Cory1848

I was also experiencing dizziness (but not specifically in the morning; it occurred at various times). Turns out, I was anemic -- low hemoglobin (red blood cells) and iron deficiency. Other symptoms were chronic fatigue and shortness of breath. You mentioned that you are no longer running.

Like you, I have a hiatal hernia (for the past several years), and in searching for the cause of the anemia, the gastro doctor at Chiang Mai Ram did an endoscopy, which turned up that I also have a small stomach ulcer, likely the cause of the loss of red blood cells. I’ve been treated for all this, and now I’m much better. (My blood pressure has been normal throughout.)

I would recommend getting your blood tested for red blood cell count, hemoglobin, and iron deficiency (there are several related things that they test for), especially if you’re also fatigued and short of breath. Good luck!

5 hours ago, JoePai said:

Is the large lady in pink the one starring in these videos  

It's just a bad camera angle; actually, she's gorgeous.

On 12/22/2023 at 3:17 PM, PETERTHEEATER said:

He was a Mayor of New York but when was he Mayor of America? How can there be such an appointment?

Some people thought that he showed resolve and leadership when he was mayor of New York during the 9/11 terrorist attack, and they started calling him “America’s mayor” as a sort of endearment, as the quintessential big-city mayor. Now the phrase is nothing more than a joke.

5 hours ago, ozimoron said:

Who would work for Trump if he wins next time? I hope Guliani spends the rest of his life in jail. It might extend his life the way he drinks.

Right! Last I checked, they don’t serve alcohol to prison inmates. He may initially need some medical attention to help him through detox ...

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

How about limiting a run at the presidency to only veterans, only people under 65 years old, people who have never filed for bankruptcy, and people who have children that are of age to serve in the military. And a promise that if the president declares war, his children will serve on the front line! How's that for a qualification? 

Also, how about requiring all candidates to pass a test in basic civics and foreign affairs, to demonstrate an understanding of separation of powers and conflict of interest, what an “oath of loyalty” means, and who the leaders of NATO countries are? If the hardest test you’re able to pass is a cognitive test used to measure dementia, what business do you have in the White House? Call me an elitist, but being a proven moron should definitely be disqualifying.

On 11/16/2023 at 8:08 AM, EVENKEEL said:

I was able to keep my international Blue Cross/Blue Shield after retiring. I turned down the Part B. When you start drawing your 401 every year the Part B increases depending on your income.

Exactly -- I have Blue Cross also and it works just great in Thailand, and pays some private Thai hospitals directly after preapproving the procedure. There’s a 15 percent copay, and on most outpatient visits I pay cash and then get reimbursed by Blue Cross after submitting paperwork. If the procedure were so pricey that the 15 percent might make a real difference, and Medicare Part A would pick up a lot of it (in tandem with Blue Cross) in the US, I would consider flying back and doing it there, but that hasn’t happened yet ... Medicare Part B seems unnecessary at this point.

1 hour ago, Voodoochile said:

Actually it is not accepted by all in Thailand.

“ Buddhism mentions kathoeys as the third gender, but that doesn’t stop monks from telling ladyboys who they should be. ‘We can’t change them all’ said one monk in the interview for The Telegraph‘but we can control their behaviour and show them that they were born men and not women’. Some monasteries offer special programmes, where parents can enrol their kids and where the young ones are taught how to be men again.

 

Kathoeys are treated as second class citizens in Thailand. They are not bullied, but their role is mainly to entertain others. They can be stylists, make up artists, dancers in one of the cabarets, but getting a well paid job

might prove very difficult”

You’re completely wrong. Transgenderism is largely accepted in Thailand; I see transgender people every day, working in a variety of jobs. You’re simply blind to it, based on your own preconceived bias. And of course some monks and others (like yourself) will have a reactionary attitude, but that’s to be expected.

I have not heard of the “special programs” you mention intended to “teach young ones how to be men again,” but if such places exist (I have no clue who your source is), they sound much like the “conversion therapy” programs that used to operate in the US, intended to force gay men into being straight. Such programs, whether for gay people or trans people, mostly just lead to chronic depression and often suicide. Not only does it not work; the whole idea is preposterous. How can you change someone’s nature, and why would you even want to?

As for your statement about trans women that “their role is mainly to entertain others. They can be stylists, make up artists, dancers in one of the cabarets,” this reminds me of similar stereotyping of other groups, for instance that one group in particular is only good at “singing and dancing.” This is simply disgusting.

16 hours ago, soalbundy said:

I was referring to society in general, predominantly western society. Wokeness is destructive, the cancel culture is an abomination, it's like having a voluntary police state...."Oh you can't say that" why not, it's my opinion, deal with it or ignore it. If you say anything against Israel you are an anti-Semite, if you support Palestine you agree with terrorism, if you speak against illegal immigration you are a racist, if you don't like transgenders you are homophobic (who cares). The middle way has been lost, as soon as labels have been stuck all discussion has been ruled out, incidentally, regarding transgenders, for the vast majority there is no need for discussion, the gut feeling is against it and most will never come into contact with the small minority of transgenders anyway, their way, their path, was cut by causality, unfortunate but they have to deal with it, nobody can demand I bleed for the whole world nor do I wish to. I read about hard working families being homeless, old age pensioners freezing and hungry, that is important to me, not some mentally afflicted fairies in dresses, it's their path, deal with it or like that brave man Quintin Crisp turn it into a style instead of weeping, 'woe is me, nobody understands me". No I don't, I don't give a $hit, do your thing but stay away from me.

Society has become weak, the people let wokeness put tapes over their mouths.... in a so called free society. They speak of tolerance for all things (which only undermines societal values, whatever they are) and pi$$ on the sleeping homeless in shop door ways. What about pedophiles, why not break a lance for them while you are about it, they have psychological issues which cause their perverse ideas.... oh no, too hot an iron for the snowflakes. There are real men and women out there working for society, it's hard enough, do we have to have the perverts around or neck as well? I fear the Gods have started to make us mad already.

“Woke” has got to be the laziest word in the English language: all it means is, “advocating anything one personally dislikes.” As a result, little of what you write has any meaning in reality. The “voluntary police state” you complain about doesn’t exist; it’s a bogeyman. As long as you’re not infringing on any libel laws, you can say anything you want. In your post, you call transgender people “mentally afflicted fairies in dresses” and “perverts,” and you obliquely compare them to pedophiles. That’s fine -- you can say those things! However, I have just as much freedom to then call you boorish, insensitive, heartless, and ignorant; that you’re just pi$$ing in the wind. If that bothers you, then who’s the “snowflake” (another lazy word).

I use the word “ignorant” with respect to your lack of knowledge about transgender people. You yourself admitted to that ignorance by saying you “couldn’t be bothered” to read about it. As a result, everything you write about the topic is just plain wrong. You write about your “gut feeling”: I’m sorry, that’s just not good enough.

If you have no interest in learning about transgenderism, that’s fine! There are only so many hours in the day. If that’s the case, however, then please don’t post garbage that reflects nothing but your own lack of knowledge. In fact, why are you even posting in this thread at all, if you have no interest? I might just as well find an online forum for brain surgeons posting about their techniques, and offer my own “opinions” about that.

2 hours ago, soalbundy said:

Those whom the Gods would destroy they first make mad

Sometimes, anger indeed arises from knowledge -- of injustice, for instance. In this thread, however, the only people I see who are angry are those who deny the existence of transgenderism, who refuse to educate themselves about it, who are totally triggered by the introduction of words like “transwoman” into the language. In this case, anger arises from plain ignorance. Not sure if that’s whom you’re suggesting the gods will destroy.

20 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

Whatever, nice of you to go to the trouble to provide URL's but I really can't be bothered, it doesn't affect me, I live in the countryside where there are men and women and the odd homosexual. I don't know any katoeys personally although I have spoken with a few in the past (never a westerner) and I have no intention of making an acquaintance of one, to me it's a fad in keeping with the general increase in mental illness these days, especially in the west, it seems everybody needs a therapist these days, it's quite alarming that people can't accept 'what is' in their personal lives, somebody else is to blame for this or that when really it is only causality, how one deals with life is of course also causal but it seems to me it was dealt with better in the past, more acceptance, more resilience. Meister Eckhart, a German Christian mystic in the 14th century once said, "He who carries his cross willingly will find in the end it is his cross that carry's him". I have opinions, maybe I'm an ar$ehole, it's what I do but I'm good with that.

That’s all fine and well; I would call you out on your quickness to publicly dismiss and condemn a whole category of humanity while simultaneously saying you “can’t be bothered” to learn anything about it, but so be it. As for “maybe [being] an ar$ehole,” I’m in no position to say, but maybe “grumpy old man”? I find that the latter term often describes myself perfectly ... Cheers.

53 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

At least I am honest and unlike you I don't patronize, you have your opinions and I have mine. I rather think that mine are organic whereas yours are possibly due to 'new age' indoctrination, whatever it doesn't concern me. Incidentally how far does your 'respect' go regarding pedophiles?

What a piece of work. You may think you’re speaking “truth” but the fact is you’re clueless. Transgender people have been around for all of recorded history, and the fact that you regard it as “perversity” rather than what is actually the case (a brain that’s wired somewhat differently, as someone here characterized it) speaks to your own intolerance. Being 75 years old (or whatever you said your age was) doesn’t give you wisdom; it means you’re unteachable.

22 minutes ago, NextG said:

No, he didn’t. That’s just your assumption. He confessed to having sexual contact with her and said that he went there for sex. 
Remember these things are translated from Thai language. You’ll see horrible mistakes in the transcript if you take a look. That’s normal. 

The article said that she reported a sexual assault, that the police had enough evidence to arrest and detain the guy, and that somewhere during this time he confessed to “the crime,” which is “sexual assault.” I assume the article was written in English; the writer is Thai, and I assume they are able to read police reports in Thai and translate them correctly into English. To confess is <สารภาพ>. Sexual assault is <การล่วงละเมิดทางเพศ>. It would be hard to mistranslate either of those words. Those are my assumptions. You’re assuming that Thai cops and Thai reporters don’t know how to do their jobs, in an effort to impose your own male-centric narrative on this whole sorry incident. If you have access to the Thai-language police reports, go wild, and if you find errors showing that the man is in fact innocent, I’ll profusely apologize. Meantime, basta.

36 minutes ago, NextG said:

No. I asked questions. Can you not see them? Do you have answers to them? No, you don’t and neither does anyone else here. 

For the billionth time, the man already confessed to sexually assaulting the woman! What don't you get about that?

56 minutes ago, charmonman said:

I hesitate to respond as I’ll no doubt be accused of all sorts of sexism and worse. But here goes. Yes, the man is in the wrong. If indeed she told him no, then he he should have respected that.

But a single woman living alone, inviting a man she just met for the first time in a bar to stay the night at her place is, at best, engaging in extremely foolish behaviour. 

Perhaps the woman was foolish, or naïve, or gullible, or too trustworthy; who knows. I myself wouldn’t recommend that any female friend of mine do the same thing. But the problem here is, by saying “Yes, the guy shouldn’t have done it, *but the woman ...*,” you’re engaging in a sort of false equivalence, pivoting the story to lay some blame on the woman, who after all is the victim here. Why not say instead, “Yes, the guy shouldn’t have done it [in this case, he’s already confessed to sexual assault], *and I hope the woman gets her day in court and doesn’t suffer any long-lasting trauma from the experience.*”

I’m not referring to you (charmonman), but the majority of people posting here twist the story completely around to lay most if not all of the blame on the woman, as though by her giving the guy the benefit of the doubt, that gave him a god-given right as a male animal to attack her. This I find sickening.

13 hours ago, balo said:

Don't blame the woman , she is the innocent victim here.

 

Remember we are living in a woke world where men have no rights anymore. 

 

Oh, boo hoo. Men (especially Christian white men) are the most oppressed demographic on the planet (?) Gimme a break ...

2 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

See what a Democrat said when the Biden administation brought charges related to classified documents only against Trump while not pursuing charges on others who were not political opponents. 

Elise Stefanik, D-N. Y., who heads the messaging operation, said in a statement that Trump's indictment “is the epitome of the illegal and unprecedented weaponization of the federal government against Joe Biden's leading opponent, Donald J. Trump.”
 

Elise Stefanik is a Republican, in fact the fourth-ranking Republican in the House and the worst sort of Trump sycophant. For as much as you've posted on this thread, you really don't seem to know what you're talking about. And with each post, it's the same inaccurate and misinformed mantra over and over. Move on, man!

5 minutes ago, NextG said:

Doesn’t make the dog nor he a criminal. 
If he did it to a stranger, that isn’t acceptable. But to a girl whom you meet via an App, meet at a bar and then head back to her place. I think most men would think that was a yes. Do you believe that she told him before they left the bar that she said “no sex because I’m working tomorrow”. Does that sound plausible to you?

Even if she did say that whilst they were in bed together but he tried it on anyway… Does that make him a criminal?

That’s my point. Stop acting as if people are robots. They argue. They shout. They cannot always have a meeting of the minds.  The question is did his behaviour go beyond what one might consider an ‘acceptable’ level. 

 

She said that he sexually assaulted her, and he confessed. Sexual assault is a crime. It's really that simple.

11 minutes ago, NextG said:

But you have no idea that he forced her to do something against her will, do you? 
Was there a physical altercation? Does she have bruises? What does she allege happened? We don’t know any of that. 
I just see some people needing to get excited just by reading something. Doesn’t even need to be real. 

According to the original article, the woman said that sexual assault occurred, and the man confessed to the crime and was arrested. That seems pretty clear to me; why do we need to know about her bruises, if any, for the purposes of general discussion? What’s weird, though, is that you’re bending over backward to defend this guy, casting doubt on the woman’s story even though he confessed.

1 hour ago, NextG said:

As I wrote earlier and I’m sure that I’m not alone. But I’ve had many girls trying it on whilst I been asleep or even ‘asleep’. Shall we label them as ‘rapists’?

It’s not clear if sexual intercourse has even taken place, but the ‘barely thinking’ are already up in arms. 
Until there is more information, it’s ridiculous to blame him for trying it on under the described circumstances. 
I wouldn’t do it, but perhaps others are more impulsive and excitable. Like the dog that wants to hump your leg. 

That’s absurd -- if a man is “excitable” and behaves like a dog, that excuses his behavior? He is 100% responsible: if he is “excitable,” he has lots of options that don’t involve assaulting the woman. Even if the woman is “loose,” wearing sexy clothes, flirtatious, comes on a like a dog in heat herself, the moment she says “no” or pushes him away, that means stop.

2 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Too much rape?   Yes, I suppose men should rape as seldom as possible!

Sorry, I was simply parroting the language of the person I was responding to, who wrote “Women often take too many risks.”

3 hours ago, NextG said:

But is it *unnatural* for him to want to have sexual relations with her? We weren’t there, so don’t know what actually happened. But Tinder, met in a bar and then back to her place…

I don’t know what you’re saying. There’s a pretty big difference between wanting to have sex and being willing to assault someone against her will to get it.

1 hour ago, peterpaintpot said:

I have to say that this lady was acting in a thouhtless way, but I understand some of the harsh comments that have been posted. However much to my surprise I have discovered as a single man that more ladies act in this way than I would have imagined.

 

While I was single and over the age of 45 at least five ladies suggested it and it happened, all wanting to share my bed just for sleep! The first was a lady from Singapore, a nurse, she was attractive with lively conversation skills, we liked each other but were not sexually attracted to each other. One evening at my house in the UK she had dropped in and we enjoyed sharing too much wine, she needed to drive about 30 minutes to get home on the M25 Motorway. I offered to let her use a folding bed that I had in my study. But she said that she would share my bed with me as she trusted me!

I reluctantly agreed, she was right, nothing happened except sleep.

 

Since I have lived in Thailed and had kicked my Thai wife out it has happenet with at least 4 Thai women, all nice people but no romantic flame burning at all between us.

 

I have written this post to support all others who have posted saying that men do not have to rape any females that fhey bump into.

Thank you for posting that. And further to your last comment, it is *unnatural* for a man to want to rape or physically assault a woman who has said “no” in plain English, casual acquaintance or not.