my default mode is civility; i'm "on the attack" (a preferred expression of yours regarding others' normal reactions) usually when you say something insanely insensitive or factually indefensible, which has been rather more than once. on rare occasions you've actually said constructive things; you seem for example to have an expertise in hormones others lack. unfortunately the bad in your posts that i've seen has considerably outweighed the good.
i've noted it when you've grossly oversimplified the situation and reaction of people in ignorance of their condition, to the point you lack humanity. you don't have to look far to find the threads on which you've done this, an instructive experience.
you say you've never told anyone not to have surgery -- you just constantly tell them they're losers if they choose that route. very subtle.
at least you've been forced to refining your phrasings.
talking with you is a tar-baby experience. you blank out other peoples' legitimate points so they don't register, you repeat yourself as if specific replies had never been made, you accuse them of attacking you for making factual objections to your claims and jabs.
i've never questioned why you post here, i've stated the responsible opposing views need representation -- just by someone more humane and morally competent than you if you're unwilling to look your actions in the eye.
as for never having said anything "proven" to be false, you seem to prefer borderline half-truths instead. you indirectly suggest recurrence is likely -- without mentioning that most of the time the "underlying cause" in most men is not permanent but transient. you defy anyone to get a guarantee of non-recurrence in writing from a surgeon, -- deliberately ignoring the fact you don't get that from ANYONE in medicine for anything, they don't give them (as anyone knows who's read the reams of "you agree nothing is our fault" paperwork they force people to sign). or you twist numbers to suggest the
opposite of what they actually tell. anyone interested in another example could see your your absurd abuse of statistics at
http://www.gynecomastia.org/cgi-bin/gyne_yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=2;action=display;num=1060571631;start=3#3can't help wondering if gsa doesn't regret perhaps iinadvertantly feeding you your favorite subject so you could lob out more of those flame quips of yours.
should we redefine our criteria for "loser"? for the love of pete, just start reading closely and THINKING about what other people are actually saying. you might be
astounded at how far that would go.