Slashdot Mirror


Heart Corset to Reduce Congestive Heart Failure

Scientists have designed a new "heart-reinforcing corset" to help combat congestive heart failure. While there isn't a large degree of understanding of the condition, many believe that the heart expands in order to pump more blood as a reaction to damage or valve problems. This expansion generally exacerbates the problem, so the new reinforcing band is attempting to control the expansion of the heart thereby reducing the chance of failure.

89 comments

  1. Not to mention... by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
    ..it will also help 'less endowed' female users to look a little more appealing?

    Oops...wrong kind of corset?

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    1. Re:Not to mention... by burtosis · · Score: 1

      Not only does she look good - her heart is slim and sexy!

  2. How much does that baby cost? by tjstork · · Score: 1

    It seems like, we never ask that question with every medical breakthrough. Should we really be more inclined to wait for "the mass produced heart corset with McDonald's like installation service"

    Lest yeah laugh at my McDonald's surgery reference, ask yourself this. Does getting a sandwich at a fast food restaurant have a lower risk of error than getting open heart surgery? I would be willing to bet that there are a higher percentage of people that get a bad open heart surgery result than there are people that get bad sandwiches. And that, my friends, is why medicine costs so much, for so little, in the United States.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:How much does that baby cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sometimes, I read a comment and think, "Do people like that really exist?". A pox on you, sir.

    2. Re:How much does that baby cost? by stranger_to_himself · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It seems like, we never ask that question with every medical breakthrough. Should we really be more inclined to wait for "the mass produced heart corset with McDonald's like installation service"

      Right now I promise there are a million insurers and healthcare providers trying to work out if this thing will save them more money in adverse events or gain in disability adjusted life years than it'll cost them they offer it. There's also another group somehwere else working on a cheaper one.

      I don't quite get your McDonald's analogy, but now I'm hungry for a Big Mac.

    3. Re:How much does that baby cost? by Spazntwich · · Score: 1

      What in the hell? Ignoring your asinine comparison of fast food and open heart surgery, and forgetting for a moment that your entire argument is based upon speculative creation of statistics, how can you say American medicine is expensive for what you get?

      We're still the best medical system in the world as far as quality goes, so while our system is indeed expensive, you get a whole hell of a lot for your money, and lest you begin throwing around the word "value," keep in mind health care isn't something that can be directly compared on cost/benefit.

      You buy an AMD processor, you'll get one that's "good enough" while being significantly cheaper. You get a liver transplant in Guatemala and you're a little too dead to tell your friends about how much money you saved over that overpriced American medicine.

    4. Re:How much does that baby cost? by e4g4 · · Score: 1

      Somehow I think you'll reconsider your position when you or someone you know survives a car accident.

      --
      The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
    5. Re:How much does that baby cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seeing as how about 4 out of every 5 times i order a chicken sandwich without mayo they leave off the other condiments and lather it in mayo i'd say open heart surgery is better.

    6. Re:How much does that baby cost? by foobsr · · Score: 2, Informative

      We're still the best medical system in the world as far as quality goes ...

      ... drum fills ...

      "Seven years ago, the World Health Organization made the first major effort to rank the health systems of 191 nations. France and Italy took the top two spots; the United States was a dismal 37th. More recently, the highly regarded Commonwealth Fund has pioneered in comparing the United States with other advanced nations through surveys of patients and doctors and analysis of other data. Its latest report, issued in May, ranked the United States last or next-to-last compared with five other nations -- Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand and the United Kingdom -- on most measures of performance, including quality of care and access to it. Other comparative studies also put the United States in a relatively bad light."
      http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/opinion/12sun1.html

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    7. Re:How much does that baby cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're still the best medical system in the world as far as quality goes

      Unless when you're talking about quality you go by things like infant mortality, where we rank lower than Cuba (to be fair, in Cuba the doctor comes to you and checks you whether you like it or not). Or maternal mortality, which over the past few years has increased in most of the US (amusingly enough, this increase correlates strongly with the increasing use of C-section for non-emergency delivery, and also correlates strongly with middle to upper class white women who can afford expensive surgery, contrary to the protests of people who blame all the poor uninsured people for America's healthcare woes).

      Of course, these are the quantitative measurable ratings of medical success, you could just go by the studies run by such biased groups as the WHO which will likely try to cite such subjective measures as "positive outcomes" and "surgical infection rates" in an effort to discredit that hated, hated USA.

    8. Re:How much does that baby cost? by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      Thank God... with all that mayo you'll be needing the open heart surgery soon.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    9. Re:How much does that baby cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that's why they call it PRACTICING medicine.

    10. Re:How much does that baby cost? by Spazntwich · · Score: 1

      "As far as quality goes," not accessibility or the myriad other amusingly subjective factors the WHO uses.

    11. Re:How much does that baby cost? by StarReaver · · Score: 0

      You obviously haven't been to the McDonalds in my neighborhood.

    12. Re:How much does that baby cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been to the doctor about 5 times in the past 10 years. Mostly for flu shots and one ankle injury. Here's what I noticed while waiting. Everyone around me was a fatty. They weren't there because of some tragic accident that befell them. They were there because they can't take care of themselves. I'm pretty sure that as soon as they got there prescription for high blood pressure, they stopped by McDonald's for a few burgers on the way home.

      Outside of the that, I have had countless co-workers run to the doctor every time they have so much as a sniffle. Or they are on 10 different prescriptions none of which are necessary. Health care is completely out of control because of fatties and pussies. Not because of car accident victims or people with cancer.

      And you know what? If I ever have life ending disease due to the choices I have made, well then it's time for a bullet to the head.

  3. Doubt it will help by harris+s+newman · · Score: 1

    If your heart can't swell out, it will either constrict itself or "swell in". Result either case would be heart failure.

    1. Re:Doubt it will help by aldousd666 · · Score: 1

      what scientific basis do you have for saying that? Swelling doesn't necessarily mean 'inflammation'... and even if you're a doctor, you know as well as I do that "Because I'm a doctor and I say so" isn't actually a scientific basis.

      --
      Speak for yourself.
  4. Uhh by Ryukotsusei · · Score: 1

    How would that affect normal physiological functioning? The heart pumps more often because it needs to get that blood out. By restricting that pumping function, the parts of the body that need it won't get as much blood. Anyone see any problems with this idea?

    1. Re:Uhh by dstiggy · · Score: 3, Informative

      This device probably won't actually constrict heart function. If you make it slack when the heart has contracted and elastic enough it will just help to squeeze the heart during ejection and decrease the force required for the contraction of the heart muscles. Basically since the heart muscle won't have to work as hard it doesn't increase its muscle mass (similar to lifting weights and then stopping). This reduction in afterload has been shown to decrease heart size in certain instances, specifically in some patients who have received Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVADs). This device is way less intrusive than an LVAD and doesn't require any electromechanical action.

    2. Re:Uhh by nizo · · Score: 1

      Though which would you rather have: decreased blood flow or the side of your heart blow out?

  5. Other neat tech from the article by techpawn · · Score: 1

    Blink-triggering glasses About 140,000 people each year in the US alone suffer damage to the nerve that controls blinking on one side of the face or the other.
    Wink, wink, nudge, nudge, know what I mean? But given the old methods of "fixing" this the glasses seem like the better option
    --
    Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
    1. Re:Other neat tech from the article by FreddyKnockout · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, I agree, the second part of TFA is actually more interesting. The posted bit is about an excessively intrusive, potential solution to a preventable problem (stop eating so much Mickey D's people!), but the second bit about the eye glasses, that's actually a fairly logical process. I can't help but prefer logical, non-intrusive processes. The heart procedure is interesting, but it seems a bit much, especially considering TFA even says that they aren't quite sure if the problem is even caused by the heart expanding.

    2. Re:Other neat tech from the article by timster · · Score: 1

      You know, it's interesting that we've gone back to the notion that every disease someone can get (from heart failure to cancer) is once again assumed to be that person's fault. We had a pretty good run there where it was just a tragedy when someone experienced organ failure and the doctors and researchers who could extend their life were seen as heroes. Now we're back to this stupid myth that almost every disease is preventable, if only you were a better person. And it's just as disgusting as it was 50 years ago.

      Get the flu? Should've washed your hands. Diabetes? Forget genetics, it's because you ate too much. I swear, one of these days some disease will be correlated with oxygen intake and we'll be told to breathe less. In reality, lifestyle plays a small to moderate part in a handful of diseases, but I guess if we admitted that people could get sick without some moral failing we'd have to admit that we live in an imperfect world where we will always need medicine, and medical research. No amount of dieting, exercise, or evolution will ever change that.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    3. Re:Other neat tech from the article by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      especially considering TFA even says that they aren't quite sure if the problem is even caused by the heart expanding.

      Nor are they quite sure that they can even make the thing. Or that it would work. It appears to be a goofy idea drawn up to grab some VC or government funding. I can think of couple of fairly large problems off the top of my head:

      - We're talking open heart surgery here. Not easy to do, not cheap. Lots of potential complications.
      - OK smarty pants, just try to get this one through the FDA's ethics committee without doing some animal studies. You've got a long road ahead of you. Especially when you haven't done any of your homework yet.
      - You can also get congestive heart failure from constricting the heart: eg, from fluid in the pericardium - the sac around the heart, or from something else squishing on the heart. There is going to be a fairly narrow mechanical window for this device (if it works at all). Sounds tricky and best of all, hard to reverse (more open heart surgery)

      Not much to see here, lets look at the other FA.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:Other neat tech from the article by FreddyKnockout · · Score: 0

      Of course, I never said that everyone would be cured of heart disease if they exercised more and ate better, but none the less, everyone would benefit from taking such actions, and many people would reduce their risk of heart disease.

    5. Re:Other neat tech from the article by timster · · Score: 1

      everyone would benefit from taking such actions

      No, that is obviously not the case. Here you are using broad, population-based statistics to make individual choices for everyone. This is completely irrational.

      Yes, diet and exercise can reduce the risk of heart disease, but it's a mistake to think this is the best choice for everyone. Perhaps most people would be better off, but some would hurt themselves exercising, some seriously. Some would (ironically) worsen some latent heart defect. Some would go too far and die from exercise. That's statistics for you.

      As for diet, sure, lots of people could be better off. But McDonald's is cheap; some people couldn't afford the extra food costs of eating right, and could damage their finances, leading to stress and possibly heart disease. Many people use junk food itself to control stress (instead of, say, heroin) and it's possible that the food does less damage than the stress would. (Some of these people have much more stressful lives than J. Random Privileged Slashdotter.)

      My point is that medical research is a tremendous boon to our society, even if it sometimes mostly benefits people who have made individual choices that differ from yours, even if some of those are simply mistakes. I think your classification of heart failure as "preventable" with a throwaway line about fast food belittles that.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    6. Re:Other neat tech from the article by CrkHead · · Score: 1

      The posted bit is about an excessively intrusive, potential solution to a preventable problem (stop eating so much Mickey D's people!)

      Not always preventable. Valve issues can cause CHF and those issues can be caused by genetics over ruling diet. Granted, genetics is just one of the risk factors and double cheese burgers likely cause more failures than genes, but it is not always a preventable problem.

      My experience? 34 year old vegitarian that gets regular light exercise under the supervision of a cardiologist that can do everything just right and still have high probability that my heart (or aorta) will pop by 40.

  6. I'll be sure to watch for one. by wooden+pickle · · Score: 1

    Perfect! Just in time for the ren faire this weekend. You think they'll be selling these there yet?

  7. Instestinal cancer? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    I suspect a new wave of crossdressing as new spam convinces people of the power of corsets.

  8. Unforseen side-effect by TBedsaul · · Score: 1, Funny

    Now your heart looks like a slut.

    Alternate punch line:
    Now your heart looks like it belongs in the band Heart.

  9. rebuilding by blahlazer · · Score: 3, Funny

    this will go great with my brain heatsink.

    1. Re:rebuilding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It just goes to show that our brains are much more highly advanced than our hearts. I won't say it's a shame, but it'd be nice to bring the latter up to speed.

  10. About Time by dazedNconfuzed · · Score: 2, Funny

    Humorous to some, good news to others.
    I've been waiting for an advancement like this.
    Time to see my cardiologist.

    --
    Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
  11. Congestive heart failure by thewiz · · Score: 2, Informative

    The obligatory link to information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestive_heart_failure

    Having had congestive heart failure I can say that this device is only going to be useful in a limited number of cases. In my case, this device would not have helped as my first bout was caused by right ventricular hypertrophy due to aortic insufficiency and the second was a bout of pneumonia that cause fluid build up in the pericardium. The device may have helped the first time around to prevent the right ventricular hypertrophy, but would not have helped in the second as it would not have eliminated the cause.

    Still, it's good to see that medical technology is progressing! Better than valvuplasty and dacron VSD patches!

    --
    If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
    1. Re:Congestive heart failure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      For those that aren't familiar with the physiology, congestive heart failure can be caused by numerous problems in the cardiovascular system. One of the causes is a defect in heart valves allowing blood to flow backwards, preventing the heart from properly pumping blood to feed itself and the rest of the body. Another of the causes can arise from hypertension. Hypertension in the blood vessels means the heart has to put more work into pumping the same amount of work. Usually the heart then tries to adapt in both cases by increasing in size in order to be able to pump more (hypertrophy). The problem though is that as it increases in size, it then requires even more blood to nourish itself and making the problem worse.

  12. Only part of the problem. by AltGrendel · · Score: 1

    Have you ever looked in to how much of the "cost of health care" is administrative costs?

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

    1. Re:Only part of the problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, insurance payroll like the guys who are working to deny claims, MAJOR profit being skimmed to the shareholders of the hospital and insurance companies and drug companies (the latter to cover all that adverti ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H research). I'm surprised there is anything left over for the doctors and nurses.

  13. Old news... by CptPicard · · Score: 1

    They did this in the new Outer Limits already... remember the old guy who just wouldn't die and wanted the heart corset instead of giving it to the teenage girl. :)

    --
    I want to play Free Market with a drowning Libertarian.
  14. Question asked by my wife... by jackpot777 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...does this make my heart look fat?

    --
    Shiny. Let's be bad guys...
    1. Re:Question asked by my wife... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, it's all them Big Macs that make your heart look fat.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  15. Medical Mechanical Marvels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it semm to anyone else that designs for medical mechanical devices mostly look like something you might think of yourself using duct tape and hose clamps?

  16. Along with my brain heat sink alows overclocking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This along with my new brain heat sink allows be to overclock my body and mind.

    Once you have the heart restriction and brain cooler, then you take this cocktail of drugs including ginko, cocaine and performance enhancing drugs.

    Now you can double the performance of you mind and body, without fear of you heart exploding or a brain blood vessel rupture.

    The downside is that you effectively age twice as fast.

  17. Unsure if this is addressing the real problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    My understanding is that the heart enlarges to push blood better through blood vessels that have become smaller from plaque buildup. While the corset may prevent this; it doesn't fix the problem of the arteries occluding from poor diet, smoking, diabetes, and genetic predisposition. The way they fix this now is through arterial grafts to create a bypass. This technological corset application might help somewhat but it's skating the issue of preserving cardiovascular health. I have no medical training but I have learned about this the hardway by caring for a parent that has had several heart attacks. A word of advice: Not all doctors are equal or willing to take risks becuase of the lawsuit factor. Don't let it discourage you! Find THAT doctor who wants to help. He/She can make all the difference between languishing in a bed on meds or a recovery at home with new functioning arteries and a chance to resume life(Not instantly of course).

  18. Surgical treatment of enlarged heart. by Anti_Climax · · Score: 2, Informative

    It sounds like it's a related concept to this older concept but much less risky and invasive.

    --
    Even people that believe in pre-destiny look both ways before crossing the street.
  19. Ummmmmm by imgod2u · · Score: 1

    Forgive me in my ignorance but if a heart expands in order to pump more blood because there isn't enough blood flow, wouldn't this device essentially cause insufficient blood flow, which, depending on where it happens, will cause a stroke?

    1. Re:Ummmmmm by I_Love_Pocky! · · Score: 1

      Which is why this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardiac_resynchronization_therapy#Biventricular_Pacing_.28BVP.29 is probably a more appropriate solution in such situations. In certain cases cardiac resynchronization therapy can lead an enlarged heart to shrink back to its natural size. It fixes the problem rather than trying to mitigate the symptoms (ie a larger heart).

  20. Cardiology primer by neapolitan · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm a cardiologist - a couple of big points here...

    Five second primer on cardiology: All muscles have a force-strength relationship that increases with distance stretched. That is, the farther you stretch a muscle, the more forcefully it will contract. This is called the Starling relationship. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starling_law

    Thus, when your heart is failing, what does it do? It allows itself to become more distended, increasing the stretch of each muscle cell, which increases the force of each beat. People that have heart failure often have big, dilated hearts in the body's attempt to generate every bit of force from it.

    Unfortunately that dilation has negative effects. Specifically, after a while the heart can not handle the increased stretch and wall strain, and muscle cells will start to fail / die, and they become altered at the cellular level in ways that is detrimental over the long term.

    Cardiac banding as described is a way to put a "girdle" on this failing heart, to *prevent further dilation* in hopes of minimizing negative consequences as above. It is used in *an already failing heart* in a kind of palliative sense. The summary is a bit misleading - it makes it sounds as though this patches it to prevent failure.

    The idea is widely proposed and you can find it in many textbooks already; the patent by this Stanford group is for a specific implementation / material / technique. There are a few companies making banding / mesh devices, but none are in completely mainstream use yet. I work at one of the largest quaternary care centers, and have seen only two.

    One of the concerns is that medium to long term outcomes are not really established, and this may give a restrictive effect -- that is, prevent adequate filling of the heart and impair blood circulation in that method. It is an active area of research, however, and IMHO is quite exciting.

    --
    Slashdotter, ID #101. UIDs are in binary, right?
    1. Re:Cardiology primer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm so glad you've found your job and the new technology applied to it exciting! That's makes all the difference. My experience was different but I didn't give up finding that one doctor who wished to push the edge to help my parent. I hope you'll be that savior to someone else who's in desperate need but has been turned away by others. My best wishes!

    2. Re:Cardiology primer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps off-topic, but what is a quaternary care center?

    3. Re:Cardiology primer by zeromentat · · Score: 2, Informative

      Quaternary care refers to advanced levels of medicine which are highly specialized and not widely used. Experimental medicine, service-oriented surgeries and other less common approaches to treatment and diagnostics consist of the bulk of quaternary care. The term is an extension of tertiary care, which is more common and less specific.
      From
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_care

      --
      Gotta move .. gotta go!
    4. Re:Cardiology primer by tsotha · · Score: 1

      I think there may be some benefit to keeping the heart in a shape that's more correct as well. Isn't that the principle behind the Batista procedure?

      Scientific American did an article years ago about mathmatical flow analysis of blood moving through the heart. The researchers opined the shape of the heart was something of an engineering marvel all by itself.

    5. Re:Cardiology primer by Zapped.Info · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they have considered a cardiac "net"
      Attempting to expand upon the idea...a net could be used instead of a band and could be composed of synthetic proteins designed to match general human dna as closely as possible to prevent rejection. The net could be tightened of loosened without the need for additional invasive surgery. But hey...all this could be moot if stem cell research would simply allow them to grow me another heart using my own DNA...but perhaps a replacement brain is what I need, complete with a heat sync...oh wait! Why stop there! I've already got two hemispheres, why not two brains! Dual processor?!?! Quad?!?!? Cough...ahem...seriously though...a net sounds like a better idea because there would be uniformity in the pressure distribution and less likelyhood of bulges (although I'm sure there's a better medical term for that) Now this is making me go deep on thought here...this might be nuts, but who knows...what if instead of a net, a sack was used and then filled with nonNeutonian fluid thus rendering resistance only when the heart expands too violently?? The fluid solution could be adjusted to be weaker or stronger, providing more or less counter pressure. I don't think this would be hard to do, all you would need it a dual chambered sack and then when you filled the outer chamber it would take on the shape of the heart...I'm sure there are all kinds of reasons why none of this is feasible, but at least Slashdot gives us a forum to think.

      --
      It's important to know that I forgot what I thought I knew when I thought I knew it all:Now I don't even know whatIknow.
  21. Hmmm. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Without reading through the patent, It would almost certainly have to be on the inside of the pericardium. Otherwise, the heart would squeeze the pericardium cells in between. I just wonder if the heart cells would survive this as well. It strikes me that after a length of time the outer cells would be cut off from blood as well. Kind of like putting a bad around a growing child's leg. Of course, this is more likely to occur in older folks, so, it may give them more time. But strikes me as treating the symptom and not the disease.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  22. Title should have been... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    ...Be Slim My Aching Heart.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  23. What is this story doing here? by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

    This story has no relevance to any of the usual slashdot themes. But it's obvious why it was posted. To get a few laughs out of corsets-for-men jokes. It's not like I had high expectations to begin with. But this is a new low.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  24. medical s&m fetishists by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    are ready to accept their nobel prize in medicine

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  25. Brains too? by dotancohen · · Score: 0

    I can think of quite a few people that I'd like to put a brain corset on. How about getting these folks some nice old fashioned encephalitis.

    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  26. Maybe Just a Good Bloodletting Will Work by trongey · · Score: 1
    Does anybody else have a problem with these two statements being together?

    Scientists have designed a new "heart-reinforcing corset" to help combat congestive heart failure. While there isn't a large degree of understanding of the condition...
    Isn't that pretty much how medieval medicine worked? "We don't know why this person's sick, but we'll just try this thing to fix it."
    --
    You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
    1. Re:Maybe Just a Good Bloodletting Will Work by MrConspiracy · · Score: 1

      Not the best analogy. The issue here isn't that we don't have any idea what CHF is, but rather that we don't really have a comprehensive physiological understanding (compare Tay-Sachs). We know some of what goes on, if you didn't gather that from all the posts from MDs on here giving overviews, and the corset is targeted at a specific aspect of the condition that is understood well enough to attempt treatment. Would you prefer we waited for more research before ordering Lasix or making recommendations like fluid restriction? After all, unless we completely understand the condition, it's essentially faith-based medieval barbering.

    2. Re:Maybe Just a Good Bloodletting Will Work by trongey · · Score: 1

      It's Slashdot. This isn't the place where people come to find good analogies, or, really anything approaching coherency.

      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
  27. Soon to be a major motion picture.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't Tony Stark do something like this for his
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Man suit?

  28. New gimmick for the Wilson sisters... by PinchDuck · · Score: 1

    so they can look good in music videos?

  29. Ahh, RennFest by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Was just at the Maryland RennFest. Having gone there for the past 8 years, we've formulated some rules that should be enforced, but sadly are not.

    1) Just because it is acceptable to wear a "saucy wench" outfit doesn't mean you look good in it. Hence, mandatory 2 minutes in front of a 3 way mirror for anyone in garb prior to admittance.
    2) Women should not be allowed to wear bells around their waist with a belly dancer outfit when said belly is drooping to over aforementioned bells.
    2a) Women should not get cranky when folks stare at #2 above - you just adorned your fat rolls with shiny, noisy things, and you expect it NOT to draw the eye?
    3) Re. "push-up" corsets - if it makes your boobs look like they are squashed in a mammogram, it's the wrong size (this is from my wife, and I assume the female slashdotters will understand. I have no clue what it means)
    4) For the men - your not fucking Sauron, so don't bring the 7 foot tall black staff with the wings and the crystal ball on top. It gets in everyone else's way and will not, repeat NOT, get you laid. Period. No, really.
    5) And added just this year - the Trekkers were bad enough, but furries? FURRIES?! I had to explain to my wife what the difference between a furry and a plishie is .

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  30. The sad answer is yes. by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They are usually young. Of course if they get sick then everything changes.
    A true story.
    I was going into a grocery store near my office to pickup some diet soda. There was a group trying to get people to sign a petition that would stop free inoculations for the children of illegal immigrants. I kind of lost it with them. I asked them if they wanted to see children in iron lungs again? Did they realize that vaccines where not 100% effective and if there where a large population that wasn't inoculated that it would increase the chance that they, there grand children, or their children might get sick with polo? I finally ask them "Do you believe in a God? How do you think God would feel about you being so selfish that you will allow children to get sick and or die because of your greed!" They actually left at that point.
    So yes their are people like that. And you will see them post on Slashdot a lot.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:The sad answer is yes. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      "Do you believe in a God? How do you think God would feel about you being so selfish that you will allow children to get sick and or die because of your greed!"

      Good thing they had not thought of that before. Otherwise, they might have pointed out to you that ultimitely it was "God's" decision, and if he is willing to sit by and watch, they would not be in a position to argue.

    2. Re:The sad answer is yes. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      "Good thing they had not thought of that before. Otherwise, they might have pointed out to you that ultimitely it was "God's" decision, and if he is willing to sit by and watch, they would not be in a position to argue."
      Nope it is an opportunity to do some good in the world and to act selflessly. If you fail to do good that is also a sin. It is a sin of omission.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    3. Re:The sad answer is yes. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      It's blasphemous to say that God is sinning! Even if you call it a sin of omission.

    4. Re:The sad answer is yes. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      I suggest that you look into improving your reading comprehension. After you that resolved you can work on your other issues.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  31. Was that secret one of by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    Victoria's?

    Or, of the construction labor/Home-Depot/grocery clerk secrets. Oh, theirs is to reduce expansive gut success...

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  32. I'd rather a doctor make me a sammich... by AnomaliesAndrew · · Score: 1

    Last time I checked, McDonalds was failing 100% of the time to make anything edible, but doctors at least save a few people with surgery.

    --
    Move all sig!
    1. Re:I'd rather a doctor make me a sammich... by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      Your checking doesn't explain why they are a fortune 500 company - other than fast food, what product do they sell again?

      If their food is so bad, why do several hundred million people around the world eat it every day?

    2. Re:I'd rather a doctor make me a sammich... by AnomaliesAndrew · · Score: 1

      "why do several hundred million people around the world eat it every day?"

      Convenience and habit. It's CERTAINLY not for quality. Back in my younger days when I still ate that garbage, I sent many sandwiches back for "quality" errors.

      I'd rather have a home made burger over a McDonalds diarrhea patty any day. Not everybody cares as much about their health as me. Not everybody has the time that I do, or the willpower to stay away from such evil convenience.

      In any case, I was trying (and evidently failed) to make a funny. He was talking about McDonalds' quality control, and I was merely jabbing an elbow to insinuate that it's easy to have 100% quality control when (IMHO) they possess no quality whatsoever.

      Also, it's a little unfair to compare having your hands inside the chest of a living human, with following a picture-based instruction pamphlet about assembling 6 prepared items into a burger. There's a different risk factor involved! In one case, you can scrape off excess catchup, in the other you're providing tissues and hugs to a mourning family.

      We trained kids with down syndrome in high school to do more complex patterns than building burgers.

      Cheers!

      --
      Move all sig!
    3. Re:I'd rather a doctor make me a sammich... by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      If their food is so bad, why do several hundred million people around the world eat it every day?

      Because human beings are not rational animals.

      On any given day, several hundred million people around the world do foolish or irrational things. From religious practices to politics to TV ratings, observation shows that popularity and quality are not correlated.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  33. Socialized Medicine is Total Crap by tjstork · · Score: 2, Informative

    As are other rankings. It's all about "how socialist" is your medicine, and not a valid comparison. I for one thought that if "the children" were so important, that parents might actually be motivated to pay for their health care. Obviously, "the children" are not so important, and so, somebody else should be responsible for their health care.

    If you have insurance in the USA, or a wad of cash, and you need an MRI, for example, you can get one. If you have insurance, and a wad of cash, you wind up getting the best medical care in the world, and most people who live in the USA and have been from abroad will say exactly that.

    I for one am sick of hearing about the superior European quality of life brought about by socialism. If the quality of the European world was so great, why do not more Europeans bring children into it. The only thing going on on that side of the world is the smell of decay, an ideologically dead, creatively spent, aging population gradually withering into oblivion, too lacking in will or drive to even reproduce itself.
    \

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:Socialized Medicine is Total Crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, unbounded population growth is, as you say, one of the advantages of mostly failing to give children even rudimentary sex education.

    2. Re:Socialized Medicine is Total Crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As are other rankings. It's all about "how socialist" is your medicine, and not a valid comparison. I for one thought that if "the children" were so important, that parents might actually be motivated to pay for their health care.

      As people like yourself so often love to point out, we do pay for our health care, via. taxes. The only difference is that the majority of us are not so selfish to deny medical care to those who are unable to pay for it themselves.

    3. Re:Socialized Medicine is Total Crap by tjstork · · Score: 1

      As people like yourself so often love to point out, we do pay for our health care, via. taxes. The only difference is that the majority of us are not so selfish to deny medical care to those who are unable to pay for it themselves.

      But you do deny health care to people, ultimately. That's the whole point. Socialism and Capitalism are different ways of addressing scarcity. With socialism, you essentially cut services to people, and make them form lines, whereas, in capitalism, some people don't get them. So, somebody gets screwed in either scenario. It's just a question of who.

      --
      This is my sig.
  34. I did survive a car accident. by tjstork · · Score: 1

    Somehow I think you'll reconsider your position when you or someone you know survives a car accident

    I did survive a car accident. I rolled a car going 50 miles per hour. But, I wore a seat belt, the frame bent and absorbed the blow, and I walked away, unharmed. No doctor required.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:I did survive a car accident. by MadnessASAP · · Score: 1
      Well clearly we should use your one extremely lucky case as a basis for all our medical health care decisions. In fact since obviously car accidents are apparently completely safe and all other people who are in hospital deserve to die we should just close them down, yes?
      Why the fuck did you even bother to post that? Do you really believe that stating you got lucky makes your claim valid? Asides from the few minutes you went outside to get in an accident to you otherwise spend all your time in the basement so that you don't actually have to meet anyone, thus not knowing anyone who has been hospitalized? Maybe you didn't get away from that accident uninjured, if I were you I would have a doctor check me out for brain damage.

      God damn idiots. Plenty of my family and friends are still here thanks to those hospitals, your goddamn lucky I don't know where you live or I might give you an idea about why we need them.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    2. Re:I did survive a car accident. by tjstork · · Score: 1

      Well clearly we should use your one extremely lucky case as a basis for all our medical health care decisions. In fact since obviously car accidents are apparently completely safe and all other people who are in hospital deserve to die we should just close them down, yes?

      I think you need to take a chill pill. All I said was that socialized medicine sucks, and our present level of medical practice isn't good enough. Now you go off on the deep end. Get off the bong and learn to think.

      God damn idiots. Plenty of my family and friends are still here thanks to those hospitals, your goddamn lucky I don't know where you live or I might give you an idea about why we need them

      You could try, but I would either kick your ass, burn your house down, or shoot you in the face.

      --
      This is my sig.
  35. old tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read about this thing over 2 years ago in popular science or such

  36. Uh, deport them? by tjstork · · Score: 1

    There was a group trying to get people to sign a petition that would stop free inoculations for the children of illegal immigrants

    My question would be, if the vaccines are so important, then, why do not the parents pay for them? The innoculations aren't -free-. They are paid for out of the taxes. So, that means less for the people of the country who actually, you know, are legal, or at least respect our immigration laws and get the proper H1s, green cards, etc.

    If I had been there when you showed up, I would have invited you to pay for the innoculations yourself, and take up a collection yourself. I have my own kids to vaccinate, educate, and cloth, and if illegal immigrants would take the same level of responsibility, then, jeez, we wouldn't have this problem now, would we.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:Uh, deport them? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Well for one I am not willing to see children suffer and die. I do pay with my tax money and I find that of all the services that I do pay for with my tax money providing vaccinations for children is one of the best and frankly one of the most cost effective uses of my tax money.
      Also I don't think you understand how vaccinations work. They are not 100% effective. They function in two ways. One they provide protection for a large percentage of the people vaccinated and they reduce the totally number of v irises in the environment. So even if you didn't get 100% immunization you get a benefit from all the people around you being immunized. So the more people around you that are immunized the better protected you and your children are.
      Second you can not deport poor people. Not everyone getting the free immunizations are illegals. So we are providing them anyway.
      Third it is wrong to punish children for the actions of their parents. Those kids didn't come sneak into the US by themselves their parents brought them. Some of them are US citizens because under US law if you where born here you are a citizen.

      Sorry but punishing children for the actions of their parents is wrong. Being too cheap to pay for vacinations for all children is wrong and frankly counter productive when it comes to total monetary costs of health care. And being willing to see children suffer and die just because their parents brought them to the US and are acting in a way that you feel is irresponsible makes you a fool that hasn't thought things through or a cruel heartless monster devoid of human compassion.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    2. Re:Uh, deport them? by tjstork · · Score: 1

      Well for one I am not willing to see children suffer and die.

      Blah blah blah. In a country that has abortion and stuffs kids in daycare rather than raise them, I think this whole suffering children thing is more political posturing than anything else. How many african kids from TV do you sponsor? Obviously, again, these kids can't be too important if their own parents can't even be bothered to vaccinate them.

      Also I don't think you understand how vaccinations work. They are not 100% effective. They function in two ways. One they provide protection for a large percentage of the people vaccinated and they reduce the totally number of v irises in the environment

      Like I said, deport the illegal immigrants, and let them infect their own country. Why doesn't Mexico pay the bill for this? How come these parents have the money to send billions of dollars back to Mexico, but don't even pay for their own kids to get medical care? Do you event want this mooching culture to continue to exist?

      Second you can not deport poor people. Not everyone getting the free immunizations are illegals. So we are providing them anyway

      That's like saying, hey we invaded Afghanistan, so lets invade Iraq, because, we're invading anyway. And again, the question has to be, why can't people pay for vaccines themselves? There's 40 million illegal immigrants.

      Third it is wrong to punish children for the actions of their parents. Those kids didn't come sneak into the US by themselves their parents brought them. Some of them are US citizens because under US law if you where born here you are a citizen.

      Being too cheap to pay for vacinations for all children is wrong and frankly counter productive when it comes to total monetary costs of health care.

      I'm not punishing anyone. I'm not a judge, and neither are you. There is no God in this country and therefor, no morality. It's really simple.

      Go ahead, be a hero. Pay for them all. I'm raising my son, with one parent at home, to raise him the right way, supporting a family by myself, while the bulk of this country hauls their kids off to daycare like so much cattle and the other half is off to the abortion clinic because they are too selfish to raise a child, and then a whole bunch are split up because they are too arrogant to make the compromises needed to make a marriage work. Tell me that you are against abortion, tell me that you think divorce ought to be stigmatized, tell me that you are willing to sacrifice personal luxuries so that one parent can stay at home and raise a child at home, while the other works... tell me that you believe in the traditional family, I'll believe that you care about children. Otherwise, shut the hell up with your fake morality.

      --
      This is my sig.
  37. First glance by Fission86 · · Score: 1

    When i first saw the title i read it as: "Horse corset to reduce congestive heart failure" and i asked myself why the hell do horses need corsets? and why the hell would they reduce congestive heart failure?

    At which point i re-read the title (got it correct this time) and commented to myself: "that was one hardcore corsetter that first tried this"

    I think i need some sleep

    --
    Coming to you live from another dimension.
  38. Decreased blood flow is nasty too by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    Though which would you rather have: decreased blood flow or the side of your heart blow out?


    Decreased blood flow is nasty in its own right too, especially reduced blood flow to the brain. It can mean often dizziness, confusion and/or constant anxiety (due to CO2 poisoning) even _with_ the heart allowed to expand to compensate for the valves malfunctioning. Reduce flow some more and, well, you might start losing neurons fast to lack of oxygen. And those don't regenerate, btw.

    Not that the other organs are better off with restricted blood flow either. We're talking basically shock and shock can and does kill.

    So basically if you wanted to say that it's better than being dead, well, it's hard to argue with that. But you might actually end up dead sooner _if_ it restricts blood flow enough, than if you waited until your heart fails naturally. You'd also be pretty much in constant shock before you die, which, as I was saying, is nasty.

    Now that all is a big "if" there. That all only applies _if_ it indeed decreases blood flow. I'm not saying it does or doesn't, I don't have half the data to make that kind of judgment. I'm just saying that decreased blood flow isn't something to be shrugged off.

    Also note that there are other operations that can help there, including getting mechanical valves installed. So there isn't necessarily a dichotomy there. The question is whether this helps more, not whether it's this or you wait until your heart blows up.
    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  39. You know I'm just giving you a hard time... by tjstork · · Score: 1

    You know, I actually agree with you but you are so pompous I just had to rattle you.

    It's only a couple billion dollars a year... the feds should do vaccination program, nationwide, and just throw it on the tab. If we can drop a half a trillion on saving the people of Iraq from their own inability to form a peaceful government, I think we can squeeze in vaccinating all the children in the United States, period.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:You know I'm just giving you a hard time... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      I wasn't trying to be pompous. I was giving an example of how bad people really can be.
      Frankly you rattleing me was getting me to the point where I thought you where about as usful to this planet as sandspurs and fireants.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.