|
kk1
AS THEY ALWAYS ADD TO THE END OF ARTICLES WHICH PURPORT TO SHOW SOMETHING NEW--"THIS NEEDS TO BE VALIDATED IN LARGER PROSPECTIVE STUDIES"--IE, THEY ARE TRYING TO COVER THEIR BEHINDS IN THE CASE IT DOESN'T PROVE TRUE IN LARGER NUMBERS
BUT IT WAS DONE AT A PRESTIGIOUS INSTITUTION WITH EXCELLENT FOLLOW-UP AND IS THE BEST WE HAVE FOR NOW--AT LEAST WE HAVE IT!
WHO KNOWS WHY THEY DIDN'T LOOK AT THIS CRITICALLY BEFORE.
IT JUST SHOWS YOU TO ASK QUESTIONS! Glad this helped
With all the bad news going wrong I am editing what I post in hopes of not scaring people further (I thought twice about posting this-- I rationalized it this way:what if a member did not have the surgery, but then there might be someone else who was deciding whether to have surgery or not and the benefit of having some good information, or just information, on which to base a life-determining decision, seemed to outwear some temporary fear in someone who already had fear and imaginings without information)
It seems getting information (even if it later turns out not to be true, which is always possible) seems to always win out in my book.
One can always choose NOT to read my posts!
|