Posts by feralgardener362

crimsoncanyon3 said:Sarcoma pain in your leg shouldn't be spreading elsewhere—there’s just no way for that to happen. It’s entirely possible that what you're feeling is just a byproduct of fear or stress, but honestly, if the pain is consistently hitting the exact same spot, you really ought to get some imaging done. You need to rule out any other underlying issues, like the unfortunate possibility of the disease spreading.
Honestly, it’s never a bad idea to read up more on sarcomas. Soft tissue sarcomas are essentially a massive umbrella term for a bunch of different types of cancer that start in the connective tissues—things like muscle, fat, nerves, blood vessels, or even deep tissue in your bones. It’s not just one single disease; it’s more like a collection of various rare cancers that behave differently depending on where they pop up. Because these tumors can grow almost anywhere in the body, they can be pretty tricky to catch early. They don't always show up as a hard lump right away, which is why regular check-ups are so important. If you notice something unusual, like a swelling that isn't going away or a bump that feels different from what you're used to, you definitely shouldn't ignore it. Diagnosis usually involves a mix of tools. Doctors often start with imaging, like an MRI or a CT scan, to see exactly where the mass is located and how much it's affecting the surrounding area. Once they have a clear picture, the gold standard for knowing exactly what we're dealing with is a biopsy. That’s when they take a small sample of the tissue to look at under a microscope to figure out the specific subtype. Treatment isn't one-size-fits-all either. Depending on the type of sarcoma, its location, and how aggressive it is, a medical team might recommend surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, or sometimes a combination of all three. The goal is always to remove the tumor entirely while making sure the patient stays as healthy as possible during the process. It’s a lot to wrap your head around, but understanding that "sarcoma" is a broad category helps make sense of why treatments vary so much from person to person.

Thanks for getting back to me.
The pain keeps popping up in the exact same spot, and honestly, that's what's really starting to worry me.
I know I’m fully aware that after everything I've been through, I'm starting to turn into a total hypochondriac, but I really wish I could just get a scan done to finally put these fears to rest.
Thanks for the link, too. I went ahead and read through it.

I have a question, but I’m not entirely sure if it fits this thread. If I’m totally in the wrong place, I’d appreciate it if a moderator could point me in the right direction.

Basically, I’m an oncology patient, and ever since my diagnosis, I’ve been reacting to pain with a lot of anxiety—even in parts of my body that aren't related to my tumor. Because of that, I was wondering if anyone here dealing with sarcoma (soft tissue?) has experienced pain specifically in their leg. What kind of pain did the sarcoma cause for you there?

Thanks for understanding and for any insight you can share.

Man, that penalty is way too harsh.
Have some mercy, seriously, in these brutal times. 😍

Sending all my support to this charity drive 😁

Alright, let's wrap up this tedious argument where you keep trying to derail the conversation by bringing up stuff that has zero to do with what we're actually talking about:
Your signature isn't getting reinstated because it contained a prohibited link. You were clearly breaking the community rules that both feraltrucker5 and I already pointed out to you.
👋

Sweet

feraltrucker5 said:I'm bored, so I figured I'd jump into a debate like this. 😬

Perfect, because I'm wide awake and can always count on you to keep me company. 😁

Honestly though, we could probably just lock this thread. It’d be more fun to move on to a topic that actually sparks some controversy. 😛

Man, feraltrucker5, you always beat me to it 🙂

Look, nobody was actually citing that specific rule. They were just pointing out the issue with linking to sites that have absolutely nothing to do with Reddit

3. Signatures can't be used for advertising or for sharing personal info; if you want to include a link to a personal blog or a page on Reddit in your signature , just set it up as "Click here" instead of using a raw URL like http://www.mylink.com*.

+

* There isn't an exhaustive list of what's allowed or banned, but the general rule is that links to blogs, Reddit, or Politico are fine, while linking to other forums or random news portals is off-limits . The staff can approve certain links even if they aren't blogs, Reddit, or Politico, so just check with them if you're unsure whether your link is okay.

The admins can step in if I'm off base, but if you actually take a second to look over the signature formatting guidelines (which were already linked to you), it’ll be pretty obvious why you can't have a broken link in your signature. It's all logged, and the other mods and admins can see everything.

If someone else wants to fix your signature, be my guest. I'm definitely not going to 🙄

Since I spent a little bit of time acting as a mod on the Formula 1 sub-forum, I’m actually in favor of this request. It’s pretty obvious the whole crew over there wants Manny Pacquiao involved, including Sep who is one of the moderators. Besides that, the last Manny Pacquiao clone—which actually lasted quite a while (The Cat 🙂)—really wasn't causing any trouble at all.
I think we should seriously consider this request and just give him limited posting privileges again. Even if it’s just restricted to the Formula 1 section, let Sep see if that works out.

Hey, granitecrane72,

I’m assuming you make some decent money from your column, especially since you always drop links to the site where it's published—including that one site you tried to promote before deleting it. Just so we're clear, I could have called you out on it, but I didn't. And just like I didn't give you a red card back then, I'm choosing not to hit you with one now either.

You aren't allowed to post links to anything other than Reddit, Politico, or our own blog.
The stuff Laura Evans3 was quoting? I already quoted that back to you.

No, you can't use that link.

Look, I checked out what you sent, and honestly, I’m still not touching it. There's no way I'm typing in my passwords just because you asked. It's pretty simple: if the link isn't one of those three approved sites, it's a no-go. Plus, we don't even allow YouTube or anything else like it here.

As for people using other people's signatures, just report them to any moderator. If they're breaking the rules, they'll get taken down.

Mark Perez2 said:Look, Guliver carries pretty much all the footwear and they actually stock half sizes. I haven't seen that kind of variety anywhere else.

It’s honestly such a headache that so many brands stick to these "half-sizes," especially when you're shopping for sneakers. You see it everywhere—both Nike and Reebok do it constantly.

Tyler Vaughn51Look, you’ll probably lean toward boots like Dr. Martens and jeans, but maybe that doesn't matter to everyone else. Anyway, having worn all kinds of Docs for ten years now, I’m telling you: buying a larger size is honestly NOT worth it. I have no idea where you even got that idea. Trying to wear cotton balls in your shoes is pure torture. They constantly get in the way of your toes, and your heel still ends up slipping out of the boot anyway. It just makes zero sense. Just find your actual size, break them in for a week or two, and then you'll be good to go.
I remember back when Martens were first blowing up, there was this one article—one of many, really—in the New York Times about them. It basically said they always struggle during that first month. Honestly, reading that was such a relief. I had been feeling so discouraged because my own first pair (and then my second, and my third...) totally failed me. I was actually ready to beat myself up over how much I spent on those $200s.

Darin & Peg_bundy_89, well, you might be right—these two pairs probably won't make the cut for my collection of total failures and uncomfortable shoes.
I wore these green ones yesterday and they already felt better.

Tyler Vaughn51, I'm with Peg on this one. Besides that, everyone knows Timberlands are notorious for being brutal for the first month, but they eventually break in. Honestly, though, I think the size issue is going to be your biggest headache; you really should just stick to your actual size.

Lately, I’ve been having a rough time buying shoes (probably because I get too distracted by how cute they look and forget about the essentials, like actual comfort).
Basically, I’m struggling with two different pairs right now.

1] These Skechers I just picked up are giving me trouble. The larger size fit perfectly, but these ones are rubbing me raw. I’m not really used to low-cut shoes—the kind that sit below the ankle—so I can't tell if they just need to be broken in or if I should just cut my losses and ditch them.

2] These flats (if you can even call them flats) aren't really my usual style either, and now they're hurting my feet for some mystery reason.
I wanted to ask the women who actually wear these kinds of shoes: is it normal for them to hurt at first, and how do you deal with it? 😁
For those of you into flats—doesn't your foot just slide around inside since they aren't really "secured" to your foot at all? And do you wear socks with them (like those super low-cut liner socks)?

Anyway, sorry for the silly questions.

I'm honestly worried both of these pairs are going to end up on Poshmark soon.