| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
quadalpha
Joined: 21 Feb 2010
Posts: 65
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:07 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| mcat_premed3832 wrote: | You put your finger on the issue. During the discussion above the words used in the question became something else. The issue is much more simple: let's try an experiment! Take your fist and hand and perform an auto-Heimlich but not too fast! If you try it on yourself, what would you say happens to your thoracic size? Bigger? Definitely.
The question never asked about thoracic volume (that came up in the discussion in this thread and was never clarified). |
Well, we've just changed the question from defining "thoracic volume" to "thoracic size", which doesn't sound all that different.
Or how about we look at it this way: at the very least, the question assumes a definition for "thoracic size", which, as far as I am aware, is not common knowledge. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mcat_premed3832
Joined: 19 Oct 2006
Posts: 412
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I know what you mean but I think that the most common definition of chest size is based on appearance (how big?) which refers to circumference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
