Posted by gary g (209.187.112.68) on July 29, 1999 at 13:35:40:
In Reply to: My Doctor RAWKS Man!!! posted by Richard E. DeFord on July 28, 1999 at 14:20:37:
encouraging words from richard !!
sounds good IF - and only IF - he keeps up with his personal research and doesn't have other underlying/parallel disease or physiological problems that might present contraindication problems
in THIS case, richard didn't really post enough info for any of us to be judging his MD's procedures - - even tho we often can do so by the commonalities in the info we share here
in my case, my Doc is the senior partner in a very busy, independent Family Practice
he is also one of my oldest friends, was a nextdoor neighboor for 15 years, and delivered my eldest . .who went to work this week, fresh out of college, in a biomed research Co.
why do tell you this ?
because basically I do the research etc on my CH case, new meds being tried, widespread results of new therapies, etc & - - no way would he have the time to keep up with it
so, I call my Doc when a cluster arrives, tell him what's up & what I need for scrips, and ask him any technical questions that I may be hung up on
I've been able to avoid a lot of the disappointing wild goose chases I used to go thru (which many of you are going thru now); and SINCERELY BELIEVE I'm not missing ANYTHING that has proven capability to fix this !@#@$#^%&*
HOWEVER: he watched the whole thing closely for at least 10-12 years, sending me to a variety of specialists, while we learned together....then, and only then, did we mutually decide that since I had access to all sorts of medical reference material (and later the internet), we might as well stop the runaround, rely on what was proven to help in my attacks, and keep an eye on the developing research - - in MY CASE it's worked great
BUT IT IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT to remember that EACH PATIENT/DR RELATIONSHIP IS DIFFERENT
variables include:
1. patient's care history with the Doc
2. patient's individual case of the problem in question (for this discussion,CH)
3. doc's understanding of CH and it's relationship (or lack thereof)to other problems
4. patient's knowledge of CH, treatment alternatives, etc - - as patient is able to demonstrate to the Dr's satisfaction
5. if Dr is employee of an HMO, large clinic, etc, that organization's protocols may impose controls on the doc that aren't the best from a "pure" analysis of the case
so -
we NEED TO BE OUR OWN PRIMARY CARE EXPERTS, but let's give the Dr's a little wiggle-room if we're also gonna "han 'em" if they're absolutely outrageous ( as many of them ARE, we all know)
IT'S the DOC's's responsibility to assess our individual abilities to understand and manage our own cases - and THAT is higly variable on several considerations: ability, temperment, access to information, to name just a few
MY OPINION:
not until we have become the world's leading expert on our OWN case of CH, AND extremely well read on CH in specific and the other physiological systems it involves, can we reasonably start critiquing the Dr's UNLESS ( I repeat) they are BLATANTLY screaming posterior orifices, beyond ANY question - and one immediate qualifier for THAT status is the "I know everything you know nothing" posture many of them assume
THEN - let 'em have it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!