I love Emily Graslie and her enthusiasm is inspirational to me…pathology and anatomy is one of my favorite subjects, and she’s managed to explain things I’ve wanted to cover in much more succinct language than I’ve ever been able to come up with.
It’s sort of disheartening to me that I’ve never had that same continual enthusiasm for my education, and that she’s younger than me but much farther along in life than I am, but I still love all of her videos. They’re educational, fascinating, and sometimes extremely gross, and are part of one of the most interesting sets of channels on YouTube.
More correctly it was a postpartum prolapse. The cervix is dilated and there’s placental and umbilical matter
blocking the entrance into the uterus.
According to the text, it was caused after an already-difficult labor, by a (presumably novice) doctor pulling on the umbilical cord after birth when the post-labor contractions weren’t sufficient to expel the placenta. After a particularly difficult birth, the woman often is expended of all her energy, but if the placenta isn’t expelled naturally, it will begin to decay and introduce infection into the uterus.
That said, this was a…suboptimal…choice the doctor made, as you can see. The uterus was removed was a hysterectomy, and the vagina was sutured into place in the body, but the lady suffered from continued vaginal prolapse problems as far as the case was followed.
ETA: The placental and umbilical remnants are actually at the top of the uterus, as both organs have been completely everted.
*shrug* It’s the internet. I try to assume the worst/least of people. I don’t always remember that not everyone is on the same level when I’m sleepy. -_-
BUT I SHALL PERSEVERE!
Like I said, this blog would be the same with one follower or a million. :) I love the subject, and maybe I can teach someone else along the way. If not…I’ve taught myself so much already, so why not continue?
Not to be snide or anything, I DONT KNOW (because apparently I offend) but, er, everything anatomical?
It depends what you’re taking. Honestly, I find studying *during* the classes a lot more helpful than studying beforehand or trying to learn things really thoroughly before the class does. Like it or not, what the teacher/professor teaches, that’s likely gonna be what’s considered “correct” on the exams - you can know as much as you want when it comes to current knowledge, and still do poorly, if the professor isn’t one to take correction well.
That said, I found studying histology before I took the course to be immensely helpful, because we never spent enough time on the interactions between cell layers (but they were all covered on the exams) for me to have remembered them otherwise. The rest I would have learned in class.
He was also polyamorous (living with two women in a “surprisingly harmonious” [as per his biographers] relationship for most of his life), and a
fairly strong feminist relatively pro-female figure, at least for his time.
I hate the term “lie detector test” when it comes to polygraphs; they’re not even reliable enough to be used in US courts, and we allow a LOT of questionable science in. But they’re still used for intimidation and coercion by police departments with very little oversight. :\ But yes, he did! And I commend him for recognizing a LOT of the weaknesses of the machine from the get-go, even if he wasn’t actually listened to beyond “this MIGHT help you catch SOME liars!”
You know, I don’t, I love too many animals, but I almost want to pick a *most* favorite species/genus now that you ask. I haven’t thought about it in a while, but it might be interesting to look at some of the animals I know of and love - my problem is that I’m constantly reading about new [to me] and awesome animals/bugs/species of everything and it’s a bit overwhelming thinking of EVERYTHING. :P
I almost miss when I knew, like, as many species as I knew pokemon… >_>
Megalonychidae (Two-toed sloths)
Phyllobates (true dart frogs)
Oraseminae (Eurcharitid wasp)
African Painted Dog
«I am not a publicly-traded company, I love you all. and I love linguistics, and etymology, and biology. I do my own thang, chickadee. I hope you still love me :D »
ETA: In fairness, I do take requests, and have a lot of interests in what my followers have to say, and constructive criticism. I do listen to what you guys have to say. I just have the final call.
ETA2: that is a rhea, they love you in the end. don’t fear them.
It wasn’t so much for the skin itself to take hold, as it was to let the vasculature actually get re-seated in the facial region, which was crucial when it came to preventing immediate necrosis of the grafted skin.
Especially since the full thickness of the dermis was going to be used in reconstructing the region, it would have been almost impossible to get such a large chunk of tissue to spontaneously attach to its host site. By letting it have a healthy vascular connection on one end, while it establishes its “roots” on the other end, the tissue stayed alive, and the person wasn’t left with a dead nose and a flesh wound on their arm.
Tagliacozzi’s nasal reconstructive surgery. Developed because people kept getting their nose tips cut off in duels.Favorite reason for developing a surgery ever.
Heteropoda maxima is larger, by leg length.
If you live outside Laos, you’re fine.
If you live inside Laos…well, just don’t live in a cave.
Oooh! I’m glad they replayed that segment! Well, one of them, at least. I’m not sure which one you heard, but there are a couple good ones - here’s the Science Friday segment on it. This Fresh Air interview of Carl Zimmer has some additional information on it.
As for “if it works”, that’s still being determined in many respects, but so far, it’s looking like one of the most effective treatments for infections caused by the destruction of gut bacteria - when our normal gut flora is destroyed by antibiotics, bacteria that are normally kept in check by the “good bacteria” can take hold and take over, like Clostridium difficile. C. difficile is in your gut already, most likely, but the good flora in there makes it so that it can’t get a solid footing in your intestines and cause problems.
Really, that’s the primary use for fecal transplants right now, but they’re being investigated in other intestinal diseases and conditions. For now, though, we’re pretty sure that the extremely high success rate for eliminating C. difficile infections(80%+ with non-“matched” transplants, 95%+ with transplants from a household member) is directly due to the infusion of good bacteria back into the gut - nothing is for certain until every possibility is investigated, but it’s looking like a really solid solution, possibly even a new standard solution to be used BEFORE giving a patient more antibiotics. We’ll see how studies on other diseases turn out eventually, but C. difficile is a horrible infection, and affects a lot of people, and this is actually a really promising treatment modality.
Oh my. I’m sorry to hear about your friend - anaphylactic shock is a terrible thing in anyone, but I can’t imagine being someone who didn’t expect it have it come on without warning.
Despite all the good it does, the immune system can be a real jerk, sometimes.
Honestly, I love archaeology, but I’m not well-versed in the science of it. I do find the tales of expeditions (especially recently) and the ways the scientists used to find everything before they even went to the dig sites absolutely fascinating, though!
I’m a skeptic through-and-through, if I’m being honest. I try not to be terribly harsh on those whose opinions differ from mine (as I tend to focus on stuff that’s either *proven* to be wrong, or things that have been highly relevant in the past, when I’m not doing natural history), but I’m pretty clear that I believe in what’s been shown by science, and if you can’t give me empirical evidence of something, I’m probably not going to be swayed…but at the same time, I love learning more, and love being shown that I’m wrong on certain facts.
Corrections are always welcome, whether they’re spelling errors or egregious factual problems, so long as people recognize that I don’t *endorse* the therapies and methods I write about, I simply present them as what was going on at the time. :3
Thanks to everyone who replied to this question - this is the general response I’ve gotten from almost everyone, anon.
Oh my gosh, solartherapy/heliotherapy was a HUGE thing back in the day - the link between vitamin D and the sun wasn’t made until the 1920s, but they knew the sun emitted radiation, and yes, that is a great idea - also good luck with that vitamin D thing and try not to get rickets or anything.