Re: rf burns

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "rheidlebaugh by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <rheidlebaugh-at-zialink-dot-com>

Mark: flame burns are on the surface then go in. Rf burns are from bone out.
They are deep tissue burns. I had one in my finger that burned a small black
trail through the marrow of the bone. That was real long healing, it drained
over a mounth and took longer to heal.
  Robert  H

> From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 08:14:35 -0700
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: rf burns
> Resent-From: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 08:29:22 -0700
> 
> Original poster: "Mark Conway by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
> <mjconway-at-ihug.co.nz>
> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> Just wondering why rf burns take so long to heal compared to normal burns.
> Over the years I've had a few minor rf burns off my sstc and they
> definitely do take a while to heal.
> 
> I think I remember reading somewhere a long time ago that rf burns take a
> long time to heal because the rf seals off the entire burn (including under
> the skin) so that blood or whatever cannot get to the burn to heal it. A
> normal burn is only on the top of the skin so that blood can get underneath
> to start the healing process.
> 
> Is the above true? I've tried doing a search on yahoo for rf burns but I
> have not come up with anything that talks about them in detail.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Mark
> 
> 
>