|
|
Post by silverdragon on May 15, 2013 8:45:20 GMT
Medical Myths.
The British Medical Journal has a section on medical myths....
Full Article here... [http://www.bmj.com/content/335/7633/1288
Brief version...
People should drink at least eight glasses of water a day
The complete lack of evidence supporting the recommendation to drink six to eight glasses of water a day is exhaustively catalogued in an invited review by Heinz Valtin in the American Journal of Physiology.
We use only 10% of our brains
They did that one already?....
Hair and fingernails continue to grow after death
Previously debunked as dehydration of the body makes nails LOOK like they have grown
Shaving hair causes it to grow back faster, darker, or coarser
Another common belief is that shaving hair off will cause it to grow back in a darker or coarser form or to grow back faster. It is often reinforced by popular media sources
Strong scientific evidence disproves these claims.
Reading in dim light ruins your eyesight
The majority consensus in ophthalmology, as outlined in a collection of educational material for patients, is that reading in dim light does not damage your eyes.
Eating turkey makes people especially drowsy
The presence of tryptophan in turkey may be the most commonly known fact pertaining to amino acids and food. Scientific evidence shows that tryptophan is involved in sleep and mood control and can cause drowsiness.
Mobile phones create considerable electromagnetic interference in hospitals
In a search by snopes, could not find any cases of death caused by the use of a mobile phone in a hospital or medical facility.
Despite the concerns, there is little evidence.
So are any of there test-worthy....
Not including 10% of the brain use 'cos they did that already.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on May 15, 2013 13:30:35 GMT
They did the turkey myth as well as the 10% of the brain one. I don't think they would touch a the hair and nails one - dead bodies would be in very bad taste to say the least.
The cell phone causing interference myth might be considered a variation of the myth about them causing problems with aircraft - which they tested. Then again using hospital equipment rather than aircraft *might* be considered a viable alternative if they wanted to revisit the basic idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 15, 2013 13:41:41 GMT
6-8 glasses of water a day:
in the fine print: (a glass is considered to be a 6-8 fluid ounce serving, all beverages are included, and a normal healthy person will normally consume this much beverage in the course of the day.)
Mobile phones and interference:
as with airplanes, the interference caused is not electronic, but physical and audible.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on May 16, 2013 7:50:38 GMT
[quote-Cyber] - dead bodies would be in very bad taste to say the least.
Human analogue, "Dead Pig", apologies to Kari already on this one......
I know some of them have been covered already, I just did a "Brief" version of the BMJ page of interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 16, 2013 13:21:16 GMT
reading in dim light - does cause eyestrain, but it is not permanent - it is essentially the same as muscle fatigue.
|
|
|
|
Post by PK on May 16, 2013 15:16:50 GMT
Cell phones in hospitals: Had to take my wife to the hospital last week for some lab work. I was surprised to note a "Free WiFi Hotspot!" sign as we entered. Obviously they aren't too concerned about interference.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Urban Mythbuster on May 20, 2013 16:00:50 GMT
The hospital I work at is consistently recognized as one of the most wired/wireless in the country. But, the argument against the use of wi-fi proving cell phones don't interfere with equipment would be that cell phones & wi-fi use different RF bands.
That being said...
There are actually very few pieces of equipment within the hospital that use wireless or RF transmission. The only one I can think of off-hand is portable telemetry (heart) monitors. Patients using these are not allowed off their unit due to the monitors operating on very short wavelength frequencies.
The distinctive argument against cell phones being detrimental to medical equipment would be the fact that patients use cell phones in their rooms all the time and no one stops them. In most cases, the cell phone ban is more for maintaining privacy and noise standards within the hospital.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 20, 2013 16:13:46 GMT
The hospital I work at is consistently recognized as one of the most wired/wireless in the country. But, the argument against the use of wi-fi proving cell phones don't interfere with equipment would be that cell phones & wi-fi use different RF bands. That being said... There are actually very few pieces of equipment within the hospital that use wireless or RF transmission. The only one I can think of off-hand is portable telemetry (heart) monitors. Patients using these are not allowed off their unit due to the monitors operating on very short wavelength frequencies. The distinctive argument against cell phones being detrimental to medical equipment would be the fact that patients use cell phones in their rooms all the time and no one stops them. In most cases, the cell phone ban is more for maintaining privacy and noise standards within the hospital. when my wife was sick, my local hospital had no problem with the fact that I was dealing with (business) calls while I was sitting in the intensive care ward with her. (they encouraged us to have someone there full time as she was less agitated if we were there) while the hospital she was transferred to wanted cell phones turned off in their ICU and limited visiting time. |
|
|
|
Post by PK on May 20, 2013 17:35:19 GMT
The hospital I work at is consistently recognized as one of the most wired/wireless in the country. But, the argument against the use of wi-fi proving cell phones don't interfere with equipment would be that cell phones & wi-fi use different RF bands. Very true, and that was my first thought when I saw the sigh. However I also realized - as the hospital folks surely do - that the most common wifi device that someone is going to be carrying with them when they walk into a hospital is their cell phone. That said, we never got beyond the main admitting area, where the blood was drawn. I have no idea what signage there may be in places like the ER or ICU, or even the patient rooms. |
|
|
|
Post by The Urban Mythbuster on May 20, 2013 17:37:39 GMT
Where I work: almost none. (Actually, it might be none. There are none in my work area & I haven't toured the entire facility lately...)
The most common signs are those promoting hand hygiene & others stating "Shhh. Quiet helps healing."
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on May 21, 2013 7:39:36 GMT
Cell phones.... I wonder if the ban has anything to do with the bloody Camera on them?....
Hospitals, and hospital gowns where you wander about with your bum sticking out....
I support an ban that removed the ability to take photographs.
|
|
|
|
Post by srmarti on May 22, 2013 2:48:53 GMT
Where I work: almost none. (Actually, it might be none. There are none in my work area & I haven't toured the entire facility lately...) The most common signs are those promoting hand hygiene & others stating "Shhh. Quiet helps healing." Don't know about the signage but, as far as wireless aren't wireless computer terminals on wheels pretty much everywhere in hospitals these days? Seem pretty common in the ones I've visited. |
|
|
|
Post by The Urban Mythbuster on May 22, 2013 3:02:19 GMT
Yep. Loads of them. Some floors have just enough for the nurses to use (10-12); others have enough for the nurses and every room on the unit (35-50)
{Sidebar: They were originally called COWs (Computer On Wheels) - but, someone took offense to this. So, they are now called WOWs (Workstation On Wheels)...}
|
|
|
|
Post by alabastersandman on Jul 5, 2013 6:32:29 GMT
"Reading in dim light ruins your eyesight" My grandmother used to tell me this. When she told me that reading in low light will make my eyes go bad, I would tell her that I was practicing for when My eyes went bad. She then would roll her eyes at me.  Dink water verse other liquids when taking medications, if I recall correctly has been brought up on the old boards a few times. This is one my father told me. If you are taking medication in pill form, you should take it with water. This is allegedly because other liquids will not transfer the medication through your body as well as water. On along the same lines, and makes a bit more sense (at least to me) is that drinking plain water will hydrate you better than other liquids/drinks. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 5, 2013 18:00:30 GMT
"Reading in dim light ruins your eyesight" My grandmother used to tell me this. When she told me that reading in low light will make my eyes go bad, I would tell her that I was practicing for when My eyes went bad. She then would roll her eyes at me. Dink water verse other liquids when taking medications, if I recall correctly has been brought up on the old boards a few times. This is one my father told me. If you are taking medication in pill form, you should take it with water. This is allegedly because other liquids will not transfer the medication through your body as well as water. On along the same lines, and makes a bit more sense (at least to me) is that drinking plain water will hydrate you better than other liquids/drinks. "reading in dim light ruins your eyesight" yes and no. it takes more work for your eyes to focus in low light, in the same way your camera does not have as much depth of field in low light - the size of the iris. because of this, the eye muscles become fatigued. the no part is that, just like the other muscles, your eye muscles can recover from fatigue with rest. "drink water..." some medications are adversely affected by components of things that are not water. plain water: technically speaking, I believe you can get a higher absorbtion rate drinking cool, but not cold water than you can in drinking any other beverage. the catch to that is; if you are so severely dehydrated that the absorbtion rate is going to be critical; you might want to be considering faster means of rehydration. (by which I mean a needle in your arm) the current doctrine is that all beverages contain water, and while plain water is best for rehydrating a person without mineral depletion; any beverage is better than no beverage. |
|
|
|
Post by craighudson on Jul 5, 2013 21:32:49 GMT
...the current doctrine is that all beverages contain water, and while plain water is best for rehydrating a person without mineral depletion; any beverage is better than no beverage. Does that include anything containing more than about 4% alcohol, such that you urinate more water due to the diuretic effect of alcohol than is in the drink? |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 6, 2013 2:17:15 GMT
...the current doctrine is that all beverages contain water, and while plain water is best for rehydrating a person without mineral depletion; any beverage is better than no beverage. Does that include anything containing more than about 4% alcohol, such that you urinate more water due to the diuretic effect of alcohol than is in the drink? actually, in the short term, yes, it does. also coffee and tea. if they are dehydrated and all they will drink is beer/wine, coffee, or tea, that is better than nothing - but it is recognized that they will become dehydrated again, later. |
|
|
|
Post by Lex Of Sydney Australia on Aug 5, 2013 3:25:12 GMT
Ok if we’re debating Medical Myths there’s one I’ve always wondered about. It’s one I’m sure we’ve ALL heard about back in primary school
If you swallow a piece of gum it’ll stay in your digestive track for 7 years before coming out the other end.
A load of nonsense's I know but it is a myth that has been going strong for over 50 years now, & I’d like to see it debunked once & for all.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Aug 5, 2013 7:30:08 GMT
{Sidebar: They were originally called COWs (Computer On Wheels) - but, someone took offense to this. So, they are now called WOWs (Workstation On Wheels)...} I'm probably going to regret asking this, but who takes offense over the "computer" part of "computer on wheels"?! If you'd told me that people in wheel chairs took offense to the "on wheels" part, I'd still think it was silly, but I could at least attempt to show understanding for that. What's so offensive about the word "computer"? |
|
|
|
Post by The Urban Mythbuster on Aug 5, 2013 12:41:18 GMT
There were some "Mac people" who took great offense to using "computers"...
But seriously, offense was taken to the abbreviation COW...I suppose some employees didn't like people walking around exclaiming "I'm looking for a COW"...
|
|
