On Jul 3, 8:10=EF=BF=BDam, Banty <Banty_mem...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article
<ea6f56f7-a915-4ea3-b713-e4ed6ccea...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Chris says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jul 2, 9:30=3DEF=3DBF=3DBDpm, Banty <Banty_mem...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> >> In article <CuqdnczFU747ufHVnZ2dnUVZ_uCdn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ericka
Kamm=
erer=3D
>
> >> says...
>
> >> >Banty wrote:
> >> >> In article <saednU2CY9B4avbVnZ2dnUVZ_qfin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ericka
K=
amme=3D
> >rer
> >> >> says...
> >> >>> Banty wrote:
> >> >>>> In article <XvydnVtIxPDrXvbVnZ2dnUVZ_snin...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Ericka=
Kam=3D
> >merer
> >> >>>> says...
> >> >>>>> Banty wrote:
>
> >> >>>>>>I don't understand this. =3DEF=3DBF=3DBDWhy is there this
bright=
line draw=3D
> >n at a urine test?
> >> >>>>>>If the physician has suspicions, but the urine test is
negative,=
if =3D
> >he orders a
> >> >>>>>> barium test, you'd say "no" then turn to assuming it's
behavior=
al?
> >> >>>>> =3DEF=3DBF=3DBD =3DEF=3DBF=3DBDI think you evaluate further
test=
ing on the merit=3D
> >s.
> >> >>>>> 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.
=3DEF=3DBF=3DBD=
No sense m=3D
> >aking this a false
> >> >>>> all-or-nothing thing, though.
>
> >> >>>>Why, a priori, declare that only a urine test is worth pursuing
in=
fin=3D
> >ding or
> >> >>>> ruling out medical issues??
> >> >>> =3DEF=3DBF=3DBD =3DEF=3DBF=3DBDBecause it is quick, easy,
non-inva=
sive and more or=3D
> > 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. =3DEF=3DBF=3DBDIf you were on the fence
=
about whet=3D
> >her
> >> >>> it was physical or behavioral, it's practically a no brainer to
> >> >>> rule out far and away the most likely physical cause...and one
tha=
t
> >> >>> could cause damage if not diagnosed.
>
> >> >> Read my question again, emphasis on the word *only*.
>
> >> >> All I'm saying is that it doesn't make sense to, even before a
doct=
or v=3D
> >isit,
> >> >> declare that a urine test is the only one that makes sense
>
> >> > =3DEF=3DBF=3DBD =3DEF=3DBF=3DBDWhere did I say "only"?
>
> >> It's not about what you said. =3DEF=3DBF=3DBDAll this started when I
r=
esponded t=3D
> >o Chris
> >> saying:
> >> _____________________________
> >> Actually, Ericka, you are in agreement with me. I mentioned earlier
> >> that a simple urine sample is easy enough to obtain and that further
> >> testing beyond that I would put off unless I was unsure about it
being
> >> behavioral and it was causing worry. The OP hasn't chimed in for a
> >> couple of days, and I'm assuming the doc visit they initially had
> >> would have included that first initial urine check-hopefully.
> >> ______________________________
>
> >> It's the "further testing beyond that I would put off" that doesn't
ma=
ke s=3D
> >ense
> >> to me. =3DEF=3DBF=3DBDThat's the 'only the urine test' idea that I'm
t=
alking abo=3D
> >ut.
>
> >> One might, and even might likely, upon discussion with the doctor,
onl=
y do=3D
> > a
> >> urine test. =3DEF=3DBF=3DBDBut it doens't make sense to decide that
ev=
en before =3D
> >seeing the
> >> doctor.
>
> >> Banty- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> >Perhaps if I cut and past the rest of that sentence you didn't
> >include, it might be more clear....
>
> >>>unless I was unsure about it being behavioral and it was causing
worry=
..
>
> >Clarification -- this means that if I was certain it was behavioral, I
> >wouldn't automatically request invasive testing to try to rule out the
> >world. (neither did the OP's doctor). You really just need to read the
> >OP and move out from there.
>
> But that's much of the discussion right there, from the beginning of
this
> thread. =EF=BF=BDOn something like this that may have a medical cause,
on=
e *can't* be
> certain it's behavioral until a medical cause is ruled out.
>
> Banty- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
One can't be certain that a persistent illness/fever isn't meningitis
unless they do a spinal tap, but you don't see them recommending those
routinely for children. @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
