Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

One of the most common misconceptions in breast augmentation is that stunning results require larger implants. Not always. This patient, age 22, stands 5'9" and weighs 110 lbs. Using 400cc saline implants placed beneath the muscle through a periareolar incision, we achieved a transformation from an A cup to...

13,860 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

💜 One Last Update! 💜 Last week when we were in Minnesota for Clark’s 6-month follow-up for his clinical trial, of all the tests they ran, the one we were both most anxious and most eager to see results from was his brain MRI. For children with untreated Sanfilippo Type A, it’s typical to see 2–5% loss of brain volume each year, along with enlargement of the ventricles (the fluid-filled spaces in the brain). This is one of the most heartbreaking parts of the disease — watching the brain slowly lose tissue and function over time. We were so nervous that Clark’s MRI might show some loss compared to his baseline scan 6 months ago. But the results came back and… ✨ ZERO change. ✨ His brain volume and ventricle size were completely stable — no loss at all. This is such an incredible sign that the treatment may be doing exactly what it’s meant to: clearing the toxic waste from his brain cells and protecting his brain from further damage. If feel that it is SO important for us to share these results as they come because people need to be FULLY aware that these treatments that are out there WORK. These children with Sanfilippo do not need to regress and they DEFINITELY do not have to have their lives cut short. We just need the FDA to say yes. We are so close to a reality where Sanfilippo syndrome is as manageable as a disease like diabetes. P.S. Enjoy this video of our little sunshine having the best time singing!

Brutus Stark

48,090 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

As a gynecologist, this is one of the most misunderstood topics and it’s important to approach it scientifically: The so-called “G-spot” (Gräfenberg spot) is described as a sensitive area on the anterior vaginal wall, typically a few centimeters inside. However, it is not a distinct, isolated anatomical structure. From a physiological perspective, this region is likely part of a complex neurovascular network, closely related to the internal extensions of the clitoris and surrounding tissues. This explains why stimulation in that area may produce different sensations in different individuals. The key point is variability. There is no universal response pattern. Some individuals may report heightened sensitivity in this region, while others may not perceive any specific difference. Both are completely normal findings. Common misconceptions include: The idea that every woman should experience pleasure from this area The belief that it represents a “guaranteed” pathway to orgasm These are not supported by consistent scientific evidence. In clinical terms: Female sexual response is multifactorial It involves anatomical, neurological, hormonal, and psychological components No single structure determines the experience What matters most is: Comfort Communication Individual preference The G-spot is not a universal “target,” but rather a concept describing part of a broader functional system. The human body is not standardized. It varies anatomically and functionally from person to person.
0:11

Sensitive content

As a gynecologist, this is one of the most misunderstood topics and it’s important to approach it scientifically: The so-called “G-spot” (Gräfenberg spot) is described as a sensitive area on the anterior vaginal wall, typically a few centimeters inside. However, it is not a distinct, isolated anatomical structure. From a physiological perspective, this region is likely part of a complex neurovascular network, closely related to the internal extensions of the clitoris and surrounding tissues. This explains why stimulation in that area may produce different sensations in different individuals. The key point is variability. There is no universal response pattern. Some individuals may report heightened sensitivity in this region, while others may not perceive any specific difference. Both are completely normal findings. Common misconceptions include: The idea that every woman should experience pleasure from this area The belief that it represents a “guaranteed” pathway to orgasm These are not supported by consistent scientific evidence. In clinical terms: Female sexual response is multifactorial It involves anatomical, neurological, hormonal, and psychological components No single structure determines the experience What matters most is: Comfort Communication Individual preference The G-spot is not a universal “target,” but rather a concept describing part of a broader functional system. The human body is not standardized. It varies anatomically and functionally from person to person.

Op. Dr. Mehmet Bekir Şen

2,961,631 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce