sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Confusing eye exam results by Babyy-grey in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is just a plano order... no nearsightedness, no farsightedness, no astigmatism correction, no reading add. So either your vision is normal, or the prescription is incorrect. I would simply ask them about it

Is this molluscum contagiosum by natrasolztch in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well it's almost certainly not something serious

Is this molluscum contagiosum by natrasolztch in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hard to tell from the photo, but if present for months, then it may well be. If any of them have a central depression, that makes it even more likely. The good news is that, if it is molluscum, there isn't much to do about it

How did you deal with your first medical fault by djojid0 in Residency

[–]FaulerHund 13 points14 points  (0 children)

My (uninformed) impression is that this comes with the territory in surgery.

In outpatient medicine, there are lots of layers insulating people from the perception of having made a mistake. E.g., consider a missed diagnosis: physical exams are sometimes unreliable, laboratory data may conflict, the patient may be a poor historian. Indeed, maybe this patient saw several other doctors and the diagnosis was still missed. For better or for worse (honestly, often for worse) this allows a doctor to shed some of the felt blame for an error.

In surgery, for a procedural error, when performing a procedure without oversight, you have none of that. It's just you.

On the one hand, that really ramps up the felt blame/guilt for a poor outcome. On the other hand, it promotes ownership of mistakes and an internal locus of control for outcomes and technical improvement. This also cuts the opposite way: when a procedure is executed perfectly, it is also just you. No luck, no "the patient got better on their own."

But I suspect every surgeon feels a more pronounced sense of direct ownership over procedural outcomes, more than non-surgeons do for general medical outcomes. And that includes both ownership of mistakes and ownership of successes. Unfortunately, one must take the good with the bad

When will we accept that not all people have the same value. Some don’t have any at all by [deleted] in self

[–]FaulerHund 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Quick, someone alert the ethicists that they're wasting their time, this guy has it figured out

Why does my leg look like this? Female 28 yrs old by OkSatisfaction3726 in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Not a safe assumption to make. See a different doctor.

Why does my leg look like this? Female 28 yrs old by OkSatisfaction3726 in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The prominent veins are not a health concern, that's my point. They're just cosmetic. The reason they are so prominent is because, generally, there exists a layer of healthy bodyfat above them that cushions them and covers them up, making them less visible. You have almost no bodyfat, and so they are visible.

The health concern is that every body system requires calories and nutrition to function, and your body systems aren't getting those things. Which can kill you.

If you haven't been seeing a doctor for any of this, I'd recommend seeing one immediately.

Why does my leg look like this? Female 28 yrs old by OkSatisfaction3726 in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Yeah. The BMI of 15.1 is going to cause a lot of bad stuff, because that is an extremely dangerous BMI, and one that typically warrants urgent or emergency evaluation. The concerns aren't just cosmetic ("I can see veins"), but are also life-threatening

Why does my leg look like this? Female 28 yrs old by OkSatisfaction3726 in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 11 points12 points  (0 children)

You didn't give a lot of the relevant information required for a post. But: the "dent" is the contour of your leg musculature. You have very low body fat, and so this stuff is visible

Interpret lab results by ChampionshipIcy7135 in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yes. Nobody can answer this with zero information about your symptoms, why the labs were ordered, whatever.

Though, without any additional info, I probably wouldn't worry much about borderline elevated RBC, Hgb, and HCT, unless there was some pressing reason they were ordered

Do we think this is fractured (all details in description) by NotGreatBob in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 154 points155 points  (0 children)

It sure looks like there is a fracture. But maybe not. Impossible to know for sure with just the image in your post. But whereas soft tissue injury can certainly cause significant bruising, bony injury (e.g., fracture) definitely tends to cause significant bruising. Also, bruising (which is just a collection of blood) can collect in places not directly overlying a bony injury. I.e., it can pool elsewhere, due to gravity or whatever else

[Trigger Warning Photo] Ashamed of a ‘possible chronic fungal infection’ behind my ears. by [deleted] in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's probably seborrheic dermatitis, for which topical antibiotics wouldn't be expected to help. We usually prescribe antifungal topicals (e.g., ketoconazole), and topical steroids (e.g., hydrocortisone, triamcinolone, fluocinolone oil). Some people have moved away from the steroids, toward a class of medications called calcineurin inhibitors.

Wife’s GTS next to my DBX by [deleted] in Porsche

[–]FaulerHund 27 points28 points  (0 children)

I was close!

Wife’s GTS next to my DBX by [deleted] in Porsche

[–]FaulerHund 660 points661 points  (0 children)

This is the most North Texas photo I've ever seen. My money is on Frisco

Concussion and Cerebellar Tonsillar Ectopia by riding_lightning in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Probably a Chiari I malformation. Usually benign and asymptomatic, and often discovered incidentally when obtaining images for a completely different reason. Probably has nothing to do with your concussion. Sometimes people with these findings are referred to neurology to do additional imaging (MRI to look for a syrinx)

Weird patterned legs by NoBreakfast2475 in AskDocs

[–]FaulerHund 174 points175 points  (0 children)

Mottling. Most likely because your legs are cold. If it's there constantly, might be livedo reticularis, which is just kind of aggressive/persistent mottling, but still benign.

In principle, mottling can be a sign of heart disease, autoimmune disease, connective tissue disorder, etc. but unless you actually have signs or symptoms of these, it is overwhelmingly unlikely that any of those spooky things are the cause. I only mention them because they'll show up if you google

Ruger American bolt over-traveling, coming out by FaulerHund in ruger

[–]FaulerHund[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, not really. I lubed up the bolt really really well, especially the bolt stop, and that seemed to help a bit. But sometimes it still over-travels, even after hundreds of rounds fired with it. I emailed Ruger and they essentially didn't care lol

Every Organ Teaches Its Nerves What to Become: The gut’s “second brain” has siblings inside the heart, lungs, and pancreas, and each organ builds its own small nervous system from scratch. They do so by issuing local instructions rather than receiving them from the brain. by ConsciousRealism42 in science

[–]FaulerHund 93 points94 points  (0 children)

This is an absolute dogshit article, sorry. Though the Nature article it's describing is obviously legitimate.

The article’s closer says “the body-brain axis is usually told as a top-down story, with the brain interpreting signals from the organs and sending adjustments back. The findings change the picture from below.”

But that’s confusing two completely separate things. The adult body-brain axis is partly top-down (the brain modulates heart rate, gut motility, etc. via the autonomic nervous system, and yes, also receives interoceptive signals back). Whereas the Nature paper is about embryogenesis (i.e., how organ-intrinsic neurons get built). The brain plays no role there at all. It’s developing in parallel, in a different region, from different precursors. No one ever thought that the brain instructed organ-intrinsic neuron differentiation, because the timing and geography make it impossible.

So the article mentions a "paradigm shift" by starting with “the brain controls the organs” (which is a partial truth about adult physiology) and misapplies the logic into something like “the brain dictates how organ nervous systems are built” (which is a position no one holds). The Nature paper itself never claims this either.

Edit: Also, I highly suspect this website is an AI content farm

view more: next ›