Posts by Jack Bishop94

Edward Young said:Hey, I just got my referral for a multidisciplinary consult over at Mount Sinai—does anyone happen to have the number to call and set that up?

Vuk Vrhovac and Mercury are actually part of the same hospital system, so just check here -

boldotter47 said:Hey! Can someone help me make sense of these results?

Varicella - Zoster virus IgM antibodies: negative
Varicella- Zoster virus IgG antibodies: 3.7 index positive

Not a doctor, but I checked this exact thing about a year ago just to be safe... IgM means an active infection, yours is negative.
IgG... if those levels spike again in 7-10 days, then you're looking at an active infection. If they don't go up, it’s probably just from a past infection...

If I got any of that wrong, let a doctor fix me...

Couldn't get back to you sooner, I was out.
The thread got nuked because it was a duplicate. It shifted focus toward stuff like drinking, gambling, weed, etc., plus the idea that you wouldn't change those habits, just the relationship.

No biggie

Brian Ross7 said:can i put a black signature above the blue one?😉

Sure 🙂

Brian Ross7 said:Can someone change "osaki ni douzo!-ie ie douzo osaki ni!" to blue, make the font smaller, and put "Don’t be a follower be a student!" underneath it?

thanks

Is this better?

Diabetes is diagnosed by checking blood glucose levels. If two separate fasting tests show a concentration of 126 mg/dL or higher, it’s diabetes. When things aren't clear, doctors run an Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT). You drink a solution containing 75g of glucose in about 4 ounces of water, and if your levels hit 200 mg/dL or more after two hours, the diagnosis is confirmed.

If the OGTT shows values between 140-199 mg/dL after two hours, that’s impaired glucose tolerance. If fasting levels sit between 110-125 mg/dL, it’s impaired fasting glucose. Impaired glucose tolerance doesn't always turn into full-blown diabetes, but it usually does. It also carries a massive risk for cardiovascular issues—basically atherosclerosis, which leads to strokes and heart attacks...

Source of the above quote

Quote : Prediabetes

Since catching diabetes early is everything, you really need to identify Quote : Prediabetes as soon as possible. This state—impaired glucose tolerance—is a serious warning sign that typically persists for 10 to 12 years before a formal diabetes diagnosis hits. The scary part? Because of modern lifestyles, we're seeing this in younger people constantly. Data shows it's showing up in 25% of severely obese children and 21% of severely obese teens. This "silent" period is dangerous because macrovascular complications like atherosclerosis start creeping in. Blood vessels narrow and clog, leading to coronary disease or peripheral vascular issues. It’s why some people don't even know they have it until they suffer a stroke or heart attack...

To minimize the risk of those cardiovascular complications, you have to catch Quote : Prediabetes early and start preventative steps immediately. Diagnosis requires testing fasting glucose (after an 8-hour fast) and postprandial levels (two hours after breakfast). Based on the results, Quote : Prediabetes falls into a few categories:

Impaired Fasting Glucose (IFG) — fasting levels are between 100 and 125 mg/dL, while two-hour post-meal levels stay within normal limits, specifically dL
Impaired Glucose Tolerance (IGT) — fasting levels look normal (up to 100 mg/dL), but two-hour post-meal levels are elevated—between 140 and 199 mg/dL for capillary blood. For venous blood, those ranges shift to 120–180 mg/dL, or 160–220 mg/dL for capillary blood.
Combined Impairment (IFG + IGT) — fasting levels are between 100 and 125 mg/dL, and post-meal levels fall between 140 and 199 mg/dL. For venous blood, that's 120–180 mg/dL, or 160–220 mg/dL for capillary blood.
(When getting bloodwork done, pay attention to lab parameters. Different labs use different sampling methods, which can change your final glucose reading.)

HbA1c levels for Quote : Prediabetes fall between 5.7% and 6.4%.

Like I said before, impaired glucose tolerance eventually turns into full-blown diabetes. It’s a slow burn—a series of pathological changes taking about a decade. But here's the kicker: in 40% of cases, that progression hits within just five years, which fast-tracks all those chronic complications. Even though the cardiovascular risk with Quote : Prediabetes is 1.5 times higher than average—not as bad as the 4x jump you see once you actually have diabetes—you still need to start preventative measures early to protect your heart. The first moves to stop vascular issues? Manage your blood pressure, watch your cholesterol, and quit smoking. Just as vital for preventing diabetes is sticking to lifestyle and diet guidelines—regular exercise and following a structured meal plan. Losing just 5-10% of your body weight, paired with intense activity (like 30 minutes a day, five days a week), is a massive win for slowing down the disease and its complications...

The full quote is right here

It's just quotes and info regarding an impaired glucose tolerance diagnosis.
So how do you handle it? Listen to what the endocrinologists at the Mayo Clinic tell you, from your diet and everything else...

copperlynx22 said: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

True, diabetics need an eye exam at least once a year. If you’re dealing with other diagnoses on top of diabetes, then it's an absolute MUST to get checked annually... speaking from experience. 😁)
I honestly don't get it. If the patient is following all the protocols themselves, HOW could Medicare even turn down the referral...

slycrane94 said:Because I'm just a total menace who hates you all and lives to mess with you.

Or maybe it was an accident.

😂🤣 is that also the answer to this ->

darkmarlin16 said:Who even decided to kick him to the curb, and what was their reasoning?

rustydrifter10 said:Don't worry, we'll get it back. 😳 I'm really hoping it happens soon, along with all those new emojis we've been suggesting. Honestly, I'd trade every single one of them just to have Facebook back. 😢

Hope it happens fast 🙂 uhhh, what was that 🤦🙂
And why did the :2up: disappear?

I’m all for it... fully support this request, the petition, whatever. Just bring back that indispensable smiley face. Losing the :2up: was enough trouble already 😛

slycrane94 said:The whole point of this risk is hoping people ditch AdBlock so they can actually make money from standard ads, instead of resorting to shady ones just to stay afloat.

I get it, everyone here thinks they’re entitled to a fast, high-quality server just to spam and troll, but that’s not how the real world works. Especially not in a capitalist system like the US, where things move this fast...

PS: Not sure which AV Milky Way is running, but https://www.virustotal.com/en/url/47...is/1374557874/
Either the link in the first post is broken or that antivirus is tripping.

Regarding what you said, all I can do is quote every single post written after this and bow down to each one individually...

Brian Edwards78 said:Axel, you've started peddling demagoguery. 😢

People only used AdBlock because forum ads were being garbage. No need to twist the argument into a "what happened before" story about adblock vs. ads. We both know you already have the answer to that. 😉

🙏

northerncyclist2 said:I had ads for a long time, right up until they started popping up with stupid junk that covered half the page every time I clicked something, and then when the viruses started... that's when I called it quits. Honestly, this site was the first one that actually forced me to install AdBlock; I didn't use it anywhere else before. That tells you everything about how "civilized" the ads here are.

🙏

melloworca6 said:Are you trolling him? 😁

I didn't even have AdBlock installed before this forum started spitting out Trojans like crazy from the ads. I'm not about to go out and buy some new piece of junk just because someone incompetent can't manage the site properly... then having to beg someone to fix it or lugging it to a repair shop just to throw money down the drain.

🙏

Sarah Martinez said:I was wondering why the discussion thread regarding dating, intimacy, and relationships has been locked? I did a little digging through the rules, but I couldn't find anything explicitly stating why it was shut down, so I figured I'd just ask here.
hey there

Every other thread gets capped at like 10,000 posts, but the chat stays wide open. It's always on the front page because people are constantly talking there.

You could've checked for a new chat or just sent a DM to the mods instead of starting a whole thing here. 😉

Christian Watson2 said:Of course. You’re commenting on the fallout instead of the root cause. Exactly what I asked you not to do because the reason is obvious.

The cause? You broke the rules. Matthew Anderson sent you the direct link to the specific rule being violated, and posts like that get nuked. You quoted and commented on a moderator warning, which isn't allowed.
I'm standing behind everything Matthew Anderson said. Fully.

Enough said for now...

I issued the warning myself for breaking the rules by commenting on moderator posts. Simple reason—you aren't supposed to comment on moderator threads. I don't even participate in the discussion, I just monitor everything daily. And when you get a warning, the notification hits automatically... so you received the message at the exact same time as the strike. That’s different from actually reading it.

@Larry Wilson25/">@@Larry Wilson25, I'm not on this thread all the time, so I'm just seeing this now... once you pointed out the mistake and I read your PM about it, I apologized, but honestly, I've already moved on from it...

Some people actually own up to their mistakes. Whether they handed out a wrong card or just messed something else up, they'll ask to have it cleared and apologize to whoever was on the receiving end.

dustyranger64 said:I'm worried you aren't exactly the spokesperson for common sense here.
And hey, make sure to put it in the official record: two (2) strikes on Lies and one (1) redefined as—harassment.

1) You don't get to decide what counts as a strike and what doesn't.
hollowtrucker77 got a strike for one of the reported posts, but not for the other. Even if it doesn't involve you, hollowtrucker77 has way more points than I do, so surprisingly, they aren't exactly suffering from the idea that I'm harassing them.

2) You got a strike for Felix because you broke the rules, not because of an insult, even if it was borderline:

Please, don't get mad. I actually feel bad for you because of everything you've been through. I'm saying this with the best intentions: if you haven't realized it yet, you really need therapy. I mean, everyone does, but man, you're on a mission here. This isn't normal.

Just because you think therapy is a good thing doesn't give you the right to hand out diagnoses or tell people they need it on any forum. Especially not on the ones where I'm supposedly harassing people. By the way, you had other posts that deserved a strike, but they let it slide.

Listen to reason = bowing down to claims that striking me is "harmful" to the forum and accusing me of harassment without actually providing any arguments?
True, that's not how I "listen to reason."
And you aren't even trying to have a civilized conversation.

Wow, you sure do have a lot of Sash in your mouth. Like, every single post has a few mentions. Maybe if the admins took a moment to explain how the appeals process works or how to request a partial ban reduction, things might actually get sorted out.

-----
Regarding that whole thing about lifting partial bans after two weeks—I'm staying out of that one since I'm not directly involved.
If Sophia Thomas7 and Jack Bishop94 think access should be restored, then I'm all for it. If they think not, then fine by me too.

On that note, I'm with Sophia Thomas7...

Sophia Thomas7 said:If I’m reading you right, you’re having issues with dustyranger64. Because of that, you sought out a partial ban on Lies. Now you're running into trouble on other subreddits where he's a moderator, yet you're asking to have the partial ban removed from Lies where he's also a moderator?

What exactly would be the reasoning for moderators to collectively agree to lift a partial ban?

Alex Cook said:I'm certain about the LIES, and I think there are one or two more PDFs out there where edits are allowed even if they were posted over 10-15 minutes ago.

You sure about that? I'm looking at posts being edited by authors more than half an hour after they went up...

Lisa Wilson26 said:you're totally fine.😉
my favorite user😉
not an egoist, you have actual opinions and you write well enough.

Thanks, venera 🙂