Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Want-3-inches]

Let's say there is a 1% serious complication rate of leg lengthening.

Now 1% is hard to make meaning of. "1 in 100" is quite arbitrary to imagine. Is it not much risky at all? Or is it still quite risky? If you could roll a 100 faced dice with the rules that if it lands ONE unlucky face you develop a limp for life, and for all other 99 faces you end up 3 inches taller without complications! Should you roll that dice?

What would make it easier is if we can compare the risk to something normal people undertake in real life.

For example, if there is an 0.1% risk of getting into a serious car accident for someone who drives daily to work, then we can think "ok leg lengthening is 10 times as risky as driving to work daily".

If there is a 0.5% risk of serious injury during skiing then we might hink, "ok leg lengthening is twice as risky as skiing".

I just made up these numbers for skiing and driving. But can YOU think of real life examples with statistics of risk to compare against leg lengthening risks? It can be something many humans go through regularly (pregnancy, driving, flying, sky diving, knee replacements, boxing, playing football professionally, anything like that)

Please explain how you arrive at your risk figures for such activities with relevant links.

[Want-3-inches]

Anyone? Common folks, this is the most straightforward of deciding or calming your nerves if you've already decided.

[Serilium]

Base jumping. Like a 0.5% injury rate, which is pretty darn high, 1 in 200

At least in the US. In India it's more like Russian Roulette

[las vegas baby]

Base jumping. Like a 0.5% injury rate, which is pretty darn high, 1 in 200

At least in the US. In India it's more like Russian Roulette

lol they probably dont even have base jumping in 3rd world countries

if base jumpin is 0.5 % risk in the states then doing leg length surgery would be equivalent to doing base jumpin

[Stryde2021]

There are no comps that present remotely the same risk profile.  There are a range of things that can go wrong with LL, there’s nothing else really like it. Sure, some activities might present a similar risk of crippling. But they won’t present a similar risk of embolic events, or nerve damage.  You have to get comfortable with each of the several specific risks on its own

[silverlining]

It's not only the percents of risk, it's type of risk. One of the risk of LL is pulmonary embolism which will kill you within minutes. I don't think you can compare it to the risks of skiing or skating.

[RealLostSoul]

I think you can't really compare it to stuff like base jumping or skiing. With LL the main priority is having a good doctor to reduce the risks of bad events happening and or going terrible.

[Want-3-inches]

I think you can't really compare it to stuff like base jumping or skiing. With LL the main priority is having a good doctor to reduce the risks of bad events happening and or going terrible.

What do you mean? The outcome of both can involve disability. Even with a good doctor LL can create disability. So it's fine to compare the odds of both. If you've done one before and didn't feel scared about it, then you can do the other (IF the probability of disability is similar). If you see someone on TV doing skiing and you know the risks of disability from skiing = risk of disability from LL then you can think 'oh my doing LL is like that guy doing skiing'.

[Want-3-inches]

It's not only the percents of risk, it's type of risk. One of the risk of LL is pulmonary embolism which will kill you within minutes. I don't think you can compare it to the risks of skiing or skating.

I don't care about death honestly. It's disability that worries me.

Anyway, even road accidents can cause death. So we can compare the risk of "Death or disability" from LL vs other events that some of us take part in.

[Want-3-inches]

There are no comps that present remotely the same risk profile.  There are a range of things that can go wrong with LL, there’s nothing else really like it. Sure, some activities might present a similar risk of crippling. But they won’t present a similar risk of embolic events, or nerve damage.  You have to get comfortable with each of the several specific risks on its own

Yes it's true there are many types of risks from LL. But you can consolidate them and make it a 1% risk (this is my research considering world class centers who offer LL). 1% includes everything from death to drop foot to a minor limp. So you can think, what other activities in life carry a similar risk or even half the risk of disability (or even death).

[RealLostSoul]

What do you mean? The outcome of both can involve disability. Even with a good doctor LL can create disability. So it's fine to compare the odds of both. If you've done one before and didn't feel scared about it, then you can do the other (IF the probability of disability is similar). If you see someone on TV doing skiing and you know the risks of disability from skiing = risk of disability from LL then you can think 'oh my doing LL is like that guy doing skiing'.

Yes but it‘s not as linearly as just saying X has a risk of Y so it is comparable. in real life there are multiple factors. For example, in skiing you have your action under more control than in a car accident. If you ski without proper skill and knowledge you are more tend to accidents than if you are cautious. For car accidents, there are multiple factors too, most of which you have under control, but there are more unpredictable ones as well (encountering drunk drivers etc).. For LL however risks are way less under your control. Most of which is just up to the dr AND randomness (for example fat emboli etc).

[Want-3-inches]

Yes but it‘s not as linearly as just saying X has a risk of Y so it is comparable. in real life there are multiple factors. For example, in skiing you have your action under more control than in a car accident. If you ski without proper skill and knowledge you are more tend to accidents than if you are cautious. For car accidents, there are multiple factors too, most of which you have under control, but there are more unpredictable ones as well (encountering drunk drivers etc).. For LL however risks are way less under your control. Most of which is just up to the dr AND randomness (for example fat emboli etc).

It does not matter how much control you have. Statistics are statistics.

Think this way: let's say you have to play a game where you have to solve one easy puzzle in 1 minute. If you don't solve it correctly you get disabled, otherwise you become 3 inches taller. So you have FULL control over the outcome.

You start testing your abilities. You do a hundred of these tests in "practice" mode. You see that you can solve it correctly 99% of the times. So do you decide to take the real test or not?

It's similar with LL. If you Paley publishes a 1% chance of disability then it means the same thing I described above. Paley doesn't dislike you or like you more than his other patients. So your chance of success is similar to his other patients.

[AllinStryde]

It's very easy to analyze yourself out of this procedure.  I did it at the Paley Institute and it was a fantastic experience.  The ultimate question is...do you want to get taller, or not?  We can read papers and and crunch numbers, but at the end of the day, you just have to pull the trigger and go for it.  One thing I will say though, I am about 1.5 years post-surgery date, and getting back to normal takes way longer than expected.  Biomechanics, muscle atrophy, etc.  A select few on this forum will disagree with me no doubt, but I am going to say that to get back to normal it takes a couple of years.  If you think you're going to Crossfit and doing box jumps or doing your routine jogging 6-8 months after surgery...think again.