Broke my femur neck on a mountain bike. Surgery, plates and screws. Surgeon said no weight on the broken bone for 8 weeks and no walking on it for 12. And then we'll see he said.
In 4 weeks I was on a trainer (fork fixed to the trainer). Started easy with 30min sessions and then increased time and force applied to the pedals.
After 2 weeks of "riding", started putting weight on the bone with short walks around the house.
8 weeks after the surgery rocked up to a road race, still on crutches because walking was still a bit uncomfy but being on the bike was fine. Raced to a 3rd place (Masters A) with hard breakaways and all.
12 weeks after the surgery go to see the surgeon to check if I can start walking (already walking by this stage as normal). He X-rays me and says your bone is fully healed. Strange but good he said.
I told him the story. Still don't know if he believed me.
I had shoulder surgery last May. My surgeon told me no combat sports (BJJ, judo) for six months minimum. I was 40 at the time.
I went back on the mats a week later. Started with only doing warmups and movement drills, worked up to gentle flow rolling (with my arm tied into my belt) at a month, then drilling techniques with well-chosen partners and conservatively rolling with those same partners at two months.
This was, of course, on top of rigorously following my PT schedule. And being very conservative with the situations I’d put myself in.
By three months I had regained full flexibility in the arm, and by six months I was back to full-contact training five days a week.
I definitely think there’s a fine line to walk here. I explicitly didn’t do judo for six months because that involves direct and unavoidable impact. And I also made sure to choose training partners who would be very cognizant of my arm and limited range of motion and who wouldn’t just grab a submission and crank it. I also would preemptively tap any time that arm got isolated or in a position where it could be attacked. But there was definitely risk that a training partner would make a mistake or I would land on it badly and tear something.
Still, I would do it all over the same way. I definitely think pushing things helped it heal dramatically more quickly and completely than otherwise. But you do have to be careful with the level of risk you’re exposing yourself to.
That's honestly wild to me. I had arthroscopic labrum tear surgery on both my shoulders (1 in 2024, 1 in 2023), and I can't imagine going back to really any range of movement within a week. Even on my solid PT schedule. Glad it worked out for you but I would hesitate to expose yourself to any sort of risk at that stage.
For me it took about 4 months to feel pretty comfortable with the shoulder(s) and about 6-12 months for skateboarding, weight lifting, etc
What was your surgery if you don't mind me asking?
Mine was similar, labral repair as well as rotator cuff arthroscopy.
I had nearly zero ability to lift the arm under its own power at one week and limited (but good for one week) flexibility. To be clear, I did not engage in any actual drilling or movement of that shoulder in training for perhaps a month. It was in the sling, tightly affixed to my body. I started with one-sided warmup movements and drills and progressed as I felt able.
By a month I was helping newcomers by helping them with some details of techniques. Due to being unable to lift the arm under its own power, I would “crawl” my arm using my fingers where it needed to go to show them. This was with zero actual resistance, but I was at least using the arm: moving it, contracting the muscles, working through scar tissue, and getting blood flowing.
Again, I 100% acknowledge that I exposed myself to greater levels of risk by doing this. I did try to mitigate that risk as best I could, but that never drops it to zero. And while I was pushing things, I was also adapting things day by day to what I realistically felt my capabilities were.
Also note that very nearly everyone practicing BJJ past 35 is taking exogenous testosterone. Without additional testosterone, it would be very difficult to sustain the sport due to frequent small injuries - the extra/"replacement" hormones help speed up recovery and actually allow frequent (>1x/week) training sessions.
It depends on the details of the surgery, but this may have helped GP heal a bit faster.
While testosterone is not well-known for helping to heal ligaments/tendons, some HRT compounds (such as nandrolone) that are occasionally prescribed by doctors/urologists, have a lot of anecdotal accounts of reducing perceived joint pain.
I do not take testosterone. I occasionally try to make a habit of taking creatine but other than that and whey protein while weightlifting (another habit I struggle to reliably form) that’s it.
Maybe I’m out of touch but I would be astonished to find that it was even remotely close to “nearly everyone” for recreational hobbyists over 35.
The level of injury is just not as high as you’re suggesting for people who aren’t training to be elite competitors. I’ve had perhaps one “small” injury (muscle pull, joint overextension, etc.) every six months or so, reasonably consistently for the last ~7 years of BJJ / judo which I do three to five days a week, 2-3 hours a day.
I definitely believe you. I know from a few injuries that with tendons you want to be moving and applying resistance as soon as you are able to prevent the formation of scar tissue and encourage blood flow. It's not a huge leap of logic that bones, too, benefit from movement and resistance when healing.
Honest question, how did you know to disregard the doctor 's instructions and start home exercises on the bone at 4 weeks? How did you limit yourself during your riding and other resistance work? How long was the recovery period after every session?
> how did you know to disregard the doctor 's instructions
My background (Russian). Don't trust western approach to solve problems with pills etc. End up talking to (usually) Soviet-trained doctors who can't practice here in the west. The advice makes sense so I follow it believing they know what they're talking about. It's always about the cause, not the symptom. This sort of thing.
> How did you limit yourself during your riding and other resistance work
By feel. Biking is a second nature to me. Femur neck wasn't the only bone I broke. More plates too.
> How long was the recovery period after every session?
First few, felt a bit fucked but I think it was both being out of shape and one leg's muscles sleeping for 4 weeks. So the usual, sit for 5-10 min, back on the crutches, off to the shower and the life goes on.
Best Soviet doctors! Poor guys working without any equipment to get perfect results. Sure good way for easy cases, bud hard cases are cripples afterwards. Or badly healed bones are separated with chisel and then comes next try… been there, saw that. Thanks but no, I’ll take a western medicine with all the screws and plates. Despite screws and plates being much easier to work with, every sane doctor will try without them at first even for moderately hard cases.
you are not wrong, shattered leg, waited too long, can't do shit now. never healed properly. should have listened to my body rather than my doctors. fucking sucks.
I think this is commonly accepted now (maybe?), but tendons, ligaments, and cartilage don't heal well without movement to increase fluid exchange. When I was a kid it was a big deal to avoid any pressure on these tissues after an injury, but it seems imperative for recovery.
When my kids hurt themselves in sports, it's straight to easy yoga, light calisthenics, and lecturing them for not cross training and treating their tissues better when they aren't competing. I sound like a dumb old man to them now, but I think in 10 or 15 years they'll be spending a lot more time focused on building that kind of resilience.
> I think this is commonly accepted now (maybe?), but tendons, ligaments, and cartilage don't heal well without movement to increase fluid exchange.
It's getting better. RICE protocol after a sprain is still too unknown to/overlooked by many physicians, although I'd rate it to 50-80% these days.
Many would recommend a 4-6 week rest after an ankle sprain, with a prescription of 10 sessions at a physiotherapist 2 weeks in, and crutches til then.
Luckily physiotherapists are better trained and usually tell you to come yesterday, start with massaging to reduce the swelling and promote lymphatic and blood flow, and movements to break down scar tissue as it forms, and walk as much as you can, with crutches not as walking aids but as "seatbelts" so that you have something to immediately lean on instead of the injured foot should you trip over.
Once tissue has healed enough the next step is relearning and recovering strength and movement (general motion, hence why in french physiotherapist is "kinésithérapeute" from greek kinesis a.k.a motion) towards normal levels. Problem is halfway through the allotted 10 sessions are up :/ so you're either down for a trip back to the physician and convince them you need more or you're on your own.
That is awesome! Thanks for sharing. Reminds me of a similar story from a friend. He, too, broke his leg and healed it quickly enough to surprise his orthopedist by riding a stationary bike. He said that initially the broken one was kinda just all by for the ride, but he thinks the circulation helped.
He too was an elite athlete (baseball).
Another friend was a bodybuilder. He said that bodybuilders do so many experiments that they sometimes know better than their own physicians. They are biohackers.
"Power users" of a product sometimes end up schooling the customer support team.
Another thing – the surgeon told me I'll need a hip replacement in 10 years' time. This was 16 years ago and I don't feel I need a new hip although it's not perfect the way it works sometimes but nothing even remotely serious.
The cost of this increased healing rate would be the tail risk of compounding injury though. It's not something a doctor could recommend even if it were true for everyone consistently.
Even if the outcome distribution is the same for everyone and the expected outcome is better healing, you can increase the risk of much worse outcomes if the distribution has the right shape.
On the other hand, I'm 6 weeks on from 3 fractured ribs, and still no exercise. I'm sure there are a few medical people on here that will tell you that ribs are a special case.
If I were to breathe too deeply during the first few weeks, there was a good chance that I'd re-fracture them; sneezing is known to do this. And for what it's worth, despite what you might see on the TV, broken ribs are no joke.
Recovery time is, apparently anything between 6 and 12 weeks. The first 3 weeks were the absolute worst. I'm finally at the 'it feels like a bruise' stage. As a sporty person I know that if I 'feel fine', I need to add at least 2 weeks on that before I actually start any sports again.
I probably broke a rib, or damaged some cartilege last summer. I never went to a doctor because it was "fine", also our 1177.se site even says not to go unless its very painful and so on.
Week 2 was worst I would say. I was sneezing a lot for some reason.
The weird thing though, it was fully healed (it felt like) week 4, but then suddenly several weeks later the same exact pain came back, without me having done anything similar to the first fall from a MTB. It did go away again though, so its all good now!!
This has been knowledge for the top orthopedic surgeons for decades (at least 20 years). But for your local orthopedic surgeon, it depends on when they graduated whether they know this or not.
Some years after my fuck up, Chris Froome, multiple Tour winner, crashed badly. Much worse than me, broke a lot of bones.
One of them was the femur neck. This one (and maybe in combination with other broken bones) took him a long time to recover from. By the time he did, he was finished as the Chris Froome, no more wins.
Not saying he did anything wrong, the fuck do I know, but I wondered for a while if he tried, how shall I say it, a more head on approach to the fractured bones recovery and if that made any difference.
Anecdata but I agree. Had two spine surgeries at two highly regarded places and those surgeons had no clue whatsoever on the recovery. They've fixed their part and the rehab part is someone else's problem.
Luckily I have a good therapist. But still I'm disappointed as they should know that part better.
Anti-anecdotal: Old family member cracked a femur neck. Tried to stand on it after a few weeks despite warnings, broke it, had to go to surgery, plates and screws. A few more weeks of resting and she would have been fine.
idk most doctors would not say don't use your limbs for 8 weeks, that would lead to atrophy. but a lot of doctors give generic advice to avoid lawsuits.
A couple of weeks ago I went over the handlebars on my bicycle and broke my collarbone, needed 5 stitches on my forehead, got a little road rash on my hip, and an avulsion (?) fracture on one finger resulting in mallet finger. I'm 54 and have noticed that I'm healing much more slowly than I remember healing when I was a teenager.
Mostly, things are going smoothly and the only thing I'm really worried about is the mallet finger. I've been told to keep it in a splint for 8 weeks and if I accidentally bend it a little before then any healing will have to start over and I might end up needing surgery for it.
If anybody here has had mallet finger, I'd love to hear how it went for you.
Yep, something I'm realizing is a lot of guidelines/expectations around how long something will take to heal seem to be based on people in the 30-45 range. In your teens and twenties you might get injured and heal faster than expected and think "huh, must be my genes/technique/etc" when really it's probably just youth. Suuuuucks when you start to realize that superpower of yours is fading.
Sorry to say I'm in almost an identical seat. I broke my thumb and have a gnarly but closed tuft fracture - after 4 weeks I saw a specialist who said there wasn't much healing or bone growth yet, and so decided to do a more aggressive splinting and lock down the whole thumb for another 4 weeks.
Oddly enough I had a similar injury 10 years prior on a different finger and that healed up in 6 weeks as if nothing ever happened to it.
Probably relevant too – systematic endurance training since 12, elite-level racing since 18 (world champion at that point). So not a stranger to all kinds of injury and what works and what doesn't. For me that is.
Nice! I was gonna say 43 is encouraging to hear, as someone who's worried about how age will affect my proneness to injury/ability to recover, but that's an impressive background and probably a major factor. Guess that's another good reason to stay active.
In the same boat here: 20+ years of hard core Christianity (Scottish Presbyterianism). Heavy, very heavy indeed studies lasting years and years. Regulative principle of worship, this kind of direction.
Was raised kinda an atheist though and converted in my 30s. A willful, well thought out decision to convert.
All came crashing down on me the moment I stopped ignoring some very obvious questions, e.g. who died on the cross?
Even some casual thinking about this lands you, inescapably, on the only conclusion you have available if you stick to the orthodoxy, and that is: a human nature died on the cross. Not God (cannot die) and, unfortunately for Christianity, not a human either (briefly: if JC is one person / two natures, you have to conclude his (human) nature died on the cross since JC the person, being God, cannot die).
At any rate, this is where it started for me and quickly escalated further. The entire New Testament, I'm convinced now, is a fraud and whoever pulled it off didn't even try to hide it. It's incredible how we can bullshit ourselves into believing what we (for whatever reason) want to believe. And not just religion.
In the end, the NT had to go leaving me with the Hebrew scriptures.
I'm from the area, near Grozny. If Grozny were under fog, there are at least 10 airports nearby (Makhachkala, Vladikavkaz, Nalchik, Minvody, Rostov, Krasnodar etc) in the North Caucasus. Why would you fly east, across the Caspian Sea, toward Kazakhstan?
Obviously just speculation but if one was just fired upon, yet still in one piece and at least somewhat in control, a pilot might decide braving a longer diversion over a body of water to get away from the area, might be the safest course of action.
Also if you have control issues and a forced depressurization it might be best to avoid obstructions (like the Caucasus mountains) and significant course adjustments.
But from what I'm seeing the actual answer is that they were denied landing clearance, which is a bit suspicious.
My guess, they picked an airport they knew well, that they could probably navigate to with nothing more than a compass and landmarks. And if they suspected GPS jamming (personally, a dual GPS failure over Russia would be my first guess) they would be biased towards an airport far away from an active war zone.
I am curious why they didn't divert back to their departure airport at Baku. It's roughly the same distance and surely they knew that airport even better, and could just follow the coastline back. Maybe by the time they had the plane under control they were already much closer to Aktau.
If I was a pilot flying into an at-war country I’d want my alternate to point in a different direction, the exact opposite course of the war zone ideally. Which this pretty much is.
And, to further that point, multiple airports you listed here are currently closed because of that war.
I just checked the transcript I've seen floating out there, the first alternate was Baku, i.e. their departure airport. Then Mineralnye Vody (which is some way to the west), then Makhachkala, then they seemed to go far to the east, so while I think the first option was Baku - matching what I said, the list of options pretty quickly became 'anywhere'. What a harrowing flight.
> The Grozny airport reportedly denied landing permission to the AZAL plane, and the aircraft was also refused permission to land at airports in Makhachkala and Mineralnye Vody.
Anyone else notice an influx of these new accounts in the last couple of years that start rapidly spamming inflammatory replies that seem to be trying to incite arguments (look at this ^ account's comments in the last hour)? HN is a bastion of mostly western, intelligent discourse. I'm really starting to wonder - is it under attack?
Has been for a while. Most articles critical of Russia end up getting flagged pretty quickly and also tend to get flooded with posts from accounts created 5 minutes prior.
Vice signalizing? Intentionally displaying one's flaws/vices? I really don't think that's what this is. I think this is someone or a bot that is trying to get people to react with anger, in hopes that it catches on and causes wider arguments in the thread/social platform. It's very similar to what foreign influence/disinformation campaigns are doing in western societies, but targeted at online societies.
The entire region was the zone of active air defence and Vladikavkaz was surely not an option given the drone strike that damaged a shopping mall there. My only question here is why there were any civilian flights at the moment. They should have been diverted.
"Kill and hide. Azerbaijani officials tell local media that Russia hit flight J2-8243 with an anti-aircraft missile and then jammed electronics and _denied permission to land in three airports, steering the damaged plane into the Caspian Sea so that it would crash there and Russia’s role would never be discovered_."
> Even better, for a few months the browsers themselves would highlight RSS feeds and allow you subscribe right in the browser. It was too good to last.
Hearing Ukrainian for the first time, if you're Russian, sounds like you're hearing a Russian dialect you never heard before but understand 90% of, bar some words you've never heard. The languages are that close.
Polish, otoh, would baffle a Russian at first, you'd grasp quite a bit but you know you're hearing a foreign language, Slavic but foreign.
Nifty diagrams, but they should be taken with a huge grain of salt of course.
For example it shows EN/DE and EN/NO as having equivalent distances (49) when obviously EN/DE are much closer than either is to NO (in any holistic comparison of the three languages). It also shows IT/FR as being significantly closer (31) than IT/SP (40) when that's also plainly not the case -- again if we consider the distance between respective language pairs holistically (which includes a whole lot of other factors like phonemic footprint, meter, etc).
In short this reads like pretty much the kind of post one would expect from a "brain candy" site like this.
Less harshly (assuming good indent on the author's part), it demonstrates the pitfalls of relying on a single score (which in itself can be subject to all kinds of weighting and sampling biases) simply because it's a "score" and we're all supposed to be "data-driven" in our analyses these days.
But again -- nifty diagrams, and they do at least give a feel for the topic of mutual intelligibility and language distance (even if the scores themselves don't seem to be particularly meaningful).
As a Pole I have a similar reaction to Czech and Slovak. Except it feels less like a strange accent (because we don’t have these as much) and more like baby talk. We get the words, just how they’re used feels unusual, and often funny.
From the other side, my Czech friends told me that Polish sounded to them like something from deep antiquity. Like reading an ancient manuscript where again you get the words but no sane person these days would use them like this.
Yup - Polish is in a different family (Western Slavic), with lots of unknown words and a different phoneme density that immediately lights up as "foreign".
Can confirm, drinking in cycling circles at elite level is normal. Heavy drinking that is, even before races. Doesn't seem to have any effect on performance the next day.
Then again, we're talking 20-25 yo males with 10-15 years of endurance training.
well, it kinda seems that drinking in any circle in Russia is more normal than other countries. Maybe it doesn't seem to have an effect because the others are drunk too every time ?
Ι wonder what would the effect be if someone got drunk just once before a race.
> Ι wonder what would the effect be if someone got drunk just once before a race.
Not sure, depends on a person I guess. My first time was ok.
Mind you, it's not like we were drinking all the time, more like occasionally, usually between big blocks of training or racing and never before anything important.
The off-season though, that was wild. It had to be for sanity's sake.
Been blogging since 2008, on and off, using few different domains. This current one is the so called work in progress, no about me page etc. Mostly write via newsletter these days though.
Sharing for the variety's sake I guess this being HN.
> no one, not even high level party members took this bullshit seriously enough
Don't know when you were born (I was in the 1960s). You're wrong. A lot of people, especially Gagarin's generation, took what you call bullshit seriously and believed in it. Hence, were willing to lay down their life for the cause.
You don't need a t there (native Russian speaker), it's a clear ch like in check.
This is a common mistake when transliterating the Russian ч (ch), t doesn't add anything. In fact, t makes it more difficult to pronounce it while it's an easy sound for most people to say.
What’s happening here is that /tɕ/ is a single sound — I’d transcribe it /t͡ɕ/, with a little tiebar to make that clear. This sound is an ‘affricate’, meaning that it’s pronounced by starting with a /t/ and releasing it with the tongue so that it finishes with a /ɕ/ sound. /ɕ/ alone would be the sound written in Russian as ⟨щ⟩, which is of course different. Incidentally English ⟨ch⟩ is also affricated, although it’s pronounced slightly differently, as /t͡ʃ/ rather than /t͡ɕ/.
> This sound is an ‘affricate’, meaning that it’s pronounced by starting with a /t/ and releasing it with the tongue so that it finishes with a /ɕ/ sound.
I don't agree. I don't start with a /t/ when I'm about to say any Russian word that starts with ч (ch). The tongue is in a different place altogether.
With т, the tongue is closer to teeth than when I start with ч (ch). This should be true for all since we're talking about more or less the same sound – ч and /ch/.
Of course for French and English speakers /ch/ represents two different sounds.
I don't speak Russian so I'm somewhat reluctant to quarrel with someone who does on this point, but the phenomenon of <ч> being used to write an affricate sound that starts with a dental stop is super-well documented in linguistics literature -- on the basis of extensive studies with, and often by, native Russian speakers.
That dental stop might or might not be exactly the same sound as any of those that are written with Russian <т> or English <t> (which, per Wikipedia, are themselves slightly different in place of articulation). English-speakers might be misled into thinking the <ч> is a familiar English sound if it's transcribed as [t͡ʃ]; Russian Wikipedia, for example, suggests it's actually [t̠̪͡ʲɕ̪] (different in three different respects from [t͡ʃ]!). But /t/ is also the closest we can probably get in English to what may be actually be, say, [t̪ʲ], even though it does have a slightly different place of articulation.
I think it would be fair to say, considering evidence from both English and Russian Wikipedias, that the Russian <ч> does start with a "t-like" sound from the English perspective, yet that sound is at least not precisely identical to that written with English <t>.
This reminds me of a conversation I had with a Vietnamese speaker about the word "đúng" which means "right" or "correct".
To my English ears it sounds like "doom" (Southern Dialect). The "ng" ending sounds like an "m". But to this Vietnamese speaker, they said "no, 'ng' makes a sound like the English word 'sung'"
And the vocalization you mentioned for the Russia sound is similar. "ng" in Vietnamese is the same "ng" sound in English but you close your mouth at the end and purse your lips like the "m" sound in English.
But I think we're both right, it's just that each person hears the same sound in different ways due to the language we grew up with.
> You don't need a t there (native Russian speaker), it's a clear ch like in check.
English can inherit some of its spellings historically from French, the language of diplomacy prior to the wars. In French the tch is necessary for pronunciation, like tchécoslovaquie. Also, American English gets various spellings from a number of different Slavic and German immigrant groups. There just isn't "a way" to spell many of these place names and terms, like borsch/borscht/borshch
That t is not entirely useless (non-native Russian speaker here). Even the pronunciation of 'check' has a starting t sound in it: tʃɛk. Without the starting t, you might end up with something that could be spelled sheck in English.
So I'd argue, that the t in transliterations helps people who don't speak Russian to get the ч sound right. Since the transliteration as 'ch' is ambiguous and doesn't appear to work for many of the inhabitants of Vancouver, WA. So ideally we should all use IPA or better yet, ask a Russian speaker.
> Without the starting t, you might end up with something that could be spelled sheck in English.
That might be true.
The truer thing though is, English speakers at least (unless they're a linguist or read IPA in the morning), go ahead and pronounce (or try to) the t and run into trouble every time because t-ch-kalof is a challenge they're not up to (Russians won't have a problem with it, even when drunk).
(Native Russian speaker here) I don’t really agree. The “t” and “ch” require very different tongue and jaw positions and combining them is awkward and would require a vowel in between when used in a real word.
English speakers are perfectly capable of pronouncing ch vs sh (e.g. chair vs share) whereas sh vs sh’ (ш/щ) might be more challenging.
Especially since there exist words in russian language that actually have "т" before "ч", and the sound it makes is different. Compare "отчёт" and "очки" (the closest similar word i could think of by the sound of the first half of it). If you try pronouncing the first word as if "т" wasn't there (or the second word, but as it "т" was there), it will sound both very different and wrong.
That (the IPA designations) could, and probably is, helpful for breaking down sounds on paper but taking that /t/ from what is a manual of sorts and dropping it into a foreign transliteration is the opposite of helpful.
Everybody expect the French won't have any problem reading out without stumbling Chkalov or Chmil. Supplying the /t/ is a copout to please the French and, as a bonus, to piss of the Russians (especially the Chekalovs ones).
I just cut and paste the IPA from Wikipedia! For actual pronunciation guidance I asked a native Russian speaker!
[Edit: I think it's possible in the IPA that the t is there to make it a harder ch sound like in check, rather than soft as in chagrin or chalet, kindof like the d in Django makes it the hard j common in English, as opposed to the soft j natural in French]
Don't know. When I think about it, all Russian ч (ch) pronunciations are consistent unlike some other sounds that vary depending who is talking. Not sure why they'd want to add anything to it. It's an easy sound from get go.
My personal pet hate is how Andrei Tchiml's[1] surname creates unnecessary difficulties for English (and other) speakers. It's a simple ch sound at the beginning and yet everyone stumbles on it trying to speak out a mouthful of consonants while they're not there to start with.
French, I think, are particularly having trouble with it.
Broke my femur neck on a mountain bike. Surgery, plates and screws. Surgeon said no weight on the broken bone for 8 weeks and no walking on it for 12. And then we'll see he said.
In 4 weeks I was on a trainer (fork fixed to the trainer). Started easy with 30min sessions and then increased time and force applied to the pedals.
After 2 weeks of "riding", started putting weight on the bone with short walks around the house.
8 weeks after the surgery rocked up to a road race, still on crutches because walking was still a bit uncomfy but being on the bike was fine. Raced to a 3rd place (Masters A) with hard breakaways and all.
12 weeks after the surgery go to see the surgeon to check if I can start walking (already walking by this stage as normal). He X-rays me and says your bone is fully healed. Strange but good he said.
I told him the story. Still don't know if he believed me.