Bobbi
07-25-2008, 02:29 PM
This is the article:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/health/2008/0722/1216627306919.html
The central theme is pretty much summed: "It is still not known why ankylosing spondylitis, a chronic inflammatory disease, affects more men than women...."
Right. And much of the lit. about AS continually perpetuates the (aforementioned) belief.
I don't believe that it affects men at a higher rate than women. As it is, men often face delayed dx. And, because it is thought, by doctors, to predominantly affect men, women are too often discounted and dismissed: treated as histrionic, told it's psychogenic, etc., ad nauseum.
It's absurd, this day and age (with all the tech. available via MRIs, CTs, bone scans, and so on) that dx'ing AS takes years - for people who do have the tell-tale indicators (symptoms, radiographic impressions, etc.).
What's the flaw in all this? Hmmm, not a rocket scientist, but seems to me if the disease were dx'd as it presents (and without undue delay - years upon years), the medications that are available and useful in helping with the debilitating effects could be Rx'd more readily - and not at bank-breaking costs.
It'd be super for the professionals treating AS to see it for what it is: Having taken the same course in women's lives as heart disease - misdiagnosed, overlooked, discounted... and all as women have dropped dead.
Do I feel better? I don't know.
P.S.: While I have this proclivity for getting this stuff outta my system, I think it would also be great if doctors treating patients with AS would communicate clearly and consistently with one another. I saw the word "exercise" in the article, and ... like... right. My rheumatologist told me "no exercise," and my PCP asked what type of exercise I do. I say: I was told not to exercise, and I get this look as if I've lost my mind. Thank gawd my rheumatologist didn't forget what he stated and made notes to himself about it. If I am to play courier, maybe I should be compensated.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/health/2008/0722/1216627306919.html
The central theme is pretty much summed: "It is still not known why ankylosing spondylitis, a chronic inflammatory disease, affects more men than women...."
Right. And much of the lit. about AS continually perpetuates the (aforementioned) belief.
I don't believe that it affects men at a higher rate than women. As it is, men often face delayed dx. And, because it is thought, by doctors, to predominantly affect men, women are too often discounted and dismissed: treated as histrionic, told it's psychogenic, etc., ad nauseum.
It's absurd, this day and age (with all the tech. available via MRIs, CTs, bone scans, and so on) that dx'ing AS takes years - for people who do have the tell-tale indicators (symptoms, radiographic impressions, etc.).
What's the flaw in all this? Hmmm, not a rocket scientist, but seems to me if the disease were dx'd as it presents (and without undue delay - years upon years), the medications that are available and useful in helping with the debilitating effects could be Rx'd more readily - and not at bank-breaking costs.
It'd be super for the professionals treating AS to see it for what it is: Having taken the same course in women's lives as heart disease - misdiagnosed, overlooked, discounted... and all as women have dropped dead.
Do I feel better? I don't know.
P.S.: While I have this proclivity for getting this stuff outta my system, I think it would also be great if doctors treating patients with AS would communicate clearly and consistently with one another. I saw the word "exercise" in the article, and ... like... right. My rheumatologist told me "no exercise," and my PCP asked what type of exercise I do. I say: I was told not to exercise, and I get this look as if I've lost my mind. Thank gawd my rheumatologist didn't forget what he stated and made notes to himself about it. If I am to play courier, maybe I should be compensated.