I don't have "Hyponatremia," I just have low sodium
My brother, as some of you might have read in the comments, recently spent some time off from his normal lawyerin' stuff due to the Hurricane Rita causing the more skittish lawyers to cancel a lot of depositions in Beaumont. During this time he got back to nature in a way and worked out west of Houston for a lady we've known for a long time. Most of the work was outdoors, and though it is October, it still gets pretty hot in Texas this time of year, and true to form it was pretty hot. My brother writes in a comment that she told him to be sure to get some salt and not to drink just water because one can die if he drinks just water, a suggestion that caused him to burst out laughing, "not that it's not true. But what can't you die from anymore?"
This causes me to pause as a doctor and the brother of an attorney/former english teacher. First of all the question he is really asking is not about salt/sodium/water or any of that. He acknowledges (however erroneously) that one might die from such a thing as he was doing and is not questioning the validity of the statement; neither is his laughter in response to the meaning of her statement, but rather it is to the irony that it seems we are finding out that life is more dangerous than we were lead to believe when we were first introduced to it.
Let's deal with the errors as they develop, shall we?
Water intoxication is when one drinks more pure water than the body can handle. This causes electrolyte imbalances and shifts of the electrolytes and fluids between cells and surrounding fluids, a process that can cause injury to the cells. "But, Dr. Dennis, how much can I drink before that happens?" Thanks for asking. Each person is different, but the normal adult can handle about 15 liters (around 4 gallons) of water in a 24 hour period. Now if one were to drink a few gallons quickly and then continue to drink a little at a time, there would be problems, and the body would get depleted of sodium, but this is an extreme situation that is not easy to produce. If my brother had been working hard in the heat all day and sweating a lot, not eating anything (food is a good source of sodium- just check any label) and drinking a lot of water, then he would probably start to notice signs of a problem (hunger, muscle cramps, fatigue). In the absence of these things, though, it is not very likely to happen to anyone. Heat illnesses are much more common and more dangerous too.
Then there is posed the question: "But what can't you die from anymore?" The sense of this is interesting too in that as our propositional knowledge of the world has increased, we have discovered more and more wonderous and dangerous things about the world. Who would have thought that water, which is the most plentiful substance in the body could actually kill us if we drank too much of it? Yet, there it is, taunting us each time we go to the fountain to quench our thirst.
Then there is the actual phrase: "what can't you die from anymore?" The use of "anymore" changes the whole sense of this question from inquisitive to rhetorical. To rephrase it, I would say that it is really asking: "what can no longer cause one's death?" The answer is only a few things: the Dodo bird, saber-toothed tigers, and Mammoths (barring some ridiculously unfortunate museum-related incident).
We could die at the keyboards of our computer. I saw it in a movie (or was it Bones?) on the SciFi channel.
So what is there to do? Read Ecclesiastes.
This causes me to pause as a doctor and the brother of an attorney/former english teacher. First of all the question he is really asking is not about salt/sodium/water or any of that. He acknowledges (however erroneously) that one might die from such a thing as he was doing and is not questioning the validity of the statement; neither is his laughter in response to the meaning of her statement, but rather it is to the irony that it seems we are finding out that life is more dangerous than we were lead to believe when we were first introduced to it.
Let's deal with the errors as they develop, shall we?
Water intoxication is when one drinks more pure water than the body can handle. This causes electrolyte imbalances and shifts of the electrolytes and fluids between cells and surrounding fluids, a process that can cause injury to the cells. "But, Dr. Dennis, how much can I drink before that happens?" Thanks for asking. Each person is different, but the normal adult can handle about 15 liters (around 4 gallons) of water in a 24 hour period. Now if one were to drink a few gallons quickly and then continue to drink a little at a time, there would be problems, and the body would get depleted of sodium, but this is an extreme situation that is not easy to produce. If my brother had been working hard in the heat all day and sweating a lot, not eating anything (food is a good source of sodium- just check any label) and drinking a lot of water, then he would probably start to notice signs of a problem (hunger, muscle cramps, fatigue). In the absence of these things, though, it is not very likely to happen to anyone. Heat illnesses are much more common and more dangerous too.
Then there is posed the question: "But what can't you die from anymore?" The sense of this is interesting too in that as our propositional knowledge of the world has increased, we have discovered more and more wonderous and dangerous things about the world. Who would have thought that water, which is the most plentiful substance in the body could actually kill us if we drank too much of it? Yet, there it is, taunting us each time we go to the fountain to quench our thirst.
Then there is the actual phrase: "what can't you die from anymore?" The use of "anymore" changes the whole sense of this question from inquisitive to rhetorical. To rephrase it, I would say that it is really asking: "what can no longer cause one's death?" The answer is only a few things: the Dodo bird, saber-toothed tigers, and Mammoths (barring some ridiculously unfortunate museum-related incident).
We could die at the keyboards of our computer. I saw it in a movie (or was it Bones?) on the SciFi channel.
So what is there to do? Read Ecclesiastes.
posted by The Doctor at vendredi, octobre 07, 2005
5 Comments:
I once read a report from a collection of life insurance companies, describing in general terms the many and varied ways policy holders had "kicked off". Interesting study in mortality, to be sure. At first it was just fascinating to see the thousands of things that can really kill a person, because most of it was not the sort of things we obsess over. But as I read, the realization came over me that I don't really know- indeed no one really knows- how we will come to our end. But is this a justification for vainly attempting to shelter ourselves from some unknown fate?
I'm all for wearing helmets and avoiding slippery road conditions, because these things make sense in a practical, livable way. But I won't allow myself to become increasingly fearful of what lurks in imagined shadows. I want to live life, to totally take life by the lips (as my brother would say). And you can't really do that when you approach everything prophylactically.
"Approach everything prophylactically." Now that is just an exquisite adverbial phrase. This whole topic reminds me of a cool video I once showed my classes: Are We Scaring Ourselves to Death, by John Stossel. Crighton's excellent novel State of Fear addresses all this on a deeper level, and best of all is a lengthy discussion in Stossel's book, Give Me a Break. As Stossel tells it, it's plaintiff's attorneys, broadcast journalists, and research scientists who spend all their time ginning up America's fears. All three groups make money, loads and loads, by filling you with fear. And that's one reason why attorneys are the biggest chickens: most of them believe their own rhetoric. (It's easier to sell it to the jury if you're sincere.)
In response to your technical and no-doubt accurate discussion of the science behind hyponatremia, here's a joke from your old pal, Gregg Matte: (or maybe it was his pal, Rodney Woo. Anyway.)
A three-year-old was eating an apple and turned to his father.
"Daddy,why is my apple turning brown?"
"Well, son, as you bite the skin off the apple, the meat of it comes into contact with the oxygen in the air. That causes it to begin to oxidize...." And Dad goes on and on and on.
After a minute or two, the little boy looks up. "Daddy, are you talking to me?"
(That little boy's name could have been Dennis, you know? I rarely said the cute stuff parents remember.)
That is pretty cool, e. I don't know him myself, but I grew up being good friends with Gregg Matte, at least until the 6th grade (he moved away).
And nice comments, guys; they are really insightful. It reminds me of the long messages I sometimes used to get on my answering machine (but they don't replace a real conversation).
I have to agree with not approaching life with too many contingency plans. I sometimes wonder if we are raised to fear too many things that are simply not that dangerous. Flying, for example, is the safest mode of travel, and yet I often see people on planes who are somewhat superstituous or otherwise obviously concerned (could it be the lack of control of the situation that causes their fears?).
I usually try to be safe, but if I decide to do something (like climb a mountain in the winter at night), all that matters is that I plan on how to be safe. That of course means considering what to do in case of emergency, but too much consideration of the dangers might mean not even doing the thing at all (sorry, Mom- I'm still going to do that). And that is just not how I want to live my life.
Suffice to say, I am going to live my life at the risk of the same, rather than watch my life pass by slowly and carefully. I will either truly live or die trying.
As I said, "I HAD" to bring it up. I
wouldn't if I didn't care. But I'm
not offended.
Go Astros.
Kathy/Mama
Yes, and by the way, twas not Mrs. Brunson (no secrets here, right) who said to drink salty water lest I die. Twas Mrs. Wales. I laughed because she has mentioned so many and various nutritional points over the years, all of them valid, I'm sure. But sometimes it's like the bitter little poem once tossed about by those frustrated with the hyper-Calvinism that followed the Great Awakening:
You can and you can't,
You will and you won't,
You're damned if you do,
And damned if you don't.
(By the way, this was a different animal than that preached today, where elders--though ever-mindful that you are dead in sin--will still say things like, "It's time to make your election sure." At that time it was: pray, read your Bible, come to church, believe, but know that God may simply have chosen you for the fires of hell and if so, your duty is to love Him for it.) See Peter Marshall's From Sea to Shining Sea, p. 95.
Enregistrer un commentaire
<< Home