The science of opinion ...

Rather profound...it's etched into my memory, I can still recall that damn breathing tube....

But other than the 2 catheter entry points on my thighs...painless.

And it was like having a switch flipped.  It's that instantaneous.

asvjerry,

How long ago did you have this procedure?

I've got a visual memory for the most part.  My spouse Ev has one good at events and when they occurred.  I kid her that, between the 2 of us, we have an entire one. *L*

She'll be watching a movie..."This is So Interesting, maybe you'd..."

"I hope so..we've seen it twice together before.  In the next scene..."

"What?   Oh..."

"....he's just about to kiss her.  *chuckle*  What happens next is 'typical Hollywood hook-up'...."

....and I get the 'smart ass' look....*shrug*.

But, to her credit, she can remember in great detail something we did (or didn't) do 5 or 15 years ago.

Anyway...enough...*S*  Stay healthy; it's been interesting but not anything I can recommend to go through.

I enjoy the general attitude and commentary here @ AG.  I Do learn and get exposed to the current level of the 'state of the art'.

Sometimes the 'art' outweighs the 'actuality' of the equipment under discussion IMHO, but I'm willing to let one or many enjoy what they may perceive.

I don't have to agree with Everything; but I'd like to be given the same latitude.

Hmm...some 2, 2.5 years ago...every 6 months I get follow-ups, once a year they check the defib/pacer.  The last, just 2 months ago.

That was a experience...*G*  Basically, the tech sets up a large-ish laptop, twiddles dials, switches...and my heart trace is on screen.

"How'm I doing?"

"5 by 5...you're good to go."

"That's it?"

"Yup."

That's when I asked about how durable the device is....

There's only 2 recorded instances when one has failed.
One was in a car accident and the implant's cable broke.
The second was the .38 bullet....but it stopped it, and he survived.

It's about 2.5 in. in diameter, maybe .5 in. thick.

Lucky shot.... ;)  Lucky guy...

*G*  I wonder if I've put anyone else 'here' in a coma yet...

When I was catching up on this forum, scanning the repartie' and all...it did strike me in general how all responded to the line of our thinking, and the responses/reactions.
I'd gave the sci paper a look....without taking notes but considering it's line of reasoning...
Overall, it's correct...for a larger surveyed group.
When one 'get's into the weeds' with a small group of AG posters....
too many variables, too small of a 'sample'.
Group dynamics only work with mass quantities...then we 'average out'.

Nothing 'average' 'round here...the old comment about 'opinions and a common body part' come into play. ;)