Anonymous wrote:Granted if you took that all to heart and practiced it then everything would be just fine and dandy now wouldn't it?
but the way I see it you members ARE the ones passing along the incorrect information here. I know exactly what the brochure says and how C-Flex works so I don't need any correcting especially from Brent Hutto.
I have no opinion on what you do or don't need. A post was made that was incorrect. I followed it up with a post containing the correct information. That was simply a CPAP-related message that I thought would be of interest and use to readers of this CPAP forum. The rest of this thread concerns personal issues of one or more persons posting anonymously which seems pretty off-topic.
I seen nothing wrong with what Guest had originally posted that needed or deserved "correcting" by Brent Hutto, or further being shown incorrect by Rested Gal.
What's wrong with the original
Guest assertion is that is was incorrect. No big deal, everyone of us have been mistaken at one time or another. The fact that you can find one illustration in one Respironics brochure that fails to definitively contradict that incorrect assertion means nothing and frankly I'm not sure what purpose you hope to serve by continuing to obfuscate an issue that is actually very straightforward and amply documented.
Many sources have been pointed out which say that the exhalation relief is explicitly not designed to be 1cm, 2cm, 3cm of pressure. Yet you find one chart which happens to illustrate something in the neighborhood of those pressures and jump directly to the conclusion that all other documentation is incorrect. All this even though nothing in your preferred source contradicts my statement in any way. I never said that under no circumstances could a Cflex setting of "2" result in 2cm of pressure reduction. I said that the setting of "2" did not correspond to any particular pressure reduction and that the exhalation relief varies with the particular situation of its use.
He and the members here of the "good ole boy network" seem to have this pet peeve and bad habit of doing that whenever they see a "Guest" post here.
Please don't tell me what my pet peeves are. I have a habit (which I do not think is bad) of correcting most errors that I read in postings on this forum. For my part, it matters not if the error was made by
Guest or by
Rested Girl,
Nighthawkeye or anyone else. Heck, I'll point out errors in my own postings if I happen to notice them before someone else does. I've stated repeately that I have no problem with the site allowing anonymous
Guest posting (at least to the point of saying that I understand why they must do so even if it's not ideal in my opinion).
Guest(s) have just as much right to post here as the members do until cpaptalk changes its current policy.
They certainly do. And they also receive the full benefit of a community of engaged and concerned cpap.com users (including other anonymous posters) who will point out and correct any mistaken assertions in their posts. Just like registered posters.
But when a Guest does post here, Brent has to come right along afterward and either dispute or critique what was already said with quotes all in order to discredit what a non-member Guest had written. He has demonstrated that over and over in his posts.
OK, now you're over the line. I don't care if you register here or not but my one real, true, birth-certificate name is right there on every utterance I make on this forum. You will refrain from making unwarrented assertions about my motives and stick to the actual content of what I post. What I belive I've demonstrated "over and over" is a respect for other posters here (registered and anonymous) and an avoidance of the
ad hominum attacks that you favor.
If someone is discredited, it will be with no help from me. I'm not the one that anonymously posted a factually incorrect "explanation", I'm not the one that chose to do so anonymously and I'm not the one choosing to turn a simple correction into some sort of narcissistic battle of personalities and deny the mistake in the face of multiple sources of documentation to the contrary.
And being a member here don't mean squat that I can tell, anyone can sign up here including the spammer bots. Being a member says nothing of what you know or what experience you have so it gives you no right to correct others.
You're correct. Cflex works as it does regardless of whether you post anonymously or I am registered on this forum. I can't imagine any reason why you have taken the thread so far off-topic except to distract the discussion from the original erroneous statement.
Here's a clue. If you don't want something you post to be corrected, then
don't post incorrect information. If you post something in this forum, whether anonoymously or with a registered username, anyone who disagrees may indeed post a contradiction. That's a good thing. That way someone doesn't read the thread and take away bogus information or advice nearly as often as they would if no assertion were ever contradited.
Are you seriously suggesting that anyone who wants to should post any made-up ridiculous claim here and that they're entitled to it being left alone an accepted as fact?
For the post in question; Guest did NOT say the C-Flex settings corresponded with any given "Pressure" setting that was Brent's OWN interpretation of what was written, like I said his goal is to only discredit or show where a Guest was somehow incorrect. Then Rested Gal another members like to chime in to Brents defense of who's correct and who's not, like that really means anything either. I realize some have nothing better to do then spend all day and night on sleep discussion boards on the WWW, and with all do respect to her, she is also incorrect in her understanding of C-Flex if her thinking is the same as Brents.
Well, here's the first paragraph of the original
Guest post:
if you think about it, if your pressure is under 10cm, cflex doesn't help all that much. For example, if your pressure is 8 or 9cm and you use a setting of 3 so it drops to 5 or 6cm on exhale.
Let's see, 8cm-3cm=5cm and 9cm-3cm=6cm so I see no possible interpretation of the statement other than the assertion that a setting of "3' corresponds to 3cm of pressure reduction. If
Guest meant something different then he/she/it should have said something different. Now here is my original correction to that assertion:
Actually, the Cflex setting is not in pressure units. Each setting (1, 2 or 3) is arbitrary and the amount and duration of pressure reduction at the beginning of exhalation is proportional to the Cflex setting and the forcefulness of the exhale.
That seems like a pretty neutral, unconfrontational and to-the-point statement of the way that Cflex works. If
Guest found that to be personally threatening or insulting then
Guest has some sort of personality disorder that renders
Guest's sensibilities awfully delicate to be participating in a public forum (especially one that allow anonymous posting). If my point had been that
Guest is a bad person or that
Guest should not be allowed to post on the forum, I would have stated that and not wasted my time explaining how Cflex works.
Look I'm no expert here and don't claim to be, so don't take my word for it, go to Respironics website and download the PDF C-Flex brochure for the machine, look on page 2 "How C-Flex Works" in it you will find 3 charts on the left side that clearly show how C-Flex changes the air flow curve based on the 3 settings.
I've read every brochure I can find on Cflex, the clinical studies I could find in medical journals on Cflex as well as Repironics APAP algorithm and all the user experiences I could dredge up on this an another forum. I never once for a moment failed to understand how Cflex works and frankly it seems odd to me that anyone could believe that the setting correspond to specific levels of 1cm, 2cm or 3cm of pressure reduction. I guess I have failed to miss the point somehow.
It clearly shows the 3 flow charts one for each setting, for C-Flex settings 1, 2 or 3 with "Pressures" shown on the left side going up from 7cm to 14cm on the left side of each chart starting with a base pressure of 11cm.
Are you referring to this brochure?
http://cflex.respironics.com/PDF/102456 ... d63005.PDF
because the graphs it has labelled "C-flex setting=1", "C-flex setting=2", "C-flex setting=3" don't even have the axes marked in units of pressure at all.
Now if the settings didn't correspond with some kind of pressure relief then WHY did they include pressures shown on the left side in the examples?
Of course the Cflex settings correspond to "some kind of pressure relief".
Guest asserted that the pressure relief was calibrated in centimeters of water pressure numerically matching the Cflex setting which is not true and that's what my response corrected. Certainly noone in this thread claimed that the Cflex settings were for something other than pressure relief.
Look there are a few members here self pro-claiming to be "experts" on a topic that they themselves don't even know what they are talking about and think its cool to discredit what others have said only because they are non-members. It seems you members have ignored the disclaimer on cpaptalk with your own interpretation of something else.
I thought this was a community of CPAP users. If there are any "experts" by the reckoning of this forum it would have to be the professionals who work at cpap.com, not the registered and anonymous posters here. I think everyone understands that quite well, except perhaps yourself.
Fact is the "variable" part of C-Flex can vary "up to the setting" (my interpretation of it according to the Respironics chart), if your on a setting of 1, the chart shows relief can vary from 0cm to 1cm, the chart of mention example shows relief at setting 1 to only .5cm (the variable part), if your on 2 it can vary from 0cm to 2cm relief, if your on 3 it can vary from 0cm to 3cm relief ALL BASED ON YOUR EXHALE FLOW JUST LIKE THE BROCHURE CLEARLY SHOWS.
I don't really care about your intrepretation of whatever chart you happen to be looking at. Your explanation here is incorrect. There is no "up to the setting" principle at all. The exhalation relief at a setting of "1" can be less than 1cm, it can be 1cm
or it can be more than 1cm depending on the forcefulness of the beginning of exhalation. Let me state it again very clearly, the numeral "1" in the Cflex setting has not relation whatsoever to "1cm". It wasn't designed to be 1cm and it won't work out to be 1cm except once in a while by happenstance. It ain't 0cm to 1cm with a setting of "1", it ain't 0cm to 2cm with a setting of "2" and it ain't 0cm to 3cm with a setting of "3", no matter how many times or how forcefully you repeat it.
And I'm not saying that because you're anonymous, I'm not even saying it because you're an unpleasant little toad of a person who acts on random personal grudges against people you've never even met. I'm saying it because your statements don't match the documented, objective reality of how Repironics's Cflex technology is designed and how it operates in the real world.
The brochure says absolutely nothing that pressure variable relief will EXCEED those value settings. If the setting of 1 varied higher then why didn't they show an example at 1.5cm in the example instead of .5cm? Because it doesn't exceed it that is why. Now I'm not making this all up, that is what the Remstar Pro C-Flex brochure clearly shows on page 2.
It's a
example, silly.
If that is not the way C-Flex works then Respironics should correct their brochure, so far nearly 3 years later after being published they haven't done so, so I will assume what the manufacturer is saying in their product brochure is still correct over any information I see posted here.
And it doesn't really matter what some Product Manager says, he was only repeating what the brochure already says in the text to the right of the charts
So what the manufacturer's Product Manager says should be ignored because it contradicts how
Guest interprets one particular piece of marketing literature.
If the information contained in the brochure was wrong (does happen), then he should have corrected it with his Marketing department and removed it from public dissemination.
If you find it misleading then why not send them an E-mail and tell them it confused you?
Then if you interpret it wrongly than that is your own fault, but I'm only going by what the brochure and manufacturer is saying in their published material until they change it otherwise. You "experts" need to understand what the "variable" part means when they say it is variable "based upon your expiratory flow and setting", in fact the brochure says:
"With three C-Flex settings, patients have the ability to select the level of pressure relief that's right for them."
Let me repeat what the brochure says: "select the level of pressure relief" if you want 0cm to 1cm relief you select setting 1, if you want 0cm to 2cm relief you select setting 2, if you want 0cm to 3cm relief you select setting 3. If you want 0cm to 5cm relief you need a bi-pap.
OK, so you repeat what the brochure says. Then you turn around and repeat your own made-up "0cm to 1cm" nonsense. Nowhere in the brochure or in any Respironics publication or utterance does it say anything about "0cm to 2cm" or any of the other fanciful stuff you keep repeating. You can't quote "select the level of pressure relief" and then expect us to accept that as documenation of your own claims which are far beyond that rather vague statement. For that matter you might as well claim that "select the level of pressure relief" means that a genie appears and conducts a PSG study in your bedroom.
The Respironics part number for the C-Flex document in PDF form is: 1016940 KW dated 08/18/03.
So if you want to post accurate information, then by all means post it, but don't sit around and "target all the Guest posts" just because they are a "Guest". Your post only goes to reinforce my point.
Everything I've posted in this thread is accurate. And it isn't because I registered my username. You go on quoting random sentence fragments from brochure and I'll go on corrected whatever flights of fancy you indulge in afterward.
