Posted by noa on March 9, 2004, at 17:32:38
In reply to Post by Tom Grimes, posted by Dr. Bob on March 8, 2004, at 20:43:34
Argghh--I wish I had already read your book. I read slowly and am getting slowly through a book that I'm enjoying, and just haven't had enough lead time to buy, let alone read "WILL@epicqwest.com: A Medicated Memoir", yet. But I want to!!
I think there is flux in the art and science of diagnosis. On a clinical level, I think a lot of pdocs use diagnosis based on symptoms as a place to start, but mostly are interested in which meds, based on symptoms, will help the most and harm the least (or at least this is what the good pdocs do). Going by symptoms is a trial and error business, still. And it crosses diagnostic catergories a lot.
Sometimes, this leads researcher types to wonder if there are underlying connections between diagnoses previously seen as separate entities. But the science is still not sophisticated enough to know what is underlying the symptoms in most types of MI. There are hypotheses out there, and some are very interesting and plausible.
But in the doc's office we patients are still working on the trial and error method of symptom treatment. It is possible that a person's depression is in the bipolar family and maybe that is also related to siezure disorders or migraines, etc. but what matters most is does medicine A help? B? A combo of A and B? Some pdocs then use the response to meds as a diagnostic tool, but this seems shaky to me in most cases because not enough is known about what is really going on deep inside those noggins of ours.
poster:noa
thread:322211
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/books/20040211/msgs/322528.html