betheffessx
betheffess
betheffessx

Doing something for a living doesn't mean you're good at it. 83% of radiologists have been found to miss things they are not looking for in an ultrasound because they aren't looking for it. The vast majority of OBs AND radiologists have not heard of the Hook Effect and erroneously believe that hCG must be detectable

You aren't very smart. Anna's description of the hook effect is nonfactual. The Hook Effect extends well beyond early pregnancy, I think she may be confusing the Hook Effect with simply late positives that often occur in early pregnancy due to slow hCG buildup. They are actually biochemically OPPOSITE phenomena. The

I absolutely did not get violent, I explained exactly what happened in a post above. I have never in my life struck or hit anyone. The rest of what you say though, spot on, you get that much.

Yes - I posted this in another comment, a few of my ultrasounds are at the bottom. ANNA REALLY SHOULD HAVE POSTED THESE IN THE ARTICLE rather than omit everything that reveals that I am actually a sane person seeing things MANY OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SEEN AND CALLED FETUSES. Yes the fetus is still there, and the only tests

According to your textbook. According to many other textbooks, it is already occurring by 12 weeks, AS I LINKED YOU TO. What is wrong with you exactly? I don't need help. You are narcissistically projecting your own need for help on to me. Admit when you're wrong. You have creepily and sadly come to an article about

You're not intelligent, and you are the one who's delusional. Everything in the article I just posted refutes what you say. Stop being creepy and fixating on stupidly bullying a stranger because she accurately found her own pregnancy. You're wrong. Those are bones. They're labelled as bones, they're bones, they appear

Hey there, since Anna for some strange reason decided to not tell the truth and say that I called what happened in the ER "an argument", I am going to repost here what I replied to another commenter. Here is the discussion that took place, which I also described while still in the hospital and gave in papers for John

Oh, of course. That's not really a 12-week scan of a fetus, then. My mistake. That is some sort of hologram. I'm glad you're around to set me straight, doctor. Reading Australian university materials on embryology will indeed set you down that dark path. They're horrid pseudoscientists. They probably took a 32-week

  • cartilage - septum of the nose.

Why are there bones labeled in the linked scans then?

I'm not misreading any paper, I literally copied it verbatim. That entire paragraph is straight from the document. I'm not sure what fetuses are like on the planet your professor hails from but on earth, quote, "the primary ossification center develops during 7th and 12th weeks of pregnancy." I think I am going to go

Oh God. Another bright bulb here.

YES. YES THEY DO.

I'm not delusional at all. When I went into the NYU-Langone ER, the intake nurse and I had this exchange after he like every other medical professional who's failed to identify the pregnancy denied the existence of the Hook Effect:

Him: Show me your ultrasounds.
Me: These are from 12 weeks.
Him: What is that?
Me: It's a

No, it doesn't mean that. The hook effect is not the only means of possible negative tests in pregnancy, and doing 7 dilultions only going up to 1/10 in a series that is supposed to go up to 1/1000 proves nothing.

Yeah, you're a nasty person, you have absolutely nothing to do with my medical care and I'm glad because

The Hook Effect absolutely has been established. No one disputes its existence in pregnancy testing. The FDA is now requiring pregnancy test manufacturers to try to reduce the margin of error caused by the Hook Effect.

http://www.pregnancylab.net/hcg-variants/

It's a real thing. You just aren't informed, and mot doctors

I'm not sure what you mean by "self-select." There is absolutely no medical paper in existence disputing the realness of the hook effect, and I provided you with papers documenting its realness.

I'm not sure what you mean by "commentators" and that one you are talking about was someone who was expressing personal anger

Yes, because race in the sense of ancestral origin is not actually socially constructed, it tells where your ancestors come from, and people consistently get it wrong for me, including people supposedly trained to be able to identify people by looking at them. Why do they get it wrong? Their methods of determining

If you have no idea if they're real please do a pubmed search. Not wasting my time educating you on what literally any human being on the planet can find out is real in 60 seconds. That is not least likely because a COMPLETE FETAL SKELETON is showing up in my ultrasounds! Good Lord!

So... what? She's a musician. Musicians usually use pseudonyms, as do many writers ESPECIALLY if they're writing an article about something where they're going to be getting a lot of backlash from people they've already gotten ignorant abuse from.

So... one commenter on there has a beef with her? Does Anna writing that