Biomedical Engineering

Oh you tease monkey...
What are the other two?
Goldfish can't eat you?
_{Masturbation doesn't cause blindness}
Del

Love to address the vaccine issue. One of the big pharma companies (this was in the mainstream news BTW) got busted peddling a dangerous vaccine that was more likely to cause the disease than prevent it. "According to two Merck scientists who filed a False Claims Act complaint in 2010 -- a complaint which has just now been unsealed -- vaccine manufacturer Merck knowingly falsified its mumps vaccine test data, spiked blood samples with animal antibodies, sold a vaccine that actually promoted mumps and measles outbreaks, and ripped off governments and consumers who bought the vaccine thinking it was "95% effective." When you are talking about a multi-billion dollar industry, a lot of govt whitewashing goes on. There is a reason a goodly number of naturopathic physicians strongly discourage their patients from getting vaccinations. Given recent advancements in science regarding the mechanism for which immunity is transferred from mother to baby in breast milk, work in that area should be rigorously pursued. Be a lot safer than the present system. I recall reading in Reader's Digest when I was a teenager in the 70s a study of I believe whooping cough. A study on the effectiveness of the vaccine revealed that those who got the initial vaccination and the two boosters was almost guaranteed to get the disease. Those who didn't get any vaccination were least likely to get the disease, and those who got the initial vaccination and a booster fell in between those two groups. Sorry, I remain EXTREMELY skeptical of vaccines and in spite of the whitewash RE: autism, I don't buy it. I don't think all those parents are wrong about what they observed.

Home made vaccines work just fine.

Based on an old wives tale and modern genetics.

Wart removal used to be done by making it bleed and rubbing it with a bit of beef stake. Then carry out a ceremony.

It works because the beef introduces a bit of bovine DNA into the wart while the induced bleeding has weakened its protective firewall that keeps the immune system at bay.

I tried it however i did not waste a bit of expensive beef. I used the dregs from an empty milk bottle as this also contains other immune system programming DNA for the calf. The area round the wart went red as the immune cells came rolling in and the wart was gone within 3 days and the red patch in a week or so.

I declared the ceremony redundant.

It worked a treat.

What I want to learn more about...

Can the recent discovery of the Higgs boson lead to better control over personal body mass?

(I am in the market for some extra Higgs bosons, if some of you out there feel you have some to spare...)

Hallo Chelsey. Here are my assessments by#/

1,. Asinine. Park your phone over your well developed and padded Gluteus Maximus, and forget about the details.

2,. Vaccines are, and will be subiect for debate for generations. No relief from there.

3,.Plastic bottles? I do not know.

Sorry, my friend. That is the best I came up with.

Have a pleasant vacation.

1,. Asinine. Park your phone over your well developed and padded Gluteus Maximus, and forget about the details.

This is quite a compelling argument. I'd love to hear more.

We are in agreement with each other and have been for a long time. It was unclear which side of the argument you were referring to as asinine. As crazy as it is, I still keep hearing news and seeing articles pop up everywhere in concern, or even warning, about safety or health hazards from cell phones. It's pretty depressing how easily misled people can be.

"No problem, simply boring repetition." Isn't everything?

Only concern I ever had with cell phone radiation concerns the rumor that it could be contributing to honey bee CCD (colony collapse disorder). Not because cell phone radiation is definitely the cause (studies have been inconclusive as far as I know), but because if it is, fixing the problem might be difficult.

Oh, thanks for reminding. I love that one!

An english college did that "study". It simply put turned on and turned off phones on beehives, then concluded, whatever. No double blind, no single blind, no check on methodology. The people of an ElectroMagnetism website used it as class 101 how not to set up any experiment, for a long time.

By the way, lately the finger is pointed two ways. A pesticide, that causes memory failure in you and me. It likely causes the same in bees. Remember, that C. Elegans, a tiny worm a favorite of genetic experimenters has about 40% identical genes to you and me. I would guess it is the same with bees. Basic cell functions, including memory.

The other finger points to the common varroe mites, a pest for bees. More exactly the viruses in them. It was common to find some 120 different viruses in them. The collapse of that to 1 or 2 coincides with the collapse of the hives.

Firm conclusion? I have none.

But, a spokesperson for chemical free, organic beekeepers proudly announced, that their, not chemically and workloadwise stressed bees show none of the problems.

Draw your own guesses and conclusions.

You won't be so sceptical when the giant mutant bees come lookin' for ya'
Just 'cos it was a cr4p naive test, doesn't mean that EM doesn't screw their navigation or memory.
Here's a better test carefully designed and approved by KrisDels^TM finest squirrels.
Try finding the jar of honey in the kitchen cupboard whilst talking to your wife on the phone.
Del

An extra factor has been determined in the CCD problem: mono crop agriculture systems.

The bees living in these rural areas are affected enourmously by the lack of flowers over the full year, resulting in not sufficient food for the colony as they need to consume the winter storage already in summer.

In cities the colonies are much healtier: humans keeping flower on their balconies.

The same system is wiping out the butterflies also, which is good as they create hurricains (at least those in the amazon region)

Monoculture is unhealthy for more than just bees and butterflies. It tends to ruin the soil. This was one of the main issues addressed back in the 1800's by George Washington Carver, and why we have peanut butter today...

What about monosodium glutamate (MSG)? It sure makes some foods taste better. But is it safe?

Have some fun today,

PAPADOC

RMFR

I'll live my way until Willie sings.

Cell phones make you stupid.

And whatever you do, never try to drive, text (or even talk)and _masturbate all at the same time.

O.K., I'll bite... on #1, at least. A response to that one will be long enough. And I think the reasoning can be applied to all three myths

The phrasing "causes brain cancer" and, thus, the argumentation over cell phone usage is simplistic. And it's like telling someone who loves chocolate that the sugar in it will cause diabetes. The debate becomes emotional because so many of us use the devices and find them awfully convenient. (Thank goodness I never got those breast implants and got attached to their effect on those around me. )

If you look at medical commentary on cancer, as well heart disease, diabetes, and other major health problems, recommendations encompass lifestyle -- a whole range of activities and variables. It would be more accurate to ask the question, "Does cell phone radiation contribute to an increased risk of developing a brain tumor."

I've posted a link to a talk I saw on BookTV (C-SPAN2 on weekends and holidays) by Dr. Devra Davis, at the publication of her book"Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family." The video is 1hr, 04 min. and I don't anticipate that readers here will invest that amount of time. I also don't expect anyone to go out and buy the book -- I didn't. But anytime I am deciding on whether a book or any product is worth pursuing, I hope there are reviews. Then I look at the 1 and 2-star reviews. That helps me cut to the chase in my decision. (On Amazon I read any comments that have been made, regarding the low review, for rebuttals.) If I then feel a need to read 4 and 5-star reviews I do so.

One comment (Soapbox Person) to the review by Austin Martin (1-star review) had a couple of links that I followed. I'll not include them in the body of this post, but they are worth a look. The first link is about "counter" myths. The second link addresses whole body radiation effects; not just cell phone radiation.

That is germane to the point I'm making. Most of us live in a sea of man-made electromagnetic radiation -- just one factor affecting bodily processes. Do studies try to eliminate the background we all live in, but which wasn't present 100 years ago? Wouldn't that be the ideal control group? The reason any of us may be at greater risk of getting some form of cancer is the sum of all our activities and our genetic predisposition. It's the may that isn't easily refuted. Living leads to dying. From that perspective we may as well give up discussing any component parts that may be more harmful than others, no?

To each his own. Others cell phone use doesn't affect my health. I just don't buy the simplistic argument and statement that cell phone radiation is totally benign. Kept in the context of total lifestyle, there is evidence that cell phone radiation can affect brain activity, and therefore, be a contributing factor to ??? ... to an altered bodily process.

Is the alteration harmful? Dr. Volkow's comments about that are here. Who knows for sure? She certainly is willing to admit not knowing. I think that bodily response is individual and part of the larger framework of lifestyle. But common sense tells me it could be. Repeated activity with the hands can lead to callouses -- the body's response to the irritation of the skin. Who knows what response the body may or may not be giving to the slight amount of radiation to the brain tissue repeatedly exposed? Or when just the right cell goes haywire into the tipping point of the body not responding to stop it? By itself, cell phone radiation may, indeed, lack the ability to cause brain cancer. But combined with genetics and overall lifestyle, it could be a tipping point.

Bottom line: None of us knows for sure. So why make unequivocal statements from either side of the argument?

Because the harm which can come from possibly inappropriate knee jerk reactions, thats why. To use your cell phone example, how many 911 calls came in from cell phones, and how many lives were saved because of those calls. We would then balance those numbers against the possibility of some vague worry which might prevent you from allowing your kids to have cell phones. (emotional argument triggers used here are totally intentional!!!)

One must be careful ask the right questions. The guy walking along the train tracks in Ottawa last August got hit by train while texting. Should we blame the cell phone or his environment? I think it was an eye dee ten tee error, but who am I to judge. Well, how about the guy who was texting while driving then? Is the cell phone at fault? What could you do about it if you could?

Me, I have a more live and let live attitude. But as an instructor (teacher) I feel obliged to ensure I get vaccinations, and because people look up to me AS an instructor, it behooves me to not act stupid. Its hard sometimes...grin!

I agree about knee-jerk. Unequivocal is what I disagree with. That's why I said "contribute to risk." Almost all health risk is statistical. How can anyone say unequivocally, that cell phone radiation has never contributed to a case of cancer, brain in particular. That's my point. In reacting to the fear-mongering that some indulge in, to me, it is a similar overreaction to say the opposite. That was my main point.

The guy who got hit by a train can mostly blame his brain.... well, not anymore. Same for texting while driving. I'm not sure I see those as relevant to what I am talking about. Most bodily processes happen without us consciously following them or consciously controlling them. If they are altered, we, likewise, may not know the effect in real time. Even a cold infection has a lag time before it manifests.

I'm not sure what I would do if I were in your situation of feeling a need to set an example concerning vaccination. Vaccinations have statistically low odds of serious effects. But to say there is zero risk would be unequivocal -- and wrong. I don't take the Flu shot, for instance. I've only had the Flu once in the last ~5 years... maybe even further back. Long enough that I can't say when the second time back was. Am I to assume you mean setting a bad example as "stupid?" Or do you mean you think, in general, that it would be stupid to decline a vaccination? You can certainly argue that vaccinations limit the number of cases in any year. But that is also subject to the "road not taken" question. For any individual they would never know if they could have avoided the Flu without a vaccination unless they didn't take it and also didn't get the Flu. A pretty exhaustive discussion is at a CDC link. There is enough wiggle room in that discussion that no decision, whether pro or con should be ridiculed. Because I have a non-traditional medical outlook, I think prevention can also be achieved without vaccination. (And here, I could digress to say health and disease prevention should be each individual's responsibility.)

Live and let live... yes, definitely!

(And revisiting stupid... as long as one knows s/he doesn't know everything s/he will be ripe for decreasing the odds of behaving that way.)

Yes, but.

I concur with your emotions, and the memories of our elders. It tracks with my memories. But the story is more complicated. There were 2 competing polio vaccines. One a (hopefully) attenuated virus with a (hopefully) diminished virulence, the other containing fragments. Both the safety and efficacy was firmly different.

That subiect is still an ongoing debate, and rightly so. What we do not know about the immune system, and in particular, why an infection transfers long term protection to you is a mystery. And why the fragmented pieces in a vaccine have a hit and miss short term effect. They really ought to do the iob.

So, the matter of immunity is very much an open issue for research, and for the rest of us. Only when the debate is open, there is progress possible.

Any attempt to shut it down on an either this or that (based on outdated info) form might serve financial or ideological interests, but not us.

A tidbit for you to ruminate on. I recently looked into how a virus DNA (a few hundred to a thousand nucleotides) function. After all, such short ones can be decoded by hand in a single afternoon. Well - surprise - the real professionals do not know.

Let me repeat it. They do not know. Contemplate on it, especially for vaccines!

...few hundred to a thousand...?

GA,

You pin the issue right where the problem is: our generation has forgotten how is was before.

On top of this some companies/organisations are more and more scrupulous in how to make money. The Mexican flu hysteria was a good example on how to manipulate the press to make more money.

Recently it turned out that the banks are playing a really problem game now which is pushing whole countries over the edge, including that people are dying due the fact that public services had to be closed due shortage in money. Just to gain that few percent of higher interest on the national depth of a country, who has no choice than paying.

Imagine that the US should stop extinguishing the wild fires as the money required is needed to pay the bonus of a bank in France. Don't laugh with it: it is reality in Greece.

The Face-book stock sale was another good example in how trustful the rating offices are.

Sorry for the delay in responding. I don't do CR4 on weekends... and on work days, usually around lunch time and at the end of the day.

Yes, I think we agree on most things -- above all, on the live and let live sentiment.

I would respectfully disagree with what seems an unequivocal statement about no cure for polio. (Oh no, here he goes again.) You might have seen the links I've posted before about Dr. Fredrick Klenner's "work/experience" in the late '40s and early '50s using intravenous vitamin C (sodium ascorbate) to "cure" polio. And the newer LypoSpheric (nano-based) vitamin C, which was, anecdotally, a factor in saving Allan Smith's life after contracting Swine Flu and being in an induced coma for weeks. I won't repost the links as they are easy enough to find.

The problem with substantiating his (Dr. Klenner's) experience is there is little incentive (research funding) for it. Vitamin C has a controversial history. Linus Pauling, a distinguished researcher was convinced of it's promise on several health fronts. Studies which show promise don't usually get coverage in mainstream media. Studies which seem to show a lack of effectiveness do, more often. Conspiracy theories aside, I would invite anyone to look at his usage and experience, look at the book, "Curing the Incurable," by Dr. Thomas Levy, a cardiologist, who has consolidated the scattered research that has been done confirming Dr. Klenner's experience and Dr. Pauling's extrapolation of his own research. But reading is not enough. Theories are a dime a dozen. Experiential, or evidence based medicine is the current test stone. I would cite Allan Smith's case as an excellent anecdotal case. Anecdotal shouldn't be considered false or pseudo such that the experience is dismissed out of hand. When a doctor "experiments" with little used (or almost nonexistent use) and sees positive results he notes it and it remains as just that -- case notes. The more positive results he sees, the more he is likely to repeat the experiment of using it with the next patient presenting the same "disease." This was Dr. Klenner's experience.

I have my own experiences with vitamin C, as well as other nutrients, in affecting disease and disease symptoms. All the disbelief in the world around me can't negate what I have experienced in my own experimentation with these substances and my health. There are enough positive anecdotal stories with intravenous vitamin C (and an accumulating number with LypoSpheric C) that it becomes likely, using common sense, to expect a large enough percentage of other human bodies (since our systems all operate the same, with the qualifier of genetic influences) will likely respond similarly. Even man-made pharmaceuticals only work in a percentage of cases. Doctors sometimes go through several similar types to try to find the right one for any particular patient. I don't think that makes people believe that the drugs are ineffective. They understand, like infomercial fine print, "Your results may vary." Pharmaceutical anti-depressants have been so unsuccessful that we now have Abilify, to improve their action. Few seem to care about those "failures."

In today's world everyone wants "proof." Vitamin C is about as benign a substance as there could be for personal experimentation. Dr. Levy went to New Zealand and gave an informative talk about the history of vitamin C research. I think it is on YouTube, for anyone interested in it. Since it was in response to the Allan Smith "case," I would suggest anyone interested, in looking at that 17 minute video to understand the context of his talk.

By the way, I don't consider your post a "rant" at all. Developing a framework is more how I see it. It's why many of my posts are long. One can call them rants. That's fine by me. But I don't think of them that way. This is somewhat a problem with modern technological protocol. We're supposed to keep things short and succinct. If we enjoy and want thoughtful discussion that is many times contradictory.

I appreciate your thoughtfulness. We can surely agree to disagree.

My Auntie is no longer in an Iron Lung. She was probably one of the few who were in it for more than a few weeks, though I understand there are still some folks stuck in these chambers after more than eighty years. New muscle fibers eventually grew beside the damaged ones. This apparently happens with or without therapy. The new fibres are not as strong, nor as long lived as the old ones, and she suffers terribly from weakness and pain as a result even today.

The rest of the family got the live but weakened virus, and I think one got a very mild case of polio as a result. (They don't use that live virus anymore I hear. But it is the most effective one.) Most people who get polio show no symptoms, ever! But they are carriers. So I can see the anectodal "evidence" piling up...."can't hit me, I smoke and that killed the virus", and other typical "personal stories". (I actually heard that one! insert eye roll here)

So I shrug. Maybe the smoke DID kill the virus, or the vitamine C, or maybe the mile and a half run every morning. Who knows. It would take a large and very elaborate battery of double blind studies to find out though.

Anyway...I have said my piece. I am not a doctor. Just a blacksmith. The lead fumes from the bullets I melt and cast in my forge kill everything from the common cold to flies on the wall. And the bullets kill anything else I want dead. Thats my story, and I am sticking to it. Polio....ha!...doesn't have a chance!

Doctor? Me neither. But I do find health and nutrition a very interesting subject.

All the best for your good health in the future!

" Bottom line: None of us knows for sure. So why make unequivocal statement from either side of the argument".

Well, some of us do know some things, and cocksure to be sure about them. Gravity is down, Sunset is in the west, the Sun is a fusion furnace.... A cellphone with 10 milliWatts average will cause anything only after Hell freezes over. For perennial worrywarts, park it over over the Gluteus Maximus, and use an earpiece. Or better, do not use it at all.

And yes, we live in a sea of radiation - oh my! The biggest of it is you yourself with about 300 Watts radiated from you all the time. Get on a treadmill, and it can be 1000Watts!!! So is Sunlight too!!! Now follow me closely: YOU are the Kilowatt radiator, your phone is the milliWatts radiator. The second is among engineers 100000 times smaller. That is darn sure in my book. Somewhere in the neighborhood of E=mc², or Newton's laws.

It would frost me, if a designer of a Boeing airplane would say something equivocal about the strenght of the airplane.

It would frost me hearing an eqivocation of the surgeon, which leg of mine he should work over.

------------------------------------------------

Everybody is entitled to their opinions. Nobody is entitled to their facts.

I understand. My reference about making unequivocal statements referred specifically to the cell phone issue, not gravity and other easily demonstrable phenomena. I also conceded that it may not cause cancer, but might contribute. Without knowing all the conditions that influence or provide the right environment for cancer to occur, it's pretty difficult to say we know them all. But medical researchers have identified some which they feel confident in advising on (such as diet, smoking, exercise... all the things that contribute to health, or not). And the implication is they are additive. That was the point I was attempting to make.

I'm not sure statistical evidence (which is what is used to counter the claim that it does or might) proves or disproves anything. One analysis of nervous system cancers shows a marked increase in the number of cases. I don't think cancer is a communicable disease, so there must be a reason for the increase. I wouldn't point the finger at any one factor. But there are factors that, common sense tells me, are likely additive. The discussion of cell phone radiation in the analysis cited above paints a non-conclusive picture of the studies done so far.

You didn't specify the body radiation frequency or frequencies, but I assume it would be in the infrared, mostly. Not very similar frequencies. So I wouldn't compare them as apples to apples.

At this point, there is not enough conclusive data to prove a link. Since I view it as potentially a contributing factor, I think it equally hard to disprove no effect at all. (What I meant by unequivocal.) It might be borderline, affecting some while others not. That gets back to the perspective of cumulative factors.

Each of us does make a choice as you suggest we do. I'm not trying to prove cause, just suggesting influence can't be disproved yet. As the linked analysis and discussion states, we just don't know enough to say for sure about several factors as causative or contributing. We don't totally understand the genesis of brain cancer.

In the end, this is a discussion. I'm not making "Chicken Little" statements.

Well i looked around and spotted that there are analogue TV transmitters that have been radiating thousands of whats of power for 50 years. London has one that is pretty close to housing and nobody has worried about it in all that time. Phones use the next band up and are on a much lower power.

It is a myth.

Thanks for the excellent note describing virus families.

Earlier this year I was pumping the brains of some PhD biochemists. Two of them are my daghter and son-in-law. The subiect was vaccine research and production. In particular efficacy, and long term effect (or the lack of it) on the immune system. The concensus was, that they do not know enough to properly predict it without testing their concoctions. While the start of the discussion was centered on the flu vaccine, the discussion was wide ranging enough.

Today, it takes 5-6months to get production amounts (for the flu). Craig Venter stated recently, that he intends to get vaccines in days. Bold statement, but he has a stellar track record to support it.

For further reading in Wikipedia:

HPV vaccine (Human papilloma virus vaccination)

Vaccine controversies

The HPV has its share in the downscaling its efficacy, and long term effects as much was learned since its introduction, as I recall.

In all the cases cited, somebody is making either financial or political gain. That in itself should be enough to ring alarm bells.

Last time I checked, Wakefield had moved to Austin, Texas, and re-invented himself. Brit hospitals banned cellphones for a while, but eventually conceded that the rational was faulty (not that I advocate yabbering down a cellphone in a public place such as a hospital).

Supermarkets exist to sell fat in various forms. In a double-whammy, they also manage to sell 'healthy options' (since when could a ready meal be called healthy ?).

The vitamin market is huge, and largely supported by the worried-well. Supplements certainly have a place, but not for the majority. The UK went nuts recently people buying stuff like Omega <whatever> and megadose vitamins to make their kids brighter. Spending time with their kids would be more productive. Something inside us all yearns for a 'magic pill' to cure anything, and the corporations know this.

In part we must blame ourselves as consumers. We now have generations of kids who cannot identify a vegetable, much less cook it.If somebody trips over, they're more likely to call an abulance chasing lawyer than dust themself off and carry on.

Can we have a user-badge for 'grumpy old gits' ?

More interests - I don't know if CR4 have covered it recently, but Leukaemia and electricity pylons has been a hot topic of debate for many years over here.