medgremlin

I have done CPR on people before, and it is astonishingly brutal. To do it correctly, you have to cave their sternum in to be able to apply enough pressure to the heart to actually move blood around. For "Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest" patients that receive bystander CPR, the survival to discharge is around 10%, give or take. The most common outcome of CPR (if it is successful and you get a pulse back) is days to weeks of dying slowly and painfully in the ICU. The older someone is, or the more health problems they have, the much lower the chance of recovery is.

CPR is absolutely reasonable for a younger person that stands a good chance of walking out of the hospital at the end of it, but 90 pound 90-year-old is extremely unlikely to survive in a meaningful way. It is very reasonable to request to not be put through that massive amount of suffering for a very low chance of any meaningful benefit.

There's also degrees of DNR. There's separate options for CPR, intubation, supportive care, active treatment, palliative care, etc. It's a lot more nuanced than CPR yes/no in most situations.

We have 3 cats, and unintentionally, they are all long haired cats. They were the ones that picked us, and we weren't about to tell them they were wrong and adopt a different cat because of their hair length.

(To be fair, I did manage to run Half Life: Alyx and Beat Saber on a 1060)

That's why it's a disagreement. I'm not necessarily saying their opinions are factually incorrect, just that they are devoid of empathy, morally reprehensible, and antithetical to the teachings of the religious figure that they are statistically likely to claim to be faithful to. A lack of empathy should not be rewarded.

Typically, the things I disagree with are the things like bad faith arguments, lies, rudeness, or bigoted ideals that purport that not all humans deserve equal rights, etc.

Usually, when I disagree with something, it is because it is incorrect, lying, or particularly mean-spirited. I disagree with people that do not think that every human deserves the same rights. I disagree with people that push for ideologies that would strip other humans of their rights, or that would inflict needless suffering. I don't downvote people when I disagree with what media they think is good or something. I downvote those that express ideas that are antithetical to what I see as basic human decency or that are factually incorrect.

Personally, I use downvotes to say "I disagree with this and/or it is a stupid/bad/bigoted/etc take, but I do not wish to spend the time and effort to respond and get dragged into a text-based mudfight with someone who is unlikely to speak to me politely, no matter how polite I try to be in my rebuttal."

I like having a way to say "no, bad, stop that" without having to spend time trying to explain things or engage with someone who I think is beyond convincing anyways.

Personally, I prefer soy milk to cow or oat milk because it has a better nutritional profile. It has less sugar and fat, and more protein, as well as having fiber. (Some oat milk brands do have fiber in them, but most of the ones I've found are very high in fat, sugar, and calories.)

Edit: And I like the not-overpowering vanilla flavored ones because I pretty much only use it for cereal or to accompany cookies.

Thankfully, the extent of the religion in the education is in the ethics discussions and strong recommendations to discuss spirituality and religion with your patients because faith communities are "very important". The religion does not make it into any of the actual medicine or science.

I accidentally ended up at a religious university for medical school and you better believe I've gotten in numerous fights with the law and ethics professor (who, to be fair, is actually a MD/JD) regarding the prescribed conservative religious approach to the ethics discussions. I absolutely did not change his mind, but I did get a bunch of my classmates to start asking questions by putting myself out there and challenging the professor on their BS.

Edit: I should clarify that these fights were on mic in the recorded lectures, so there's a hard record of my arguing with him.

I mean, I'm partial to the Tang dynasty in part due to Wu Zeitan. Her history and time as empress are absolutely fascinating and the relative prosperity of her reign is really impressive.

"Tachycardia" is a sign. "Palpitations" or "heart racing" are symptoms. Signs are the objective things that can be measured and recorded as hard data. Symptoms are what the patient reports feeling that are not measurable. In taking a history and physical, the symptoms tell the physician what signs to look for.