Banty wrote:
> In article <XvydnVtIxPDrXvbVnZ2dnUVZ_sninZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ericka
Kammerer
> says...
>> Banty wrote:
>>
>>> I don't understand this. Why is there this bright line drawn at a
urine test?
>>> If the physician has suspicions, but the urine test is negative, if he
orders a
>>> barium test, you'd say "no" then turn to assuming it's behavioral?
>> I think you evaluate further testing on the merits.
>> It is not always the beneficial to run every possible test
>> to rule out every single possibility no matter how small.
>
> Well, sure, step by step based on what is learned. No sense making this
a false
> all-or-nothing thing, though.
>
> Why, a priori, declare that only a urine test is worth pursuing in
finding or
> ruling out medical issues??
Because it is quick, easy, non-invasive and more or less
capable of indicating whether there's a UTI, which would be far
and away the most likely cause of a physical problem causing
these sorts of accidents. If you were on the fence about whether
it was physical or behavioral, it's practically a no brainer to
rule out far and away the most likely physical cause...and one that
could cause damage if not diagnosed.
Best wishes,
Ericka
|
