What is the difference between a finger stick and a venipuncture?

A fingerstick screening takes only a few drops of blood from a fingertip, while the venipuncture method requires a vial (or two) from the arm.

Both provide accurate measurements of total cholesterol, HDL, LDL, triglycerides, and glucose. But the fingerstick method offers several advantages that make it our most popular screening option.

Many people find fingerstick screenings less invasive and painful. But the most important advantage is timing: fingerstick results are available immediately. We’re able to provide health education in the moment, when participants are most receptive.

It takes 5-7 days to obtain results from a venipuncture screening. However, this method does offer a larger panel of tests than fingerstick. If you’re set on testing thyroid levels and the like, venipuncture may be for you.

One consideration that does not need to be part of your decision-making is accuracy. The Cholestech LDX, our fingerstick testing equipment of choice, is used by doctors and hospitals across the country. Clinical tests have shown that fingerstick results are in close agreement with laboratory methods.

to prevent people from getting the ebola virus, countries around the world paid to doctors develop a new vaccine. now that the vaccine has been made, doctors will need to experiment on a large number of people to find out if it works safely.

what is the greatest limitation that scientists are dealing with as they try to figure out how to experiment with the ebola vaccine?

meditation is a practice of sitting still and quiet for minutes or even hours. it has been practiced for thousands of years and is even a part of religious practices for some people. carefully controlled, repeated measurements of brain activity have shown that meditation does increase certain chemicals in the brain and even grows the part of the brain that people connect with their current surroundings and activities.

are claims about the effects of meditation most likely scientific or pseudoscientific?

not pseudoscientific, because people have made claims about it but scientific observations have not been made