| Favorite team: | |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 100 |
| Registered on: | 4/23/2019 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Any of you guys ever have a priapism?
Posted by Wiener on 1/25/26 at 1:08 pm to Big Block Stingray
quote:At least the spinal cord injury priapisms are high flow and don't require drainage.
I do see it fairly regularly with spinal cord injuries, couple a year.
quote:It's not typically painful if addressed in a timely fashion. Also, the chances of permanent damage decrease with earlier intervention. I've seen it happen less with medications like Viagra than I have other reasons like cocaine (most common during training) and a certain sleep medication.
I’ve never heard of anyone actually gettting one even though you hear about it as a warning for some ED meds.
It sounds like it would be unbelievably painful. I can’t image going through that.
I've treated some 48+ hour erections in the past. Those guys will never have normal erections again...
re: Any of you guys ever have a priapism?
Posted by Wiener on 1/25/26 at 11:52 am to RazorBroncs
quote:More testing is needed.
Side note: is there anything more universally funny to both men and women than calling a penis a weiner in a joking fashion? Basically any time it's referred to that in real life or TV I can look over at my wife and she's audibly giggling
quote:
Insurance companies are getting richer and so are the doctors and medical equipment suppliers, and big pharma, too.
The ACA holds probably the largest hit against physician income in history by limiting physician ownership in healthcare facilities.
Since then, the American Hospital Association has run wild and you've likely seen an explosion of one or more hospital systems in your area depending on how large a city you live in. These businessmen aren't looking to make sure physicians are well paid and aren't looking to save you any money either.
quote:
One interesting factoid about ACA/ObamaCare: Prior to implementation, only about 35% of physicians were employed. Now over 77% are. Regardless of political affiliation, these are the facts and show the power of this piece of legislation to fundamentally alter the US health system. The shift in reimbursement models, increased regulation, increased power of insurance companies in their ability to vertically integrate has killed the private practice model in the US.
This cannot be overstated. The AHA lobbied hard against physician ownership of medical facilities and won. They've used that leverage to kill private practice and bring physicians under their control. The funny part is they've used the employed model to recreate the scenario they created fear of - self referrals because you own the hospital.
If your physician seems more detached these days, they're probably reminded daily that they're just an easily replaceable cog in the machine the AHA lobbied to turn medicine into.
There's a reason hospital systems are metastasizing like wildfire now.
quote:
(very major plan, big group)
Large insurers reimburse less to physicians as the cost of access to their patients.
And only once you're in do they start to come up with even more reasons to not reimburse you.
re: Why do women complain to their men?
Posted by Wiener on 6/17/25 at 8:01 am to burger bearcat
Why are you doing it now?
quote:
3.) The Nile River in the Bible is actually the Mississippi River because the Mississippi River has 7 outlets (this is especially dumb because the number of rivers inlets changes over time and also nothing else in the Bible would make sense if this was true. )
He must be in de-Nile that he's just another fanatic of a Middle Eastern religion.
quote:
What are odds of him beating it?
We do not have a cure for metastatic prostate cancer, but we can manage it fairly well. A lot of the prognosis depends on the degree of spread and labs at time of diagnosis, which we don't know.
re: Former President Joe Biden was diagnosed with an "aggressive form" of prostate cancer
Posted by Wiener on 5/19/25 at 4:38 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
Pretty sure I was correct:
quote:
(WACH-ful WAY-ting) Closely watching a patient's condition but not giving any treatment unless signs or symptoms appear or change. Watchful waiting may be used when the risks of treatment or repeated tests, such as biopsies, are greater than the possible benefits.
Cute, you posted a definition and still don't understand the difference.
Active surveillance is planned blood tests and biopsies to defer treatment/side effects until definitive treatment is warranted. This is what that guy described with PSA testing and repeat biopsy.
Watchful waiting is what you posted, doing nothing until symptoms occur, and more or less letting it run its course and treat for symptoms as needed. This is not what that guy described.
re: Former President Joe Biden was diagnosed with an "aggressive form" of prostate cancer
Posted by Wiener on 5/18/25 at 7:25 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
That’s not treatment, that’s watchful waiting.
Correction, that's active surveillance.
re: AAMC (Association of American Medical Colleges) is ridiculous regarding COVID vaccines…
Posted by Wiener on 3/30/25 at 9:56 am to auwaterfowler
Your kid is going to have a hard time doing anything other than a private office-based only practice if getting vaccinated is on their shite list.
If that's how they're going to be about vaccinations, why bother doing an away for a specialty? Hospitals require vaccines every year, and I can't think of a specialty that doesn't interact with a hospital in some fashion. Just do a family medicine residency and be done with it.
If that's how they're going to be about vaccinations, why bother doing an away for a specialty? Hospitals require vaccines every year, and I can't think of a specialty that doesn't interact with a hospital in some fashion. Just do a family medicine residency and be done with it.
The amount of replies that believe in this makes me think of this book excerpt:
quote:
"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage"
Suppose I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!
"Show me," you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle — but no dragon.
"Where's the dragon?" you ask.
"Oh, she's right here," I reply, waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon."
You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints.
"Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floats in the air."
Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.
"Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless."
You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.
"Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick."
And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.
Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.
quote:
I don't think big pharma would ever release something that would significantly impact a major money maker. And unless someone discovers it in a shack somewhere, it's going to be embedded within the system - and the system won't let something like that out.
This line of thinking represents a misunderstanding of the clinical trial process. They don't have magic drugs hidden away that they know work in large scale studies. It takes too many people to get a trial accrued and followed for it to be locked away after seeing significantly positive results.
They aren't doing large scale hidden trials behind the scenes and anything that hasn't been thoroughly tested can't really be described as some magic bullet.
quote:
I also dislike private equity's involvement in hospitals, as I tend to think that trying to derive profit or excessive profit from medical care can lead to some really perverse incentives.
This is something that blows my mind. Physicians are not allowed to own hospitals now due to conflicts of interest.
The alternative we've moved forward with is that groups whose sole purpose is to generate profit are now taking ownership. With physicians, it was a potential problem, but with private equity, it's the stated goal.
Fournier's gangrene.
Google at your own risk.
Google at your own risk.
Middle Eastern religious superstitions.
re: Ivermectin: Cancer killer Are you aware of these studies?
Posted by Wiener on 3/4/25 at 5:24 pm to WigSplitta22
quote:
Mel Gibson said the same on Rogans podcast. He had 2 friends with stage 4 that no longer have it after taking Ivermectin, Feben, Methylene blue etc
Had 2 friends?
re: Move over Mardi Gras says Texas...It's time for the Houston Rodeo and all the fake cowboys
Posted by Wiener on 3/3/25 at 4:14 pm to sidewalkside
quote:
These clowns look like such fools playing dress up for Rodeo every year.
They should go to Mardi Gras instead and dress up like real clowns!
quote:
What about 100 30-06's with 12 power scopes, we could have picked the Yanks off from 250-300 yards.
We? Sorry to inform you, but the Confederacy is dead.
re: Has any profession ever lost as much respect as doctors in the last 5 yrs?
Posted by Wiener on 2/21/25 at 9:10 am to CleverUserName
quote:
Spoke with a nurse not long after that and she confirmed that surgeons love removing it cause it’s a quick payday with minimal risk.
Oh good, a nurse confirmed it. I'm sure she's up to date on the evidence regarding recurrence rates.
Popular
0









