Slashdot Mirror
Why You Shouldn't Stifle Your Sneeze (theguardian.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: In a season where colds are rife, holding your nose and closing your mouth might seem like a considerate alternative to an explosive "Achoo!" But doctors have warned of the dangers of such a move after a man was found to have ruptured the back of his throat when attempting to stifle a sneeze. Medics say the incident, which they detail in the British Medical Journal Case Reports, came to light when a 34-year old man arrived in A&E with a change to his voice, a swollen neck, pain when swallowing and a popping sensation in his neck after he pinched his nose to contain an expulsion. The team took scans of the man's neck to investigate and discovered bubbles of air in the tissues at the back of the throat, and in the neck from the base of the skull to halfway down the man's back. That, they say, suggested a tear had occurred at the back of the throat as a result of increased pressure from the stifled sneeze, leading to air collecting in his soft tissues. The authors warn that blocking the nostrils and mouth when sneezing is dangerous, noting that while tearing of the throat tissue is rare, it could result in a ruptured eardrum or even a brain aneurysm.
are there really people that stupid, and they need to read a warning not to do that? They are the ones that need "caution: hot, may cause burns" on drive-thru coffee cups? how about we forego warning them and instead hope they get brain aneurysm and die before they reproduce?
Strangers expect you to cover it. You can't hand out a URL to the article after you blast them with boogers. Well, you could try, but they'll think you are a, well, nerd, and some may even pop you one.
Table-ized A.I.
same thing.
What? Women don't get hyenias?
Boy was I surprised anyone have a cloth ?
Whenever I get sick (and occasionally when I'm not) I get the urge to sneeze but can't actually do it, which feels 10x worse. None of the stupid online tricks to make yourself sneeze ever work either.
I find the most controllable and least painful way to handle an unwanted sneeze is to press the tongue against the roof of the mouth, in the same way as when you imitate a machine gun. It makes a weird noise but at least it works in private . . . is there a (safe) silent way to deal with a sneeze?
Sneeze in the inside of your elbow with it placed just above the nose. Whatever doesn't get absorbed by the clothes or arm, will get directed downward. This shouldn't be complicated, but apparently there's enough morons in the world where it needs to be taught. FFS
Life is not for the lazy.
It's just some fucking drunk troll. Yes, there truly are people with such empty, worthless lives.
Take your xenophobia and shove it. Christians say plenty about love, then they turn around and spew hate.
There are a few people, like myself, in which it is a reflex. When I have that moment before a sneeze, where I breath in, my body clenches up involuntarily so when I sneeze most of the time the muscles have clenched it up. Even actively trying to relax does nothing cause that just makes it seem like the sneeze isn't going to happen and then when it does happen it's so fast and explosive that I can't prepare at all and I clench up faster than I can even think.
aren't your eyes supposed to pop out if you totally block a sneeze? At least that was the rumor way back when I was a kid. Also, if you drink pop rocks and coke at the same time your stomach will explode. Or something like that.
There is about a kajillionth of a chance of this happening to you, please cover your mouth when sneeze, millennials.
The story explicitly says "such complications from sneezing were so uncommon that there was no evidence in general that individuals should not hold one in." -- the headline directly contradicts the story. Here's what we actually learn: There existed a single patient who tore the back of his throat, purportedly as part of stifling a sneeze. Okay.
I think Slashdot editors should not post stories about science if the headline is inaccurate or if they themselves lack the scientific literacy to evaluate the claims in the headline or the body of the story.
Embarrassing.
For me, stifled sneezes are more comfortable and convenient than going full achoo.I stifle them essentially by sneezing while holding my breath. Sneezes vary in forcefulness. I make sure the sneeze only gets stifled if it's less than a certain pressure. If I know it's going to be a forceful I'll skip attempting the stifle because at that point it defeats the purpose.
Supposedly (according to Suetonius, IIRC), one of the Ceasars declared that it's OK to fart at dinner parties, after one of his guests hurt himself trying to hold one back so he wouldn't have to leave the room.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Try pushing the tip of your nose next time you're about to sneeze. On myself and the few people I've tested it on, it suppresses the sneeze. You won't feel that great after, but you won't sneeze.
From an evolutionary standpoint, it makes sense that there would be an "off" switch for a noisy and messy reflex like a sneeze. If you're hiding from a predator and don't have any way to suppress your sneeze, you die.
CIA secret: It's quite easy to hardly make a sound while sneezing by simply exhaling without using the tongue to block the airway (neither mouth nor nasal passages). Just open mouth and "wheeze" out. This avoids scaring to death the people around you and doesn't create much spray. Do this into the crook of your elbow, and hardly anyone will even know you did anything.
To get hurt just sneeze normally. I pulled a damn back muscle once on a particularly large sneeze and it was nearly a pain in the ass for two weeks.
Leftists. Proof you, christophobic biggot.
Maybe this is something Sesame Street could do in a PSA, with their character of 'The Count'. "Vun! Vun sneeze! Ah ah ah ah...choo!"
In what you universe is this "news that matters"?
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
You probably missed the fact that I use English spelling rather than American. Not surprising. Your attempt at pretending to be a Muslim is equally superficial.
On second thought, let's pass on that, huh?
I reviewed the posts that appear to be years. You didn't use any words that are spelled differently between British and American English. That's the central claim of your post, and it's completely without merit.
So one guy hurts himself and that means it's not safe for every single other person on the planet? It's still way better to just hold it in and not spread your germs.
This is doubly useful because it also keeps effluvia off your mitts. Not nice if you are wearing short sleeves, though. Personally I use a big bandanna when I can. These come in handy for lots of stuff, including sneezes, but especially to dry my hands in places that lack towels. Also... Along the same lines... Hard honking nose blows can be counter productive -- albeit satisfying. The best method is to gently blow one nostril at a time while sealing the other. Hard blows actually send material deeper into the sinus cavity as well as out. IANAD, but I dated any number of nurses -- back in the day.
"No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
"RIP in Peace" is redundant. Yes, standards have slipped a bit at Slashdot, mostly because of the 4chan ops which are designed to destroy the place. They haven't been successful, but the hassle has dissuaded a lot of the good people from posting as much.
But none of that means we should let our grammatical usage slip due to laziness, so you're on notice mister. Strike one.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Calvin and Hobbes
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/fb/40/eb/fb40eb8694718adc5ab64712a1caf286--calvin-and-hobbes-comics-online-comics.jpg
Calvin and Hobbes
In our country, people dont stifle the sneeze. Even they make some funny sounds with that sneeze. It's normal in my country
a href ="https://beatcolor.com/"> Beat Color
4chan ops? Can you elaborate?
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
Hey, sometimes fumbling for your kerchief is just setting yourself to explode in a cloud of infectious spewage. Simply tuck yourself into the nook of your arm, or nestle your face underneath your shirt, and just splatter away.
Clean yourself up afterwards; donâ(TM)t hug me!
...that we now have an official metric to diagnose someone as a pussy.
My father got a hernia stifling a sneeze.
If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
...to intentionally induce a fatal condition, is that considered attempting suicide?
I broke my rib holding in a sneeze. (At night, in my bed, while laying on my side.) And this to not alarm the wife and child.
^^^^Same AC who was singing praises of allah earlier in the thread. Just wants to see the world burn.
There's been towelhead spam in three consecutive articles.
Yeah, posted by you, so you can pretend to react to it.
Don't try to hold your poop and pee indefinitely. Slow news day eh Slashdot?
We'll make great pets
Not sure why this got modded down, it's on point. I would mod you up despite being AC.
We'll make great pets
Don't resist a sneeze, just go with it, if you want to minimize it. Open your mouth wide, open your throat, remove all obstructions. My sneezes this way just sound like loud fast exhalations. Instead of ah-choo it's a-hooo.
And do all this into your armpit. The loud part of the sneeze is the pressure buildup releasing. Don't provide any resistance, no pressure buildup. I bet it reduces droplet projection quite a lot to sneeze this way too.
To a lot of people this isn't even recognizable as a sneeze. They look at you like, "what just happened?"
--PM
Decades ago, I taught myself to sneeze entirely through my mouth to prevent the nostril mess afterwards (adding the Dracula elbow in more recent times). Since I usually only sneeze "once at a time", I wonder about sneezing's effectiveness regarding/correlation with the nose. I've been studying the vagus nerve lately (it innervates SO much within the body), that I wonder whether IT is involved in sensing and dealing with pulmonary/esophageal irritation more than anything else...
What is this "consequence to your karma" stuff? Aside from the fact that the post is obviously inappropriate religious trolling and entirely off topic (especially for a first post) and hence EARNS some bad karma, we are WAY down in the thread at this point and nobody cares.
Look, poster human who allegedly is trying to convert people to Islam: The Quran is a violent -- incredibly violent, almost maximally violent as far as comparative religious mythology is concerned -- inconsistent, absurd collection of assertions. Its only -- only -- possible claim to being perfect truth is that it claims, as often as possible "This document is perfect truth". Here, look, I can make the same claim -- "This post is perfect truth". Do you now believe it? No, you judge it on the basis of certain common-sense comparisons to your prior beliefs and your life experience, that is, the EVIDENCE for how the world works. If you completely lacked this common sense base, you'd do things like walk off of buildings because you disbelieve in gravity, burn your hands on the red hot stove the third or fourth time just because the red coils are pretty, be unable to drive your car or operate simple machinery.
Having read the Quran cover to cover multiple times, it is a purely extortionist document. Count the number of times Allah threatens to burn up unbelievers. My favorite -- where he details how he will hold unbelievers in the fire and burn off their skin, then magically regrow their skin back so he can iterate, burning their skin off in an unterminated do-loop for the rest of eternity. It isn't ever "believe this because it makes the most sense and is in perfect correspondence with your experience of the world and the evidence of your senses" it is "believe this because if you don't I will HURT YOU FOREVER!" It's like Muhammed took the hell meme from Christianity -- where it is really only barely expressed in a few places and is itself inconsistent and silly and quite possibly an add-on from long after Jesus lived, IF Jesus as a unitary entity and not a syncretic creation ever lived -- and said "That's the ticket! If they won't believe this crap straight up, I'll scare the robes right off of them with all of the horrific stuff Allah will do to them if they call me a liar!"
The beauty of evidence-based reasoning is that it is self-correcting and anybody can use it. You don't need angels dictating to you in caves, you don't need angels showing you golden tablets, you don't need mystic poets or prophets or seers. You don't have to be beloved by God (if God exists) or selected by God (if God exists) or be brainwashed into considering some documentary collection to be the one authority on how the Universe REALLY works BEYOND QUESTION at the expense of completely turning off your critical reasoning facility when examining certain aspects of the world. Anybody can play. Yes, you probably need an IQ on the high side of 85 or 90, but that's enough to have a fair bit of common sense and to be able to learn not to play with fire or walk off of tall buildings.
"Science" is just the collection of beliefs about the real world that are supported by a mostly consistent network of evidence and evidence supported beliefs. Like a belief in the law of gravitation -- gravity doesn't CARE what you believe -- as you grow up and drop things (including yourself) it will teach you what it is, and you can either learn or not learn and if you walk off a cliff in the future it and the laws of physics, chemistry and biology that govern your material existence will cause you to splat at the bottom and cease as an organized named biological entity quite independent of your beliefs. Using those laws you can infer the age of the Universe and conclude that documents that assert that the Universe is (say) 6000 years old are absurdly wrong. Using simple common sense and math you can conclude that documents that assert that there was a big flood that covered the entire surface of the world from a rain that lasted 40 days and nights, and that
Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
Christians and Muslims worship the same God. That you do not understand this proves you are merely an ignorant troll.
This is doubly useful because it also keeps effluvia off your mitts. Not nice if you are wearing short sleeves, though. Personally I use a big bandanna when I can. These come in handy for lots of stuff, including sneezes, but especially to dry my hands in places that lack towels. Also... Along the same lines... Hard honking nose blows can be counter productive -- albeit satisfying. The best method is to gently blow one nostril at a time while sealing the other. Hard blows actually send material deeper into the sinus cavity as well as out. IANAD, but I dated any number of nurses -- back in the day.
Best not to dry your hands with a bandanna which was previously used to contain a sneeze (unless it's been washed since, of course); it just transfers the germs to your hands - which was the whole point of using a bandanna in the first place!
I already have a ruptured right eardrum. If I suppress a sneeze it causes an astonishingly loud (only to me, I realize) and painful whistle. So my sneezes sound more like cannon shots.
Yeah, if you're giving it to someone else to use. You can't contaminate yourself with germs you expel from your own body. It's your hands you want to wash.
Successful troll is successful.
Great reply to our sockpuppet so you could post this ramble that excuses and ignored other religions
I disagree with your reply, but I do appreciate it.
I'm not accusing people of bigotry, not at all, but I think there are some inherent biases. People develop these biases and they may not even be aware of it. The solution is to make them aware.
I promise you that if I was telling people to convert to Christianity, no one would hesitate to accept the authenticity of the author being a Christian. Yet the message of conversion to Islam is met with skepticism as to whether the author really believes the Islamic faith. There is an inherent bias and I am defending my Christian friends on this.
With respect to science, there is another inherent bias. The idea that the universe is a simulation, governed by some programmer outside the universe, is taken seriously enough for scientists to discuss it and even look for evidence. However, replace the programmer with Allah or God, and the message is ridiculed. This is another inherent bias that I've noticed. Essentially the same concept is treated differently depending on whether it's presented in a religious context or not.
In regard to the Qur'an being violent as religious texts go, I assume you have a point of comparison against which to make that judgment. Your post implies you have also read the Bible. With a text of that length, it's very difficult for you or anyone to make an accurate assessment from your own reading which texts ate more violent. Rather than a general statement as to which is more violent, you cite an example from the Qur'an and make a somewhat inaccurate comparison to Christianity. There are plenty of depictions of Hell in the Bible including Jesus describing the "wailing and gnashing of teeth" in a parable, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, and the Lake of Fire described in Revelation. The Old Testament doesn't discuss the afterlife much, and in many respects, it's a Christian innovation.
That said, the Old Testament God is pretty violent in his own right. He's very jealous and constantly demanding praise. He unleashes plagues upon innocent Egyptians because of the failures of the Pharaoh, ultimately drowning most of the Egyptian army. God is murderous, even demanding genocide of the tribes living in the promised land. He's hardly a wholesome character, leading some atheists to describe the Christian God as the most evil character in fiction.
You might argue that the New Testament is different, and for most of the way, it is. The message of Jesus is strikingly different from the Old Testament God. Although there is violence as part of the crucifixion, it's different because it doesn't reflect God being violent. By the way, Islam teaches that Jesus is a prophet, and Muslims also venerate Mary, the mother of Jesus. It's all well and good until Revelation, which is back to the wild visions of Ezekiel and Daniel, but with far greater violence. It depicts a period of time in which angels are sounding trumpets, opening scrolls, and pouring out bowls on the Earth, each of which leads to a plague. Each of the plagues is seemingly more violent than the last, many of which are killing large portions of humanity. As God is torturing and killing humanity, he has the audacity to wonder why the people he hasn't killed aren't worshiping him and praising him. All this time, the faithful in Heaven are praising God and celebrating God as he kills those unfortunate enough to be on Earth. That's more violent and more vile than your depiction of Hell, especially because God's rage is directed at all of humanity.
More to the point, natural language analysis of the Bible, using computers and statistics, has found that the Bible actually is more violent than the Qur'an. In fact, Muslims who exclusively follow the Qur'an tend to be extremely peaceful. However, most Muslims believe some texts of the Hadith, some of which are very peaceful, and some of which are full of rage. Basically, I disagree with your assessment that the Qur'an is a particularly violent religious text.
Yeah, if you're giving it to someone else to use. You can't contaminate yourself with germs you expel from your own body. It's your hands you want to wash.
The point is that if you have germs on your hands (even if it's your own germs), you will pass them on - touching door handles, faucet handles, shaking hands, etc. You obviously do want to wash your hands soon.
When I was a missionary in Brazil, it was a mission rule to carry trial size containers of hand sanitizer.
It's on the front page, jackass. You can quit shitting your panties, snowflake.
You are correct, there was no difference in spelling at the time you wrote your parody/imitation.
I didn't see the parody post until after I had replied to something else (which did contain English spelling), and replied based on that.
I apologise.
Your posts are at -1 as well.
Yes, because I don't want to cruft up the discussion with this off-topic debate. I'm using the fact that AC starts at 0 to prevent my comments from being seen by anyone except you and parties interested in this discourse. You claim to want to inform people. You won't do that from 0 or -1 posts. Either as an AC or a regular account that is moderated not because of xenophobia, but because you are offtopic (which is not to say that xenophobia is absent, but that it's a drop in the bucket compared to the far more prevalent disgust with off-topic posts and spam).
You're complaining from a position of hypocrisy. You've conveniently deflected and ignored this.
No, I've addressed it directly several times now. I'm not sure how to explain that our goals are different and hence that while the choices I make are the same as you (to post AC) the reason for doing so is different. Or should be different if you are what you claim or are attempting what you claim to be attempting.
If you're sincere, you'll do it, and face the consequences to your karma.
*laugh* I hope to plant a seed. I can't persuade you. Or stop you. But maybe some of what I say will add to the comments and reactions that other people give you and over time you'll learn. But probably not.
Be well.
(not the person you were replying to, I'm the AC from above)
Thank you for your reply, and had you posted something like this instead of spamming your 'convert ...' then this would have been a much more interesting conversation from the start.
I'm not accusing people of bigotry
And yet you claim that if you posted under an account you'd be subject to xenophobia. You go on to mention biases, but I'm not sure I understand the distinction you are making. 'Bias' and 'xenophobia' both seem to be a form of bigotry.
no one would hesitate to accept the authenticity of the author being a Christian
And I assure you that if they did so in the way you did, I'd call them on it in much the same fashion.
is taken seriously enough for scientists to discuss it and even look for evidence
Some take it seriously because they believe it is or may be true. Others take it seriously because the formulation of the argument is interesting, or because disproving it interests them. Importantly, they don't spam forums like this with 'convert to Simulationism' like you did. Nor do they knock on doors on Saturday morning to talk about Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, nor do they set up charities that help the poor, so long as the poor are Christian - etc. So, sorry, not equivalent except in the broadest sense.
Essentially the same concept is treated differently depending on whether it's presented in a religious context or not.
Are you suggesting that if I were to go to a Muslim forum and spam 'Islam is a lie. Science is the only reality' that I would be treated the same as if I asked a question of interpretation of a Surah?
Do you not evaluate science through the lens of your belief? Why would you expect others to behave differently?
For the record, I have no issue with Muslims or much of Islam, just as I have no issue with Christians or much of Christianity. There are individuals who happen to be Muslim, or Christian who act in ways that I object to, and there are sects and sub-sets of both groups that preach violence, intolerance or use religion as means of control that I disagree with.
Your actions (if you are the 'convert to Islam' spammer) are objectionable. Not your beliefs.
Please consider that no-one on these forums is likely to be unaware of the existence of Islam. Consider as well that while some, even many, may have a negative view of Islam, _nothing_ in the content or the way you posted was likely to alter that, but on the contrary was likely to justify negative opinion in those that already held such and to engender it in those who may be neutral and I have to point out that your stated intention of showing people the truth of Islam is contradicted by your actions. If you really have the faith you claim, you've done more harm than good for that faith.
You've pushed people away from Islam by your actions and behaviour. No-one likes being told what to do. No one likes someone coming into their community and ignoring the rules. I recall several passages from the Quran that advised courtesy (I can't quote reliably, and googling feels like claiming a familiarity that I don't have - I've read the Quran once, about 20 years ago, although I'v re-read parts more recently), just as similar parables and instruction appear in the Bible. Unsurprising given that they both come from similar roots and cultures. I've argued the same point with Christian evangelists who seem to think that yelling loudly at people on street corners is going to do anything except fuel their (the preacher's) need for persecution.
So, if you post one or two lines of spam I'll call you a troll, because there's only one outcome from that behaviour.
Sounds like good advice. But then my very loud sneezes will wake up my wife. :-(
I didn't know this was a thing. I just do it anyway. That way I'm not sneezing into my hands and then getting that sneeze all over the subway poles I touch, door handles, etc.
Sneezing into your elbow pit just contains the damage and unless someone grabs your arms before you get a chance to wash them, contains the problem.
Well duh.
Why would I dry my hands with a banana?
Well duh. Why would I dry my hands with a banana?
Look at the parent post by bdwoolman:
This is doubly useful because it also keeps effluvia off your mitts. Not nice if you are wearing short sleeves, though. Personally I use a big bandanna when I can. These come in handy for lots of stuff, including sneezes, but especially to dry my hands in places that lack towels
Being ./ I couldn't tell if sarcasm was included or not.