transport-sleep-apnea-scam

mollete · Post by **mollete** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 7:48 am

49er wrote:Molette - Come on my friend, why do you have to insult people who post things you don't like?

Not so, and I'll prove it!

49er (hypothetically) wrote:http://www.thetruckersreport.com/trucki ... -scam.html

Wow!

Great post 49er!!

NateS · Post by **NateS** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 11:01 am

Trudger wrote:No, Nate, I will not post any medical report on here, just for the simple fact that I don't have to produce anything, as an American. This is not a communist country, contrary to how you may desire to see it.

Todzo wrote:
You forgot to mention all of the emotionally distracting pictures and all.

I apologize to anyone who was "emotionally distracted" by my neck-measuring photo humor.

Thinking in years gone by of watching one of my grandfathers who was a tailor, it occurred to me just how easy it would be to account for a difference between 16 1/2 vs 17 inches in neck measurement, if one had an adverse interest in the outcome rather than in precisional accuracy.

If I did cause anyone to become emotionally distracted, I sincerely hope that it was not a severe case.

Regards, Nate

chunkyfrog · Post by **chunkyfrog** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 12:03 pm

I wasn't distracted.
If the measurement had been an inseam, however . . .

Trudger · Post by **Trudger** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 1:20 pm

Look, we all ( or many) agree to disagree, which is fine in this country. We are all entitled to our opinion, and have all had differing experiences in life regarding this issue. What I do want to point out here is in that "DOT" regulation post someone put up here, it states that mandatory treatment is required for those diagnosed with MODERATE-SEVERE apnea. Even with Marten's test, I was diagnosed with SLIGHT-MODERATE, which doesn't require mandatory treatment by a doctor (of which they never provided. NEVER spoke with ONE doctor when I was there.) I did nothing illegal, period. I just stood up for my rights, in my opinion.

BlackSpinner · Post by **BlackSpinner** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 1:56 pm

Trudger wrote:Look, we all ( or many) agree to disagree, which is fine in this country. We are all entitled to our opinion, and have all had differing experiences in life regarding this issue. What I do want to point out here is in that "DOT" regulation post someone put up here, it states that mandatory treatment is required for those diagnosed with MODERATE-SEVERE apnea. Even with Marten's test, I was diagnosed with SLIGHT-MODERATE, which doesn't require mandatory treatment by a doctor (of which they never provided. NEVER spoke with ONE doctor when I was there.) I did nothing illegal, period. I just stood up for my rights, in my opinion.

The sleep behind the wheel syndrome hits even slight to moderate levels of OSA. I am sure you are proud you stood up for your right to kill innocent people on the road by using fraudulent methods.

Todzo · Post by **Todzo** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 2:03 pm

The medical community is not accurate or effective in the diagnosis or treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea.

I think that mandatory automated vigilance supervision is a better direction.

NateS · Post by **NateS** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 2:27 pm

Todzo wrote:The medical community is not accurate or effective in the diagnosis or treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea.

I think that mandatory automated vigilance supervision is a better direction.

You mean devices like these?:

Will your next car wake you up when you fall asleep at the wheel?

Sleepy truck drivers have been an issue for about as long as commercial trucking has been around. They operate large, lumbering vehicles that could take out several cars at once. Due to the rigs' size, they can't be maneuvered as quickly as cars or light trucks. And truck drivers simply drive more than other drivers. They may push themselves beyond the limits demanded by the sleep cycle -- the pattern of sleep and wakefulness -- in order to deliver their haul and get home.

The problem posed by snoozing truckers has prompted a glut of studies on how to address the issue of nodding off behind the wheel. These studies have led to regulation and new technologies. The federal government mandates that truckers can drive for no more than 12 hours before taking a mandatory 10-hour break [source: Dallas Morning News]. Researchers have created inventions to keep truckers awake, like LED lights that simulate morning light to trick truckers' circadian rhythm -- the body's natural clock -- into thinking it's morning and time to wake up [source: ScienceDaily].

While truckers make great subjects for tests that aim to solve the problem of drowsy drivers, they're hardly the only ones who fall asleep at the wheel. Auto safety researchers have come up with some clever ways to rouse sleepy drivers in passenger vehicles, too. So will your next car wake you up when you fall asleep? That's a real possibility, especially if you're planning on shelling out the money for a luxury car when you buy your next automobile.

Francis, Erica. "A wake-up call behind the wheel." Forbes Autos. November 26, 2007. http://www.forbesautos.com/news/feature ... wheel.html
Gaskin, Max. "Blue LEDs to reset tired truckers' body clocks." New Scientist. March 18, 2008. http://technology.newscientist.com/arti ... locks.html
LaFleur, Jennifer. "Poodle-toting trucker says diesel runs in her veins." Dallas Morning News. December 11, 2006. http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... 26397.html
Moran, Tim. "Keeping tired drivers alert, with no snooze button." New York Times. March 11, 2007. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/11/autom ... 1WAKE.html
"Electronic warning system to keep drivers alert." Continental Corporation. September 19, 2006. http://www.vdo.com/press/releases/comme ... 005-en.htm
"Lane departure warning systems help drowsy drivers avoid crashes." Science Daily. October 17, 2006. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 121708.htm
"Mercedes Attention Assist nears production." Motor Authority. Decmber 10, 2007. http://www.motorauthority.com/news/safe ... roduction/
"New Mercedes-Benz system warns sleepy drivers." Gizmag. December 12, 2007. http://www.gizmag.com/new-mercedes-benz ... vers/8497/
"Tech watch: Volvo's driver alert control finally ready for prime time." Edmunds. August 30, 2007. http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Ne ... eId=122411
"Volvo's 2020 vision: The injury-proof car." Reuters. May 1, 2008. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24406445/

1998-2013 HowStuffWorks, Inc

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/car-drivi ... ou-up1.htm

One problem with this approach is to note the dates on these reports. It is now 2013 and this concept is still not universally applied. In fact, it is not even minimally applied and people are still getting killed out on the highway by both truck drivers and passenger car drivers falling asleep.

Devices to diagnose and treat sleep apnea, on the other hand, are widely manufactured and available now, in the present.

Regards, Nate

Todzo · Post by **Todzo** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 2:32 pm

NateS wrote:
Todzo wrote:The medical community is not accurate or effective in the diagnosis or treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea.

I think that mandatory automated vigilance supervision is a better direction.
You mean devices like these? ... ... ...

One problem with this approach is to note the dates on these reports. It is now 2013 and this concept is still not universally applied. In fact, it is not even minimally applied and people are still getting killed out on the highway by both truck drivers and passenger car drivers falling asleep.

Regards, Nate

I know that there are many technologies in development.

The trucking industry is critical to our health and wealth. We need someone to coordinate development and then make this work and we need it soon.

BlackSpinner · Post by **BlackSpinner** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 2:53 pm

Todzo wrote: I know that there are many technologies in development.

The trucking industry is critical to our health and wealth. We need someone to coordinate development and then make this work and we need it soon.

By the time they wake you up the truck/car is in another lane, the ditch or the river.

Far, far better is to prevent falling asleep in the first place by testing drivers and making sure they meet health requirements.

Todzo · Post by **Todzo** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 3:30 pm

BlackSpinner wrote:
Todzo wrote: I know that there are many technologies in development.

The trucking industry is critical to our health and wealth. We need someone to coordinate development and then make this work and we need it soon.
By the time they wake you up the truck/car is in another lane, the ditch or the river.

Far, far better is to prevent falling asleep in the first place by testing drivers and making sure they meet health requirements.

The technologies that I know of look for signs of loosing vigilance. This occurs long before a person would drop off.

Sleep apnea testing is miss and miss and maybe hit once in a while and they have no good treatment to offer.

Your proposal seems silly to me. Why propose what will not work?

scbeaver · Post by **scbeaver** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 3:34 pm

In defense of the OP, the test he described sounded like a test pitched to me at a trucking convention. This test should be used as a screening tool for all drivers to decide who should go through a full blown sleep study. I also fault the trucking company for not having a good followup program to help with treatment/compliance. Trudger, you may not be in the clear yet. Once the claim of possible sleep apnea has been made, FMCSA requires you see a doctor and undergo a sleep study. If you did not get a sleep study in a clinical setting, you may have a legal stand against the trucking company. Just do notexpect that to be the case.

Sleep well,

Steve

Trudger · Post by **Trudger** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:22 pm

Like I said, many agree to disagree. I'll leave it at that.

zoocrewphoto · Post by **zoocrewphoto** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:46 pm

Todzo wrote:
BlackSpinner wrote:
Todzo wrote:
Sleep apnea testing is miss and miss and maybe hit once in a while and they have no good treatment to offer.

This is your opinion, yet you state it like it is fact. The treatment is good. The help and followup is crappy. If everybody got a good machine with data so that treatment was monitored enough to make sure it was working, AND help given to the patient to adjust to using the machine - then the treatment will work for most people. Assuming of course that they are past the denial phase and willing to work on their health.

You make it sound like most people are doomed to fail. Maybe years ago when all machines were bricks, and there was no internet. But these days, people have the tools to be their own advocate and improve their own therapy.

Todzo · Post by **Todzo** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 10:32 pm

zoocrewphoto wrote: The treatment is good.

The treatment works less than half of the time and you call that "good"?!?!? What is wrong with you!

zoocrewphoto · Post by **zoocrewphoto** » Sun Jun 02, 2013 10:41 pm

Todzo wrote:
zoocrewphoto wrote: The treatment is good.
The treatment works less than half of the time and you call that "good"?!?!? What is wrong with you!

Your statement is totally wrong.l What is wrong with YOU?

The people who fail to continue treatment probably never got real treatment in the first place. You can't just get a brick, no help, and expect success.

If the machine is set correctly for the patient, AND the patient finds the right mask, AND uses it every night - then the treatment works for MOST people.

Let me explain this differently. If 100 people are prescribed a medication that is known to work well, and only 20 people continue to take it, did the medication really fail? Or did the people fail? You are blaming the medication when there were lots of reasons that a person may have quit taking it. They may not think it is important. They may forget it. They may have trouble swallowing pills. They may not have insurance and didn't want to pay for it, etc.

CPAP treatment works well for most people who USE it. The machine does its job and holds the airway open. But it has to be set correctly and used.

People quitting is a totally different issue. Stop combining them.

transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam

Re: transport-sleep-apnea-scam