Miscellaneous desk
< July 15	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 17 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 16

What about the flaps of skin?

I am thinking of having gastric bypass surgery...for health and beauty reasons. I have known others who have had it. Mine and their medical insurance will pay for it but here's the problem. Once you lose all the weight you get huge flaps of skin, over your stomach arms, neck and so on. I have been told that medical insurance wont pay for this because it's considered "cosmetic". It would seem to be a health issue tho - low self esteem and the bacteria and skin irritations that come with the skin. Are there any orginizations that will help pay for or completely pay for the removal of this skin? Is there any information about this leftover skin?

Is this a weight loss question? ie what happens when you lose all the fat but still have the skin? Yes thats one good reason for not getting fat. I suppose a complete body lift would be the answer.

You need to discuss this with the surgeon who is doing the bypass surgery. Depending on your age, and the amount of weight you ultimately lose, your skin will do considerable shrinking over time. (Think of the number of women who have had their body shape return to pre-pregnancy size, plus a few stretch marks, within a few months.) If you are in your twenties, your skin is much more elastic than if you are attempting to do this in your fifties. There is likely a chat group for post-bypass patients somewhere on the Internet where you can learn about their actual experiences. You might also talk to your GP, who has no vested interest in whether or not you have the surgery (unlike the surgeon), and to your insuror, before you make any commitments to something this serious based on what you "have heard". Bielle 02:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note that while it is quite likely, there are cases where the skin retracts/shrinks with you as you lose weight - although I hear typically the stomach is more commonly where this doesn't happen.

As for gastric bypass surgeory, I highly highly highly recommend you read the Wikipedia Article - even if it doesn't answer your question.

Finally I have a close friend that went through gastric bypass surgeory and has only lost a small amount of weight because she continues to eat very badly. My point is that gastric bypass is really considered one of the 'last attempt' solutions to weight-loss. There are also various kinds of gastic bypasses that you can have. Some quite literally bypass some of your intestine so you get less absorption. Also you might consider some of the more traditional solutions, which you've probably tried several times before, and you might find that a lifestyle change might help you achieve it this time. Anyways I'm not preaching, good luck and I hope it works out if you do it. Rfwoolf 14:14, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Air India Lost Baggage

I boarded AI126 from Chicago to Mumbai on 11 July 2007 and had a connecting ticket to Kochi on AI690. When I reached Mumbai, India, on 12 July 07, the AI690 to Kochi was cancelled. I was asked to check out the baggage at Mumbai. One of my two bags was missing. I filed a 'Property Ireegularity Report' at Mumbai before I was put on a Jet Airways flight to Kochi, India, ten hours after I had landed in Mumbai. I was given no food or accommodation. The staff did not respond positively to any queries. After reaching Kochi, I have been in touch with Air India at Kochi airport and also at Mumbai regarding the missing bag. Five days have passed since I lost the bag in which I had my contact lenses, all my clothes, and other valuable articles. The lenses alone cost more than 400 dollars. Air India officers at Kochi say that compensation is based on weight of the missing bag. My missing bag weighed 49.5 pounds (around 23 kilos). Going by what Air India officers say, the compensation could be around 440 dollars. This covers only the cost of my contact lenses, whose weight is less than a pound. The cost of my clothes and other valuables is much more. Please send advise me what I should do.

Be grateful you still have one of the bags and, next time, place anything valauble in your hand luggage, and make sure your baggage is adequately insured. Thousands of bags go missing every year, from all the major airlines, most of them stolen. Unfortunately, one has to expect this.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:38, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Offensive olfaction

What do I do when I have no choice but to use a toilet stall right after a person who leaves a particularly stubborn odor? Maybe I have a pretty sensitive nose, but I've always had trouble bearing strong smells; things like perfume and people that don't shower make me nauseous, though I know I'm not the only person that feels that way.

I often will cover my nose with a sleeve or a tissue, but is this really an effective filter? It also makes it difficult to breathe, so my search for a more effective escape continues. 58.156.47.154 06:38, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no way of "turning olfaction off" (well, there are ways, but that involves using chemicals that destroy the olfactory epithelium and thereby your ability to smell anything for 3 weeks. You really don't want to do that). Breathing through your mouth is probably the best alternative, since the movement of air through the nose is important for olfaction. Rockpocket 06:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Carry a pomander or some bottle of strong smelling liquid to sniff in the offending toilet.hotclaws 06:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't breathing through your mouth defeat the purpose of having a nose in the first place? I know I'm not the only person who feels unsure about breathing in the smell of someones shit directly into my lungs. I guess I could carry a toilet spray (or a pomander?) around with me wherever I go (I'm talking about public restrooms here), but that seems like a little much. 58.156.47.154 07:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The nose has a number of purposes, one of which is to mediate olfaction. We don't have olfactory receptor neurons in our mouth or lungs. In addition, the air that goes through your nose goes to the same set of lungs as the air that you breathe through your mouth, so irrespective of which orifice you breathe through, the odorants will still end up there. The difference is, if you breathe through your mouth, you bypass the sensory organ that smells them, which appears to solve your problem. Rockpocket 21:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find a cigarette covers up the smell. DuncanHill 08:29, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But smoking in toilettes carry a fine in a lot of places (well in the developed world anyway), plus it's very inconsiderate to the other people who find the smell of smoke equally offensive. --antilived^{T | C | G} 09:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lighting a match is a great way of eliminating the smell, at least very substantially - and it's much more acceptable to most noses than cigarette smoke. That would not breach the no-smoking rule. But it might breach some other rules in certain places. -- JackofOz 22:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the lit match. Although it won't actually get rid of the smell, it will cover it quite well. Doesn't work though if you don't like that sulfur smell of burning matches. 170.148.92.18 15:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The John Cage character in Ally McBeal had a remote-controlled flushing device, to ensure he always encountered a clean pan. Even if the pan's clean, it seems to me that a flush can help with localised smells. Perhaps it's just a placebo effect, or maybe there's actually something to it. Of course, if the pan is full, a flush will definitely enhance your olfactory experience. Otherwise, try a clothespeg on the schnozz.--Dweller 12:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find that long exposure can lessen the effect of strong smells in future. Breate in and enjoy! Capuchin 12:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These activated charcoal underwear won the 2001 Ig Nobel prize. You can put them on, and let your breezy nature take its course with no social discomfort. Perhaps you could buy a pair, but affix them to your face before entering the lavatory? This alternative usage might indeed cause some social discomfort, but at least you won't have aerosolized particles from a stranger's fecal matter entering your nose and mouth. --TotoBaggins 16:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A filter mask that uses activated carbon cartridges would do the trick. If you're a woman, you could carry one around with you everywhere fairly conveniently if you use a large purse. MrRedact 20:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about some of that Gel that Forensic Pathologists rub under their nostrils before they set to work on a badly decomposing stiff - or maybe more appropriate to the matter in hand - what about some of that GEL that dominant Gay Men use when they are about to get to grips with their submissive partner? I have never used either so can't offer any guarantee of success.

Vicks is the sort of stuff pathologists use, though as the OP says they have trouble with strong smells, it may not be of much use to them. DuncanHill 23:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Febreze: The product's active ingredient, cyclodextrin, binds or entraps various hydrophobic compounds that cause odors.

U.S. Military clothing - green pants strap

What's the meaning of the green strap wrapped just above the boot on this soldier's left leg? Bapho 10:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it ties off that pants leg, but it's probably to make him easier to locate if he's wounded in a bunch of brush, while being discreet enough to not help out enemy shooters --L^augh! 11:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where did this picture originate? Is it possible it's being used as part of a war game to distinguish on team from another? --Ybbor ^Talk 13:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it's a colour-blind fan of David Gower ([1]). --Dweller 13:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks a bit like the sort of velcro calf strap that bicyclists wear to keep their pants out of the gears. Maybe it has no meaning at all, but was just a convenient way to keep his pants tight around his boots, maybe for tick avoidance or similar. --TotoBaggins 15:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, as our article on Bicycle clips says, they are often fluorescent. Rockpocket 21:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not that it matters to the question at hand, but why do we think this soldier is US military? The weapon appears to be something from the HK stable, and the DPM isn't the ordinary US pattern. Looks continental European to me - maybe Dutch or German? PeteVerdon 19:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at what's linked to the image itself, it appears to be an AK 4, formerly used by Swedish armed forces. --Charlene 20:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am concerned about the copyright status of that image. It was apparently moved from en.Wikipedia to Commons, but its source was lost somewhere along the way. Corvus cornix 18:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FROM WHAT SOURCE IS THE REFENCE MADE?

It your articles under Bast and Bastet, there is a link made from the mythological cat goddess to the Baby Phat clothing line marker. Is there a source for this or is this based only on a commonality in the appearances of the images?

No reference was given. The "fact" was added by User:Pinkleboo on the 13 June 2006, in this edit. I've copied your question and this answer to the article: someone who cares may want to amend the article. There's no information on the Baby Phat page to substantiate the assertion. (Please try to avoid using uppercase - it comes across as rather shouty.) --Tagishsimon (talk)

Backpack purchase

What would be an appropriate sized backpack for a 5/6 day mountain climbing expedition in a Southern Mediterranean area, in mid-late Autumn? Also, are there any special factors to take into consideration when choosing such a sack, and can you suggest any suitable sacks? Any guidance would be great - the selection of bags available in online shops is truly mind-boggling, and it's hard to get a sense of what's "best". 22:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

This is some sort of "how many angels on the head of a pin" type question; you'll not get it sorted out here, and this is almost certainly an inappropriate place to ask the question; not least it asks for opinion, provides too little input information, and is in any event a subjecgive not objective matter. I'd start here or here or here. Indeed, I'd probably start by getting a printed climbing magazine with an article on backpacks. Good luck. --Tagishsimon (talk)

(edit conflict):Hard to say - without knowing just what you need to be carrying (eg. tentage, food, climbing equipment etc). However, I would suggest you look in the 55 - 75 litre range. In my experience, there's no substitute to visiting real camping/hiking shops and talking to the staff and actually trying on rucksacks. The shape and arrangement of the harnesses vary, and a sack which one person finds super-comfortable may be unbearable to someone else! Features to look for include adjustable harnesses, a waist-belt (this takes some of the weight off your back), expandibility - some sacs have pockets or pouches which can be added/removed as neccessary - and this can make a sac more flexible to respond to your needs. Do you need a sac with lots of loops etc to fix things on the outside? Don't go for the cheapest models - you do get the quality you pay for with rucksacks. Makes such as Berghaus, North Face, Vaude, Karrimor are generally good quality and reliable - but some shops own-brand sacs are also worth looking at, eg Blacks. Hope this is of some help - and that you have a great trip. DuncanHill 22:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]