Miscellaneous desk
< July 14	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 16 >

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 15

Diagram of muscles exercised by the power twister bar?

I'm talking about this generic piece of exercise equipment. I've been searching online for information regarding which muscles exactly this is supposed to target. All I've been able to find so far are some eHow-type online writer crapmills. I see lots of YouTube videos in the Google results but those are extremely difficult to access for me so I haven't watched any. Can someone please help me find a diagram of just what muscles this equipment exercises? Thank you. The Masked Booby (talk) 07:24, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This 'Power Twister Bar' appears basically be a large spring with handles at each end. If so, the muscles that are 'targeted' depend on how it is used, and on how it is held while being used. When analysing an exercise, you need to look at the movement at each joint individually. If you know the joint and anatomical movement (such as flexion, extension, abduction, adduction etc.), then with a decent anatomy book you can determine what muscle/s is/are being used. There are of course specific exercise books that show what muscles are used for particular exercises. A google search for "muscle analysis chart system" may help. See particularly http://freepdfdb.org/pdf/muscle-analysis-chart. A specific book on the subject published in Australia is "Exercise Analysis Made Simple" by Paul Batman & Michelle Van Capelle. FIT4U Publications, 1992, ISBN 9780646082219. Not sure if this is still available, but if you can get a copy it should tell you all you want to know, though some knowledge of anatomy is probably required. 220 of ^Borg 13:59, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Women/Old days/Breasts

So, we were watching a movie (I can’t remember the movies name) in English as part of our movie analysis topic. Anyway, the movie was modern, but set in the “olden days” I know how vague that is but I’m not sure what year it was set in. So a kid (rather immature, if I say so myself) asked, “Why do the women have larger breasts in those days.” The teacher said that was an inappropriate question and left it.
But I’m curious as to why this is? Has it got something to do with wearing corsets, certain diets, or what?
I wasn’t sure where this belonged so I put it in Misc.
Charlotte Tame (talk) 10:08, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't have just been a big-breasted actress (how modern is modern, anyways? Like, 2000s?) in a quasi-period outfit? I'm under the impression that Victorian-era women (corsettes?) were not keen on too large or busty a figure. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:26, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The teacher simply did not know the answer. Ha! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:29, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The answer, I suspect, lies in the changing notion of what constitutes "beauty", which has changed even in my lifetime. For example, Marilyn Monroe was a size 16 (today's size 8), whereas modern models strive to be size 2, 4 or even 0. This article gives a good summary. This article gives a summary of how underwear fashions have changed. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:02, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that movies employ actresses to play the roles of historical characters - and to give the movie a little more attraction, they pick actresses with physical characteristics that suit the director's idea of what women looked like back then. I'd also be prepared to bet that the average breast size of movie actresses exceeds that of typical modern women. Since the director is unlikely to have the background in human biology or anthropology needed to make a determination about what was typical - you certainly can't assume that any movie is an accurate portrayal of changing body shape. SteveBaker (talk) 13:28, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Related to the ideal of "beauty" for any given place and time is the fashion aspect and clothing manufactured accordingly. The silhouette (size and shape) of the bust has been emphasized or de-emphasized in outerwear and underwear, along with the use of padding or compression to expand or contract dimensions, besides the woman's actual build and proportions. A stage or screen production interested in authenticity can certainly do research on historical fashion and costume. -- Deborahjay (talk) 17:00, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it's the other way around - bigger busts today - because of better nutrition and an "obesity epidemic". The same linked article also cites a "link between increased oestrogen levels and bigger breasts". Clarityfiend (talk) 07:19, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...and not only for women: see Gynecomastia#Epidemiology. I didn't (yet) find a reputable scientific source for the claim that eating the meat of chickens raised with hormonal additives is a cause of the above. -- Deborahjay (talk) 08:56, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mujoy Hill Portland Maine

Your information on Munjoy Hill in Portland Maine is not correct. You list this section of the city as an Irish American site but it wasn't and isn't. I grew up there and Irish, Italian, and Jewish folks lived there happily together in the 50's and 60's. Please correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.55.205.170 (talk) 11:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This sort of request should really be on the article talk page (Talk:Munjoy Hill). The "Irish-American" statement is sourced to Time magazine (the actual article is behind a paywall) - if you feel that it's incorrect, you'll need to provide a similar reliable source for your replacement, not just your personal opinion or experiences. Tevildo (talk) 18:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article calls it an historically Irish-American neighborhood, and the source is a 1951 edition, so I'm guessing it refers to a time long before the OP lived there. Ssscienccce (talk) 19:41, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Websites that give medical or legal advice

I'm aware that Wikipedia does not give medical or legal advice, and that questions that seek such advice are prohibited here. But are there any good websites that do specialize in giving such advice, and is it allowed to link to them here? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 12:18, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no one wants to open themselves up to legal liability for malpractice or practicing without a license. It's often annoying and expensive, but you really need to contact a professional for those matters. NW (Talk) 12:46, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, websites that offer free medical advice are generally paid for by pharmaceutical sponsors which tend to create a bias. See Webmd#Criticism. We would not want to be seen "endorsing" a particular site by referring people there. Remember that Wikipedia is a reference desk i.e. we try find a reliable reference to your problem. So giving you advice directly or linking to a site basically amounts to the same thing.196.214.78.114 (talk) 13:34, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

<snip>

Reading the question again, I notice the OP doesn't ask for such sites but for the policy regarding links to them (on the RD or in WP articles?) The talk page or village pump would be better places for such questions.Ssscienccce (talk) 16:03, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any site that gives medical advice in the sense of "if you have these symptoms, then this is what illness you have" has to be assumed to be unreliable. Wikipedia has lots of medical information. It's like the difference between, "What are some of the symptoms of a heart attack?" vs. "I have this pain in my chest. What's going on?" As regards legal, I see TV ads for something called legalzoom.com, but whether it or any site is reliable or not might depend on what you're trying to do. If the question is "I live in Idaho. What are the rules about makeing a will?" They might be able to help. If the question is, "This guy punched me out. Should I sue?" that's getting into slippery slope territory. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:41, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:List of online reference desks/Science#Medical sciences: medicine (610–619).

—Wavelength (talk) 16:48, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:List of online reference desks/Humanities#Law (340–349).

—Wavelength (talk) 16:51, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can rely on the UK National Health Service for mainstream medical advice. http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Pages/hub.aspx Itsmejudith (talk) 17:34, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But probably only if you live in the UK - if you live in any other country, chances are the website would have at least the wrong emphasis on what you might get in your country. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 18:41, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's good general advice, the equivalent of what you would have got from a family health encyclopedia when many families had them. Have a look. I don't think you will find much that would surprise an American physician. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:03, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I expect it depends significantly on what sort of advice is being looked at. Also bearing in mind the OP as far as I know if from the Philippines, the difference is likely to be acute. (To be clear, I'm not saying the site is useless to the OP, simply that they should consider the limitations.) Nil Einne (talk) 02:54, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are some excellent sites which have information about the causes and treatment of many medical conditions, despite the claims above that they are likely to be quacks selling worthless treatments or products. The Mayo Clinic, a world-renowned institution in Minnesota, offers free online medical info, though not via interaction with a doctor or nurse. See [Mayo Clinic. Edison (talk) 18:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

lifting weights and other exercise

recently getting back into stopping being lazy, I dug out my old set of weights, cleared a nice big space on the floor and worked out what I thought would be a decent and varied exercise regime. But now I have a couple of questions I want to check. firstly, last time I tried similar, a couple of years ago, I was taught that the most efficient weight was one I could manage perhaps 10-15 'reps' with between rests, and should keep adding to that every time it got too easy. More recently, though, I've been told I'd be better off with slightly lighter weights that I can comfortably spend more time with. any ideas which is right? secondly, after a few weeks of this, I've started to notice some slight difference in my reflection, but mostly around my shoulders and chest area, rather than anywhere else, I'm wondering, in the interest of keeping a properly balanced appearance what sort of exercises can I try that would only affect other parts of my body, particularly the rest of my arms, instead?

thank you,

213.104.128.16 (talk) 16:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "big five" of resistance exercises are generally held to be 1) deadlift 2) squat 3) benchpress 4) clean and jerk 5) pullup. The "bad five" that people actually seem to do is 1) benchpress 2) incline benchpress 3) decline benchpress 4) biceps curl 5) biceps curl. If your goal is to resemble some kind of unfortunate human carrot, do the latter lot. If you want to be healthy fit person go to gym and insist that the instructor show you how to do the former lot. They're all fairly technical, all have some degree of risk of injury if you do them wrongly, and they all require more mobility than you probably have right now (you're not alone - I'm told my dorsiflexion is "pathetic", and I didn't even know that mattered (it does)). The instructor can also advise you about the best programme of sets and reps to do; it varies a bit depending on whether you want strength or hypertrophy, and on your age and gender. Three or four sets of 10 or so, where the last movement is something of a struggle, is roughly where you'll be. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 00:11, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For biceps development, biceps curls are the most useful, but they're hard to do properly without something to brace yourself against. For triceps development, lying triceps extensions are by far the best exercise. For your forearms, weight training exercises are not particularly useful, because gripping your hands is what works those muscles. Looie496 (talk) 22:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pilates

This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page.

. Note, stating "this is not a request for medical advice" does not make direct requests to diagnose your problem OK. --Jayron32 16:47, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the past year, I've grown another foot. Is this normal? Note that I am not asking for medical advice. I just want to know who remembers that oldie. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:27, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]