Then you probably didn't have an anaphylactic "immediate hypersensitivity reaction after peanut ingestion" as the article says. If you had, your mother probably would have been terrified of putting you near a peanut ever again.
Because these people tend to die when they eat peanuts. You need to know how to do it in a very careful, controlled manner otherwise people will die. Mostly children. That would be a bad thing.
I agree it's based on the same idea, but this is quite a different thing. House dust antigen is relatively harmless and leads to worsening of atopic (asthma, eczema etc.) symptoms in some people. This new trial looks at treating people who have an anaphylactic response to peanuts ("immediate hypersensitivity reaction after peanut ingestion" from the article). People in this category die rapidly if they eat a peanut, which is why they carry epi-pens. Even with immediate epinephrine (adrenaline) some people could end up needing intubation and ventilation when exposed. Treating these sorts of reactions with desensitisation therapy is certainly not "standard practice" and would be groundbreaking if these findings can be confirmed on a wider scale and turned into treatment regimens for non-research settings.
Amazing how an automated tool can spot something like this after so many years.
Dude, that's already happened. Look at life expectancy increases in the West over the past 100 years. In the UK NHS, it's referred to as the 'population time bomb' as people think that we'll be unable to afford universal healthcare in 20 years' time. It hasn't stopped all of these life-prolonging treatments to become mainstream, and the UK government still spends millions every year educating people in health improvement that actually extends life and ultimately costs more (stop smoking, reduce saturated fat intake).
I don't think it's a useless file system. When I'm taking media to a conference, I have a small external hard drive with a small partition with exFAT drivers on, and a larger exFAT partition with all the media on it. That way, if there's an XP box being used for projection, I can move long video files around without the insanity of trying to use NTFS on removable media.
Ah, OK. I'm not sure why anyone would want to do that anyway, but fair enough. I want to have all of our music on all of our computers (synced via Home Sharing over WiFi) and then sync my mobile device to my laptop and my wife's to hers. That's what we did until Apple brought out iTunes Match, now we use that service as it's cheap and convenient.
"I can't believe that in 2013 she can only use an iPad properly with one computer" - what do you mean by that statement?
Yes, I suppose if you're organising your music on a 386SX25 with 10Mb RAM, the 'tons of hard drive space' used by a flat database would be a major concern.
Sound like you've never worked in paediatrics. Palpation is almost useless for children under 8, just go for what you can see, transilluminate or in this case pick up with infra-red.
I disagree. Certainly in paediatrics transilluminators work on all skin colours. To my knowledge, they don't use 'near-infrared' but use visible light, usually from red LEDs. This technology does use infra-red, and again skin pigmentation shouldn't matter. The projection-based devices I've used (e.g. Vein Viewer) worked fine on black african and asian skin pigments.
They did, just not head-mounted: http://www.christiedigital.com/en-us/projection-solutions/medical-innovations/pages/default.aspx
You don't know what you're talking about.
Yep, and this will help with those patients in no way at all. In fact, it's likely to make you try for a tiny mobile vein that looks good through the glasses but isn't any good in practice. This would certainly be a helpful tool in the toolkit, but in now way a complete answer.
Actually this sort of tech is available now, it uses a compact video projector rather than glasses. It works well, although it does have a tendency to make even tiny veins appear viable for cannulation. http://www.christiedigital.com/en-us/projection-solutions/medical-innovations/pages/default.aspx I can see the potential of using glasses, the good thing about the projection version is that other people can also see what you're doing, which is helpful for a difficult procedure (e.g. PICC lines) where a couple of people might be involved. I could also imagine it reducing litigation potential compared to a single person looking through glasses.