waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
In article <1993Apr27.043035.22609@etl.go.jp>, klaus@ipri.go.jp (Klaus Hofmann;(6663)) writes... >I heard that a certain disease (toxoplasmosys?) is transmitted by cats which >can harm the unborn fetus. Does anybody know about it? Is it a problem to  >have a cat in the same apartment?  The disease you are talking about is toxoplasmosis.  It is a protozoan that  lives and multiplies within cells.  In cats, the protozoan multiplies in the intestinal cells and eggs are shed in the cat's feces.  The protozoa can cross the placenta to infect the fetus.  The disease may be asymptomatic after the baby is born, or it may be very severe.  Toxo may cause blindness and mental retardation.  Having a cat in the same apartment should not be a problem; however, pregnant women should not scoop or change the cat's litterbox.  In addition, whoever does empty the litterbox should thoroughly wash his/her hands before handling anything else, especially food.  Information came from _The Merck Manual, 15th Ed._  I hope this information is helpful to you.
I've read that exercise makes the heart pump more blood at a stroke, and that it also makes the heart pumb slower, in order to make up for the greater volume. My Internist, who diagnosed my AV block, slow heart rate and PVC's, told me something different. She says that heart rate is associated with the electrical properties of the hear muscle, not its size. Exercise lowers heart rate and increases stroke volume, but the effects are unrelated except for their common source. The AV block, she asserts, is another electrical effect, which is irreversable - even when exercise is dicontinued. PVC's are also common in runners.   So my EKG puts me in a class with trained athletes and also with heart patients. Isn't that strange, though? Are there any not-so-beneficial aspects to athlete's heart? Is it all good?
L(>  levin@bbn.com (Joel B Levin) writes: L(>  John Badanes wrote: L(>  |JB>  1) Ron...what do YOU consider to be "proper channels"... L(>   L(>  |  I'm glad it caught your eye. That's the purpose of this forum to L(>  | educate those, eager to learn, about the facts of life. That phrase L(>  | is used to bridle the frenzy of all the would-be respondents, who L(>  | otherwise would feel being left out as the proper authorities to be L(>  | consulted on that topic. In short, it means absolutely nothing. L(>   L(>  An apt description of the content of just about all Ron Roth's  L(>  posts to date.  At least there's entertainment value (though it  L(>  is diminishing).       Well, that's easy for *YOU* to say.  All *YOU* have to do is sit       back, soak it all in, try it out on your patients, and then brag      to all your colleagues about that incredibly success rate you're      having all of a sudden...       --Ron--
There's a chiropractor who has a stand in the middle of a shopping mall, offering free examinations.  Part of the process involves a multiple-jointed sensor arm and a computer that says in a computer- sounding voice "digitize left PSIS" "digitize right PSIS" "digitize C7" "please stand with spine in neutral position".  I'm wondering whether this doesn't really measure anything and the computer voice is to impress the victims, or whether it is measuring something that chiropractors think is useful to measure. --  haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet
hbloom@moose.uvm.edu (*Heather*) writes:  >Nutrasweet is a synthetic sweetener a couple thousand times sweeter than >sugar.  Some people are concerned about the chemicals that the  body produces  >when it degrades nutrasweet.  It is thought to form formaldehyde and known to >for methanol in the degredation pathway that the body uses to eliminate  >substances.  The real issue is whether the levels of methanol and formaldehyde >produced are high enough to cause significant damage, as both are toxic to >living cells.  All I can say is that I will not consume it.    >Phenylalanine is >nothing for you to worry about.  It is an amino acid, and everyone uses small >quantities of it for protein synthesis in the body.  Some people have a disease >known as phenylketoneurea, and they are missing the enzyme necessary to  >degrade this compound and eliminate it from the body.  For them, it will  >accumulate in the body, and in high levels this is toxic to growing nerve >cells.  Therefore, it is Only a major problem in young children (until around >age 10 or so) or women who are pregnant and have this disorder.  It used to >be a leading cause of brain damage in infants, but now it can be easily  >detected at birth, and then one must simply avoid comsumption of phenylalanine >as a child, or when pregnant.    >-heather  If I remember rightly PKU syndrome in infants is about 1/1200 ? They lack two genes. And people who lack one gene are supposed to be 1/56 persons? Those with PKU have to avoid naturally occuring phenylalanine. And those who only have one gene and underproduce whatever it is they are supposed to be producing are supposed to be less tolerant of aspartame.   The methol, formaldahyde thing was supposed to occur with heating?
If anyone has any information on this deficiency I would very greatly appreciate a response here or preferably by Email.  All I know at this point is a deficiency can cause myoglobin to be released, and in times of stress and high ambient temperature could cause renal failure. x
In article <1993Mar29.204003.26952@tijc02.uucp> pjs269@tijc02.uucp (Paul Schmidt) writes: >I think it is important to verify all procedures with proper studies to >show their worthiness and risk.  I just read an interesting tidbit that  >80% of the medical treatments are unproven and not based on scientific  >fact.  For example, many treatments of prostate cancer are unproven and >the treatment may be more dangerous than the disease (according to the >article I read.)  Where did you read this?  I don't think this is true.  I think most medical treatments are based on science, although it is difficult to prove anything with certitude.  It is true that there are some things that have just been found "to work", but we have no good explanation for why.  But almost everything does have a scientific rationale.  The most common treatment for prostate cancer is probably hormone therapy.  It has been "proven" to work.  So have radiation and chemotherapy.  What treatments did the article say are not proven?    --  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon."
In article <0fpzY=S00WBOM2Vn1u@andrew.cmu.edu> "Charles D. Nichols" <cn0p+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes: >>From: herzog@sierra.lbl.gov (Hanan Herzog) >>Subject: Discussions on alt.psychoactives >>Date: 20 Apr 1993 19:16:25 GMT >>  >>Could the people discussing recreational drugs such as mj, lsd, mdma, etc., >>take their discussions to alt.drugs? Their discussions will receive greatest >>contribution and readership there. The people interested in strictly >>"smart drugs" (i.e. Nootropics) should post to this group. The two groups >>(alt.drugs & alt.psychoactives) have been used interchangably lately. >>I do think that alt.psychoactives is a deceiving name. alt.psychoactives >>is supposedly the "smart drug" newsgroup according to newsgroup lists on >>the Usenet. Should we establish an alt.nootropics or alt.sdn (smart drugs & >>nutrients)? I have noticed some posts in sci.med.nutrition regarding >>"smart nutrients." We may lower that groups burden as well. > >I beg to disagree with you on this subject.  If I recall correctly, >alt.drugs was being flodded by posts like "how do I grow MJ" "How do I >use a bong?" "wow, man, I just had the coolest trip" etc...  There were >quite a few people out there who were versed in pharmacology and biology >who wanted to discuss centrally active substabces at a higher level >without all the other crap filling the bandwidth.    I would suggest >that you proceed to create a newsgroup dedicated to Nootropics if you >must have one dedicated to them, and leave alt.psychoactives to the >discussion of psychoactives (including nootropics, which are but a small >portion of the realm of centrally active substances).  I was wondering if a group called 'sci.pharmacology' would be relevent. This would be used for a more formal discussion about pharmacological issues (pharmacodynamics, neuropharmacology, etc.)  Just an informal proposal (I don't know anything about the net.politics for adding a newsgroup, etc.)  [more alt.psychoactives stuff deleted]
In article <1993Apr27.182155.23426@oswego.Oswego.EDU>, Harry Matthews writes... >  > I've heard of community swimming pools refered to as PUBLIC URINALS so what > else is going on?      Do you swim nude in a public swimming pool?  :)  I doubt sperm can penetrate swimsuit material, assuming they aren't immediately dispersed by water currents.
Thanks to all those who responded to my original post on this question.  The final diagnosis was Stress.  I did not take her for a chiropractic adjustment. (Rachel receives all her medical care at Keller Army Hospital since she is a military dependant, and the Army does not yet provide chiropractic adjustments as part of its regular health care.)  I am hoping that the arrival of (1) Spring Break, and (2) College Acceptance Letters, will help.  *UNFORTUNATELY* she was wait-listed at the college she most dearly wanted to attend, so it seems as though that stressor may just continue for a while.  :-(  Meanwhile she is going on a camping trip with her religious youth group for spring break, which seems like a good stress-reliever to me.  Thanks again for everybody's help/advice/suggestions/ideas.
[From Kalat, J.W.. (1992):  _Biological Psychology_. Wadsworth Publishing Co. Belmont, CA.  Pg. 219.  Reproduced without permission.]    Digression 6.1:  Miracle Berries and the Modification of Taste Receptors  Although the _miracle berry_, a plant native to West Africa is practically tasteless, it temporarily changes the taste of other substances.  Miracle berries contain a protein, _miraculin_, that modifies sweet receptors in such a way that they can be stimulated by acids (Bartoshuk, Gentile,  Moskowitz, & Meiselman, 1974).  If you ever get a chance to chew a miracle berry (and I do recommend it), for about the next half an hour all acids  (which are normally sour) will taste sweet.  They will continue to taste sour as well.  Miraculin was, for a time, commercially available in the United States as a diet aid.  The idea was that dieters could coat their tongue with a miraculin pill and then eat and drink unsweetened, slightly acidic substances.  Such substances would taste sweet without providing many calories.  A colleague and I once spent an evening experimenting with miracle berries. We drank straight lemon juice, sauerkraut juice, even vinegar.  All tasted extremely sweet.  Somehow we forgot how acidic these substances are.  We  awoke the next day to find our mouths full of ulcers.  [... continued discussion of a couple other taste-altering substances ...]   Refs:    Bartoshuk, L.M., Gentile, R.L., Moskowitz, H.R., & Meiselman, H.L.  (1974):    Sweet taste induced by miracle fruit (_Synsephalum dulcificum_).     _Physiology & Behavior_.  12(6):449-456.   -------------   Anyone ever hear of these things or know where to get them?
I am looking for the email address of the World Health Organization, in particular the address for the Department of Nursing or the Chief Scientist for Nursing: Dr. Miriam Hirschfeld. The snail-mail address I have is the following:      World Health Organization     20 Avenue Appia     1211 Geneva 27     Switzerland  Please respond directly to me. Thank you for your assistance.       ---   elg   ---
In article <jschwimmer.123.735362184@wccnet.wcc.wesleyan.edu> jschwimmer@wccnet.wcc.wesleyan.edu (Josh Schwimmer) writes:     Any opinions on Burzynski's antineoplastons or information about the current     status of his research would be appreciated.  Burzynski's work is not too promising. None of his A-1 through A-5 antineoplastons have been shown to have antineoplastic effects against experimental cancer. The NCI conducted tests of A-2 and A-5 against leukemia in mice, with the result that doses high enough to produce toxic effects in the mice were not effective in inhibiting the growth of the tumor or killing it. (These were in 1983 and 1985)  Burzynski claims that A-10 is the active factor common to all of A-1 and A-5 (something which he has not shown, A-10 has only been extracted from A-2. He also hasn't shown that A-1 through A-5 are actually distinct substances). The NCI conducted a series of tests using A-10 against a standard panel of tumors that included different cell lines from tumors in the following classes: leukemia, non-small-cell and small-cell lung cancer, colon cancer, cancer of the central nervous system, melanoma, ovarian cancer and renal cancer. A-10 exhibited neither growth inhibition nor cytotoxicity at the dose levels tested.  It is necessary to process A-10 since it is not soluble (Burzynski's theory requires soluble agents), but this basically hydrolizes it to PAG (which he calls AS 2.5). PAG is not an information carrying peptide, something which Byrzynski claims is necessary for antineoplastic activity. AS 2.1 (also derived from A-10) is a 4:1 mixture of PA and PAG. PA (also not a peptide) can be purchased at a chemical supply houses for about $0.09 a gram. A-10 is chemically extremely similar to glutithamide and thalidomide, both of which are habit forming and can cause peripheral neuropathy. The nasty effects of thalidomide are widely known. In spite of this similarity, A-10 does not appear to have been tested for it's potential to induce teratogenicity or peripheral neuropathy.  Many of Burzynski's statements about the origin of his theory, early research, past and present support by others for his work have been shown to be untrue.   sdb
Hi.  Does anyone know the possible causes of nasoparynx carcenoma and what are the chances of it being hereditary?  Also, in the advacned cases, what is the general procedure to  reduce the pain the area as it prevents the patient from eating due to the excessive pain of swallowing and even talking?  Thanks.
Probably within 50 years, a new type of eugenics will be possible. Maybe even sooner.  We are now mapping the human genome.  We will then start to work on manipulation of that genome.  Using genetic engineering, we will be able to insert whatever genes we want. No breeding, no "hybrids", etc.  The ethical question is, should we do this?  Should we make a race of disease-free, long-lived, Arnold Schwartzenegger-muscled, supermen?  Even if we can.    --  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon."
>I am 35 and am recovering from a case of Chicken Pox which I contracted >from my 5 year old daughter.  I have quite a few of these little puppies >all over my bod.  At what point am I no longer infectious?  My physician's >office says when they are all scabbed over.  Is this true?  I have been in the same boat as you last year. I've tried four times to send you an email response, but your end doesn't seem to accept my mail? Please let me know if you receive this.  Cheers Nigel
In article <1993Apr26.120417.22328@linus.mitre.org>, gpivar@maestro.mitre.org (Greg Pivarnik) writes: =In article <1993Apr22.211005.21578@scorch.apana.org.au>, bill@scorch.apana.org.au (Bill Dowding) writes: =|> todamhyp@charles.unlv.edu (Brian M. Huey) writes: =|>  =|> >I think that's the correct spelling.. =|> >	I am looking for any information/supplies that will allow =|> >do-it-yourselfers to take Krillean Pictures. I'm thinking =|> >that education suppliers for schools might have a appartus for =|> >sale, but I don't know any of the companies. Any info is greatly =|> >appreciated. =|>  =|> Krillean photography involves taking pictures of minute decapods resident in  =|> the seas surrounding the antarctic. Or pictures taken by them, perhaps. =|>  =|> Bill from oz =|>  = = =Bill, =No flame intended but you're way, way off base. In simple terms Kirilian =photography registers the electromagnetical fields around objects, in simple, =it takes pictures of your aura.  Greg:  Flame definitely intended here.  Bill was making fun of the misspelling.  Go look up the word "krill."  Also, the correct spelling is Kirlian.  It involves taking photographs of corona discharges created by attaching the subject to a high-voltage source, not of some "aura."  It works equally well with inanimate objects. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL
In article <1993Mar25.085526.914@news.wesleyan.edu>, RGINZBERG@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Ruth Ginzberg) writes: |>  |> But I'll be damned, his "rights" to be sick & to fail to treat his disease & to |> spread it all over the place were, indeed preserved.  Happy?  Several years ago I tried to commit a patient who was growing Salmonella out of his stool, blood, and an open ulcer for treatment. The idea was that the guy was a walking public health risk, and that forcing him to receive IV antibiotics for a few days was in the public interest. I will make a long story short by saying that the judge laughed at my idea, yelled at me for wasting his time, and let the guy go.  I found out that tuberculosis appears to be the only MEDICAL (as oppsed to psychiatric) condition that one can be committed for, and this is because very specific laws were enacted many years ago regarding tb. I am certain these vary from state to state.  Any legal experts out there to help us on this?
According to a previous poster, one should seek a doctor's assistance for injections. But what about Sumatriptin [sp?]? Doesn't one have to inject oneself immediately upon the onset of a migraine?
In article <1993Apr15.161112.21772@cs.rochester.edu>, fulk@cs.rochester.edu (Mark Fulk) writes:  |> I don't think "extra-scientific" is a very useful phrase in a discussion |> of the boundaries of science, except as a proposed definiens.  Extra-rational |> is a better phrase.  In fact, there are quite a number of well-known cases |> of extra-rational considerations driving science in a useful direction.  Yeah, but the problem with holding up the "extra-rational" examples as exemplars, or as refutations of well founded methodology, is that you run smack up against such unuseful directions as Lysenko.  Such "extra- rational" cases are curiosities -- not guides to methodology.
This is to followup my previous reply on this topic, which it has been pointed out to me might have been dangerously misleading in two spots.  1.  I stated that psychotherapy (meaning talking therapy and so on) was used      to treat Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, which though sometimes true is      misleading.  It is not often found effective, particularly by itself.     Primary treatment today usually consists at least in part of drug     therapy.  The most current theories of this condition attribute      it to more to biological causes than psychological, in places where this     distinction becomes important.  2.  I mentioned that the DSM-IIIR mentions 'impulses' as a possible  	diagnostic marker.  However, this might look like something 	people associate with psychotic conditions, uncontrollable or 	unpredictable behaviors, which is NOT the case with OCD.   	One of the diagnostic criteria of OCD is that the individual 	can and does suppress some of their 'impulses,' although they 	are an unending source of anxiety.   	The obsessive thoughts and ritualistic actions usually associated with  	OCD are most frequently very mundane and predictable, closer to 	a superstitious nature than a dangerous nature for the most part.  	Some references (one non-technical and several technical) 	that someone was kind enough to supply for me 	but was unable to post themself :  |"The boy who couldn't stop washing" by judith rapaport.   ***  	(technical refs) :  |	pharmacotherapy of o-c disorder |	donna m jermain and lynn crismon |	pharmacotherapy 1990; 10(3):175-198  |	epidemiology of ocd |	seteven a rasmussen and jane eisen |	j clin psychiatry 1990;51(2, suppl.):10-13  |	the waking nightmare: an overview of ocd |	judith l rapoport |	j clin psychiatry 1990; 51(11, suppl.):25-28  |	absence of placebo response in ocd |	matig r mavissakalian, bruce jones, stephen olson |	j nerv ment disease 1990 vol 178 no. 4  	And thanks very much to those who supplied constructive   	criticism to my first post on OCD.  I hope this helps clarify 	the parts that were misleading.  						kind regards,
In article <1ravpeINNah4@gap.caltech.edu> ken@isis.cns.caltech.edu  (Ken Miller) writes: >So, if you have any evidence *against* the hypothesis --- for example, >controlled double-blind studies showing that the anti-fungals don't do any >better than sugar water --- then let's hear it.  If you don't, then what we >have is anecdotal and uncontrolled evidence on one side, and abject >disbelief on the other.  I don't have any evidence against water from Lourdes curing MS -- I'm sure there is anecdotal evidence that it does.  Do you really think that in the absence of a double-blind study I should be indifferent to the hypothesis that water from Lourdes cures MS?  For what it's worth, I know of only one double blind study of Nystatin for "candida hypersensitivity syndrome."  It was published in the  New England Journal (I think 1990) and showed no benefit on systemic symptoms (though I think it reduced vaginal yeast infections, not surprisingly).  As I recall, the yeast crowd had some major objections to the study, though I don't remember what they were.
Laser printers often emit ozone (which smells sort of like Clorox). Adequate ventilation is recommended.
I was just wondering if exercises specific to particular regions of the body (such as thighs) will basically only tone the thighs, or if fat from other parts of the body (such as breasts) would be affected just as much.
In article <C67G01.2J1@efi.com>, alanm@efi.com (Alan Morgan) writes: -| In article <C65oIL.436@vuse.vanderbilt.edu>  -|   alex@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (Alexander P. Zijdenbos) writes: -| Okay.  Name one single effect that Kirlian photography gives that -| can't be explained by corona discharge.  Dozens of very funny postings to sci.image.processing  [of which this may not be one :-].
In article <C5Mv3v.2o5@world.std.com> rsilver@world.std.com (Richard Silver) writes: > >Some recent postings remind me that I had read about risks  >associated with the barbecuing of foods, namely that carcinogens  >are generated. Is this a valid concern? If so, is it a function  >of the smoke or the elevated temperatures? Is it a function of  >the cooking elements, wood or charcoal vs. lava rocks? I wish  >to know more. Thanks.      From THE TUFTS UNIVERSITY GUIDE TO TOTAL NUTRITION: Stanley Gershoff,     Ph.D., Dean of Tufts University School of Nutrition; HarperPerennial, 1991    (ISBN #0-06-272007-4):  	"The greatest hazard of barbecuing is that the cook will not use 	 enough caution and get burned.  Some people suggest that the 	 barbecuing itself is dangerous, because the smoke, which is  	 absorbed by the meat, contains benzopyrene, which, in its pure form, 	 has been known to cause cancer in laboratory animals.  However, 	 in order to experience the same results, people would have to 	 consume unrealistically large quantities of barbecued meat at a 	 time."
In article <1993Apr24.162351.4408@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, elg@silver.lcs.mit.edu (Elizabeth Glaser) writes: > I am looking for the email address of the World Health Organization, > in particular the address for the Department of Nursing or the Chief > Scientist for Nursing: Dr. Miriam Hirschfeld. The snail-mail address I > have is the following: > >     World Health Organization >     20 Avenue Appia >     1211 Geneva 27 >     Switzerland  The domain address of the WHO is:  who.arcom.ch So try sending email to  postmaster@who.arcom.ch  Josh backon@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL