Thread: Epic overuse/misuse of words

Originally Posted by JohnnyCakeDC

Str8 Razor. This one is on my nerves now.

Me too. Why is a Str8 razor called a Str8?

Originally Posted by Miner123

It's not misuse but pronunciation.

Nuculer instead of Nuclear. It drives me crazy.
Say it with me: NU - KLEE - UR one more time NU - KLEE - UR.

I agree...this one gets under my skin...in a BIG way

What the heck is Nuculer or Nucular?

110% (as in he gave 110%), not possible.

Qualifiers on anything that is by its nature absolute (eg. kind of pregnant).

MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) the correct term is NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance); magnetics (what ever they may be) do not resonate.

Originally Posted by MasterRolf

MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) the correct term is NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance); magnetics (what ever they may be) do not resonate.

I kind of understand what you're saying, 110%

Originally Posted by MasterRolf

110% (as in he gave 110%), not possible.

Qualifiers on anything that is by its nature absolute (eg. kind of pregnant).

MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) the correct term is NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance); magnetics (what ever they may be) do not resonate.

Well yes and no...technically, you are right. The resonance stems from the nuclei radiating back the energy absorbed from the EM pulse. This energy, which is radiated back out, is at a specific resonance frequency (which depends on strength of magnetic field, etc...). By definition:

NMR = Nuclear Magnetic Resonance is used primarily in scientific research (structural biology etc...). It is the resonance that occurs when a nucleus (usually hydrogen, but any nucleus that has non-zero spin will work) is placed in a magnetic field and is 'swept' by a radio frequency that causes the nuclei to 'flip'. This causes the radio frequency to be absorbed, which is what is measured.

MRI = Magnetic Resonance Imaging is use more in clinical settings (medicine). it is a more complex application of NMR in which the geometric source of the resonances are detected and deconvoluted by Fourier transform analysis.

Essentially, they do the same thing.

The main factor, imo has to do with nomenclature...Imagine if a doctor requested a patient to have a Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging (rather than MRI) done, 95% of the patients would freak out. I believe that the term (for clinical practice) was changed to ease patient concerns.

But, that's just my 2 cents

Originally Posted by BladeRunner001

Imagine if a doctor requested a patient to have a Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging (rather than MRI) done, 95% of the patients would freak out. I believe that the term (for clinical practice) was changed to ease patient concerns.

We have a nuclear medicine department at the facility where I work. Patients are injected with a radioactive isotope for imaging studies. I've never seen anyone freak out when it's explained to them that they are going to have radioactive material injected into their body.
Some ask questions, but I have yet to see anyone refuse a study.

Originally Posted by HNSB

We have a nuclear medicine department at the facility where I work. Patients are injected with a radioactive isotope for imaging studies. I've never seen anyone freak out when it's explained to them that they are going to have radioactive material injected into their body.
Some ask questions, but I have yet to see anyone refuse a study.

You are right HNSB...these days, they do all sorts of nuclear/isotope labeling and dye imaging these days as these become common place in medicine. But, I was speaking historically...I recall a panel that was set up shortly after the publication of an article outlining the successful use of NMR in humans (I think late 70s or so). The panel was to discuss the merits of whether they should change the name to something other than NMR, exactly because of the uncertainties associated in using the word "nuclear". If I recall, it was decided that by using the term as is, will result in the widespread "fear" amongst patients, and patient groups...so the term was MRI...less innocuous and "invasive"-sounding. Not to mention, they are slightly different in the way they image.

That makes sense.