Rocky Sassoon

interesting photo of the "men in black". I wonder why they carry riot shields....

Maybe this video from the 10th of April 2010 answers your question.

Signs vs Symptoms is taught in basic CPR/1st aid.

That's correct and health care professionals as well as medical literature often do not make such a black and white distiction at all. Ever heard the term objective symptom used instead of sign?

http://dictionary.re...browse/symptom

http://medical-dicti...ary.com/symptom

An objective symptom is just another way to say sign.

Dictionary.com is not a valid medical reference.

From your medical dictionary link:

symptom /symp·tom/ (simp´tom) any subjective evidence of disease or of a patient's condition, i.e., such evidence as perceived by the patient; a change in a patient's condition indicative of some bodily or mental state.

From medical news today:

"In medicine a symptom is generally subjective while a sign is objective. Any objective evidence of a disease, such as blood in the stool, a skin rash, is a sign - it can be recognized by the doctor, nurse, family members and the patient. However, stomachache, lower-back pain, fatigue, for example, can only be detected or sensed by the patient - others only know about it if the patient tells them."

http://www.medicalne...cles/161858.php

"A sign is objective evidence of disease; it is something that can be seen.

You can see the signs in a patient (either by eye or with medical quipment or labs) polyuria, polydipsia and polyphagia are signs of diabetes.

A symptom is subjective evidence of disease; it is a feeling people other than the patient cannot see/feel it. A headache is a symptom. Chest pain could be a symptom of an MI"

"mosby's medical, nursing, & allied health dictionary, 6th edition explains it the best and most concisely:

• sign - an objective finding as perceived by an examiner. . .many signs accompany symptoms
  
• symptom - a subjective indication of a disease or a change in condition as perceived by the patient. . .many symptoms are accompanied by objective signs. . .some symptoms may be objectively confirmed
  

per taber's cyclopedic medical dictionary, 18th edition. .

• sign - any objective evidence or manifestation of an illness or disordered function of the body. signs are more or less definitive and obvious apart from the patient's impressions, in contrast to symptoms which are subjective
  
• symptom - any perceptible change in the body or its functions that indicates disease or the kind or phases of disease. symptoms may be classified as objective, subjective, cardinal, and, sometimes, constitutional. however, another classification considers all symptoms s being subjective, with objective indications being called signs.
  

http://allnurses.com...oms-342501.html

And yeah, DEET is generally not classed as an insecticide. ...

That issue has been put to bed on this and other threads. Semantics aside, the important thing is there is clear and meaningful evidence that DEET when ingested can create the same signs (or "objective symptoms" if you must) as were reported here, including death. I agree though, DEET obviously wasn't ingested alone. They were clearly mixing it with other stuff.

Signs and symptoms are sometimes overlapping and there is no universally accepted definition either. Usually it is forgiveable to call any sign that could be also be a symptom as a symptom. Bleading, rash, distended abdomen, shortness of breath etc. could all always be both sign and a symptom. If any of those were reported by the patient, but already resolved, they would not really be a symptom any more, would they? Of course there are signs that would usually not be called symptoms by health care professionals. You may find that those individuals are more than often busy with other stuff, than arguing if you may have applied the wrong terminology somewhere along the lines.

Doc Hollywood: "Dr. Zhivago, you medical record say patient symptom include positive Hoffmann's sign! How can be positive Hoffmann's sign? Is present or absent and is not symptom, is sign like name say so! What kind of doctor are you? You even have basic CPR training?"

Dr. Zhivago: "Doc Hollywood - get a life!"

OK, on the DEET issue it clear now that someone mixed it with something else then? I thought that was mere speculation based on a leak at a lab in Bangkok and in fact nothing was proven. I think someone mentioned that lab tests could come back possitive for DEET, when in fact someone had ingested and metabolized other substances, which may be correct or not? Has such a scenario been excluded yet?

You obviously have no medical training or you wouldn't have used the word "symptoms" because a symptom is something experienced by the patient, not observed.

And where did you do your medical, toxicology, organic chemistry, coroners, private investigators and CIA training then ?

Signs vs Symptoms is taught in basic CPR/1st aid.

That's correct and health care professionals as well as medical literature often do not make such a black and white distiction at all. Ever heard the term objective symptom used instead of sign?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/symptom

http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/symptom

And yeah, DEET is generally not classed as an insecticide. There were trials to use it as a pesticide, which would not have made it an insecticide either and calling it a pesticide would be much less wrong than calling it an insecticide. If someone would regularily drown mossies in that shit or somehow else OD tehm with it, then he would be probably crazy, but could say he is using it as an insecticide. Same if he would do the same stunt with citronella, which is not an insecticide either.

Back to the topic, I do not buy the theory that DEET poisening caused killed them either. I suppose a mix of DEET and a few other substances is much more likely. Some of them could have been consumed voluntarily (drinks, pills), possibly without reading up on all ingredients and possible side effects (never received much of an information sheet with party drugs myself), other substanced could have found into their bodies by accident (food, fumes). If it was a combo of a party drug cocktail and overeager use of pesticides in their room, it would not really make solving the case any easier at all. Then there may also still be the possibility of other drugs showing up as a positive for DEET, which I do not know much about apart from heresay and am not eager trying to become an instant expert in the field by raping Google either. Just saying...

"(think patricide, fratricide etc, these are not descriptions of chemicals designed to kill fathers or brothers but the act of killing ones father or brother)" Hilarious mate! Thanks.

The definition of insect repellent (chosen by you to describe DEET) vs the definition of the word insecticide (which clearly it is as established as by the multitude of links provided in this thread) is quite amusing. Everyone already knows what "repellent" means and everyone knows what "-cide" means. The issue isn't what the words mean, it's which one DEET is. DEET is an insecticide (insect killing) and pesticide (pest killing) that is used in low quantities as a mosquito repellent. To cure you of your hilarious little language hiccup there, an insecticidal is "of or relating to an insecticide." The as you correctly point out the word "-cide" has nothing to do with chemicals so your comment "these are not descriptions of chemicals designed to kill fathers or brothers" makes no sense here whatsoever.

How people are still thinking that DEET is not an insecticide is quite amusing. Try reading the threads and links again, then if you still aren't convinced please share your reasons and supporting information as to why, When you post baseless things like "DEET by it's very nature does not kill insects but acts as a strong repellent." you just sound silly.

On balance, the more I read up on DEET the less likely it seems that DEET would be the cause of death in these cases.

Then I suggest you do somemore reading. I think some of these may have been posted here already.

"There is little information available about oral absorption. Severe symptoms have appeared within 30 minutes of ingestion, which implies rapid GI absorption. Ingestions of DEET have been associated with nausea, vomiting, hypotension, encephalopathy, seizure, coma, and ataxia. Ingestion of 50 mL of 100% DEET by a 33 year-old woman resulted in hyptotension, coma, seizures and death. Ingestion of 25 mL of 50% DEET by a one-year-old child resulted in coma and seizures"

http://uuhsc.utah.ed...ox/Vol7_No2.pdf

"DEET is primarily toxic to the CNS, although the mechanism

of action is unknown. Severe toxicity has resulted in children after having

ingested 25mL of a 50% DEET solution, and in adults after having ingesting

50mL of 100% DEET solution.

Clincial Symptoms:

Clinical effects include:

CV- Hypotension and rarely bradycardia;

CNS – Confusion, ataxia, hypertonicity, drowsiness and seizures;

GI – Abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting;

Dermatologic – Rash and contact uticaria (aka hives: raised, often itchy, red welts on the surface of the skin.)"

- http://www.mnpoison....ellent 3-06.pdf

"Intentional Ingestion of DEET

Rarely, people have ingested DEET intentionally to commit suicide, or because of psychological problems (Tenenbein 1987; Fraser et al. 1995). The effects resulting from intentional ingestion are variable, due to the different scenarios in which they occurred. Of the six reported cases of deliberate DEET ingestion, three led to death. In these cases, the amount ingested was 15-50 mL of 47.5% to 95% DEET in bottles. In two cases, bottles of DEET were drunk along with unspecified amounts of alcohol. Health effects included coma, unresponsiveness to pain and other stimuli, and death. In another case, a woman with a history of unipolar-depressive illness ingested a number of pills along with 50 mL of 95% DEET. She arrived at the hospital comatose and pulseless. She had a generalized seizure and died from a generalized bowel infarction (Tenenbein 1987). In another case, a woman with a history of psychological disorders ingested 15-25 mL of 95% DEET. She had a right and left atrial enlargement and diffuse ST-T abnormalities, but returned to normal within 24 hours with no further cardiac abnormalities."

- http://www.atsdr.cdc...th-effects.html

Well done you have provided information on a number of cases where people deliberately ingested DEET and suffered none of the symptoms we saw in this actual incident. Way to prove your point! I repeat my original statement, on balance, the more I read up on DEET the less likely it seems that DEET would be the cause of death in these cases. I am sorry you find it so hard to accept the fact that others have differing views to your own but I'm afraid that's life, deal with it, perhaps you are the one that should do a little more research...

However much you care to spin it Deet is an insect repellent not an insecticide. It has been used in pesticides but it itself is a repellent by it's very nature:

DEET was historically believed to work by blocking insect olfactory receptors for 1-octen-3-ol, a volatile substance that is contained in human sweat and breath. The prevailing theory was that DEET effectively "blinds" the insect's senses so that the biting/feeding instinct is not triggered by humans or other animals which produce these chemicals. DEET does not appear to affect the insect's ability to smell carbon dioxide, as had been suspected earlier.^[5][6]

However, more recent evidence shows that DEET serves as a true repellent in that mosquitoes intensely dislike the smell of the chemical repellent.^[7] A type of olfactory receptor neuron in special antennal sensilla of mosquitoes that is activated by DEET as well as other known insect repellents such as eucalyptol, linalool, and thujone has been identified. Moreover, in a behavioral test DEET had a strong repellent activity in the absence of body odor attractants such as 1-octen-3-ol, lactic acid, or carbon dioxide. Female and male mosquitoes showed the same response.^[8][9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEET

Are you guys seriously in a heated discussion if the word insecticide could be loosely used to describe DEET? Wow! Or is it more to do with saving face?

Don't think anybody seriously uses DEET to kill insects, but it's reknown as one of the best insect repellants. Insect repellants are classified as pesticides, too. Even bloody citronella gets called a (bio)pesticide. OK, let's find out the LD50 of citronella for moskitos and get ready for a proper handbag fight!

What was the topic all about again?

When did insecticide come into this story? There was no mention of insecticide before, only DEET a insect repellant.

I will assume another poor reporting job.

Deet kills insects, so that would make it an insecticide.

Holly sh!t! there are more of you.

So sorry but deet is a insect repellant, not a bug killer. Before you look stupid like NomadJoe please do some reading. Oh to late.

Lol. Yeah I'm the one that looks stupid.

Look mate, just because it's a repellent doesn't mean it isn't also an insecticide. The two are not mutually exclusive. I used to be a sales rep for mosquito repellent among other things. But don't take my word for it, read the several links I provided. You provided a single quote from a website of a product advocacy group which works for mosquito repellent manufactures. Please tell me that isn't your sole source of your (mis)information?

http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/insecticide

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/insecticide

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insecticide?show=0&t=1346906823

Just had a quick look at Oxyfit and would have to say it's a waste of time. 8l of Oxygen would be give or take 1 minute of quiet breathing at rest only and they do not look like they are meant to be refillabled either. Even if one would be able to get them refilled, that would be a lot of trips to the Oxygen dealer. Depending on how often your son may need to breathe oxygen, I would rather get a 10l or 40l oxygen tank from one of the gas suppliers, like the one wheelyking mentioned. A 10l cylinder, usually filled up to about 120 bar would give you 1,200l of Oxygen. There is another one roughly opposite the Royal Phuket Marine. Coming from Phuket Town and heading towards Talang, it's right after the Jotun shop. You have to drive in to see it. They will sell you tanks with valves and also do refills. I guesstimate a 10l cylinder to be around 3,000 THB and a 40l one around 6,000 THB. Refills are cheap, they do the 40l one for under 300 THB. You should learn about handling Oxgygen and oxygen equipment though. Although Oxygen does not burn itself, it will help and make literally anything burn, including the metall the tank and valve is made out of. If you drop a filled oxygen tank on it's valve for example, it can turn the tank into a rocket that will finally burst, after going through walls! A simple regulator like they use in hospitals can be found for example in Super Cheap's pharmacy for less than 1,500 THB. For the purpose you describe you would probably set the regulator at not more than 8 l/min when using with a non-reabreather mask and 2 l/min if using nasal cannula, which I would personally not bother with, unless the O2 is to be given for days rather than minutes or a couple of hours max.

Purchasing a demand valve setup would be unneccesary in my opinion. It is the best way to effectively deliver 100% straight into the lungs and save Oxygen at the same time, but this does bring possible sideeffects on much earlier. Breathing Oxygen at normal pressure is not going to kill someone, unless maybe they have COPD, are poisened by a rare incecticide or you adminster very high concentrations for many days without breaks. The patient would very likely complain about chest burning, dryness and start coughing long before that though. Usually you are wise to be a tad sceptical about Wikipedia entries, but this article is excellent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_toxicity

Nomad and Steven, none of the suppliers currently sell DAN O2 kits. They really are kinda pricey for what they are, it is hard to source spare parts, the first stages would usually have to be sent back to the factory for service and they are not really made for tropical / saltwater environment. So they deterirotae too quick and you cannot really get them fixed. IMO they only thing they have going for them, is that they are considered the standard of care in some countries, like US and Oz. There are other and better options available.

I uploaded a few pictures of the car with the film on it.

Wow, that's really not a good idea at all, unless you are driving exculisively in bright sunshine and take a cab as soon as it gets dark or cloudy. One would hope that the BIB put a stop to such a mindless move and I am not talking about filling their pockets, but not allowing someone to drive in such a mindless setup. Yeah, I know - fat chance!

I have owned a couple REAL Stealth full face helmets. One a limited edition Stealth Classic which I was really happy with. Price about 3200B (See below) Slightly heavier than an Arai or Shoei but provide the same amount of protection. Good ventilation. Quiet at high speeds. The shaking/bobbing isn't going to change much based on the helmet. That is a function of where your helmet sits in the wind stream. And if the helmet is lifting/floating then it's too loose. At 120mph you had better have a proper fitting helmet (a proper fitting helmet is tighter than most people think) or it will be floating.

There are only two helmets that are certified for both us in Thailand (TIS 369-2539) and the states (DOT or SNELL). They are Shark and Real. Arai, Shoei, AGV, Scorpion, Bell, HJC, etc. are not legal for use in Thailand.

Never ever buy a used helmet. There is no way to know how close to the end of it's useful life it is or how it's been treated, if it's been dropped etc.

You say that Arai, Shoei, AGV, Scorpion, Bell, HJC, etc. are not legal for use in Thailand. Why would that be, who would care about it if that was the case and why would anybody at all care anyway?

I would actually give more importance to Sharp ratings and ECE approval than to DOT or Snell certifications, because of how those test are designed. Standards that are passed by basically any oval shaped plastic shell with a layer of styrofoam and a chin strap, are nothing that would make me choose one helmet over another one though.

thats about the worst youtube video i wasted my time with

You can say that one again!