Science desk
< April 20	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 22 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Science 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.

April 21

experience day on breast pumps (for milk)

Hello there. I work in a Shop for Sex Toys. I am wondering why there is an "best before..." day printed on the packet of the breast pumps for milk. There is nothing more inside as in a packet of breast pumps for breast enlargement or penis pumps - and the last 2 things have no date on them. The plastic even feels the same of all 3 products, so I doubt that it is because the material may get weak. I can't imagine what may happen if you use breast pumps which are out of date. Any Idea? The day is also printed on pumps which doesn't include the bottle where the milk flows inside. I doubt first that it is because of that bottle, but seems to be not the reason. --Saegen zeugen des sofas jehovas (talk) 03:11, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I added the link for you for those who are unsure what a human breast pump is. SSS (talk) 04:57, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Googling the subject, one item that came up is this page with several opinions.[1] I've seen expirations on medical equipment before. The points raised about the parts deteriorating and/or accumulating residue sound reasonable. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:19, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

However there is consensus [2] that pumps for breast enlargement are ineffective and possibly harmful. DroneB (talk) 19:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was talking about breast pumps for producing milk from an already-lactating woman. The other items are fraudulent. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:52, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Calories

This paper says that recovered anorexic patients required more calories to just maintain a healthy weight than people who were never anorexic. It doesn't explain why though. Does anyone know? Is the claim this paper makes even true at all? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.149.85.156 (talk) 17:22, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eh? The abstract explicitly compares restricting anorexic patients and bulimic anorexic patients, not restricting anorexic patients and people who were never anorexic (that might imply a normal population). Big difference. SSS (talk) 18:23, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is published in 1991. So, it's likely outdated. I would say that the information is true, because it is based on observation. But the information may be outdated. Earlier studies are useful in understanding the accumulation of knowledge throughout time, but are not that relevant today. I would suggest limiting your search results to at least 2010. SSS (talk) 19:13, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PMC 24200367 is a recentish (2013) review article on the topic. Don't have time right now to look in depth at its findings. DMacks (talk) 23:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Think that caloriofic intake discussions can be a bit misleading. If someone has very low muscle mass, then what they need to recover is not simply calories per sa . The calories need to come from both carbohydrates and protein in the right ratio. During the end of the second world war, the US forces could not understand why the death-rates of the liberated inmates of concentration camps continued to die, despite being more fed bread than they have every had for some time. Their liberated US POW's from Japan also had a greater mortality more than any of the allied forces. With the benefit of hindsight it is obvious why. The war was costing the US millions of dollars per hour ( not per day). So wanting to be economic they provided the cheapest food. The US doctors that recommend this ( for the purposes of career advancement) should hang their heads in shame for for the number of US personnel that died from their self interested recommendations... Whoops. Nearly missed the point. If an individual is emaciated with low muscle mass, then gets fed loads of carbohydrate, the body needs some protein in the diet in-order to metabolise it. If it is not available in the diet, the body get the protein from the individuals muscle mass. For someone someone who is already emaciated - that results in death. People that have been diagnosed with anorexia need more protein. Aspro (talk) 22:13, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder whether it matters to derive protein from solid food or liquid food for emaciated individuals. Solid food still requires chewing, so maybe liquid food like cow's milk or soymilk will be a better alternative? SSS (talk) 23:40, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In some cases only parenteral nutrition can save their lives. Count Iblis (talk) 00:05, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let's remember we're talking about recovered, not recovering anorexics. (Although normal weight as used in the abstract seems a better term than recovered IMO, but either way we aren't exactly talking about people who are still emaciated.) Nil Einne (talk) 06:54, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]