Electronics > Beginners

What is the white powder inside computer IEC power cords?

<< < (5/8) > >>

stj:
J&J have a long history of tainted products and medical device recalls,
a couple a year on average!!

i could believe just about anything if they are involved.

jpanhalt:

--- Quote from: stj on July 16, 2018, 09:22:16 pm ---J&J have a long history of tainted products and medical device recalls,
a couple a year on average!!

i could believe just about anything if they are involved.

--- End quote ---

With an outrageous claim like that, please present your evidence for the last 5 years.  That is, 10 recalls for serious matters.  NB: Medical devices are particularly prone to recalls for such things as typos and blurred printing on labels.  I some cases, the products can just be relabeled.

IanB:

--- Quote from: langwadt on July 16, 2018, 08:21:25 pm ---I'm no MD but from there to the ovaries? what were they doing?

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: jpanhalt on July 16, 2018, 09:05:46 pm ---You don't need to be an MD to read about the anatomy.   There is no parietum (i.e., wall) between a female's ovaries, her vagina, or her skin. Ovaries --> fallopian tubes --> uterus --> vagina --> (you guess the rest)  Or, just think of how babies and made and reverse it.
--- End quote ---

Without wanting to get into too deep into anatomy, there is no natural migratory path for foreign substances like talc to get from the outside to the inside of the female reproductive apparatus. The vagina is a self-cleaning system with a constant flow of mucus sweeping foreign objects like microbes, dirt or bacteria from the inside to the outside.

Any supposed connection between the external application of feminine hygiene products and a pathology of the ovaries has to be tenuous at best.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled programming...

jpanhalt:

--- Quote from: IanB on July 16, 2018, 10:03:45 pm ---
--- Quote from: langwadt on July 16, 2018, 08:21:25 pm ---I'm no MD but from there to the ovaries? what were they doing?

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: jpanhalt on July 16, 2018, 09:05:46 pm ---You don't need to be an MD to read about the anatomy.   There is no parietum (i.e., wall) between a female's ovaries, her vagina, or her skin. Ovaries --> fallopian tubes --> uterus --> vagina --> (you guess the rest)  Or, just think of how babies and made and reverse it.
--- End quote ---

Without wanting to get into too deep into anatomy, there is no natural migratory path for foreign substances like talc to get from the outside to the inside of the female reproductive apparatus. The vagina is a self-cleaning system with a constant flow of mucus sweeping foreign objects like microbes, dirt or bacteria from the inside to the outside.

Any supposed connection between the external application of feminine hygiene products and a pathology of the ovaries has to be tenuous at best.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled programming...

--- End quote ---

I didn't say it was likely.   I said there is no physical barrier.   I don't know if you have ever witnessed an American trial with dueling "expert witnesses."  That is, a plaintiff or defendant can find an "expert" who will testify to anything.   A general consensus among trial attorneys is that you have to have those witnesses, but ultimately they have little influence on the jury's decision.   And in most cases involving strong emotion (like a disabled child) the jury's decision is based on emotion and a bias against the "big, rich companies."  Of course, those cases get appealed and the final outcome is usually a negotiated settlement.

Now as for "cleansing," how do sperm get all the way from the vagina to the ovaries to cause an occasional tubular or ovarian pregnancy?

CatalinaWOW:
OK they found asbestos in a cancerous tissue.  That is one step in proof, but there are several more needed.  A small one is establishing carcinogenic properties in that tissue.  It is credible, but proof means you have evidence.  Such as examining huge numbers of ovaries and measuring amount of asbestos in both non-cancerous and cancerous ones and showing a statistical relationship.  Tying it to the talc is another step.  Showing that asbestos existed in some quantities in some talc at some time establishes plausibility, but is not proof.  Perhaps the ladies in question had relations with brake repairmen or insulation installers who had poor hygiene practices.  Or used strange sex toys.

But as said before, proof in the American legal system is a very flexible concept, administered by juries of people who score poorly on world comparisons of education and knowledge.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod