Pulmonary Embolism Support Group
By far the most common form of pulmonary embolism is a thromboembolism, which occurs when a blood clot, generally a venous thrombus, becomes dislodged from its site of formation and embolizes to the arterial blood supply of one of the lungs. Symptoms may include difficulty breathing, pain during breathing, and more rarely circulatory instability and death.
THESE ARE NOT MY WORDS! Just to clarify. This is found at
http://www.web-friend.com/help/articles/web_truth.html
Read the last two paragraphs if you don't take the time to read it all.
"Truth on the Web:
Things you should know when reading information on the Internet.
What do you believe on the web? How much should you believe when you read articles on the Internet? That's a hard question to answer. The Internet in some ways may be the greatest invention since the library. In other ways it has also disceminated more false information than any other media. The very nature of the Internet that makes it so easy to "find" information is also the reason you should be leary of what you take to be the truth on the Internet.
In the days before the web, when you needed to research a topic, you went to a library and looked through the reference section of the topic you were researching. If you were lucky enough to have a set of encyclopedias, then your task may have been a bit easier. The benifit of this type of research is of course that not only did a person have to go to the trouble to 'write' down the information, but that information also had to pass inspection from editors to publishers. This added secondary resources that tended to weed out a lot of false information. Publishing companies did not want to be hit with liable lawsuits, and writers not only had editors looking over their shoulders to ensure that the information they were putting out was accurate, but they had publishers, and lawyers who had to be satisfied that the information was valid as well.
With the Internet, it's not quite so regulated. Anyone with a very modest amount of money, and minimal skills with computer desktop publishing or webmastering is capable of posting an article. The article need not be accurate, in fact, it doesn't even have to be true. There are very few legal issues (outside copyright laws) governing the web.
My advise to anyone who is researching ANY topic, looking for answers, or information is ... research more than one or two sources on the web. If possible, also research an encyclopedia or library resource as well to verify the facts. Be aware of the site you are reading, and the person or persons responsible for posting that information. A site such as cnn.com is much more likely to be posting valid information about a new story versus a site such as aol.com/~someguy/mynews.com. Professional writers will usually post a bibliography at the end of any extensive work they have done, if there is one, with valid links, then chances are better that you have found a good source of information. They may list book titles and authors they've researched, you may find things like "faq" (Frequently Asked Questions) and RFC (Request For Comments) also listed. FAQ and RFC are Internet terms that refer more often than not to what is also considered "white paper" - or information that has been researched.
The bottom line is "DO NOT believe everything you see and read on the Internet." Use your common sense, research a topic in more than one place before you state something you saw or read on the web as fact."
There are a few caveats I'll post about reading the media (such as CNN) and newspapers etc. Also 'white papers'. And more. Later
http://www.web-friend.com/help/articles/web_truth.html
Read the last two paragraphs if you don't take the time to read it all.
"Truth on the Web:
Things you should know when reading information on the Internet.
What do you believe on the web? How much should you believe when you read articles on the Internet? That's a hard question to answer. The Internet in some ways may be the greatest invention since the library. In other ways it has also disceminated more false information than any other media. The very nature of the Internet that makes it so easy to "find" information is also the reason you should be leary of what you take to be the truth on the Internet.
In the days before the web, when you needed to research a topic, you went to a library and looked through the reference section of the topic you were researching. If you were lucky enough to have a set of encyclopedias, then your task may have been a bit easier. The benifit of this type of research is of course that not only did a person have to go to the trouble to 'write' down the information, but that information also had to pass inspection from editors to publishers. This added secondary resources that tended to weed out a lot of false information. Publishing companies did not want to be hit with liable lawsuits, and writers not only had editors looking over their shoulders to ensure that the information they were putting out was accurate, but they had publishers, and lawyers who had to be satisfied that the information was valid as well.
With the Internet, it's not quite so regulated. Anyone with a very modest amount of money, and minimal skills with computer desktop publishing or webmastering is capable of posting an article. The article need not be accurate, in fact, it doesn't even have to be true. There are very few legal issues (outside copyright laws) governing the web.
My advise to anyone who is researching ANY topic, looking for answers, or information is ... research more than one or two sources on the web. If possible, also research an encyclopedia or library resource as well to verify the facts. Be aware of the site you are reading, and the person or persons responsible for posting that information. A site such as cnn.com is much more likely to be posting valid information about a new story versus a site such as aol.com/~someguy/mynews.com. Professional writers will usually post a bibliography at the end of any extensive work they have done, if there is one, with valid links, then chances are better that you have found a good source of information. They may list book titles and authors they've researched, you may find things like "faq" (Frequently Asked Questions) and RFC (Request For Comments) also listed. FAQ and RFC are Internet terms that refer more often than not to what is also considered "white paper" - or information that has been researched.
The bottom line is "DO NOT believe everything you see and read on the Internet." Use your common sense, research a topic in more than one place before you state something you saw or read on the web as fact."
There are a few caveats I'll post about reading the media (such as CNN) and newspapers etc. Also 'white papers'. And more. Later
"Media coverage of medical research often fails to provide the information needed for the public to understand the findings and to decide whether to believe them. Although it is easy to blame journalists for poor quality reporting, problems with coverage could begin with the journalists' sources."
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-01/dmc-qmj013112.php
Sometimes that's because PR releases by the medical establishment is 'sloppy'.
Journalists will often read those and more or less repeat what is said.
That can leave a lot of information unsaid ---- such as adverse reactions. What PR person in their right mind would put something out that scares the public and might cut down on sales?? :)
Journalists also use the Internet for their 'sources'. That's fine if they do more digging around and don't quote other journalists under the same restraints as they are.
Journalists also have an editor standing behind them (figuratively) with scissors ready to cut 'inches' off their otherwise good reportage. Thereby giving incomplete truths which is almost worse than lies.
Then the companies who support the newpaper or magazine will yelp if their latest and greatest 'next big thing' has a shadow of doubt cast over it. AND the journalist either edits or might lose his job.
And the trail continues----- follow the money or agenda.