Posted 10/22/2012 5:30 PM (GMT 0)
Martin Victor. Yes. Thanks. I found the comment that I had missed before. Does sound like a success story.
But, please accept without reservations, I have no axe to grind. Why is there no statistical information available for a procedure that the good doctors say that they have been performing for 3 years now? If it is 100% successful, or even 75% successful, where are all the 'cured'. We have here Andy and Yoav. I accept them both as bona fide personalities who are sharing with us their own personal experience for our benefit. And I thank them for it.
BUT MY UROLOGIST is not satisfied. He doesn't do operations and, as far as I can determine, has no axe to grind either. My family doctor refers me to the urologist.
Pity to go all over it again. I will wait to see what statistical data Dr. GAT puts in the public arena.
As I have written before, IF the procedure is 'successful', various health funds will jump on it. Even with the initial cost, 15,000 dollars I believe, there is no hospitalization involved and, as with 'stents', very small likelihood of complications developing. The Health Funds would be falling over themselves to adopt it and the good doctors GG would almost certainly receive the Novel Prize for Medicine. The Health Funds would laugh any objecting urologist out of their fund if he objects. The 15,000 dollar cost would quickly drop to the level of the cost of an angiogram.
Surely, money is no problem here?
I am not a doctor and cannot be expected to gain the correct insights from statistical material pertaining to the GG results but I will wait and see and I suggest that you do too.