posted
Oh no, Keesh, please stop, my internetz rep is in agony!
Everyone needs a hobby, but Internet Warrior has always seemed a little boring to me. Happy to see it keeps you entertained, though.
Posts: 55 | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Puzzled Observation: Shigs didn't pivot to 'this is all meta-troll tomfoolery' until after his positions were exposed as dishonest and not applying to what Shanna had actually said. Confusion. /Elcor.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Less meta-trolling, more like having fun responding to an internet warrior and a /b/tard. Curious what Elcor is, though.
Posts: 55 | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've always theorized that trolls on the internet are trolls in real life.
Shigs has been masterminding his life all along. He actually meant to catch that diabetes thing. So he could LAUGH at all of the people who think he's a troll. Because he's got street cred or something.
Posts: 196 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: why the assumption that the person will be driving when faint/seizure? Most people's body gives them some warning before doing crazy stuff. When it is rare enough, you may not recognize warning signs but chronic sufferers seem to know pretty well when they are going to have problems.
Because that is what the driving laws are trying to prevent, the possibility of losing control while moving at speed in something that weighs over a ton.
Also, driving can be high stress, and that IS a trigger for many people. Most conditions like this are at a higher risk while driving....not a good combination.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Rakeesh frequents 4Chan!? How could you Rakeesh
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Aros: an inference that that an incapacitating seizure would provide more impairment than a few glasses of wine.
No, it was an unfounded speculation.
Not so much. A lot goes into BAC, and a guy like me, over 200 lbs, can drink a glass or two of wine and have a lower BAC than someone half my size. And while there IS a lowering of reflex times, regardless of if a person is actually drunk or not, it IS less of a liability than completely passing out or fainting, which is almost by definition a complete loss of consciousness.
Also, you KNOW when you are at risk for being drunk....you've been drinking. You can call a cab, or a friend, or sleep over someones house. You may not know you are going to faint, or have a SZ, until AFTER, so you can't prevent it.
All in all, they aren't the same risk level at all.
As far as Shanna's particular situation......he MD has cleared her, she knows what her triggers are, and her condition is not placing her at risk while driving. So as long as her MD thinks it is fine, why wouldn't it be?
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Belle, paramedics are great for trauma. In a trauma situation, I'd take one over most nurses too. As far as overall medical knowledge though, nurses have a broader base of knowledge, and a good nurse, LPN or RN, can handle a broader base of issues better. Paramedics or nurses, the most significant thing isn't the certification, it's that persons history and specific experience. I dealt with trauma as a medic in the Army, and I know I act as soon as I see an issue. There are nurses that work with me who freeze because they have never worked trauma. But in other nursing situations they are more knowledgeable than I am, and deal with those situations better than I do, at least right now.
I think the medical profession is changing, although too slowly. Nurses are starting to be able to work with protocols as well, and it's a good thing.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know I'd sue the MD's butt off if I was hurt by his friend who still drives.
I also know it depends on what state you live in. Some states wouldn't allow her to drive regardless, and I can't say they are wrong.
About Grand Mal seizures though....usually there is an aura, and you can tell you are about to have one, or at least that you might. Most people would be able to pull over in time.
Most people with SZ disorders are actually driving against MD's orders, and just not tell the state. It's a common issue. In order to be cleared, you have to be SZ clear for about a year (less in some cases, but never less than 6 months), and have an MD clear you.
Shanna's case is a little different, but should be covered under the same laws that govern people with SZ disorders, as the LOC is the issue.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kwea, thank you for the article. It was an interesting read. I think it makes a good point about the variety of fainting episodes. While I use neurocardiogenic syncope by choice for my chronic condition, its more commonly known as neurally-mediated syncope (or even neurally-mediated hypotension, which I have problems with but that's another story). But its the same verbage as when someone has one, even explainable, faint. When I was taken to the ER after my first episode, no recommendations against driving were made as the doctor put it down to anemia and advised me to use iron supplements. It was alteast three months before I had a follow-up episode and we began to wonder if there was something else going on.
It really just isn't logistical to pull someone's license for six months after a fainting episode. Nearly every doctor and nurse I've run into over the last two years had a story about someone fainting earlier in the day. People who fainted after blood draws or after shots. People who fainted while out in the sun all day or during a stage performance. Most of these are triggers for chronic fainters but should we assume everyone is at risk for a future faint or do we look at that statistics that 50% of the population will have atleast one faint in their lifetime?
Again, it just keeps coming down to the point that it needs to be case-by-case with a doctor's guidance. Even once a chronic fainting disorder had been diagnosed, the variety of conditions is huge. Even myself who has a "fainting" diagnosis, has only lost consciousness once and it was under incredibly out-lying circumstances.
quote: Patients with mild neurally mediated syncope have no restrictions on driving private vehicles and should have a 1 month event-free period before driving commercial vehicles. Mild neurally mediated syncope is characterized by mild symptoms (usually without syncope), occurs with warning, usually occurs only with standing, and occurs infrequently.
Severe neurally mediated syncope is characterized by severe symptoms (usually syncope), occurs without warning, occurs in any position, has no clear precipitating causes or occurs frequently. These patients are allowed to drive private vehicles after 3 months of documented control of the condition and commercial vehicles after they have been symptom free for 6 months.
Untreated patients with severe neurally mediated syncope are completely prohibited from driving.
posted
Wow. It sounds almost as though you have thought this through quite carefully after lengthy consultations with experienced medical professionals over a long period, or something!
Oh, perhaps soon a mysterious new (well, old) posted will appear expressing contempt for people criticize your decision to drive. I wonder what the ratio of 'don't care/not going to stop expressing my opinion' to 'all a schtick don't you people get it' will be!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Blayne - Rakeesh is our brave warrior. Samp is the /b/tard. Keesh - This crush of yours is cute and all, but are you ever going to ask me out?
Posts: 55 | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Shigs: Disparaging other posters is not going to be tolerated. Also, you haven't dialed down the hostility one iota. Please stop.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
