 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / March 2008Does it take one to know one?
OK, I'll try another post likely to be less contoversial. I have seen actually five urologists in my journey from first detection until finally RP. I swear, even though they are in the "prostate business" not one of them seem to know exactly what it feels like to have undergone this massive change to our life and manhood, based on their comments and overall bedside manner (abrupt, dominant, condescending, dismissive, and NO empathy) Plus, other people who may hear about your RP tend to dismiss it as "oh a lot of people have that now, don't they" influenced by the media no doubt. And perhaps the worst offender is my wife!! Very helpful of course, but since outwardly I look and act the same, she thinks nothing is any different about me....hey...the scars have healed, you must be all better, right? The reality of course, is there is not more than 20-30 minutes per day that I don't think about (or have to deal with) the change in my body...and its functions....or my future. Who else does that? Not urologists or friends or spouses....only other men who have undergone this treatment. SO, in conclusion, I guess I'm saying that's the good thing about this news group...the information ranges from medically published to anecdotal, but at least it is told and presented from the very men who know what it's like to live without their prostate, and have to deal with the very confusing unknown element to their future.....it takes one to know one. (my apologies to the few enlightened wives who post here who of course are the exceptions) > OK, I'll try another post likely to be less contoversial. > I have seen actually five urologists in my journey from first [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > one to know one. (my apologies to the few enlightened wives who post > here who of course are the exceptions) Sorry you happened to walk into our inner sanctum with dog poo on you shoes in the form of probably THE most controversial subject in the whole field of prostate cancer. We hope it toughened you rather than diminished you. I happened to find several very cooperative, unrushed uros and oncs (I consulted 9-10 during my diagnosis, prognosis, treatment selection, doctor selection, and treatment phases (three due to my having two unrelated cancers at once). Most gave me all the time I needed and had a good "presence"; the primary exception was quickly passed over for that and other reasons. I think the uro who first told me I had PC seemed more shook up about it than I did; I'm sure he's had some pts fall apart at the announcement, but my reaction when being told my life is under assault is, "Crap. OK, what do I need to do now?" Where I encountered FAR more problems with abrupt, dominant, condescending, dismissive, absolutely empathy-deprived, arrogant, unhelpful, useless, often incompetent -- even downright mean in a couple of cases -- providers was in my week in the recovery ward. DAMN, but 80% of those nurses were a bunch of a-holes. My three surgeons had to intervene to protect me from truly bad care which threatened my recovery, and they said that my long list of complaints were so common and well-documented that there was no point in filing a formal complaint. The details would fill a couple of pages and drop your jaw, yet didn't surprise my docs. Has you wife been at your side in all your doctor visits, hearing all the discussions and asking her own? Have you discussed the cancer books at great length with her? Do you keep her informed of your daily hassles? Some authors claim, maybe based on research, that the wives are often more impacted psychologically by PC than their men are. I must admit, however, that my wife lost both her parents to a variety of diseases, including one of mine, during the same few months I was diagnosed and treated, so she was predisposed to understanding the threats and problems. I.P. > OK, I'll try another post likely to be less contoversial. As eluded to by I.P., it wasn't your question that was controversial. > I have seen actually five urologists in my journey from first > detection until finally RP. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > overall bedside manner (abrupt, dominant, condescending, dismissive, > and NO empathy) I have no personal experience regarding this, because my uro is, simply, fantastic. Even my internist, during my last visit when we discussed my uro, he said, "I'll bet you haven't stumped HIM yet, have you?" And, when I have a question, he stops in his tracks, sits down, and we discuss it until _I'm_ done. That said, you are far from alone if this NG is any indication. I have read over and over horrendous stories of ignorance, malfeasanse, malpractice and egotistic condescension. You are correct in changing when you find that behavior, unless, of course, his mastery of PCa is such that it outweighs the misery of dealing with the a.shole. I've been very lucky with doctors all my life. I can only remember one with which I had an issue. It was my considered opinion that she harmed my son more than she helped. I typed her a letter expressing 1) I would not subject my son to her again, 2) where she could send his records, and 3) that I would not be paying her for services rendered. I got no return letter or bill and she forwarded the records. They have since named a wing of the Children's Hospital after her. But, you should be seeing an oncologist, exclusively, now, IMHO. > Plus, other people who may hear about your RP tend to dismiss it as > "oh a lot of people have that now, don't they" > influenced by the media no doubt. As we told you when you were first diagnosed, PCa is curable and a slow growing cancer. Personally, I prefer people think that way about me. I'm a mid-level manager and I don't need for people to know that all they have to do is wait me out for a couple of years and I'll be dead (of course, I'm beating the odds on that stat, too). However, I have been in situations where I needed to impress people with the scope of my problem -- financial counselor for instance -- and I say "Advanced Prostate Cancer". No one questions that. > And perhaps the worst offender is my wife!! Very helpful of course, > but since outwardly I look and act the same, she thinks nothing is any > different about me....hey...the scars have healed, you must be all > better, right? I don't know you and I certainly don't know your wife. Nor do I know your relationship. But, I can tell you that my wife was just wonderful when I was diagnosed. I was stoic and treating it like it was a walk in the park, obviously in denial, and my wife was researching and filling me in on things. But, about the same time I suffered biological failure, she went into a two to three year funk including a catatonic episode for nearly a year. If your relationship was good before PCa, don't underestimate the psychological toll on her and the length of time it will take her to get through it. > The reality of course, is there is not more than 20-30 minutes per day > that I don't think about (or have to deal with) the change in my > body...and its functions....or my future. Who else does that? Not > urologists or friends or spouses....only other men who have undergone > this treatment. So true. I have a great life, but I don't go very many hours without the realization that I have a pad, my shoulder hurts, this might be the last time I....., I will never....., he's 71 and running for president and I have a ghost's chance in hell of making it to 71..... > (my apologies to the few enlightened wives who post > here who of course are the exceptions) ... and Heather? :-)  SignaturePSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins PSA <.1 <.1 <.1 .27 .37 .75 PSAD 0.19 years EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 PSAD .056 years Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 and every 4 months there after PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145 PSAD 1.4 years Casodex added daily 07/06 PSA <0.04, <0.05, <0.04, <0.04, <0.1 2/12/08 Non Illegitimi Carborundum >> OK, I'll try another post likely to be less controversial. > >> (my apologies to the few enlightened wives who post >> here who of course are the exceptions) > > ... and Heather? :-) Excuse me???? I am heading out for a CAT scan and I will deal with you later, young man!! Abrazos....8-)) > ... I am heading out for a CAT scan ... Haven't you moved into the modern era Heather? You don't need to go out any more to scan cats. You can scan all the cats you want right over the Internet. > ... and I will deal with you later, young man!! Sock it to him Heather. He's gotten too complacent. And by the way, I hope all your cats come out healthy on the scan. Alan LOL!! Thanks for the laugh....see inline..... >> ... I am heading out for a CAT scan ... > > Haven't you moved into the modern era Heather? You > don't need to go out any more to scan cats. You can > scan all the cats you want right over the Internet. I have never had one before and wasn't sure if it was CT or CAT....of course I picked the wrong one. >> ... and I will deal with you later, young man!! > > Sock it to him Heather. He's gotten too complacent. That he has....must be the weight gain, snicker. > And by the way, I hope all your cats come out healthy > on the scan. Cat is healthy, thank you......and my dental surgeon and I are trying to find a (possible) miniscule hole in my upper jaw which I am sure is the root cause (bad pun, of course). Seems the roots of my teeth were fused into the jawbone....I don't appear to have sockets like normal people do.......lol. Now there is a HUGE opening for Little Stevie Wonder to get me with. Cheers Alan and a good weekend to all. Heather. > Now there is a HUGE opening for Little Stevie Wonder to get me with. Worry not! 1. I don't take the easy ones. 2. I never make fun of dental pain (ouch!). 3. I gave it up for Lent. I'd like to add a little to the great replies by I.P. and Steve > ... other people who may hear about your RP tend to dismiss it > as "oh a lot of people have that now, don't they" I remember going through a considerable psychological trauma after getting my diagnosis and then telling a co-worker about it. He said, "that's all curable now isn't it? I understand there's nothing to worry about." Well, nothing for HIM to worry about. But I sure worried. > And perhaps the worst offender is my wife!! Very helpful of course, > but since outwardly I look and act the same, she thinks nothing is any > different about me....hey...the scars have healed, you must be all > better, right? She may, of course, be having a tough time of her own with this. She may think (incorrectly perhaps in this case) that the best thing she can do for you is to try to take your mind off it. Or maybe the best thing she can do for herself is to take her mind off it. ... > The reality of course, is there is not more than 20-30 minutes per day > that I don't think about (or have to deal with) the change in my > body...and its functions....or my future. Who else does that? ... My own situation is pretty good, which makes it easy for me to talk. I'm four years past treatment now and still have a low PSA. However when I was going through treatment, and for two and a half years of big PSA bounces after that, I sure did think a lot about my cancer. It would take an extraordinary person not to become at least somewhat self-absorbed during such a process. You feel isolated from other people. You feel that everyone you meet on the street or see on television is living a free and easy life that you can never again experience. You feel like a dead man walking, or a cripple. I think most of us go through that. However, I'd like to urge you to put that behind you as best you can. A lot of those people out in the world have issues of their own that we don't know about. And most importantly, we have many critical aspects of our own lives that were NOT changed by cancer or by treatment. Maybe there are some things we can't do any more. Maybe we have to deal with a larger set of problems. Maybe our ultimate future has come into a lot sharper focus that it had before. But we're still the same people we always were. We can still enjoy a great, great many things in our lives and can still contribute a great deal to others. Don't lose heart or give in to despair. Life is still very much worth living. Alan (su-nip) > SO, in conclusion, I guess I'm saying that's the good thing about this > news group...the information ranges from medically published to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > one to know one. (my apologies to the few enlightened wives who post > here who of course are the exceptions) I'll set aside my canned rant about "men" who rely upon their long-suffering ladies to do the heavy lifting. If it were not for the courage, perseverance, and just plain guts of the ladies the human race would have died out long ago. Almost ranted, didn't I? As for this support group: despite its flaws, it has the potential to be vitally helpful to patients who are not granted that help from others, such as certain medics. It's far from the only PCa support group, on one of which I have the honor to be a moderator, but it has a niche to fill and does it well despite the anarchy. Regards, Steve J Kyrie eleison. O Lord, have mercy. >OK, I'll try another post likely to be less contoversial. >I have seen actually five urologists in my journey from first [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >overall bedside manner (abrupt, dominant, condescending, dismissive, >and NO empathy) I must honestly say that I've learned much, much more through reading this news group and corresponding privately w/ one of its participants than from my 3 urologist and a radiologist (IMRT). We'll see if my first meeting w/ the oncologist next week is going to change this fact. As to helping men in dealing with PC and its treatment, a psychologist friend of mine, who also has PC, wrote to every urologist of a large local group practice offering his help in counseling/supporting their PC patients, and not a single one of these urologists took him up on it. >Plus, other people who may hear about your RP tend to dismiss it as >"oh a lot of people have that now, don't they" >influenced by the media no doubt. My preference has been to mention my situation to as few people as possible, and this includes even my extended family and co-workers. One of my brothers doesn't know. My teenage kids don't know. I don't want or need their sympathy and I hate putting them in the position where they have to struggle w/ how to respond. >And perhaps the worst offender is my wife!! Very helpful of course, >but since outwardly I look and act the same, she thinks nothing is any >different about me....hey...the scars have healed, you must be all >better, right? My wife is a separate story. It's not that I needed her to do any research for me, but I must confess I hoped for more participation, or even "babying." That didn't happen. There could be various reasons for that, incl. her own self-preservation, but it would've felt nice to have a clear sense that someone right next to you is there to help you go through this. >The reality of course, is there is not more than 20-30 minutes per day >that I don't think about (or have to deal with) the change in my >body...and its functions....or my future. Who else does that? That I don't do. Perhaps for my own self-preservation I prefer to bury my head in the sand, live my life, and worry about a myriad of other things, certainly, as long as my PSAs are undetectable. But then the moment comes when you can't ignore that "thing" inside of you. SY > I must honestly say that I've learned much, much more through reading > this news group and corresponding privately w/ one of its participants > than from my 3 urologist and a radiologist (IMRT). That's great, as long as you recognize and adjust for bias in your "private guru". Many of us discourage such private discourse for three reasons: 1. It shields their wisdom from others who may benefit from it. 2. It shields their advice from peer review. 3. It always has the potential of leaving you ripe for bias and/or ignorance, and everyone knows that every one of us has both in some topic or another. 4. Forums aren't intended as "matchmaking" pools leading to ; their purpose, at least in this type of forum, is to openly share emotional support, facts, opinions, and logic, most of which is useful to many of us. Sidebars short-circuit the process. I.P. On Mar 15, 11:48 pm, "I.P. Freely" <fuhgheddabou...@noway.nohow> wrote: > ... Many of us discourage such private discourse for three > reasons: > ... In general I agree with that, though I can also see that there are some people who would prefer not to expose all of their problems for the whole world to see. However, if you're using an alias rather than a real name or email address, I think there's less reason to be concerned about privacy, and maybe you should consider posting questions publicly. Along similar lines, I would discourage people from setting the "X-No-Archive" flag. If something was worth posting to the world, it's probably worth leaving it in the archive. I sometimes see threads for which the original posting has been deleted (Google saves them for only 6 days if X-No-Archive is set) and I wonder what the previous poster said or what question he asked. Sometimes I see what I think is wrong advice, but I can't correct it because I don't know what the original question was. Sometimes people reply to a posting either quoting the whole thing (completely defeating the X-No-Archive intent), or worse, quoting part of it. That's worse because they might quote only the part that was wrong, or quote something that is wrong out of context. So the original poster suffers the indignity of having his out of context words preserved and his complete message deleted. But I know I'm pissing in the wind here. No one will change anything as a result of this argument. Alan > I must honestly say that I've learned much, much more through reading > this news group and corresponding privately w/ one of its participants > than from my 3 urologist and a radiologist (IMRT). We'll see if my > first meeting w/ the oncologist next week is going to change this > fact. There are some aspects to cancer, treatments, side effects, work arounds, preparedness, etc., that are far better supported by anecdotal experience than by books or by "experts" that have never experienced the disease. [snip] > The reality of course, is there is not more than 20-30 minutes per day > that I don't think about (or have to deal with) the change in my > body...and its functions....or my future. Who else does that? Well, lots of people actually. For example my wife has progressive Multiple Sclerosis, is confined to a wheel chair, has to be catherized about every hour, has constant untreatable neuropathic pain, vision loss, loss of sensation in her hands, etc, etc, etc. Her prognosis is inexorable continued deterioration. At least for the present, I wouldn't exchange my life for hers. Oh, and she is stuck with me as her sole caregiver :-) I watched a show on Discovery last night about a woman who has had no legs since birth, who cares for a mentally retarded brother, an abrasive and ungrateful father, a child, and a husband. Kind of helped me put things in perspective. I think it was Hemmingway who said "most men live lives of quiet desperation". Who knows what pain others are dealing with? I find that I don't expect a lot of empathy and am pleasantly surprised when I encounter any and not particularly disappointed when I don't. It's not something I feel I am owed. Nor am I offended when others have only a cursory knowledge of Prostate Cancer since I have only a cursory knowledge of a myriad of other conditions. That's not to excuse boorish insensitivity, but to set a level of expectation. There is a book written by an MS Patient, Chris Tatevosian, titled "Life Interrupted: It's Not All About Me" which kind of sums up my attitude. Prostate Cancer sucks. So do a lot of other things. If you are dwelling on it every 20-30 minutes, you are just making things worse for yourself. SignatureDedman > [snip] > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > on > it every 20-30 minutes, you are just making things worse for yourself. Oh, Dedman, it is soooo nice to hear of another couple like us!! Mine is not MS, though. It is Myasthenia Gravis, and severe diabetic polyneuropathy (where the worst chronic pain comes from). Your wife and I have so much in common (ha, in a bad sorta way I guess ;), and now Jim has joined you in the prostate cancer 100% caregiver role. He is 68, soon to be 69, with his surgery coming up soon. I am 65, pushing upon 66, bedridden, and in the wheel chair, too. Jim retired two years ago, and has been the sole everything around here ever since. I love him so! We are a team. Hey man, any help, advice you can give us on his post-op life in taking care of things would be MOST appreciated. I am not catherized due to impaired immunity, so am in Depend underwear that doesn't work all the time, meaning hospital bed changes for him. We laugh because he will be joining me in the incontinency area. We use the same urologist, and I'm wanting to tell him to go the cath route, but not for sure if I really do or not. All solutions suck! And they are for life, not just a period of time. We have a new great-grandson, and I told him we'll have to hold a contest with Ashton with our "diapers." Oh, my, you just have to laugh, don't you. I've just come from the CaringPages where the moms keep Updates on their kids who have cancer. The one little boy that I started keeping up with there, died last month from a brain tumor, after a year of treatment. Seeing how that little 3 y/o who turned 4 during the year, coped with all he did with all the radiation and stuff, I'm telling you, it sure puts things in perspective for me. I imagine my life is similar to your wife's, and I wrote in my blog last night that I should be ashamed for wishing I could read, and about my still having trouble reading right now, and questioning when the ptosis is going to get gone, hopefully forever (just one part of MG). Think I just blew that sentence, but hopefully, you'll understand it. Can your wife walk at all? Well, Dedman, I am just so excited to have *found* you and your wife, to know you even exist at all!!! I go Monday to the hospital for my IVIG treatment, and Jim will have his R & R from my care. Please give your wife my regards, and well wishes. And for you, too, of course. I didn't mean to be rude, just my excitement getting in the way. LOL Ragdoll Billie on the Road to Remission http://andlifegoesononedayonestepatatime.blogspot.com/ http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/billiewages Striving for a world without Myasthenia Gravis http://www.myasthenia.org/amg_whatismg.cfm [snip] > Oh, Dedman, it is soooo nice to hear of another couple like us!! Mine is > not MS, though. It is Myasthenia Gravis, and severe diabetic polyneuropathy [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > any help, advice you can give us on his post-op life in taking care of > things would be MOST appreciated. I am sorry to hear what you are both going through, but admire that you aren't just sitting on the "pity pot". I'm afraid there is not much advice I can give you concerning post-op life since I elected EBRT specifically to avoid the operation, knowing that there was no way I could care for my wife during the recovery and not having the financial resources to hire someone else to do it. It also allowed me to be treated "on the sly" so I didn't have to add to her burden with anxiety about the diagnosis and outcome. The day may come when she has a need to know but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. > I am not catherized due to impaired immunity, so am in Depend underwear > that doesn't work all the time, meaning hospital bed changes for him. We > laugh because he will be joining me in the incontinency area. We use the > same urologist, and I'm wanting to tell him to go the cath route, but not > for sure if I really do or not. All solutions suck! And they are for > life, not just a period of time. Again, I don't know what to tell you about that. We self-cath. Sometimes she is able to cath herself and others I have to do it for her. I also have to cath myself sometimes because of retention due to obstruction, a problem I had before the PC diagnosis and treatment. The problem I have found in both cases is not the cathing itself, but the frequency. For a time she needed cathing almost every hour, 24 hours a day. It was just maddening. We tried a Botox injection and that seemed to help as did taking Trazadone so she would sleep through the night. Ditropan seemed to help also. The problem is that there are multiple variables, so that when there is a change you never know which one caused it. I'm sure this falls into the "more than I care to know" category for most other people in this newsgroup so you should probably contact me off-list if you have any other questions. > We have a new great-grandson, and I told him we'll have to hold a contest > with Ashton with our "diapers." Oh, my, you just have to laugh, don't you. Yes, you do. We joke about the indignity of it all. > Can your wife walk at all? Not really and that is a relief. When she was walking, she would fall. I was terrified of a broken hip or worse. She was covered with bruises and I injured my back trying to lift her. Took over a year to heal. Sounds like a "can you top this?" story doesn't it :-) Anyway, the MS Society loaned us a Hoyer Lift which I now use in case of emergency. > Well, Dedman, I am just so excited to have *found* you and your wife, to > know you even exist at all!!! My impression and experience is that there are many couples like us who are have simply dropped off the social radar screen and just do the best they can in isolation. I have tried social services, etc and found them a joke. You are on your own. [snip] > I go Monday to the hospital for my IVIG treatment. Good luck. Hope it doesn't interfere with the Caribbean vacation you had planned ;-) SignatureDedman (snip sad news of wife) > I watched a show on Discovery last night about a woman who has had no legs > since birth, who cares for a mentally retarded brother, an abrasive and > ungrateful father, a child, and a husband. Kind of helped me put things in > perspective. Yes, when I begin feeling sorry of myself, I recall others in far worse circumstances. Perspective is the right word. > I think it was Hemmingway who said "most men live lives of quiet > desperation". Actually, it was Henry David Thoreau, "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation." > Who knows what pain others are dealing with? I find that I > don't expect a lot of empathy and am pleasantly surprised when I encounter [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > conditions. That's not to excuse boorish insensitivity, but to set a level > of expectation. (snip) On the support groups, we can develop some sort of idea, since we're all in pretty much the same boat. Regards, Steve J Google said: "Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Mar 23, 9:52 am)." What? It will all be gone after six days and no one will know what Dedman said. Dedman, Please have a look at my message from earlier today, March 16, in this thread. Thanks. Alan > Google said: "Note: The author of this message requested that it not > be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Mar [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Please have a look at my message from earlier today, > March 16, in this thread. Alan, yes I saw that message and respect your opinion. I don't "archive" for several reasons, some of which I understand :-) First, I am concerned about privacy. We are losing it and that has implications for health insurance, employment, unwanted marketers, law enforcement, running for political office, personal "enemies" and stalkers, Big Brother, etc. If you think an "alias" protects you, you don't understand the tools and techniques that are out there. The internet has changed the whole paradigm. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you... or may not be in the future :-) Second, I don't find Google to be the beneficent entity that their PR would have you believe. They already censor newsgroups based on their own view of what is politically correct and their business model is based completely on obtaining information about you that they can sell to others. The implications for personal freedom are to frightening to me. Third, I'm not sure we understand all the implications of saying something that lasts "forever". It is a totally new phenomenon. I have said things in my life that I wish I had never said as I am sure is true of most of us. Sometimes they were said in anger and sometimes they seemed like the right thing to have said. It seems to me that with a few exceptions for things such as the Gettysburg Address, words like individuals should remain ephemeral to maintain the natural order of things. Counterbalancing these concerns is the probability that something I say might have some value to some individual later on. I'm afraid I don't have such high opinion of my musings :-) Truths will be repeated like a mime while the rest will disappear into well deserved obscurity. So no, I don't plan to "archive" my posts (although Google does it anyway... they just don't make them available for free). Get them now while they are hot :-) SignatureDedman < ... No quoted text here ...> Thanks for the reply Dedman. It is of course your prerogative to set the archive flag any way you like, and I respect that. I have avoided quoting your text above for that reason. I will note however that you have already been quoted out of context. Callchief posted a message in which he quoted just one of the three arguments you made. This all brings to mind our study of ancient history. There are many ancient writers who are known to us only by fragments of the writings that were quoted in the writings of their contemporaries. Some of those fragments are tantalizing, but alas, the originals are gone forever. But you may be right. I am in inveterate hoarder and saver of words and images. I have 4,000 books in my library. I have a diary that goes back to 1971, and a list of books I've read, most with my comments, going back to 1959. I have scanned family photos that go back to the 1890's. I have a copy of just about every email I've ever written to anyone, and many of those written to me. It's probably a silly conceit. No doubt my children or their children will chuck the stuff out, and perhaps be fully justified in doing so. Sigh .... Alan > you have already been quoted > out of context. Callchief posted a message in which > he quoted just one of the three arguments you made. Your concept of "out of context" differs significantly from mine -- and I suspect most of the real and virtual worlds'. To most of us, "out of context" implies that including more text, whether it's the letter "I" or the entire text of a speech or post, will shed a different light on the story. What Calichief omitted was irrelevant to his response, and he clearly snipped it in the interest of brevity, not deception. Just as we don't need to hear Pastor Wright's entire sermon to know that he is a raging America-hater and white-hater, Calichief doesn't need to re-post Dedman's entire post to comment on the *techniques* of achieving privacy, to which Dedman's motivation is irrelevant. It's not about saving bandwidth. It's about saving time. Would you like to see people re-post my entire tomes just to comment on one line, and then expect you to figure out which line he's talking about? Any masochist who wants to read my entire tomes knows they're just a click away; why repeat the whole tome -- whether just a sentence or three pages -- onto their screen? Snipping stuff irrelevant to one's response is a valid, courteous, de rigeur practice, without which posts in long threads would hit hundreds of pages in length. Its evil twin, deliberately deceptive word twisting or parsing, is quickly outed in respectable groups, and the hell with groups who allow it to go unchallenged and unclarified. I.P. > > you have already been quoted > > out of context. Callchief posted a message in which [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the story. What Calichief omitted was irrelevant to his response, and he > clearly snipped it in the interest of brevity, not deception. You are absolutely right I.P. I was using the term "out of context" too literally here. I agree Callchief did not misrepresent the intent of the original poster by paring down his quotation. > ... > It's not about saving bandwidth. It's about saving time. Would you like > to see people re-post my entire tomes just to comment on one line, and > then expect you to figure out which line he's talking about? I agree. I frequently excerpt text myself. > Any > masochist who wants to read my entire tomes knows they're just a click > away; why repeat the whole tome -- whether just a sentence or three > pages -- onto their screen? Ah, now here we have some difference. If a person sets the X-No-Archive flag, then the entire tome is not just a click away. It disappears from the Google archive (the only permanent archive I'm aware of) after six days. > Snipping stuff irrelevant to one's response is a valid, courteous, de > rigeur practice, without which posts in long threads would hit hundreds [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I.P. I agree. Alan > < ... No quoted text here ...> Alan, you are too polite by half :-) I don't mind being quoted... I just don't want everything I have ever said to be logged for all eternity (along with my headers). Please feel free to quote me any time it is appropriate. [snip] > But you may be right. I am in inveterate hoarder and > saver of words and images. I have 4,000 books in my [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I've ever written to anyone, and many of those written > to me. I am the same way. But it's _me_ saving _my_ stuff, not Big Brother saving it for me. > It's probably a silly conceit. No doubt my children or > their children will chuck the stuff out, and perhaps > be fully justified in doing so. There are things I have saved that had best perish with me. I am wrestling with that as part of The Final Plan. SignatureDedman -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > First, I am concerned about privacy. We are losing it and that has > implications for health insurance, employment, unwanted marketers, law > enforcement, running for political office, personal "enemies" and stalkers, > Big Brother, etc. Exactly why my return address is fake, why I no longer reveal my real name in forums to which it matters not, and why I will continue to ignore attempts from within this group to ferret out my identity. Your return address looks real, and thus invites spam at the very least. My old ISP once phoned me and requested that I change my address because my incoming spam was clogging their severs with thousands of spam every day. > Second, I don't find Google to be the beneficent entity that their PR would > have you believe. They already censor newsgroups based on their own view of > what is politically correct and their business model is based completely on > obtaining information about you that they can sell to others. The > implications for personal freedom are to frightening to me. Yet you use Yahoo!, whose terms of agreement admit they sell your data. I won't go near Yahoo! because of that and because of their self-professed forum censorship bias. I.P. >> First, I am concerned about privacy. We are losing it and that has >> implications for health insurance, employment, unwanted marketers, law [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > I won't go near Yahoo! because of that and because of their > self-professed forum censorship bias. The yahoo address is indeed functional so that people can communicate with me off-group if necessary. It is a throw-away address that I created specifically for this group. Yahoo has no idea who it belongs to since I am not required to reveal anything to create it... and, of course, I delete all cookies. I realize they log my IP address but I use a proxy ;-) As far as spam, it really doesn't matter since this is not my primary address, Yahoo has pretty good spam filters and, if it gets bad, I can just create a new Yahoo address eg dedman1@yahoo.com. Again if, say the FBI, wanted to track me down, I'm sure they could. The idea is to simply be prudent, not to be untraceable by any means. Just an application of the old 80-20 rule. SignatureDedman -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Yahoo > has pretty good spam filters and, if it gets bad, I can just create a new > Yahoo address eg dedman1@yahoo.com. I hope your next one is more like bastardfighter@yahoo.com > Again if, say the FBI, wanted to track me down, I'm sure they could. Probably not. At least not getting a subpoena of Yahoo's records. I think the amount of proof has to be pretty high for that. >> Yahoo >> has pretty good spam filters and, if it gets bad, I can just create a new >> Yahoo address eg dedman1@yahoo.com. > > I hope your next one is more like bastardfighter@yahoo.com I see no advantage in anthropomorphizing a disease :-) Hell, they are _my_ cells, after all... that's one of the problems, isn't it? Sure, they are misguided but perhaps they just had a bad childhood or grew up in a bad environment. I'm sure they are just trying to express themselves. Try to look at it from their point of view... everybody hates them. Just think if we could somehow harness their secret of eternal reproduction. SignatureDedman -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > I see no advantage in anthropomorphizing a disease :-) Hell, they are > _my_ [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > if > we could somehow harness their secret of eternal reproduction. I couldn't tell if you were describing the cancer in your body or in society. :-) > ... > Yet you use Yahoo!, whose terms of agreement admit they sell > your data. I won't go near Yahoo! because of that and because > of their self-professed forum censorship bias. > > I.P. While serving as the American ambassador in Paris during the Revolutionary War, Benjamin Franklin was approached by an agent of the French secret service. The Frenchman said, "Dr. Franklin, we have some evidence that your private secretary is a British spy." Franklin replied, "Yes, I've suspected that myself, but he's such a good secretary that I can't let him go." [The quotes here and above are paraphrases, I don't have the sources in front of me.] That's my feeling about Yahoo and Google. I don't post anything on the net that I consider to be secret or compromising in some way. Since the services provided by Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, and others are so eminently useful, I live with the fact that they have found ways to use my information to profit from me. Alan [snip] > That's my feeling about Yahoo and Google. I don't post anything > on the net that I consider to be secret or compromising in some > way. Since the services provided by Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, > and others are so eminently useful, I live with the fact that > they have found ways to use my information to profit from me. Alan, the issue is not as simple as not posting secret or compromising information on a public medium. Most people know not to do that (yet, amazingly, there are fools who do it anyway). The issue is the ability of data mining software to tie together _all_ of your internet activities, including sites you may even visit out of simple curiosity or by accident; files you download; private email you send and receive (where do you think Google, Yahoo, or Microsoft store email sent or received by their free customers? Oh, right... they wouldn't peep); your shopping habits; your reading habits; public court records, tax, and legal documents; what other people say about you in their blogs; etc, etc. Not to mention private databases which can be correlated with the public ones. It is only within recent memory that the technology became available to make this practical... and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to do it. Without much effort I myself have been able to identify people's identities simply by using what is available in the Google archives. It is trivial, for example, to correlate all the aliases a person uses on Usenet. (I can imagine some people breaking out in a sweat right now :-)). People were identified by simply correlating the sites they visited when AOL inadvertently released one of their databases. I often hear the rejoinder "Well, I have nothing to hide". Then why not send all your correspondence on post cards rather than enclosed in envelopes? Read up on what FaceBook tried to foist off without their subscribers' knowledge: all their "partners" were going to secretly report back to Facebook whenever a Facebook subscriber visited a partner's site. I find that creepy. They still plan to do it but will allow you to "opt out". Yeah, right. What happens when you need a security clearance and your invisible (to you) profile shows you have visited say Al Jazeera's web page? What happens when you click on an innocuous looking link and it takes you to a child pornography site? When you apply for medical insurance and they find out you have been hanging out in a prostate cancer group? When you apply for a job and they find out you have subscribed to a whistle-blower blog? The possibilities for mischief are endless. I agree that the internet is simply too useful not to use it. But I am appalled at the assumption of anonymity and privacy that the average person entertains. I prefer to practice "Safe Surfing" :-) This is waaay off topic, so I'll now apologize to everyone and desist. SignatureDedman -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > the issue is not as simple as not posting secret or compromising > information on a public medium. Most people know not to do that (yet, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > recent memory that the technology became available to make this practical... > and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to do it. You're preaching to the choir here. We broached this a couple of months ago with this: "None of these guys and gals would use real data of any sort online if they had read the book "Look Both Ways" by Linda Criddle, who left a senior technical management position at Microsoft to fight internet-based crime worldwide. My long discussion with her last week prompted me to put her in touch with some radio and TV hosts to promote her message that any public exposure (e.g., the internet, forums in general, clubs, school, work) opens the door to 100,000 local and international criminals who could obtain most of the following data about people within a few minutes: Name, address, home and cell phone numbers. Mother’s maiden name. Age, quite possibly a photo. Sexual preference. Credit card and social security numbers (for $6-$10, depending on the mark’s income) Economic status, health records, mortgage balance. Commute/school/work/vacation schedules. Hobbies, interests, favorite haunts, friends, neighbors. State of mind (e.g., strong, weak, vulnerable, gullible). Now compound that with this asinine "One Laptop Per Child" program" > Without much effort I myself have been able to identify people's identities > simply by using what is available in the Google archives. It is trivial, for > example, to correlate all the aliases a person uses on Usenet. (I can imagine > some people breaking out in a sweat right now :-)). Not me. The miscreants whose stalking led me to nom my plume here are apparently not motivated enough to dig that deeply, and I wouldn't care if 98% of the people here knew my real name. But in case I do care in some future forum, are my alter egos readily available via Google? > This is waaay off topic, so I'll now apologize to everyone and desist. Off the primary newsgroup topic, surely, but since every person here is a potential target for any of these threats, it's still relevant. You'll see computer topics often surface here. I.P. [snip] > But in case I do care in some future forum, are my alter egos readily > available via Google? I don't know... I haven't looked. It's kind of tedious to do. I just did it out of curiosity once or twice. SignatureDedman -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Hi Skeptic, Larry's team of uro surgeon's consisted of both men and "woman" who very very kind, caring and informative. His robotics surgery went smoothly. I wrote prior, he took his time researching and finding the best surgeon in the area and that was found with Dr Wagner of Hartford Hospital in Ct. I look at Larry now and he looks very good. At home I was caring for him in a variety of ways. He knew he could be a pain . Everything was new to him ( catheter care, getting hemorrhoids - yup, we found out a percentage of guys get this after surgery related to do surgical swelling etc., pain issues, etc. etc. ). I know he is still sore at the incision areas and not back to 100% yet. We communicate freely. He states each day he is lucky to be alive and enjoy each day and to be free of prostate cancer. He is very positive and verbalizes his mental and physical concerns to me. I support him 100%. Positive people go on with their lives and don't live or dwell in the past. You have to look at the glass either half empty or half full. He feels no less of a man and actually feels relieved the cancer is out of him; Or no less a man because he has to wear a pad to catch some occasional dribbles, or to take Viagra to help get it up. I love him for who he is , his being, his soul and spirit. That's what makes every individual unique and special. He doesn't go out of his way to talk about his surgery unless someone asks him . It's in the past for him. We are back to our nomal routine, going out with friends, to a movie, concert, taking walks together, visiting relatives etc.. This weekend I helped him pile the garbage bags in the car and take it to the dump. We went grocery shopping, he drove and did some errands; shortly we are meeting friends for Chinese food. He fathered two wonderful daughters, was the priamry bread winner ( he is retired now ) of the family, dealt positively with prior medical conditions, and always found the good in anything or anyone. We balance each other in many ways. He is my hero and I often wished I could be more like him! Joan > OK, I'll try another post likely to be less contoversial. > I have seen actually five urologists in my journey from first [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > one to know one. (my apologies to the few enlightened wives who post > here who of course are the exceptions)
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.