Talk:Cardiac muscle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

is cardiac muscle be consider as voluntary or involuntary?

cardiac muscle is definitely involuntary

This article states that cardiac muscle is a type of striated muscle, I am unsure as to whether this is the case as skeletal muscle is considered to be striated. Since this is a non-skeletal muscle and is considered as smooth muscle by its very nature it should not be striated should it not?

It would be nice to have a pretty picture.

[edit] Why doesn't the heart get tired?

Googling tells me the high number of mitochondria is the key. Can anyone add that to the article, with a citation, please? Thank you. --Kjoonlee 04:34, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Some other links mention acquiring energy directly from the bloodstream. Hmm... --Kjoonlee 16:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

My question is why is cardiac muscle lack multiple nuclei and would you expect to see recruitment in cardiac muscle or notr

[edit] Striated muscle?

I have a question about this edit: Some sources do consider cardiac muscle to be striated muscle -- for example, Dorlands/Elsevier m_22/12547787, and my physiology textbook ("Medical Physiology", Rhoades and Tanner, p. 138, ISBN 0-7817-1936-4). I do agree that when "striated muscle" is used without qualification, it usually refers to skeletal muscle. --Arcadian 04:53, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

As I understood it, cardiac muscle was a type of striated muscle - 'striated' refers to the presence of bands on the myofibrils in muscle cells, which skeletal and cardiac muscle possess, but smooth muscle does not. Also, the link to an external source at the bottom of the page leads to a page about smooth muscle, is this relevant to the article? Alaeangelorum 19:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

This is indeed ambiguous. 'striated muscle' on its own does refer to skeletal muscle only. Rather than say whether cardiac muscle is or is not a 'type' of striated muscle, maybe we could just say "although cardiac muscle has clear striations, the term 'striated muscle' refers exclusively to skeletal muscle." Robotsintrouble 22:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thats wrong. It's like saying uhm a someone is a human and not short because being short is blah blah blah etc. Cardiac muscle is striated just like skeletal muscle is striated. Whatever connotations to the different types you make is superfluous. It is what it is because thats the way it looks under light microscopy.

I agree also. Doing medicine in the Uk we are taught that cardiac and skeletal are striated muscle. To say it's not is wrong. Also to say 'it's conventionally said that striated refers specifically skeletal' is like saying 'conventionally canabilism is great and practiced by nearly 100% of members in some communities' If that makes no sense i apologise but you get my drift. Whose conventions do we have to use? In the case of stating fact then do it and say cardiac IS striated BECAUSE IT IS.

Ha ha i realise that i just 'agreed' with myself. I think i made both of the above posts.