Ahmed N M Ghanem*

Consultant Urologist Surgeon - Retired, Independent Investigator and Scientist, Free Lance Author, Dreamer and Revolutionary, NHS and Mansoura University, Faculty of Medicine, Egypt

*Corresponding Author: Ahmed N M Ghanem, Consultant Urologist Surgeon - Retired, Independent Investigator and Scientist, Free Lance Author, Dreamer and Revolutionary, NHS and Mansoura University, Faculty of Medicine, Egypt.

Received: August 25, 2021; Published: September 01, 2021

  Substantial evidence currently exists to demonstrate that Starling’s law is wrong [1], the revised Starling Principle is a misnomer [2] and all the formulae that goes with it are also wrong. Persistent to defend such erroneous concepts is a futile attempt to defend fraudulent science. It is well known that Starling’s law dictates the rules on fluid therapy for the management of shock which misleads physicians, and particularly anaesthetists and surgeons, into giving to much fluid during shock resuscitation, induction of anaesthesia and prolonged major surgery [3]. This practice induces the newly recognized volumetric overload shocks (VOS) that cause ARDS and hundreds of thousands of patients death per year [4-6] though remain unrecognized and underestimated.

References

1. Ghanem AN. “Final Affirmative Proof Starling’s Law Wrong and G Tube Hydrodynamic is the Correct Replacement: New Results and Critical Analytical Criticisms of Impactful Landmark Articles”. Biomedical Journal of Scientific and Technical Research 5 (2021).
2. Ghanem AN and Ghanem KA. “Revised Starling’s Principle (RSP): a misnomer as Starling’s law is proved wrong”. Medico Research Chronicles (2020).
3. Ghanem AN. “What is Misleading Physicians into giving too much Fluid during Resuscitation of Shock and Surgery that Induces ARDS and/or AKI?” Asploro Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Case Reports 3 (2020): 90-98.
4. “Why and how Starling’s law is killing patients in clinical practice in hundreds of thousands per year?” Journal of Anatomy and Physiology 2 (2021): 41-44.
5. Ghanem AN. “Volumetric Overload Shocks Cause the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: The Plenary Evidence on Patho-Aetiology and Therapy”. Open Access Journal of Biomedical Engineering 4 (2020).
6. Ghanem AN. “Volumetric Overload Shocks Cause the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Building the Bridge Between Physics, Physiology, Biochemistry, and Medicine”. Biomedical Journal of Scientific and Technical Research 1 (2020).
7. Starling EH. “Factors involved in the causation of dropsy”. Lancet 2 (1886): 1266-1270, 1330-1334, 1406-1410.
8. Starling EH. “On the absorption of fluids from connective tissue spaces”. Journal of Physiology 19 (1896): 312-326.
9. PAPPENHEIMER JR and SOTO-RIVERA A. “Effective osmotic pressure of the plasma proteins and other quantities associated with the capillary circulation in the hindlimbs of cats and dogs”. American Journal of Physiology3 (1948): 471-491.
10. Rhodin JA. “The ultra-structure of mammalian arterioles and pre-capillary sphincters”. Journal of Ultrastructure Research 18 (1967): 181-222.
11. Karnovesky MJ. “The ultra-structural basis of capillary permeability studied with peroxidase as a tracer”. Journal of Cell Biology 35 (1967): 213-236.
12. Ghanem AN. “Twenty-one reasons affirming Starling’s law on the capillary-interstitial fluid (ISF) transfer wrong and the correct replacement is the hydrodynamic of the porous orifice (G) tube”. Journal of Clinical Case Reports is an Open Access 1 (2020): 8-11.
13. Ghanem AN. “Goodbye Starling's law, hello G tube”. Journal of Urology and Nephrology 1 (2020): 000175.

Citation

Citation: Ahmed N M Ghanem. “Fraudulent Science and Starling’s Law for the Capillary-interstitial Fluid Transfer”. Acta Scientific Neurology 4.10 (2021): 01-03.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2021 Ahmed N M Ghanem. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.