Geezer Health Care

Feel free to talk about anything and everything in this board.
User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Wed Jun 07, 2017 6:20 pm

I just had my annual physical checkup this morning and am about to turn 75 years old. I got a reasonably clean bill of health, which encouraged me to go out to Pizzeria Uno today for a Windy City thin-crust pizza and a 23-ounce ale. Nice reward.

But the best reward of all came from hearing that doctors no longer do prostate exams on patients over 75. I have graduated!! I asked the doctor if I could have a merit badge for 50 consecutive negative exams. He said he didn't know what it would look like. Well, what I had in mind was a badge built around the following motif:

Spoiler:
Image


I offer the idea to you gratis. If you come up with a good design, feel free to copyright it and sell it to the geezers with no credit to me.
Last edited by Upton_O_Goode on Wed Jun 07, 2017 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19638
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby scrmbldggs » Wed Jun 07, 2017 6:24 pm

Seems you did very well! However, the image seems to be a victim of O'care. :(


Edit: You fixed it! Can you be elected?
Last edited by scrmbldggs on Wed Jun 07, 2017 6:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Wed Jun 07, 2017 6:24 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:Seems you did very well! However, the image seems to be a victim of O'care. :(


Should be back now. I had to edit it.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19638
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby scrmbldggs » Wed Jun 07, 2017 6:25 pm

So did I. :-P
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29100
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Gord » Wed Jun 07, 2017 10:43 pm

You're lucky, my doctors won't even give me a prostate exam. They all say, "You don't need one." I can't decide whether I'd rather go without one, or suggest they give it to me with a ten foot pole.

...wait, yes I can. I'll do without.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19638
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby scrmbldggs » Wed Jun 07, 2017 10:59 pm

Wait, you're not a Gorda, are you? :shock:
Hi, Io the lurker.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:12 pm

Only one finger?....................Nice doc.

I read up on prostates and its exams. I forget the details why, but I came away with thinking there was a lot of hype and scams going on. It allows the docs to "look like" they are really helping, when mostly they are not.

My first anal was required by my employer. I asked the doc: "How often does someone come to you proclaiming "perfect health" and you find something? He said: almost never. I asked: then why have a physical unless there is a complaint?? He said: to catch anything early.

Like all "professionals"==its a bit of a scam when they recommend their OWN services.....for the bills it creates.

Raise your hand: who here has their house or car inspected......just to be safe?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8119
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Poodle » Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:27 pm

You'd need you whole arm for a house. Oh - I see. Sorry.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:28 pm

I hate the muddy shoes.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:01 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Only one finger?....................Nice doc.

I read up on prostates and its exams. I forget the details why, but I came away with thinking there was a lot of hype and scams going on. It allows the docs to "look like" they are really helping, when mostly they are not.

My first anal was required by my employer. I asked the doc: "How often does someone come to you proclaiming "perfect health" and you find something? He said: almost never. I asked: then why have a physical unless there is a complaint?? He said: to catch anything early.

Like all "professionals"==its a bit of a scam when they recommend their OWN services.....for the bills it creates.

Raise your hand: who here has their house or car inspected......just to be safe?


Wise words. We could save billions every year by omitting screening tests. There is considerable debunking literature showing that mammograms do not decrease the death rate from breast cancer. My doctor told me a few years ago that he was omitting the PSA test for prostate cancer because it gave too many false positives. He said the annual digit was all anybody needed, and now it appears I no longer need even that. Good. According to the doctor, they don't attempt to treat prostate cancer in older guys because (1) nearly everybody over the age of 80 has prostate cancer, and (2) it grows so slowly that something else will kill you first. I like that second principle, and will invoke it in a lot of places.

In addition to this annual checkup, I had a colonoscopy on Friday. Another screening test, done every ten years, and again, this would have been my last one, except that they found three benign polyps, so they want to follow up in three years with another one. First of all, the whole procedure is, well....unpleasant, in a lot of ways that I won't go into. (You get some idea of it if you go through a very thorough TSA screening.) Second, how do they set the growth period for colon cancer at 10 years. That seems like a long time to me. I'd be surprised if a cancerous growth would stay harmless for even five years. So, it appears they are willing to settle for catching at most half of these cancers in an operable or treatable state (assuming they actually find them even with the colonoscopy). I said I'd think about the rescan in three years, but I'm not going to start thinking about it until at least 2 1/2 years have elapsed. By the useful principle (2) above, something else may have carried me off by then, and I won't have to think about it at all.
Last edited by Upton_O_Goode on Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:07 am

the phrase I like is: "You die with prostate cancer not from it."

There are pros and cons to all decisions. I have half a memory that I amused myself with some rough calculations and with a fudge here and there I decided I was more likely to die in a car crash going to the exams than I was from prostate cancer. THAT......and every male in my family has died of a heart attach.

I mean, what good is a history if you don't follow it?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Nikki Nyx » Thu Jun 08, 2017 4:38 am

Upton_O_Goode wrote:There is considerable debunking literature showing that mammograms do not decrease the death rate from breast cancer.

I didn't know this, and will now look for it. It an extremely painful experience for me, both because my tissue is dense and because I have chronic pain. I'd love to skip it if it's unnecessary. Frankly, I think it is. I do my monthly checks and there's no breast cancer in any branch of my family. Plus, it's stressful. Last year, they scared the crap out of me unnecessarily for what turned out to be an artefact on the film. I'm currently two months overdue and procrastinating.

Upton_O_Goode wrote:In addition to this annual checkup, I had a colonoscopy on Friday. Another screening test, done every ten years, and again, this would have been my last one, except that they found three benign polyps, so they want to follow up in three years with another one. First of all, the whole procedure is, well....unpleasant, in a lot of ways that I won't go into. (You get some idea of it if you go through a very thorough TSA screening.) Second, how do they set the growth period for colon cancer at 10 years. That seems like a long time to me. I'd be surprised if a cancerous growth would stay harmless for even five years. So, it appears they are willing to settle for catching at most half of these cancers in an operable or treatable state (assuming they actually find them even with the colonoscopy). I said I'd think about the rescan in three years, but I'm not going to start thinking about it until at least 2 1/2 years have elapsed. By the useful principle (2) above, something else may have carried me off by then, and I won't have to think about it at all.

This is one I won't skip. Both my maternal grandparents had colon cancer. My grandmother, in the '70s, had to have a colostomy. My grandfather was luckier; he was operated on in the '80s by the surgeon in Boston who invented the resection procedure, and only lost about 12" of his colon. I also had three benign polyps last year, so I have to follow up in 2019. I did delay this test until after I turned 50, and I really shouldn't have.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29100
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Gord » Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:37 am

Mammograms and other tests performed on the broad population will come back with more false positives than true positive, because they do so many tests on people who don't have problems.

Think of it this way. Take a population of 1000 people. Assume 1% of them have a particular medical condition: That's 10 people. Now suppose you have a test that is 90% accurate (in this case, I mean a test wherein a person with the condition has a 90% chance of being correctly diagnosed and a person without the condition has a 10% of being incorrectly diagnosed). Scan all 1000 people, and you will tend to end up with the following:

9 people correctly diagnosed as having the condition
1 person incorrectly diagnosed as not having the condition
891 people correctly diagnosed as not having the condition
99 people incorrectly diagnosed as having the condition

So as you can see, even when the test is 90% accurate, you'll still get 9 correct positives and 99 incorrect positives, so if you receive a positive result your odds are still only 9/108 of having the condition.

Holy crap, I found a youtube video with almost exactly what I'm talking about!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2tNxIaGpR4

This is why doctors prefer to find a reason to send a particular patient for testing, rather than just testing the entire population.

This doesn't in and of itself mean mammograms are a bad screening technique, as long as people understand it's just for screening potential candidates for further testing. In other words, getting a positive result on a mammogram just means you should be tested -- it doesn't mean you've got something wrong.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jun 08, 2017 9:40 am

........and the docs and lab get paid for all false positives.

You figure the motivations.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:08 am

Prostate cancer Dx'd in 1999 by biopsy. Still got it, still ain't dead. Gotta work on that.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:29 am

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:Prostate cancer Dx'd in 1999 by biopsy. Still got it, still ain't dead. Gotta work on that.


No whimsy here Gawdzilla; I mean this: Good luck with that.
Last edited by Upton_O_Goode on Thu Jun 08, 2017 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:31 am

Gord wrote:Mammograms and other tests performed on the broad population will come back with more false positives than true positive, because they do so many tests on people who don't have problems.

Think of it this way. Take a population of 1000 people. Assume 1% of them have a particular medical condition: That's 10 people. Now suppose you have a test that is 90% accurate (in this case, I mean a test wherein a person with the condition has a 90% chance of being correctly diagnosed and a person without the condition has a 10% of being incorrectly diagnosed). Scan all 1000 people, and you will tend to end up with the following:

9 people correctly diagnosed as having the condition
1 person incorrectly diagnosed as not having the condition
891 people correctly diagnosed as not having the condition
99 people incorrectly diagnosed as having the condition

So as you can see, even when the test is 90% accurate, you'll still get 9 correct positives and 99 incorrect positives, so if you receive a positive result your odds are still only 9/108 of having the condition.

Holy crap, I found a youtube video with almost exactly what I'm talking about!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2tNxIaGpR4

This is why doctors prefer to find a reason to send a particular patient for testing, rather than just testing the entire population.

This doesn't in and of itself mean mammograms are a bad screening technique, as long as people understand it's just for screening potential candidates for further testing. In other words, getting a positive result on a mammogram just means you should be tested -- it doesn't mean you've got something wrong.


Absolutely right. I used to give this example to classes I was teaching. On one occasion, I mentioned that someone had proposed testing all recruits in the US Army for HIV, and indicated that something like this would be possible. I was immediately confronted by a furious AIDS activist who said that if the ELISA test was positive, then there was no doubt the patient was HIV positive. Well, the class was about statistics, not medicine, so I let it go. I hope students got the point.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:35 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:the phrase I like is: "You die with prostate cancer not from it."

There are pros and cons to all decisions. I have half a memory that I amused myself with some rough calculations and with a fudge here and there I decided I was more likely to die in a car crash going to the exams than I was from prostate cancer. THAT......and every male in my family has died of a heart attach.

I mean, what good is a history if you don't follow it?


My Dad died (at age 92) of various abdominal tumors. He had had prostate cancer (but diagnosed by the PSA test only) for about a decade. Well, none of us should expect to go on accumulating frequent-flyer miles forever. Something is going to get us some time. I see medicine as useful only to the extent that it enables us to steer the Grim Reaper toward some less prolonged and painful death. My object is to quit life "cold turkey." I have no desire to taper off first.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:38 am

Upton_O_Goode wrote:
Gawdzilla Sama wrote:Prostate cancer Dx'd in 1999 by biopsy. Still got it, still ain't dead. Gotta work on that.


No whimsy here Gawdzilla; I mean this: Good luck with that.

I just got an ominous e-mail from a long-time friend who had a CT scan a few weeks ago. He wants me to come over and chat for an hour this morning. Well, I'll of course do it, but I have a feeling of dread as I do so. He also has had prostate cancer for a number of years, and has been coping. I doubt if it's the prostate though. This was an abdominal CT scan.

Thanks, but I'm not sweating it. Too much else trying to kill me for PC to have a shot.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:48 am

Upton: I'm with you on that. Here in the GOUSA there is still a high animus against "Death with Dignity" but I find no stronger expression of self worth than deciding when its time to call it quits. But here..you are forced to linger on and give all your assets and time over to the medical/industrial complex. I watched/attended my Mom go thru terminal lung cancer (she smoked heavily for 50 years before quitting) and actually got to say she was active and engaged until the first surgery...and then died 3 months later. All in.... not a bad way to go, surrounded by family. We had just started to consider nursing home care........for real: I view them as sadistic.

Before I start to dither..........I'll stop. A very individual decision. Ha, ha.........I'm not even active enough NOW by most standards....but I enjoy what dithering I do. I might even move to Oregon for a little assistance when I pick up my first disability. Until then.......... I fake it.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jun 08, 2017 2:17 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Upton_O_Goode wrote:
Gawdzilla Sama wrote:Prostate cancer Dx'd in 1999 by biopsy. Still got it, still ain't dead. Gotta work on that.


No whimsy here Gawdzilla; I mean this: Good luck with that.


Thanks, but I'm not sweating it. Too much else trying to kill me for PC to have a shot.


That's the spirit! And we both know how many things are trying to kill us too well to sweat it. I spent the last two days of 2016 in intensive care, getting massive blood clots out of my pulmonary arteries and legs. I think I'm back to normal now. At least, I'm bicycling 25 miles two or three times a week and walking five or six on the other days. But this was my second bout of blood clots that they call "idiosyncratic" (the official medical term for, "we haven't got a {!#%@} clue what brought this on").

I just talked with my friend, and out of consideration for him, I'm removing the remarks I made in my post. Even though I'm operating under a pseudonym, so presumably (naive fool that I am!) people don't even know who I am, let alone what friend I'm talking about, I think it best not to take any chances of anything being traced back to him.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jun 08, 2017 2:24 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Upton: I'm with you on that. Here in the GOUSA there is still a high animus against "Death with Dignity" but I find no stronger expression of self worth than deciding when its time to call it quits. But here..you are forced to linger on and give all your assets and time over to the medical/industrial complex. I watched/attended my Mom go thru terminal lung cancer (she smoked heavily for 50 years before quitting) and actually got to say she was active and engaged until the first surgery...and then died 3 months later. All in.... not a bad way to go, surrounded by family. We had just started to consider nursing home care........for real: I view them as sadistic.

Before I start to dither..........I'll stop. A very individual decision. Ha, ha.........I'm not even active enough NOW by most standards....but I enjoy what dithering I do. I might even move to Oregon for a little assistance when I pick up my first disability. Until then.......... I fake it.


Yeah, I hear you. We've got a "death with dignity" law in Vermont, pushed through a reluctant legislature by former representative Dick Mallory. I looked it over, and decided it wouldn't really help me. It allows the doctor to prescribe lethal doses of pain killer to patients who (1) sign a statement indemnifying the doctor (understandable) and (2) in the doctor's opinion, have less than six months of life remaining. That second clause makes the law useless to me. If I knew I had less than six months to live, I'd just go into palliative/hospice care and let them knock me out. If I knew I'd have to wait six months to a year for the law to apply to me, I'd simply find a high ledge and jump off. Some 8 years ago, I had the experience of going over the handlebars of my bicycle and waking up 15 minutes later in an ambulance with a face that could have played Phantom of the Opera without makeup. It only took the skills of a cosmetic surgeon (and $20,000 from the insurance company) to put my face back approximately where it had been before. But the main lesson I took away was, there was never any pain involved, and I never knew what hit me. So, ever since, I've decided the proper way to off oneself is the Wall Street 1929 procedure.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Nikki Nyx » Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:09 pm

Gord wrote:So as you can see, even when the test is 90% accurate, you'll still get 9 correct positives and 99 incorrect positives, so if you receive a positive result your odds are still only 9/108 of having the condition.

This doesn't in and of itself mean mammograms are a bad screening technique, as long as people understand it's just for screening potential candidates for further testing. In other words, getting a positive result on a mammogram just means you should be tested -- it doesn't mean you've got something wrong.

So a positive result is only correct 8% of the time? Yikes. I mean, that's great for that 8%; I wouldn't wish breast cancer on anyone. But it's a lot of stress to go through for someone who's not likely to get breast cancer. Admittedly, I may be relying too heavily on the fact that no one in any branch of my family has ever had breast cancer, and I should conduct more research before bagging on the mammograms. It may be that not all types of breast cancer are heritable.

The colonoscopy is worthwhile for me, though, especially since they can actually do something then and there if they discover polyps. They sent me a report...with photos, which I thought was unnecessary. Is anyone clamoring to see their polyps' baby pictures? :shockd:
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jun 08, 2017 9:56 pm

LunaNik wrote:
Gord wrote:So as you can see, even when the test is 90% accurate, you'll still get 9 correct positives and 99 incorrect positives, so if you receive a positive result your odds are still only 9/108 of having the condition.

This doesn't in and of itself mean mammograms are a bad screening technique, as long as people understand it's just for screening potential candidates for further testing. In other words, getting a positive result on a mammogram just means you should be tested -- it doesn't mean you've got something wrong.

So a positive result is only correct 8% of the time? Yikes. I mean, that's great for that 8%; I wouldn't wish breast cancer on anyone. But it's a lot of stress to go through for someone who's not likely to get breast cancer. Admittedly, I may be relying too heavily on the fact that no one in any branch of my family has ever had breast cancer, and I should conduct more research before bagging on the mammograms. It may be that not all types of breast cancer are heritable.

The colonoscopy is worthwhile for me, though, especially since they can actually do something then and there if they discover polyps. They sent me a report...with photos, which I thought was unnecessary. Is anyone clamoring to see their polyps' baby pictures? :shockd:


Well, thanks. I'll give it a pass. I didn't even want to see my own! :D :D

The actual probability that a positive result is true rather than false depends on the incidence of the disease within the population being tested. That's why it's hard to apply it to any individual. For example, am I to be considered as a human being in the abstract, as a male, as a white male, as a white college-educated male, as an elderly white college-educated male.... etc.? All of these groups have different incidences of various diseases, so if I'm tested for anything, it becomes virtually impossible to assign a number to the reliability of the result. Given that most diseases have a rather low incidence, however, a negative test is a very reassuring thing. In the example Bobbo gave, with 90% probability of accuracy, a negative result reduces the antecedent probability of .001 by a factor of about 10, meaning that people who get a negative result have only one chance in 10,000 of being ill.

The point to be carried away from the Bayesian analysis is just this: Saying that if a person has the disease, there is a 90% probability that the test will be positive, is VERY DIFFERENT from saying that if the test is positive, there is a 90% probability that the person has the disease. And the vague phrase "90%-reliable" applied to the test tends to confuse those two things.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:02 pm

Gord wrote:You're lucky, my doctors won't even give me a prostate exam. They all say, "You don't need one." I can't decide whether I'd rather go without one, or suggest they give it to me with a ten foot pole.

...wait, yes I can. I'll do without.


Hmm, Gord, you may be old enough to remember Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In of 50 years ago. They had a weekly segment they called the "flying fickle finger of fate" award, which they offered to whoever in the news had done the most outrageous thing the week before.

(This is way off-topic, and has nothing to do with the strange fact that your doctor won't do a prostate exam. But I couldn't resist posting it.)

If your doctor is right, and the exam is utterly useless, I want my money back for the 50 exams I paid for! I do know that they are hardly a panacea. The late Stephen Jay Gould got it detected by such an exam. But it didn't help; he eventually succumbed to it anyway.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29100
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Gord » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:59 pm

LunaNik wrote:So a positive result is only correct 8% of the time?

Well, only in the example given. That's when a test is 90% accurate if you have it and 90% accurate if you don't have it. I have no idea what the accuracy is for most tests.

Upton_O_Goode wrote:Hmm, Gord, you may be old enough to remember Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In of 50 years ago. They had a weekly segment they called the "flying fickle finger of fate" award, which they offered to whoever in the news had done the most outrageous thing the week before.

Yes, my parents would try to send me out of the room when they watched it. I think I was just that annoying whenever a television was on.

If your doctor is right, and the exam is utterly useless, I want my money back for the 50 exams I paid for!

They [multiple doctors] didn't say it was utterly useless, they said I didn't need one. Either they didn't want to play with my butt [and hence the "ten-foot pole" joke], or they didn't think I was in the category of people who should get one.

There's still a test they give out to people, but it's a take-home test and it's to detect blood in the stool. You get to play with your own poop, and then mail it to someone! It's awesome!
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7371
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby TJrandom » Fri Jun 09, 2017 12:18 am

LunaNik wrote:
Upton_O_Goode wrote:There is considerable debunking literature showing that mammograms do not decrease the death rate from breast cancer.

I didn't know this, and will now look for it. It an extremely painful experience for me, both because my tissue is dense and because I have chronic pain. I'd love to skip it if it's unnecessary. Frankly, I think it is. I do my monthly checks and there's no breast cancer in any branch of my family. Plus, it's stressful. Last year, they scared the crap out of me unnecessarily for what turned out to be an artefact on the film. I'm currently two months overdue and procrastinating.


Hitachi recently developed a new mammography device - a table/bed, where the breasts hang naturally into cut-away voids, with the circular scanner beneath the table taking a 360 degree scan. No squeezing, no pain. Clinical trials first, with market availability in 2020…

http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201705250043.html

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7371
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby TJrandom » Fri Jun 09, 2017 12:24 am

When I get my colonoscopy – every two years, I watch the screen and get my results in real time. Any removed polyps are tested for cancer. I have recently obtained on-line access to test results, and scan images, etc. - so can get the results just as soon as the procedure or lab work is completed.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29100
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Gord » Fri Jun 09, 2017 1:47 am

TJrandom wrote:When I get my colonoscopy – every two years, I watch the screen and get my results in real time. Any removed polyps are tested for cancer. I have recently obtained on-line access to test results, and scan images, etc. - so can get the results just as soon as the procedure or lab work is completed.

Wait until someone hacks it and infects it with a virus. :oldman:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 09, 2017 2:27 am

TJrandom wrote:When I get my colonoscopy – every two years, I watch the screen and get my results in real time. Any removed polyps are tested for cancer. I have recently obtained on-line access to test results, and scan images, etc. - so can get the results just as soon as the procedure or lab work is completed.

Honestly, I prefer to be sedated while the whole thing is going on. Other than hearing, "You're good for three years," I'm not intimately interested in the inside of my colon. :no:
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Fri Jun 09, 2017 10:52 am

LunaNik wrote:
TJrandom wrote:When I get my colonoscopy – every two years, I watch the screen and get my results in real time. Any removed polyps are tested for cancer. I have recently obtained on-line access to test results, and scan images, etc. - so can get the results just as soon as the procedure or lab work is completed.

Honestly, I prefer to be sedated while the whole thing is going on. Other than hearing, "You're good for three years," I'm not intimately interested in the inside of my colon. :no:



That's my view, although the technology TJ describes impresses me. Is it available only in Japan? I wonder.

My wife gets regular mammograms, but I think her risk of breast cancer is low anyway. There isn't any in her family. While the reliability of the test may be dubious (and I'm certainly not a medical doctor who would know anything about it---I'm just as confused by what gets into the popular literature as most other people), I think it's still probably a good idea to get one. Statistics are fine for the medical profession; that's the way they have to operate. But for an individual, statistics are of limited use. I recall the (apocryphal) story, back in the days before 9/11, when a statistician, worried that somebody on an airplane he was on might have a bomb, decided to carry a bomb on board himself, having reasoned that the probability there would be more than one bomb on the plane was much smaller than the probability there would be just one bomb.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Jun 09, 2017 11:23 am

The real time tv monitor was used on me 20 years ago..... the same tv the doc is looking at to guide the camera. Just ask him to turn it around.

Am I paranoid or distrustful......or think it will make the doc more careful..... to always stay conscious if there is a choice...AND to monitor what is going on. You never know what error you might catch.

I asked my current doc about the "new tech" I saw on tv many years ago about simply swallowing a camera that records your entire digestive track. "Better" for everything. Still not commonly used. I don't see why not in this age of miniturization and what not. By now.... should almost be an app for the smart phone?

As always..........I suspect our good docs are just keeping the tech off the market so they can BILL FOR THEIR SERVICES.

They all think they are entitled to be millionaires. The fantasy is kept alive by keeping competition illegal....be it other providers or technology.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7371
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby TJrandom » Fri Jun 09, 2017 1:56 pm

The only down-sides to the aswallered camera, is that it cannot take snippits or clip site tags. But that really shouldn`t be a problem, since the scope, which does have risks, would only need to be used for confirmed targets.

Here it is exactly as you describe - the same screen as the techie is viewing. I too prefer to remain awake and alert.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jun 10, 2017 1:46 am

Upton_O_Goode wrote:My wife gets regular mammograms, but I think her risk of breast cancer is low anyway. There isn't any in her family. While the reliability of the test may be dubious (and I'm certainly not a medical doctor who would know anything about it---I'm just as confused by what gets into the popular literature as most other people), I think it's still probably a good idea to get one. Statistics are fine for the medical profession; that's the way they have to operate. But for an individual, statistics are of limited use. I recall the (apocryphal) story, back in the days before 9/11, when a statistician, worried that somebody on an airplane he was on might have a bomb, decided to carry a bomb on board himself, having reasoned that the probability there would be more than one bomb on the plane was much smaller than the probability there would be just one bomb.

Love the anecdote! But I agree that statistics don't mean anything when you're the "one" in the "one in a million." My younger sister died at 8 months old from an extremely rare form of rapidly-metastasizing cancer. I'm sure the statistics were of no comfort to my parents, and most people whose infants didn't contract this cancer weren't aware of its existence, so the statistics weren't of much use to them either. Perhaps I'll rethink the mammogram issue. Thanks!
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:02 am

Well, I got the official report over the week-end, and my polyps, this time, were "precancerous," so they want to do another one in three years. I suppose this is the justification for doing the damned things at all. I should be happy they didn't find any outright malignancies.

As I said, the purpose of all this screening, as far as I'm concerned, is to steer my body into a fatal illness that isn't too messy, prolonged, or painful. Eternal life isn't an option, and I've lived long enough to be world-weary in any case. Since colon cancer is one of the messier and more prolonged ways to go, I'll try to avoid it.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:08 am

"If you're not in the obits, have breakfast." Betty White.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:42 am

LunaNik wrote:But I agree that statistics don't mean anything when you're the "one" in the "one in a million."

Heh, heh==>simply not true. The statistic stands. When you are "the one" the PREDICTIVE VALUE of the statistic is no longer relevant. Is this an example of statistics/math/science in general not being understood, or emotional or just a quick gibe?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Nikki Nyx » Mon Jun 12, 2017 6:18 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
LunaNik wrote:But I agree that statistics don't mean anything when you're the "one" in the "one in a million."

Heh, heh==>simply not true. The statistic stands. When you are "the one" the PREDICTIVE VALUE of the statistic is no longer relevant. Is this an example of statistics/math/science in general not being understood, or emotional or just a quick gibe?

This--->When you are "the one" the PREDICTIVE VALUE of the statistic is no longer relevant. Of course the statistic still stands. It simply no longer has any relevant meaning to "the one." A gibe? In what way and for what purpose?
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:31 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:"If you're not in the obits, have breakfast." Betty White.


Sage advice, from a fine lady who is older than dirt.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Geezer Health Care

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:39 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote:
Gawdzilla Sama wrote:"If you're not in the obits, have breakfast." Betty White.


Sage advice, from a fine lady who is older than dirt.

I'd take Deadpool in the dead pool before her.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest