Posts by Linda Gonzalez16

frozenbison122 said:What's the deal with pleural effusion? I'm totally lost right now.

Don't sweat it, it wasn't a reaction to what you posted.

Listen, guys, don't go looking for trouble. Just be glad you're healthy.
By the way, eating raw potatoes is just asking for bloating, and if you're feeling particularly reckless and eat those green ones, you're looking at solanine poisoning.
I think this thread has run its course. Time to kill it.

Sam Hall15 said:... Baretta's gastric metaplasia of the stomach(intestinal epithelium) ...

Just one quick addition here. There are actually three types of epithelium seen in Baretta's case—two are similar to gastric epithelium (which makes sense since that helps build up resistance against stomach acid), but the third type is intestinal, and that’s the one that paves the way for malignant changes...

ruggedpanther64 said:I was just asking... my bad.

If nobody in your family has ever dealt with cancer, does that mean you're less likely to get it? Like, if my Mom, Dad, or baba Deda never had anything, how does that work with genetics?

With certain types of cancer, having a family history definitely bumps up your risk. For example, if a sister or mother has breast cancer, or if someone has colon cancer—where your risk can jump 2 to 4 times depending on how old they were when diagnosed—it’s much higher if it’s a first-degree relative. The reverse is also true.

ruggedpanther64 said:If nobody in your family has ever dealt with cancer... is there still a chance you could get it?

Absolutely. We're talking lung, oral cavity, esophageal, stomach, cervical, liver cancer—you name it. Even if you rule out any hereditary genetic flaws like oncogenes or messed-up tumor-suppressor genes, you can't ignore environmental stuff. Smoking, viruses (like HPV or Hepatitis B and C), carcinogens in food (think nitrosamines), chemicals, radiation... all of it matters.

Raymond Gray2 said:I think there's a misunderstanding here. I wasn't talking about additives or whatever you guys jumped to—I meant that people just eat the wrong stuff and they eat way too much of it, which I honestly believe is the root cause of modern diseases... Not even touching on additives, emulsifiers, preservatives, and all that junk.
We’re eating way too much meat and protein in general, which we don't even know is harmful in massive amounts, let alone unnecessary! An adult really only needs a few grams a day, yet people are slamming 200g or more! And that’s not just from meat; it’s through milk, cheese, and all that, too.
There's also way too much white flour and sugar—which is incredibly damaging—yet people barely touch fruit or veggies... Fruit usually just ends up as a dessert.
That's what I meant.
Plus, I used myself as an example: by cutting back on meat, sugar, and white bread to a minimum, I managed to get my high blood pressure under control. Modern medicine doesn't have a real answer for this—some call it "essential" hypertension. They claim the cause is unknown... But then why don't people living closer to nature with sparse diets deal with blood pressure issues? (Like in the Andamos, the Caucasus, or somewhere in Africa) Nobody mentions how important the GI (glycemic index) is either! Someone once told me vegetarians get high blood pressure too... Well, if they aren't eating meat, maybe they're overdoing the starches and proteins that spike blood sugar—and then insulin kicks in, which also raises blood pressure... in case you didn't know. Then you've got to factor in the lack of movement and not drinking enough water. That's just as vital for blood pressure.
Look, I'm no expert, I admit that—but I listen to people who experiment on themselves and make discoveries that modern medicine ignores or refuses to acknowledge... I'm skeptical of the medical establishment and doctors who just hand out pills left and right (I'm speaking from my own experience and my whole family's).

That's a pretty bold claim, and honestly, it doesn't hold water. Diet definitely influences certain diseases, but you're nowhere near capturing the role it actually plays. As for the points you highlighted, we could go on forever. We don't know everything about hypertension, but we certainly know more than you think, and any decent, responsible doctor will tell a patient to modify their lifestyle to lower their pressure before jumping straight to meds. For instance, a "healthy" diet avoiding saturated fats and loading up on fruits and veggies = a drop in systolic pressure of 8-14 mmHg, keeping salt intake below 100 mmol/L = a drop in systolic pressure of 2-8 mmHg, doing aerobic exercise for half an hour a few times a week = a drop in systolic pressure of 4-9 mmHg, cutting back on alcohol if you drink heavily = a drop in systolic pressure of 2-4 mmHg, or reducing body weight back to a normal BMI = a drop in systolic pressure of 5-20 mmHg per 10 kg lost .
By the way, insulin doesn't raise blood pressure. There are multi-factorial conditions that cause peripheral tissue insulin sensitivity to drop, requiring higher levels of insulin in the blood to maintain normal function. Since those conditions also drive atherosclerosis and contribute to rising blood pressure, people often jump to the wrong conclusion that insulin directly causes high blood pressure, when it's really just a bystander. If anything, to add a bit of irony, there are hormones that act opposite to insulin that actually raise arterial pressure (like adrenaline or corticosteroids...).

And being skeptical of the medical system and doctors who blindly prescribe meds is a respectable stance, provided that criticism is backed up by actual arguments.👍 .

Christian Wood63 said:The fact remains: there isn't just one single reason why someone ends up having their spleen removed. The medical indications vary wildly depending on the situation.

It’s listed right there. One of those factors causes certain cells to break down and then pile up in the spleen, which ultimately prevents the body from functioning the way it's supposed to.
I don't know the surgical team personally.
When it comes to the actual surgery, you're looking at two main options: either they go in laparoscopically or they make a classic incision under the left rib cage.
Surgery itself shouldn't be the part that gives you any real trouble.
If you actually look at the literature, there are about 18 different complications already documented. Why aren't more people talking about this?
As far as I'm concerned, the procedure mentioned here is nothing more than a routine operation.
Since we’re dealing with a young man here, extra caution regarding infections is non-negotiable. Why? Because the incidence of pneumococcal sepsis in this specific patient demographic is significantly higher. It's a risk that simply cannot be ignored.
Since we aren't discussing bowel movements here, they should probably be discharged soon. It really all comes down to how their other vitals look over the next eight days.☕
Before surgery, it would be ideal if they could administer a platelet concentrate transfusion. I mean, this needs to be properly coordinated. You can't just wing it when it comes to an operation like this.
Of course, hematologists should be able to state with absolute certainty whether this will actually provide any real benefit.
And most of the time, it actually works.
Unfortunately, it all boils down to the statistics. For the majority, things work out just fine. For the minority? Not so much.🤷

The spleen plays a huge role in fighting off bacteria with polysaccharide capsules—think Streptococcus pneumoniae, Neisseria meningitidis and Haemophilus influenzae—so you’ve gotta be careful. Luckily, there are vaccines out there that offer solid protection.
Right after the surgery, you need to stay on top of any fever immediately so antibiotics can be started right away to prevent sepsis.
A person living without a spleen functions just fine; they might just hit a wall a little sooner during heavy physical activity.

When it comes to idiopathic (autoimmune) thrombocytopenia, getting a splenectomy works for over 80-90% of cases. Plus, the procedure can be done safely even if platelet counts are under 10,000.
High-dose immunoglobulins definitely bump up those platelet levels, but the effect is short-lived, maybe lasting a week or two. Platelet transfusions aren't really a long-term fix because they face the same fate as the body's own platelets—they get wiped out by macrophages in the spleen reacting to the antibody-platelet complex, so the benefit only lasts a few hours. As for corticosteroids, they're the go-to first choice, but unfortunately, not everyone responds to them. Even for those who do, a splenectomy is often still on the table because you just can't stay on high doses of steroids forever.
If the splenectomy doesn't do the trick (and there's no reason to doubt it will work), there are other drugs and options available. Keeping my fingers crossed for you. Good luck!

Don't sweat it 😉. Since you don't have any actual TB symptoms—I'm talking fatigue, weight loss, a cough, or a fever (and 99°F isn't a fever)—plus your chest X-ray came back clear, you’d also need to have had direct contact with someone actively infectious while being unvaccinated to even consider it.
As for the night sweats—one single symptom doesn't make you sick, and it's definitely not specific to anything major; it really just depends on how much you overthink it. That sharp pain and your spleen looking slightly enlarged on an ultrasound (which, honestly, shows up on tons of random scans) might be loosely linked to TB in some extreme scenario, but trust me, if you actually had TB, you'd know it by now.
If everyone jumped to conclusions based on every little thing they felt, we'd all be walking around convinced we have at least ten different chronic illnesses...

Nitrates in urine are just an indirect sign that there’s inflammation—basically, bacteria are present. A round of antibiotics should clear things up.
If I were you, I’d get a urine culture and sensitivity test done to figure out exactly which "bug" we're dealing with and what actually kills it. But, if you've already started on antibiotics, there's no point in testing now because the results will just come back negative.
If you start feeling sharp pains during those bathroom trips, or if you get a fever with chills, nausea, or even vomiting along with more intense urinary issues, go see a doctor immediately.

jadesailor14 said:I’m gonna lose my mind 🙂
if I have to deal with

and to anyone else still posting "this, this, this..." in this thread this year... seriously,
I will find you. 🙂

👍 👍 👍 This forum is a total circus. Look, folks, all we need is a little common sense and some basic biochemistry knowledge... or honestly, just a shred of decency so people stop talking about stuff they clearly know nothing about.

Look, I’m no pediatrician, so I can't give you official medical advice or tell you what to do. All I can say is that there's a standard practice where, if a kid keeps catching Group A Strep, doctors often prescribe Extencillin. Since it stays in the system for a few weeks, you aren't dosing them nearly as often, which helps act as a shield—especially since kids in daycare are basically walking petri dishes constantly bumping into these bacteria. You'd usually monitor an antistreptolysin titer to see if the treatment is actually doing its job. If the strep throat just keeps coming back like clockwork, one of the actual solutions on the table is a tonsillectomy.

We use the ASO titer to measure antibody levels against one of the proteins (streptolysin O) produced by Group A strep. You won't see a positive result immediately; it usually takes about a week—sometimes even a month—after the bacteria hit your system. Levels typically peak around the third week of symptoms before they start to taper off. Interestingly, about 30% of people still show elevated titers even six months after they've cleared the infection. Practically speaking, a high reading means the infection is currently active or was present in the past (you can get much clearer data through paired sampling—basically testing again two weeks later to see if the titer is rising or falling). It could also point to non-infectious complications from the strep illness itself. Antibiotics actually lower the ASO level because by killing the bacteria, you're reducing the body's need to churn out antibodies. Technically, taking antibiotics doesn't stop you from getting the test, but it definitely messes with the results, especially if you take them before the antibody titer even has a chance to climb (which, honestly, is a good thing if you actually have strep).

Bottom line? An ASO test isn't exactly a silver bullet for diagnosing an acute infection or double-checking a diagnosis. A throat swab or a rapid Strep test would be way more helpful, but we shouldn't forget that doctors use clinical criteria to make a call with a decent degree of certainty. I'm pretty sure no doctor is going to prescribe antibiotics for a simple viral sore throat, but since there are times when it's clinically tough to tell the difference, many will opt for antibiotics just to be safe. You've got to treat strep to prevent nasty side effects—everything from ear or sinus infections spreading to more serious stuff like rheumatic fever or post-streptococcal glomerulonephritis. It’s not black and white; there's a massive gray area. Since the dawn of medicine, people have been fighting over how to handle a standard sore throat; they keep tweaking the criteria, yet we still don't have one definitive "perfect" test.

copperseal9 said:I get the mosquito thing... but can an infected person actually pass it to someone else directly? Like through coughing, spit, or whatever else

Nope!

Edward Sanchez72 said:well, via mosquito 🙂
they pass it on... that's how it spreads.

Exactly. It’s the Anopheles kind of mosquito. Female ones, obviously 😁 😉. That's pretty much the main way—if not the only way. It’s extremely rare, almost theoretical at this point, through blood transfusions (not really an issue here in the States) or from mother to fetus.

redowl90 said:Look, I also think Michael Moore's movies are straight-up propaganda (especially Fahrenheit 9/11) and I hate how he desperately rubs it in our faces just how bad Americans are and how much of a wreck their system is...

...but the undeniable fact remains that it’s exactly how he portrays it!

It’s never quite that black and white. You can make a biased documentary anywhere in the world; it all comes down to what your intentions are. I work in healthcare, so I've got "inside" experience from both the US and other places. Sure, crazy stuff happens, but trust me, the screen often pushes generalizations, while the reality sits somewhere in the middle.
The truth is, tons of people in the US lack health insurance. But it's also true that, take UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles for example, lives are frequently saved through heart and lung transplants even for people without coverage or with plans that don't cover such procedures. When you're talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars, it's pretty easy to see whether economics is winning out over humanity or not.
Obviously, you need to point out the flaws and make people aware of things that need fixing, but you shouldn't ignore or downplay the good stuff in that process. From my perspective, "Sicko" is pure propaganda loaded with bias (you show what you want to show and hide the rest—I mean, leaving parts out isn't technically a lie, it's just not the whole truth), but if that's what it takes to get a result, I'm not against it.

On the flip side, the healthcare system here is built on a solid idea—collecting funds and providing access based on "social" principles—but when it comes to organization and how the money actually gets distributed, there's still a lot of mess (like the role of primary care doctors, secondary care being overwhelmed by issues that arguably don't belong there, staffing shortages, and so on).

We're talking about accessory spleen here—basically just an extra little knot of splenic tissue hanging out on its own. It pops up in maybe 10% of people, and honestly, it’s usually just a random finding that means absolutely nothing. In super rare cases, certain diseases affecting the spleen might spread to this extra bit, but that's a whole different conversation. Bottom line? Nothing to worry about.

Michael Anderson10 said:I suppose a doctor would know for certain, but from what I've read, Cephalins seem quite similar to penicillin. Since she suffered an anaphylactic shock from penicillin, that's why I'm asking.

Look, my advice? Sit down with that doctor and lay out exactly why you're worried. There’s just no reason to take an unnecessary risk, especially when there are other options available—and with Cephalosporin II., there's a legitimate danger here.

What’s she even taking the antibiotic for? For most things, there's always an alternative.

lonefox72 said:I can't recall the exact names (I just remembered his description, basically my sister lost it when she saw what he prescribed—like, "what is this even supposed to do?" ), but he won't touch them. He’s just not a pills guy. Doesn't believe in the whole thing.
but I think if he actually wants to sleep, he'll eventually have to take something.
So, basically "Deep relief".

I've been browsing some international forums, and it mostly boils down to rest, some light exercises—just gentle stretching after the muscle stiffness subsides—and then using ice after working out.

Does anyone know if a light massage with rubbing alcohol helps at all?

Exactly, just rest at first. Once the bruising fades and the pain lets up, you can start some light, gradual movement, stopping right before it hurts. If you use ice afterward, don't put it directly on the skin; wrap it in a towel first. And no, an alcohol massage isn't going to do anything.

As for the meds—a real nurse knows where her expertise ends. Making comments about a doctor's decision is totally unprofessional, to put it mildly, and honestly, it says a lot about someone's character.

Besides, doctors don't exactly have an easy time dealing with your husband either—refusing to believe in medicine pretty much undermines their "healing powers."😁 😁 .

lonefox72 said:My buddy pulled a muscle—or maybe several—and tore some tissue. It’s looking pretty swollen and bruised, with blood pooling under the skin, and he can't even sleep.
He saw a doctor who told him to just rest and prescribed some heavy-duty painkillers that he’s refusing to take.
Does anyone have recommendations for a good cream to speed up the healing or anything else that might take the edge off the pain?

Thanks, cheers.

What kind of "heavy-duty painkillers" are we talking about here? And why is he turning them down?

Look, honestly, nothing beats time and actual rest if he wants to recover properly. There aren't any magic creams out there. For the pain, though, something like Advil cream might help—it gets enough ibuprofen right where it hurts to dial down the inflammation and soreness. Just make sure he isn't allergic to the ingredients (ibuprofen, levomenthol).

Michael Anderson10 said:My mother was given some Cephalins, but she has a severe penicillin allergy. I'm wondering if it's safe for her to take this?

That's a tricky one. Honestly, back in the day, doctors used to go overboard worrying about "cross-reactivity" between penicillin and cephalosporins. Generally speaking, Cephalosporin II. and III. generations are considered safe bets in those cases.
Cephalexin is a first-generation drug. While it's usually the go-to choice for people allergic to penicillin, there's still a 5-10% chance of cross-reactivity in patients with severe penicillin hypersensitivity—we're talking serious stuff like anaphylaxis, hives, or interstitial nephritis. It happens because of a specific chemical group that's identical in both.

Seriously though, talk to a doctor first!
By the way, did the doc who wrote the prescription even ask about her allergies?