In my opinion, standardization is paramount. I would have thought the article's referee would have caught the error--unless the "2 1/4'" refers to a standard size used in the associated protocol. If that is a standard size, aren't their metric standards vis-a-vis wrench sets? I am not a medical person so I wouldnt know.
I sure hope that when I get to be older, say in my 40s, we will have metric road signs, metric weather reports and metric "nearly or completely everything". Prosper! -----Thanks!----- Cole Kingsbury Geology Undergrad-UAF http://www.uaf.edu/geology ------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Remek Kocz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Cc: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 3:19:17 PM GMT -09:00 Alaska Subject: [USMA:41954] Re: -er preferred Writers of technical publications should first make a full committment to metric only in their journals. Check out JAMA (Journal of American Medical Association) or NEJM (New Englan Journal of Medicine for gems like "when performing paracentesis, insert a 2 1/4" needle 4 cm into the patient's abdomen." Now that's confusing, isn't it? Anyone who reads technical or scientific journals is sophisticated enough to know that meter and metre are the same thing. Remek On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 12:30 PM, < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Writers and editors of technical documents have to make a choice; "-er" or "-re". Random alternte use of the two is not acceptable in high quality publications. Gene Mechtly ---- Original message ---- >Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 13:31:49 -0500 >From: "Remek Kocz" < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: [USMA:41903] Re: -er preferred >To: "U.S. Metric Association" < [email protected] > >Cc: "U.S. Metric Association" < [email protected] > >... >> As far as the spelling issue goes: we're wasting > time. Spelling is irrelevant, so long as metric is > used. > > Remek
