[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by Jim at 03 Jun 2002 21:49:29: Re: Cant' figure out so-called
As an answer to: Cant' figure out so-called written by Paul B. at 03 Jun 2002 19:55:24:
Scathing or not, I, for one, am glad to know this. Especially here in the states, we seem to place more faith in the specialist than in the GP, not that I have much faith in some of them I've seen. It takes some good shopping to find good ones here with the insurance companies cutting the benefits as they have. As a former member of a HMO (Kaiser), I was assigned a GP whom I saw for an URI. He claimed there was nothing wrong, even after two visits. The third time I insisted that I be assigned someone else to see. They had me examined by a Nurse Practioner who indeed agreed there was in infection, and thus prescribed various medicines to combat it. Within about a week, everything was back to normal. The GP would have let it linger on for months.
>>> You have been checked for diabetes, haven't you?
>> Not yet but I will do so.
>And the "urologist" didn't enquire about or check for that before recommending a circumcision? That would be prima facie negligence if it were true, for what you describe.
>You need to know, as if you are diabetic, you will need to control this and use an anti-fungal preparation as well as the steroid cream or the problem will never improve (and will be but the least of your worries).
>> Th' urologist I saw said he had to circ one man that had urine backed up on him. Maybe a scare tactic on his part.
>Oh, it can happen. He probably didn't mention the age of this one victim, or whether he was in a nursing home, or whether he was diabetic which - if he, the "urologist" never checks for, - is a "minor" detail he obviously wouldn't know or care about.
>Do I sound scathing about this so-called "specialist"?