Posts by copperlynx22

Jack Jones61 said:Here’s the breakdown of who is recommended to get vaccinated—chronic asthma is definitely on that list, though it isn't free:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/index.html

The cost is roughly $20.

According to the link you provided, it's free for those managing chronic conditions, including patients with lung disease:

According to the latest guidelines from Medicare, certain groups are eligible to receive their flu vaccine at no cost. These categories include:

Individuals aged 65 and older.
Those living with chronic conditions—specifically those managing heart, lung, or kidney disease, diabetes, or life after an organ transplant—face a much more complex landscape when it comes to health management. For these individuals, what might seem like a minor ailment for someone else can quickly escalate into a significant medical complication.
Healthcare professionals.

Nicole Lilly, looking at that treatment plan, it’s pretty obvious your dad is dealing with a bacterial throat infection rather than the flu.

Tyler James5 said:can you dive a little deeper into that, please?

It might be useful to look at this explanation I found:

Glucophage (metformin) is a medication that works by increasing tissue sensitivity to insulin.

To put it simply, the insulin molecules naturally produced by your body need to "sit down" on your tissue cells at a specific location—think of this seat as something called an insulin receptor.

Once they sit down, the insulin can actually perform its function, which is to allow glucose molecules to enter the cell (where the glucose can then be utilized, and so on).

If those insulin molecules aren't able to sit down quickly and easily—perhaps because the "seats" are warped or there aren't enough of them (which often occurs in cases of obesity)—then you run into the issue of insulin resistance. In that scenario, the glucose fails to enter the cells and instead remains in the bloodstream, leading to elevated blood sugar levels.
(This happens because, due to insufficient insulin receptors, the glucose cannot successfully migrate into the cells.)

Essentially, insulin resistance is a lack of insulin sensitivity, and it can be managed by taking medications such as Glucophage (metformin).

This process is also aided significantly by incorporating regular aerobic physical activity.

That isn't to say that going for a run is a direct substitute for medication, but it certainly contributes to the overall improvement.

The ultimate objective is to maintain healthy glycemic levels. As long as your blood sugar numbers are within a good range, things are moving in the right direction.

Regarding side effects from Glucophage, some individuals experience none at all. My recommendation would be to monitor your glucose levels closely (fasting, both before and after meals—though post-meal readings are particularly important in your case—and before bed) and maintain an open dialogue with your endocrinologist about everything.

The lab didn't include enough anticoagulant in the blood sample, causing it to clot—which is only natural given the circumstances.
Consequently, they were unable to proceed with the analysis.

A new sample needs to be drawn.

Tylenol is just paracetamol, and DayQuil is a combination formula where paracetamol also serves as the primary active ingredient. There’s no reason to mix them; you simply need to ensure that the total amount of paracetamol you ingest—regardless of which product it comes from—doesn't exceed the maximum daily limit, which is 4,000 mg for adults.

A single dose should stay under 1,000 mg.

Check the drug facts on the packaging to see the specific dosage of each component, then do the math. For instance, Tylenol typically comes in 500 mg tablets.

It is perfectly fine to alternate between Advil (like Neofen, Rapidol, or Motrin) and paracetamol. However, you should consult with your doctor or pharmacist regarding the exact timing and dosage.

Grammar issues 😁 My edit expired.
I actually meant "on the part of the one who needs forgiveness."

Joseph Jones2 said:I honestly think there are two totally different ways to look at forgiveness, like two separate categories of the whole concept.

The first kind is purely internal—it’s just yours. It’s that private process you go through within yourself to find peace, regardless of what anyone else does. You handle it your way, on your own terms, and nobody else even needs to be involved.

Then there’s the second kind, which involves someone else—someone who actually caused you pain, went out of their way to be unfair, or just straight-up hurt you. Even if they eventually come to you and sincerely apologize—and let's face it, that doesn't happen nearly as often as we'd hope—it's a different beast entirely.

To truly, fully forgive someone in that second category, that person has to actually realize the weight of what they did. They need this deep, internal realization of the damage they caused, followed by genuine remorse. And honestly? That rarely happens unless they experience a bit of that same hardship themselves. Don't sit around waiting for it to just "happen" naturally; most people aren't built that way without a wake-up call.

So, that's my take: you can always work through that first type of forgiveness on your own. But with the second kind? Usually, the conditions just aren't there to make it possible.

Precisely so.
Such a level of absolution demands a profound moment of clarity from the transgressor.

You have answered the question I was posing; thank you, 🙂

What does it actually mean to "forgive"?

Is it the absence of ill will toward someone—moving past actions that once hurt us as if they never occurred, or perhaps even understanding them? To see those actions as the only possible outcome given the circumstances, thereby rising "above" the pain to continue loving that person as they are?

Or, when we claim to have forgiven, do we simply mean that time has rendered us indifferent to everything, including the person themselves (which usually implies cutting contact forever)?

It seems to me that in the case of a total severance, we cannot truly speak of forgiveness, because forgiveness should imply an acceptance of that person as they are.

I recently experienced the latter regarding a friendship. There is still a mountain of things I would love to say to this person (so clearly, I haven't "forgiven" by any standard definition); I am still wounded, yet over time, a sense of indifference is beginning to take hold. It isn't as simple as my description suggests, of course, but I feel the situation drifting in that direction. For example, during the phase when everything was still raw, I knew I had to ignore any attempts at contact just to protect myself and my own peace. In truth, I would have preferred to use those interactions—which, naturally, never happened—as opportunities for further clarification. I would have laid out exactly what they did to me, and I would have welcomed them drawing a map for me to show how they felt and why things unfolded the way they did.
Now, the idea of saying anything at all feels nonsensical; I remain silent because, at this moment, silence is my preference. I have come to terms internally with the fact that our relationship wasn't worth the investment, that we both drifted into ignoring certain red flags from the start, and so on.

Since we will certainly never re-establish contact or normalize what was once a very intense bond, once I reach a point of complete indifference, it will be difficult to say, "There, I have finally forgiven." I won't have, because I no longer accept that person as part of my life; if I did, we would still be in a position to communicate.

Of course, when parents are involved, the entire matter becomes significantly more complex, and I lack any profound advice regarding the dilemma presented here.

Gamma knife scheduling depends entirely on the clinical indication; you can't just wait indefinitely. It all comes down to patient volume and specific diagnoses—basically, how urgent each case is considered by the medical team.

A family member of mine underwent a craniotomy, followed by Gamma knife to target the remaining tumor that was too risky to excise surgically.

None of the doctors or nurses at the Mayo Clinic where they were treated were looking for any kind of reward or special recognition.
From what I observed, they simply go above and beyond for everyone.

Check your PM.

Who provided the diagnosis? It is a reality that meningiomas don't typically exhibit rapid growth, but whether surgery is necessary depends entirely on the specific location, which a neurosurgeon will determine. In some instances, doctors opt for a "watch and wait" approach to monitor growth patterns; in others, if the tumor size allows, it can be addressed via Gamma Knife—meaning no craniotomy is required. As I understand it, in the US, Gamma Knife technology is primarily available at the Mayo Clinic, where Dr. Heinrich specializes in these procedures.

If surgery is deemed essential, the critical question is whether a total resection is feasible or if the tumor's placement makes an invasive approach too risky. There are also hybrid strategies: performing a craniotomy to remove what can be safely extracted, then treating any remaining tissue later with Gamma Knife. This is often the preferred route if a full excision poses too high a risk of permanent neurological damage that would compromise one's quality of life.

Beyond the neurosurgeons at the Mayo Clinic working with Dr. Paladin, I believe Dr. Chudy from the General Hospital in Brooklyn is also highly regarded. I’ve heard rumors they might be acquiring their own Gamma Knife unit, so it might be worth inquiring.

Generally speaking, intracranial tumors are benign in over 90% of cases. Roughly 7% are classified as atypical—occupying a middle ground between benign and malignant—while only about 2% are truly malignant.

Precisely my thoughts. I've experienced this myself—though perhaps not with such dramatic flair: I make a mistake, realize I’ve tripped up, and immediately feel that pang of regret. I apologize, we clear the air, and eventually, everyone ends up offering each other a bit of mutual comfort. 😬

The situation as described feels more like a power struggle or someone being unnecessarily difficult over a triviality. Since we weren't there to witness the actual events, I can only offer this as my personal impression.

wanderingbadger44 said:It’ll be the whole class traveling together, likely moving from a smaller rural district over to a larger hub like Chicago or maybe Atlanta.

If he hasn't even finished the entire school year yet, I just don't see how his mother could claim to be on such good terms with those parents. It feels like there simply hasn't been enough time in a single school year for that kind of bond to actually form.
Rachel Jones8 said:

I can't help but feel that none of these discussions would even be happening if the teacher had just been honest and owned up to her mistake from the start.

Hjao, I have to admit, I find myself completely captivated by this whole discussion.😁 How would you even go about measuring if her apology is actually genuine? I wonder if we’d need a polygraph test or something just to find out the truth.

Rachel Jones8 said:

It feels a bit like watching a rhinoceros charge through a glass house—all that heavy, unstoppable momentum just crashing into everything in its path without any regard for the delicate things it leaves behind. kaže: I’ve been scrolling through the threads for a while now, trying to find that specific post where someone was asking about getting married or dealing with a cancellation, but I just can't seem to track it down. But honestly, I just can't bring myself to do it. 🤷

I honestly can’t seem to find a single thread where anyone actually defends her actions or considers what she did to be the right way to handle things. 🤷 I feel like I could spend all day scrolling through dozens of different forums where people are constantly being threatened with termination.

It’s almost like there wouldn’t even be a need to offer an apology to a child who hasn't done anything wrong, because if the mistake never happened in the first place, you wouldn't find yourself in a position where an apology is necessary. In a perfect world, the kid would just look over what was written, spot the error themselves, and either fix it right then or reach out to talk about it.

It feels like there’s an underlying implication in what you’re saying, almost as if you’re suggesting she’s hurting the kids just because of the sports they play.
Rachel Jones8 said:

It’s funny how some things just strike you with such heavy, unmovable force, much like the sheer weight of a rhino charging through the brush. I'm not sure I follow what you mean by that. In my view, it’s perfectly fine if the boy didn't explicitly say, "I made a mistake because of my dyslexia," nor did his classmates step in to tell the teacher, "Just so you know, he struggles with dyslexia."😕 If she doesn't have that specific insight, what is she even supposed to do with it?

Following that line of reasoning, there wouldn't be any need for her to receive formal written documentation either. What purpose would that serve?

One can tell from a mile away, especially during an in-person encounter IRL.

Rachel Jones8 said:Honestly, wouldn't it be super weird if that class didn't already know? They've been together for four years.
If his dyslexia was kept a secret between his parents, him, and the teacher—like it was something shameful to hide from the other kids—then someone really messed up there.

I really hope everyone calling for her to be fired over one mistake—without even considering her apology or her actual effort to fix things—has had a few jobs they lost themselves along the way.
...Not talking about quitting on purpose, but actually being let go because of a mistake that's unforgivable.
Because let's face it, nobody's perfect.

wanderingbadger44 said:Alkar Kajperinja, damn! 👍

Don't lose track of the clock (😁); the opening post mentioned the child already changed schools. 🙂

Generally speaking, I can't help but feel this whole discussion wouldn't even exist if the teacher had sincerely apologized and owned up to her error. This isn't about a mother seeking vengeance; it's about a desire for the teacher to genuinely realize that treating a student this way is unacceptable. Because that acknowledgment never came, the mother is understandably bitter.
(That is just my take, though I don't actually know what the original poster is thinking).

Updates to the new ordering guidelines were released yesterday:

A portion of this pertains to Type 1 diabetes, so I initially posted it in the diabetes thread, but since there are several other changes included, I thought it best to share the link here as well.

vividsailor7 said:The real question here is how his DM was managed during his last check-up.

Your primary care physician has the final say on your medical leave.

The ophthalmologist requested an appointment now; I assume that since they are the specialist monitoring this specific patient's retina, they have a clear reason for it.

mistyjackal842 said:I honestly don't quite get this. I mean, a general practitioner shouldn't really be performing a retinal exam on their own. Maybe she was just following guidelines to refer him to a standard ophthalmologist instead? So, he had a fixed appointment scheduled for a specific day with a retinologist, and she just flat-out refused to give him the referral? I actually missed my annual checkup this year because I was looking after my mom while she was sick, so I'm planning to reschedule toward the end of this month. I need to grab a referral before then, too. I really hope they'll just give it to me. It’s just... four whole years ago, I had to undergo laser treatment because of a retinal detachment. One thing though—at the facility where I go for my follow-ups, they call it the Laser Suite, yet most people there haven't even had laser surgery; they're just there for routine checks. I guess maybe they try to direct people to a regular outpatient clinic first, and then if things take a turn for the worse, they send them to a specialist retinologist. In my case, a private ophthalmologist was the one who caught the retinal detachment, and he's the one who referred me to the hospital retinologist four years ago. Usually, the wait times at the standard clinics aren't nearly as bad as they are with the specialists, and from what I've heard from people who went last year, they still dilate your pupils and perform the exact same exams.

Exactly. She didn't give him a referral because he hasn't been diagnosed with diabetic retinopathy yet (he's still 🙄).
That said, it’s vital to emphasize that diabetics should see an ophthalmologist who specializes specifically in diabetic eye disease.

mistyjackal842 said:I honestly don't quite get this. I mean, a general practitioner shouldn't really be performing a retinal exam on their own. Maybe she was just following guidelines to refer him to a standard ophthalmologist instead? So, he had a fixed appointment scheduled for a specific day with a retinologist, and she just flat-out refused to give him the referral? I actually missed my annual checkup this year because I was looking after my mom while she was sick, so I'm planning to reschedule toward the end of this month. I need to grab a referral before then, too. I really hope they'll just give it to me. It’s just... four whole years ago, I had to undergo laser treatment because of a retinal detachment. One thing though—at the facility where I go for my follow-ups, they call it the Laser Suite, yet most people there haven't even had laser surgery; they're just there for routine checks. I guess maybe they try to direct people to a regular outpatient clinic first, and then if things take a turn for the worse, they send them to a specialist retinologist. In my case, a private ophthalmologist was the one who caught the retinal detachment, and he's the one who referred me to the hospital retinologist four years ago. Usually, the wait times at the standard clinics aren't nearly as bad as they are with the specialists, and from what I've heard from people who went last year, they still dilate your pupils and perform the exact same exams.

I assume you don't have diabetic retinopathy yourself; that's a much more specific diagnosis.

The goal is to catch it in its earliest stages, when there are no obvious changes—just perhaps a few microaneurysms that might remain stable for years. Standard ophthalmologists often miss these; quite simply, they haven't seen enough fundus images of that nature.

In patients with diabetes, these changes progress very slowly. Through regular monitoring, one can prevent the proliferative stage, which is when everything tends to spiral out of control for a diabetic. We aren't talking about a single rupture, but rather constant, tiny hemorrhages that trigger the growth of new, fragile, and faulty vessels, which eventually burst repeatedly and lead to total blindness.

As for your situation, I suspect they won't deny you a follow-up referral since you already have a documented history involving the retina.

A few days ago, a primary care physician refused to issue a referral for a young patient with Type 1 diabetes to see an ophthalmologist-retinologist—the specialist who normally monitors his retina—claiming they simply couldn't due to some new system model or similar bureaucratic nonsense.

I don't have all the specifics regarding this particular case, and I suspect the patient hasn't actually been diagnosed with retinopathy yet. However, given the primary diagnosis, he really should be seeing a retinologist for routine monitoring to catch any changes, perhaps once a year or at least once every two years.
That is the standard clinical recommendation for anyone managing diabetes. https://www.cardiosmart.org/~/media/...en/zu1686.ashx

It seems we aren't quite on the same page here.

vividsailor7 mentioned a situation where a primary care physician refused to prescribe a more expensive therapy to a patient who arrived with a specialist's recommendation, but if I understood correctly, that wasn't actually about generics. Back before the current reforms, Medicare eventually sided with the specialist.

I believe his concern lies in the possibility of such a scenario recurring. It isn't a matter of whether someone receives Bayer Aspirin or Pfizer (to use a loose analogy), but rather whether a patient can access an insulin analog if their endocrinologist determines it is necessary over standard insulin—or if a GP will deny the prescription simply because they deem the switch unnecessary.

I won't get bogged into the technical nuances between analogs and non-analogs, but the crux of the matter is that analogs lack generics and cost twice as much, even though they are all included on the essential drug list.

A few firsthand observations regarding healthcare in Washington, D.C.:

- Routine blood work ordered through your primary care physician’s office via an internal referral typically yields results by the following day.
- A secondary blood test, such as a coagulogram at Petrov via the American Red Cross, usually involves drawing the blood on the same day you arrive, with results ready within a couple of days.
- Regarding chest X-rays at the health clinic on Lagrange, we managed to get it done the same day, though they had a scheduling gap. We happened to drop in right then; there are still other locations where you can get this done. The results aren't instantaneous, but everything seems to wrap up within three to four days.
- For an EKG at the Heart Station on Drašković, the process requires booking an appointment at the counter first. The wait isn't excessive—perhaps about a week. It might be more efficient to give them a call ahead of time to see what their current availability looks like.

In the event that an EKG cannot be completed in time or if the results are no longer current, the hospital can simply repeat the tests prior to the actual surgery. The same logic applies to blood work, which generally needs to be no more than a week old.
The chest X-ray remains valid for up to six months.

This was the experience for a member of my immediate family; we simply followed the doctor's instructions to the letter.