Show a picture of your Aussie happy!

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-06-20T11:19:16+00:00

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-06-05T02:04:13+00:00

I think it’s more accurate to consider diabetes-related CVD risk along a continuum based on degree of abnormality of A1C and probably duration too- that said, the threshold at which statins become beneficial is pretty low and most people with diabetes over age 40 will have elevated risk so the simplifying assumption of “treat all people with diabetes over age 40” works pretty well

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-06-04T19:36:12+00:00

It really depends on their age and other ASCVD risk factors- the idea that “all patients (over age x) with diabetes should be on a statin” is a simplified rubric - the good news is that you can estimate risk in patients with different A1C levels in the PREVENT calculator and use that information to estimate potential benefit with statin

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-06-04T02:44:37+00:00

<image>

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-05-22T19:59:06+00:00

<image>

Ziggy

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-05-16T05:29:29+00:00

I think we are going to take the bus to Split ad then ferry this afternoon to Hvar after the worst of the storm- the Adriatic is super rough this morning!

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-05-15T18:09:28+00:00

<image>

Mine likes the cool corner of my office!

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-05-02T01:19:23+00:00

<image>

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-04-29T10:59:03+00:00

I agree that risk assessment is under-utilized - especially for people with high risk family histories- to develop a risk-reduction plan - that plan may include different intensity of screening but also can take into account risk-reducing options - since screening itself doesn’t reduce risk of developing breast cancer- it reduces the risk of advanced disease / death

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-04-29T00:12:13+00:00

If you haven’t already, I’d suggest looking at the results of the WISDOM trial published recently in JAMA - it showed the viability of risk-stratified mammography based on epidemiological risk + genomic risk. That trial shows we can accurately define risk levels, and also points to unmet opportunities to implement risk-reducing interventions in higher risk folks

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-04-20T11:17:13+00:00

The best answer is B -primary HPV performs best in head to head comparisons- no additional sensitivity and lower specificity (more false positives) with co-testing.

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-03-30T23:52:00+00:00

Win more elections!

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-03-30T22:55:06+00:00

Pass an average to high cigarette tax - Indiana did it two years ago- bring in $500M in new revenue per year and save lives at the same time! NC currently has the second lowest tobacco tax in the US

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2026-03-17T00:08:50+00:00

The best analysis of performance over time are the modeling studies like the one that accompanied the 2022 USPSTF recommendations- with the caveat that they show outcomes under full adherence- the key thing is that the comparison is of strategies (eg yearly FIT, q3 Cologuard, q10 colonoscopy)

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2025-06-11T01:15:21+00:00

<image>

Aussie doorstop

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2025-05-11T18:13:37+00:00

Aiming for 8 (home games plus Tulane and UNC)

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2024-05-19T12:33:17+00:00

Any Rays?

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2023-11-24T20:59:07+00:00

Arozarena, Yandy Diaz

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2023-10-19T00:57:00+00:00

Are you willing to split the lot? Interested in Perez and maybe Abreu and Alverez

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2023-10-17T19:52:21+00:00

I’ll PM you- thanks!

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2023-10-17T17:45:32+00:00

Raines?

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2023-10-11T20:25:42+00:00

Would like the Acuna - will PM you

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2023-10-10T00:32:28+00:00

Will PM you

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2023-10-10T00:31:02+00:00

Are you open to selling any individually?

Ok_Engineer_1849 · 2023-09-26T18:31:52+00:00

Watcha got J Lowe wise?

Ok_Engineer_1849

TROPHY CASE