It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Guns don't kill people, doctors do

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cherish


Give the MD's a break. The majority of ppl do not go to the doctor until they are sicker than they would have been if they did not put off going to the doctor


That is because even with insurance you can't get into the doctor's office in under seven days.
So you wait two days to actually see if you are really truly sick, you call the doctor, they say "oh next week", by the time you see him you have been sick for nine days.

This has happened to my mother 3 times in the past two years.

Three years ago I stepped on a nail, called the doctor to get a tetnus shot, get a special last minute emergency visit for three days later, get there and the doctor says there is a shortage of tetnus shots because the military is using it all up and they won't let the doctors carry a supply of it. So.. in the end, no tetnus shot for me because I'm not about to wait 8 hours in emergency room and pay $300 for one damn shot.




posted on May, 15 2005 @ 10:47 PM
link   
I came to this forum because I thought the topic would be discussing how Drs. starved Terri Schaivo. Does anyone know where that topic is being discussed? Or, can I start it here as a new topic?

chanteuse



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 06:07 PM
link   
chanteuse, welcome.

No, this is not a Schiavo thread, may she rest in peace. Its more about private, responsible gun ownership not being as dangerous as everybody might think, and I used a joking comparison to doctor induced mortality for a starter. Never thought it would take on the new meaning. No wonder my dad called 'em all croakers! Find more Schiavo related stuff here.

Terry Schiavo

again, welcome.





posted on May, 16 2005 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Still laughing, I saw the title and just started laughing and now just can't quit laughing. I certainly was not expecting any info that makes sense but it does. Great post!



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 07:06 AM
link   
it's not the doctors i mind,although some of them should take down the shingle and put the leeches away(lol).the thing that bothers me the most is the F.D.A. letting companies put medicines on the market only to pull them off a few years later because of (unforseen complications,causing death).i haven't seen soo many pills with as many side-effects as i have in the last ten years.i almost choked when hearing an advert(can't remember the name of the pill) stating one of the side-effecs as a (LETHAL VIRAL INFECTION) LOL.WTF are they thinking!!!!



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 06:03 AM
link   
Hospitals cause diseases eg MRSA



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 10:22 AM
link   
A little levity now and then is a good thing. I really enjoyed your post.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 06:14 AM
link   
doctors can and are irresponsible. My dad was ill with his diabetes earlier this year.While he accepts part of the blaim for not seeing his speacialist.He first went to see the gp not his regular one because he wasnt in but he had seen this doctor before and he had also prescribed medicine so he knew he was diabetic.He diagnosed him with having an oral infection without having checked his blood sugar level.still feeling ill he went back to the doctor within 48 hours he checked his sugars and they had spiked to 28.8 and was admitted to hospital when he was confronted with a "DR" who couldnt even insert a needle.What are they teachings these students today?Maybe to much tek not enough everyday skills.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 07:43 AM
link   
Patients can be irresponsible, too.

Many don't tell their doctors what medicines they already take, or even which conditions are already present.

(Are you in a different country, btw? Did his 28.5 refer to his A1C test or something else?)

Not that I'm pointing fingers - I'm absolutely not. But, just as there are irresponsible doctors (and there are), there are sometimes patients who just expect the medical community to possess psychic powers.

Question: should a mistake be classed as irresponsibility?

I ponder this one quite a bit.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:16 AM
link   
no the 28.8 refered to his sugar levels the secong time he went to visit his doctor.the first one didnt check for anything but the oral infection



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Sorry, that's why I was confused; just assumed him being diabetic he'd be more used to the 200s or worse. The use of "spiked" confused me


At 28.5 he was really, really, really low...dangerously so. Most at that level would be unconscious.

I'm glad he got helped though




[edit on 13-9-2005 by Tinkleflower]



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Isn't 70 the normal blood sugar level, or something like that? If I am right, then you're dad was on the verge of diabetic coma. That's what killed my mom back in 2000, three weeks after she was fitted with this wonderful new insulin pump.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
Sorry, that's why I was confused; just assumed him being diabetic he'd be more used to the 200s or worse. The use of "spiked" confused me


At 28.5 he was really, really, really low...dangerously so. Most at that level would be unconscious.

I'm glad he got helped though




we have been told 28.8 for asugar level is high. i thought 5- 10 was healthy



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
Isn't 70 the normal blood sugar level, or something like that? If I am right, then you're dad was on the verge of diabetic coma. That's what killed my mom back in 2000, three weeks after she was fitted with this wonderful new insulin pump.


now either im confused or the doctors and specialists have been screwing with us. when they don the finger prick with the machine it was 28.8 now im led to belive that thats bad.i thought 5-10 was healthy.

they said he was close to being really crook



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by tarzan
we have been told 28.8 for asugar level is high. i thought 5- 10 was healthy


Where do you live? I'm wondering if a different system of measurement is being used.

BG is usually measured: mg/dL = milligrams per deciliter

Levels up to 100 mg/dL are considered normal (though less than 30 would usually be considered dangerously hypoglycemic).

Levels between 100 and 126 mg/dl are generally referred to as "impaired fasting glucose" or pre-diabetes. At these levels you're usually considered to be at risk for Type 2.

Diabetes itself is typically diagnosed when fasting blood glucose levels are 126 mg/dl or higher (over several tests - one isn't enough for a diagnosis, unless it's exceptionally high).

This is why I think the test was the A1C, which has values where 5-10 is much more desirable (it's a percentage, not a mg/dl value). Even so, 28.5 would mean his BG was actually 840 or so...most patients at this level are very, very sick (some would be comatose, more would be unconscious, or at the very least, not able to move around much at all).

Very glad he's ok now.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:42 AM
link   
NM - you're in Australia.

Sorry, I forgot


Yes, there are different calibration measurements.

As we can see here

So ignore everything we've said so far



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower

Originally posted by tarzan
we have been told 28.8 for asugar level is high. i thought 5- 10 was healthy


Where do you live? I'm wondering if a different system of measurement is being used.

BG is usually measured: mg/dL = milligrams per deciliter

Levels up to 100 mg/dL are considered normal (though less than 30 would usually be considered dangerously hypoglycemic).

Levels between 100 and 126 mg/dl are generally referred to as "impaired fasting glucose" or pre-diabetes. At these levels you're usually considered to be at risk for Type 2.

Diabetes itself is typically diagnosed when fasting blood glucose levels are 126 mg/dl or higher (over several tests - one isn't enough for a diagnosis, unless it's exceptionally high).

This is why I think the test was the A1C, which has values where 5-10 is much more desirable (it's a percentage, not a mg/dl value). Even so, 28.5 would mean his BG was actually 840 or so...most patients at this level are very, very sick (some would be comatose, more would be unconscious, or at the very least, not able to move around much at all).

Very glad he's ok now.




Im in Australia so maybe its a different messuring system.Lets just say his Hbac1 was way above the normal target level.They say the good sign was that he came walking to the hospital with us and was nuerological aware the whole time.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Here you go


Conversion chart

Shhh...I know it's a pet diabetes site, but the conversion factors are the same


28 is around 540...so yes, he was too high!

Oddly enough I took my friend to the ER a few days ago, and his BG was 645. His diabetes (type I) is way out of control though



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
NM - you're in Australia.

Sorry, I forgot


Yes, there are different calibration measurements.

As we can see here

So ignore everything we've said so far




so i suppose in the states theres different measuring guides. well now u can see how bad things got



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
Here you go


Conversion chart

Shhh...I know it's a pet diabetes site, but the conversion factors are the same


28 is around 540...so yes, he was too high!

Oddly enough I took my friend to the ER a few days ago, and his BG was 645. His diabetes (type I) is way out of control though




so i suppose 645 was way over 30. hes educator who he last say mid to late 2003 was shocked because he was doing fairly well and maintining fairly good control.But he gave up on seeing his endocronogist because he used to put my dad down he was never happy never gave him confidence.But hes Gp who never brought the topic of his diabetic control in a long time
refered him to a new endocronolgist who has given us the confidence that he can maintain him and a good state of health to see "grandkids".He's creatine levels were within normal range to him because he did have an infection in his urine in hospital so i have fingers crossed that everything will turn out fine.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join