Opioids and cancer
k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Tue May 13 04:19:17 EST 2003
"Schmitd! Schmitd! Ve vill build a Shapel!"
"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message news:5G0wa.81572$cO3.5425677 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"Heart Pump and Brain Injury: A Riddle Deepens With Time", By GINA KOLATA
Quoting from the New York Times Article:
"It made sense, surgeons thought, that the bypass machine could cause problems. Doctors clamp blood vessels closed, preventing them from flooding the heart with blood, and inject an icy cold solution in the heart, almost freezing the tissue. They redirect the blood through tubes that can cause injury, creating little bubbles in the blood or tiny fragments of debris that can hurt the brain."
"`You can view this as a conflict between the younger, more aggressive surgeons versus the older, more conservative ones," said Dr. Daniel Mark, a cardiologist and professor of medicine at Duke University. "Until recently, once you learned how to do bypass surgery, you pretty much knew how to do it. Now these guys have to learn something that's really kind of challenging. You can think of it as innovation versus staying with the old procedure that we know and love and have used for 30 years.`"
This is a good example of resistance to the TD E/I(up) inherent in experiencing "rendering useless" [AoK, Ap8] with respect to a consequential real-world problem in which there is insufficient data. In such instances, the long-term, high-'level' information-processing dynamics discussed in AoK, Ap7 constitute the only valid approach to problem resolution. [Which is important because NDT exposes the need for a high "diminishing-returns decision" threshold - else the necessary long-term problem-solving work will be 'moved away from']
"Then he began to have second thoughts. Small studies were inconclusive on the whole, he said. But a study from Johns Hopkins raised questions about whether the problem should be called pumphead or atherosclerosis-head."
It seems to me that the problem exists at the level of molecular 3-D energydynamics. If the heart-lung machine is distributing 'fractured' molecular-level stuff into the blood, that's an introduction of molecular 'level' 3-D energydynamics disorder.
This introduced molecular-'level' 3-D energydynamics disorder should be observable in scan data [just remember that it's a condition of increased relative 'randomness' within neural activation, so the scan filters have to be set accordingly - else you'll just blow-away what's being looked-for.]
I;kk discuss further if what;s here is not clear, or if there are questions, etc. kpc
This can, and should, be evaluated outside of the surgical environment - just blood. Divide a blood sample. Compare the relative order of bllod that's passed through the machine with the portion that disn't pass through the machine.
There are many ways to evaluate the relative orders. The simplest is light-microscopy. but other tests that yield the 'same' relative-order info can be done via oxygen-carrying, immune function, cell-type count-ratios, etc. - all 'just' standard Lab work. It all comes out as relative-order differentials when the numbers for the two blood-sample portions are compared. Get it?
It's just a different, and in my view, more-powerful, way of looking at the same data. The enhanced 'power' [literally, enhanced seeing of what's in-there] derives in the way that the relative-order info 'points'-right-to all the meaningful differentials. Get it?
It's the Future of Medicine. The "relative-order method" allow the 3-D energydynamics to be flat-out =seen= at all 'levels'. The 'power' in the method derives in the way that it applies across all scales. It doesn't matter at what scale one looks. One can always see the relative-order differentials. Get it.
It's 'just' doing what the brain does with respect to WDB2T. Get it?
A proprietary-interest URL that discusses some 'immune system' concerns [Note: I'm not commenting, one way or the other with respect to the proprietary-interests.
Anyway, Immune System function is all 'just' more 3-D energydynamics.]:
Note: "tends to denature protein" - a negative relative-order differential. Get it?
I don't know how applicable the following discussion will be, but I want to offer it, so that it can be evaluated by folks who possess the necessary experience.
An engineering approach that incorporated air-pressure-diaphram-activation would work better than mechanical- [roller-'squeegee'] activation. [It would introduce smaller order-differentials - zero order-differential is the goal.]
What I envision is a pumping-chamber that's fitted with a one-use flexible pumping-core whose pumping-action is driven via 'a' staged-segmental-activation diaphram [think of the way a catepillar 'crawls', or the way a worm moves - staged-segmental activation].
The goal of trying to develop a heart-lung machine that works this way is to minimize mechanical 'bruising' - introduction of order-differentials [test it as above [two-portion blood sample], and folks'll see such.].
I don't know enough to comment on how to fit the necessary oxygenation into this 'diaphram' design, but I don't like the 'spinning-wheel' approach that's depicted at the SMU URL. The 'spinning-wheel' approach is too mechanically-'violent' - introduces too large an order-differential [test it as above [two-portion blood sample], and folks'll see such.].
K. P. Collins
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Neur-sci