| Cockatiel in Dear Abby - CLICK HERE for the Pet Manual Forum Home Page |
| Mongo Sucks |
There was a letter in today's Dear Abby regarding a cockatiel. The
letter-writer and Abby both thought that feeding a bird at the table
was disgusting. I am curious what everybody thinks about this. I bet
that most of us here do this all the time.
DEAR ABBY: I recently met a lady I'll call Gloria. We have been
spending time together and enjoy each other's company. Last week, she
invited me to her home for dinner. While I was eating, she excused
herself from the table and returned a few minutes later with her pet
cockatiel, "Bogart," on her shoulder. After she sat down, she placed a
morsel of food in her hand and lifted it to her shoulder so Bogart
could eat.
Next, she put some food in her mouth, and with the bird still on her
shoulder, exposed the tip of her tongue (which had another morsel of
food on it), and proceeded to let Bogart peck the food off her tongue.
Finally, she craned her neck toward the bird as if delivering a
passionate kiss, while Bogart inserted his beak between Gloria's lips
and withdrew a shred of food.
I enjoy Gloria's company very much, but we are only at the beginning of
a relationship. Abby, does being a pet lover have any bearing on what
is appropriate at the dinner table? And what are the health
implications of intimate contact with one's bird?
I have had pets in the past that I loved. But they never sat at my
table, nor did they insert any part of themselves into my mouth to
retrieve snacks of any kind. Was what Gloria did acceptable behavior at
the table? -- NAUSEATED IN OLDE VIRGINNY
DEAR NAUSEATED: Hardly! However, putting aside her lack of basic table
manners, I have a "tidbit" for you: This is a basic hygiene issue --
meaning there are health concerns for both Gloria and her pet. My
veterinary expert, Dr. Erwin David, tells me that the oral cavities of
both birds and humans are teeming with bacteria. Both Gloria and Bogart
could catch something potentially harmful from each other.
You have now had a taste of what life will be like if your relationship
progresses. Do not kiss Gloria unless she first gargles with a
mouthwash that kills germs on contact.
|
|
|
| dkrug |
Mongo Sucks wrote:
> There was a letter in today's Dear Abby regarding a cockatiel. The
> letter-writer and Abby both thought that feeding a bird at the table
> was disgusting. I am curious what everybody thinks about this. I bet
> that most of us here do this all the time.
>
>
> DEAR ABBY: I recently met a lady I'll call Gloria. We have been
> spending time together and enjoy each other's company. Last week, she
> invited me to her home for dinner. While I was eating, she excused
> herself from the table and returned a few minutes later with her pet
> cockatiel, "Bogart," on her shoulder. After she sat down, she placed a
> morsel of food in her hand and lifted it to her shoulder so Bogart
> could eat.
>
> Next, she put some food in her mouth, and with the bird still on her
> shoulder, exposed the tip of her tongue (which had another morsel of
> food on it), and proceeded to let Bogart peck the food off her tongue.
> Finally, she craned her neck toward the bird as if delivering a
> passionate kiss, while Bogart inserted his beak between Gloria's lips
> and withdrew a shred of food.
>
> I enjoy Gloria's company very much, but we are only at the beginning of
> a relationship. Abby, does being a pet lover have any bearing on what
> is appropriate at the dinner table? And what are the health
> implications of intimate contact with one's bird?
>
> I have had pets in the past that I loved. But they never sat at my
> table, nor did they insert any part of themselves into my mouth to
> retrieve snacks of any kind. Was what Gloria did acceptable behavior at
> the table? -- NAUSEATED IN OLDE VIRGINNY
>
> DEAR NAUSEATED: Hardly! However, putting aside her lack of basic table
> manners, I have a "tidbit" for you: This is a basic hygiene issue --
> meaning there are health concerns for both Gloria and her pet. My
> veterinary expert, Dr. Erwin David, tells me that the oral cavities of
> both birds and humans are teeming with bacteria. Both Gloria and Bogart
> could catch something potentially harmful from each other.
>
> You have now had a taste of what life will be like if your relationship
> progresses. Do not kiss Gloria unless she first gargles with a
> mouthwash that kills germs on contact.
We will let our birds eat at the table, but I sure wouldn't let the bird
eat out of my mouth. That, as Abby pointed out, could give the bird or
the person unwanted germs.
Debbie
|
|
|
| Louis Boyd |
Mongo Sucks wrote:
> There was a letter in today's Dear Abby regarding a cockatiel. The
> letter-writer and Abby both thought that feeding a bird at the table
> was disgusting. I am curious what everybody thinks about this. I bet
> that most of us here do this all the time.
I often offer my birds food by mouth. It's perfectly acceptable social
behavior with birds, but it's not acceptable social behavior when dinner
guests who don't themselves keep pet birds are present. It's best to
keep pets, particularly birds, away from the dinner table. I realize
that a bird is likely to crap on the table and most guests would find
that totally disgusting during a meal.
Etiquette is the art of making guests feel at ease and comfortable.
Obviously in this case the bird owner failed miserably to do that.
Knowing (or guessing) what particular guests will perceive as proper
behavior is necessary in order to behave correctly yourself.
|
|
|
| Peter Hucker |
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 08:39:49 -0700, Louis Boyd <boyd@apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote:
> Mongo Sucks wrote:
>> There was a letter in today's Dear Abby regarding a cockatiel. The
>> letter-writer and Abby both thought that feeding a bird at the table
>> was disgusting. I am curious what everybody thinks about this. I bet
>> that most of us here do this all the time.
>
> I often offer my birds food by mouth. It's perfectly acceptable social
> behavior with birds, but it's not acceptable social behavior when dinner
> guests who don't themselves keep pet birds are present. It's best to
> keep pets, particularly birds, away from the dinner table. I realize
> that a bird is likely to crap on the table and most guests would find
> that totally disgusting during a meal.
>
> Etiquette is the art of making guests feel at ease and comfortable.
> Obviously in this case the bird owner failed miserably to do that.
> Knowing (or guessing) what particular guests will perceive as proper
> behavior is necessary in order to behave correctly yourself.
If a guest don't like the way my birds eat, that's their problem.
--
*****TWO BABY CONURES***** 15 parrots and increasing http://www.petersparrots.com
93 silly video clips http://www.insanevideoclips.com
1259 digital photos http://www.petersphotos.com
Served from a pentawatercooled dual silent Athlon 2.8 with terrabyte raid
A penny saved is a government oversight.
|
|
|
| Rick |
"Peter Hucker" <hucker@clara.co.uk> wrote in message news:opsa5guhvjaiowgp@blue...
> On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 08:39:49 -0700, Louis Boyd <boyd@apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote:
>
> > Mongo Sucks wrote:
> >> There was a letter in today's Dear Abby regarding a cockatiel. The
> >> letter-writer and Abby both thought that feeding a bird at the table
> >> was disgusting. I am curious what everybody thinks about this. I bet
> >> that most of us here do this all the time.
> >
> > I often offer my birds food by mouth. It's perfectly acceptable social
> > behavior with birds, but it's not acceptable social behavior when dinner
> > guests who don't themselves keep pet birds are present. It's best to
> > keep pets, particularly birds, away from the dinner table. I realize
> > that a bird is likely to crap on the table and most guests would find
> > that totally disgusting during a meal.
> >
> > Etiquette is the art of making guests feel at ease and comfortable.
> > Obviously in this case the bird owner failed miserably to do that.
> > Knowing (or guessing) what particular guests will perceive as proper
> > behavior is necessary in order to behave correctly yourself.
>
> If a guest don't like the way my birds eat, that's their problem.
I think it has more to do with the way *you* eat.
I agree with the other posters.
Rick
|
|
|
| waitingforgodot@samuel.beckett |
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 11:12:53 -0400, dkrug <me@privacy.net> wrote:
><(((*> We will let our birds eat at the table, but I sure wouldn't let the bird
><(((*> eat out of my mouth. That, as Abby pointed out, could give the bird or
><(((*> the person unwanted germs.
Agreed.
Jester sits in his cage beside the table at dinnertime, and he
gets food from our plates placed into his treat bowl.
He ***loves*** spaghetti noodles, which he holds in his claw as
he eats them.
But we don't give him food from our mouths. The risk of giving
him an expensive or fatal illness is simply not worth it.
Tara J. Ballance
Montreal, Canada
|
|
|
| Peter Hucker |
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 16:48:09 -0700, Rick <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> "Peter Hucker" <hucker@clara.co.uk> wrote in message news:opsa5guhvjaiowgp@blue...
>> On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 08:39:49 -0700, Louis Boyd <boyd@apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > Mongo Sucks wrote:
>> >> There was a letter in today's Dear Abby regarding a cockatiel. The
>> >> letter-writer and Abby both thought that feeding a bird at the table
>> >> was disgusting. I am curious what everybody thinks about this. I bet
>> >> that most of us here do this all the time.
>> >
>> > I often offer my birds food by mouth. It's perfectly acceptable social
>> > behavior with birds, but it's not acceptable social behavior when dinner
>> > guests who don't themselves keep pet birds are present. It's best to
>> > keep pets, particularly birds, away from the dinner table. I realize
>> > that a bird is likely to crap on the table and most guests would find
>> > that totally disgusting during a meal.
>> >
>> > Etiquette is the art of making guests feel at ease and comfortable.
>> > Obviously in this case the bird owner failed miserably to do that.
>> > Knowing (or guessing) what particular guests will perceive as proper
>> > behavior is necessary in order to behave correctly yourself.
>>
>> If a guest don't like the way my birds eat, that's their problem.
>
> I think it has more to do with the way *you* eat.
>
> I agree with the other posters.
We were discussing letting birds eat from your mouth.
--
*****TWO BABY CONURES***** 15 parrots and increasing http://www.petersparrots.com
93 silly video clips http://www.insanevideoclips.com
1259 digital photos http://www.petersphotos.com
Served from a pentawatercooled dual silent Athlon 2.8 with terrabyte raid
A note left for a pianist from his wife: "Gone Chopin, have Liszt, Bach in a Minuet."
|
|
|
| Hector |
Etiquette is one thing, personally I wouldn't do it, just like I wouldn't
bring a dog or cat to the table (even if they are well behaved).
But I think the bigger issue is the bird's health, passing bacteria,
parasites, etc. I've read in books, bird aritcles that the human mouth
compared to the bird's beak and MUCH MUCH dirtier and food should not be
passed from the human to the bird. This includes kissing, smooching,
etc....
"Louis Boyd" <boyd@apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:cd3k45$3p8$1@oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
> Mongo Sucks wrote:
> > There was a letter in today's Dear Abby regarding a cockatiel. The
> > letter-writer and Abby both thought that feeding a bird at the table
> > was disgusting. I am curious what everybody thinks about this. I bet
> > that most of us here do this all the time.
>
> I often offer my birds food by mouth. It's perfectly acceptable social
> behavior with birds, but it's not acceptable social behavior when dinner
> guests who don't themselves keep pet birds are present. It's best to
> keep pets, particularly birds, away from the dinner table. I realize
> that a bird is likely to crap on the table and most guests would find
> that totally disgusting during a meal.
>
> Etiquette is the art of making guests feel at ease and comfortable.
> Obviously in this case the bird owner failed miserably to do that.
> Knowing (or guessing) what particular guests will perceive as proper
> behavior is necessary in order to behave correctly yourself.
>
>
|
|
|
| Louis Boyd |
Hector wrote:
> Etiquette is one thing, personally I wouldn't do it, just like I wouldn't
> bring a dog or cat to the table (even if they are well behaved).
>
> But I think the bigger issue is the bird's health, passing bacteria,
> parasites, etc. I've read in books, bird aritcles that the human mouth
> compared to the bird's beak and MUCH MUCH dirtier and food should not be
> passed from the human to the bird. This includes kissing, smooching,
> etc....
I certainly agree human mouths are deadly to many birds. Look what
happens to Colonel Sander's birds!
There are far more diseases that are communicable between humans than
between humans and birds. Logically you should absolutely never kiss a
spouse, parent, child or (heaven forbid) a close acquaintance! Though
much safer, I'll conceed that kissing birds isn't totally safe either.
--
Lou Boyd
|
|
|
| Peter Hucker |
I can't believe human mouths are dirtier. bIrds use their beak for everything!
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 00:48:48 GMT, Hector <hayala@houston.rr.com> wrote:
> Etiquette is one thing, personally I wouldn't do it, just like I wouldn't
> bring a dog or cat to the table (even if they are well behaved).
>
> But I think the bigger issue is the bird's health, passing bacteria,
> parasites, etc. I've read in books, bird aritcles that the human mouth
> compared to the bird's beak and MUCH MUCH dirtier and food should not be
> passed from the human to the bird. This includes kissing, smooching,
> etc....
>
>
> "Louis Boyd" <boyd@apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote in message
> news:cd3k45$3p8$1@oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
>> Mongo Sucks wrote:
>> > There was a letter in today's Dear Abby regarding a cockatiel. The
>> > letter-writer and Abby both thought that feeding a bird at the table
>> > was disgusting. I am curious what everybody thinks about this. I bet
>> > that most of us here do this all the time.
>>
>> I often offer my birds food by mouth. It's perfectly acceptable social
>> behavior with birds, but it's not acceptable social behavior when dinner
>> guests who don't themselves keep pet birds are present. It's best to
>> keep pets, particularly birds, away from the dinner table. I realize
>> that a bird is likely to crap on the table and most guests would find
>> that totally disgusting during a meal.
>>
>> Etiquette is the art of making guests feel at ease and comfortable.
>> Obviously in this case the bird owner failed miserably to do that.
>> Knowing (or guessing) what particular guests will perceive as proper
>> behavior is necessary in order to behave correctly yourself.
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
*****TWO BABY CONURES***** 15 parrots and increasing http://www.petersparrots.com
93 silly video clips http://www.insanevideoclips.com
1259 digital photos http://www.petersphotos.com
Served from a pentawatercooled dual silent Athlon 2.8 with terrabyte raid
Backup not found. A)bort, R)etry or P)anic?
|
|
|
| Louis Boyd |
Peter Hucker wrote:
> I can't believe human mouths are dirtier. bIrds use their beak for
> everything!
Not dirtier, just 10 to 1000 times more volume, hence more bacteria. Not
that bacteria is necessarily a bad thing.
--
Lou Boyd
|
|
|
| Heather |
"Louis Boyd" <boyd@apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:cd62ao$9ve$1@oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
> Peter Hucker wrote:
> > I can't believe human mouths are dirtier. bIrds use their beak for
> > everything!
>
> Not dirtier, just 10 to 1000 times more volume, hence more bacteria. Not
> that bacteria is necessarily a bad thing.
> --
> Lou Boyd
The problem lies in the types of bacteria in our mouths vs. in a birds
mouth. What may be normal for us could be deadly for them, and vice versa.
|
|
|
| Peter Hucker |
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:59:58 GMT, Heather <h.michna.nospam@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> "Louis Boyd" <boyd@apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote in message
> news:cd62ao$9ve$1@oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
>> Peter Hucker wrote:
>> > I can't believe human mouths are dirtier. bIrds use their beak for
>> > everything!
>>
>> Not dirtier, just 10 to 1000 times more volume, hence more bacteria. Not
>> that bacteria is necessarily a bad thing.
>> --
>> Lou Boyd
>
>
> The problem lies in the types of bacteria in our mouths vs. in a birds
> mouth. What may be normal for us could be deadly for them, and vice versa.
But the they don't catch our colds? Hmmmm
--
*****TWO BABY CONURES***** 15 parrots and increasing http://www.petersparrots.com
93 silly video clips http://www.insanevideoclips.com
1259 digital photos http://www.petersphotos.com
Served from a pentawatercooled dual silent Athlon 2.8 with terrabyte raid
What is the difference between a chicken and a baby?
A chicken is the result of a sitting hen while the baby is the result of a standing cock.
|
|
|
| Idjit Chaser |
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de kqxN7jYw9FV36JKMNbh5Iw/RO0z4X3lvjkgb0rlPi7eM+YppqU
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Path: text-east!propagator-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
Xref: 127.0.0.1 rec.pets.birds:206166
"Peter Hucker" <hucker@clara.co.uk> wrote in message
news:opsa60knu4aiowgp@blue...
> On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:59:58 GMT, Heather <h.michna.nospam@verizon.net>
wrote:
>
> >
> > "Louis Boyd" <boyd@apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote in message
> > news:cd62ao$9ve$1@oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
> >> Peter Hucker wrote:
> >> > I can't believe human mouths are dirtier. bIrds use their beak for
> >> > everything!
> >>
> >> Not dirtier, just 10 to 1000 times more volume, hence more bacteria.
Not
> >> that bacteria is necessarily a bad thing.
> >> --
> >> Lou Boyd
> >
> >
> > The problem lies in the types of bacteria in our mouths vs. in a birds
> > mouth. What may be normal for us could be deadly for them, and vice
versa.
>
> But the they don't catch our colds? Hmmmm
Colds are caused by viruses and rhinoviruses.
The conversation was about bacterial infection.
Major difference for those who know how to read and have a modicum of
comprehension skills.
|
|
|
| Rick |
"Idjit Chaser" <u-r-stoopid@aol.com> wrote in message news:2lo3giFetfvpU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> Colds are caused by viruses and rhinoviruses.
> The conversation was about bacterial infection.
> Major difference for those who know how to read and have a modicum of
> comprehension skills.
What a troll. "Colds" is a generic term and has no meaning in the
medical community. Illnesses which are called "colds" can be
caused by both viruses and bacterias.
Rick
|
|
|
| Another Idjit |
"Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2lo40cFf8ebmU1@uni-berlin.de...
> "Idjit Chaser" <u-r-stoopid@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2lo3giFetfvpU1@uni-berlin.de...
> >
> > Colds are caused by viruses and rhinoviruses.
> > The conversation was about bacterial infection.
> > Major difference for those who know how to read and have a modicum of
> > comprehension skills.
>
> What a troll. "Colds" is a generic term and has no meaning in the
> medical community. Illnesses which are called "colds" can be
> caused by both viruses and bacterias.
Wrong, Bucko!
(Where's Jynxie when you need 'em?)
From:
http://www.mercola.com/2001/nov/14/colds.htm
"It seems that many families are mistaken in their beliefs about the way
colds are caught and cured. There is a fair amount of misunderstanding in
families about ways to prevent the transmission of viral diseases in the
home.
The investigators found that 60% of parents erroneously believed that some
colds were caused by bacteria and nearly half erroneously believed that
things such as colds, bronchitis and green mucous should be treated with
antibiotics. Colds are actually caused by viruses, and antibiotics and
antibacterial lotions have no effect on them.
Nearly half the parents also had erroneous beliefs about causes of colds,
with 46% thinking colds could be caused by not wearing enough clothes, 57%
thinking they could be caused by cold weather, and 37% thinking they could
be caused by going outside with wet hair.
Colds are more easily transmitted through contact with the nose and eyes
more often than through the mouth. However, 90% of the parents focused
preventive measures on issues such as sharing drinks or utensils, or kissing
someone with a cold, while only three-quarters correctly thought shaking
hands was a key culprit for catching a cold.
People seem obsessed with sharing drinks with or kissing someone who has a
cold, but they don't really think shaking hands with someone who has a cold
is important, and that's very important.
Meanwhile, 50% of the parents thought antibacterial soaps are an effective
mechanism, but these would be no more effective against catching a cold
virus than washing with simply soap and water.
The parents who answered the survey were 95% female and were, on average, 34
years old.
Annual Meeting of the Infectious Diseases Society of America San Francisco,
CA October 26, 2001"
|
|
|
| Peter Hucker |
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:17:29 -0700, Another Idjit <cantarguewithignoramuses@aol.com> wrote:
> "Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:2lo40cFf8ebmU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> "Idjit Chaser" <u-r-stoopid@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:2lo3giFetfvpU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> >
>> > Colds are caused by viruses and rhinoviruses.
>> > The conversation was about bacterial infection.
>> > Major difference for those who know how to read and have a modicum of
>> > comprehension skills.
>>
>> What a troll. "Colds" is a generic term and has no meaning in the
>> medical community. Illnesses which are called "colds" can be
>> caused by both viruses and bacterias.
>
> Wrong, Bucko!
> (Where's Jynxie when you need 'em?)
>
> From:
> http://www.mercola.com/2001/nov/14/colds.htm
>
> "It seems that many families are mistaken in their beliefs about the way
> colds are caught and cured. There is a fair amount of misunderstanding in
> families about ways to prevent the transmission of viral diseases in the
> home.
>
> The investigators found that 60% of parents erroneously believed that some
> colds were caused by bacteria and nearly half erroneously believed that
> things such as colds, bronchitis and green mucous should be treated with
> antibiotics. Colds are actually caused by viruses, and antibiotics and
> antibacterial lotions have no effect on them.
>
> Nearly half the parents also had erroneous beliefs about causes of colds,
> with 46% thinking colds could be caused by not wearing enough clothes, 57%
> thinking they could be caused by cold weather, and 37% thinking they could
> be caused by going outside with wet hair.
>
> Colds are more easily transmitted through contact with the nose and eyes
> more often than through the mouth. However, 90% of the parents focused
> preventive measures on issues such as sharing drinks or utensils, or kissing
> someone with a cold, while only three-quarters correctly thought shaking
> hands was a key culprit for catching a cold.
>
> People seem obsessed with sharing drinks with or kissing someone who has a
> cold, but they don't really think shaking hands with someone who has a cold
> is important, and that's very important.
>
> Meanwhile, 50% of the parents thought antibacterial soaps are an effective
> mechanism, but these would be no more effective against catching a cold
> virus than washing with simply soap and water.
>
> The parents who answered the survey were 95% female and were, on average, 34
> years old.
>
> Annual Meeting of the Infectious Diseases Society of America San Francisco,
> CA October 26, 2001"
Unbelievable amount of idiots about. I thought people were beginning to stop believing that crap about getting a cold from being cold.
--
*****TWO BABY CONURES***** 15 parrots and increasing http://www.petersparrots.com
93 silly video clips http://www.insanevideoclips.com
1259 digital photos http://www.petersphotos.com
Served from a pentawatercooled dual silent Athlon 2.8 with terrabyte raid
An expert is someone who takes a subject you understand and makes it sound confusing.
|
|
|
| Peter Hucker |
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:09:55 -0700, some people never get it <est@Got.It> wrote:
> "Peter Hucker" <hucker@clara.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:opsa617rb0aiowgp@blue...
>> On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:11:53 -0700, Idjit Chaser <u-r-stoopid@aol.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> > "Peter Hucker" <hucker@clara.co.uk> wrote in message
>> > news:opsa60knu4aiowgp@blue...
>> >> On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:59:58 GMT, Heather <h.michna.nospam@verizon.net>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > "Louis Boyd" <boyd@apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote in message
>> >> > news:cd62ao$9ve$1@oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
>> >> >> Peter Hucker wrote:
>> >> >> > I can't believe human mouths are dirtier. bIrds use their beak
> for
>> >> >> > everything!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Not dirtier, just 10 to 1000 times more volume, hence more bacteria.
>> > Not
>> >> >> that bacteria is necessarily a bad thing.
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Lou Boyd
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > The problem lies in the types of bacteria in our mouths vs. in a
> birds
>> >> > mouth. What may be normal for us could be deadly for them, and vice
>> > versa.
>> >>
>> >> But the they don't catch our colds? Hmmmm
>> >
>> > Colds are caused by viruses and rhinoviruses.
>>
>> Who brought rhinos into the equation?
>>
>> > The conversation was about bacterial infection.
>> > Major difference for those who know how to read and have a modicum of
>> > comprehension skills.
>>
>> Or those with a medical degree.
>
> Or a High School diploma?
> Or people who presumably have worked in the medical field?
> http://www.stir.ac.uk/staff/psychology/pmh1/
> (and who are anything but technicians... whatever the f@ck that is!)
Nothing to do with Psychology.
--
*****TWO BABY CONURES***** 15 parrots and increasing http://www.petersparrots.com
93 silly video clips http://www.insanevideoclips.com
1259 digital photos http://www.petersphotos.com
Served from a pentawatercooled dual silent Athlon 2.8 with terrabyte raid
A dyslexic man walks into a bra.
|
|
|
| Kris Krieger |
"Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in news:2lo40cFf8ebmU1@uni-berlin.de:
> "Idjit Chaser" <u-r-stoopid@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:2lo3giFetfvpU1@uni-berlin.de...
>>
>> Colds are caused by viruses and rhinoviruses.
>> The conversation was about bacterial infection.
>> Major difference for those who know how to read and have a modicum of
>> comprehension skills.
>
> What a troll. "Colds" is a generic term and has no meaning in the
> medical community. Illnesses which are called "colds" can be
> caused by both viruses and bacterias.
>
> Rick
>
Sorry, but that is not correct. "Cold" is a term for an upper respiratory,
most specifically nasal/sinus, infection caused by a rhinovirus.
As an aside, in case anyone is curious, "Rhinovirus" means a virus that
specifically attacks the nose - compare the term with "rhinitis", the
technical term for a stuffy nose. Like the vast majority of scientific
terms, the word is derived from either Ancient Greek or Latic (I forgot
which one is the root for the "rhino-" prefix) - the decision to do this
was made a long time ago, and the reason they chose Ancient Greek and Latin
was that the languages have long been "dead" languanges, meaning, not
spoken in daily society. THe advantage of using a "dead" language rather
than a "living" language is that the "dead" one remains constant rather
than changing and evolving through daily use. "Rhinocerous" is also
related to "rhinovirus" in that the name means something like "nose made of
horny material".)
"Flu" is a more generalized respiratory viral infection. What the lay
person calls "a chest cold" is often bronchitis, which typically is caused
by bacteria.
The medical community has to acept (and translate) terms used by patients,
simply because many patients don't understand the differences between
bacterial and viral infections, which is why a physician, nurse
practitioner, or other medical professional has to ask about the patient's
signs and symptoms. That is, however, *very* different from a term "having
no meaning". If a physician says, "I have a cold", he or she uses it with
a specific meaning, i.e., rhinoviral infection typically lasting 3-5 days,
localized in the upper respiratory system, causing nasal congestion and
runniness, but seldom with fever or other generalized body symptoms.
You might be thinking of the term "pneumonia". That is a general term for
a lung infection becasue it refers tothe resulting inflammation rather than
to the type of infection; same thing with meningitis - inflammation of the
meninges, which can be due to viral or bacterial infection.
I read through this thread belatedly, but it bothered me that implications
and allusions to lack of brain capacity were being made. One thing that
ANY medical professional needs to remember is that not everyone has had the
same education, and given the low quality of many school systems, and the
fac tthat the US has no standardized national curriculum, not even a core
curriculum, a high scholl diploma is not guarantee of anything. Also, not
all teachers are bright or knowledgeable, and school is worthless if the
kids are taught junk. Then too, not everyone can be a genius, but that
does not make them inferior beings who deserve ridicule. It'd make a huge
impriovemnent in the world if more people developed a little bit of
patience and a little bit of looking at things from other people's
perspectives.
- Kris
--
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
