Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Just Win Baby

Members
  • Content Count

    20,426
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,926 Excellent

About Just Win Baby

  • Rank
    Footballguy
  • Birthday 11/12/1968

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Virginia Beach

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    San Diego Chargers

Recent Profile Visitors

17,352 profile views
  1. There is a spectrum of metabolizing of certain medications, from poor to ultra-rapid. Patients who fall in different places on that spectrum can have markedly altered response to some drugs. Depending on your genetic profile, you may process some medications too quickly, or others, too slowly, which can both cause complications. This is also affected by ethnicity. From The Effect of Cytochrome P450 Metabolism on Drug Response, Interactions, and Adverse Effects: Maybe you are an ultra-metabolizer, GB. Testing has shown that my wife is, which is a significant reason she is on such high dosage pain medication. This issue is also a significant reason why one size fits all policy is not appropriate.
  2. In case anyone wants to understand better about the impact of "inconvenience" on people with chronic illness, I highly recommend the Spoon Theory.
  3. I am emotionally invested but well informed on the subject. I don't think I am any less objective than you are, for example. You missed the point of the post you responded to. Thus far, there has been no option for any patient flagged in the practice to go to more frequent, shorter prescriptions and more intense monitoring. There has only been forced tapering. So your response is not on point. Furthermore, I flatly reject that stuff for pain patients like my wife anyway. There is no medical basis for it. She has been on high dose opioids for pain for 21 years, and has been on generally the same level of dosage she is at now for at least 7 years. None of her meds have been diverted. She has not overdosed. She has not sought or used illegal drugs. She doesn't even drink. There have literally been no negative issues. And to subject a patient like her to more frequent, shorter prescriptions means what? She already gets prescriptions every 28 or 30 days. She already sees her pain physician every 3 weeks or so. What would more frequent mean? His practice could not sustain more frequent visits from all of his high dose pain patients. There is no room in the schedule. It is also extremely difficult for patients with serious pain to get to appointments; making them more frequent inevitably means appointments will be missed sooner or later, and then what? And to subject her to "more intense monitoring" means what? More intense than seeing her in person every 3 weeks? More intense than supporting a urine test whenever asked? More intense than supporting a blood test whenever asked? Seriously, what are you envisioning here? What you are advocating doesn't make sense. At least not for stable patients exhibiting no negative behavior or side effects. You are basically just advocating that we sacrifice the lives, or at least the quality of the lives, of patients in serious pain. For what gain? Opioid prescribing is already at a 15 year low, yet opioid overdose deaths are at a 10 year high. You're not taking in the information provided with any objectivity, the exact thing you accused me of above. Opioid prescriptions have been reduced year over year for 7 years now. How much of a lag do you think is necessary to see improvement? How do you explain the fact that overdose deaths are highest in young people, despite the fact that the highest rates of opioid prescribing are for older people? I can tell you how to explain it - overdose deaths are not caused by opioid prescribing. So let's make policy to attack problems we have trouble defining? Say that out loud and tell me it makes sense. I have linked more than 30 references in this thread. None of them were anecdotal. The fact that you would post this shows that you either lack reading comprehension or objectivity or both.
  4. Keep in mind, it isn't just injury to him that could create a problem. Every player you named could get injured, as could the OL, etc. Their offense was generally very healthy last season. I also think they face a more difficult schedule this season. All of these teams could have top 5-10 defenses: LAC x 2, JAX, BAL, IND, HOU, MIN, TEN, NE, CHI. KC plays 10 games against that group, and 8 of those games are against teams that played KC last season and may be better prepared to deal with the KC offense.
  5. In any discussion of rankings, IMO ppg > total points. I assume one reason for the narrow spreads you are citing is missed games by some of those players. What was the spread of ppg from RB9 to RB15, with a reasonable threshold of games played? (I would check one of my dynasty leagues but MFL is blocked at my company.) I'm saying I expect he will be around RB13 in ppg.
  6. I'm not saying they are all equal, just that Kelce theoretically provides a disproportionate advantage. So not taking him means you are only at a disproportionate disadvantage to 1 team. For a given league and draft position, regardless of what that draft position is, one can perform multiple mock drafts in which they take Kelce at the latest reasonable draft slot and others where they purposely do not. My expectation is that the latter teams will compare more favorably to the rest of the league's teams and will stand a better chance of winning.
  7. When you draft Kelce, in theory you get a big advantage over every other team in your league at TE, in exchange for a big disadvantage at RB1 or WR1, unless you get lucky and draft a player lower in the draft who outperforms his draft position. But if you don't draft Kelce, you only have a big disadvantage at TE to 1 team in your league, the Kelce owner, and you are as good or better than other teams at RB1 and/or WR1. I drafted Kelce last year, and ultimately felt it hurt my roster more than helped with the positional advantage. I'm with the group that will pass on him this year unless he falls much further than expected.
  8. Yes, knowing Hill won't be suspended takes away one of the deltas in comparison to last season. I still think the KC offense will regress somewhat, and I suspect Williams will disappoint those who think he will be a top 10 fantasy RB. FantasyPros consensus rankings have him ranked #13 right now in PPR. I think that's about right, so those with that level of expectation should be fine.
  9. I am well aware of all of this. I posted that she would likely end her life if force tapered to 500 MME/day. You call that inconvenience? You want to rephrase that? I completely disagree with the bolded. There is a wealth of information available, much of it posted/referenced in this thread, that shows that the current policies are having zero/minimal effect on opioid overdose deaths while doing significant harm (suffering, deaths) to the pain patient population.
  10. An Open Letter to the Virginia Board of Medicine If you care to read any of the referenced sources, the links are in the open letter, linked at the top of my post. I am a member of the Alliance for the Treatment of Intractable Pain copied on this email that was then posted as an open letter on LinkedIn. I also live in Virginia, so this particularly hits home to me and my wife, who is disabled and takes prescribed opioids to manage her pain. My wife's neurologist, who treats her pain, has had several complaints filed against his practice by the Virginia Board of Medicine for prescribing opioids at levels greater than 500 Morphine Milligram Equivalents (MME) per day. In each instance, Virginia BOM investigators came to his practice and reviewed records on those patients. They found that his treatment was reasonable enough that he was not penalized in any way, yet they directed him to lower each of those patients to no more than 500 MME/day. He did so in order to preserve his license and practice. At this point, he has just 2 patients above 500 MME/day - 1 cancer patient and my wife. The quoted extract is at least partly BS - the part where it says Virginia regulations "...do not have ceiling doses for opioids and do not require reductions to levels that are ineffective for the patient’s pain..." Perhaps they are making a semantics argument, saying it is not in written regulations while knowing full well that they scrutinize doctors prescribing above 500 MME and force them to cut to that level. But to do that would be a level of deceit that would be shocking to me. We live in daily fear that the Virginia BOM will file a complaint about my wife's treatment. She is over 1200 MME/day and has been for at least a decade. If he is forced to reduce her to 500 MME/day, I expect she will take her own life. We have discussed it many times. As I see it, it would amount to the Virginia BOM taking my wife's life.
  11. Let’s Reset the Discussion on Pain Management and Opioid Misuse
  12. Task Force: Canada's Chronic Pain Patients ‘Simply Deserve Better’
  13. How Did We Come to Abandon America’s Pain Patients?
  14. Regarding Lamar Jackson, it's worth noting a few things: He started 8 games. Using a sample size less than all 8 games is effectively cherry picking, whether intentional or not. The fact that his 8th game was dreadful illustrates this. In those 8 games, he had a lot of negative plays - 19 sacks, 4 interceptions, and 12 fumbles. He also only threw for 200 yards 1 time and had just 7 passing TDs. He is going to have to improve a lot to hold onto his job. It is also true that only 1 team faced him twice during his stretch as the starter. That team was the Chargers, which made him look terrible despite missing 5 defensive starters in that game, including both DTs and their best 2 LBs at defending the run.