what % of o2 do we use each breath?
150708
Oxygen and carbon dioxide, symbolized O2 and CO2 respectively, are colorless, odorless gases. The atmosphere, or air around us, contains approximately 21 percent oxygen and 78 percent nitrogen. There is almost no CO2 in air (about 0.03 percent)
640954
From 90% to 100% saturated of oxygen (at 2800 meters over sea level)\n\nMeaning your saturation is fine.\n\nWhy do you need it measured?
966386
Air is 80% N2 and about 20% O2\nFigure out how much air the lungs hold\nThen convert the volume to molecules\nFind out how much air is in the world and convert that to molecules\nThen figure out the ratio
692375
Glycated Hb estimation,B.P.chek,and Exercise tolerance(treadmill)tests.If you are between 40 and 60 test your "BREATH HOLDING CAPACITY".After taking a deep breath Hold your BREATH,and observe the time (in seconds) you can hold your breath. 60/Age in minutes is normal.If you are 40 , 60/40 minutes ie 90 seconds is normal.This simple test indirectly speaks about your stamina and correlates well with treadmill test.Not useful in smokers /otherwise sick/pregnant women.
182733
at a rate of 91% on room air you need to be started on lo oxygen via nasal canula or non rebreather mask start the flow at 1 or 2 on the delivery dial dont go much higher as the lungs are now responding to the carbon dioxide levels not the oxygen levels. yes it is smart to have an o2 saturation meter
932725
N2: about 78%\nO2: about 21%\nAr: about 0.9%\nMisc.--includes CO2, nitrogen oxides, SO2, Xe, Kr, Ne, etc: about 0.1%
1064470
The question is how deeply do you want to breath the next stroke.. that should be determining how much you exhale\n\nIf you are recovering or starting a very long race.. you should breath and exhale deeply\n\nIf you are sprinting or getting ready for the end.. you should breath less and so you have to hold your breath\n\nCollege sprinters dont breath for a whole 50 yrds, but distance swimmers breath every 2 strokes... it varies\n\nOne thing for sure you dont want to be doing, is exhaling when your mouth is outside of the water.. cause that means you are taking time out of when you can breath.. and so you slow down to breath
232358
inhalation is breathing in, exhalation is breathing out
1038791
I found an answer here:\nhttp://www.auburn.edu/communications_marketing/askaubie/101205.html\n\nOne estimate indicates that a large tree whose trunk is 39 inches in diameter at breast height releases 0.67 pounds (0.31 kilograms) of oxygen per day.  For comparison, according to NASA, a typical adult would use 1.85 lbs (0.84 kg) of oxygen gas per day in the process of respiration. \n\nSo you would need 3 trees for one person. And double that if you take into account that the tree only produces oxygen during the day.
393835
PO2 must drop below 60 mm Hg for stimulation of peripheral chemoreceptors. Up to a PO2 of 60 mm Hg, Hemoglobin is still substantially saturated with O2 and adequate amounts of O2 can be delivered to tissues and the brain. Also, when PO2 drops from 100 - 60, usually there is also increased PCO2 levels. So, ventilation is usually increased due to response of central and peripheral chemoreceptors to increasing PCO2 levels.
924197
PCO2 = 35-45\nPO2 = 75-100
1004507
Vital capacity is the total amount of air that we can exhale forcefully. To calculate vital capacity, first you add your tidal volume and the extra amount of air beyond the tidal volume that your lungs can hold (the IRV). So, so far:\n\nVC = TV + IRV\n\nWhen you take the deepest breath you can and then exhale, you exhale first your IRV, and then your TV, but then you have even more air in your lungs that you can exhale if you need to. This is called the ERV. When you are measuring how much your lungs can exhale when they are FORCED to, ERV is part of the equation. So now:\n\nVC = TV + IRV + ERV\n\nThe reason you include ERV is because normally you don't exhale that amount of air (normally you will only exhale your tidal volume and, if you take a slight deep breath, some of your IRV). However, if you attempt to completely get all the air out of your lungs, you will also exhale your ERV. Since the definition, in general, of vital capacity is the total amount of air you can forcefully exhale, ERV must be a part of the equation.\n\nSide note: what is NEVER a part of the equation is residual capacity, RC. This is the amount of air in the lungs that you can't force out, no matter how hard you try. It is about 1 L.
929547
I find 16.4% \nHere we go:\n1) As air is a mixture of O2 and N2 two reactions are taking place:\n2 Mg + O2 -> 2 MgO\n3 Mg + N2 -> Mg3N2 \nThere are 4 parts of N2 for one part of O2, so the second reaction takes place four times as frequently as the first. Effectively we have\n14 Mg + O2 + 4 N2 -> 2 MgO + 4 Mg3N2.\n\n2) The molar mass of MgO is 40.3 gram. In MgO the magnesium makes up 24.3/(24.3+16.0) = 60.3 % of the mass.\nThe molar mass of Mg3N2 is 100.9 gram, the magnesium makes up 3*24.3/(3*24.3 + 2*14.0) =  72.2 % of the mass. \n\n3) Assume you have 1000 gram of reaction product. If it is pure MgO you will find 603 gram of Mg. But in the mixture you will have  \ntwo moles of Mg2N3 (201.8 g) for every mole of MgO (40.3 gram).\nIn 1000 gram of mixture, 833.5 gram of  Mg2N3 and 166.5 gram of MgO. This gives 72.2% * 833.5 + 60.3% * 166.5 = 702 gram of Mg.\n\n4) Finally: the error is (702-603)/603 = 16.4%
1028797
well theres one for pulse and one for oxygen saturation.  check also with respiratory tech infor
633736
I am guessing 30-40%.\n\nmuscle - 30-40%\nfat - 15 - 20%\nskeletal wt + blood and other fluids + internal organs - 40-50%
1010474
A certain amount of our oxygen comes from trees.  One article claims that 70% comes from the trees in the rainforest.  Of course a conflicting article says that 30% of our oxygen comes from trees.  I'd be interested to know the truth.  (I believe the truth is that most of our oxygen comes from ocean plants.)  The fact is, though, that oxygen comes to us through photosynthesis.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_cycle  Trees are one source of the oxygen we breathe on this planet.   Bacteria, algae, and all other plants also contribute.\n\nThere are a few things that come to my mind when discussing the preservation of the world's forests.  Trees are a renewable resource.  If harvested responsibly, the older and unhealthy trees are taken, and the younger, healthier trees are left to grow and reseed the forest.  In the long run, you end up with healthier forests that continue producing trees at a sustainable rate.\n\nWhen developing an area, land may be cleared of trees and forests may be destroyed.  In that case, the forest will not reseed and grow back.  That part of the forest is gone.  Many areas have laws about the size of a piece of land that one can clear-cut, although some do not.  There are no laws providing for the contribution of trees to another piece of land as a way to reclaim the forest lost to development.\n\nIn the case of coffee growers, etc, land is clear-cut to make fields for growing the more lucrative crops.  While no one can really blame anyone for wanting to make money, I believe this type of deforestation is destroying the rainforests.  As long as individuals are allowed to own land, there will be arguments about how much authority the private citizen has over land use.\n\nSome forests are lost naturally to fire.\n\nThere are small things that a person can do to help slow the deforestation process.  First, manage the land that is in your care well.  If you own land, be aware of the health of your trees.  Are you considering logging off your back forty?   Be responsible.  Choose a responsible forester and loggers that respect the remaining trees.  Smaller logging operations may be more apt to manage the project with less damage to the trees that are to be left.  Remember, the logger makes money off your trees, too.  Be sure you pay attention to the project and understand what is being cut.  In many cases, a forest can be logged again in 10 years.\n\nIf you are developing an area for a house lot, carefully consider what it is that you really wish to cut?  Do you really want to clear all ten acres?  Would you have just as beautiful a view and maybe a prettier landscape if you leave the nicer hardwoods?  Remember the animals that a small softwood cluster would attract.  Think about the shade that trees provide and the colors of the autumn foliage just before winter covers that land.  Make your choices wisely, and remember the benefit of the trees to the rest of the world -- even those who will never see your lovely new home.\n\nIn the case development by business, support those business that care for the land.   If you spend your money in support of responsible businesses, if everyone does, then it will be more lucrative for that business to continue to be responsible.  If it appears over the course of doing business that no one cares, the people operating the business may decide it isn't worth the effort.  Responsibility has rewards, but it also has a price.  Support responsible businesses.\n\nLikewise, consider the rainforest.  If you are concerned with the deforestation of the rainforest, as we all should be, consider giving up some of the products that you enjoy that have been harvested from land that was once rainforest.  Although that forest is already gone, if there isn't demand for those products, if consumption falls, that act could lessen the "need" to cut more forests.  Seriously, I drink a lot of coffee and continue to do so.  I'm not sure what sort of a dent this on
839197
Nitrogen by far. it is approximately 78% of what we are breathing