i'm sure orphancrow will be able to fill in the details for us.. front page news with picture all over the canadian globe and mail newspaper today.. with major double-page spread across the whole of pages 8 and 9 in the newspaper's front section.. globe and mail, tuesday 8 august 2017.. the patient, a 70-year-old man with high-risk prostate cancer, was a jehovah’s witness.. his religion was one of the reasons he decided to undergo surgery at st. joseph’s healthcare in hamilton, home to a robot named da vinci whose steady metal hands can remove a prostate with scant risk of the blood transfusions forbidden by the man’s faith.. on a recent afternoon, the patient laid unconscious on an operating table as surgeon bobby shayegan and his team plunged a camera and three robotically controlled surgical instruments through small incisions in his abdomen.. dr. shayegan settled himself in front of a three-dimensional screen, clasped the two joysticks that controlled the tools inside his patient’s pelvis and proceeded to cut, cauterize and stitch until he freed the man’s prostate, pulling it out through one of the original incisions.. there was next to no blood.. “that was routine,” dr. shayegan said afterward, holding the plum-sized gland that he and the robot had removed together.
...in its first real ruling on a robotic surgery, the expert committee that advises ontario on which new health technologies to pay for said there was no good evidence that robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is any better than conventional open surgery when it comes to controlling cancer or preserving urinary and sexual function.. the panel said the robot’s other benefits – patients have smaller incisions, lose less blood, suffer less pain and leave the hospital sooner – were not significant enough to justify spending, on average, an extra $3,224 a case, a figure that does not include the millions that wealthy benefactors have spent buying the machines for canadian hospitals.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/the-fight-for-robots-in-canadas-operatingrooms/article35897282/.
... if we factor in less ward time, less pain killers and less use of donated blood I am sure the overall saving would outweigh the greater cost of the procedure. I am guessing...
Yes, it is a guess. And there isn't evidence to back up that guess. Unfortunately, when it comes to medicine and science, what seems to be intuitively right and logical, often isn't. That is why we use the scientific method. And scrutinize the method and results at all times
i'm sure orphancrow will be able to fill in the details for us.. front page news with picture all over the canadian globe and mail newspaper today.. with major double-page spread across the whole of pages 8 and 9 in the newspaper's front section.. globe and mail, tuesday 8 august 2017.. the patient, a 70-year-old man with high-risk prostate cancer, was a jehovah’s witness.. his religion was one of the reasons he decided to undergo surgery at st. joseph’s healthcare in hamilton, home to a robot named da vinci whose steady metal hands can remove a prostate with scant risk of the blood transfusions forbidden by the man’s faith.. on a recent afternoon, the patient laid unconscious on an operating table as surgeon bobby shayegan and his team plunged a camera and three robotically controlled surgical instruments through small incisions in his abdomen.. dr. shayegan settled himself in front of a three-dimensional screen, clasped the two joysticks that controlled the tools inside his patient’s pelvis and proceeded to cut, cauterize and stitch until he freed the man’s prostate, pulling it out through one of the original incisions.. there was next to no blood.. “that was routine,” dr. shayegan said afterward, holding the plum-sized gland that he and the robot had removed together.
...in its first real ruling on a robotic surgery, the expert committee that advises ontario on which new health technologies to pay for said there was no good evidence that robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is any better than conventional open surgery when it comes to controlling cancer or preserving urinary and sexual function.. the panel said the robot’s other benefits – patients have smaller incisions, lose less blood, suffer less pain and leave the hospital sooner – were not significant enough to justify spending, on average, an extra $3,224 a case, a figure that does not include the millions that wealthy benefactors have spent buying the machines for canadian hospitals.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/the-fight-for-robots-in-canadas-operatingrooms/article35897282/.
And then there was this, an article that was dated 2008:
https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/27/regrets-after-prostate-surgery/
Regrets After Prostate Surgery
BY TARA PARKER-POPEAugust 27, 2008 9:26 amOne in five men who undergoes prostate surgery to treat cancer later regrets the decision, a new study shows. And surprisingly, regret is highest among men who opt for robotic prostatectomy, a minimally invasive surgery that is growing in popularity as a treatment.
The research, published in the medical journal European Urology, is the latest to suggest that technological advances in prostate surgery haven’t necessarily translated to better results for the men on which it is performed. It also adds to growing concerns that men are being misled about the real risks and benefits of robotic surgical procedures used to treat prostate cancer.
Of the 219,000 men in the United States who learn they have prostate cancer each year, nearly half undergo surgical removal of the gland, according to the National Cancer Institute.
Duke University researchers surveyed 400 men with early prostate cancer who had undergone either a traditional “open” surgical procedure or newer robotic surgery to remove the prostate. Overall, the vast majority of men were satisfied. However, 19 percent regretted their treatment choice. Notably, men who had undergone robotic surgery were four times more likely to regret their choice than men who had undergone the open procedure.
Researchers say the higher level of regret among robotic patients suggests that they had higher expectations for their recovery, possibly because the robotic procedure is widely touted as a more innovative surgery than traditional prostatectomy. Even among men who had the same scores on erectile function and other measures of post-surgery recovery, the robotic patients still reported a higher level of dissatisfaction and regret than other men.
Part of the problem may be that doctors who perform robotic prostatectomies commonly cite potency rates as high as 95 percent and above among their patients, giving patients an unrealistic view of life after surgery.
But the data are highly misleading. Researchers often define potency as simply being able to achieve an erection that is “adequate” for intercourse — but for many men, that definition doesn’t capture their ongoing struggle to return to a normal sex life. Earlier this year, researchers from George Washington University and New York University used a more realistic definition of potency, showing that after surgery, fewer than half of the men studied felt their sex lives had returned to normal within a year.
Another important finding of the new research showed that men were less likely to regret their choice shortly after surgery. The men who were long past surgery experienced more regret. That finding likely speaks to the fact that as time passes after surgery, men gain a more realistic view of lingering health and quality-of-life issues like erection problems and other changes in their sex lives.
The Duke researchers said that the study shows urologists need to communicate more carefully the risks and benefits of the treatment prior to surgery so that men have more realistic expectations of what to expect.
i'm sure orphancrow will be able to fill in the details for us.. front page news with picture all over the canadian globe and mail newspaper today.. with major double-page spread across the whole of pages 8 and 9 in the newspaper's front section.. globe and mail, tuesday 8 august 2017.. the patient, a 70-year-old man with high-risk prostate cancer, was a jehovah’s witness.. his religion was one of the reasons he decided to undergo surgery at st. joseph’s healthcare in hamilton, home to a robot named da vinci whose steady metal hands can remove a prostate with scant risk of the blood transfusions forbidden by the man’s faith.. on a recent afternoon, the patient laid unconscious on an operating table as surgeon bobby shayegan and his team plunged a camera and three robotically controlled surgical instruments through small incisions in his abdomen.. dr. shayegan settled himself in front of a three-dimensional screen, clasped the two joysticks that controlled the tools inside his patient’s pelvis and proceeded to cut, cauterize and stitch until he freed the man’s prostate, pulling it out through one of the original incisions.. there was next to no blood.. “that was routine,” dr. shayegan said afterward, holding the plum-sized gland that he and the robot had removed together.
...in its first real ruling on a robotic surgery, the expert committee that advises ontario on which new health technologies to pay for said there was no good evidence that robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is any better than conventional open surgery when it comes to controlling cancer or preserving urinary and sexual function.. the panel said the robot’s other benefits – patients have smaller incisions, lose less blood, suffer less pain and leave the hospital sooner – were not significant enough to justify spending, on average, an extra $3,224 a case, a figure that does not include the millions that wealthy benefactors have spent buying the machines for canadian hospitals.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/the-fight-for-robots-in-canadas-operatingrooms/article35897282/.
ILoveTTAT2: There is very little good data that shows benefits/drawbacks, and the data is flawed... the entire rest of the article says so!
Exactly. I say "good for Ontario" for demanding solid evidence instead of just jumping on the technology bandwagon
But in the rush to adopt the da Vinci technology, few researchers conducted randomized controlled trials comparing robot-assisted prostatectomy to open surgery, the gold standard in evidence.
"One of the stories here," Dr. Dhalla said, "is why isn't there good evidence?"
He estimated that hundreds of thousands of men around the world have had a robot-assisted prostatectomy, "and there's been one, tiny randomized control trial in Australia with about 300 patients comparing the open approach with the robotic approach."
That Australian study, published a year ago in The Lancet, was the foundation of OHTAC's thumbs-down for robot-assisted prostatectomies.
The study, which followed 157 men who underwent robot-assisted surgery and 151 who underwent open surgery, found no statistically significant difference in cancer control, urinary function or sexual function between the two types of surgery.
Critics of the OHTAC report say the Australian study has profound shortcomings – namely, that it compared the work of an experienced open surgeon to that of a robotics novice.
The study also reported outcomes only three months after surgery, which could mask longer-term benefits of the robotic approach, said Stephen Pautler, a professor of surgery at Western University in London, Ont., who was among the urologists who asked to have their names taken off OHTAC's final report.
"We said you [OHTAC] are basing the entire economic analysis on a flawed study," Dr. Pautler said. "They were absolutely rigid and would not change their mind."
(Intuitive, for its part, said in an e-mailed statement there are many studies backing the da Vinci Surgical System that rely on "real-world evidence." The company called OHTAC's heavy reliance on randomized controlled trial data "inconsistent" with recent health-technology assessments in other places, including Alberta, the only province that funds robot-assisted surgery.)But Anthony Adili, the chief of surgery at St. Joseph's Healthcare and a cheerleader for robotic surgery, said he couldn't fault OHTAC when the committee had so little high-quality evidence at its disposal.
john cedars latest youtube video refers to last weekend's wt study article which some have referred to on another thread but i am truly outraged at the continuing misogynist attitude toward women.
not only did that study article say if women have a family to care for it will stop them gossiping or meddling into other people's affairs, lloyd shares on his video a talk by sam herd from when he was a c.o in 1971.
(i hope he has since changed his opinion!
believing that it is ok to throw in the 'sorry, it must be your time of the month' when somebody doesn't agree with you, is just one of those 'small beginnings'.
bullshit
That is like saying it is like a big man throwing rocks at a little girl and then calling foul when she throws a handful of sand back
boo hoo
Or like they guy who wants mommy to look at his bandaid when she is lying in bed with last stage cancer
jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.
but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .
i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.
Question. Relating, sort of, to the OP.
About the JWs "restoring" the name of god in places in the NT where the term "Lord" is used. The premise is that if the OT verse is quoted in the NT, then that verse should say Jehovah. Do I have that right? It is pretty simple. OT verse in the NT should say "Jehovah" instead of "Lord".
Maybe SFB can answer this for me, seeing as he has read the background for this....Why, then, does Hebrews 1: 10-12, in the JWs NWT, still retain the term "Lord" when it quotes a verse from Psalms?
john cedars latest youtube video refers to last weekend's wt study article which some have referred to on another thread but i am truly outraged at the continuing misogynist attitude toward women.
not only did that study article say if women have a family to care for it will stop them gossiping or meddling into other people's affairs, lloyd shares on his video a talk by sam herd from when he was a c.o in 1971.
(i hope he has since changed his opinion!
Hi darkspliver.
Seriously? You really think that is a fair comparison? Aren't you swatting at a mosquito when Phoebe is talking about the shark tank??
http://watchtowerdocuments.org/wbbr-am-a-pioneering-radio-experiment/#more-9319.
wbbr-am: a “pioneering” radio experiment by the watch tower .
introduction to main article.
Anderson: Thanks Orphan Crow for your post regarding some of IBSA's history in British Columbia which I'll add to the original article that appears on Watchtower Documents.
That was Hoser who did that! I just added the link.
I actually didn't know anything about the ISBA's radio history in Canada and I was fascinated with the connection to the Klu Klux Klan in Saskatchewan. For those who don't know, the Klan's history runs deep in this province and the ISBA and the Klan shared anti-Catholic sentiments.That radio broadcasting would have been happening when my grandparents in Saskatchewan converted to the Russellites.
As well, it is interesting that it was the ISBA's inflammatory attacks on other religions and government that led to a Canadian Royal Commission, and from there, the establishment of our CBC, which exists to this day.
jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.
but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .
i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.
sbf: Before 2001 I hardly heard abuse even mentioned as a reason for leaving JWs. Yet now, justifiably, it's a major, if not the major thing former JWs are corcerned about.
Just because you didn't hear about it, doesn't mean that it wasn't a large issue in many who left before you "hardly heard" about it.
The way you have worded your position, assumes that your position is correct. It isn't. It is only your view and it is lacking in perspective. Your statement leads the reader to think that abuse was rarely, if ever, the reason for leaving. That is not a valid conclusion. It is misleading.
we often have debates on this site about what was written in the bible and why.
there are also debates about which bible is better .
then there's the debate about if the quran is really the better book or more accurate.
CrazyGuy: In the first century when Jesus was supposedly alive less then 1% of the population could read. So with that being said why would a god put his ideas and his expectations in a book?
I think the answer to your question lies inside the question itself:
"...less than 1% of the population"
That 'less than 1%' is the elite ruling class. They control the word, the voice and the rules that the voice declares. The written word survives beyond each generation and as such, contains the power of time.
There is a reason that John 1:1 says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
The Word, the written down rules of the powerful elite class, was given divine power over the masses - that multitude of people who could not read.
The Word became God. The Word was the power of the elite.
http://watchtowerdocuments.org/wbbr-am-a-pioneering-radio-experiment/#more-9319.
wbbr-am: a “pioneering” radio experiment by the watch tower .
introduction to main article.
hoser: Link doesn't work so you have to google
I found this:
In 1925 or 1926, CFYC entered the final phase of its life under the International Bible Students Association, which later became the Jehovah's Witnesses. As a boy, John Avison played the piano for Bible Students' programs at a studio on Hastings Street. JOHN AvtsoN: I used to be amused by the fact that the manager of the station was a man with, I think, not a suitable name for a radio station manager: his name was W. J. Tinney. They had a group called "The Choir of a Million Voices." Of course, they couldn't accommodate a million voices, but this was premised on the fact that they sold the hymn books. They assumed that everybody who bought a hymn book, all across the country, would be joining in. I played the piano for the choir and played solos. The religious part, outside of playing for the choir, was not part of my knowledge of the station at all. CFYC moved out of the building on Hastings Street to a very large house on Kingsway near Central Park [in Burnaby]. I think that was just about the end of the operation of the station. In addition to CFYC, the International Bible Students Association was also operating radio stations in Edmonton and Saskatoon and two stations in Toronto. These stations were the focus of a dispute that had a profound effect on the future of Canadian broadcasting. In 1928, the Department of Marine and Fisheries refused to renew the licences of the IBSA stations on the grounds that the Bible Students were using the airwaves to attack other religious groups. Although the government was acting in response to complaints from the public, the number and credibility of the complaints received were questionable. The only significant case of defamatory broadcasting involved two anti -Catholic lectures by a Ku Klux Klan spokesman who had purchased time on the Saskatoon IBSA station. Nevertheless, the licences were not renewed. CFYC Vancouver and its sister stations went off the air in March 1928. The whole issue was vigorously debated in Parliament and in the press. The government was accused of religious discrimination in the matter, and received a tide of letters and petitions in support of the Bible Students. The controversy led, in the same year, to the creation of a royal commission on Canadian broadcasting led by Sir John Aird. The Aird Commission's recommendations pointed the way to the establishment of the CBC some years later.
