Risks of Surgery:

[freedomfries2]

Interesting article on the risks of surgery for sleep apnea. http://healthlifeandstuff.com/2009/07/s ... eep-apnea/

[Wulfman]

Interesting article on the risks of surgery for sleep apnea. http://healthlifeandstuff.com/2009/07/s ... eep-apnea/

Yup! And they've all been discussed here (in varying degrees) over the years. It's too bad that more patients didn't do their homework before consenting to those procedures. Lots of horror stories.


Den

[Jason S.]

Interesting article on the risks of surgery for sleep apnea. http://healthlifeandstuff.com/2009/07/s ... eep-apnea/

I wouldn't have the surgery anyway, but the link you posted is a paid advertisement, not an article from a medical journal or one that offers any documented research. See the sponsors below the article. Nowadays you have to be careful when viewing content on the web and be able to distinguish what is genuine medical research and what is actually product promotion under the guise of a "medical article".

[Wulfman]

Interesting article on the risks of surgery for sleep apnea. http://healthlifeandstuff.com/2009/07/s ... eep-apnea/

I wouldn't have the surgery anyway, but the link you posted is a paid advertisement, not an article from a medical journal or one that offers any documented research. See the sponsors below the article. Nowadays you have to be careful when viewing content on the web and be able to distinguish what is genuine medical research and what is actually product promotion under the guise of a "medical article".

No it's not! (in my opinion) They have advertising on their pages......that's how lots of websites support their "existence", but this one isn't selling any solutions ("snake oil") or remedies to the information they're posting.

http://healthlifeandstuff.com/about/

http://healthlifeandstuff.com/

http://healthlifeandstuff.com/2009/07/sleep-apnea-101/


Den

[Bearded_One]

Whether or not it is commercial, the information is still valid and accurate.

[Jason S.]

Whether or not it is commercial, the information is still valid and accurate.

How do you know? It may be. It may not be. Its not reliable. That's my point. When you see an "article" bashing surgery and then 5 non-surgical treatment ads on the right side, and 4 more non-surgical treatment ads on the bottom, do you think maybe there was a point to the "article" other than to freely publish helpful medical information? Duh? The "article" has no author, and cites no documentation to back up its claim. Caveat Emptor, or "there's a sucker born every minute". Take your pick.

[2ndGenCPAPgal]

When you see an "article" bashing surgery and then 5 non-surgical treatment ads on the right side, and 4 more non-surgical treatment ads on the bottom, do you think maybe there was a point to the "article" other than to freely publish helpful medical information? Duh?

Actually, since the ads are by Google, the website probably has little, if any, control over which ads get posted to the article. They possibly have an agreement where Google will supply ads "related" to the article content...but that is up to Google's logic. It also could be based on where each "user" has previously surfed. Here's Google's info about their ads. (sorry about the huge URL, I don't know how to make it pretty)

http://services.google.com/feedback/abg ... ne=1&gl=US

In any case, I agree w/ your advice to be aware of the source of the info, but I think basing the judgement on advertising alone is a bit misguided.

[freedomfries2]

seems like they got rid of most of the advertising anyways...