I appreciate the kind words(including from those whose posts were deleted). The challenge at the time was finding an alternative to a THR, not in deciding to go ahead with it. To me, it was a no brainer--I was a very active 45 year old, who desperately wanted to continue to be active, particularly to play basketball and run, both of which I was able to do after resurfacing. If the resurfacing failed, then I would wind up with a THR, which is what they all wanted me to get in any event. I recognize that THR surgery has been a godsend to many, and is an appropriate surgery for certain people, but, in my opinion, it is resurfacing that should be the gold standard for most people(certainly for those under the age of 65) needing hip replacement surgery. The fact that it is not, is likely mostly about $$, as THR surgery is a huge cash cow for the orthopedic community and the device manufacturers. I believe it is incumbent upon those of us who have had hip resurfacing to continue to counter the misconceptions about the surgery, and to promote all of the positive aspects of resurfacing when the opportunity arises.