I've been trying to understand the mindset of some here. Some of the comments -- for a support site -- are bewildering.
Do they write such negative things because they think that what was good enough for them -- when time and place may not have allowed them a valve choice -- should be good enough for everyone else today? Do they actually think that nobody should have any choice, despite medical breakthroughs and advancements?
And what about people who died from failed valves before there was heart valve surgery available? Do you think that they would have thought that what was good enough for them was good enough for everyone who would come after them? Do you think that some may have thought that bodies shouldn't be cut open and hearts shouldn't be taken out and operated on, because it had never been done before? Or do you think that some would have hoped for future medical breakthroughs and advancements, for those who would come after them -- such as how we have all benefited? The other day I read that, these days, 70-80% of valves implanted today are tissue valves. Why, do you think?
Some may claim history is on their side. I don't know what that is supposed to mean really. For what it's worth, my first heart surgery was over 31 years ago and I sure don't claim to know everything.
But this simple fact remains: none of us knows what our medical futures may bring. Valve choice is a serious personal medical decision. I don't think that my valve choice is what everyone else should choose -- because you must realize that we all have unique circumstances, unique health issues and familial histories -- but I hope it was the right choice for me. And I hope your choice is right for you. I'm glad if your valve is still going strong and I'm glad if you are doing well and I hope that continues. And I hope you feel the same for me. That would be support.
Furthermore, regarding accuracy and truthfulness, I've read a dangerously untrue thing here in this thread, posted by a member in their signature. So let the buyer beware.
Do they write such negative things because they think that what was good enough for them -- when time and place may not have allowed them a valve choice -- should be good enough for everyone else today? Do they actually think that nobody should have any choice, despite medical breakthroughs and advancements?
And what about people who died from failed valves before there was heart valve surgery available? Do you think that they would have thought that what was good enough for them was good enough for everyone who would come after them? Do you think that some may have thought that bodies shouldn't be cut open and hearts shouldn't be taken out and operated on, because it had never been done before? Or do you think that some would have hoped for future medical breakthroughs and advancements, for those who would come after them -- such as how we have all benefited? The other day I read that, these days, 70-80% of valves implanted today are tissue valves. Why, do you think?
Some may claim history is on their side. I don't know what that is supposed to mean really. For what it's worth, my first heart surgery was over 31 years ago and I sure don't claim to know everything.
But this simple fact remains: none of us knows what our medical futures may bring. Valve choice is a serious personal medical decision. I don't think that my valve choice is what everyone else should choose -- because you must realize that we all have unique circumstances, unique health issues and familial histories -- but I hope it was the right choice for me. And I hope your choice is right for you. I'm glad if your valve is still going strong and I'm glad if you are doing well and I hope that continues. And I hope you feel the same for me. That would be support.
Furthermore, regarding accuracy and truthfulness, I've read a dangerously untrue thing here in this thread, posted by a member in their signature. So let the buyer beware.
