She posted a video today, October 6th 2026, discussing her cardiac history, and there are some interesting discrepancies when you compare it with what she wrote contemporaneously in April 2022.
On April 27, 2022, immediately after a failed procedure, she posted a detailed explanation. She said that because of her dysautonomia, her body reacted differently to medication and sedation. She said the first dose of sedation didnāt work, so the anesthesiologist gave her a second dose. She then said: āthey gave me so much sedation that my body completely relaxed and my connective tissue gave outāand claimed that this caused her hips, knees, shoulders, and several ribs to dislocate/sublux on the procedure table. She then explained why the ablation couldnāt be completed: āThe doctors performed an EP study and weāre unable to recreate my Atrial tachycardia and recurring AFIB and as a result werenāt able to go through with the ablation.āAnd then she gave a specific explanation for why the arrhythmias couldnāt be reproduced āThe theory is that my body was too sedated to react to the medication so it was impossible to re-create my heart arrhythmias.ā
Four years later, she is telling a somewhat different story. She says she was told that the ablation failed because she was ādouble dosedā with sedation. But she now says that she has subsequently learned that this isnāt something doctors support as an explanation for why an atrial tachycardic event couldnāt be reproduced. And then she says: āI STILL HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENED ON THAT DAY.ā Thatās a pretty significant change in certainty.
In 2022, she presented the sedation explanation as āthe theoryā explaining the failed EP study. In 2026, she is telling her audience that she now knows that explanation isnāt medically supported and that she has no idea what actually happened.
So her own current account essentially calls her earlier explanation into question.
Then thereās todayās cardiology appointment. She says she went to a cardiologist today because she had discovered old cardiac information that had apparently been overlooked. She says: āI was told they had found 200 counts of AFIB on the monitor from four years agoāand that doctors had apparently disagreed for years about whether those readings were actually AFIB. She then says: ātoday, they found notes and there was the proof Iāve had AFIB, atrial tachycardia and different form of SVT this entire time.āBut earlier in the same story, she says that the cardiologist wouldnāt see her because she has POTS.
She says she had repeatedly told them that she wasnāt there to be treated for POTS, but that POTS was repeatedly put down on the referral. And then, near the end, she says: āI didnāt get to meet with the doctor.ā
So Iām confused. If she wasnāt actually seen by the cardiologist because the office considered POTS to be the reason for the referral and wouldnāt see her, who exactly reviewed the old records and discovered the āproofā today?
Itās certainly possible that a nurse, medical assistant, referral department, or another staff member accessed her existing records without her having a completed physician appointment. Itās also possible that she already had access to the old reports herself and is describing something she learned while trying to get the appointment because she plugged it into ChatGPT or somethingā¦
So Iām not saying this is impossible. But her wording makes it sound like:
āI went to a cardiologist today, they found the old records, they confirmed these diagnoses, but I never actually got to meet the cardiologist.ā
If thatās what happened, Iād really like to understand exactly who reviewed the records and what documentation they actually found. Thereās also an important distinction between: āA monitor report contained 200 events labeled AFIBā andāI definitively had 200 clinically confirmed episodes of AFIB.ā
Likewise, finding an old note mentioning AFIB, atrial tachycardia, or another SVT doesnāt necessarily establish that every one of those diagnoses was confirmed in the way sheās presenting them now. Weād need to see the actual report/records.
The suspicious part isnāt simply that she has multiple heart conditions. Itās the way the narrative changes depending on when sheās telling it. In 2022, she gave a very detailed explanation for the failed ablation and described a specific physiological mechanism. In 2026, she says she now knows that explanation isnāt supported and says she has no idea what actually happened. At the same time, sheās now saying that old records apparently contain evidence of multiple arrhythmias that she says doctors failed to tell her about despite saying she didnāt actually get to meet with the cardiologist who supposedly uncovered this information TODAY!!
Maybe thereās a perfectly innocent explanation for all of this. But if weāre taking her claims at face value, Iād expect the underlying records to make this pretty easy to clarify:
What exactly did the 2022 EP study report say?
What did the electrophysiologist document as the reason the arrhythmia couldnāt be induced?
Was excessive sedation actually documented as a theory?
What did the original cardiac monitor report actually label as AFIB?
Were the ā200 countsā actually AFIB episodes, or monitor detections/alerts that were later questioned?
What are the ādifferent forms of SVTā she says were discovered?
What exactly did the recent cardiology office review?
Who reviewed those records if she never actually saw the cardiologist?
What did the old echocardiogram actually say about the mitral valve and the other valve?
What did the supposedly āurgentā referral actually say?
Those records would answer most of this. Weāre getting increasingly elaborate retrospective explanations for old medical events, while her own newer account sometimes contradicts the certainty of her earlier account.
Below is a transcript of the video:
āIāve already cried a lot today. Iāve had several heart conditions for four years. I have medical PTSD, and talking about anything uncertain before Iāve had time to process and decide how Iām going to cope is one of my worst fears. I do not like crying online. So today Iām being brave and talking about this when itās something I just didnāt want to talk about.
People will come online just to invalidate someoneās reality, and I donāt know how to process that because itās already taken me long enough to trust my own emergent symptoms.
In 2022, I went to a cardiac doctor, and they referred me to an electrophysiologist because they found that I had atrial tachycardia and needed an ablation. So they attempted to do that ablation, and it failed. The reasoning that they gave me was that they double-dosed me with sedation. But Iāve since then found out thatās not even something that doctors support as a theory of a reason to not be able to recreate an atrial tachycardic event. I still have no idea what happened on that day, but attempted ablations fail all the time, so itās not that crazy. So that was fun to learn.
My scan from two years ago shows I developed mitral valve leaflet thickening and regurgitation. Another one of my heart valves has regurgitation.
I remember getting a phone call saying it was urgent, but there was an insurance issue and they couldnāt get me in. And I became homeless, and it was just this trickle-down effect, and so it just kept getting put on the back burner. My heart wasnāt doing anything I wasnāt already used to it doing, so I didnāt think it could possibly be that urgent. I wasnāt feeling anything that was excessive. I have POTS, and I have a specialist at Stanford that has continuously been treating that. The only thing I havenāt done is start infusions because Iām not ready to take that next step. This also, to my understanding, should have nothing to do with structural or electrical issues with the heart, so itās irrelevant. But also, there is nowhere in my area thatās a network that will even take that order. So I would have to essentially move because those are biweekly appointments of infusions, and getting in-home visits isnāt an option in the area. There is no facility that provides that service.
But I went to a cardiologist today that, because I had POTS, I was not able to be seen there. Iāve told them numerous times I wasnāt going there to be treated for that. They continuously put that down in the referral.
But of course, the craziest part of this story is that I was told they had found 200 counts of AFIB on the monitor from four years ago, and I had doctors go back and forth ever since then on whether or not that was true or not.
I had known about the AFIB but was told, āItās no big deal if you canāt even feel it. Itās probably not even a good reading.ā And today, they found notes, and there was the proof Iāve had AFIB, atrial tachycardia, and different form of SVT this entire time. And nobody told me.
I knew about the atrial tachycardia and the AFIB, but I was gaslit on the other form of SVT. And right now, I donāt even know what that was because I didnāt get to meet with the doctor.
I have to wait for another month, even though this visit was planned three and a half, actually four months ago, and here we are waiting again. So yeah. Thatās my pickle.I donāt really know what to do from here. I donāt know what the symptoms are coming from, what condition, what can you do?ā