Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Heart PVC's

The difference is that you misquoted me as saying that PVCs were evidence of an abnormal pathway in the heart. That's stating it backwards and imprecisely. I assume you have a reason for doing that, and your reasons for doing things like that are usually in the service of twisting. Why not just quote what I've said if you wish to communicate what I believe, rather than rephrasing, if you don't have a twisting intention?

How am I mis-quoting you; it's freaking VERBATUM what you said!!

I quote your exact words and you said I was twisting them.

Look, either you're just FOS (and I've yet to hear your medical background), and you don't know when to stop. Or you're horribly misstating what you're trying to say. If it's the latter, for God's sake, step back and re-word your point. Because the literal meaning of your statement about the pathways is just incorrect.

And your advice to a cardiac patient under the care of a cadiologist is freaking scary. You don't tell a cardiac patient to increase his potassium intake until you know EXACTLY what his potassium levels are...AND YOU DON'T!!! And this stuff about it being benign at best is also freaking wrong. Stop giving out advice that can get someone killed!

Why are you pretending that I objected to quotes of my statements?

Where you quote me, I approve. Where you don't quote me, but rephrase my words, I (knowing you) suspect a twisting intention. Clear?

All my best friend did,was go in the hospital and have his heart stopped and restarted.
Took about 15 minutes from start to finish.
I drove both him and his wife home.
He had some soup and went to bed to get some rest and was at work the next day.
He has been loosing water weight that has accumulated for a while and is doing fine.

Been a while since i stayed at a hotel/motel but from where i set going to a heart doctor and following what they said saved him from taking a crapload of drugs.

So, to be 100% clear, I quoted you clarifying your quote.

Now, please explain how one's pathways are "defective" because they throw a few PVC's after a cup of coffee.

Again, be specific.

While you're at it, just one example of how an "inefficient" transfer of electrical signals could result in a PVC.

Just one. Be specific.

Or just what you mean by, deficient pathways?

We've been through this, as you know.

If the signal followed its proper and non-defective pathway, no PVC will have occurred. This is by definition the case, essentially a truism. If the signal followed an improper or damaged pathway, one may occur. Multiple causes of the latter are possible. One example would be damage to certain nerves and/or tissues along the proper pathway, while another can be strictly temporary, such as the presence of caffeine in one's system, which is disruptive of normal nerve function.

Both words are in the dictionary. Simply apply those definitions to the subject matter under discussion, and you will have your answer.

Um, if a premature signal followed the "normal" pathway through the heart, it would be a PAC, not a PVC.

You really don't have a clue. Keep talking, it's amusing.

While you're at it, how about describing what the "normal" pathway of an electrical impulse through the heart is?

Laff'n

The reason a PVC may occur in the presence of a defective/damaged pathway is that it will then be required to take a more circuitous route, thus triggering the PVC.

Just one example of how an "inefficient" transfer of electrical signals could result in a PVC.

Just one. Be specific.

Sure. Inefficiency in signal travel can cause the signal to travel a more circuitous and improper route, thus triggering a PVC.

OK, now this is gold. Do you even understand what a PVC is? The idea that the "more circuits rout" is "triggering" the PVC is simply absurd.

Heck this statement is beyond awesome. I can't wait to show the cardiologists at work.

But, seriously, look logically at what you are saying:

The REASON the PVC occurs, according to your statement, is the pathway it will take after it does occur.

OK, I didn't think you could do it, but you did. You just topped yourself from a few posts ago.

Hint: the area in the heart the impulse originates just might have something to do with why it is traveling inefficiently. The actual impulse, on the other hand, is PREMATURE, or, to a layman like you, TOO efficient.

Keep digging. China is down there somewhere.

PS circuits rout above should be circuitous route. You were too quick on the draw, so it came through on your quote.

Sure, show your cardiologists.

Waiting. (Mainly because if you google it, you just might get a clue)

So, you stand by the assertion that the path a PVC travels CAUSES the PVC? What about PAC's? Does the pathway they travel cause them as well?

Edit: And, if, by "quick on the draw" you mean I don't need to look this chit up because it's what I do at work, yeah, you're right.

I'm uncomfortable with the way you chose to phrase that. I would rather you said that the path of the nerve signal, rather than that of the PVC (which seems a bit nonsensical to me) being defective is what triggers the PVC. Were pathways normal, no PVC would occur.

Go back and google the PAC part. It might help you figure out why you are wrong.

Hint: people with normal conduction systems in their heart have PVC's.

Seriously, google what the normal electrical pathway is, think about the PAC vs PVC thing, and maybe STFU until you know what you are talking about. There is a reason why people talking about this stuff use very specific language. One cannot opine in an intelligent manner without knowing the language.