I'm sorry you feel I was venting my frustration with my insurance company or this disease on you. I wasn't. After today and finally finding out I can do something that doesn't involve slicing me open I'm not even the slightest bit frustrated with my insurance company, merely confused about why they're so keen to spend a ton of money and so reluctant to spend so little.

My frustration, if that's what you want to call it (I'm not sure what else to call it really, although I don't feel that's really the right word) is with the idea that someone would tell me that pursuing the therapy is pointless because of how it got FDA approval. You said you didn't want to reignite the debate, then went ahead and stated all the reasons you felt were valid for reigniting the debate. We're all free to pursue the treatments we desire, and while I appreciate feedback from people who have undergone this therapy (whether positive or negative), I don't really see how your feedback was helpful. I don't want to debate it. I intend to pursue it before being sliced open because every time we undergo any type of surgery it risks a spread of our disease. No matter how quacky it may be, it's a better alternative than surgery imo.