gastro ./ hepato gastroenterology
New Information On Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Or Acid Reflux By Groshan Fabiola Gastroesophageal reflux also known as acid reflux or heartburn is a condition in which the contents of the stomach flow back into esophagus causing the lower part of the esophagus to become inflamed and painful and the condition in which this occures is known as reflux esophagitis.
Those who are usually affected by gastroesophageal reflux are those that are obese or have a hiatal hernia or scleroderma and in pregnancy.
The exact cause is the disfunction of the the lower esophageal sphincter, the lower esophageal sphincter opens and let the stomach acid contents to reflux. If you are eating very large meals, lying down within two to three hours of eating, and taking certain drugs including diazepam, meperidine, theophylline, morphine, prostaglandins, calcium channel blockers, nitrate heart medications, and anticholinergic and adrenergic drugs you are susceptible of developing gastroesophageal reflux. Alcohol, nicotine and caffeine aggravate the acid reflux.
Symptoms
One of the symptoms in acid reflux is heartburn, others are: painful swallowing, cramping, excessive salivation, coughing, shortness of breath, sore throat. Those symptoms are relieved when you adopt a n orthostatic position. You may also have a bitter taste in your mouth and can lead to reflux esophagitis, esophageal ulcer and Barrett’s syndrome which can further develop esophageal cancer.
Diagnostic
A gastroenterologist will perform some tests x-rays and barium examination, esophagoscopy, biopsy examination, manometry of the esophagus, the Bernstein test which deals with the level of acidity in the esophagus. Esophagus has an important role in moving the food down in the stomach with the aid of muscle contractions, at the lower end there is a specialized
More or fewer, many or less
At Chez Boca,
Bunny is the prescriptivist in the household,
and I the descriptivist.
So while ?Grammar rules you can stop sticking to? meshed with my biases,
Bunny remained unconvinced with a small exception towards not ending a sentence with a preposition.
But the majority of our discussion centered around the use of ?fewer? and ?less.?
The rule Bunny was taught was to use ?fewer? for a countable number of items and ?less? for uncountable or fungible items.
For example,
we have fewer cookies around here because we had less flour to make them
(I originally ended this sentence with ?to work with? but I wanted to avoid ending with a preposition).
I always say ?less? but I suspect this has less to do with my descriptivism and more to do with programming,
where x < 3 is translated to ?x is less than three.?
It just seems weird to say ?x is fewer than three,?
despite most numbers on a computer system being countable,
if potentially large
(the only exceptions would be ±inifinty and NaN).
I also wondered about the opposites of ?fewer? and ?less.?
When I asked Bunny for the opposite for ?fewer? she said ?more,?
and when asked for the opposite of ?less? she also said ?more.?
To her,
the word ?more? could be applied to either countable items,
like ?I need more cookies,?
and for fungible items,
like ?I need more flour.?
But that struck me as odd?why separate words for ?a smaller number or amount of? and not for ?a greater number or amount of??
Why does ?more? get a pass for both concepts,
and not something like ?many? for countable items,
and ?more? for fungible items?
Why the rule for ?less? and ?fewer??
I need many cookies,
and I need more flour to make them.
After our discussion,
I thought about this for a bit.
While Robert Baker made this distinction in 1770
(per the video),
I have to wonder why he felt the distinction needed to be made,
applying ?fewer? to numbers rather than ?less.?
At first,
I thought it may have something to do with the Norman conquest of England.
As my 1924 copy of Roget's Treasury Of Words says: ?[i]t is interesting to note that the French names for different kinds of food became restricted to the cooked meats;
while the English names were reserved for the living animals.?
It also noted the act of word doubling?using both the Norman-French and Saxxon terms,
such as humble and lowly,
poor and needy,
act and deed,
aid and abet,
use and wont,
will and testament,
and
assault and battery.
Could this be a reason for the distinction between ?fewer? and ?less??
It's not due to the Norman invasion that's for sure.
While looking
through my copy of the Oxford English Dictionary,
I found the word ?less? is an Old English word from Northumbria,
having been a word in both Old Frisian and Old Teutonic.
The usage meaning ?smaller quantity? didn't first appear until 1314.
And as Oxford states,
the opposite is ?more.?
The word ?few? is also an Old English word,
also in Old Frisian and Old Teutonic but importantly,
not from Northumbria!
It's meaning of ?smaller quantity? or ?a small number? is documented from around 900,
and it's ?antithesis?
(as Oxford calls it) is ?many!?
How about that?
But I'm now of the opinion that Robert Baker wanted to signal he wasn't part of the hoi polloi and came up with a pointless distinction.
Bunny remains unconvinced of my theory.
]]>
DOES> RECURSE doesn't DOES> RECURSE does't DOES> RECURSE ?
Recursion in Forth isn't as straitforward as you would think.
The obvious:
: FOO ... FOO .. ;
doesn't work.
It will either error out as FOO isn't found,
or it will call the previous definition of FOO if it exists.
This is a quirk of Forth,
and it one reason why globals aren't as much of an issue as they are in other languages?if you define the word REPEAT it won't break existing code that called REPEAT ,
they will just keep using the old version of REPEAT while new words will use the new version.
In fact,
the ANS Forth standard says as much: ?The current definition shall not be findable in the dictionary until [colon] is ended.?
Thus the reason for the word RECURSE ,
an immedate word
(which is run durring compilation, not compiled)
to exist in Forth?to do recursion.
This was an easy word to implement:
forth_core_recurse ; ( -- )
fdb forth_core_r_fetch
fdb _IMMED | _NOINTERP :: .xt - .name
.name fcc "RECURSE"
.xt fdb .body
.body ldx forth__here ; get current comp location
ldd forth__create_xt ; get xt of current word
std ,x++ ; recurse
stx forth__here
ldx ,y++ ; NEXT
jmp [,x]
So the above would be written as:
: FOO ... RECURSE ... ;
And the resulting code would look like:
foo fdb ...
fdb .xt - .name
.name fcc "FOO"
.xt fdb forth_core_colon.runtime
.body fdb dot_dot_dot.xt
fdb foo.xt ; FOO's xt
fdb dot_dot_dot.xt
fdb forth_core_exit.xt
The only reason I'm mentioning this word is because of this bit from the Standard:
?An ambiguous condition exists if RECURSE appears in a definition after DOES> .?
There's a reason for that?depending upon the implementation,
it may be impossible to do recursion after DOES> .
Why?
In my Forth implementation,
the code following DOES> doesn't have an xt to reference.
The xt of any word is the address of the .xt field.
So using the example from my explaination of DOES> ,
the xt of MAN would be of its .xt field:
man fdb shape ; link to next word
fdb .xt - .name
.name fcc 'man'
.xt fdb shape.does ; the XT of this word is this address
.body fcb $24
fcb $24
fcb $24
fcb $99
fcb $5A
fcb $3C
fcb $18
fcb $18
But the problem is?that address doesn't exist until the word is defined!
If,
for example,
the definition of SHAPE used RECURSE :
: SHAPE CREATE 8 0 DO C, LOOP
DOES> ... RECURSE ... ;
when RECURSE is executed,
there is no xt for it to use.
We can't use the xt for SHAPE ?that's not the word we want to recurse on.
And we can't use the address of shape.does
because that's not an actual xt.
And the code following DOES> can be shared by multiple words:
... SHAPE MAN
... SHAPE FACE-HUGGER
... SHAPE ALIEN
... SHAPE FLAME-THROWER
so there's no single xt that RECURSE could use when compiling the code after DOES>
(never mind the fact that that happens before the words that use the code are created).
So,
in my Forth implementation,
no RECURSE after DOES> .
Which is fine,
because it's an ambiguous condition.
Could I make it work?
Maybe.
But it would be a lot of work for a feature that Forth programmers can't rely upon anyway.
]]>
muscle called the lower esophageal sphincter that is tight until the food is above it, then it relaxes to let pass the food and fluids.
This way acids, enzymes and other substances from the stomach do not come up in the esophagus to damage the tissue. It is important to drink milk until the esophagus has healed and you have no more acid reflux. There are some easy to make recipes that may be used during the period of recovery. Proton inhibitors drugs only mask the symptoms, so what I truly recommend are natural and healthy recipes. Acid reflux can be healed with herbs, meditation, exercise and diet, health store items.
Not chewing food properly and eating wrong foods determine the condition known as: esophageal reflux disease. In this condition the esophagus is damaged and the lower esophageal sphincter is weakened, the first thing to do in the healing of the esophageal reflux disease is to cure the esophagus.
The best solution is to continue treatment even if the symptoms are relieved, so as the condition will not return. Article Source: http://www.articlemap.com For more resources about acid reflux or especially about acid reflux diet please click this link www.acid-reflux-info-guide.com/acid-reflux-diet.htm
|