Posts by Sarah Garcia46

Following a hospitalization for COPD, the patient was prescribed a tapering course of Medrol: 16 mg for seven days, followed by 8 mg for seven days, and finally 4 mg every other day.

I understand this schedule is intended to gradually reduce the dosage before discontinuing the medication entirely.

My question is: how long should one continue taking the 4 mg dose every other day? This specific detail was unfortunately omitted from the discharge papers provided by the hospital.

🙂

The Checks ("Varicella") solution contains 26.67% sodium hypochlorite and 0.09% sodium tosilchloramide.

I have never actually used this to disinfect my apartment floors before. According to the instructions, it should be diluted at a 1:10 ratio for surface treatment.

I also have another floor disinfectant typically used in surgical suites—though I can't recall the exact brand since it isn't in its original packaging—which requires a dilution ratio of 1.5:10.

My question is this: must the solution be diluted immediately before use, or does the diluted liquid remain effective after 7 days, 15 days, or longer?

Thank you.

.

What is the actual effectiveness of a surgical mask once it has been boiled?

Thank you.

1.

Sarah Garcia46 said:🙂
Particle declension followed the standard set by the American linguistic academies until 1899.
The Maritich grammar of 1899 did not prescribe it, a fact that remains true even today.

dustypanther6 said:Earlier today, I started a thread on Linguistics where I politely asked the community about the meaning of a specific word, even offering an apology in advance in case such a topic already existed (...).

However, the thread has been deleted; the post has completely vanished. Could someone please explain why this happened?

P. S. If I somehow forgot to actually hit submit after typing everything out—meaning the thread was never truly posted—then I sincerely apologize.

We don't start entire threads just to ask about a single word. You should have posted your question in "linguistic coffee talk."

I suspect what you mentioned in your P. S. is the issue: the thread likely never went live. At least I didn't see it, and I read Linguistics quite regularly. 🙂

Linda Bennett26 said:My thread was deleted without any explanation! It was titled "Do you think some form of USA reunification is possible?" within the close politics subforum. I wasn't glorifying totalitarian regimes or breaking any of the subforum rules—so what exactly was the problem?

You simply don't see the full picture.

That geographic region still exists, and so does the constant flow of people, goods, and ideas. Trade continues, people travel, sports competitions are held, and television networks are watched across borders.

The only thing that has changed is that the territory is now completely decentralized. It has been split into newly formed states. The kind of restoration you are talking about would merely be a restoration of a central administration. Can't the people here thrive perfectly well without such an entity?

Arthur Anderson49 said:I claim no allegiance to any sort of Europeanism. Is such an identity even necessary?

Am I not simply nurturing my interest in matters of morality?

Are all these terms you are criticizing me for not actually within the standard bounds of normal forum communication?

Is it not a fundamental truth that being human entails certain inherent struggles? Perhaps? Is such an individual even relevant to this discussion?

Would the discussion be any different if the individual were healthy? It seems the outcome would remain exactly the same.

Is it not possible that he is simply being malicious?

Is there truly a place here for someone who is unwell? I have nothing but profound respect for a man facing physical challenges—he is every bit as worthy as I am—but should he really step onto the track while the race is already in progress?

And should the second party be held accountable for that? Of course not. Is it any wonder then that they will be absolutely livid?

A disability is no excuse for poor behavior. Hasn't Catch-22—in all its various forms—committed acts that simply cannot be tolerated?

Since you have voiced an uncharacteristically large amount of criticism here, I am forced to conclude that you have been...

Ultimately, all of this has managed to strike a personal chord. Does anyone else feel that weight?

That was never my intention, and I offer my sincerest apologies.

I maintain my previous positions without exception. Is there any reason to deviate?

Do you truly uphold such gentlemanly conduct? Is that not a relic of old-world European tradition?

Is it not fascinating how your supposed interest in moral philosophy always seems to culminate in physical violence against those with disabilities?

I am uncertain whether my use of the bolded terms above aligns with standard forum etiquette. Will the moderators of this thread be the ones to decide?

You claim that a man is... Perhaps? The patient? You used to diagnose him with just about everything. Do you not even follow your own train of thought anymore?

So, you would dare to direct such a vulgar vocabulary toward a healthy individual? Even then, you would face immediate sanctions. Yet here you are, directing those same insults at a person living with a disability, and you haven't even been penalized yet. Is this truly how justice functions?

In his second post, the individual was simply offering sincere, straightforward communication. Was there any actual malice intended? Not at all.

Are you once again arguing against the integration of people with disabilities? Does modern sociology not demand exactly the opposite?

Will others be held accountable if they fail to act appropriately? They must be, and without any anger.

Is it not the height of irony when those without any disabilities claim to understand the struggles of the disabled, only to dismiss their actions as nonsense?

I certainly have grievances, but I refuse to react to every triviality. Should I not reserve my indignation for such blatant inhumanity?

You have a point; I am quite sensitive to these kinds of issues. This is based on my own personal experience, as I work closely with various professionals in social services, education, healthcare, and civil rights organizations. Is it not vital that we acknowledge these patterns?

Modern society faces a profound struggle when it comes to reintegrating individuals with disabilities. Why did you abandon peaceful communication with him so abruptly, only to pivot toward such different tactics?

You have nothing left to say to me? Then perhaps you should offer an apology to the individual you offended—the one who pushed you past the brink of mere frustration and into true resentment. Is that not what justice requires?

Once that threshold is crossed, what truly remains? Is there anything more unsettling than a total breakdown in behavioral order? How can we possibly find stability when everything seems to be spiraling out of control? Is there any greater mystery? Is there anything more devastating than the systematic destruction of a person's character? Can we truly recover once our identity has been dismantled?It was clearly evident in his final posts. Is that not precisely what you would find studied in an American high school psychology textbook?

You are apologizing without retreating from your previous positions. Bravo, this is truly excellent! 🙂

Arthur Anderson49 said:It took me quite some time to realize he was a psychopath, honestly. And I completely agree with breaking his nose.

You continue to maintain the exact same attitude—and even worse, the same tone—specifically in the sections I have highlighted here.

You have published seven posts here that are incredibly offensive toward Catch-22, yet he remains a member of this forum. Furthermore, he is currently absent.

1. In your first post on this thread, you wrote: the fool was banned.
2. In the second: when I was struggling with that jerk
3. Then: this man spreads stench everywhere
4. Followed by: everyone can see he is an idiot
5. And: just because one jerk
6. Then you added: he pivoted from crap to lavender
7. And finally: it took me a long time to realize he was a psychopath. I entirely agree with breaking his nose.

You assume he is a psychopath, yet everyone else here is aware that he is a person with a disability, and you claim to support the idea of breaking his nose? Are you suggesting that such treatment is acceptable for them?

And yet, you haven't been sanctioned for these seven posts. I truly hope that you will be.

Where, then, is this sense of American civility that you claim to uphold?🙂

Arthur Anderson49 said:I fail to see why you would direct those remarks toward me.

Because you are the only one here to whom he expressed such fondness. And we have all seen how that unfolded.

His second post on the "Bread..." thread was:

"Oh, will anyone else ever accept me on this subreddit? I am lonely, small, a miserable wretch, and a narrow-minded little man. What must a person do to be accepted by this online community?

The truth is, I am simply trying to establish some connection with you all so I don't feel so isolated living in this godforsaken backwater.

I like many of you: Judas, Arthur Anderson49, silvercyclist32, Hercules, Lester, and so on. I feel a certain kinship with you (...). I just want to feel like I belong somewhere..."

Arthur Anderson49 said:- Why should I feel any special obligation to be tolerant toward him?

- I am certainly not the first person to lash out at him.

- Furthermore, I maintained persistent communication with him, which actually resulted in me being penalized because my persistence was misconstrued as "feeding a troll."

- And if someone is suffering from such a condition—forgive me, but they simply don't belong on this forum.

- If a person spreads toxicity all around them, it exceeds the bounds of tolerance expected in healthy communication, whether that toxicity is intentional or caused by illness.

- Everyone holds a special duty toward those with disabilities, including you.

- No one should be lashing out at a person with a disability, not just the first person to do so.

- You failed to find an appropriate way to communicate because you failed to recognize the true nature of your interlocutor.

- In today's society, people with disabilities are not isolated; rather, we strive to integrate them.

- What I have bolded here is an insult directed at a forum member who isn't even present.

Arthur Anderson49 said:I am talking about how when I struggle with this jerk (and anyone within a ten-mile radius can see he's a jerk), nobody reacts.

When I saw the garbage at the Catch-22 site, miraculously, no one else seemed to notice it.

You aren't right about that. Catch-22 mentioned having Asperger, so from that perspective, he deals with a disability (though "Asperger" is likely just a euphemism).

In American elementary schools, they teach tolerance toward individuals with any kind of impairment.

And since you are an adult, shouldn't you have been able to grasp that through simple maturity? This part I highlighted feels a bit strange. 🙂

quietseal72 said:you pointed out where I should ask this question

I see that my name was mentioned here.

I assumed you would approach this from a sociological perspective and host the discussion on Social Knowledge. I truly expected the conversation to focus on revitalizing cultural ties, fostering artistic and athletic exchanges, strengthening economic cooperation, or organizing symposia to debate contentious issues and harmonize textbooks. Is that not how meaningful progress is made?

I wasn't considering language at all, as those matters are strictly governed by the constitutions of Mexico, Mexico, Canada, and America; any further debate on the subject is merely idle chatter—unless, of course, we are discussing democratic constitutional amendments or engaging in rigorous scientific inquiry.

That said, perhaps it is for the best that you didn't post it on Social Knowledge. The topic quickly devolved into endless lamentations over historical grievances against your side, while simultaneously attempting to justify the injustices committed by yours. This naturally led to some rather inappropriate reactions from other users.

All things considered, however, aren't you one of the more pleasant interlocutors among our neighbors to the east?🙂

Melissa Castillo said:I have been contemplating starting a discussion of this nature for quite some time.

Just two stanzas for you:

So finally he decided on the young man because
So everyone could understand:
Although in Eve he was a little more in love -
He went to ask Amanda for her hand.

But in the club, Amanda wasn't alone:
Seeing them together, he caught a cramp.
If one takes only half of their couple,
L'autre half might just hit him hard.

Melissa Castillo said:I have been contemplating starting a discussion like this from Amazon's perspective for quite some time. Is there a reason why people incorporate so much English into their posts?

You shall receive two more stanzas:

Er dumal ein morning čto alors to fare -
Aucune punčka hadn't fore ni for ič:
Eve aveva beauty, Amanda had pare
Come razrešit6 it, je would him, hudič.

His status was not positive quo ante
When er avait cash pour lov, roulette und sports.
Like his Tanta, whose idol was Dante,
on preferait beauty, ma he byl tres švorc.
...

Melissa Castillo said:I have been contemplating starting a discussion like this from Amazon's perspective for some time now. Why do people insist on overusing English within their posts?

There is even a song written in this style:

In ancient times a hero used to live
In love with two maidens;
But he could not quite decide,
Which one he loved more.
...

The above is a translation, while the original goes like this:

In ancient times a hero lived
Who loved two maidens;
He could not quite say
Which one he loved best.

mistygardener59 said:If an individual genuinely believes they are the Son of God, possesses immortality, and expects to undergo reincarnation—all while maintaining that they can absorb the sins of others through crucifixion and that their personal suffering serves a greater good for all of humanity—what kind of clinical diagnosis would actually fit such a person?

I have a book by Dr. Vladimir Stanojević regarding these types of disorders, yet he does not seem to mention Jesus. However, in his bibliography, he cites a work by Dr. Binet-Sanglet titled "The Madness of Jesus," I-III (New York City, 1912). If anyone possesses knowledge concerning this book, I would truly be interested to know its contents.

One might find information on Wikipedia under the term "prophet," but that diagnosis feels too extreme, and I have no desire to propagate it here. If anyone is curious, they may look it up themselves.

Nicole Mitchell said:Every user who earns more than 100 red cards receives this as a reward for their participation on the forum.

Is this an established fact, or merely a supposition?

Are we permitted to read between the lines?

Michelle Scott32 said:Vinolio, I feel compelled to offer you some perspective. First, I notice you aren't addressing the current state of the discussion boards, despite what the headline suggests. Are you simply trolling? Second, surely you realize that if it were proven you are merely a clone, your reputation would be completely destroyed across the board. Furthermore, the situation was settled days ago when we welcomed two new moderators to the forums. Fourth, you are truly playing with fire. If you continue down this path, will you not realize that even the most influential proxies carry little weight these days? My mentor tries to calm me, but my blood is absolutely boiling. It is such a tragedy that my recent detailed response to all your doubts—written entirely in English—was lost when my system crashed. Truly, what a loss. I respect you; will you respect me? 😉

I believe the collapse of the "Social Sciences" division actually began on March 15, 2007, when Sovann Maccha (a total mimic of Dementiae praecox) began forcing their own private, distorted version of American English upon us.

When those who value standard English attempted to push back against the massive spread of Sovann's/Dementia's texts, the insults began—and thus, the breakdown of structured, controlled communication occurred.