I totally just watered my house plants
What's your favourite internal organ?

I like the pancreas. Although the duodenum is not without merit.
( Gilgamesh gazed in wonder as Frampton came alive, Fri 29 May 2009, 5:47, archived)

Thyroid gland all the way.

( Mu Dinofiddler, Fri 29 May 2009, 5:50, archived)

*endocrine gland fives*

( Gilgamesh gazed in wonder as Frampton came alive, Fri 29 May 2009, 5:51, archived)

I don't get along well with my internal organs.
I like my sternum, though. It's a nice quiet bone that hasn't caused me any problems. Yet.
( Shiksa, Fri 29 May 2009, 5:55, archived)

When you have your heart attack and need a bypass it will get in the way of the surgeons trying to save your life.
The saw will break and a piece of shrapnel will fly off and puncture your lung causing you to drown in your own blood.
( Mu Dinofiddler, Fri 29 May 2009, 5:59, archived)

as long as I'm under anesthesia, it's all good.
plus, that's more badass than dying from INTERNAL ORGAN CANCER.
( Shiksa, Fri 29 May 2009, 6:05, archived)

Any way that doesn't involve fire, gunfire or travelling at over 80mph isn't badass enough.

( Mu Dinofiddler, Fri 29 May 2009, 6:12, archived)

Has to be the liver
Does loads of important stuff (so look after it, folks) and can repair itself/regenerate (if allowed; liver damage is only reversible if you stop doing whatever it is that caused the damage) and bits of one can be surgically removed and given to someone else (partial liver transplant) so that it can grow into a new liver in the same way that you can grow plants from cuttings.
( custard, Fri 29 May 2009, 6:15, archived)

I fear it may be too late for mine

( fagilliD Fuck I'm good!, Fri 29 May 2009, 6:23, archived)

really?
How old are you? I woudn't worry about a not that healthy liver (in terms of not being able to reverse the damage) if I was under 50 (not that people should interpret that as being able to treat it badly for most of your life and not suffer any consequences).
( custard, Fri 29 May 2009, 6:27, archived)

I turned 50 about 10 weeks ago
And I think I indulge in a little more than the Governments stated maximum number of daily units...however, at my last medical (January)I was declared to be in extremely good nick
( fagilliD Fuck I'm good!, Fri 29 May 2009, 6:29, archived)

HOLY CRAP YOU'RE OLD






not that far behind you actually
( Shiksa, Fri 29 May 2009, 6:37, archived)

I often wondered why so many assume that everyone that posts here is in their mid twenties
I think there are more than a few of the older generation who participate
( fagilliD Fuck I'm good!, Fri 29 May 2009, 6:59, archived)

I'm closer to 35 than 34, and I often feel old here

( custard, Fri 29 May 2009, 7:13, archived)

PS: Like your animations....

( fagilliD Fuck I'm good!, Fri 29 May 2009, 7:19, archived)

Lots of people drink quite a bit for a long time and don't suffer from anything serious as a result
although (like smokers that live in their ninties) their health would be better if they drank less.

I only tell people (usually people who think govt. sponsored health campaigns/guidelines are like having people break in your house and stealing all of your booze instead of just being advice/guidance that you are free to ignore) to consider drinking less/not getting drunk so often (I love alcoholic drinks, but I rarely drink more than 7-8 units a week) because of the increased risks of something nasty happening as opposed to telling them that their drinking will kill them.
( custard, Fri 29 May 2009, 6:44, archived)

This is sound advice
But I rarely get drunk, in addition, I don't drink every day, but, if you were to take it over a week it certainly overhauls the guidelines by quite a bit...
( fagilliD Fuck I'm good!, Fri 29 May 2009, 6:56, archived)

you don't need to drink much every day to exceed more than 3-4 units a day (limit for blokes)
especially if you prefer wines and spirits to more watery drinks (I don't, so my couple of 500ml bottles of ale/beer every other evening or every third evening is enough for me).

That said, these limits are a bit abritrary; they only revised the limits (downwards) a few years back because they felt that they 'ought to' do it.

It's easy to identify really heavy drinking (people who regularly drink 40-50+ units a week usually end up in hospital long before anyone their age should), but nobody knows where the borderline between no adverse long-term health effects and some adverse long-term health effects is for a specific individual.

All anyone can do (and should do) is weigh up the risks, and don't do blatantly stupid things like drink heavily during pregnancy (= very high risk of foetal alcohol syndrome)
( custard, Fri 29 May 2009, 7:12, archived)

that maximum daily units
has no basis in fact, it's just a number some civil servant thought sounded about right.
( The Light in Chains don't touch the Pope's boner, Fri 29 May 2009, 7:40, archived)

To an extent I agree
But I do believe there is a maximum and I have had the head the next day to prove it!
( fagilliD Fuck I'm good!, Fri 29 May 2009, 7:42, archived)

This is true
There is a level of drinking which is dangerous and/or is pretty much certain to cause long-term health problems, but nobody knows where the boundary between 'you'll get away it' drinking and 'you're going to die of liver failure or some other grotesque complication like complications resulting from hypertension in the portal vein caused by a diseased/cirrhosis ridden liver*' drinking is.

*(less blood/minute can flow through a diseased liver = higher blood pressure/hypertension in the blood vessels that supply the liver with bllod)
( custard, Fri 29 May 2009, 7:56, archived)