- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
As a child, there were older dads in the neighborhood who had served in WW II. They had tattoos. Huge, saggy tattoos of anchors and hula girls. I am sure they were awesome on a 21 year old fit marine. On a hairy 50-60 year old beer-gutted guy .. Not so much. Those shirtless lawn-mowing neighbors gave me a bias against tattoos.
Then there is work. In my work life, i work in an OR. I see a lot of flesh and a lot of really bad tattoos. Tattoos have become so common, so pervasive, that it is unusual to see someone without one.
Everyone is pretty much covered with ink. Bad ink.
So often I have a patient tell me that they got a tattoo to show off their uniqueness. Unique .. Yeah .. Just like every other person I cared for today.
Then there are the trauma cases .. Ganstar ink, bad prison Ink, and La Vida Loca.
None of those tattoos are improved by a surgical incision.
I am totally non-tattoo … And it has nothing to do with church.
Look up scarification and subdermal implants… they make tattooing look as if it’s for wimps. Sam Bee: We have had a few patients in who had studs implanted under their skin. Ick. The poor nurse in the room is supposed to make sure all the jewelry is off of a patient and she just didn’t know what to do with THAT.
Yikes. I hope they never need an MRI or a jolt from a defib. amateurparent wrote:Sam Bee:
We have had a few patients in who had studs implanted under their skin. Ick. The poor nurse in the room is supposed to make sure all the jewelry is off of a patient and she just didn’t know what to do with THAT.
That could be bad in an MRI.LookingHard wrote:amateurparent wrote:Sam Bee:
We have had a few patients in who had studs implanted under their skin. Ick. The poor nurse in the room is supposed to make sure all the jewelry is off of a patient and she just didn’t know what to do with THAT.
That could be bad in an MRI.It could be fun to watch if you’re into gore.
:sick: DarkJedi wrote:LookingHard wrote:amateurparent wrote:Sam Bee:
We have had a few patients in who had studs implanted under their skin. Ick. The poor nurse in the room is supposed to make sure all the jewelry is off of a patient and she just didn’t know what to do with THAT.
That could be bad in an MRI.It could be fun to watch if you’re into gore.
:sick: Hmm, I can imagine being the nurse in that situation. Pretty sure I wouldn’t know what to do with that either.
In those cases they don’t allow the person to get an MRI, they do CT scans. Most MRIs are scheduled (non emergencies) because they take so long and you’ve got to fill out a “do you have metal inside you form” to get one. God I feel old. Studs implanted under the skin. I’ve never heard of that. I guess I live a sheltered life.
They’re called dermals. So you basically have a stud type jewelry piece sticking out, usually on your chest or back. I think they’re weird as hell. In regards to the argument of wondering what your tattoo will look like when you are older, here is a nice gallery of senior citizens baring their tattoos. Warning, lots of bare shoulders and one case of body modification. http://www.hefty.co/tattooed-senior-citizens/http://www.hefty.co/tattooed-senior-citizens/” class=”bbcode_url”> Hey Reflexzero, nice to hear from you. Great pics, but I’ll note that those are fit seniors with relatively recent tatoos. I want to see a gallery of average seniors with 40-year-old ink for a real study.
Well I imagine that the scenario for average Americans is that the tattoos will look a bit saggy and stretched, just like the rest of your body. There is some kind of disconnect where folks seem to think only the tattooed bits will be old and worn out, and the rest of you will be prime fleshy real estate. Personally, I can appreciate some tattoos on artistic merit, from a comfortable distance. Still, I don’t understand why anyone would consider getting a tattoo of David Hasselhoff’s face on their body.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.