Page 6 of 7
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2025 6:36 am
by daBee
Well here is what I got, for what it's worth. The second one is this morning.
UPDATE: AI recommended dropping the pressures (I was on APAP) to 6-12. I did that earlier and had a morning sleep for over 5 hours. Just over API 2. That looks very promising. The card was not in the machine so I'll post what comes today/tonight.
- Screenshot 2025-11-16 at 7.33.16 AM.png (740.88 KiB) Viewed 1488 times
- Screenshot 2025-11-16 at 7.33.37 AM.png (718.45 KiB) Viewed 1488 times
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2025 1:10 pm
by Miss Emerita
I'm glad to hear you've had some promising signs. I look forward to seeing the next chart at your new settings.
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2025 10:08 am
by Dog Slobber
daBee wrote: ↑Sun Nov 16, 2025 6:36 am
UPDATE: AI recommended dropping the pressures (I was on APAP) to 6-12.
Following the advice of AI for CPAP settings, absolutely has to be discouraged.
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2025 10:13 am
by daBee
Dog Slobber wrote: ↑Mon Nov 17, 2025 10:08 am
daBee wrote: ↑Sun Nov 16, 2025 6:36 am
UPDATE: AI recommended dropping the pressures (I was on APAP) to 6-12.
Following the advice of AI for CPAP settings, absolutely has to be discouraged.
To set it back to the default pressure? Tell me why it's discouraged. It's been working pretty well so far. And yes, I will be bringing it up with my sleep doctor. I was within this range for years.
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2025 11:14 am
by Dog Slobber
daBee wrote: ↑Mon Nov 17, 2025 10:13 am
Dog Slobber wrote: ↑Mon Nov 17, 2025 10:08 am
daBee wrote: ↑Sun Nov 16, 2025 6:36 am
UPDATE: AI recommended dropping the pressures (I was on APAP) to 6-12.
Following the advice of AI for CPAP settings, absolutely has to be discouraged.
To set it back to the default pressure? Tell me why it's discouraged. It's been working pretty well so far. And yes, I will be bringing it up with my sleep doctor. I was within this range for years.
I didn't say "
setting it back to the default" should be discouraged, I said "
Following the advice of AI for CPAP settings", should be discouraged.
But, if you set it back to the default, 4-20, then yes, that too should be discouraged.
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2025 12:01 pm
by daBee
Dog Slobber wrote: ↑Mon Nov 17, 2025 11:14 am
daBee wrote: ↑Mon Nov 17, 2025 10:13 am
Dog Slobber wrote: ↑Mon Nov 17, 2025 10:08 am
daBee wrote: ↑Sun Nov 16, 2025 6:36 am
UPDATE: AI recommended dropping the pressures (I was on APAP) to 6-12.
Following the advice of AI for CPAP settings, absolutely has to be discouraged.
To set it back to the default pressure? Tell me why it's discouraged. It's been working pretty well so far. And yes, I will be bringing it up with my sleep doctor. I was within this range for years.
I didn't say "
setting it back to the default" should be discouraged, I said "
Following the advice of AI for CPAP settings", should be discouraged.
But, if you set it back to the default, 4-20, then yes, that too should be discouraged.
6-12 and 4-20 are pretty much the same thing compared to the 8cm I was told to use/try. And you still haven't explained why either of those is discouraged. Discouraged by whom? And why?
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2025 4:21 am
by daBee
Here are some more measurements.
- Screenshot 2025-11-18 at 4.38.33 AM.png (719.98 KiB) Viewed 662 times
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2025 8:16 am
by ozij
I don't understand full columns that are appearing in both the flow and the mask pressure, at 04:33 or so. They appeared in other charts as well.
I've never seen anything like it.
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2025 8:26 am
by Dog Slobber
daBee wrote: ↑Mon Nov 17, 2025 12:01 pm
6-12 and 4-20 are pretty much the same thing compared to the 8cm I was told to use/try. And you still haven't explained why either of those is discouraged. Discouraged by whom? And why?
Huh, so you're claiming that 4-20 is pretty much the same as a min pressure of 8. absolutely not.
A minimum of 4 is only used by lazy doctors and for children. It is far too low to adequately treat and too far away from one's treatment needs to an adequate pressure in time, when events start to happen.
For your case 6, is too low, this is obvious because as soon as treatment kicks in it jumps rapidly from 6, and stays above it.
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2025 9:31 am
by daBee
Dog Slobber wrote: ↑Tue Nov 18, 2025 8:26 am
daBee wrote: ↑Mon Nov 17, 2025 12:01 pm
6-12 and 4-20 are pretty much the same thing compared to the 8cm I was told to use/try. And you still haven't explained why either of those is discouraged. Discouraged by whom? And why?
Huh, so you're claiming that 4-20 is pretty much the same as a min pressure of 8. absolutely not.
A minimum of 4 is only used by lazy doctors and for children. It is far too low to adequately treat and too far away from one's treatment needs to an adequate pressure in time, when events start to happen.
For your case 6, is too low, this is obvious because as soon as treatment kicks in it jumps rapidly from 6, and stays above it.
That's what the machine is designed to do. Maintaining 8 cm obviously creates issues and anything higher has shown to create even more problems. And it seems this new setting is getting results.
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2025 10:02 am
by Dog Slobber
daBee wrote: ↑Tue Nov 18, 2025 9:31 am
Dog Slobber wrote: ↑Tue Nov 18, 2025 8:26 am
daBee wrote: ↑Mon Nov 17, 2025 12:01 pm
6-12 and 4-20 are pretty much the same thing compared to the 8cm I was told to use/try. And you still haven't explained why either of those is discouraged. Discouraged by whom? And why?
Huh, so you're claiming that 4-20 is pretty much the same as a min pressure of 8. absolutely not.
A minimum of 4 is only used by lazy doctors and for children. It is far too low to adequately treat and too far away from one's treatment needs to an adequate pressure in time, when events start to happen.
For your case 6, is too low, this is obvious because as soon as treatment kicks in it jumps rapidly from 6, and stays above it.
That's what the machine is designed to do. Maintaining 8 cm obviously creates issues and anything higher has shown to create even more problems. And it seems this new setting is getting results.
Is this what AI told you?
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2025 10:07 am
by daBee
Dog Slobber wrote: ↑Tue Nov 18, 2025 10:02 am
daBee wrote: ↑Tue Nov 18, 2025 9:31 am
Dog Slobber wrote: ↑Tue Nov 18, 2025 8:26 am
daBee wrote: ↑Mon Nov 17, 2025 12:01 pm
6-12 and 4-20 are pretty much the same thing compared to the 8cm I was told to use/try. And you still haven't explained why either of those is discouraged. Discouraged by whom? And why?
Huh, so you're claiming that 4-20 is pretty much the same as a min pressure of 8. absolutely not.
A minimum of 4 is only used by lazy doctors and for children. It is far too low to adequately treat and too far away from one's treatment needs to an adequate pressure in time, when events start to happen.
For your case 6, is too low, this is obvious because as soon as treatment kicks in it jumps rapidly from 6, and stays above it.
That's what the machine is designed to do. Maintaining 8 cm obviously creates issues and anything higher has shown to create even more problems. And it seems this new setting is getting results.
Is this what AI told you?
No, my observations. This thread was started because of it. Second, the chart I posted doesn't "jump rapidly from 6 and stays above it". That's just in your head. That's why we post statistics like this. Maybe you should use AI to explain it
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2025 10:28 am
by Dog Slobber
You don't have a clue. Your pressure, absolutely rose quicly and then never returned to 6, or even close tyo it.
You got your CPAP knowlege from AI and your machine sitting in a closet for years.
You constantly misinterpret what others say, and then create strawmen to defend your misinterpretations.
I made the statement that One should never use AI for their CPAP settings. You interpreted that as "To set it back to the default pressure? Tell me why it's discouraged". HUH?????
You made an absolute idiotic statement that 4-20 is basically the same as a minimum of 8.
You are now arguing that my explanation of why 4-20 is discouraged by showing data for your machine at 6-12.
Somehow you believe that potential problems from high pressures can be resolved by lowering the minimum pressure. That's just stupid. In fact, excessively low minimum pressures can cause these devices to achieve higher peak pressures.
Here's a clue, if you are experiencing potential problems from high peak pressures you limit the maximum pressure, and then gradually increase your minimum to flatten the trace.
But you're not interested in explanations, or learning you're argumentative nature combined with your ignorance is just tedious.
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2025 10:52 am
by daBee
Dog Slobber wrote: ↑Tue Nov 18, 2025 10:28 am
You don't have a clue. Your pressure, absolutely rose quicly and then never returned to 6, or even close tyo it.
You got your CPAP knowlege from AI and your machine sitting in a closet for years.
You constantly misinterpret what others say, and then create strawmen to defend your misinterpretations.
I made the statement that
One should never use AI for their CPAP settings. You interpreted that as "
To set it back to the default pressure? Tell me why it's discouraged". HUH?????
You made an absolute idiotic statement that 4-20 is basically the same as a minimum of 8.
You are now arguing that my explanation of why 4-20 is discouraged by showing data for your machine at 6-12.
Somehow you believe that potential problems from high pressures can be resolved by lowering the minimum pressure. That's just stupid. In fact, excessively low minimum pressures can cause these devices to achieve higher peak pressures.
Here's a clue, if you are experiencing potential problems from high peak pressures you limit the maximum pressure, and then gradually increase your minimum to flatten the trace.
But you're not interested in explanations, or learning you're argumentative nature combined with your ignorance is just tedious.
I do have a clue. Look at the chart. You said it rose quickly. It didn't. The first half shows it likes 6 cm. Not sure why you said that, and I'm sure you don't either. My machine is sitting in a closet? Let me guess, I'm making up these posts then? Seems you need some sleep.
8 is not 6. Maybe your delusion has convinced you of this as well. It seems you're threatened by AI and actual observations. That's pretty idiotic if you ask me.
I asked AI about claustrophobia, which I was experiencing. And it said that lowing pressure can fix this. So I lowered it. And it worked. You can't seem to grasp this. It's in the trial and it's clearly observed and experienced that it's working. But you aren't up for any remedial science as you have a grudge against AI. You don't have an explanation, other than the fabricated data in your head. Step away from the bong. That's my recommendation.
Re: Yet Another Attempt
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2025 11:24 am
by Dog Slobber
At 3:55 it rose from about 7, to 9.8 in a couple minutes. And then it never returned below 7.5, how can you dispute that?
You're just dishonest.
And your ignorance about how these devices work is once again demonstrated with how you incorrectly applied the AI advice.
You said, "And it said that lowing pressure can fix this. So I lowered it."
You did not lower the pressure, you effectively lowered the boundaries that APAP operates with in. With APAP you can't and don't set the pressure, the algorithm does.
How many times do I need to point out how you misunderstand and misinterpret what should be simple to understand. Perhaps you should put your silly machine back in the closet for a couple more years to gain more experience.