Talk:Bone

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Wrong!

"Sesamoid bones are bones embedded in tendons. Since they act to hold the tendon further away from the joint, the moment arm of the tendon is increased"

This is simply not true. If you´ve read some physics you would know that the moment arm is not increased (the tendon is stuck remember). It´s the tendons angle against tibia that increases.

[edit] Appositional Bone Formation

Although intramembranous and endochondral bone formation are the two ways that new bones are formed (i.e. skeletogenesis), it is not the only way that bone tissue is formed.

New bone tissue can also form by appositional bone growth (i.e. bone growing on the surface of existing bone). This mechanism can be important for fracture repair.

This information can be found in most orthopaedic texts.

Aaron 09:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Big bones?

There's wide spread talk especially in the weight loss field that humans have varying bone mass, with some being "big boned". Is there any truth in that, since I've read that the bone mass is usually ~20 pounds, which doesn't seem like much that can vary to make people heavy, unless it's common with people to have, say, 200% bone mass compared to the usual. :-/ Often, these people refer to "big bones run in my family". Can anyone with medical knowledge confirm or deny the "big bones" thing? It would be nice to have the total bone mass in this article, possibly along with mentioning this topic. -- Jugalator 08:41, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

I don't believe the "big boned" expression actually stems from medical facts. It's use seems to pre-date the invention of the medical technology to measure bone mass. I'm sure you've noticed that some people have larger frames than others. Assume you have two males of the same height, but their chest size differs by 6-8". While the one with the larger torso appears larger/fatter, it's entirely possible that his rib cage is visible through the skin, while the narrower male has a an inch or more of fat covering his. I believe it's from something like this that the big boned expression came to be. In any event, you're interested in hard data & facts, not my conjectures. According to IRPA, bone accounts for 5kg (11lbs) in the 70kg Reference Male and 3.778kg (~8lbs) in the 60kg Reference Female. There is also a link between Body Mass Index and Bone Mineral Content. The Total Body Bone Mineral Content for thin, normal, overweight and obese was 2.2, 2.4, 2.8 and 3.1 kg, respectively. (I'm aware that this clashes with IRPA's Reference Female, but I'm just repeating data.) It does appear that obese people have greater bone mineral content, but this doesn't contribute significantly to the overall weight, nor should it be considered a reason for being classified overweight. In other words, the direction of the correlation is questionable. Perhaps when one becomes overweight, the bones grow simply because there is an excess of nutrients or to accomodate the larger burden being handled by the body. I suspect that if any of the obese subjects lost weight, they would also lose some bone mineral content (but that's just my opinion). I've seen a few notes of bone density being affected by leptin, but some studies show a negative effect, while some show a positive. As far as I'm concerned, there is no consensus on the relation between leptin and bone density. I haven't looked for anything about bone mass that is 200% of the average, but even if it's the case, that would be at most 20 lbs, hardly enough to contribute to obesity (unless the person was extremely short). I hope this helps. --jag123 10:06, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)


I'm in a biomaterials grad course at the moment, and bones do indeed strengthen in response to stress, and weaken in the absence of stress. This is most apparent in cosmonauts (astronauts don't tend to stay up as long), but can also be seen when implants shield a bone from stress and prevent it from healing, or apply concentrated stress and promote uneven bone thickening. I hear some of the best experiments have been from birds with their wings tied back.
I think "big boned" is a classic case of metonymy, with bones standing for muscles and other connective tissue (pretty heavy, all told) as well as themselves. The English language doesn't predate surgical & anatomical knowledge, much less this particular expression, and agricultural types know more about (farm animal) anatomy & physiology than most folks in cities, but that wouldn't stop them from using a figure of speech now and then.--Joel 01:14, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm training in orthopaedic surgery and would like to weigh in (pardon the pun).

  • My experience of the expression "big boned" it that is less a case of it being a metonymy and more a case of it being a euphemism for obesity. Sure, there are differences between individuals with respect to overall bone mass, but as Joel points out; there's not that much difference in it. It's usually more to do with diet and lifestyle than genetics.
  • The reason for the association between bone mineral density and BMI is that bone is a dynamic organ. Bone remodels itself continuously in response to various stimuli, in particular, loading and axial compression forces. So, if you're morbidly obese, osteoclasts lay down more lamellar (like cortical) bone (with a high mineral content) to try to prevent you spontaneously fracturing under your own weight. Unfortunately it doesn't always work. Nonetheless, that explains why obese people have a lower incidence of Osteoporosis than people with normal range or low BMIs.
  • Obese people who lose weight tend not to lose much bone density becuse they are increasing their exercise. Weight bearing exercise is highly recommended as a preventative measure for osteoporosis. --Mattopaedia 03:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] bone remodelling

I think there should be a section on bone remodelling. I'm not an expert so I can't write it but I think that it should be useful for this article. Maybe, there can be a new article on bone remodelling. I hope some one is interested in my suggestion.Wai Hong 01:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] references

I'd like to know the references of this inttresting article. please add refeerences i think it will be informative.

[edit] Bones outside the body

No mention in this article of uses of bone in industry/manufacture and tool making for early humans.

It is in the category Category:Bone products but these items should be mentioned in this article.--ZayZayEM 12:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Are bones really what is stated in the introduction.

"Bone, also called osseous tissue, (Latin: "os") is a type of hard endoskeletal connective tissue found in many vertebrate animals. Bones support body structures, protect internal organs, and (in conjunction with muscles) facilitate movement; are also involved with cell formation, calcium metabolism, and mineral storage."

Isn't bone, when saying it "supports body structures, protects internal organs, and (in conjunction with muscles) facilitates movement" rather an organ of a lot of various tissues (nerves, epithelia [in the blood vessels], cartilage and blood?) than "a type of hard endoskeletal connective tissue"? It might be just me but I think the sentence cited above is somewhat unstringent. --Warfvinge 15:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


  • It is pretty complex linguistically. Bone is the tissue discussed above in the lead. Bones are the organs you describe, and they form the integral part of the Skeletal system. English has its limitations sometimes - though I'm sure there is probably an uncommon linguistic differentiator between Bone (tissue) and Bones (organs).--ZayZayEM 23:38, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Allright, thank you. I made a small edit in the introduction to clarify that, you're welcome to revert if it is inadequate. --Warfvinge 11:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Osseous tissue has its own page I noticed. Perhaps a bit of divurgence between the terms with a {{Otheruses}} uses tag should be used. If so I'd recommend that Osseous tissue remain to deal with bone-as-a-tissue; while this article be moved to bones and deal with bones-as-organs. Bone could be a disambig to bone-as-tissue, bones-as-organs, bone-as-material, bones-as-tools, Bones-as-a-TV-show, Bones-as-a-name etc.

I'm in process of converting the page over to bones as organs rather than bones as tissues, I put in a brief discussion on the osseous tissue page on the difference between bones (organs) and bone (tissue). What do people think of re-naming the page Bone (organ) and re-naming Bone (disambiguation) to just Bone?

Expect this to be a stop and start process, as I'm not sure I'll have the time to do it all in one go - please help! WLU 00:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Someone vandalised the page, but accidentally added some info at the same time - a bird's beak is made of bone, covered in a thin layer of keratin. Now, the question is, does this count as exosed bone, or is it in the wrong section? WLU 18:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey, WLU - I think the bird's beaks should be omitted from the article, myself. I was doing just that, parrying your rework, but got caught in some cyber-vortex and my change didn't go through. Figma 19:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I just did a minor re-word of the sentence, if you still think it doesn't apply feel free to take it out. WLU 19:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] can bones conduct electricity?

I have been trying to come up with inventions to prevent the human race from collapsing when we run out of fossil fuels and I need to know this. Can bones of any kind conduct electricity? No one will give me any funding because I'm 14 and that really sucks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.166.78.42 (talk) 00:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/o/n/Talk%7EBone_997a.html"