Category Archives: things that don’t work

Total knee replacement surgery, the second time around: learn from our experience

Posted on by
112

Nearly three years ago my husband had Total Knee Replacement (TKR) surgery. It’s drastic and major surgery, which people usually only choose when the pain from osteoarthritis becomes intolerable. And, it was not done properly so that last month it had to be re-done! Perhaps our experience can be useful to others.

Why do knees need to be replaced?

Generally because of pain and restricted motion caused by loss of cartilage (which cushions and separates the bony parts of a joint) and growth of bony “spurs”. This is labelled osteoarthritis. Other causes, like trauma, rheumatoid arthritis, and infection, account for a minority of the 300,000+ TKRs each year in the US.

As to what causes osteoarthritis, that is less understood than previously thought, when it was all blamed on “wear and tear”. The knee is the largest joint in the body, and bears the complete weight of the body at each step we take, so it is indeed subject to lots of “wear and tear”. Common-sense risk factors include types of high-stress activity in work or sports, injury, obesity, infection, stiffness from lack of activity, and age (since cartilage becomes more brittle with age). However, not all elderly people develop arthritis and some who do have no significant pain. This is why I said above that knees need to be replaced, not because of osteoarthritis, but because of pain and reduced range of motion.

The biologic factors leading to the deterioration of cartilage in osteoarthritis are not entirely understood. Many experts believe that osteoarthritis results from a genetic susceptibility that causes some biologic response to injuries to the joint, which in turn leads to progressive deterioration of cartilage. In addition, the ability to make repairs becomes progressively limited as cartilage cells age.

Although osteoarthritis generally accompanies aging, osteoarthritic cartilage is chemically different from normal aged cartilage. As chondrocytes (the cells that make up cartilage) age, they lose their ability to make repairs and produce more cartilage. This process may play an important role in the development and progression of osteoarthritis. [Emphasis mine. Source: www.healthcentral.com ]

What’s involved in Total Knee Replacement surgery?

The x-rays below, from the site of a prosthetics manufacturer,

kneeXraysB&F.jpg

show views of a knee before and after surgery. On the left, cartilage loss has caused bone-on-bone contact: very painful. Bone spurs or bits of broken bone floating around can also cause pain in the deteriorated joint. On the right, an artificial knee joint (prosthesis) is in place. (These are not x-rays of the same knee; in fact, looks to me like one’s a left leg and the other is a right leg.)

Here are some views of prostheses. To install them, the ends of the two long-bones of the leg, tibia and femur, are sawed off (removing “usually between 2 and 12 mm” according to one source) and the artificial joint is affixed with cement, screws, etc. The work involved in removing bone and attaching the prosthesis involves considerable force and power tools. Note that the knee-cap, as well as muscles and ligaments, must be carefully moved aside to install the prosthesis. [Picture sources: 1, 2, 3 ]

KneeProsthesis1.jpg

knee-bone&prosthesis.jpg

knee-implant1.jpg

There are many patented designs for artificial knee joints, and these illustrations are for general example only. Surgeons have their preferred models; many were developed by orthopedic surgeons, and those surgeons tend to prefer the ones they have an interest in. Choice of prosthesis isn’t something the patient can weigh in on, we don’t know enough, but you may want to find out if your surgeon has a financial interest in the one he is going to use; if so, perhaps a second opinion would be valuable on the pros and cons of various types as applied to your individual case. Most insurance will pay for a second opinion for major surgery.

Research continues for better, longer-lasting designs and breakthroughs are regularly announced with fanfare––but some don’t fulfill their original promise, as with teflon-lined joints which wore away much faster in practice than lab tests had predicted. You will have to rely on the experience of your surgeon.

You can see photos of the stages of knee surgery (not for the faint-hearted) here, on a prosthesis company ‘s site.

Our experience

Surgery #1, 2006

Now, back to my husband’s case. Dan had knee pain for years that ruled out unnecessary walking, as in hiking or walking for enjoyment, and interfered with sleep. There was bone on bone contact and perhaps bone spurs or growths from osteoarthritis. In August 2006 he underwent total knee replacement surgery by an established older orthopedist in our area. Afterwards, the surgeon came out to me in the waiting room and told me that the operation had taken half again as long as planned because they had “run into something unexpected”. Later, when we knew more, that remark would have much more significance to us. The “something unexpected” was apparently the result of a broken leg at age ten, that had caused greater reliance on the other leg (the one that received the TKR).

The surgery was brutal, with terrible bruising all over the leg, and post-op pain and swelling were severe. From the beginning, the prosthesis felt loose and insecure, sometimes the knee buckled, and after the post-surgical pain subsided, he was still in pain sufficient to make walking difficult. At each visit with the surgeon Dan raised these issues and was told to exercise more, and that it would get better with time. Two years on, that hadn’t happened, and the surgeon then agreed that the knee was a bit loose and offered to go back in and “put a shim in it”.

At some point after the 2006 operation, when it became apparent that it had been unsuccessful, I began to research the subject. Immediately I found that it’s common practice now to use Magnetic Resonance Imaging before TKR, rather than merely relying on x-rays. MRIs provide an exact and minutely detailed three-dimensional picture of the joint. The data can be used to make a 3-D visualization that can be rotated. This way the surgeon knows exactly what to expect; the prosthesis is customized, if necessary, beforehand; the surgery is generally shorter and the incision may even be smaller. (Other advances, such as computer-assisted orientation systems to guide the surgeon in positioning the prosthesis during surgery, may also be used.) Nothing like this was done in Dan’s case, and we didn’t know to ask about it. We know now that the original surgeon does have access to an MRI, in the hospital across the street from his office, and used it to look at Dan’s hip after the bad artificial knee began to cause a lot of pain in his hip, back, and other knee. But he didn’t use it for the knee needing replacement.

Surgery #2, 2009

Finally, after the remark about putting in a “shim”, we began to look for another surgeon. I searched online for someone who used MRIs and computerized techniques for joint replacement and who was experienced in what I learned is called “revision” (re-do) of TKRs. (Some surgeons, including the only other ones in our area, won’t touch someone else’s failures.) I found a surgeon who met these qualifications, about 4 hours drive from where we live, and we went to see him. The first thing he did was to get a full-leg digital x-ray, which surgeon #1 had never done. He showed us the x-ray, and used software to examine the precise alignment of the prosthesis. It was 7.5° out of alignment. In effect, his lower leg-bone had been detached and then put back on at a different angle from the upper leg. For over two years the first surgeon had taken no steps to examine the results of his surgery, other than feeling the knee.

We liked what we saw here, added to what we already knew about Surgeon #2’s experience, and proceeded with the preparations for a revision.

In late May Dan went through the revision surgery. Pry off the old, shave off a little more bone, affix the new.

When the surgeon met with me afterward in the waiting room, he had troubling things to report but they weren’t about what had just taken place. He told me that the prosthesis he had removed was badly installed. He actually used the word “sloppy”––and you know how rare it is for doctors to criticize one another’s work! The lower part was out of alignment both front-to-back and side-to-side; the upper part was supposed to be stabilized by the bone growing into it on all sides, but this had not taken place (he remarked that he did not use this model because sufficient bone regrowth often failed to occur). So this artificial joint had been loose and seriously mis-aligned, with every step stressing both parts of the prosthesis, the ends of the bones, the muscles/ligaments/tendons, and the other joints involved in walking (back, hip, other knee). It was clear, said the surgeon, that this had been causing Dan considerable pain, and he felt confident that the new prosthesis was going to be a great improvement.

Today is post-op day 19, and there is no comparison between the two post-op experiences. The day after the surgery they got Dan on his feet, and the first time he put his weight on the new knee he said that it felt more solid than the old one ever had. The next day he was walking the hall, slowly, and walking without hip pain for the first time in ten years. Bruising of the leg is minimal, the incision is shorter, and pain is less. The first time he was using fentanyl patches, very heavy opioid painkiller, and was still in too much pain. This time it is Tylenol-3 every 4 hours, and ultram (tramodol) occasionally when needed.

The incision is closed with superglue, covered with crossways lengths of what looks like strapping tape: no staples to distort the skin and then have to be removed. He was able to take a short shower on post-op day 5. Last time the first shower was not permitted nearly so soon and he was in so much pain he had to sit down on a plastic bench in the shower. This time, he was easily able to stand and feel secure. He’s in pain, but not nearly as much as last time, and the solidity of the knee makes it possible for him to get around the house carefully but confidently, only occasionally using his walking stick for stability (and to keep the dogs from bumping him).

Like the first time, the anesthesia was a spinal block (not general anesthesia) but the new surgeon added a femoral nerve block. As I understand it, the spinal keeps pain messages from reaching the brain during surgery; the femoral block keeps the nerves immediately affected by the surgery from registering pain which gets the nerves excited even though the brain doesn’t hear about it. It’s supposed to lessen post-op pain and it certainly seems to do that, especially for the first 24-36 hours.

There is swelling, but it’s not bad unless he keeps his leg bent too long while sitting; last time he was still mostly in bed for at least 2 weeks, and the swelling was severe from above the knee to the foot. Perhaps this is related to another difference in surgical procedure: this time a drain was placed near the incision with a receptacle attached which had to be periodically emptied of fluid, partly blood. Before the drain was removed, 1200 cc of fluid had been collected. The first surgeon did not place such a drain, the leg continued very swollen, and at the two-week check-up the surgeon had to use a syringe to remove at least 200 cc from the still very swollen knee. Doing this is risky because in raises the risk of infection, which would be a dire complication.

At this point the future looks very good for this new knee, and we are talking about being able to get out and hike with our dogs again. I still have limited energy (fibromyalgia) but more than I used to, since getting off of methadone which I took for pain.

Lessons learned

The parts of our experience that I think may be useful to everybody facing joint replacement surgery are these:

Research and ask questions. Get a second opinion.
This is major surgery which will shape your everyday life for the next decade or more. Revisions are to be avoided: not only because of pain and expense, but each surgery removes a little more bone. Don’t be afraid of getting a second opinion, even if your orthopedic surgeon seems great. Believe me, if your orthopedist were going in for brain or heart surgery, he or she would ask around, not just take the first name in the phone book! Insurance generally covers second opinions for major surgery.

Educate yourself about the surgery in general: what can go wrong, and why? what are the different methods?

In choosing a surgeon, standard advice is to find someone who has done this particular surgery a lot and does it regularly. That’s good advice, but incomplete. Our first surgeon had lots of experience and he performs knee replacements regularly. But based on results and what we’ve learned since, this fellow has not kept up with new methods: MRI’s, femoral nerve blocks, post-surgical drains, etc.

Of course nothing is better just because it is new. Some things provide an advantage even the layperson can evaluate, such as the use of MRI’s to see exactly what the joint and surrounding bone look like, so that the operation can be planned using that information. There’s no real downside for the patient in providing better information to the person doing the cutting and sawing. As for the high-tech implantable prostheses used in TKR, there’s always something new coming out, which may or may not be better. You can at least ask a surgeon how long he has been using the device he intends to implant into your body, what the failure rate is, and when and why it fails. Does it fail to be stabilized by bone growth, or do components or surfaces wear out? Does it loosen in 2 – 5 years, for whatever reason? Do particles get ground off and act like grit in a bearing?

Read up on the subject and you’ll get an idea of what to ask. Take notes on your reading and your concerns, and bring them with you; then take notes on what the doctor says. Have someone else come along to help by writing things down, reminding you of questions, and in general giving you moral support. The doctor is the expert, but your body is what’s at risk; don’t be timid about asking. In my mind, a doctor who won’t answer my questions fully, as fully as I want, doesn’t get my business.

Also ask what to expect after the surgery. Surgeon #1 kept stringing us along, telling us that things would get much better. Now we hear from others that isn’t really true, that you “know” right away. And indeed the bad job felt loose from Day 1 and never changed; the recent revision felt solid from Day 1. Certainly, telling us for 2 years that there would still be improvement, was unrealistic (charitable interpretation) and dishonest (blunt interpretation).

More information on Total Knee Replacement

There’s an encyclopedia-style summary of the procedure, risks, failures, etc. here that looked good to me, and another page on this site deals with TKR revisions (re-doing the TKR).
Wikipedia also has good information.

How to reduce the chances that you’ll need knee replacement surgery

It’s no fun, really. And you’ll get stopped by airport security for a special check, every time.

Knee_Replacement2.jpg

Photo from Wikimedia Commons.

Here’s the advice from the National Institutes of Health––

How Can People Prevent Knee Problems?

Some knee problems, such as those resulting from an accident, cannot be foreseen or prevented. However, people can prevent many knee problems by following these suggestions:

Before exercising or participating in sports, warm up by walking or riding a stationary bicycle, then do stretches. Stretching the muscles in the front of the thigh (quadriceps) and back of the thigh (hamstrings) reduces tension on the tendons and relieves pressure on the knee during activity.

Strengthen the leg muscles by doing specific exercises (for example, by walking up stairs or hills or by riding a stationary bicycle). A supervised workout with weights is another way to strengthen the leg muscles that support the knee.

Avoid sudden changes in the intensity of exercise. Increase the force or duration of activity gradually.

Wear shoes that fit properly and are in good condition. This will help maintain balance and leg alignment when walking or running. Flat feet or overpronated feet (feet that roll inward) can cause knee problems. People can often reduce some of these problems by wearing special shoe inserts (orthotics).

Maintain a healthy weight to reduce stress on the knee. Obesity increases the risk of osteoarthritis of the knee.

What Types of Exercise Are Best for People With Knee Problems?

Ideally, everyone should get three types of exercise regularly:

Range-of-motion exercises to help maintain normal joint movement and relieve stiffness.

Strengthening exercises to help keep or increase muscle strength. Keeping muscles strong with exercises – such as walking up stairs, doing leg lifts or dips, or riding a stationary bicycle – helps support and protect the knee.

Aerobic or endurance exercises to improve function of the heart and circulation and to help control weight. Weight control can be important to people who have arthritis because extra weight puts pressure on many joints. Some studies show that aerobic exercise can reduce inflammation in some joints.

If you already have knee problems, your doctor or physical therapist can help with a plan of exercise that will help the knee(s) without increasing the risk of injury or further damage. As a general rule, you should choose gentle exercises such as swimming, aquatic exercise, or walking rather than jarring exercises such as jogging or high-impact aerobics.

So there it is, same old thing: exercise and lose weight. If you really really do not want a titanium and plastic knee, losing weight is probably the best thing you can do. “Data from the first National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (HANES I) indicated that obese women had nearly 4 times the risk of knee osteoarthritis as compared with non-obese women; for obese men, the risk was nearly 5 times greater.” Moreover, if you already have knee pain, losing even ten pounds can significantly reduce both pain and the ongoing deterioration of the knee. Being only 10 pounds overweight increases the force on the knee by 30-60 pounds with each step. You don’t need to reach your ideal weight; any reduction will help. And maybe that will be encouragement enough to keep going, slowly, losing weight and feeling better. (Thorough discussion of weight loss and osteoarthritis, here.)

More about credit cards, debt, pyramids, and eschatology

Posted on by
2

My recent post “Why I’m canceling my Bank of America credit card” brought a comment pointing out that cancelling credit cards can adversely affect one’s credit score, perhaps making it difficult to borrow for cars and houses. That may well be true, but it seems to spring from a view of credit and debt quite different from mine. Rather than dump this on the hapless commenter as a reply, I’ll say it here.

First, the companies have no incentive to restrict credit, and I expect they’ll soon be back to sending out credit apps to dogs and kindergartners. When the banks lose money through extending credit unwisely, they raise rates on the rest of us to recoup. Worst case, as now, the taxpayers bail them out, they buy each other up, write off debt, get tax breaks for losses. So I think people can safely cancel all but one or two cards, and still be able to use credit to make major purchases.

Second, I’m hoping that ordinary people, who DO have an incentive to learn from the present debacle, may start restricting their debt to large necessary items. Cars and houses usually do require going into debt. But I’m old enough to remember life without credit cards; my mom had a metal “charge-a-plate” for Macy’s, and there was layaway at some stores, but no credit cards. If you wanted something you saved up for it. If you couldn’t afford to go out to dinner, you didn’t go. To those accustomed to incurring chronic credit-card debt for indulgences, such a life may seem a bleak prospect. But actually I recall very few people growing despondent for want of cruises, concert tickets, and designer handbags.

Back in the 1980’s when I saw items at an Oregon department-type store bearing tags that said “Want me? Buy me!” and a credit card logo, I viewed it as a dangerous & selfish attitude to cultivate. Along with it came the re-definition of human beings as “consumers”.

The present economic system is a pyramid scheme because it is predicated on continual growth. We do not live in a world of infinite resources and space, therefore neither population nor consumption/production can continue to increase forever. Business interests, and even the administration, expect increased consumption to get us out of this depression. If it does, it can be only a temporary fix.

I know there are a lot of optimists out there who say not to worry about dismal stuff like the economy, climate change, and all that, because the world is going to end in 2012 (Mayan Calendar theory) or “soon” (some Christian fundamentalist theories). But I just can’t be that optimistic. Call me crazy, but what if we’ve got those Mayan numbers just a little bit wrong? Or some translator introduced an inaccuracy into the Book of Revelations? What if God has changed His mind, and now thinks it might be amusing to see how His little creatures manage with these challenges? We just can’t know. Better to keep our eyes on the ball, as it were (in this case the planet & its inhabitants) and not count on the Umpire calling the game on account of End of Time.

Oregon’s “Puppy Mill” bill: ineffective and wrongly aimed

Posted on by
3

In an earlier post I discussed some of the problems I see with two bills now in the Oregon legislature, HB 2470 the supposed anti-puppy mill law, and HB 2852 which is ostensibly aimed at increasing public safety from “dangerous dogs”.

The latter bill may be dead, and that is a good thing. But HB 2470 lives on, and I have closely examined the available version and have more to say about why it should also be forgotten. [I am still commenting on the original version. I have heard that changes have been made in committee but apparently the text of those changes is not available to the public. However, the bill is so fundamentally flawed that it would need to be rewritten completely to become both effective and beneficial, in my opinion, and I doubt that that has happened.]

What’s wrong with Oregon’s “anti-puppy mill” bill

We already have the laws needed to shut down puppy mills

Oregon animal cruelty laws currently contain requirements which would put puppy mills out of business, if enforced.

 (6) “Minimum Care” means care sufficient to preserve the health and well-being of an animal and, except for emergencies or circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the owner, includes, but is not limited to, the following requirements:

(a) Food of sufficient quantity and quality to allow for normal growth or maintenance of body weight.

   (b) Open or adequate access to potable water in sufficient quantity to satisfy the animal’s needs. Access to snow or ice is not adequate access to potable water.

   (c) For a domestic animal other than a dog engaged in herding or protecting livestock, access to a barn, dog house or other enclosed structure sufficient to protect the animal from wind, rain, snow or sun and that has adequate bedding to protect against cold and dampness.

   (d) Veterinary care deemed necessary by a reasonably prudent person to relieve distress from injury, neglect or disease.

   (e) For a domestic animal, continuous access to an area:

    (A) With adequate space for exercise necessary for the health of the animal;

    (B) With air temperature suitable for the animal; and

    (C) Kept reasonably clean and free from excess waste or other contaminants that could affect the animal’s health.
[ORS Chapter 167 – Offenses Against Public Health, Decency and Animals. 167.310 Definitions for ORS 167.310 to 167.351. As used in ORS 167.310 to 167.351]



I’ve never heard of a puppy mill that could come anywhere close to meeting these requirements. Hard to make a profit following those rules. Yet the existing criminal law has not been effective in ending puppy mills in this state. Why not?

1. Puppy mills hide in rural areas.
2. There is no funding for enforcement.
3. There is apparently no requirement for licensing of breeding establishments, so their location can remain unknown to authorities. Without licensing, there is no possibility of a regular inspection program like that for, say, food-handling establishments; and of course there’s no funding for such an inspection program either. Hence enforcement of the existing law depends on law enforcement rather than inspectors. Unless violations are reported by a witness or are visible from outside the property, law enforcement may not be able to enter the premises legally.

So what do we need? To do it right, licensing of breeding facilities (at a nominal cost), and funding for inspection. A couple of the provisions in HB2470 would provide some help, notably the requirement that “puppy dealers” provide purchasers with written documentation about the health, and origin of the dog––but the negatives in the bill far outweigh the positives. And “puppy dealers” as defined in the legislation wouldn’t apply to pet stores which sell the product of puppy mills!

HB 2470 is wrongly aimed

As far as I can tell, it systematically exempts pet stores, the main sales points for puppy mill “product”, from the standards of care and the health and documentation requirements, as well as from responsibility if a puppy turns out to have a health problem. The bill distinguishes between a pet store

SECTION 1. (1) As used in this section:

(b)(A) “Retail pet store” means a retail establishment open to the public that sells, or offers to sell dogs.
(B) “Retail pet store” does not mean a person that sells or offers to sell only dogs:
(i) That were bred or raised by the person; or
(ii) Are kept primarily for the purpose of reproduction.

and a pet dealer

SECTION 2. As used in sections 2 to 12 of this 2009 Act:

(3)(a) “Pet dealer” means a person that during a 12-month period sells, offers for sale, barters or exchanges more than the greater of:
(A) Twenty dogs; or
(B) Three litters of dogs.

All the subsequent requirements of the bill apply to pet dealers and not to pet stores.

Pet stores are not required to provide documentation to buyers giving the mill-produced puppy’s vet record, name and address of breeder or broker, and a guarantee of current health. Why not? What possible justification can there be for this?

HB 2470 also exempts pet stores from the “lemon law” portion of the bill. This part requires breeders, but not pet stores, to reimburse pet owners for dogs that have certain problems within two years of purchase. Sometimes that would be fair. But it makes the seller responsible for any “disease, illness or condition adversely affecting the health of the dog that existed in the dog before or at the time the customer acquired the dog”, or “a congenital or hereditary defect adversely affecting the health of the dog or requiring hospitalization or nonelective surgical procedures”. There is no provision here as to whether the condition or defect could reasonably have been known to the seller. The most careful screening of breeding stock, whether of a pure-bred dog or a cow or horse, cannot rule out every single genetic (hereditary) defect. Similarly, a puppy from a responsible breeder can receive all vaccinations, be checked by a veterinarian, and still possibly have some undetected condition that will affect its health in future.

Exemption of pet stores makes a mockery of the claim that the bill is aimed at shutting down puppy mills. Reducing demand, from the pet stores, is crucial to making puppy mills less profitable. Instead, those most affected will be the responsible breeders who are most easily located, not the secretive puppy mills, whether in Oregon or in the Midwest, which hide behind brokers, internet sales, and pet stores.

Unintended consequences

For boarding kennels:

”SECTION 1. …(2) A person may not possess, control or otherwise have charge of at the same time more than 25 sexually intact dogs that are four months of age or older.”

Foreseeable consequences

I’m not going to get into the motivations of some of the supporters of this bill, including allegations that it is part of PETA’s agenda to eliminate the “animal slavery” of pet ownership by driving breeders out of business. But it is predictable that HB 2470 will have far more effect on responsible breeders than on puppy mills. The responsible ones are out in the open, easy to find, unlike puppy mills. You are much less likely to have a problem with a dog from a responsible breeder, few of whom make a profit from their hobby. These breeders welcome potential puppy buyers to their homes to see the parents of the puppies, to interact with the puppies before they are 8 weeks old and ready for new homes, and to watch puppy temperament testing; they also choose male and female carefully when planning a breeding, with specific goals for the breed, do testing (genetic, x-ray, etc.) so as to avoid breeding dogs that carry heritable defects, and keep extensive records on their dogs.

An article in the Oregonian featured a woman who had purchased a puppy which turned out to have severe health problems due to bad care and bad breeding. That is a heartbreaker for the owner and the dog. But she bought it from a broker. Try to find that broker, probably in another state, and get him to comply with the bill’s “lemon law” provision. So, how much of the problem of true “lemon” puppies will be addressed, and how many good local breeders will be harassed by owners when a problem develops months or years later? I can leave my puppy outside 23 hours a day, and when it turns into a barking unsocialized dog, claim that it had an inherited genetic defect causing this behavior. Under the law, there’s no provision for evaluating claims against breeders.

I have some personal experience over two decades with breeders of two different dog breeds. They taught me right away that it is not simply a transaction to them: they decide if my household is suitable for one of their puppies, they require spaying or neutering to keep ill-bred or surplus pups of their breed out of the shelters and out of the wrong hands, they urge me to keep in touch and call with questions, they have me sign a contract which includes notifying the breeder if I can no longer keep the dog––even if it is 10 years later––so that they can accept it back for placement in a suitable home.

What happens at a pet store if I go in and buy a puppy? None of this, that is for sure! Those “doggies in the window” are there for a reason, to promote impulse buying of a live animal which will be a serious commitment for a decade or more. Pet store employees have no reason to talk a customer out of buying, say, a high-energy pup when the person says they want a quiet couch potato to watch tv with. If those cute puppies go unsold too long, they certainly do not go back to the breeder for placement; they get dumped or drowned or sold out out of the back of a truck. Yet this industry isn’t required to change one bit by HB 2470.

I know not all AKC breeders are so responsible as the ones I have dealt with and known. I have some ideas about that, which I’ll put in another post. But to burden this group with new legal restrictions under the guise of shutting down puppy mills, while exempting the pet stores which market the pups bred under cruel and unhealthy conditions, this makes no sense. And the lack of funding for enforcement ensures that breeders out in the open will be the actual subjects, while the unspeakably vile and carefully hidden puppy mills continue to grind out misery.

dogFontFigures.jpg

In the couch potato class, our beloved English Mastiff Bart was a champion, as in all else. We lost him in February to consequences of old age (he was 11 and a half).

BartSleepingDeck.jpg

BartSleepCouch.jpg

Back to the past: Return of the percolator

Posted on by
1

Over three decades our household has averaged a new coffee-maker every three or four years. We’ve had Braun, Gevalia, Black and Decker, Krups, and other brands I’ve forgotten. A couple of times we got the $90 model but mostly they’ve been about half that price. Either way, eventually they quit working and this big non-repairable piece of plastic and electronics goes into the garbage.

As years have passed they’ve gotten more complicated, and that seemed to be the downfall of last week’s purchase. It was a Krups with an added water filter (good for us, with mineral-rich well water, but also one more thing to have to find, buy, and replace––profit’s big on consumables, like printer cartridges!). It also had an extra idiot light feature: a “low water” display and override which would keep it from running if it thought there was not enough water. This was not a feature we wanted, in fact we did not discover it until it malfunctioned on the third day of use. Push ON and all that happened was a cryptic pattern flashing on the display.

In the morning, when you want your coffee, reading a coffee-maker manual is not on your list of desired activities. Before consulting the manual we tried the chimpanzee approach, pushing the four control buttons in various combinations. Luckily we did not happen to activate any of the more arcane features, which can only be guessed at, nor (since we live in such a remote location) did the machine’s electronic calls for help manage to bring its plastic comrades jetting to its aid in time to defend it from our mishandling. Nor did we fix it, even after we deciphered the display message. We plugged and unplugged it, emptied and refilled it, all to no avail. Then we called the Customer Service number and listened to music for 20 minutes before a polite woman with a southern accent came on, heard our story, and informed us that by unplugging it and plugging it back in, we had “done all the troubleshooting” that we could do and our next step was to pack it up and ship it to their service center. Or, she said, we “might be able” to return it to the point of sale for a “straight-across trade”. Yes, I said, thinking “But not for another one of your brand!”

By then, we had made our morning’s coffee using a kettle and a flat-bottomed gold filter set in a sieve over a large pyrex measuring container. It was good. Caffeinated, we discussed our next step. Something simpler, not plastic and electronic, would be good; perhaps it would even have been Made NOT in China. We decided on a percolator, since Dan said he’d seen one on the shelf when he chose the Krups, and I remarked that when I was a kid people had the same percolator for 20 years, perking on and on. We marvelled that the coffee-makers of our childhood were still being sold. Maybe we weren’t the only people tired of having to read a manual for something that should be simple, and tired of the (planned or unplanned) short life-span of the new coffee-makers.

For $45 we got a shiny stainless steel West Bend percolator. It has no controls. Fill with water (there is a clear water gauge on the side, one new feature); insert the tube up which the hot water flows; put coffee in metal basket, put on lid, place basket on tube, put coffee-maker lid on, plug in. Less than a minute later hot water is flowing up into the clear knob on top and down onto the coffee basket. There is no possible programming, no clock, and only one “feature”, a plastic light on the base. I thought the thing was already broken, when the light did not come on after the percolator was plugged in. But no: the light comes on when the coffee is done. It keeps the coffee hot until unplugged, so you have to remember to do that to avoid cooked-all-day coffee remains. Unlike all the coffee-machine carafes we have ever had, the percolator does not drip when you pour too fast. Also, it takes up less space on the counter.

And the coffee? We like it better than what we were drinking before. The perking noise is pleasant, unlike the hissing and puffing of the previous type. Only one part didn’t turn out as we hoped: it was “Made in China”. But we hope it’s the last coffee-maker we buy for a long long time.