Question regarding e-mailed images an dtheir quALITY

On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 12:40:19 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/8/2015 8:11 PM, Mort wrote:
PeterN wrote:
You just triggered a memory. In the mid 70s I was on the board of a
medical device manufacturer. One of its products was a TENS unit. The
owner insisted that a square wave produced the most effective results.
Although I have a limited knowledge of biological engineering, from what
I understood, he was right.


TENS units, to my knowledge, have never been shown in classic double
blind studies, to offer any improvement in patients.

I cannot say whether there were double blind studies. But there were
certainly sufficient anecdotal incidences to make a reasonable case for
efficacy. The original units worked so well as an analgesic that body
builders used them to “work through the pain,” causing excessive, and in
some cases, permanent damage to their ligaments.
A few years ago I needed a replacement unit. My orthopedist prescribed
one, and Medicare paid for it.
I don’t intend to disparage the importance of double blind studies, but
in this case there seems to be sufficient evidence that the placebo
effect is not be a factor.
But then again, isn’t the placebo effect a very real element of healing.



Square wave stimulation was the classic mode when I did that research in
1950/51 with muscle/nerve stimulation measurements.

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 08 Jul 2015 20:11:24 -0400, Mort wrote:

PeterN wrote:
You just triggered a memory. In the mid 70s I was on the board of a
medical device manufacturer. One of its products was a TENS unit. The
owner insisted that a square wave produced the most effective results.
Although I have a limited knowledge of biological engineering, from what
I understood, he was right.


TENS units, to my knowledge, have never been shown in classic double
blind studies, to offer any improvement in patients.

According to Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transc...ve_stimulation
" ... the use of TENS has proved effective in clinical studies ...".

Square wave stimulation was the classic mode when I did that research in
1950/51 with muscle/nerve stimulation measurements.

Most square waves are anything but square and are full of harmonics. I
would question the extent to which the harmonics played a part. I
don't mean to start a discussion on the subject: it's all water under
the bridge.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 7/9/2015 6:44 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 12:40:19 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/8/2015 8:11 PM, Mort wrote:
PeterN wrote:
You just triggered a memory. In the mid 70s I was on the board of a
medical device manufacturer. One of its products was a TENS unit. The
owner insisted that a square wave produced the most effective results.
Although I have a limited knowledge of biological engineering, from what
I understood, he was right.


TENS units, to my knowledge, have never been shown in classic double
blind studies, to offer any improvement in patients.

I cannot say whether there were double blind studies. But there were
certainly sufficient anecdotal incidences to make a reasonable case for
efficacy. The original units worked so well as an analgesic that body
builders used them to “work through the pain,� causing excessive, and in
some cases, permanent damage to their ligaments.
A few years ago I needed a replacement unit. My orthopedist prescribed
one, and Medicare paid for it.
I don’t intend to disparage the importance of double blind studies, but
in this case there seems to be sufficient evidence that the placebo
effect is not be a factor.
But then again, isn’t the placebo effect a very real element of healing.



Square wave stimulation was the classic mode when I did that research in
1950/51 with muscle/nerve stimulation measurements.



???

--
PeterN

On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 22:33:11 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/9/2015 6:44 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 12:40:19 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/8/2015 8:11 PM, Mort wrote:
PeterN wrote:
You just triggered a memory. In the mid 70s I was on the board of a
medical device manufacturer. One of its products was a TENS unit. The
owner insisted that a square wave produced the most effective results.
Although I have a limited knowledge of biological engineering, from what
I understood, he was right.


TENS units, to my knowledge, have never been shown in classic double
blind studies, to offer any improvement in patients.

I cannot say whether there were double blind studies. But there were
certainly sufficient anecdotal incidences to make a reasonable case for
efficacy. The original units worked so well as an analgesic that body
builders used them to “work through the pain,” causing excessive, and in
some cases, permanent damage to their ligaments.
A few years ago I needed a replacement unit. My orthopedist prescribed
one, and Medicare paid for it.
I don’t intend to disparage the importance of double blind studies, but
in this case there seems to be sufficient evidence that the placebo
effect is not be a factor.
But then again, isn’t the placebo effect a very real element of healing.



Square wave stimulation was the classic mode when I did that research in
1950/51 with muscle/nerve stimulation measurements.



???

*@^##&~/|\!

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Rusty Gear wrote:
Rusty Gear wrote:
Mort,
If you want to email higher quality edited photos out of Picasa, select
"Export" to get the command box (very bottom of the page: "Use Original
Size": "Image Quality 'Maximum': then "Export". The photo "as edited"
will be placed in a folder named ...../Picasa/Exports/'folder named in
the export command box'. Then email that edited photo by attaching the
file to your email.
John


Hi John,

I tried your suggestion, utilizing Picasa's export icon, etc.
Unfortunately, the images still are of medium quality, and still
becoming much better if the received image's JPEG # at the upper right
corner is double clicked.

I cannot figure out why, and how to correct it. I just distributed about
100 images of an important family event in a house of worship, and
asking each recipient to double click on each JPEG # of each picture is
just too much.

Thanks again,

Mort