guy at park

[jc71]

I saw this dude with no shirt on while my wife and I were at the park today.  

I noticed a very small scar next to each of his areolas.  Being on these boards, I guess i've developed a good eye for noticing stuff like that.

I flat out asked this dude if he had gyne and he said yes.  He had glandular excision (lipo wasn't created yet).

He had surgery 25 years ago in 1980 when he was 13 years old (now 38 ).  His results were very encouraging.

I thought, if they could do a great job like that in 1980, they should be able to do really good today.  

I guess it still depends on picking the right surgeon.

I'm not asking any of you to respond.  I just thought I'd tell you guys about that strange experience. :-/

[Blarneystoner]

wow i didn't know they could do that kind of surgery in the 1980s. But wait a minute, if it was 25 years ago, why was the scar still visible!

[jc71]

But wait a minute, if it was 25 years ago, why was the scar still visible!

It's one of those things that you'd have to see it to know what i'm talking about.  

It was a VERY small scar.  

So small that if you didn't have an eye for gyne, or someone didn't point it out, you probably wouldn't have noticed.

[doddy]

Did you also take into account the cases of people who were 'butchered' over the past 25 years as a result of gynecomastia surgery?

Can you provide me with any figures?

[doddy]

I don't have any such figures with me right now, but on a, 'case for case' basis, you can read about one guy who had it done 10 years ago.

http://www.gynecomastia.org/content/treatment/horrstor.shtml

The point here is, we can't just look at one successful operation 25 years ago and use that as a basis for anything. I'm sure you have also heard of unsuccessful cases from around that time and since. It was perhaps, even more risky back then.

You're right that we can't just look at one successful operation and use that as a basis for anything.

So how exactly can you talk "about one guy" and use it as a basis for anything? Surely you can realise that you've just done what jc did, which you criticized? However, jc acknowledged that an ideographic case cannot be used to make big conclusions, whereas you didn't.

I've asked you to quote specific figures. That's because I assume you have these when you refer to "the cases of people who were 'butchered' over the past 25 years as a result of gynecomastia surgery". That's quite an alarmist thing to say - "butchered" - without any figures to back it up.

Btw, when you reply, make sure you stick to what you said - "butchered" - rather than just "not 100% successful".

[doddy]

I'm not using what I said as a basis. The onus is not on me. JC made the claim and I'm just giving an example of how it can be refuted. The successful case he cited in 1980 is not a basis for saying, "I thought, if they could do a great job like that in 1980, they should be able to do really good today." like he did. Do you understand, Doddy? Stop trying so hard to beat me at semantics.

You are using what you said as a basis. I asked you to back up your "butchered" comment and you gave me one case only. The onus originally wasn't on you, but I asked a question and asked you to back up what you're saying, so now the onus is on you. Can you actually answer it or not?

Really? Where? I believe I'm the one who made that sort of contention.

He said "I guess it still depends on picking the right surgeon" which is clearly saying ".. you can't draw a general conclusion from this one case, there are other factors."

Why should I quote specific figures when JC only mentioned one case?

Forget JC. You're the only one who seems to be thinking that he's claiming that this one guy is proof of gyne surgery being 100% successful. He's clearly not claiming this.

What I'm interested in is how you say: "Did you also take into account the cases of people who were 'butchered' over the past 25 years as a result of gynecomastia surgery?" despite by your own admission only reading about a few cases of actual "butchering".

[doddy]

Seriously Graham, I don't need any English lessons from you.

All I'm saying is you shouldn't make comments inferring an epidemic of butchered surgeries if you don't have any stats to back them up. After all,

Looking at just one or a few cases is not evidence of anything. .

How many cases of butchered surgeries have you looked at then?

[hypo]

Doddy your wasting your time.

This guy is about semantics NOT facts, figures and sure as hell NOT the truth.

Lines like;

Quote
Even if only a handful of people have been 'butchered' over the past 25 years, my refutation of his claim still holds
Unquote

That simply isn't true though is it.  

Because there are risks inherent in getting up in the morning, getting out of bed, in crossing the road etc.

How risky surgery is, is based upon the percentage of people who end up butchered as graham puts it (not unsatisfied, but butchered- the two are quite different).  

If a handful of people have been butchered out of hundreds of thousands, that would be a very small and acceptable risk to most people and would support JC entirely.

So the figures are EVERYTHING!!!

Graham is trying to bastardize the truth by making out that the figures are unimportant.  But if this were so skiing, skateboarding, boxing, climbing, all forms of racing whether cars bikes or horses would be banned,  social drinking would be banned and fifty percent of the medicines on sale in the world today would be banned.

Take one look at the potential effects of taking an aspirin.  It could kill you, but you still take it, because you see the risks as being negligible.

So the figures are ALL IMPORTANT.

This man isn't even particularly clever with the semantics.  You, me, whoever can win the arguments hands down time after time.

But we will never truly win because is isn't going away, there will always be one more argument, he only seems to be in his element on the site when he is arguing with someone.

He has very little knowledge or understanding of anything.

If you ever ask for facts or figures from him they are entirely missing.

People who think that Graham has an understanding of any of the issues are taken in.  When you ask for facts they just aren't there.

Quote
When I first came to these boards, I was under the impression that gynecomastia surgery was a, 'sure thing' too. That was until I dug a little deeper and analyzed all the facts.
Unquote

Apart from one rehashed white paper from Harold E Carlson M.D (it was originally written in 1980 over 25 years ago- I know as I have the original).

Can you please show us what you have analyzed in order to reach your conclusion???

Or is this just a case of the emporers new cloths yet again.

I am not posting again on this subject.

I am not furthering a debate with Graham the ignorant, Graham the Argumentative, Graham the Misinformer, Graham the Propagandist.

P.S

I am thinking of quitting the site because it is simply too difficult to help people with him getting in the way.

[doddy]

So wait, are you debating that gynecomastia surgery has improved over the last 25 years?

[doddy]

I'm not specifically trying to debate anything. You just happen to say stuff I don't necessarily agree with, or at least phrase it in a way that I don't agree with.

[usernameX]

It doesnt take a genious to know that the health system has improved in the last 25 years. Im not talking only about gyno. And because gyno is really starting to bring out its bad side in todays society, there is more demand for this operation. So its done ALOT more often. Resulting in better operations because of the experience. Back in the 70s, gyno wasnt as big of an issue as it now. So yeah I totally agree with Grahm that there would be alot of half ass jobs being done because of the lack of experience. How many operations does JFC do a year? 50? He wouldnt be very good if he didnt have so many patients. I had absolutly no idea what gyno actually was. I thought I was just fat. And there are alot more people who suffer from gyno and have no idea what it is or how to treat it.

Since ive joined this forum I feel like a big weight was taken off my shoulders beacuse I know something is going to be soon about it. But at the same time I think about 2 times more then I use to.

[ss14]

Graham, just please stop.

Stop operating under the assumption that you are smart and everybody else is an idiot.  Stop thinking you are the only one who would even consider the risks OBVIOUSLY inherent in surgery.  You tell us that there are risks.  We're not stupid.  We know that.  Therefore, unless you are contributing factual information about these risks, you are contributing nothing.  Therefore, you are contributing nothing.  

 

[Blarneystoner]

Graham, just please stop.

Stop operating under the assumption that you are smart and everybody else is an idiot.  Stop thinking you are the only one who would even consider the risks OBVIOUSLY inherent in surgery.  You tell us that there are risks.  We're not stupid.  We know that.  Therefore, unless you are contributing factual information about these risks, you are contributing nothing.  Therefore, you are contributing nothing.  

 

Dude, he's just trying to help. Graham is very smart and puts a lot of time into his posts. He's trying to warn everyone about the risks. Just because you understand them does not mean everyone else does. Show him some respect.

[Spleen]

We keep seeing this 30% number but have yet to see a citation or attribution for it.  Can you find it for us?

[STILLgotIT]

A friend of mine had gyne surgery back in 1993 with great results. That, too, was before the age of lipo I believe. But, he was lean so didn't need lipo anyways.