41
Physiology & Medicine / Can nitric oxide-oozing socks boost blood flow?
« on: 08/09/2010 02:02:52 »
Res Ipsa Loquitur = the thing speaks for itself
But when five self styled pundits are spouting baloney all that results is baloney to the fifth power. Now it has been asserted by the local wink, wink, nudge, nudge snicker brigade that I have been talking through my hat because I have said that the epidermis consists of dead skin ..it was asserted that this is the "stratum corneum" It is further asserted by the "experts" that the function of the epidermis is not to keep things out but to "keep water in"
Here is a relevant passage from the online Merck Manual ( which you may read at this url
http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec18/ch201/ch201b.html
"The outermost portion of the epidermis, known as the stratum corneum, is relatively waterproof and, when undamaged, prevents most bacteria, viruses, and other foreign substances from entering the body"
Furthermore as proof that NO is absorbed transdermally it was offered by these learned and honorable persons the claim that transdermal absorbtion of nitroglycerin definitely yields NO in pharmacologically active amounts similar to Viagra.
If that piece of big lie propaganda were true. Then everybody who shells out $10 per dose for Viagra is a fool because Transdermal NTG (costs pennies) would do the job. Has anybody noticed NTG ointment flying off the shelves? It does not because this is plain old garden variety twaddle being passed off as truth.
Res Ipsa Loquitur = the thing speaks for itself
also "caveat lector" let the reader decide for themselves. On the one hand (mine) you have my easily verifiable proof. On the other side (my learned -it says here - colleagues) and their obvious load of sniggering double entendre and hot air.
So I say go and look and then decide for yourself if you want to see who is mistaken. Scientific progress is not accomplished by having a pedantic band of self-styled experts. It is accomplished by testing hypotheses. I have refuted the hypothesis that topical NTG is not different from oral phosphodiesterase inhibitors. therefore providing indirect proof that transdermal absorbtion of NO is at best insignificant.
I don't expect truly professional scientists to insult me (or my profession as an RN) when I have done that.
Res Ipsa Loquitur
But when five self styled pundits are spouting baloney all that results is baloney to the fifth power. Now it has been asserted by the local wink, wink, nudge, nudge snicker brigade that I have been talking through my hat because I have said that the epidermis consists of dead skin ..it was asserted that this is the "stratum corneum" It is further asserted by the "experts" that the function of the epidermis is not to keep things out but to "keep water in"
Here is a relevant passage from the online Merck Manual ( which you may read at this url
http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec18/ch201/ch201b.html
"The outermost portion of the epidermis, known as the stratum corneum, is relatively waterproof and, when undamaged, prevents most bacteria, viruses, and other foreign substances from entering the body"
Furthermore as proof that NO is absorbed transdermally it was offered by these learned and honorable persons the claim that transdermal absorbtion of nitroglycerin definitely yields NO in pharmacologically active amounts similar to Viagra.
If that piece of big lie propaganda were true. Then everybody who shells out $10 per dose for Viagra is a fool because Transdermal NTG (costs pennies) would do the job. Has anybody noticed NTG ointment flying off the shelves? It does not because this is plain old garden variety twaddle being passed off as truth.
Res Ipsa Loquitur = the thing speaks for itself
also "caveat lector" let the reader decide for themselves. On the one hand (mine) you have my easily verifiable proof. On the other side (my learned -it says here - colleagues) and their obvious load of sniggering double entendre and hot air.
So I say go and look and then decide for yourself if you want to see who is mistaken. Scientific progress is not accomplished by having a pedantic band of self-styled experts. It is accomplished by testing hypotheses. I have refuted the hypothesis that topical NTG is not different from oral phosphodiesterase inhibitors. therefore providing indirect proof that transdermal absorbtion of NO is at best insignificant.
I don't expect truly professional scientists to insult me (or my profession as an RN) when I have done that.
Res Ipsa Loquitur