Answer:
The onset, and treatment of PTSD is no easy matter. In order for such a disorder to appear, which is later expressed with tremendous peaks of stress, crisis, behavioral problems, panic disorders, anxiety disorders, and many more debilitating conditions, a person must have experienced an event, or circumstance, that traumatically negatively impacted the correct psychological and emotional processes of the mind. In these patients, one the most common situations is that panic attacks and anxiety peaks happen particularly when the traumatic event, moment, or circumstance is remembered, and they are very good at remembering not just the moment itself, but all elements that surrounded that trauma. Also, they are able to make really clear connections and associations between those events and normal events in life that, when they appear, trigger the defensive responses of the mind.
The idea of administering a patient with PTSD with medication that would stop memory formation shortly after a traumatic event would not be a good idea simply because while the drugs focus on the chemical processes involved in memory formation, this procedure ignores that memory is much more than just chemicals in the brain. This has been show time and time again in research. Even with strong medication that basically generates amnesia, or trauma to the brain that may cause amnesia, it has been seen, and science cannot yet fully explain how, these patients may have partial, or total recovery of memories. And because the process of memory formation is still so misunderstood, and not all the factors involved are completely known, simply administering a drug that would stop the hormones that are believed to play a role in memory formation could become more of a problem for the patient. Also it is not being considered that amnesia causes even more stress in patients, as somehow the brain still recognizes that there is information present, but cannot simply bring it to concious awareness.
Answer:
So, it depends on how serious their wound is. It's like a scale of one to ten, if it's a one being not serious, then you won't get admitted soon. But if it's a ten, being incredibly serious, then you'll get admitted sooner. Their method is known as Triage. Same thing goes with the person's illness.
I hope I answered your question... Let me know if you need help with anything else.
Answer:
c: laparoscopic
Explanation:
Laparoscopy is an instrument that is used to do any surgery procedure in the internal organ.
Answer:
I would say Option B
Explanation:
A controlled experiment is where you have two or more independent variables, that way you have an experiment to compare results with.
Answer:
One of the conditions that she describe
was induced heart failure, which is basically a “broken heart.” She says that human doctors apparently discovered that this is true in humans around 2000. However, veterinarians had recognized this in the earlier 1970s. This just goes to show that there are more correlations between the two than people realize and could help substantially.
Do you find Dr. Natterson-Horowitz's argument that physicians can learn a lot from veterinarians convincing? What part of her argument is, to you, especially strong or
weak?
I think that her argument is extremely convincing and I definitely agree with her. Her statements about how she performed
the same functions on both humans and other animals helped portray the argument she was making but was also a strong point. I also thought that her naming the three
conditions was very strong
Explanation:
