GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

500 yrs in the future....and we still use needles ?

POSTED BY: AURAPTOR
UPDATED: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 06:57
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2939
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, October 8, 2004 6:23 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Was watching Ariel (again) and I noticed how many times we see the use of syringes and needles in Firefly. Simon uses a needle/syringe to put him and River to sleep. Mal uses another to wake them up. Later on still, Simon uses what to help medicate River ? You guessed it.

I mean, come on..we have injector devices NOW that don't even use needles. Are we going to see this corrected during the movie ? I sure hope so.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 8, 2004 6:43 PM

NEEDLESEYE


Isn't this Firefly were talking about, where they fly in space AND ride horses, carry guns, herd cattle, ride in wagons...
Y'know, some medications may not be delivered properly with one of those new fangled injectors anyhoo.

Just sayin' :}

Keeper of Jayne's goggles. 8)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 9, 2004 1:50 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


I just think that Joss didn't want to look like he was ripping off Star Trek. However, in Bushwhacked, Simon does appear to give the survivor/pre-Reaver guy a sedative in the neck w/ out some injector device.

The horses and covered wagons make sense, if you're trying to start building up a world from the ground. Horses and cattle are relatively cheap, and work right in w/ the eco system. Also because solar or fuel cell technology still hasn't quite been refined after 500 yrs.

Wash: Psychic, though? That sounds like something out of science fiction.

Zoe: We live in a space ship, dear.



" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 9, 2004 6:02 AM

TRAGICSTORY


In all honesty, a needle is MUCH better than an injector. It hurts less, delivers the medicine/drugs directly into the bloodstream and is cheap to make.


A presurized injector injects stuff by creating enough air pressure to break your skin and slam stuff in. I'm not a docootr but AFAIK, it is only used if you need to innoculate 100's of people quickly.





-----------
"Societies are supported by human activity, therefore they are constantly threatened by the human facts of self-intrest and stupidity." --Peter Berger

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 9, 2004 10:36 AM

SHINYSEVEN


Simon also gives Mal the injector and tells him to anesthetize Kaylee.

Hell, it's 500 years later, and he's still sewing people up with sutures and digging bullets out of 'em with retractors. And I'm pretty sure that it's not SOP to put surgical instruments in your mouth even if you don't have a surgical nurse available.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 9, 2004 10:52 AM

NEUTRINOLAD


500 years in the future... and we're still using tables, chairs, and the wheel?

Yes, some technologies are long-lived because they serve the purpose SO WELL.
welcome to engineering.

Now where is my anti-grav pod?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 9, 2004 3:38 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by NeutrinoLad:
500 years in the future... and we're still using tables, chairs, and the wheel?

Yes, some technologies are long-lived because they serve the purpose SO WELL.
welcome to engineering.

Now where is my anti-grav pod?



You'd be surprised at how many things we use today that weren't in existance 500, hell, just 100 yrs ago.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 9, 2004 3:58 PM

STIZO


Quote:

You'd be surprised at how many things we use today that weren't in existance 500, hell, just 100 yrs ago.


Yeah, but that number is pretty small compared to the number of things that have been in use for many, many, many years. (knives, hammers, gunpowder, rockets, telescopes, calculus, geometry, mathematics in general, etc) Besides, the new technologies are created by using the old ones in a new way.

Seeing as how Firefly is only supposed to be 500 years in the future, it makes very much sense that they still use needles. Take a look at the things we still use on a day-to-day basis that were invented over 500 years ago. Even the so called "New technologies" are based on older mechanics and principles.

Being an Engineering student I am finding this out more and more.

----------------------------------------------
Conquering the galaxy with terrifying space monkeys, one ship at a time...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 9, 2004 4:37 PM

POTHER


That's not the only thing... they've still got the same building codes at St. Lucy's...

...You'll notice the EXIT signs in the lobby at the main entrance. They look exactly like they did 500 years ago. Not even a BI-LINGUAL sign with Chinese, just plain old English.

...What you might also notice from Ariel, is how they land expensive flying-ambulances on black draped dollies, where one of the set of wheels of the dolly doesn't have its drape on it, and you can see the 4 wheels on that corner of the dolly. Amazing how Wash landed the ambulance so neatly on that dolly. He really is a good pilot!

:) But boy, I sure wish they'd make more episodes!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 9, 2004 4:58 PM

GWENHARKER


You have to remember that things take time to be created. 500 years isn't really that far off into the future, people.

Look at the Star Wars Episode II. They may have lightsabers and all this wonderfully 'futuristic' stuff, but Anakin still has to have a droid hand, while 25-30 years later, Luke can have a perfect prothestic. Doesn't mean there isn't some horrible side effect.

What I'm getting at is, people will stick with what they know works.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 15, 2004 8:56 PM

TENTHCREWMEMBER

Could you please just make it stranger? Stranger. Odder. Could be weirder. More bizarre. How about uncanny?


Quote:

Originally posted by shinyseven:
Simon also gives Mal the injector and tells him to anesthetize Kaylee.

Hell, it's 500 years later, and he's still sewing people up with sutures and digging bullets out of 'em with retractors. And I'm pretty sure that it's not SOP to put surgical instruments in your mouth even if you don't have a surgical nurse available.



Hey, alot of things can be overlooked in SOPs when it comes to "field surgery". And remember, Simon does mention to Inara that her immunization packages will help because there isn't much in the infirmary. Because why? Because this is a CARGO ship in the middle of nowhere, not an Alliance HOSPITAL in the Core. So yeah, sewing, retractors, needles. It's all good.

And that's not even getting into the Economics of border worlds and oppresive Gov'ts (who notoriously like to keep people behind the times and *NEEDING* big Gov't) or the scientific aspect of molecules that can't be absorbed through the skin because they are too damn big!

Some things are eternal because they work. You can build an anti-grav chair, but A) it is *still* a chair and B) the principle behind it is the same...sit your ass down! Guns and bullets are cheap AND effective ways to deter or invoke violence. Even the Alliance realizes this (See Serenity, Train Job and Bushwhacked).

Hell, one of the best lines to me is "Use of a swhat?" As if to say "People still use those?"
And coming from a guy who was looking to smuggle cattle offworld to thems that need it, made me LOL. So even within the paradigm, there is the aspect of old world/new world. Just because wagons are not practical to modern transportation systems, does that mean we shouldn't use cars because 4 wheels and horsepower is outdated?

So all in all, I s'pect the more things change, the more they'll stay the same. Dong ma?

TCM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not yet an OFFICIAL BROWNCOAT? Well join up and swell the ranks 'cuz I am thinkin' we will rise again!
visit: http://browncoats.serenitymovie.com/serenity/?u=TenthCrewMember
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Show your Browncoat pride! I have original (meaning: designed by me!)
T-shirts and posters for sale
http://www.zazzle.com/contributors/home/default.asp?cid=23847914695881
5760

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 16, 2004 3:23 AM

BIKISDAD


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by NeutrinoLad:
500 years in the future... and we're still using tables, chairs, and the wheel?

Yes, some technologies are long-lived because they serve the purpose SO WELL.
welcome to engineering.

Now where is my anti-grav pod?



You'd be surprised at how many things we use today that weren't in existance 500, hell, just 100 yrs ago.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "




This has already been addressed by others, but I would also like to point out that probably 60-70% of the things we use in everyday life were already being used by the Romans and other advanced civilizations over 2000 years ago. A Roman inventor named Hero developed a working steam engine almost 2000 years ago. It took until the 1800's for someone to re-discover the technology. Also, I recently saw a piece on PBS showing that Archimedes developed the calculus in 400 B.C.. It was a full 2000 years before Leibnitz and Newton re-developed the same principals - principals without which we would have none of the advanced technology we currently have.

Why was there such a long period with little or no advancement in technology? In our real case, it was a little period of social and scientific stagnation known as The Dark Ages, brought on by the fall of the Roman Empire. In the case of Firefly, it was apparently a period of social stagnation brought on by the destruction of "earth-that-was" and the need for the human species to find new places to live. The development of some technologies, such as space travel, would have been a priority due to necessity. Resources would have been directed into that area of research. Other areas, such as medical research, would have been a much lower priority and would have received less resources and therefore, less advancement.

One of the reasons I like Firefly so much is that I think the "world" that Joss presented in the show is so realistic looking compared to other sci-fi shows. A very small part of that is using needles for injections.

Apathy on the Rise. No One Cares.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 16, 2004 6:32 AM

LEAFY


During the time that the earth was in the process of "dying" technology probably didn't make many advances. It could make a "technology gap" where when things settled down, science had to take up where it left off however many years before. During that time also, science was probably focused on trying to save the earth rather than making advances in other fields.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 17, 2004 11:13 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


bikisdad wrote:
Saturday, October 16, 2004 03:23
Quote:

This has already been addressed by others, but I would also like to point out that probably 60-70% of the things we use in everyday life were already being used by the Romans and other advanced civilizations over 2000 years ago. A Roman inventor named Hero developed a working steam engine almost 2000 years ago. It took until the 1800's for someone to re-discover the technology. Also, I recently saw a piece on PBS showing that Archimedes developed the calculus in 400 B.C.. It was a full 2000 years before Leibnitz and Newton re-developed the same principals - principals without which we would have none of the advanced technology we currently have.

Why was there such a long period with little or no advancement in technology? In our real case, it was a little period of social and scientific stagnation known as The Dark Ages, brought on by the fall of the Roman Empire. In the case of Firefly, it was apparently a period of social stagnation brought on by the destruction of "earth-that-was" and the need for the human species to find new places to live. The development of some technologies, such as space travel, would have been a priority due to necessity. Resources would have been directed into that area of research. Other areas, such as medical research, would have been a much lower priority and would have received less resources and therefore, less advancement.

One of the reasons I like Firefly so much is that I think the "world" that Joss presented in the show is so realistic looking compared to other sci-fi shows. A very small part of that is using needles for injections.




Yep, well said.


It just dawned on me that saying, 'the Earth that was 'sounds so much cooler ( more cool? ) than just saying ' old Earth'.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 17, 2004 3:49 PM

BRUISERSMOM


Quote:

And I'm pretty sure that it's not SOP to put surgical instruments in your mouth even if you don't have a surgical nurse available.


It's also not SOP to have a crowd of people in the room in their non-surgical clothing and without face masks to prevent the spread of bacteria. I guess medical sanitation has gone downhill in 500 years.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 17, 2004 7:14 PM

YT

the movie is not the Series. Only the facts have been changed, to irritate the innocent; the names of the actors and characters remain the same


Quote:

Originally posted by shinyseven:
I'm pretty sure that it's not SOP to put surgical instruments in your mouth even if you don't have a surgical nurse available.


Maybe not, but it looks way cool.

Keep the Shiny Side Up

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 17, 2004 8:21 PM

TENTHCREWMEMBER

Could you please just make it stranger? Stranger. Odder. Could be weirder. More bizarre. How about uncanny?


Quote:

Originally posted by BruisersMom:
Quote:

And I'm pretty sure that it's not SOP to put surgical instruments in your mouth even if you don't have a surgical nurse available.


It's also not SOP to have a crowd of people in the room in their non-surgical clothing and without face masks to prevent the spread of bacteria. I guess medical sanitation has gone downhill in 500 years.



I think I am in one of "those moods" tonight...

500 years has NOTHING to do with it. See "emergency", "field surgery" and "using what is available".

|realitycheck|
I bet every soldier who had his life saved on a battlefield would have rather died waiting to get to a sanitary hospital where his surgery would have been performed by guys in white dresses who were cleaner than the guy next to him in the trench who had a knife, and a first aid kit and dug shrapnel out of the wounded guy's body even though they both were covered in mud, sand and the blood of the guy who unfortunately caught the brunt of the exploding grenade.
|/realitycheck|

|hypothetical|
Yeah, Simon should have said, "Fly all the way to Capital City on Osiris, so I can get proper tools, nurses in proper clothing, and a wetnap for washing my hands of the death of Kaylee because she was the one who decided to inconvienently get shot on a luh suh transport in the middle of space."
|/hypothetical|



|sarcasm|
Yeah, great show that would be. That would be so much more like real life. Mmmmhmmm. Shiny.
|noitdoesnotendhere|

Why is common sense so uncommon?

*sigh*
|/sarcasm|

TCM

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 17, 2004 8:44 PM

NEUTRINOLAD


You'd be surprised at how many things we use today that weren't in existance 500, hell, just 100 yrs ago.

Bet I wouldn't. Try me, list a few.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2004 2:10 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


mobile phones, remote control devices, cars,planes, trains,indoor
plumbing,refrigeration, the electric light, dishwasher, clothes washer, clothes dryer, computers, e-mail, message boards....

( just to list a few )

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2004 3:13 AM

BIKISDAD


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
mobile phones, remote control devices, cars,planes, trains,indoor
plumbing,refrigeration, the electric light, dishwasher, clothes washer, clothes dryer, computers, e-mail, message boards....




Some of the things you named are actually new. Some are just new versions of things that have been around for a long time. Indoor plumbing has been around forever. The electric light is just an inefficient (energy conversion wise) version of the kerosene lamp. Dishwashers, clothes washers and dryers and remote controls used to all have one name - slaves. Planes are new. Cars (also inefficient from an energy use standpoint) used to be called carts (or buggies or chariots, etc.).

RANT WARNING!

We'll be going back to those as soon as we run out of oil - it's not like there's any more being made. We're just using up what little is left - notice the sky-high oil prices lately. They're only going higher over the long-term as we use it all up with our fabulous modern inventions. Makes Joss's vision of Firefly look even more realistic, although at the rate we're going we'll have to leave earth much sooner than 500 years from now.

RANT OVER.

EDIT: Sorry for the rant. I just filled my gas tank this morning. Makes me wish had a horse.

Apathy on the Rise. No One Cares.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2004 6:02 AM

FARSCAPEPKWARS


I love the way firefly is a mix between future and past

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2004 6:17 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


bikisdad wrote:
Monday, October 18, 2004 03:13
Quote:

RANT WARNING!

We'll be going back to those as soon as we run out of oil - it's not like there's any more being made. We're just using up what little is left - notice the sky-high oil prices lately. They're only going higher over the long-term as we use it all up with our fabulous modern inventions. Makes Joss's vision of Firefly look even more realistic, although at the rate we're going we'll have to leave earth much sooner than 500 years from now.

RANT OVER



The high price of oil has nothing to do w/ the amount that we have left. There is quite a great deal of oil left. I can detect from the tone of your post that while we live on the same planet, we're coming from different worlds. How you equate inanimate objects to 'slaves' is a bit of a stretch from my point of view.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2004 6:35 AM

BIKISDAD


I in no way meant to "equate" inanimate objects with slaves. I was just saying that they performed the same tasks. It's not like those tasks weren't done before these great new inventions.

As to the availability of oil. Yes, there's still plenty left in the ground to last another 30 years, or so. If you think that's a really long time, then I guess you must think we're all pretty well off. Unfortunately, the easily extractable oil has already been removed. Now we're working on the difficult to remove (and more expensive) stuff.

However, the supply of oil is just part of the problem. The real problem is that, while the supply is declining (go ahead and tell me that isn't true), the demand for the stuff is soaring because of the development of previously undeveloped countries like China and India. What do you think is going to continue to happen to the price of oil as these two conflicting trends continue into the future?

Apathy on the Rise. No One Cares.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2004 6:52 AM

DRALIONSOLEIL


this reminds me of a magazine article i read a few years ago about things that last and etc...

the article is more elaborate, but i'm not going to type it out. i'll see if its on line tho.
from discover magazine, oct 2000:

20 things that won't change in the next 20 years.

1) Houses (refering to current popular home architecture)
2) Pencils (developed since 1565. pencil sales remained steady thru the word processing revolution.)
3) Books
4) Cash
5) Eating utensils (forks knives spoons aaand chopsticks)
6) Passenger jets --thru 2020, sure. but what about 50/60 years from now?
7) Driving (talking about fully automated cars vs. human reaction driving)
8) Traffic congestion
9) Noise (talking about the development of noise insolation, insulation and cancelation technologies)
10) Religion
11) Baseball --i don't get this one, but then i never liked baseball
12) Sex (versus cloning technology for reproduction)
13) Zippers (since 1851 boys and girls)
14) Poverty
15) Shopping (versus e-commerce, real shops will still be more popular)
16) Paper clips
17) Zealotry and terrorism
18) Men's suits. (the classic "sack suit" has remained aggressively static for nearly a century, suffering only lapel width oscillations)
19) Death -- no one's going to figure out how to live forever.
20) (they actually printed this) Dick Clark. At age 90, he'll no doubt look younger than ever.

the article is on line but you have to be a subscriber... :(

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2004 7:07 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


bikisdad wrote:
Monday, October 18, 2004 06:35
Quote:

As to the availability of oil. Yes, there's still plenty left in the ground to last another 30 years, or so. If you think that's a really long time, then I guess you must think we're all pretty well off. Unfortunately, the easily extractable oil has already been removed. Now we're working on the difficult to remove (and more expensive) stuff.


I recall having a similiar discussion about oil with a classmate back when I was in High School. I had been told that our supply of easily extractable oil would last about 20-30 yrs. The year ? Around 1981. 23 Yrs later, and the forecast is .....about another 30 yrs. See a pattern?

We do have a finite supply of oil. No question there. China and India will also use more oil in the future. There are still untapped reserves out there just waiting for used. Long before the oil has 'run out', we'll see alternative energy sources being incorporated into our daily life. Fact is, that trend has already begun.


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2004 7:24 AM

BIKISDAD


Alternative energy is also in the same miniscule stage of advancement that it was in 30 years ago. Our entire economy (indeed, our whole way of life), even after the warnings from the 70's and 80's oil shocks is still based almost entirely on fossil fuels. Note the key word there - "fossil", as in plankton that died and decayed hundreds of millions of years ago. What took 100's of millions of years to develop, we're about to use up in a few short decades. Don't think 30 years from now. Think 100 years from now, when the oil supply is GONE. Do you think our descendant's lives will more resemble ours or our frontiersman ancestors?

EDIT: The answer is in Firefly, by the way. This show was very forward thinking in so many ways.

Apathy on the Rise. No One Cares.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2004 8:37 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Well, we'll agree to disagree. You say 30,100 yrs. I say 1000's of yrs. Doesn't matter. We'll be long gone either way.


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 19, 2004 4:50 AM

CYBERSNARK


Quote:

Originally posted by DralionSoleil:
20) (they actually printed this) Dick Clark. At age 90, he'll no doubt look younger than ever.

Heh. I so want to see him (or Michael J. Fox) making an appearance on Firefly "as himself." ;)

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 19, 2004 6:57 AM

MINGHUSCHUTNEY


I do understand where you are coming from on this one. I am still amazed that we use sutures to close wounds today, when medical science has been advancing at an exponential rate. Its only in the last 10 years or so that we stopped using animal derived sutures such as catgut, and that was mainly related to the risk of PRION transmission. It does seem a bit archaic to use what is in effect sterile string to hold biological tissues together until they heal. However, if I think about advances in medical technology most of them are outside of the surgical field. These include things like diagnostic imaging and pharmaceutical therapies. Firefly certainly gets the imaging right with the very impressive body scanner used in Ariel. Surgical advances have basically been in techniques which make things faster or less traumatic to the patient and tissues such as keyhole surgery or in finding new ways to cut tissues without causing bleeding (like diathermy or harmonic scalples). Infact I am told by anaesthetists that the real reason surgery is so much better today is because anaesthetics have become a lot safer. In reality the drive to advance surgery is waning because it is becoming an increasingly redundant form of therapy. Many illnesses once treated with the knife are now treated with a pill (like gastric ulcers). Molecular biology will almost certainly make cancer surgery a thing of the past in the not so distant future. I would not be too surprised to see sutures still being used in 500 years time in the rare instances when old fashioned surgery was still needed; for instance following trauma, especially outside of a hospital setting (as is usually the case on Serenity).
As far as non-needle injectors are concerned I could only see these delivering accurate doses into the subcutaneous tissues. Most drugs are still given intravenously due to the rapidity of action and accurate dose administration acheivable via this route. Its not so hard to imagine that needles will remain the cheapest and safest way to do this for many years to come.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL