Posts by brightgull95

The results speak for themselves. There’s absolutely no need for extra testing. Honestly, what on earth is your primary care physician even doing with this? It feels like a total lack of direction on their part. If anything, they should just be looking at bumping up your Lipitor dosage.

What on earth does that have to do with the lab results?

Where exactly is this lesion located? Are we talking about the renal medulla or the cortex? And more importantly, is the radiologist who read the scan actually recommending anything, or are we just relying on some random person—or heaven forbid, an internet forum—to provide the "second opinion"?

Seriously, what are you even worrying about here? Your INR should naturally be low—under 1.0, actually—if you aren't taking any Vitamin K antagonists.

So, what exactly is eating at you regarding the PV and the Federal Reserve? Are you even taking some kind of Vitamin K antagonist, or what?

The only way that works is if someone is being incredibly stubborn about it, but even then, it’s really just a minor supplement to a mild amenorrhea.

For everything else—aside from coagulation (specifically looking at INR)—it isn't.

Oxygen saturation needs to be at 95% or even higher.
For those dealing with COPD, we're looking at 92% (or maybe a bit more).

Nicholas Johnson8 said:...Can someone please explain why we have to sit around waiting for the surgeon's follow-up? Is this elevated CEA marker just because of osteoarthritis or spondylitis, or has this lung lesion actually started changing or getting worse after 11 years?

Look, that CEA marker is completely non-specific. You can't just stare at one number and expect an answer. It’s impossible to tell if you're looking at simple inflammation or something much more serious based on that value alone. Honestly, it could be both.

It could be considered low, but honestly, that all depends on the reference range, the units used, and what’s actually happening with the patient clinically. Since in the US, CRP is most commonly measured in mg/L—where the standard normal is anything under 5 mg/L (unlike some other places where they use mg/dL and set the bar at dL)—that value of 7.4 mg/L is really just a very slight elevation. How and why it's elevated? That depends on a massive amount of variables. You absolutely have to sit down and ask your doctor about this.

If you really want the most accurate answer, you need to take this exact same question directly to one of the doctors who was actually overseeing your father’s care. I know, I know—there are all these general guidelines and standard protocols out there, but let's be real: at the end of the day, the only person who can give you a definitive, precise answer is the specialist who actually prescribed the treatment plan in the first place.

The anesthesiologist will sit down and walk you through the entire process in detail right before they wheel you into surgery.
What you can definitely count on is being intubated, but as for how they’ll set up the ventilator—well, that’s entirely up to the anesthesiologist's call.

Look, spinal anesthesia is definitely the lower-risk route here, regardless of any other factors—it’s just the better choice, period.

But since there's even a slight chance they might not be able to pull off the spinal, we can't say the risk of a myocardial infarction isn't a factor. It really comes down to how massive the infarct actually was (whether we're talking STEMI or NSTEMI), what the current EF looks like, and if the UZV shows any localized wall motion issues. That said, the anesthesiologist is going to demand a cardiologist's sign-off on all this anyway, so you'll get your answer then.

Nicholas Johnson8 said:Hey everyone,
Could someone please take a look at my mom's CBC results? This is in light of the fact that she was hospitalized about a month ago, likely due to IBD.
I'll just list the values that fall outside the normal range:
Eric's ESR 37 (0 - 28)
RBC 3.68 (3.86 – 5.08)
Hemoglobin 114 (119 - 157)
Hematocrit 0.335 (0.356 – 0.470)
Neutrophils 43.1 (44.0 – 72.0)
Iron – TIBC 47.5 (49 - 75)

Everything else looks normal, including her ferritin, Vitamin B12, and Folate.

Hypochromic, microcytic anemia. You need the full clinical picture to interpret this properly, though a chronic inflammatory condition is always a very solid explanation for this kind of anemia.

Nicholas Johnson8 said:From the abdominal CT report:
In the multi-phase cross-sections through the abdomen and pelvis, there is no evidence of pneumoperitoneum, ileus, or free fluid. There is colonic interposition between the anterolateral liver margin and the diaphragm—Chilaiditi syndrome. From the described bowel segment down to the level of the sigmoid colon, including the distal sigmoid, there is a loss of haustral markings accompanied by mesenteric fat stranding; meanwhile, the ascending colon wall is thickened and shows intense post-contrast enhancement. Radiomorphologically, this could represent IBD. Sigmoid diverticulosis is present, without signs of perforation. Further internal medicine evaluation is required.
The liver, pancreas, and spleen are normal in size with homogeneous post-contrast enhancement. Both adrenal glands appear normal. Both kidneys are normal in size with maintained parenchymal thickness.
The liver, pancreas, and spleen are normal in size with homogeneous post-contrast enhancement. Both adrenal glands are normal. Both kidneys are normal in size and have maintained parenchymal thickness.

Can we actually conclude from this that it's IBD? My mom is terrified that it might be something much worse. We're waiting on a colonoscopy at the end of the month.

Thanks in advance! 🙂

What's described definitely points toward inflammation. Is there some tiny, two-centimeter tumor hiding somewhere? It’s impossible to say for sure. But what *is* possible to say is that if a tumor were truly there, it would have been visible.

neonfalcon99 said:It’s sitting at 339 right now, which is barely even elevated considering the normal limit goes up to 337. I honestly have no clue if it has anything to do with me being on Ethambutol this past month.

Look, 339 is basically just some arbitrary number from whatever lab you used—your specific lab might be using totally different units or a completely different reference range. Or maybe it's both. Either way, sure, that medication could be the culprit, but it's far from a certainty.

Maybe so, maybe not; but what does "elevated" actually signify in this context? Are we talking 8.01 mg/dL, 481 µmol/L, or some other unit entirely? Or are we looking at levels even higher than that? There are several possible explanations for high urate levels—is it an overproduction issue, a failure to clear it properly through the kidneys, or a combination of both? Everything hinges on that distinction, because it completely changes how you interpret the results and, ultimately, what kind of treatment is actually necessary.

Elizabeth Johnson5 said:My grandmother just had surgery for breast cancer and now she has to go in for radiation. Does anyone know for sure if an 8-month-old baby can be near her while she's undergoing treatment? I asked her to check with her oncologist, but she just says, "Of course they can," and didn't bother asking. I've been Googling and Googling, and I'm finding some American sites saying it's fine, but then I see other English pages suggesting it might be better to stay away.

It's perfectly fine. A grandma who has been treated isn't radiating anything. It's a proven fact. Honestly, the same goes for anyone else who has been exposed to external ionizing radiation—they aren't "radioactive."

Look, you didn't put anyone at risk, so please stop worrying about that. As for everything else, just be completely upfront with your hematologist about exactly what happened and leave it at that. I'm no medical expert—hematology isn't exactly my specialty—but if my memory of physiology class serves me right, two or three weeks is more than enough time for a healthy person to fully replenish what was lost during a blood donation.

steelangler88 said:Does anyone know how much heavy bleeding or donating blood actually messes with lab results? Specifically looking at red blood cells, hemoglobin, and things like that if you take a sample maybe 2 or 3 weeks after a donation. Could a result taken 3 weeks post-donation theoretically give a false reading—like showing low RBCs, elevated erythropoietin, or some kind of anemia? Or does the blood loss have to be significantly larger to make a real dent in those numbers?

How much blood was lost, roughly speaking? How old is the person? Are we dealing with chronic kidney failure—and if so, what stage? Diabetes? Any lung issues like COPD? Or is this person otherwise perfectly healthy?

I can't believe I even have to address this, but here we go. It’s like everyone on this board just collectively decided to stop using their brains today. Honestly, the level of sheer, unadulterated nonsense being spewed lately is enough to give anyone a migraine. And don't even get me started on what brightgull95 was trying to pull earlier. Are you kidding me? You can't just make up facts because they fit your little narrative! It’s pathetic. People need to realize that just because you have an opinion doesn't mean it carries any weight when it's factually bankrupt. I’m sitting here, trying to have a coherent discussion, and instead, I’m wading through this swamp of misinformation. It’s exhausting. It really is. If we’re going to talk about these issues, let's at least act like adults who understand basic logic. Otherwise, why are we even here? Just to shout into the void? Because right now, it feels exactly like that. Absolute madness. kaže:
Thanks for getting back to me.

I find this whole situation absolutely mind-boggling. I mean, seriously, how does this even happen? Look, I get that the section where they connected the stomach is fine, but the part from the transverse colon down toward the anus—which I assume is still tucked away in there since I’m waiting on the discharge papers to arrive in the mail—that part is still right where it was. It makes zero sense.

That specific segment—even with whatever residue might be sitting inside it—isn't going to cause any issues just because of leftover stool. If we're talking about actual complications, the real danger would be ischemia (you know, when the blood supply gets cut off, leading to necrosis and inflammation), but even then, I don't see that being a likely scenario here.

I can't believe I'm even seeing this here. Honestly, what happened to actual discourse? It’s getting harder and harder to find anyone who actually thinks before they type. Just more noise, more nonsense, and zero substance. It’s exhausting. kaže:
I honestly can’t wrap my head around how they could even consider going into surgery without doing a proper cleaning, especially since they hadn't touched it the day before. I actually called the unit around 2:00 PM that afternoon to demand an explanation as to why it wasn't being cleaned, and get this—the nurse just tells me the doctor explicitly ordered them *not* to clean it. Are you kidding me?

When he had that colonoscopy, they had him prepping for two whole days. It was an absolute nightmare. Now, I’m wondering—is there some kind of "fast-track" cleaning procedure they can do right on the day of surgery? He seems to have completely blanked on how intense the prep actually was, or maybe he just forgot how much of a hassle it was. Does a quick, same-day clean exist, or is he in for the same grueling ordeal all over again?

I don't think they had to go through that whole intense "cleansing" process like they do before a colonoscopy (at least, that’s how I remember it working). At the end of the day, the only thing that really matters is that his bowel wasn't full when they started the procedure.

I can't believe I'm even seeing this right now. Honestly, it’s just exhausting. Every single time I log on, it’s the same recycled nonsense being peddled like it's some groundbreaking revelation. It's maddening! You see people jumping on these trends without a second thought, and frankly, it makes my blood boil. And don't get me started on what **stormyviper2** was saying earlier. What a joke! How anyone could take that logic seriously is beyond me. It’s completely disconnected from reality. And then you have **brightgull95** chiming in with those half-baked arguments? Please. It's all just noise at this point. We need actual substance here. We need people who actually think before they type, instead of just adding to the mindless clutter. It’s frustrating, it’s tedious, and quite frankly, it’s beneath the level of discourse we should be having. I'm done playing along with this circus. kaže:
He spiked a fever north of 102°F even after being on Cleveland and Amoxicillin. He ended up in the ER, where they hit him with IV Ceftriaxone and Rexocefom (two 200mg doses, twice a day). After that, he went four or five days without a fever, only for it to come roaring back at 100.4°F+. I honestly have no clue how he’s running a fever like that while being blasted with such heavy-duty antibiotics. My mind is racing through every possible scenario here...

Emergency room? Isn't the whole thing handled within the hospital itself? Or are you using "emergency" to mean something else entirely?

Anything is possible, really. But look, if there’s an intestinal issue at play here, that "dead" functional segment isn't even my primary concern—the real nightmare is everything leading up to the stomach. Of course, you need the specialists to weigh in on that; they’re the ones with the direct line of sight into what's actually happening inside. Honestly, it almost doesn't matter exactly what they were doing during the surgery itself. Inflammation can be triggered by a dozen different things, even if it seems less likely. Especially considering how little time his father actually spent back home between those two hospital stays.

Look, the whole point of the procedure is that everything from the large intestine gets diverted straight into the stoma bag. So, if there's anything left sitting distally from the stoma, nothing from the intestinal tract is reaching that area anymore. It’s physically impossible for any waste to get down there, which means there is absolutely nothing to "clean out" from the outside.
And let's be real—there is zero chance they performed this surgery while the bowels were completely full. There isn't even anything left inside to sit there and rot or ferment.