Widely available studies on phalloplasty surgeries show the serious complications that affect many patients.
The main problems include the forearm hair causing urethral obstruction, the high number of initial urinary fistulas, the need for a stiffener or prosthesis, the residual scar on the forearm donor site [Figure 4] and limitation in size of the available forearm skin. Some surgeons even feel that there is loss of phallic girth as a result of tissue atrophy, rendering a phallic contour cosmetically unsatisfactory…there are high rate of complications including up to 25% flap related complications and up to 64%,[28] urethroplasty related complications.
Dr. Gabriel Del Corral, a phalloplasty surgeon, admits that the risk of complications is as high as 100%. “I tell all my patients that the complication rate for Phalloplasty can be 100%. It could be a small opening, but it’s 100%. There’s something that’s going to happen. The question is how do we as surgeons really try to navigate minimizing all the potential issues.”
And they do these on kids. Sometimes who've not hit puberty, which adds a whole 'nother level of crap.
9 comments:
I wonder what happened to “do no harm “.
Ed
Apparently it now takes second place- with a lot of them- to "Do not upset the mentally disturbed, as they will call you names."
We knew all about this surgery when I was in H.S. I am not sure of the generic name, but in Latin, it is known as addadicktome.
If they could come up with a surgery to actually increase the size, no doubt many would have it done.
Some women actually complain if the man is too small. I have not heard what women answer if a man says her tits are too small, or her female parts are too big.
Reminds me of the husband and wife, who had been high school sweethearts, and married just after graduation. Sitting at the breakfast table one morning, the wife put her coffee cup down, walked around the table to her husband, and slapped him in the snot box as hard as she could. She then sat back down and started to drink her coffee again.
Her husband, after he got up, thought about it, and could talk again, said "What in hell was that for?'. She said, " That's for having such a short tool. "
He thought it over for a couple of minutes, then put his paper down, walked over to his bride of 40 years, and smacked her so hard, the next 2 generations would feel it. She crawled up onto her chair and said, in a shaky voice, "What was THAT for?".
" That was for knowing the distance" he told her.
Pigpen51
This is not surgery. Whether "doctors" are trying to turn boys into girls or girls into boys (or into any of the other 99 versions of sexual orientation these mentally ill people think exist), it is butchery.
My heart goes out to those rare folks who truly have serious gender dysphoria. I've known a couple of folks who were "trans". I was never close enough to them to know the extent of their physical transition. One thing I'm very certain of is that making permanent changes to the body should be the last thing considered. I hope there is a reckoning for those who've used others misery for their political gain.
No offense intended, Pigpen51, but the punchline is, "That's for knowing the difference."
This is a "surgery" that was NEVER intended by nature to occur. And the criminals performing them should be hunted down and strung up.
I agree with your tag line. Malpractice. If there is a 100% chance of complications, they should not be doing these surgeries.
--Generic
From an OR nurse, just don't.
Post a Comment