Actually, health care costs in the US are inflated due to the additional R&D costs other countries don't pay.
"Countries with government-run health care save money by relying on the United States to pay the research and development costs for new medical technology and medications. If we adopt the cost-control policies that have limited innovation in other countries, everyone will suffer."
-Bill
as
If the kidneys or heart are damaged it can't "just pass through".
Are you trying for a DimBulb award? Of course there are reasons to take even dangerous drugs. In the last several years of my mother's life, she was walking a tightrope of heart and kidney drugs. Too much of one caused heart failure, too much of the other caused the kidneys to fail. Both were required to keep her alive. Neither are given to healthy people, for obvious reasons.
as
they
Why not? Why would my intestines import more salt than my body needs? Bodies have all sorts of excellent regulatory mechanisms. Maybe a lot of salt is bad for people whose systems are damaged, but normal people regulate their appetites and chemistry just fine. We evolved to do that.
It wasn't that long ago that doctors told us to eat margarine instead of butter.
John
much as
they
Because they aren't very smart. The regulation is on the other end. If the kidney doesn't work the salt builds up.
Like all systems, it works to a point. We regulate sugar, too. Don't try abusing that regulation for thirty years, though.
Yes, it didn't take long for them to figure out that margarine wasn't such a good idea. There is now margarine that isn't as bad, though.
potato
much as
they
able
Maybe your body isn't very smart. Mine is. It regulates tens of thousands of chemicals, temperatures, pressures, and emotions a lot better than any computer (or any doctor) could.
I've eaten all the sugar I wanted for twice 30 years now. And everything is working fine.
Just 90 years or so.
John
of potato
the
y as much as
how do they
s the
almost
ke
may be able
t damage
h=A0If the
There you go again. All that regulation wasn't designed - it evolved. It stopped evolving when it kept the body healthy enough through the child-bearing and child-raising years to guarantee that the phenotype would pass on its genotype. It certainly includes stupidities equivalent to the recurrent laryngeal nervein the giraffe, which is metres longer than it needs to be.
The regulatory mechanisms aren't excellent. They are just mostly good enough - that's the way evolution works. Single-point nuclear polymorphisms mean that many of them don't work as well as they did in your remote ancestors, which is also the way evolution works, since it discards a lot of less- than advantageous random changes in pursuit of the occasional advantageous random change
't try
A lot of Americans seem to want - and get - more sugar than is good for them. Maybe they inherited a slightly less favourable genotype.
-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Actually I said that John might be wise to keep out of a risky area. Since he doesn't like developing large complex systems, perhaps because he isn't good at it, this is merely endorsing his preference.
It can be a lot more profitable - the margins on turn-key projects can be very high - and I never claimed that it wasn't risky.
John Larkin made it perfectly clear that his less ambitious projects don't always lead to successful products. A one hundred-fold return on development investment would be remarkably high. A successful and long- lived product might make it, but probably not if you discounted your cash-flows correctly. And how many products do you have to develop before you find one that is popular enough to sell persistently and in volume, without attracting the attention of the larger-small manufacturers in the area, who can afford to develop an ASIC to handle most of the electronic function to let them sell something that does the same job a lot cheaper.
But James Arthur "knows" business - with the same sort of confidence with which he "knows" economics - and this sort of consideration passes him by.
-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
s
But the people I worked for who did occasional big projects were rather better at keeping me busy.
Some of the stuff. Even John Larkin isn't going to be able to avoid designing the occasional dud for the wrong market.
And hire extra people for final test to make sure that the contract assmebler have put the stuff together right.
At Fison's Applied Sensor Technology all electronic production was contracted out to assemblers, but not all the boards that we got in worked first time, and there were always a few that where the fault was hard to find.
-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
potato
much as
they
salt.
able
damage
Don't be ridiculous (I know it's in your blood). Anecdote isn't data.
Again, anecdote isn't data. I'm not allergic to poison ivy/oak/whatever but I don't tempt fate, either.
Just because the government (and ag lobby) didn't get it doesn't mean it wasn't known.
potato
much as
do they
salt.
able
damage
And then it evolved some more. Lots more. Evolution itself evolved.
How do you account for 90 year old ladies?
It certainly includes stupidities
It's been a long time since evolution worked by single-point nuclear polymorphisms. Bodies *are* smarter than that.
Americans are the most diverse genetic mix on the planet. To say that "Americans" inherited any genotype is silly. Some specific subpopulations, like those of the Pacific Islander path, seem especially unable to handle a European (wheat, meat, dairy, sugar) diet. But people are different.
John
Of course not. Maybe 50% of our designs are profitable. So we design lots of stuff. That wey, we make money on the winners and learn stuff from the apparent losers.
What's surprising is that practically everything I've designed, or even partially designed, turned out to produce useful knowledge or offshoots, often many years later, often in most unexpected ways.
Testing grows almost linearly with volume, except that it's mostly automated these days, and building another test rack isn't hard.
John
Out here in the desert, you need to keep hydrated AND salted! You may not realize it, but just sitting around in even A/C with a
I am on a lot of different medications. Most remove sodium from my body. Being diabetic doesn't help. There are short phrases mentioning sodium in the documentation, if you wade through the 20+ pages per drug. I am replacing what is being lost. Even with the amount I'm using, I usually can't taste it. If I cut it back, I start getting sores that won't heal. Go ahead and tell me you wouldn't use the required salt to maintain your electrolytes.
-- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
Of course you need to replace the sodium but you have to admit that this isn't normal.
Go ahead and read the thread.
even
required
reasons.
According to the doctors I had, I was told I wasn't to replace the lost sodium. That was my point. Like I said, I can post some photos of the almost square foot of scar tissue on my legs.
I have read it. I know my body, and that it needs more salt than most people.
-- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
I agree. When I was in school, you were required to take a salt tablet when gym class was out in the hot sun. I've had days I drank three full two liter bottles of ice water in two hours, then two full two liter bottles of Diet Mt Dew when I got home. A half hour later I was starting to cool down, and needed another two liter bottle of water.
-- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
It's not just hot areas that are the problem! When visiting a center dedicated to Antarctic research a few weeks ago, I read that the drinking-water demand for research field teams down there is about one liter per three hours per person! Collecting snow and melting it to provide water takes up a substantial portion of each working day.
I doubt that the salt demand is proportionately high ("cool" sweating vs. sweating to cool down the body) but it's probably still higher than in a less evaporation-prone climate.
--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
life'
even
heart
required
reasons.
If the medications you're taking are removing too much sodium (and likely potassium, too) then you *do* have to replenish it. Most diuretics remove these electrolytes. Some can handle it normally, some not. Your case has nothing to do with whether or not sodium is harmful in large quantities.
No one is arguing that. You're generalizing *your* case. To help you read; in *general* high sodium diets are harmful. In *general* we ingest far more sodium than we need. This, in *general* is harmful.
Like I said, some need to take even more dangerous chemicals to live. They would be better off if they didn't need them, however. That is, others shouldn't take them because the chemicals are needed for one to live.
In San Francisco, it cool and humid most of the time, so I find I don't want a lot of salt. Bodies are automatic that way.
John
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.