 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate BPH / June 2004PVP Horror Story
I finally had my PVP done. I now wish I could have it undone! After the procedure I waterlogged myself and peed in a plastic urinal thingy. The folks felt I was OK and could go home. When I got home I found that I could not pee a drop. So I went to the ER in town. In the ER, two nurses and three doctors tried to insert a catheter. No go! The thing would not go past my prostate. Finally a Urologist was called in and he first dosed my up with morphine (which made me sleepy but didn't deaden the pain) then he kept at it with some kind of wire implements until the tube finally pushed past the obstruction. I am now back home with a very sore behind and waiting for what the next step might be (the doctor mentioned scoping me again! I feel now that I should have gone for TURP. At least then I would have a stay in hospital and not release me until everything was OK. jg I also went into (very painful) retention the morning after my 1st PVP, and then had to go home with a catheter a few days later. I eventually got another PVP 14 months later, and got retrograde from that 2nd Op. Ron > From: "John G." <johnny.g@no_spam.com> > Organization: Primus Canada [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > jg I went into retention the night after my PVP. I was told it was "normal" to have trouble urinating so I delayed getting to the ER for 6 hours. I was writhing in pain when the ambulance came and after the catheter was taken out a few days later, I went through a couple of months of miserable urgency, intense burning, and frequency. Laserscope did nothing to prepare me, or it sounds like you, and others, for this possibility. As far as I'm concerned they are liable for negligent advertising and should be dealt with accordingly. This is not toothpaste they are selling. It is invasive, potentially problematic surgery. Legal action is not beyond the realm of possibilty. They should be much more upfront about what this surgery is all about and what can go wrong. Marcus > I also went into (very painful) retention the morning after my 1st PVP, and > then had to go home with a catheter a few days later. I eventually got [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > > > jg With all due respect to you and your doctor it would not be Laserscope who's duty it is to inform you of what may go wrong. It is the responsability of your surgeon. And as with any device (from a scalpel to a laser) the results can be a "horror" if the protocal is not followed or the surgeon is negligent. I find it odd to see someone critisize the device when it was in a surgeons' hands. What about your doctor? - Just my 2 cents. > I went into retention the night after my PVP. I was told it was "normal" to > have trouble urinating so I delayed getting to the ER for 6 hours. I was [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > > > > > jg Marcus is enraged at Laserscope, the maker of the PVP tool, and routinely criticizes them, but when I asked who his surgeon was, he replied "I don't want to point fingers". Really! I had an extremely super successful PVP 6 months ago (Dec 16). As I read the posts here I am thoroughly convinced the most important element is the skill of the individual surgeon. I had Dr TE, no one has ever posted of a bad result with Te. Likewise Laub, Lin, Muir, and Larner. I think Marcus is negligent since he will not disclose who the possible unskilled surgeon was who did him, thereby allowing the possibly that someone here may go to the same guy. Same with Ron, who keeps saying he had 2 PVP's in 2 years and now has retro. Why did his Dr not get it right the first time? Why doesn't he want others who follow this newsgroup to avoid this guy? Why did he let a guy who screwed up once work on him again? I have previously posted here how my second Uro wanted to do a TURP, but when I said I was interested in a PVP he said he could do it. When I asked him why he wasn't on the Laserscope web site, he replied that he had lasers, they were all the same, and Green Light was just a marketing ploy. This leads me to believe that some posters here who claim unsuccessful PVPs, never had PVP, and they may not even know it. Al > With all due respect to you and your doctor it would not be Laserscope > who's duty it is to inform you of what may go wrong. It is the [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] >>>> >>>>jg Dear Readers, Please take a breath and try to understand that I am not criticizing the PVP procedure nor anything my surgeon may have done during that procedure. It is the hype that Laserscope has used to promote it. My surgeon, Dr.Collins in SanFrancisco, I believe is a competent and responsible physician. But I think he was pumped up by the hype as much as anyone else. You are correct in claiming that he should have better prepared me for the possibility of retention and the prolonged recovery that I went through. But so should have Laserscope. It is interesting that just a week or two after I spoke with one of their PR people and expressed my concerns over their over the top marketing, they added some important caveats to their site about urinary retention and other matters. Apparently even the implication of a possible lawsuit got them into gear. Again, I repeat: THERE IS NO PLACE FOR COMMERCIAL ADVERTISING WHEN IT COMES TO SURGERY. THIS KIND OF MALARCHY SHOULD BE STOPPED IN ITS TRACKS! LASERSCOPE IS RAKING IT IN, MAKING HUGE PROFITS, WHILE NOT BEING HONEST ABOUT THE SIGNIFICANT MINORITY OF PATIENTS THAT DON'T EXPERIENCE THE TROUBLE-FREE RECOVERY THEY LEAD US TO EXPECT. There are more stories of problematic PVP recoveries now telling their stories on this newsgroup........and there will probably be more as the surgery becomes more available. If I had the resources I would sue Laserscope for their arrogant misrepresentations. We shouldn't put up with it. Marcus > Marcus is enraged at Laserscope, the maker of the PVP tool, and > routinely criticizes them, but when I asked who his surgeon was, he [quoted text clipped - 82 lines] > >>>> > >>>>jg Marcus, I can tell you first hand that no one at Laserscope from the president Eric Reuter on down to the wonderful marketing rep Martina, to the sales rep Henry DOESN"T hype the Greenlight PVP. Neither does the website which over the years has gotten better and better and more informative. You can find on the website published papers describing the results as far back as five years ago and as recent as May 2004. As I have said many times Greenlight is a tool. In the hands of a good surgueon, it can vaporize prostate tissue better and with less trama and more safely than, a cutting loop (TURP) , microwaves (TUMT), RF energy (TUNA), or lasers at other wavelengths (Holmium). That is all Laserscope PVP does. It opens up a channel in your prostate without bleeding, burning or swelling. It doesn't fix bladder problems, it doesn't heal the prostate after blasting a hole in it. Your body does that. Just because I was jogging a week after my PVP and you were going into retention, doesn't mean the lasercope laser worked any differently on each of us. It means that you reacted differnently to opening a channel in your prostate than I did. But it wasn't because of the laser used. You would have had the exact same problem probably worse if you had had a TURP. Patrick > Dear Readers, > [quoted text clipped - 128 lines] > > >>>> > > >>>>jg Patrick, Again, you refuse to acknowledge the point that: THERE IS NO PLACE FOR "HYPE" WHEN IT COMES TO SURGERY! "Hype" can also be defined as dishonesty. Do you really believe that surgical procedures should be marketed to the public on the same basis as appliances, clothing or entertainment? There are virtually no controls for medical advertising...or 'hype' on the internet. I am arguing for such controls. Marcus > Marcus, > I can tell you first hand that no one at Laserscope from the president Eric [quoted text clipped - 170 lines] > > > >>>> > > > >>>>jg > Patrick, > [quoted text clipped - 211 lines] > > > > > > >Marcus I am sick and tired of telling you that your other medical problems which include kidney problems are the reason you had problems .......i will bet that it sure was not Gordon Muir who did your op A bad workman blames his tools and you are blaming Laserscope wrongly .......blame your other medical problems or blame your surgeon Great pity you did not have a TURP then you would have plenty to gripe about Marcus, I challenge you to find any hype or dishonesty about anything Laserscope has on their website. Go get it and let's see how dishonest it is. Patrick > Patrick, > [quoted text clipped - 209 lines] > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>jg I predict that anything that implies a recovery easier than he experienced he will call dishonest. > Marcus, > I challenge you to find any hype or dishonesty about anything Laserscope has [quoted text clipped - 246 lines] > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>jg > Marcus, > I challenge you to find any hype or dishonesty about anything Laserscope has > on their website. > Go get it and let's see how dishonest it is. > Patrick Laserscope has made some modifications to their site which I applaud, belated as they are. But when I went through my surgery, back in November these changes had not been made. For example: Up until a few months ago, there was no mention of urinary retention. But Here's one: > "After the procedure you may have some mild discomfort such as slight burning during urination for about a week or so." Check the archives Patrick. This overly optimistic information does not address the "significant minority" who have experience extended pain, frequency, urgency, etc. The video is full of misleading suggestiveness about the "ease" with which one can go through the surgery. Again, not applicable to the 'significant minority' who don't waltz home whistling Dixie. According to my copies of the Laserscope web-site back in December-March, there was no "Pre and Post Operative Guidance." But I'll check again. Marcus Marcus, I fully disagree with you concerning Laserscope website both past and present. Everything I have ever seen on the website has been factual and has been backed up by clinical study and published papers. You mentioned the statement, "After the procedure you may have some mild discomfort such as slight burning during urination for about a week or so." I believe that this statement is true. This is what has been reported by many people as well as documented in clinical studies. It is also what I experienced, i.e. slight burning during urination for about a week. The website now comes with a new section containing pre and post precedure guidelines. This is factual and shows that they are gathering the results of many procedures and giving that information to future patients. In fact I was given those same guidelines by my doctor, Dr. Te two years ago when I had mine. Did your doctor give you them when you had your surgury? Did your doctor tell you the possibility of going into retention after surgury? My doctor did. If he didn't it is your doctor who didn't give you the facts NOT the laser manufacturer. I see nothing nor recall anything about overly optimistic information. They always report on the results of clinical studies. Given that PVP is relatively new, they only had hundred of cases to report on. But now they have thousands of cases to report on. Note that 20,000 PVP will be done in 2004. I believe that what they say on there website is factual, honest, and realistic. As for you suing Laserscope, go ahead. I will volunteer to be Laserscope's first witness and tell the court how innovative, how helpful, and how successful they were in giving Dr. Te a fantastic tool that enabled him to completely rid me of BPH with no complications or side effects. Patrick > > Marcus, > > I challenge you to find any hype or dishonesty about anything Laserscope [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Marcus Patrick, First of all, you apparently are not keeping up with the posts. I am not the only one who has been hoodwinked into expecting a quick,1-2 week recovery. Second, you are right. Laserscope did finally add the pre and post-op guidelines. But that was months after my surgery...and only after being implicitly threatened with a lawsuit. These guidelines should have been up there from day one. After all, we're talking invasive surgery here. If a medical company wants to advertise a surgical procedure then they should give ALL THE FACTS AND POSSIBLE SCENARIOS...NOT JUST THE ONES LIKELY TO INDUCE BUSINESS! Finally, it is apparent that we have had different personal experiences with the surgery and clearly different philosophical-political views on the place of commercial advertising in medicine and the relevance of the interests and rights of the "significant minority" (who have less than the quick recovery Laserscope claims).You also apparently know folks at Laserscope and it sounds like you're trying to protect them from criticism. A worthy effort but one that only obfuscates the truth. Marcus > Marcus, > I fully disagree with you concerning Laserscope website both past and [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > > > > Marcus > Patrick, > [quoted text clipped - 99 lines] > > > > > >And you Marcus still refuse to face the issues of your other medical problems which quite clearly influence your recovery from PVP Dont blame Laserscope when you wont face your own problems Your right Marcus, Patrick is wrong. I'm also a post PVP patient and am very familiar with Laserscope's advertising. Dean, > Patrick, > [quoted text clipped - 97 lines] > > > > > > Marcus Dean, Please tell us about Laserscope's advertizing. Please be specific about their claims. I would very much like to hear about them. Patrick > Your right Marcus, Patrick is wrong. I'm also a post PVP patient and am very > familiar with Laserscope's advertising. Dean, [quoted text clipped - 115 lines] > > > > > > > > Marcus Dean, Since you are dissatisfied with your surgery, would you share with the list who your surgeon was, so guys can avoid making the same mistake you did. Al > Your right Marcus, Patrick is wrong. I'm also a post PVP patient and am very > familiar with Laserscope's advertising. Dean, [quoted text clipped - 173 lines] >>>> >>>>Marcus To:Al and Patrick, I didn't say I was dissatisfied with the surgery . It just takes a lot longer than Laserscope says to reach a point where you don't have the previous symptoms about 8 months in my case. Something that I've never heard laserscope mention.The burning can take up to 3 months to heal but after along time not knowing what to expect I 'm finally lots better, however I think that all the variables in the surgery could have been better explained. One think laserscope says in their advertising is that it takes 4 to 6 weeks before you can sleep threw the night without having to get up to urinate I've not reach that point yet however I'm getting close to it. Dean, > Dean, > [quoted text clipped - 181 lines] > >>>> > >>>>Marcus Dean, Where does "Laserscope says in their advertising is that it takes 4 to 6 weeks before you can sleep through the night without having to get up to urinate." ? I have never seen such a statement from Laserscope. Patrick > To:Al and Patrick, > I didn't say I was dissatisfied with the surgery . It just takes a lot [quoted text clipped - 202 lines] > > >>>> > > >>>>Marcus Patrick, Come on Patrick!!! last July when I first started investigating PVP it was absolutely stated in laserscope website. I don't think that they make that statement now but I'm pretty sure that you have seen the statement,maybe forgotten about it. I have great respect for your knowledge of PVP for I have read most of your postings and know that you have great knowledge about PVP also I respect you for the compassion you have shown for the people of this group I have received a couple of mailings from you when I first had my PVP, you told me to be patient and things would get better and you were right for now I'm 8 plus months post PVP and things are getting pretty good and I expect them to improve some more. It seems to me Patrick that maybe due to your fondness for PVP that maybe you have developed a mental block as far as Laserscope is concerned and think that they can do no wrong but there is nothing to this 2 week recovery that Laserscope tried to promote, maybe they don't push this two week recovery like they did. True some people may feel pretty good after two weeks I think you had a fast recovery but the truth is it takes most people's bodies months to heal especially at our age ,I think that maybe you are a little younger. I hope you are not offended by anything I've said for I have great respect for you and appreciate the good work you have done for me and this group. I'm simply saying that maybe due to the newness and lack of experience with Pvp that some things were said that shouldn't have been said but that was definitely stated in Laserscope website last July or around that time that it took 4 to 6 weeks before you could sleep threw the night However I still think that PVP is probably the best thing out there and I would do it again. Dean, > Dean, > Where does "Laserscope says in their advertising is that it takes 4 to 6 [quoted text clipped - 231 lines] > > > >>>> > > > >>>>Marcus Dean, You are mistaken. It was never stated in the Laserscope Website last July or ever. You may have gotten that from other people experiences on this newgroup including mine but it wasn't from the Laserscope website nor advertisement (as they don't advertise.) Patrick > Patrick, > Come on Patrick!!! last July when I first started investigating [quoted text clipped - 273 lines] > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>Marcus Patrick, It looks like we are at a standoff for it did say it and it wasn't on a posting, If I want to go to the trouble I can probably prove it but I don't see the necessity in that. Keep up the good work you are doing for this group Respectfully, Dean > Dean, > [quoted text clipped - 316 lines] > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>Marcus Here is a copy of the texts concerning "recovery from the Laserscope site as of January 25th of this year (2004). . How long is the recovery time? How soon can I return to normal activities? Most patients can resume normal activities within the week. This would include a desk job and driving a car, which you should be able to resume within a couple of days. You will have to avoid more strenuous activities, as well as lifting more than 30 pounds or riding a lawnmower for example, for about 2 weeks following the GreenLight PVP Laser procedure. A bit of an exaggeration, I think it can agreed. Marcus > Patrick, > It looks like we are at a standoff for it did say it and it [quoted text clipped - 357 lines] > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>Marcus Marcus, You think this is an exaggeration! I think this is right on the mark. Within a week, most people can go back to work, drive a car etc. I was able to do that within 48 hours of my PVP. Some people report driving the same day, although they are pushing things needlessly. And no heavy lifting for 2 weeks. Sound right to me. Please tell me what you think is exaggerated? You couldn't drive a week after your PVP? Patrick Here is a copy of the texts concerning "recovery from the Laserscope site as of January 25th of this year (2004). . How long is the recovery time? How soon can I return to normal activities? Most patients can resume normal activities within the week. This would include a desk job and driving a car, which you should be able to resume within a couple of days. You will have to avoid more strenuous activities, as well as lifting more than 30 pounds or riding a lawnmower for example, for about 2 weeks following the GreenLight PVP Laser procedure. A bit of an exaggeration, I think it can agreed. Marcus "Dean" <deanperkins@highstream.net> wrote in message news:10djesh41nll503@corp.supernews.com... > Patrick, > It looks like we are at a standoff for it did say it and it > wasn't on a posting, If I want to go to the trouble I can probably prove it > but I don't see the necessity in that. Keep up the good work you are doing > for this group > Respectfully, Dean > "TAP" <1LCrestview@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:26KdnTIUWMnx50TdRVn-vg@comcast.com... > > Dean, > > > > You are mistaken. It was never stated in the Laserscope Website last July > > or ever. > > > > You may have gotten that from other people experiences on this newgroup > > including mine but it wasn't from the Laserscope website nor advertisement > > (as they don't advertise.) > > > > Patrick > > > > "Dean" <deanperkins@highstream.net> wrote in message > > news:10dhp1ke9kkdq8b@corp.supernews.com... > > > Patrick, > > > Come on Patrick!!! last July when I first started > investigating > > > PVP it was absolutely stated in laserscope website. I don't think that > > they > > > make that statement now but I'm pretty sure that you have seen the > > > statement,maybe forgotten about it. I have great respect for your > > knowledge > > > of PVP for I have read most of your postings and know that you have > great > > > knowledge about PVP also I respect you for the compassion you have shown > > for > > > the people of this group I have received a couple of mailings from you > > when > > > I first had my PVP, you told me to be patient and things would get > better > > > and you were right for now I'm 8 plus months post PVP and things are > > getting > > > pretty good and I expect them to improve some more. > > > It seems to me Patrick that maybe due to your fondness for PVP > that > > > maybe you have developed a mental block as far as Laserscope is > concerned > > > and think that they can do no wrong but there is nothing to this 2 week > > > recovery that Laserscope tried to promote, maybe they don't push this > two > > > week recovery like they did. True some people may feel pretty good after > > two > > > weeks I think you had a fast recovery but the truth is it takes most > > > people's bodies months to heal especially at our age ,I think that maybe > > you > > > are a little younger. I hope you are not offended by anything I've said > > for > > > I have great respect for you and appreciate the good work you have done > > for > > > me and this group. I'm simply saying that maybe due to the newness and > > lack > > > of experience with Pvp that some things were said that shouldn't have > > been > > > said but that was definitely stated in Laserscope website last July or > > > around that time that it took 4 to 6 weeks before you could sleep threw > > the > > > night However I still think that PVP is probably the best thing out > there > > > and I would do it again. Dean, > > > "TAP" <1LCrestview@comcast.net> wrote in message > > > news:CKydnQb4boEBU0XdRVn-sQ@comcast.com... > > > > Dean, > > > > Where does "Laserscope says in their advertising is that it takes 4 to > 6 > > > > weeks before you can sleep through the night without having to get up > to > > > > urinate." ? > > > > > > > > I have never seen such a statement from Laserscope. > > > > > > > > Patrick > > > > > > > > "Dean" <deanperkins@highstream.net> wrote in message > > > > news:10dh3dnsmiq7f9c@corp.supernews.com... > > > > > To:Al and Patrick, > > > > > I didn't say I was dissatisfied with the surgery . It just > takes > > a > > > > lot > > > > > longer than Laserscope says to reach a point where you don't have > the > > > > > previous symptoms about 8 months in my case. Something that I've > never > > > > heard > > > > > laserscope mention.The burning can take up to 3 months to heal but > > after > > > > > along time not knowing what to expect I 'm finally lots better, > > however > > > I > > > > > think that all the variables in the surgery could have been better > > > > > explained. One think laserscope says in their advertising is that it > > > takes > > > > 4 > > > > > to 6 weeks before you can sleep threw the night without having to > get > > up > > > > to > > > > > urinate I've not reach that point yet however I'm getting close to > it. > > > > > Dean, > > > > > "Al" <XnospamX@optonline.net> wrote in message > > > > > news:nWTBc.101413$V57.16478469@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net... > > > > > > Dean, > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you are dissatisfied with your surgery, would you share with > > the > > > > > > list who your surgeon was, so guys can avoid making the same > mistake > > > you > > > > > > did. > > > > > > > > > > > > Al > > > > > > > > > > > > Dean wrote: > > > > > > > Your right Marcus, Patrick is wrong. I'm also a post PVP patient > > and > > > > am > > > > > very > > > > > > > familiar with Laserscope's advertising. Dean, > > > > > > > "Marcus" <orealius@comcast.net> wrote in message > > > > > > > news:%JCBc.89195$0y.67619@attbi_s03... > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>Patrick, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>First of all, you apparently are not keeping up with the posts. > I > > am > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>only one who has been hoodwinked into expecting a quick,1-2 week > > > > > recovery. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>Second, you are right. Laserscope did finally add the pre and > > > post-op > > > > > > >>guidelines. But that was months after my surgery...and only > after > > > > being > > > > > > >>implicitly threatened with a lawsuit. These guidelines should > have > > > > been > > > > > up > > > > > > >>there from day one. After all, we're talking invasive surgery > > here. > > > If > > > > a > > > > > > >>medical company wants to advertise a surgical procedure then > they > > > > should > > > > > > >>give ALL THE FACTS AND POSSIBLE SCENARIOS...NOT JUST THE ONES > > LIKELY > > > > TO > > > > > > >>INDUCE BUSINESS! > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>Finally, it is apparent that we have had different personal > > > > experiences > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>the surgery and clearly different philosophical-political views > on > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > place > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>of commercial advertising in medicine and the relevance of the > > > > interests > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>rights of the "significant minority" (who have less than the > quick > > > > > > > > > > > > > > recovery > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>Laserscope claims).You also apparently know folks at Laserscope > > and > > > it > > > > > > >>sounds like you're trying to protect them from criticism. A > worthy > > > > > effort > > > > > > >>but one that only obfuscates the truth. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>Marcus > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>"TAP" <1LCrestview@comcast.net> wrote in message > > > > > > >>news:XbOdneNjyPy-Rkvd4p2dnA@comcast.com... > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>Marcus, > > > > > > >>>I fully disagree with you concerning Laserscope website both > past > > > and > > > > > > >>>present. Everything I have ever seen on the website has been > > > factual > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>has been backed up by clinical study and published papers. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>You mentioned the statement, "After the procedure you may have > > some > > > > > mild > > > > > > >>>discomfort such as slight > > > > > > >>>burning during urination for about a week or so." > > > > > > >>>I believe that this statement is true. This is what has been > > > reported > > > > > by > > > > > > >>>many people as well as documented in clinical studies. It is > > also > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>experienced, i.e. slight burning during urination for about a > > week. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>The website now comes with a new section containing pre and > post > > > > > > > > > > > > > > precedure > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>guidelines. This is factual and shows that they are gathering > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>of > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>many procedures and giving that information to future patients. > > In > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>was given those same guidelines by my doctor, Dr. Te two years > > ago > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>had mine. Did your doctor give you them when you had your > > surgury? > > > > > Did > > > > > > >>>your doctor tell you the possibility of going into retention > > after > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>surgury? > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>My doctor did. If he didn't it is your doctor who didn't give > you > > > the > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>facts > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>NOT the laser manufacturer. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>I see nothing nor recall anything about overly optimistic > > > > information. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>They > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>always report on the results of clinical studies. Given that > PVP > > > is > > > > > > >>>relatively new, they only had hundred of cases to report on. > But > > > now > > > > > > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>have thousands of cases to report on. Note that 20,000 PVP > will > > be > > > > > done > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>in > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>2004. I believe that what they say on there website is > factual, > > > > > honest, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>and > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>realistic. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>As for you suing Laserscope, go ahead. I will volunteer to be > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>Laserscope's > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>first witness and tell the court how innovative, how helpful, > and > > > how > > > > > > >>>successful they were in giving Dr. Te a fantastic tool that > > enabled > > > > him > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>completely rid me of BPH with no complications or side effects. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>Patrick > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>"Marcus" <orealius@comcast.net> wrote in message > > > > > > >>>news:nxrBc.125242$3x.47939@attbi_s54... > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>>"TAP" <1LCrestview@comcast.net> wrote in message > > > > > > >>>>news:8sSdnQMD55TviEvdRVn-gQ@comcast.com... > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>>Marcus, > > > > > > >>>>>I challenge you to find any hype or dishonesty about anything > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>Laserscope > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>>has > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>>on their website. > > > > > > >>>>>Go get it and let's see how dishonest it is. > > > > > > >>>>>Patrick > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>Laserscope has made some modifications to their site which I > > > > applaud, > > > > > > >>>>belated as they are. > > > > > > >>>>But when I went through my surgery, back in November these > > changes > > > > had > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>not > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>>been made. > > > > > > >>>>For example: Up until a few months ago, there was no mention > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > urinary > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>retention. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>But Here's one: > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>>"After the procedure you may have some mild discomfort such > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > slight > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>burning during urination for about a week or so." > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>Check the archives Patrick. This overly optimistic information > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>address the "significant minority" who have experience > extended > > > > pain, > > > > > > >>>>frequency, urgency, etc. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>The video is full of misleading suggestiveness about the > "ease" > > > with > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>which > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>>one can go through the surgery. Again, not applicable to the > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>'significant > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>>minority' who don't waltz home whistling Dixie. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>According to my copies of the Laserscope web-site back in > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>December-March, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>>there was no > > > > > > >>>>"Pre and Post Operative Guidance." But I'll check again. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>Marcus No, I couldn't drive a car for more than 20 minutes without running to the nearest urinal....which is where Laserscope's marketing campaign belongs! Marcus, You think this is an exaggeration! I think this is right on the mark. Within a week, most people can go back to work, drive a car etc. I was able to do that within 48 hours of my PVP. Some people report driving the same day, although they are pushing things needlessly. And no heavy lifting for 2 weeks. Sound right to me. Please tell me what you think is exaggerated? You couldn't drive a week after your PVP? Patrick "Marcus" <orealius@comcast.net> wrote in message news:qvlCc.100235$0y.15307@attbi_s03... Here is a copy of the texts concerning "recovery from the Laserscope site as of January 25th of this year (2004). . How long is the recovery time? How soon can I return to normal activities? Most patients can resume normal activities within the week. This would include a desk job and driving a car, which you should be able to resume within a couple of days. You will have to avoid more strenuous activities, as well as lifting more than 30 pounds or riding a lawnmower for example, for about 2 weeks following the GreenLight PVP Laser procedure. A bit of an exaggeration, I think it can agreed. Marcus "Dean" <deanperkins@highstream.net> wrote in message news:10djesh41nll503@corp.supernews.com... > Patrick, > It looks like we are at a standoff for it did say it and it > wasn't on a posting, If I want to go to the trouble I can probably prove it > but I don't see the necessity in that. Keep up the good work you are doing > for this group > Respectfully, Dean > "TAP" <1LCrestview@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:26KdnTIUWMnx50TdRVn-vg@comcast.com... > > Dean, > > > > You are mistaken. It was never stated in the Laserscope Website last July > > or ever. > > > > You may have gotten that from other people experiences on this newgroup > > including mine but it wasn't from the Laserscope website nor advertisement > > (as they don't advertise.) > > > > Patrick > > > > "Dean" <deanperkins@highstream.net> wrote in message > > news:10dhp1ke9kkdq8b@corp.supernews.com... > > > Patrick, > > > Come on Patrick!!! last July when I first started > investigating > > > PVP it was absolutely stated in laserscope website. I don't think that > > they > > > make that statement now but I'm pretty sure that you have seen the > > > statement,maybe forgotten about it. I have great respect for your > > knowledge > > > of PVP for I have read most of your postings and know that you have > great > > > knowledge about PVP also I respect you for the compassion you have shown > > for > > > the people of this group I have received a couple of mailings from you > > when > > > I first had my PVP, you told me to be patient and things would get > better > > > and you were right for now I'm 8 plus months post PVP and things are > > getting > > > pretty good and I expect them to improve some more. > > > It seems to me Patrick that maybe due to your fondness for PVP > that > > > maybe you have developed a mental block as far as Laserscope is > concerned > > > and think that they can do no wrong but there is nothing to this 2 week > > > recovery that Laserscope tried to promote, maybe they don't push this > two > > > week recovery like they did. True some people may feel pretty good after > > two > > > weeks I think you had a fast recovery but the truth is it takes most > > > people's bodies months to heal especially at our age ,I think that maybe > > you > > > are a little younger. I hope you are not offended by anything I've said > > for > > > I have great respect for you and appreciate the good work you have done > > for > > > me and this group. I'm simply saying that maybe due to the newness and > > lack > > > of experience with Pvp that some things were said that shouldn't have > > been > > > said but that was definitely stated in Laserscope website last July or > > > around that time that it took 4 to 6 weeks before you could sleep threw > > the > > > night However I still think that PVP is probably the best thing out > there > > > and I would do it again. Dean, > > > "TAP" <1LCrestview@comcast.net> wrote in message > > > news:CKydnQb4boEBU0XdRVn-sQ@comcast.com... > > > > Dean, > > > > Where does "Laserscope says in their advertising is that it takes 4 to > 6 > > > > weeks before you can sleep through the night without having to get up > to > > > > urinate." ? > > > > > > > > I have never seen such a statement from Laserscope. > > > > > > > > Patrick > > > > > > > > "Dean" <deanperkins@highstream.net> wrote in message > > > > news:10dh3dnsmiq7f9c@corp.supernews.com... > > > > > To:Al and Patrick, > > > > > I didn't say I was dissatisfied with the surgery . It just > takes > > a > > > > lot > > > > > longer than Laserscope says to reach a point where you don't have > the > > > > > previous symptoms about 8 months in my case. Something that I've > never > > > > heard > > > > > laserscope mention.The burning can take up to 3 months to heal but > > after > > > > > along time not knowing what to expect I 'm finally lots better, > > however > > > I > > > > > think that all the variables in the surgery could have been better > > > > > explained. One think laserscope says in their advertising is that it > > > takes > > > > 4 > > > > > to 6 weeks before you can sleep threw the night without having to > get > > up > > > > to > > > > > urinate I've not reach that point yet however I'm getting close to > it. > > > > > Dean, > > > > > "Al" <XnospamX@optonline.net> wrote in message > > > > > news:nWTBc.101413$V57.16478469@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net... > > > > > > Dean, > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you are dissatisfied with your surgery, would you share with > > the > > > > > > list who your surgeon was, so guys can avoid making the same > mistake > > > you > > > > > > did. > > > > > > > > > > > > Al > > > > > > > > > > > > Dean wrote: > > > > > > > Your right Marcus, Patrick is wrong. I'm also a post PVP patient > > and > > > > am > > > > > very > > > > > > > familiar with Laserscope's advertising. Dean, > > > > > > > "Marcus" <orealius@comcast.net> wrote in message > > > > > > > news:%JCBc.89195$0y.67619@attbi_s03... > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>Patrick, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>First of all, you apparently are not keeping up with the posts. > I > > am > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>only one who has been hoodwinked into expecting a quick,1-2 week > > > > > recovery. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>Second, you are right. Laserscope did finally add the pre and > > > post-op > > > > > > >>guidelines. But that was months after my surgery...and only > after > > > > being > > > > > > >>implicitly threatened with a lawsuit. These guidelines should > have > > > > been > > > > > up > > > > > > >>there from day one. After all, we're talking invasive surgery > > here. > > > If > > > > a > > > > > > >>medical company wants to advertise a surgical procedure then > they > > > > should > > > > > > >>give ALL THE FACTS AND POSSIBLE SCENARIOS...NOT JUST THE ONES > > LIKELY > > > > TO > > > > > > >>INDUCE BUSINESS! > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>Finally, it is apparent that we have had different personal > > > > experiences > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>the surgery and clearly different philosophical-political views > on > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > place > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>of commercial advertising in medicine and the relevance of the > > > > interests > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>rights of the "significant minority" (who have less than the > quick > > > > > > > > > > > > > > recovery > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>Laserscope claims).You also apparently know folks at Laserscope > > and > > > it > > > > > > >>sounds like you're trying to protect them from criticism. A > worthy > > > > > effort > > > > > > >>but one that only obfuscates the truth. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>Marcus > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>"TAP" <1LCrestview@comcast.net> wrote in message > > > > > > >>news:XbOdneNjyPy-Rkvd4p2dnA@comcast.com... > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>Marcus, > > > > > > >>>I fully disagree with you concerning Laserscope website both > past > > > and > > > > > > >>>present. Everything I have ever seen on the website has been > > > factual > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>has been backed up by clinical study and published papers. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>You mentioned the statement, "After the procedure you may have > > some > > > > > mild > > > > > > >>>discomfort such as slight > > > > > > >>>burning during urination for about a week or so." > > > > > > >>>I believe that this statement is true. This is what has been > > > reported > > > > > by > > > > > > >>>many people as well as documented in clinical studies. It is > > also > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>experienced, i.e. slight burning during urination for about a > > week. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>The website now comes with a new section containing pre and > post > > > > > > > > > > > > > > precedure > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>guidelines. This is factual and shows that they are gathering > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>of > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>many procedures and giving that information to future patients. > > In > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>was given those same guidelines by my doctor, Dr. Te two years > > ago > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>had mine. Did your doctor give you them when you had your > > surgury? > > > > > Did > > > > > > >>>your doctor tell you the possibility of going into retention > > after > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>surgury? > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>My doctor did. If he didn't it is your doctor who didn't give > you > > > the > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>facts > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>NOT the laser manufacturer. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>I see nothing nor recall anything about overly optimistic > > > > information. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>They > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>always report on the results of clinical studies. Given that > PVP > > > is > > > > > > >>>relatively new, they only had hundred of cases to report on. > But > > > now > > > > > > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>have thousands of cases to report on. Note that 20,000 PVP > will > > be > > > > > done > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>in > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>2004. I believe that what they say on there website is > factual, > > > > > honest, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>and > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>realistic. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>As for you suing Laserscope, go ahead. I will volunteer to be > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>Laserscope's > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>first witness and tell the court how innovative, how helpful, > and > > > how > > > > > > >>>successful they were in giving Dr. Te a fantastic tool that > > enabled > > > > him > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>completely rid me of BPH with no complications or side effects. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>Patrick > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>"Marcus" <orealius@comcast.net> wrote in message > > > > > > >>>news:nxrBc.125242$3x.47939@attbi_s54... > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>>"TAP" <1LCrestview@comcast.net> wrote in message > > > > > > >>>>news:8sSdnQMD55TviEvdRVn-gQ@comcast.com... > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>>Marcus, > > > > > > >>>>>I challenge you to find any hype or dishonesty about anything > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>Laserscope > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>>has > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>>on their website. > > > > > > >>>>>Go get it and let's see how dishonest it is. > > > > > > >>>>>Patrick > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>Laserscope has made some modifications to their site which I > > > > applaud, > > > > > > >>>>belated as they are. > > > > > > >>>>But when I went through my surgery, back in November these > > changes > > > > had > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>not > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>>been made. > > > > > > >>>>For example: Up until a few months ago, there was no mention > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > urinary > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>retention. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>But Here's one: > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>>"After the procedure you may have some mild discomfort such > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > slight > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>burning during urination for about a week or so." > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>Check the archives Patrick. This overly optimistic information > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>address the "significant minority" who have experience > extended > > > > pain, > > > > > > >>>>frequency, urgency, etc. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>The video is full of misleading suggestiveness about the > "ease" > > > with > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>which > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>>one can go through the surgery. Again, not applicable to the > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>'significant > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>>minority' who don't waltz home whistling Dixie. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>According to my copies of the Laserscope web-site back in > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>December-March, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>>there was no > > > > > > >>>>"Pre and Post Operative Guidance." But I'll check again. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>Marcus Marcus, You are right on it. Your body does not heal itself in one weeks time. Your body will be about the same one week after PVP as it was the day of surgery,whoever heard tell of being healed enough in two days to be able to drive, when you wasn't able to drive immediately after surgery. I respect Patrick but it seems as if he has fallen in love with Laserscope and thinks that whatever they say is Gospel, he absolutely will not recognize the truth. Dean, Here is a copy of the texts concerning "recovery from the Laserscope site as of January 25th of this year (2004). . How long is the recovery time? How soon can I return to normal activities? Most patients can resume normal activities within the week. This would include a desk job and driving a car, which you should be able to resume within a couple of days. You will have to avoid more strenuous activities, as well as lifting more than 30 pounds or riding a lawnmower for example, for about 2 weeks following the GreenLight PVP Laser procedure. A bit of an exaggeration, I think it can agreed. Marcus > Patrick, > It looks like we are at a standoff for it did say it and it [quoted text clipped - 358 lines] > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>Marcus >Here is a copy of the texts concerning "recovery from the >Laserscope site as of January 25th of this year (2004). [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >A bit of an exaggeration, I think it can agreed. I don't agree. The above description fits me almost exactly. In fact, I was back to my desk working in 3 or 4 days. My recovery was easier and quicker than my last 2 prostate biopsies. Also the quote you posted above says "Most patients ..." not "All patients ..." So just because you were one of the exceptions doesn't mean that the above statement is an exaggeration. I know of at least one PVP patient who has posted on this group who was back to working his ranch in much less than a week. Google this group for posts by Derry Argue. Now if Laserscope had used his experience as "normal" then I think you might have a point. Bob My point is nobody heals in two weeks' it takes months for your body to heal. The older you are the longer it takes but you can do anything you want if you want to tough it out like Derry Argue did, ask him if he was healed? Dean, > >Here is a copy of the texts concerning "recovery from the > >Laserscope site as of January 25th of this year (2004). > >. How long is the recovery time? How soon can I return to normal activities? > > > >Most patients can resume normal activities within the week. This would include a desk job and driving a car, which you should be able to resume within a couple of days. You will have to avoid more strenuous activities, as well as lifting more than 30 pounds or riding a lawnmower for example, for about 2 weeks following the GreenLight PVP Laser procedure. > >A bit of an exaggeration, I think it can agreed. > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Bob >My point is nobody heals in two weeks' it takes months for your body to >heal. This point is entirely different than the one I replied to in my post. I'll agree fully that I was not fully healed within two weeks. In fact I passed a blood clot almost 3 months after the operation. My uro told me it could be 6 months or more before I received the maximum benefits from the PVP. That is an entirely different question than "How long is the recovery time? How soon can I return to normal activities?" While I certainly wasn't fully healed, I was able to return to normal activities (including driving and working at my desk) easily within a week. The point in the post I was replying to was that I don't believe that Laserscope exaggerated when they said that "most" patients could resume normal activities, including driving and working at a desk. This statement said nothing about fully healing within a week. >The older you are the longer it takes but you can do anything you want >if you want to tough it out like Derry Argue did, ask him if he was healed? Derry is undoubtedly a very unusual case. It's obvious from his posts that he wasn't fully healed either, but was able to return to his normal activities in a very short time, at least on a limited basis. But, his normal activities were a lot more than driving and working at a desk. >Dean, >> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >> >> Bob Dean, I don't mean to be labor this but it has been stated on this newsgroup that Laserscope does or has done a lot of "false advertizing". The fact is that Laserscope doesn't advertise. Plus their website is mainly about the procedure itself, and whether a person suffers from BPH. The fact is that Laserscope really has no way of knowing post-procedure recovery, only what the doctors report in the published papers. If you look at the published papers the only post-results talked about are: 1. Improvements in peak flow rates. 2. Decreases in post void residual. 3. Improvements in AUA symptom score 4. Improvement in Quality of Life Scores 5. Change in Prostate size 6. Change in PSA. No where does Laserscope say the you will have this or that improvement in X months. So I am at a loss when you and Marcus says that they advertize "quick recovery" from BPH symptoms. They don't make those claims. The claims that they make about the procedure are that: 1. Most patients are catertized for less than 24 hours. 2. Most patient are out of the hospital in less than one day. 3. No blood transfusions needed. 4. No incontinence, impotency or deaths reported from procedure. As for results, most are as good or better than after a TURP and much better than a TUMT or TUNA. Patrick > Patrick, > It looks like we are at a standoff for it did say it and it [quoted text clipped - 357 lines] > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>Marcus Patrick, What do you mean they don't advertise? Would "promote" or "market" make more sense to you? I wonder how Laserscope has "no way of knowing post-procedure recovery, only what the doctors report in the published papers." They were one of the funders of the initial study that the FDA approved!!! You're trying to tell us they didn't consider recovery time as a critical factor in promoting it...which is what they did to the FDA. Frankly Patrick, you're beginning to sound naive. Marcus > Dean, > I don't mean to be labor this but it has been stated on this newsgroup that [quoted text clipped - 422 lines] > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>Marcus > I had Dr TE, no one has ever > posted of a bad result with Te. Likewise Laub, Lin, Muir, and Larner. Knock on wood - he does me on July 13. Jim W. > I finally had my PVP done. I now wish I could have it undone! After the > procedure I waterlogged myself and peed in a plastic urinal thingy. The [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > jg Just a follow up. I went back to Scarborough Hospital yesterday where they removed the catheter and I did the water and walk routine. This time I was only able to pee about a tablespoon every hour, so the Uro who did the PVP came in and catheterized me once again. The scary thing was that not much urine came out of the tube after all the water and time to build up. However, once I attached the bag and stood up, the urine flowed freely. So it appears that I now have a totally dead bladder on top of everything else. Thanks very much Laserscope! However, I am going back again next week to try again to have the catheter removed, and this time if it doesn't work I get a cystoscope exam to see what may be causing blockage. So it is now a countdown to finding out whether or not I'll have to wear a catheter the rest of my life. jg > > I finally had my PVP done. I now wish I could have it undone! After the > > procedure I waterlogged myself and peed in a plastic urinal thingy. The [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > jg JG .......you have all of our immense sympathy but i honestly do not think for one minute this is the fault of PVP or Laserscope I suspect its the fault of the surgeon who did the job and on no account whatever would I go back to see the same one again Go to the expert in PVP who first did it in the UK .......Gordon Muir .....see www.london-urology.co.uk contact him I am sure he will find a way to see you and discover the real reason for your problem If the original surgeon has boobed you do not want any cover up being done >> I finally had my PVP done. I now wish I could have it undone! After the >> procedure I waterlogged myself and peed in a plastic urinal thingy. The [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >> >> jg >Just a follow up. I went back to Scarborough Hospital yesterday where >they removed the catheter and I did the water and walk routine. This [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >urine flowed freely. So it appears that I now have a totally dead >bladder on top of everything else. Thanks very much Laserscope! >However, I am going back again next week to try again to have the >catheter removed, and this time if it doesn't work I get a cystoscope >exam to see what may be causing blockage. So it is now a countdown to >finding out whether or not I'll have to wear a catheter the rest of my >life. Could jg tell us who did the PVP? Thanks LRM Is it possible for some to share their opionion or information on Dr. Colton, MD, Denville, New Jersey regarding his success rate on PVP laser surgery? > I finally had my PVP done. I now wish I could have it undone! After the > procedure I waterlogged myself and peed in a plastic urinal thingy. The [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > sore behind and waiting for what the next step might be (the doctor > mentioned scoping me again! |
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.