| Author |
Question about radiologists comments. (What does this mean?)
|
|
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-16, 5:56 pm |
| I had a "Radiology Diagnostic flat and upright or decub ABD"
It said: " Air-fluid levels identified throughout nondistented colon.
No definite air-fluid levels identified within small bowel and no
abnormal distention of small bowel. No organomegaly or pathological
calcifications. Skeletal functions within normal limits."
"Metallic density overlying gastric air shadow is indeterminant. This
could be a foreign body extrinsic to the patient r injested. It
measures approximately 9 mm in diameter."
Conclusion:
1. The air - fluid levels and nondistented colon could represent
laxative or enema use or gastroenteritis. No evidence of obstruction at
this time.
2. Radiopaque somewhat curvilineat structure overlying gastric shadow
on upright view (This area not included on supline view). This could be
artifact extrinsic to patient or ingested item. It measurses 9 mm in
greatest diameter.
This is I guess an x-ray I had last year. I just got a copy of my
medical records and hope to make an appointment with another doctor in
a larger town. What exactly does this mean?
| |
| Twittering One 2005-08-16, 5:56 pm |
| 'If you want me to explain,
make another appointment, and I will happily do so."
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-16, 5:56 pm |
| What?
Twittering One wrote:
> 'If you want me to explain,
> make another appointment, and I will happily do so."
| |
|
| stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
> I had a "Radiology Diagnostic flat and upright or decub ABD"
>
> It said: " Air-fluid levels identified throughout nondistented colon.
> No definite air-fluid levels identified within small bowel and no
> abnormal distention of small bowel. No organomegaly or pathological
> calcifications. Skeletal functions within normal limits."
>
> "Metallic density overlying gastric air shadow is indeterminant. This
> could be a foreign body extrinsic to the patient r injested. It
> measures approximately 9 mm in diameter."
>
> Conclusion:
>
> 1. The air - fluid levels and nondistented colon could represent
> laxative or enema use or gastroenteritis. No evidence of obstruction at
> this time.
>
> 2. Radiopaque somewhat curvilineat structure overlying gastric shadow
> on upright view (This area not included on supline view). This could be
> artifact extrinsic to patient or ingested item. It measurses 9 mm in
> greatest diameter.
>
>
>
> This is I guess an x-ray I had last year. I just got a copy of my
> medical records and hope to make an appointment with another doctor in
> a larger town. What exactly does this mean?
>
The image shows gas in your colon. Did you use laxative or enema? If
not, it could be inflammation. In your stomach view of standing
upright, there is something of 9mm. It could be film artifact or the
object that you swallowed. Otherwise, no worry.
If you really need to find your abnormality, go for contrast studies --
fluoroscopy. Such as a double-contrast barium enema.
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-16, 5:56 pm |
| What "object I swollowed?"
This is funny. This test was done in April of 2004. In may of 2005 I
had a Galiuum Scan because of "fever of unknown origion" It has since
went away. But I remember the Gallium scan showed something "on my left
side next to my diagaphram." I want to say it was 2 centimeters or so.
I had a follow up chest ct which was normal.
Could this be the 9mm thing they were talking about a year earlier?
I have to take milk of magnesia or a tap water enema every day in order
to use the bathroom. I usually take it at night. This test I believe
was around noon. Whould that have showed up on this as the gas? (I
never use stimulant laxatives).
Cindy wrote:
> stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
> The image shows gas in your colon. Did you use laxative or enema? If
> not, it could be inflammation. In your stomach view of standing
> upright, there is something of 9mm. It could be film artifact or the
> object that you swallowed. Otherwise, no worry.
>
>
> If you really need to find your abnormality, go for contrast studies --
> fluoroscopy. Such as a double-contrast barium enema.
| |
| Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com 2005-08-16, 5:56 pm |
|
stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
> I had a "Radiology Diagnostic flat and upright or decub ABD"
>
> It said: " Air-fluid levels identified throughout nondistented colon.
> No definite air-fluid levels identified within small bowel and no
> abnormal distention of small bowel. No organomegaly or pathological
> calcifications. Skeletal functions within normal limits."
>
> "Metallic density overlying gastric air shadow is indeterminant. This
> could be a foreign body extrinsic to the patient r injested. It
> measures approximately 9 mm in diameter."
>
> Conclusion:
>
> 1. The air - fluid levels and nondistented colon could represent
> laxative or enema use or gastroenteritis. No evidence of obstruction at
> this time.
>
> 2. Radiopaque somewhat curvilineat structure overlying gastric shadow
> on upright view (This area not included on supline view). This could be
> artifact extrinsic to patient or ingested item. It measurses 9 mm in
> greatest diameter.
>
>
>
> This is I guess an x-ray I had last year. I just got a copy of my
> medical records and hope to make an appointment with another doctor in
> a larger town. What exactly does this mean?
It means: "We see many impending farts. Also funny shadow we can't
identify which may be nothing. Need second X-ray to see if it's real."
SBH
| |
|
| stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
> What "object I swollowed?"
The radiologist used the term "ingested". I rephrased it for you.
> This is funny. This test was done in April of 2004. In may of 2005 I
> had a Galiuum Scan because of "fever of unknown origion" It has since
> went away. But I remember the Gallium scan showed something "on my left
> side next to my diagaphram." I want to say it was 2 centimeters or so.
> I had a follow up chest ct which was normal.
>
> Could this be the 9mm thing they were talking about a year earlier?
It could be artifact. The radiologist didn't identify the same thing in
another view, did he? The dictation didn't sound serious to me, so
don't worry.
> I have to take milk of magnesia or a tap water enema every day in order
> to use the bathroom. I usually take it at night. This test I believe
> was around noon. Whould that have showed up on this as the gas? (I
> never use stimulant laxatives).
>
> Cindy wrote:
>
>
>
| |
| Mortimer Schnerd, RN 2005-08-16, 10:55 pm |
| Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> It means: "We see many impending farts. Also funny shadow we can't
> identify which may be nothing. Need second X-ray to see if it's real."
Oh my God!!!! Not the farts!
This is a potentially lethal event... for anyone around you.
--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerd@carolina.rr.com.REMOVE
| |
| Ray Laughton 2005-08-16, 10:55 pm |
| It means: normal abdominal x-ray for a person with chronic
laxative/enema abuse. The rest is blah blah blah.
ray
<stryped@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I had a "Radiology Diagnostic flat and upright or decub ABD"
>
> It said: " Air-fluid levels identified throughout nondistented colon.
> No definite air-fluid levels identified within small bowel and no
> abnormal distention of small bowel. No organomegaly or pathological
> calcifications. Skeletal functions within normal limits."
>
> "Metallic density overlying gastric air shadow is indeterminant. This
> could be a foreign body extrinsic to the patient r injested. It
> measures approximately 9 mm in diameter."
>
> Conclusion:
>
> 1. The air - fluid levels and nondistented colon could represent
> laxative or enema use or gastroenteritis. No evidence of obstruction at
> this time.
>
> 2. Radiopaque somewhat curvilineat structure overlying gastric shadow
> on upright view (This area not included on supline view). This could be
> artifact extrinsic to patient or ingested item. It measurses 9 mm in
> greatest diameter.
>
>
>
> This is I guess an x-ray I had last year. I just got a copy of my
> medical records and hope to make an appointment with another doctor in
> a larger town. What exactly does this mean?
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-16, 10:55 pm |
| What does "artifact" mean?
Cindy wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
> The radiologist used the term "ingested". I rephrased it for you.
>
>
> It could be artifact. The radiologist didn't identify the same thing in
> another view, did he? The dictation didn't sound serious to me, so
> don't worry.
>
>
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-16, 10:55 pm |
| Would a colon that does not work cause this "accumulation" of gas?
Wouldnt my chest ct scan have shown something if it was there? I had
one a year later.
| |
| Cindy 2005-08-16, 10:55 pm |
| stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
> What does "artifact" mean?
Artifact could be produced by a speck of dust stuck on the film or
screen. For the upright abdomen projection, the wall bucky surface
could be dirty with something like barium or gastrographin drop. Your
gown could be soiled by those contrasts (highly unlikely). The tech
used a bad film-screen contact cassette. The film processor messed the
film up.
| |
| Cindy 2005-08-16, 10:55 pm |
| stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
> Would a colon that does not work cause this "accumulation" of gas?
It's normal to have some gas or air in the alimentary canal. But if you
have excessive gas, you have a blockage. It is serious.
> Wouldnt my chest ct scan have shown something if it was there? I had
> one a year later.
>
The lungs are the major air organ. You must be able to see air not fluid.
| |
|
| In article <1124225170.641800.176490@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
> What "object I swollowed?"
>
> This is funny. This test was done in April of 2004. In may of 2005 I
> had a Galiuum Scan because of "fever of unknown origion" It has since
> went away. But I remember the Gallium scan showed something "on my left
> side next to my diagaphram." I want to say it was 2 centimeters or so.
> I had a follow up chest ct which was normal.
>
> Could this be the 9mm thing they were talking about a year earlier?
Extremely unlikely. It was probably something on the film (dust, tech's
thumb, etc).
> I have to take milk of magnesia or a tap water enema every day in order
> to use the bathroom. I usually take it at night. This test I believe
> was around noon. Whould that have showed up on this as the gas? (I
> never use stimulant laxatives).
That qualifies as laxative/enema overuse. In other words, as the report
states, 'The air - fluid levels and nondistented colon could represent
laxative or enema use or gastroenteritis. No evidence of obstruction at
this time.'
--
"Did Father shoot him? I will eat Grandfather for dinner."
- Helen Keller, on learning of the death of her grandfather
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-17, 8:56 am |
| How does laxative use cause this?
REP wrote:
> In article <1124225170.641800.176490@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Extremely unlikely. It was probably something on the film (dust, tech's
> thumb, etc).
>
>
> That qualifies as laxative/enema overuse. In other words, as the report
> states, 'The air - fluid levels and nondistented colon could represent
> laxative or enema use or gastroenteritis. No evidence of obstruction at
> this time.'
>
> --
> "Did Father shoot him? I will eat Grandfather for dinner."
> - Helen Keller, on learning of the death of her grandfather
| |
| Howard McCollister 2005-08-17, 8:56 am |
|
<stryped@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124281076.974270.268090@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> How does laxative use cause this?
Laxative abuse will "train" the colon, often to the point where it won't
work without laxatives. One typical xray finding of an advance state of this
condition would be dilatation of the colon with air/fluid levels. It is *so*
typical, that a radiologist suggested that diagnosis on the basis of a
flat/upright film with almost zero clinical information about you. As we
have wound our way throught the saga of your colon over the years, it's
clear that laxative abuse through your life is by far the most likely reason
for your colon inertia.
Don, I thought you had found a surgeon that was going to take your colon
out. What ever happened to that?
HMc
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-17, 11:54 am |
| What terms abuse? I have to have it becasue of slow colon motility.
(Under doctors orders).
Ray Laughton wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> It means: normal abdominal x-ray for a person with chronic
> laxative/enema abuse. The rest is blah blah blah.
>
> ray
>
>
>
> <stryped@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-17, 11:54 am |
| What do you mean? I could have a blockage?
I meant wouldnt the ct scan showed the 9mm "spot" if it was truly
something other than an wrror in the film?
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-17, 11:54 am |
| I have only used laxatives for 2 years. Why do you think I have used it
"my entire life?" And when I do, it is milk of magnesia, never
stimulant laxatives. It is because I can go without it. I have had
abnormal transit studies.
It just scares the heck out of me having this surgery. The doctors dont
even like doing it. Plus, the problems afterward are sometimes worse
than the problems you had before.
I just want this bloating to go away.... I am only 33 years old and too
young to have this problem. I just dont undeerstand.
| |
| Cindy 2005-08-17, 11:54 am |
| stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
> I have only used laxatives for 2 years. Why do you think I have used it
> "my entire life?" And when I do, it is milk of magnesia, never
> stimulant laxatives. It is because I can go without it. I have had
> abnormal transit studies.
>
> It just scares the heck out of me having this surgery. The doctors dont
> even like doing it. Plus, the problems afterward are sometimes worse
> than the problems you had before.
>
> I just want this bloating to go away.... I am only 33 years old and too
> young to have this problem. I just dont undeerstand.
>
Now I can tell why we shouldn't discuss diagnostic results with a patient.
One thing I can tell you positively Mr. Stryped that my clinical
instructor said to me, "Never ever have any surgery in your alimentary
canal. You'll have to go back to your doctor again for more help."
Almost all patients of mine who had the Small Bowel Series had had
experiences of such surgeries. The major symptom was obstruction.
By the way, dairy products such as milk, cheese and so on causes gas in
your intestine. Eat a lot of fiber food, drink water, and exercise.
| |
| Howard McCollister 2005-08-17, 11:54 am |
|
<stryped@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124292653.504871.286890@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> What terms abuse? I have to have it becasue of slow colon motility.
> (Under doctors orders).
Or, you have slow colon motility because of laxative abuse.
HMc
| |
| Howard McCollister 2005-08-17, 11:54 am |
|
"Cindy" <cindy15464973@att.net> wrote in message
news:OI6dnZ2dnZ34kNHwnZ2dnbn-nt6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
> stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Now I can tell why we shouldn't discuss diagnostic results with a patient.
>
> One thing I can tell you positively Mr. Stryped that my clinical
> instructor said to me, "Never ever have any surgery in your alimentary
> canal. You'll have to go back to your doctor again for more help." Almost
> all patients of mine who had the Small Bowel Series had had experiences of
> such surgeries. The major symptom was obstruction.
>
> By the way, dairy products such as milk, cheese and so on causes gas in
> your intestine. Eat a lot of fiber food, drink water, and exercise.
>
Such bullshit.
The reason why you shouldn't discuss diagnostic results with a patient is
that it is far beyond the scope of your technologist-level training.
It's good advice, and you should take it, even when posting anonymously on
the internet.
HMc
| |
| Cindy 2005-08-17, 11:54 am |
| Howard McCollister wrote:
> "Cindy" <cindy15464973@att.net> wrote in message
> news:OI6dnZ2dnZ34kNHwnZ2dnbn-nt6dnZ2dRVn-y52dnZ0@comcast.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Such bullshit.
That's a very encouraging word for an X-ray student!
> The reason why you shouldn't discuss diagnostic results with a patient is
> that it is far beyond the scope of your technologist-level training.
>
> It's good advice, and you should take it, even when posting anonymously on
> the internet.
You shouldn't have to. It's all up to the patient.
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-17, 6:00 pm |
| But this problem developed "before" I ever used laxatives.
Plus, I thought that MOM was safe becasue it does not contain
stimulant. That is at least what the gastroenterologist led me to
believe.
Howard McCollister wrote:
> <stryped@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1124292653.504871.286890@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> Or, you have slow colon motility because of laxative abuse.
>
> HMc
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-17, 6:00 pm |
| SO such a surgery to remove part of your colon is bad?
| |
| Howard McCollister 2005-08-17, 6:00 pm |
|
<stryped@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124302504.992421.185020@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> But this problem developed "before" I ever used laxatives.
>
> Plus, I thought that MOM was safe becasue it does not contain
> stimulant. That is at least what the gastroenterologist led me to
> believe.
Milk of Magnesia is a hyperosmotic laxative. It functions by osmotically
pulling water into the colon, distending it, and stimulating it to contract.
A colon can become dependant on that stimulation in order to function.
HMc
| |
| Howard McCollister 2005-08-17, 6:00 pm |
|
<stryped@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124302718.988097.91430@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> SO such a surgery to remove part of your colon is bad?
>
I think that it's usually bad to remove any organ if you don't fully
understand the pathologic basis of the problem, and this is especially true
of a major abdominal operation and it's potential complications where there
is no way to accurately guess at what the ultimate effect will be. If they
don't understand the pathology, they can't fully understand what the effect
of removing all or part of your colon would be on curing the problem.
HMc
| |
| Ray Laughton 2005-08-17, 6:00 pm |
| Cindy <cindy15464973@att.net> wrote:
> One thing I can tell you positively Mr. Stryped that my clinical
> instructor said to me, "Never ever have any surgery in your alimentary
> canal. You'll have to go back to your doctor again for more help."
> Almost all patients of mine who had the Small Bowel Series had had
> experiences of such surgeries. The major symptom was obstruction.
Figures, sort of. Obviously if you have bowel cancer surgery is the
lesser evil..
> By the way, dairy products such as milk, cheese and so on causes gas in
> your intestine.
This is an incorrect generalization. SOME people (eg due to lactose
intolerance) have this problem with dairy products.
> Eat a lot of fiber food, drink water, and exercise.
Bingo! The answer is so simple, its often overlooked..
ray
| |
| fresh~horses@despammed.com 2005-08-17, 6:00 pm |
|
Howard McCollister wrote:
> <stryped@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1124302718.988097.91430@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> I think that it's usually bad to remove any organ if you don't fully
> understand the pathologic basis of the problem, and this is especially true
> of a major abdominal operation and it's potential complications where there
> is no way to accurately guess at what the ultimate effect will be. If they
> don't understand the pathology, they can't fully understand what the effect
> of removing all or part of your colon would be on curing the problem.
>
> HMc
So. Let me hypothesize here: if a surgeon didn't understand the role
statins played in causing my gall bladder disease and pancreatitis, it
wouldn't be a good thing to remove my gall bladder?
Zee
| |
| Norminn 2005-08-17, 6:00 pm |
|
stryped@hotmail.com wrote:
> I have only used laxatives for 2 years. Why do you think I have used it
> "my entire life?" And when I do, it is milk of magnesia, never
> stimulant laxatives. It is because I can go without it. I have had
> abnormal transit studies.
>
> It just scares the heck out of me having this surgery. The doctors dont
> even like doing it. Plus, the problems afterward are sometimes worse
> than the problems you had before.
>
> I just want this bloating to go away.... I am only 33 years old and too
> young to have this problem. I just dont undeerstand.
>
I asked you some time back about consulting a registered dietician.
Since it appears the docs find nothing organically wrong, it would be a
very sensible, and probably helpful, approach. You are too young to be
a chronic worrier or chronic laxative user if not absolutely necessary.
Sooooo.....what happens if you get bloated? You also mentioned that
you have a new baby, I believe. Enough stress in this whole situation
to constipate anyone.
Your gut can become physically dependent on laxative, so it is a good
idea to try something else. What normally acts as a laxative, can, for
some people, have a reverse effect (caffeine). I have known marvelous
dieticians who have very definite and positive knowledge that the rest
of us do not seem endowed with, including practical methods of making
good changes.
As for the defect on the xray, call the radiologist and see if he will
repeat the film if you are worried. Also ask HIM your question about
comparing the previous film. This ain't the place!
| |
| Howard McCollister 2005-08-17, 6:00 pm |
|
<fresh~horses@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:1124310886.148987.174120@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Howard McCollister wrote:
>
>
> So. Let me hypothesize here: if a surgeon didn't understand the role
> statins played in causing my gall bladder disease and pancreatitis, it
> wouldn't be a good thing to remove my gall bladder?
>
>
> Zee
Uh huh. Except statins aren't causing your gallbladder disease and
pancreatitis - gallstones are. And the pathology of chronic or acute
calculous cholecystitis is very well understood.
Lame try, Zee.
HMc
| |
| fresh~horses@despammed.com 2005-08-17, 6:00 pm |
|
Howard McCollister wrote:
> <fresh~horses@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:1124310886.148987.174120@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Uh huh. Except statins aren't causing your gallbladder disease and
> pancreatitis - gallstones are. And the pathology of chronic or acute
> calculous cholecystitis is very well understood.
>
> Lame try, Zee.
>
> HMc
So now gallstones are causing my gall bladder disease and pancreatitis.
But my diseased gall bladder (mit gall stones) isn't gall bladder
disease...
We've known for some time statins have potential to cause gallstones*.
Now we know they have potential to cause pancreatitis. In case you
missed it:
http://www.joplink.net/prev/20 0507/11.html
Zee
*http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.m...10361403?hl=en&
| |
| fresh~horses@despammed.com 2005-08-17, 10:56 pm |
| The cite for statin induced pancreatitis. Zee
http://www.joplink.net/prev/20 0507/11.html
Full text available free, a letter to the editor
JOP. J Pancreas (Online) 2005; 6(4):380.
Drug Induced Pancreatitis Might Be a Class Effect of Statin Drugs
Sonal Singh
"Clinicians need to be aware that drug induced pancreatitis might be a
class
effect of statin drugs and the newest statin, rosuvastatin is as likely
to
be associated with pancreatitis as the other statins."
Evidence and Citations
Keywords Anticholesteremic Agents; Pancreatitis; Poisoning; Salicylates
References
1.. Antonopoulos S, Mikros S, Kokkoris S, Protopsaltis J, Filioti K,
Karamanolis D, Giannoulis G. A case of acute pancreatitis possibly
associated with combined salicylate and simvastatin treatment. JOP. J
Pancreas (Online) 2005; 6:264-8.
2.. Singh S, Nautiyal A, Dolan JG. Recurrent acute pancreatitis
possibly
induced by atorvastatin and rosuvastatin. Is statin induced
pancreatitis a
class effect? JOP. J Pancreas (Online) 2004; 5:502-4.
3.. AstraZeneca. Rosuvastatin product information. AstraZeneca
Pharmaceuticals LP 08/2003.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Howard McCollister wrote:
> <fresh~horses@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:1124310886.148987.174120@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Uh huh. Except statins aren't causing your gallbladder disease and
> pancreatitis - gallstones are. And the pathology of chronic or acute
> calculous cholecystitis is very well understood.
>
> Lame try, Zee.
>
> HMc
| |
| Howard McCollister 2005-08-17, 10:56 pm |
|
<fresh~horses@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:1124320080.351213.218100@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> The cite for statin induced pancreatitis. Zee
>
>
> http://www.joplink.net/prev/20 0507/11.html
>
> Full text available free, a letter to the editor
>
> JOP. J Pancreas (Online) 2005; 6(4):380.
>
> Drug Induced Pancreatitis Might Be a Class Effect of Statin Drugs
>
> Sonal Singh
>
> "Clinicians need to be aware that drug induced pancreatitis might be a
> class
> effect of statin drugs and the newest statin, rosuvastatin is as likely
> to
> be associated with pancreatitis as the other statins."
>
Totally irrelevant to the discussion regarding gallstones. A surgeon would
not remove your gallbladder for drug or chemical induced pancreatitis.
HMc
| |
| Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com 2005-08-17, 10:56 pm |
|
Howard McCollister wrote:
> <fresh~horses@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:1124320080.351213.218100@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Totally irrelevant to the discussion regarding gallstones. A surgeon would
> not remove your gallbladder for drug or chemical induced pancreatitis.
>
> HMc
COMMENT:
Not only that, but this whole argument that statins cause pancreatitis
is based on reports of TWO patients who got pancreatitis while taking
one statin, then later got pacreatitis again while taking another. Duh.
I've got a newsflash: pancreatitis happens often enough that every
doctor has seen at least dozens and probably hundreds of cases, and
it's more common in the kind of people who take statins (obese
diabetics with high triglycerides-- who are also--- surprise the people
who make gallstones). If you've been on one statin, your doctor is
likely to switch you to another, if something funny happens. But now
the rub: people who've had one bout of pancreatitis are likely to have
another one, and that was true before statins were invented. And if
they do these days, they'll still be on that second statin. What do you
do then? Why, blame the whole CLASS of drugs, apparently. On the basis
of N=2 patients. Sweet.
And I suppose if they stopped the statins altogether in favor of
another anticholesterol drug, and the patient got pancreatitis *again,*
they could hypothesize a general "anti-cholesterol drug pancreatitis."
>From there we go to an "general medication pancreatitis", a
"hospitalization pancreatitis," and "fengshuious pancretitis" cause by
bad couch placement and bad window treatments, and finally (if
necessary) a terraneo-pancreatitis, caused by the gross effects of
living on this imperfect orb. That's a toughie, because your control
group has to be in orbit.
SBH
| |
| Cindy 2005-08-17, 10:56 pm |
| Norminn wrote:
> As for the defect on the xray, call the radiologist and see if he will
> repeat the film if you are worried. Also ask HIM your question about
> comparing the previous film. This ain't the place!
Oh, yeah, the film could've been taken by an x-ray student or even by a
tech's assistant and sent for reading without his or her tech's approval.
| |
| stryped@hotmail.com 2005-08-20, 8:54 am |
| I soemtimes even wake up this way.
|
|
|
|