 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Tinnitus / April 2007neck massage
After reading a few suggestion on here, I went for a massage, explaining the situation to the masseuse, who really did seem to know about the subject. Anyway, and this might be a cause for some optimism, it has actually got louder. Why I say optimism, is that at least I know that a neck massage effects my tinnitus. I look forward from any one who might have been down this route in the past. Sometimes massage, like accupuncture, works by enhancing some metabolic functions. Get a few more massages and see what happens. Even for full body massages, the first massage usually does nothing or can bring pain back to life. > After reading a few suggestion on here, I went for a massage, > explaining the situation to the masseuse, who really did seem to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > forward > from any one who might have been down this route in the past. I haven't had a neck massage, but my tinnitus gets a lot softer after a chiropractic neck adjustment. The volume returns to the usual level after sleeping. > I haven't had a neck massage, but my tinnitus gets a lot softer after a > chiropractic neck adjustment. The volume returns to the usual level > after sleeping. Use a chiro pillow... ======================= I have one of those very expensive neck support pillows with the mushy foam and it is just wrong for head and neck alignment. The centre is very thin and acts like you have no pillow at all. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The correct height for you shoulder width from your neck is more appropriate. Who has a neck that thins out from their head on the side? If a pillow works on your side it is wrong on your back. An adjustment needs to be made with pillow height when rolling from side to back. After people get used to it, and can do it subconsciously, the problems disappear usually. On 4ÔÂ17ÈÕ, ÉÏÎç11ʱ48·Ö, don <d...@no.spam> wrote: > I haven't had a neck massage, but my tinnitus gets a lot softer > after a > chiropractic neck adjustment. The volume returns to the usual level > after sleeping. Use a chiro pillow... ======================= > > I haven't had a neck massage, but my tinnitus gets a lot softer > > after a chiropractic neck adjustment. The volume returns to the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > more appropriate. Who has a neck that thins out from their head on the > side? Really the only intelligent solution (and this would be very hot in warm climates without air conditioning) is to have some sort of support wrapped around your neck so it moves with you when you toss and turn in your sleep. Janice is correct: we need a different amount of support when we are on our back, compared to when we are on our side. Wouldn't the ideal posture be our head just barely touching the same plane as our back? Sort of like standing up straight? Most pillows push our posture forward, so if we were standing, we'd be stooping over. This seems wrong. Then, imagine some sort of support that wraps around your whole body. When you're on your side (especially for women) you'd have support at your waist. But when you're on your back, it would be minimal. One could devise pads for the knees as well when we are on our side. Knee pillows are impossible to hold in place when asleep and moving around. . > If a pillow works on your side it is wrong on your back. An adjustment > needs to be made with pillow height when rolling from side to back. > After people get used to it, and can do it subconsciously, the > problems disappear usually. Janice, please post below the previous post, deleting all headers so it looks clean, like this. People read from top to bottom. At least most of us do. You've got some good ideas. Please orchestrate your answers so they get maximum exposure. Don't even go there. I won't tell you not to bottom post. Many will never bottom post as is violates the basic concepts of attached reference material. There are too many other factors to even go into here. I can read either method. Bottom posts tend to get ignored unless they are really interesting. >> > I haven't had a neck massage, but my tinnitus gets a lot softer >> > after a chiropractic neck adjustment. The volume returns to the [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > You've got some good ideas. Please orchestrate your answers so they > get maximum exposure. >> Janice, please post below the previous post, deleting all headers so >> it looks clean, like this. People read from top to bottom. At [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> You've got some good ideas. Please orchestrate your answers so they >> get maximum exposure. >Don't even go there. I won't tell you not to bottom post. >Many will never bottom post as is violates the basic concepts of >attached reference material. There are too many other factors to even >go into here. What a load of crap. Go to any newsgroup, including this one, and you'll find that only a small minority of people top-post. And those who do are either new to Usenet or pigheaded dolts who top-post just to prove they're different. Grow up, Janice. b  SignatureA: Dunno, maybe it's because they're stupid. Q: Why do some people top-post? A: Because they are REALLY STUPID! Q: Why do some people cross-post? > >> Janice, please post below the previous post, deleting all headers so > >> it looks clean, like this. People read from top to bottom. At [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > What a load of crap. Go to any newsgroup, including this one, and > you'll find that only a small minority of people top-post. Why is it neccessary to do what the majority does? Does the principle of democracy also operate in deciding whether one should top or bottom post? Leave others alone and do your own thing...OK? And those > who do are either new to Usenet or pigheaded dolts who top-post just > to prove they're different. Grow up, Janice. b [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Q: Why do some people cross-post? >> >> Janice, please post below the previous post, deleting all headers so >> >> it looks clean, like this. People read from top to bottom. At [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >Leave others alone and do your own thing...OK? Leave others to drive the wrong way on a one way street or go up the off-ramp of a freeway? The essence of communication is intent. If you intend for people to follow a thread you bottom-post. If you only want people to read what you've written and couldn't care less about maintaining the thread, then you top-post. Top-posters are self-serving egotists who obviously think that what they have to write is far more important than anyone else's contribution in a thread. It's the Usenet's version of "Look at me! Look at me!" Got it? > And those >> who do are either new to Usenet or pigheaded dolts who top-post just >> to prove they're different. Grow up, Janice. b > On 19 Apr 2007 05:36:24 -0700, "fyfp...@gmail.com" <fyfp...@gmail.com> > sez: [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > is far more important than anyone else's contribution in a thread. > It's the Usenet's version of "Look at me! Look at me!" Got it? I have got it that you are imposing your own view on others. I understand perfectly what Janice has to say and I do bother to read no matter she top or bottom posts. It is my view that if someone does not want to read or is too lazy to read, he won't read whether the other side top or bottom posts. For your information, in the US people drive on the right side while in England on the left side. You seem to be someone of a exacting principle which if I am not wrong makes you a difficult person to get along with your spouse. > > And those > >> who do are either new to Usenet or pigheaded dolts who top-post just [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > - 显示引用的文字 - >> On 19 Apr 2007 05:36:24 -0700, "fyfp...@gmail.com" <fyfp...@gmail.com> >> sez: [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >not want to read or is too lazy to read, he won't read whether the >other side top or bottom posts. In other words, I'm welcome to express my opinion as long as it doesn't conflict with your opinion, or Janice's? And yes, Janice's posts are extremely valuable and worth going out of one's way to read. The point is, they would be far easier to read if she didn't insist on top-posting. If anything, it's the top-poster who's too lazy to post in a logical order. >For your information, in the US people drive on the right side while >in England on the left side. So what? >You seem to be someone of a exacting principle which if I am not wrong >makes you a difficult person to get along with your spouse. You are making assumptions that you are in no position make. But I'm curious why you think there's something wrong with having "exacting principles." Do you have an principles at all? > The point is, they would be far easier to read if she didn't insist on > top-posting. If anything, it's the top-poster who's too lazy to post > in a logical order. No, the lazy person is the one who bottom posts and includes the text of all the preceding messages like you just did. You were too lazy to delete over 50 lines of superfluous crap that I'd already read and had to scroll through to get to your response which wasn't really worth all that effort after all. If top posting is such a sin, why do all my newsreaders offer the choice to "start my reply above the quoted text" in their settings? It's because it's a personal preference not a rule, a law, or one of the ten commandments. Have a look at the Usenet FAQs at www.faqs.org which don't even mention top or bottom posting. If the people who wrote the FAQs over 10 years ago weren't concerned about it, why are you guys getting your panties in a wad over it? What do you mean by "far easier to read?" Are you saying you can't read her posts without scrolling through all the quotes that preceded hers? If you can't remember the conversation leading up to her posts, join alt.support.alzheimers instead of this group. Why don't you two anal retentive nitpickers find something better to do with your time than harassing people who are just trying to offer some helpful information to the newsgroup? >Why don't you two anal retentive nitpickers find something better to do >with your time than harassing people who are just trying to offer some >helpful information to the newsgroup? So why do *you* bottom-post? > > The point is, they would be far easier to read if she didn't insist on > > top-posting. If anything, it's the top-poster who's too lazy to post > > in a logical order. > > No, the lazy person is the one who bottom posts and includes the text of > all the preceding messages like you just did. But by leaving in the original material it allows newcomers to join a thread and immediately come up to speed. It has its advantages as well. > You were too lazy to > delete over 50 lines of superfluous crap that I'd already read and had [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > If top posting is such a sin, why do all my newsreaders offer the choice > to "start my reply above the quoted text" in their settings? Because most people, in their ignorance, use that for email. And it makes email communication a horrid mess, once a conversation gets batted back and forth a few times. Bottom posting makes it a clear. > It's > because it's a personal preference not a rule, a law, or one of the ten > commandments. Have a look at the Usenet FAQs at www.faqs.org which > don't even mention top or bottom posting. If the people who wrote the > FAQs over 10 years ago weren't concerned about it, why are you guys > getting your panties in a wad over it? Because it makes such huge difference to the reading ability of everyone concerned. > What do you mean by "far easier to read?" Are you saying you can't read > her posts without scrolling through all the quotes that preceded hers? > If you can't remember the conversation leading up to her posts, join > alt.support.alzheimers instead of this group. Lol.....good one. > Why don't you two anal retentive nitpickers find something better to do > with your time than harassing people who are just trying to offer some > helpful information to the newsgroup? Hey, you're contributing to this as much as we are! Thanx for the support fyf, but the person you are adrressing uses many. many different names to troll many newsgroups. The source chain matches the person that posts over 2-300 posts per day, continually tries to get attention and has ruined many, many groups with one bit of nonsense or another. The top posting troll is a classic and is well known by experienced Usenet posters.. If they do not like my posting where it can be read easily then let them killfilter me. Easier that way. I still prefer to not scroll to the bottom and back again to some indetermined point to start reading. If I want to see reference material I can read the previous post. ***I*** have a threading browser and understand how to use it, unlike some, apparently. Next will be your font usage and the speed you strike your keys with. Thanx. On 4?20?, ??5?20?, BobF <inva...@invalid.invalid.com> wrote: I have got it that you are imposing your own view on others. I understand perfectly what Janice has to say and I do bother to read no matter she top or bottom posts. It is my view that if someone does not want to read or is too lazy to read, he won't read whether the other side top or bottom posts. For your information, in the US people drive on the right side while in England on the left side. You seem to be someone of a exacting principle which if I am not wrong makes you a difficult person to get along with your spouse. >Thanx for the support fyf, but the person you are adrressing uses >many. many different names to troll many newsgroups. The source chain >matches the person that posts over 2-300 posts per day, continually >tries to get attention and has ruined many, many groups with one bit >of nonsense or another. That is nonsense, Janice. I do post to four newsgroups and I do use a different persona for each. But my real first name is Bob, my last name starts with an "F" and I post two or three posts a day at most. So you better take a refresher course for your tracking skills, because you're totally wrong. Unless, of course, you are looking for other posts with a from address like "invalid@invalid.invalid.com", in which case, you're simply sloppy. >The top posting troll is a classic and is well known by experienced >Usenet posters.. I stand by my assertion that top-posting is for Usenet newbies and people like you. As any honest person can find out for themselves by looking at the newsgroups of their choice, only a small minority top-post and I am far from being the only one who criticises them for it. Top-posting is a classic blunder. >If they do not like my posting where it can be read easily then let >them killfilter me. Easier that way. As I said to fyf, your posts are usually valuable and worth going to the effort of scrolling up and down in order to make sense of the message. What a shame you're so pigheaded. Would you read a stack of letters by reading the most recent first? Of course not, because you'd want to know the CHAIN of communication so you could make sense of what the most recent letter was referring to. That's why the vast majority of people using Usenet bottom-post. >I still prefer to not scroll to the bottom and back again to some >indetermined point to start reading. If I want to see reference >material I can read the previous post. ***I*** have a threading >browser and understand how to use it, unlike some, apparently. Then it's you who are lazy ... as well as illogical. >Next will be your font usage and the speed you strike your keys with. And silly ... >Thanx. Any time. SignatureA: Dunno, maybe it's because they're stupid. Q: Why do some people top-post? A: Because they are REALLY STUPID! Q: Why do some people cross-post? Sorry. My Browser, with it's economy text mode cut off your bottom drivel. >>Thanx for the support fyf, but the person you are adrressing uses >>many. many different names to troll many newsgroups. The source [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > message. What a shame you're so pigheaded. Would you read a stack of > letters by reading the most rece >Sorry. My Browser, with it's economy text mode cut off your bottom >drivel. Like I said: pigheaded. SignatureA: Dunno, maybe it's because they're stupid. Q: Why do some people top-post? A: Because they are REALLY STUPID! Q: Why do some people cross-post? > >The top posting troll is a classic and is well known by experienced > >Usenet posters.. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > what the most recent letter was referring to. That's why the vast > majority of people using Usenet bottom-post. Perfectly said. > >I still prefer to not scroll to the bottom and back again to some > >indetermined point to start reading. If I want to see reference > >material I can read the previous post. ***I*** have a threading > >browser and understand how to use it, unlike some, apparently. Then we'll just have to put up with you! :) Intelligence, poorly laid out, is better than foolishness well laid out. If Janice has good tips, I'll wade through the mess to read them. So be it. Maybe she'll convert later for the benefit of the rest of us. And especially people reading the thread late. For them its just a total mess trying to piece things together with headers not removed and everything in reverse order. Like I said, if you want the best response, you'll bottom post. Bottom posting encourages things to be edited out that are inapplicable to the conversation. It encourages constant trimming and every reader benefits from that. It just rocks. :) > >> Janice, please post below the previous post, deleting all headers so > >> it looks clean, like this. People read from top to bottom. At [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > who do are either new to Usenet or pigheaded dolts who top-post just > to prove they're different. Grow up, Janice. b Well said, if bit harsh. Janice, I just think you'll get better response and better feedback to your posts if you bottom post. Just look at the clarity when things flow from top to bottom, headers removed. Bottom posting encourages the cleaning up of messages. Top posting encourages a lazy, flippant reply. Keep my headers with my text please. Don not bottom post. It was never meant to be. ...and stop trolling with your troublemaking nonsense here. >> >> Janice, please post below the previous post, deleting all >> >> headers so [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > Top > posting encourages a lazy, flippant reply. I have a very old pillow filled with crumbed foam. I can punch that into any shape I want. Very useful. Elly -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Discovery consists of looking at the same thing as everyone else and thinking something different. Roger von Oech "Discovery consists of seeing what everybody else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought." - Jonathon Swift, the author of Gulliver's Travels http://eebee.net/ >I have one of those very expensive neck support pillows with the mushy >foam and it is just wrong for head and neck alignment. The centre is [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >======================= SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > >> I haven't had a neck massage, but my tinnitus gets a lot softer > >> after a chiropractic neck adjustment. The volume returns to > >> the usual level after sleeping. That's probably because of the your neck isn't moving when you sleep and the joints get stiff. The more I read on this, the more it looks like aging joints are related to T. > >If a pillow works on your side it is wrong on your back. An adjustment > >needs to be made with pillow height when rolling from side to back. > >After people get used to it, and can do it subconsciously, the > >problems disappear usually. > >I have one of those very expensive neck support pillows with the mushy > >foam and it is just wrong for head and neck alignment. The centre is > >very thin and acts like you have no pillow at all. Wrong, wrong, > >wrong. The correct height for you shoulder width from your neck is > >more appropriate. Who has a neck that thins out from their head on the > >side? The pillow should actually be attached to your head. As absurd as this sounds (and decidedly unromantic!) its the only way of having the correct support whether you're on your side or back. > I have a very old pillow filled with crumbed foam. I can punch that > into any shape I want. Very useful. The trouble is it doesn't know if it be should thicker (for when you're on your side) or thinner for when you're on your back. I have two pillows under my head. One (thin one) comes out when I am on my back and the thin one goes on top again when I am on my side. This took a few month to develop subconscious performing this. It is a necessity for me or headaches to the point of vomiting can occur. Alog with this I can now also flip a thick folded pillow from one side to the other side and the pillow between my knees from one side, to under my knees, to the other side, all without conscious awareness. This all took a few years of practice. One tip though....never sleep when you are too tired...LOL. You pass out and wake up, in the morning, without moving. Then your body is sore and dead in spots. >I have a very old pillow filled with crumbed foam. I can punch that > into any shape I want. Very useful. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >> >>======================= Please tell me the pillow between your knees has nothing to do with tinnitus! ;-) P.S. I'm top posting just to irritate certain people. (I won't say who.) > I have two pillows under my head. One (thin one) comes out when I am > on my back and the thin one goes on top again when I am on my side. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > under my knees, to the other side, all without conscious awareness. > This all took a few years of practice. > > I have two pillows under my head. One (thin one) comes out when I am > > on my back and the thin one goes on top again when I am on my side. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > under my knees, to the other side, all without conscious awareness. > > This all took a few years of practice. > Please tell me the pillow between your knees has nothing to do with > tinnitus! ;-) > P.S. I'm top posting just to irritate certain people. (I won't say > who.) Hey, content is more important than presentation. Cure my T and I'll top post all you want! > I haven't had a neck massage, but my tinnitus gets a lot softer after a > chiropractic neck adjustment. The volume returns to the usual level > after sleeping. Definitely one of the triggers for T, at least for a lot of people is the general health of the neck. If you are feeling the again of your joints in your neck area, its time to work at getting that area limber like it used to be. > After reading a few suggestion on here, I went for a massage, > explaining the situation to the masseuse, who really did seem to know > about the subject. Anyway, and this might be a cause for some > optimism, it has actually got louder. Why I say optimism, is that at > least I know that a neck massage effects my tinnitus. I look forward > from any one who might have been down this route in the past. Change to another massager. But i agree you have found optimism in the situation as your tinnitus might well be related to muscle tension rather than anything else. > After reading a few suggestion on here, I went for a massage, > explaining the situation to the masseuse, who really did seem to know > about the subject. Anyway, and this might be a cause for some > optimism, it has actually got louder. Why I say optimism, is that at > least I know that a neck massage effects my tinnitus. I look forward > from any one who might have been down this route in the past. Neck massage is what caused my tinnitus. Be very careful. Skycloud Perhaps made you aware of your tinnitus? I doubt it "caused" it unless it was done with a mallet. >> After reading a few suggestion on here, I went for a massage, >> explaining the situation to the masseuse, who really did seem to [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Skycloud > Perhaps made you aware of your tinnitus? I doubt it "caused" it unless it > was done with a mallet. Haven't you ever heard of whiplash injury causing tinnitus? Intensive neck manipulation can be pretty severe. Skycloud I guess the massage must have been done with an automobile then. tit for tat? >> Perhaps made you aware of your tinnitus? I doubt it "caused" it >> unless it was done with a mallet. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Skycloud >I guess the massage must have been done with an automobile then. > > tit for tat? < plonk > |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.