I just knew that was going to elicit a response! I even got an implicitly reproachful PM. Interestingly both people who responded are two of the most sensible and cautious posters we have---well-educated posters who make very responsible suggestions IMO. I don't recall either of those posters ever suggesting settings for medically challenging cases on these message boards. Honestly, you two always seem to intuitively know when the ratio of known-factors to unknown-factors gets unwieldy.Wulfman wrote:Whatchu talkin' 'bout Willis?-SWS wrote:Lastly, beware that message boards can be a "dial wingers" paradise. In general people love to help. And in general some helpful people simply don't know what it is they don't know---strange as that entirely lacking type of self assessment sounds. Proceed with caution if the dial wingers decide to woo you.
When I read the part I bolded, I thought of this......
"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know." - Donald Rumsfeld
Yes, proceed with caution.....don't be a "dial winger" unless/until "you KNOW what is is you don't know"....
Den
By contrast there is never a shortage of people on message boards who are avidly willing to wager their best guesses when diseased physiology drastically and obviously deviates from simple obstructive apnea. Voila! Enter the avid guessers! Now why is it that you two posters never enter those threads with specific settings to try? Because you understand perfectly that there is plenty that you don't know.
Now for the PM assessment that my statement was inflationary (you know who you are ). I too understand that there is very little about physiology that I truly understand. I understand that my ignorance of fact far exceeds my knowledge. I also understand that being wrong is much like quantum mechanics: we can predict the aggregate rate but we can never predict the individual occurrences. When I wake up each morning I seldom revel in what very little in this world I truly know. Rather I set about the business of methodically addressing my remaining vast ignorances. I expect to be wrong and I expect to be ignorant---again and again. It's a "deflationary" given.
So is it ignorant or egotistical of me to wish that some members of this message board were a little more reluctant to dive in with guesses when cases are medically challenging---and to be a little more inclined to recommend professional assistance? Quite honestly, I don't think it is. I think it's a perfectly rational opinion. And it's an opinion that doesn't get voiced nearly enough on this message board. Message board help is clearly a knife with two edges. Ironic that the two people who took issue with my position have always wielded the correct edge of the knife---when I'm positive they have repeatedly noticed that same two-sided message-board knife employed with sorely lacking caution.




