Off topic for a moment....

Lynn09, you said something that confused me a bit and I wanted to ask you what you meant so I could better understand.

You said:
"Sometimes patients who have languished for a long time being limited and frail due to heart disease, have recovered rather miraculously when the diseased part of the heart finally dies. The rest of the heart muscles then pick up the slack and funciton quite well no longer dragged down by the diseased part that has died".

I know what your were saying was an analogy and perhaps I am simply taking it too literally. I dunno. I worked as a RN specializing in cardiac and thoracic trauma and hearts have long been a passion of mine. But it is true that I have not worked in ten years so I am not up to date. I have been reading journal articles trying to prepare to return to work but so much happens so fast in medicine that catching up is a daunting task.

But I digress... I understand how when the normal pacemaker cells die the lower pacing cells can take over and things can be fine but I don't quite understand the part where you said when the part of the heart dies the rest of the heart muscles pick up the slack. I have seen cardiac aneurysms resected with improvement in cardiac function and obviously things like faulty valves replaced with improvement but I am not following with what you meant. I kind of feel like I can't see the forest for the trees, ya know what I mean?

But anyway as I have said I want to go back to work and am trying to learn all I can and wondered if you could explain to me what you meant. I know that some drugs can help the heart muscles pump better and such but have you ever felt like you should understand something but you don't and it just makes you loco trying to figure it out? That's me.

I hope I am not annoying you with my questions but at the moment the bulb in my brain has burned out.