  For
about 1/10 of the home remedies, it advises check with your doctor
first.   Well, there are dozens of these remedies I would like to try,
yet how do I present them all to my doctor?  Do I schedule 10 office
appointments over the course of ten weeks so he will have time to talk
to me about each remedy (diet change, exercise change, vitamin therapy,
etc.) or do I write a long letter in advance of my office visit
explaining what I want to discuss so he can plan to have time to talk to
me about each concern.
        It occurs to me, my doctor may be unfamiliar with some methods
reported in The Doctors Book of Home Remedies.  If he disapproves solely
due to lack of personal knowledge -- one man can't be expected to keep
up with all current findings in every field of medicine --  should I
anticipate this possibility and do a thorough literature search and
attach the appropriate medical journal/textbook literature with my
letter?   I am not a doctor (obviously), but I have occasion to use
Medline (either online via the National Library of Medicine's Elhill
system, or on Silver Platter cd's) several times per week and I use the
med library frequently... so I wonder if it would be appropriate to
provide my doctor with the information necessary to make an educated
decision?
        Well, to make this quick <g>, all I really want to know is how I
should I best approach my doctor when I have lots of personal health
questions and want full honest and learned answers, while at the same
time I have reason to believe my Family Practitioner may not know all
the answers to all my questions.  [Reason to believe:  The Doctors Book
of Home Remedies presents therapies that a doctor with a single
specialty may be unqualified to answer.  The book just says, "Ask your
doctor."  My feeling is that the book is in error.  It should say, "Ask
your OB/GYN. Ask your proctologist.  Ask your neurologist. Ask your
endocrinologist. Ask your internal medical physician.  Ask your
oncologist (God Forbid :) ).  Ask your rehab medicine physician. Ask
your orthopedist.  Ask your hematologist.  Ask your family practitioner.
Ask your GP.  Etc.  --  Is it just assumed (do you think) that the
book's authors' just assume a reader will know to ask the correct
specialist?]   Well... I don't want to overwhelm my doctor with all
these questions I have, so I am just curious if I should try the book's
suggestions without asking anyone, or should I ask my FP and just
anticipate he will refer me to the correct specialist for questions he
is not qualified to answer?
 
                                -  Tony Safina
 
                                compunet!tony@uunet.UU.NET

Newsgroups: sci.med
From: gasman1@netcom.com (David A. Silva)
Subject: Re: Physician's Incomes
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 21:24:07 GMT

Robert Blandford (rrb@corona.CSS.GOV) wrote:
: the median US wage, the median doctor's salary, and the median specialists
: salary from 1970 to present.  The median US wage was flat, the doctor's
: salary had increased by a factor of 3 and the specialist's salary by
: a factor of 10.

Robert
I do not know how they came to that conclusion. I am a subspecialist (
anesthesiologist ), started anesthesia training in '83, finished in '86.
I can tell you that overall salaries have *decreased* in my field
markedly since '83 - mostly due to serious payment reductions by both
government coverage as well as non "super premium" health insurance.
Anesthesiologists still make a good living, but I am getting tired of
the media using physicians as the economic scapegoat. We have been under
government and private sector constraints in an ever increasing fashion
for nearly 10 years.... Who's policing the insurance companies, which
are rife with the paybacks and other side steps to siphon money which
the public is led to believe is the doctors domain? My biggest laugh was
Time's issue on the deficit in July. The first paragraph has something
paraphrased as:
The 80's..... when doctors were millionaires....
I was a doctor in the 80s, and I am *no* millionaire. In fact to save
money for a transcontinental move, I lived in a small old apartment in
NYC, hardly glamourous, allowing me to pay off educational and other
bills at the same time. I am *not* griping about my situation - I have
chosen how to deal with the realities of my profession - but I am a bit
tired of the warhorse blame the physician ruse which may have been
reality based at some time, but currently not.

David

: >----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: syscrc@pickle.gsu.edu (Randy Carpenter)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: looking for Comp Sys for Dental practices
Keywords: Dental
Date: 8 Jan 93 16:01:18 GMT
Organization: Georgia State University

dabaghi@menusin.inria.fr (Fadi El Dabaghi) writes:

>I am looking for informations about any advanced computerized
>system for dental practices (patient's data, color or b/w graphics
>showing patients history with automatic invoicing, electronic
>appointment list, diagnostics, treatments and periodontal treatments,
>librairies,...). I have a pc (Note Star NP-913, 60 mb mem and a proc
>intel 386dx) running with Dos. Thanks for replying on my email.

There's a company called Mediclaim in Georgia (USA) that offers a package
called DentalWare that I think does most or all of what you are looking
for.  I believe they also have other medical and veterinary software.

      Mediclaim
      (912) 638-0140
      (912) 638-0690 (fax)

Hope this helps.

-- 
===========================================================================
Randy Carpenter                    rcarpent@gsu.edu          % Got a light?
Georgia State University           (404) 651-2648            No match.
Wells Computer Center                                        %
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: kudzu@netcom.com (Michael Sierchio)
Subject: Re: Cellular telephones and brain tumors
Organization: True Love, and Home-Grown Tomatoes
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 17:32:32 GMT

In article <DRAND.93Jan5111703@spinner.osf.org> 
	drand@spinner.osf.org (Douglas S. Rand) writes:

>The power output is in
>the several watt range.  This is pretty low power.  The antenna is
>outside the vehicle,  usually at the rear, with the antenna as high
>as possible.  This reduces exposure as well.

You must not have read the post -- it refers to the hand-held variety
of cellular phone -- which has a max. power output of 1.3 W   The very
reason for the reduced power output (from the 3  Watt max. of the non-
handheld variety) was because of the evidence that supports a causal
link between the devices and brain tumors.  But even a very superficial
analysis shows that a 1 watt handheld delivers many times the dose of
a 3 W car phone with an external antenna.

>There are multitudes of people who have exposure to much higher power
>output of RF in the military (radar and radio operators).... 

I think that the military has pretty low standards for preventing
work-related injury.  Cf. Navy Dive Tables, etc.
-- 
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Michael Sierchio                          1563 Solano Avenue, Suite 123 |
|  kudzu@netcom.com                                Berkeley, CA 94707-2116 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: thuyan@ravel.udel.edu (Thuy-An Hartman)
Subject: Breast implants and Breast Feeding
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 19:53:06 GMT

With Breast implants, I was wondering if someone can still breast feed.  

So, what are the dangers (besides silicone leakage)?

Thanks, Thuy-An
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: tas@pegasus.com (Len Howard)
Subject: Re: Looking for info on abortifacents
Followup-To: sci.med  
Summary: stick with conventional medicine  
Organization: Pegasus,  Honolulu
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 14:01:34 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.144242.599@news.wesleyan.edu> RGINZBERG@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Ruth Ginzberg) writes:
>In <1993Jan8.183821.9039@henson.cc.wwu.edu> n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu writes:
>> dart@symphony.cc.purdue.edu (Dartanyan) writes:
>> >	I need any possible information about publicly available abortifacents
>> >(miscarriage-inducing substances).  Both chemical and herbal substances are
>> >of extreme interest at this point. ... This is a situation in which the
>> >choice lies between the death of a fetus and the death of my wife.
> 
>> 	Did it ever occur to you that the situation might be important
>> enough to merit going to a doctor?  Abortion is legal in the US you know,
>> especialy if the situation is how you describe.
>
>I might add that, contrary to what literary references & ethics texts might
>lead one to believe, this sort of a medical situation (in which one must choose
>between the life of the mother & the life of the fetus) is actually EXTREMELY
>rare.  Furthermore, it does not arise in otherwise perfectly healthy women of
>childbearing age (to the best of my knowledge).  If your wife is so ill that
>pregnancy threatens her life, she should be under a doctor's care ANYWAY, for
>her OWN sake.  Or (as sometimes happens) if she is in danger of being injured
>or killed by someone *else* (because of her pregnancy), then the police should
>be called in to the situation.
>This does not sound, to me, like a situation in which you and your wife ought
>to be messing around with do-it-yourself remedies, without advice, consultation 
>(*in person; not on the NET*), & help of professionals whose experience with
>such matters exceeds yours.  Sorry to be so blunt.
>Ruth Ginzberg <rginzberg@eagle.wesleyan.edu>
>Philosophy Department;Wesleyan University;USA

Sean, I will be equally direct, speaking from the point of view of an
OB doc who is also a charter member of our Hospital Ethics Committee,
and echo Prof. Ginzberg.  Get thee to thy physician, post haste.  This
is NOT something to mess around with at home.
Len Howard MD - tas@pegasus.com

Newsgroups: sci.med
From: mark@st.unocal.com (Mark E. Towfiq)
Subject: Michael Jackson's Skin
Reply-To: mark@st.unocal.com
Organization: Unocal Science & Technology Division, Ca.
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 22:34:09 GMT


How did Michael Jackson make his skin so much lighter?
I was debating over this with my family last night.

-- 
Mark E. Towfiq                           Unocal Corporate Information Services
Phone: (714)693-6740                     5460 E. La Palma Ave.
Internet: mark@st.unocal.COM             Anaheim Hills, Ca 92807
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: dl10696@ehsn4.cen.uiuc.edu (Dat Trieu Le)
Subject: Re: Cellular telephones and brain tumors
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 12:56:16 GMT

dougb@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Bank) writes:

>In article <1993Jan5.173232.4856@netcom.com> kudzu@netcom.com (Michael Sierchio) writes:

>>You must not have read the post -- it refers to the hand-held variety
>>of cellular phone -- which has a max. power output of 1.3 W   The very
>>reason for the reduced power output (from the 3  Watt max. of the non-
>>handheld variety) was because of the evidence that supports a causal
>>link between the devices and brain tumors.  But even a very superficial

>Wrong!!!

>The reason for the reduced power is so that they don't kill the
>battery in 5 minutes.

I think the FCC states that devices outputing more than 7 Watts are
considered hazardous. The maximum hand-held portable ham radio outputs
5 Watts (that I've seen). So, if cellular phones only outputs 1.3 W,
then developing tumors from it would take some time. It could
happen though....
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: hank@well.sf.ca.us (Hank Roberts)
Subject: Re: Peter Breggin, _Toxic Psychiatry_ (Q)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 23:52:28 GMT


I was just admiring how long my original header has persisted unchanged,
even the (Q) at the end.  I started the thread by asking who'd read Peter
Breggin's book and what comments they had.
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Subject: Re: Reliability in medicine and engineering  (was: ... incomes)
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:16:55 GMT

In article <17961@pitt.UUCP> geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks) writes:
>In article <BzroxD.IJ3@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:

>>We need thinkers, and unfortunately the great bulk of today's physicians
>>already have it knocked out of them.  Now Mr. (Dr.?) Nye's proposal would
>>tell physicians that if they go by the book and refuse to think that they
>>are safe, but they are at risk if they deviate from it.  But we have had

>This is not Dr. Nye's proposal, Herman, but that of agencies of the
>US Government.  I think the day of cookbook medicine is coming,
>thanks to the lawyers and bureaucrats.

That WAS included.  We do agree on something, here, and the move to
bureaucratic cost-controls, almost a consequence of our anti-insurance
procedures, is very definitely bringing it on.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
Xref: sparky sci.med:23815 alt.drugs:20865
From: kudzu@netcom.com (Michael Sierchio)
Newsgroups: sci.med,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: RU-486 soon?
Date: 12 Jan 93 03:36:25 GMT
Organization: True Love, and Home-Grown Tomatoes

In article <1993Jan11.192219.10345@spdcc.com> 
	dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:

>In article <1993Jan11.184411.1163@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> 
> aankrom@nyx.cs.du.edu (Anthony Ankrom) writes:
>> Is RU-486 a prostaglandin-type thing? Should we expect to see black-market
>>production of it eventually?
>
>It's a progesterone and glucocorticoid antagonist, and is a steroid itself.

The abortion regimen involves one or two injections of prostaglandin
(B?), given at the physician's office.  This, and the need to verify
(via ultrasound, whatever) that the termination has been successful are
exactly why it will never be a "do it yourself" procedure -- it has
been very much oversold by politically-motivated groups for whom it has
symbolic value.

-- 
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Michael Sierchio                          1563 Solano Avenue, Suite 123 |
|  kudzu@netcom.com                                Berkeley, CA 94707-2116 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: jimkent@well.sf.ca.us (Jim Kent)
Subject: Re: Heating milk in microwave for babies??
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 00:45:58 GMT


<<  assorted warnings about the hot spots in micorwaved milk...

These seem to assume we all have the intelligence of a garden slug.
I think you would almost have to put the bottle in the microwave in the
nursing position to keep from stirring it enough to disperse the hotter
fluid, even if you didn't have sense enough to shake it.
From: turpin@cs.utexas.edu (Russell Turpin)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: Questions about Reynaud's Syndrome
Date: 11 Jan 1993 16:38:53 -0600
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: im4u.cs.utexas.edu

-*----
In article <1993Jan7.131628.17345@news.acns.nwu.edu> dougb@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Bank) writes:
>> As I see it, the problem isn't necessarily that the herbs are dangerous,
>> it is that people *think* they are effective when they are not, causing
>> them to disdain standard, effective, modern medicine.

In article <1993Jan11.201356.6712@island.COM> green@island.COM (Robert Greenstein) writes:
> How about disdaining standard INeffective, modern medicine?

Would you like references to the evidence that, for example,
measles vaccine prevents measles or that various antibiotics 
are effective cures for certain diseases?  

>> Of course, modern treatments have their problems too, but you can't
>> just go shopping around looking for alternatives without first trying
>> standard treatments.  I think that many people interested in 
>> "alternative" medicine do *not* do this, and they run the risk of 
>> delaying proper treatment and endangering lives.

> Sez who? Everytime I post something to this newsgroup, I get deluged
> with demands for "proof". ...

Piddle.  We long ago stopped expecting anything that comes 
close to proof.  Of late, we have just been asking for 
*some* evidence.

> ... So where are you references showing that lives are endangered
> by people who seek alternative medicine? THe fact that a lot of
> people believe this to be so doesn't count.

Since Douglas Bank spoke of risk, without mentioning how much,
his claim is very weak, and is backed by *any* case where a
patient died of something easily treated by standard medical care
while trying out "alternative" health care.  Such cases are
around, but to be fair, patients have also died for want of care
while in the hands of physicians. 

My guess is that it makes only little difference on mortality
rate if one tries "alternative" health care.  Most problems are
self-limiting, most of those that are not will eventually drive
the patient to a real physician even if that is not the patient's
first stop, and some of the rest are fatal regardless of what
treatment the patient seeks.  But this has to remain a guess
because the relevant statistics are not available.  Inevitably,
evaluation of risks of health care modalities turns on evaluation
of treatments. 

Newsgroups: sci.med
From: jwinter@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (winter julia robin)
Subject: Re: What is a Physcian Assistant?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:17:38 GMT
Keywords: physicians' assistant

As a medical student, I've worked with several P.A.'s in training, so I'll
share with you what I know.

P.A. training varies from state to state, but it's often two years post B.S.
or five years post high school.  Physician's assistants behave very much like
nurse practitioners, as far as I've seen.  They examine patients and enter
data into medical records, but any "orders" they write must be co-signed by
an M.D.

Some P.A.'s get additional training, and can earn a very good living with
what seems to be a little less stress (less legal responsibility).  For 
example, most surgery that I've seen is done by a surgeon (M.D.) assisted
by a surgical assistant (who does more than just hold retractors, although
they do a lot of that too).

Politically speaking, it seems that this new profession was devised to increase
the numbers of auxilary health personnel and particularly to attract men who
may not think of themselves as "nurses."  I don't mean to imply that P.A.'s
are nurses, because they have very different responsibilities.  That's my
explanation for why we have both nurse practitioners and P.A.'s.

There's a nation-wide journal for P.A.'s which may be found at a hospital or
medical school near you.  It seems like a good career, if you like the health
field, but aren't keen on 7-10 years of training post-B.S.

Julia Winter, Med Scholar at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana

Newsgroups: sci.med,alt.drugs
From: guru@camelot.bradley.edu (Jerry Whelan)
Subject: RU-486 soon?
Organization: The Smelly Ditch
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 93 09:08:36 GMT

	A friend of mine told me that he had read a recent newspaper article
about RU-486 and the FDA.  He said that within days of Bush's downfall at
the polls, the process for legallizing the use of RU-486 in the USA had
started and that the drug would probably be available within a few months.
	This sounded bogus to me as I had previously heard that the drug
had not even been submitted for FDA testing and thus probably had a four
or five year waiting period before it could get to the market.
	Anyone know some relevant facts here?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
``written by a drunken insane pathological liar''        guru@stasi.bradley.edu
Newsgroups: sci.med
From: russ@pmafire.inel.gov (Russ Brown)
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 18:47:05 GMT
Organization: WINCO
Subject: Re: Cellular telephones and brain tumors
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: usa
Organization: WINCO
Keywords: 

In article <DRAND.93Jan5111703@spinner.osf.org> drand@spinner.osf.org (Douglas S. Rand) writes:
>In article <3390@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> rlp@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Ralph L. Place) writes:
>
>   I heard yesterday on a radio newscast that someone in Florida was suing
>   a cellular telephone company for causing his wife's brain tumor.  He
>   claims that she held the phone and antenna close to her head and the rf
>   (the announcer called it 'microwave') radiation resulted in causing the
>   brain tumor.

Ex ante facto apology to those suffering from (directly or indirectly)
brain tumors.

------

Perhaps the illness had something to do with the urge to use cellular
phones.

:-)
From: oispeggy@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Peggy Brown)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Xanax...what Consumer Reports said...
Date: 8 Jan 93 00:11:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


Due to popular request, here are some QUOTES from the article in 
Consumer Reports magazine, January 1993 edition.

o Xanax is not only the most common treatment for panic attacks, 
  but also the drug most often prescribed for run-of-mill anxiety - 
  the kind that anyone might experience during a rough period in 
  life.  It is now the nation's largest selling psychiatric drug; 
  more than that, it is the fifth most frequently prescribed drug 
  in the US.
o Xanax has fallen short.
o Xanax does have some serious drawbacks - even more than the 
  drugs it was supposed to improve on.
o How did such a flawed drug become a pharmacological superstar?
o Xanax does not represent a remarkable treatment advance so much 
  as a marketing coup.
o Xanax 3 times a day, a standard schedule for panic disorder, 
  find that theyeven have dymptoms as the drug wears off between 
  one dose and the next.
o ...all benzodiazepines cause memory lapses, especially in the 
  elderly.
o ...patients who have used benzodiazepines for years have often 
  suffered falls and heard injuries.
o ...The drug has never been established as effective for more 
  than 4 months.
o Today, a bottle of 100 one-milligram Xanax tablets costs 
  &72.55.  The same amount of generic lorazepam in an equivalent 
  does costs as little as $3.75.
o At the end of the study, there was no significant difference in 
  the average number of panic attacks - or in functioning work, 
  home, and social life - betweeen the people who had been taking 
  Xanax and those who were taking placebos.
o At the end of the 8 weeks, 78 percent of peole taking Xanax 
  were panic-free, complared with 81 percent of those opn 
  imipramine and 75 percent of the people on placebo - virtually 
  identical numbers.
Newsgroups: sci.med