Medical Diagnosis: Just Another Service I Offer

Last night around 1:15, Sophia woke up crying. She didn’t know why she was crying, she just knew she couldn’t stop. She had a lot of head congestion which of course was made worse by her being upset. I tried giving her medicine, laying down with her, giving her a drink of water, pretty much everything in my bag of tricks. Still she kept crying.

I was afraid she was going to wake up Trevor and/or keep Dan awake, so I took her out to the den (at the opposite end of the house) and laid across our big leather chair with her. She was mostly laying down, but her head was more upright than it would have been in bed. After she finally stopped crying, she managed to fall asleep. I waited a little while, then took her back to her bed and she slept the rest of the night without incident.

To most people, that might just seem like a fluky little incident, but coupled with the fact that she’s had a runny nose for the past two days, to me it meant that she had an ear infection. No fever, no complaints of her ears hurting, but I was betting that it was an ear infection. Every time that girl has had a runny nose and disrupted sleep patterns, she’s had an ear infection.

So, first thing this morning, I called the doctor for an appointment. When I got there, Doc asked me the usual questions. Is she running a fever? No. He looked at Sophia and asked her if her ears hurt. No. Well, what’s the problem? She has a runny nose and she didn’t sleep well last night. (I know it sounds stupid, and I felt stupid saying it. Of course, the fact that he was looking at me like I was stupid didn’t help.)

He checked her breathing, looked in her throat, and then her nose. He looked in the left ear, and then the right. As he peered into the right ear, he said, “There it is.” Turns out she does have an ear infection. He said that on a scale of 1-10, it was about a 4 and that by Saturday night it probably would’ve been full blown. I said that was why I had called today. No way am I heading into a 3 day weekend with a kid who has an ear infection and is up half the night.

So, it just goes to prove, sometimes Mom knows best. I don’t have a medical degree or even a science-heavy education, but I know my kids like the back of my hand, and I think that qualifies me as an expert, at least where they are concerned.

http://gloriana.wordpress.com/2007/01/12/dr-mom/

RRC Lecture: Intuitive Medical Diagnosis

Larry Burk, MD, President of the Rhine Research Center Board of Directors is a musculoskeletal radiologist who has worked with a number of local and national medical intuitives. Dr. Burk was former Director of Education at the Duke Center for Integrative Medicine, and is now President of Healing Imager, Inc., in the private practice of teleradiology. He has made presentations on intuitive diagnosis at the NIH, the Parapsychological Association and the American Holistic Medical Association. Larry has been interested in this subject since Caroline Myss did a reading on one of his MRI patients in 1992. In 2001, he did a small pilot research project with John Palmer, Ph.D., at the Rhine Research Center, testing seven local intuitives.

This presentation will consist of an historical overview, a summary of research studies, and a brief introduction to the experience of intuitive diagnosis for the audience through a partnered exercise.

For directions to the Rhine Research Center or the Stedman Auditorium, and/or to register, call 919-309-4600, between 9 am-5 pm, Monday-Friday, or visit The Rhine website at www.rhine.org.



http://publicparapsychology.blogspot.com/2007/02/rrc-lecture-intuitive-medical-diagnosis.html

Medical Diagnosis and Software Diagnosis

Interesting article in The New Yorker about how doctors think when they diagnose illness, or to quote the article, "the process by which doctors interpret their patients' symptoms and weigh test results in order to arrive at a diagnosis and a plan of treatment". The author, Jerome Groopman, makes the point that medical school students spend a lot of time memorizing facts, and a lot of time learning applications of those facts, but not a lot of time thinking about how to ensure they make correct diagnoses.

He describes three types of errors. The first is "representativeness", being overly influenced by what is typically true: "[Doctors] fail to consider possibilities that contradicts their mental templates of a disease, and thus attribute symptoms to the wrong cause." The example given was a very fit man who came in complaining of chest pain, but not the pain normally associated with coronary-artery disease; as a result the doctor was assuming that everything was OK, and was surprised when the patient had a heart attack the next day (like every patient discussed in the article, he survived).

The second type is "availability error", "the tendency to judge the likelihood of an event by the ease with which relevant examples come to mind." In the example, a doctor who had recently seen a lot of patients with pneumonia was quick to diagnose a new patient with it, even though she actually had aspirin toxicity. He over-emphasized the symptoms which were associated with pneumonia, and ignored the ones that were not, because pneumonia was the diagnosis that came to mind (the article also mentions that psychologists call this "confirmation bias", "confirming what you expect to find by selectively accepting or ignoring information"; I'll ignore the obvious political comment that could be made here).

The third type is "affective error", making decisions based on what we wish were true. In the example cited, a doctor had failed to perform a particularly embarrassing examination on a patient because he liked him personally, and was hoping that he did not have an infection.

There's an interesting quote about how doctors begin diagnosing patients as soon as they meet them: "Even before they conduct an examination, they are interpreting a patient's appearance...Doctor's theories about what is wrong continue to evolve as they listen to the patient's heart, or press on his liver. But research shows tht most physicians already have in mind two or three possible diagnoses within minutes of meeting a patient, and that they tend to develop their hunches from very incomplete information."

What this made me think of is how developers approach debugging software (it also made me think, to a lesser extent, about how we approach interviewing). Although debugging is not the life-or-death situation that medical diagnosis can be, and there are ways in which debugging software can be both harder (computers can't tell you how they feel) and easier (we can look as deeply as we want into a computer), there are some aspects that are remarkably similar (such as "it doesn't happen in my office"). Working in an emergency room with a patient who is in critical condition has some (note that I only said some) of the pressue of working in a build lab trying to figure out why the new build of Windows is crashing in your driver. Programmers do start out with a hypothesis based on the early symptoms reported, and then set about proving or disproving that hypothesis. The mistakes of representativeness, availability errors, and affective errors remind me of mistakes I have made while debugging, for similar reasons.

And I think that the cognitive dimension of debugging has been just as ignored as the cognitive dimension of medical evaluation. The medical school tenet of "see one, do one, teach one" accurately describes the way in which debugging knowledge is learned and passed on by developers. Doctors are starting to look into how doctors think (search for the name "Pat Crosskerry" to find some of this); I wonder if someone has, or will, look into how programmers think.

http://www.proudlyserving.com/archives/2007/01/medical_diagnos.html

The benefits of ultrasonography in diagnosing appendicitis

Doctors know nowadays that diagnosing appendicitis is most easy and most difficult at the same time. Symptoms like pain around the navel, nausea, vomiting can also be caused by other disorders in the abdominal area. The pain in appendicitis localizes in the right ileal fossa where a sensation of tenderness and discomfort occurs due to the implication of the peritoneum.

Blood testing is usually of little value and can mislead the diagnosis. The base of diagnosing appendicitis remains the clinical exam done by the surgeon. But precisely the clinical examination can be sometimes mistaken as the variety of symptoms can mislead you easily.

Wrong interpretation of signs often makes a surgeon remove a normal appendix or delay the removal of a perforated one. Further complications like peritonitis, infection and longer hospitalization period needed, appear either due to late presentation of the patients in hospital or because of doctor’s hesitation in establishing a diagnosis. Because of the dangerous sequels normal appendix removal must be avoided.

In the last two decades, certain new scoring systems have improved the clinical performances in establishing diagnoses although the general results were manifold. According to studies, mistaken diagnosis by young doctors has decreased from 42% to 29%, and perforation cases dropped by 50%.

The precision of medical conclusions increased though the new discovery more than due to the Alvarado scoring system that calculates the susceptibility of a person to develop appendicitis by several clinical references. The new technology using computers seemed to promise a most accurate diagnosis, but the normal appendectomy was still 15-30%.

In a study using ultrasonography combined with the Alvarado score, no major benefits occurred compared to the unassisted clinical judgment. Both camps showed an about 12 percent of mistaken diagnosis owed to normal appendix or late surgery of a perforated one. Echography, even when performed by most experienced clinicians gives a rate of 5% false positive diagnoses.

The question whether ultrasonography should be rarer used because of the cases that could have been better interpreted by clinical judgment, persists. The answer is dual, as ultrasonography sometimes proves itself vital when establishing a prompt diagnosis and thus reducing morbidity.

Recent research showed no necessity of routine ultrasonography in patients with clear signs of appendix inflammation, as it can only mislead surgeons by showing a false negative image. No clinical benefits can be provided by performing an echo to all hospitalized patients.

The importance of ultrasonography appears in uncertain cases and diagnoses, when the clinical judgment must be doubled by Para clinical technology. On the other hand a negative result from the Echography shouldn’t make a doctor send the patient home; clinical abilities are still the most important in diagnosing.


For more resources about acute appendicitis or even about appendicitis please visit this website http://www.appendicitis-center.com/

This article is free for republishing
Source: http://www.a1articles.com

The Complexity of Autism and Issues in Diagnosing the Syndrome

Autism has drawn the attention of many medical scientists throughout the course of history. Fascinated by the various levels of impairment determined by this complex neurological disorder - behavioral, emotional, communicational and cognitive, scientists have tried to clarify the notion of autism and its revealing signs. The most exhaustive research conducted upon this type of disorder belongs to Leo Kanner, an Austrian psychiatrist that focused on the study of autism and other related disorders. Kanner was the first scientist to establish an elaborate description of the disorder which he referred to as a syndrome.

In the 40's, Kanner came up with a clear model of diagnosis for autism, based on various experiments and elaborate research. Although Kanner's model of diagnosis is relevant and complete, nowadays it can also be confusing in the process of diagnosing autism. Therefore, various contemporary medical scientists had focused their careers on improving the model of diagnosis introduced by Leo Kanner, clarifying certain obscure aspects that he presented in the past.

It is very important to understand that people with autism don't follow the same pattern of impairment, and in fact, the development of the syndrome can greatly vary from a person to another. The severity of autism can alternate from mild to very pronounced and the syndrome can affect people on multiple levels. It is very difficult to correctly diagnose people with autism, as the syndrome can generate a multitude of abnormalities that might point to other neurological disorders. For instance, while some people with autism may present a pronounced impairment of their social skills, they may have an average emotional IQ and a high performance IQ. Other people with the syndrome may have a low performance IQ, but they may present higher levels of emotional intelligence and better social skills.

When Kanner first established his model of diagnosis, he stated that the disorder is very complex and its margins are very difficult to identify. Hence, he invoked that autism can affect some levels more than others. Kanner's model of diagnosis presented these following features:

- Impairment of social skills, from early childhood to maturity;

- Impairment of communication skills, which can vary anywhere from complete inability to develop speech to poor ability of initiating and maintaining a conversation. Kanner also noted echolalia and excessive questioning as autistic features;

- Very low responsiveness to external stimuli, exaggerated preoccupation with repetitive activities, stereotype behaviors;

- Good cognitive skills and memory;

- Good physical skills and muscle coordination.

Considering the fact that Kanner didn't clarify many aspects of the syndrome, contemporary medical scientists have focused upon simplifying his model of diagnosis. Although the features and the patterns of autism described by Kanner have been preserved, modern science attempted to establish clear criteria of diagnosis. Furthermore, in the late 70's, Rutter developed new controversial theories, claiming that autism shouldn't be separated by performance intelligence in the process of diagnosing the disorder.



So, if you want to find out more about Autism, and especially about autism symptoms or autism symptoms checklist, please click one of the following link.

This article is free for republishing
Source: http://www.a1articles.com

Do I Get My Child Diagnosed?

This is a question that parents of children they think may have social difficulties have to ask themselves. And it is a really difficult question to answer.

The type of questions that parents ask themselves:

� Why does my child need to be diagnosed?
� How is an autism diagnosis going to affect my child in the future?
� Am I labelling my child?
� What will happen after I get my child diagnosed?
� Can the diagnosis be removed?

The route for a diagnosis starts when parents believe their children may have a social problem. The likelihood is that they will look up a set of symptoms from a doctor or from the internet and try and match the child with the different types of behavior. Once the parents are fairly sure that their child fits a certain condition, they then look for some confirmation. This is where the difficulties start, because there are very few ways to get any definite assessment without actually diagnosing the child.

If you do have an assessment done which says that your child does have a social disorder, then you are faced with the question, do you get a formal diagnosis? The way parents have their children diagnosed is typically done by a specialist or group of specialists that assess them against a set of behaviors and abilities. If the child fits a certain number of behaviors or abilities then they can be formally diagnosed as having a social disorder or syndrome.

Here are some benefits and disadvantages:

Benefits

� Once you have a diagnosis you can move on and stop guessing
� Helps parents to know how to deal with the condition
� Helps Specialists and teachers to deal with the child in the correct way

Disadvantages

� Possible label they will have forever?
� Can be used as an excuse for blaming the child (e.g. at school or with siblings)
� Is it necessary? Especially when dealing with high functioning autism
� The diagnosis is subjective and may not be accurate

Getting a diagnosis is very much a decision for the parents and should be considered in detail if the child seems to be a borderline case. The best thing to do is to face realities about your child and whether they really need help. If they do then you could be making an important step forward in getting your child diagnosed because a diagnosis will probably lead to a clear plan of development. On the other hand you must not let a diagnosis be in vain.

Give it time and avoid making hasty decisions. If you feel a sense of time running out then you probably need a diagnosis to help you move on. You must also be open minded, don't make decisions based on emotion but remain factual and clinical about it. If you can do these things then you will be making the right decision.

Ben Sidman is a Parent of an amazing autistic child and founder of http://www.autism-support-community.com - an informative and friendly web site for parents with autistic children.

This article is free for republishing
Source: http://www.a1articles.com

Difficulties in Diagnosing Lupus

Due to its polyvalent character and its intrinsic nature (lupus is triggered and augmented by severe immune system impairments), lupus is very difficult to diagnose accurately and promptly. In some cases, the complexity of lupus renders doctors unable to reveal its presence in time, the unspecific symptoms produced by the autoimmune disease often being misleading in the process of establishing the correct diagnosis. It may take months or even years to confirm the diagnosis received by patients with suspected lupus. The process of diagnosing lupus can be challenging even for the most experienced doctors. Patients can also influence the duration of the process of diagnosis, as doctors often rely on symptomatic reports apart from common laboratory analyses and physical examinations. The challenging process of diagnosing lupus can only be accelerated and facilitated by good doctor-patient cooperation.

Although at present there aren’t any specific tests that can reveal the presence of lupus, the existing laboratory tests can still help doctors decide upon the correct diagnosis. The most commonly used method of diagnosing patients with suspected lupus consists in looking for the presence of auto-antibodies in blood samples. The antinuclear antibody test (ANA test) is nowadays extensively used to detect the presence of auto-antibodies in patients with suspected lupus. However, the main problem with the ANA test is that it isn’t 100 percent accurate. For instance, a positive result for the ANA test may be influenced by factors such as past infections, chronic diseases or prolonged treatments with certain medications and not by the actual presence of lupus. In order to confirm the presumptive diagnosis, doctors have to rely on various other tests, such as anti-DNA, anti-RPN, anti-Ro, anti-La, or anti-Sm antibody tests.

When these previously mentioned blood tests along with clinical examinations and the patient’s symptomatic report are inconclusive for establishing the correct diagnosis, doctors may decide to perform biopsies of the skin or kidneys in order to reveal clear evidence of lupus. Additional tests often include the test for syphilis, as lupus sufferers commonly have a series of antibodies that generally occur in patients with syphilis. Thus, a falsely positive result for the syphilis test is also considered to be an indicator for lupus. Doctors have to rely on a wide range of tests in order to analyze the disease from different angles and find the accurate diagnosis. Without multiple medical investigations and elaborate research, lupus is virtually impossible to diagnose properly.

Once lupus has been appropriately diagnosed, doctors still depend on a series of tests in order to identify the actual type of lupus and its rate of progression. In order to gather the required medical information, doctors may choose to perform the following tests: complete blood count (CBC), blood chemistry tests, erythrocyte sedimentation tests and urinalysis. After the results of these tests are properly interpreted, doctors can finally choose the appropriate course of medications. Due to the fact that the process of diagnosing lupus is time consuming, patients may have developed serious complications by the time they receive the appropriate medical treatment. Despite their limited relevancy, the existing procedures of diagnosis are the only means of revealing signs of lupus in patients. Medical scientists are hoping to find more efficient methods of diagnosing lupus in the near future, methods that can simplify the process of diagnosis and allow prompt medical intervention.

So if you want to find more about Lupus or more details about systemic lupus please follow this link http://www.lupus-guide.com

This article is free for republishing
Source: http://www.a1articles.com

Why medical id bracelets are important

Copyright 2006 Jason Bibb

Medical ID bracelets are actually identification bracelets that are custom-engraved. These are also pieces of jewelry that have medical condition information engraved on them. There can also be found drug or food allergies, prescribed medicine and even emergency contacts.

Doctors usually recommend these medical ID bracelets because it offers the patient peace of mind. Wearing such a device is important because you might find yourself in an emergency situation when you will be unable to speak for yourself, thus the bracelet will tell the doctors a lot of things about your medical condition. This will, of course, give the physicians the chance to deal with the situation much more rapidly and efficiently. Another reason why this bracelet is very useful is because many times symptoms of some diseases can be misdiagnosed.

If you have all your medical information with you, you can help doctors to promptly give you a diagnosis, this being quite critical in establishing an effective treatment. The description of your medical facts will ensure that you will benefit of an appropriate medical care. It is also important to take into consideration the fact that almost half of the medical errors are based on diagnosis mistakes. Thus, wearing the medical ID bracelet you will protect yourself from potential medical errors.

You should also know that most emergency doctors look for medical ID on their patients and most of them check this immediately after they reached the patient. Thus, you should not worry about the efficiency of wearing such a device. Another great thing about the medical ID bracelet is that it saves you from a lot of trips to the hospital and they are even capable of preventing unnecessary hospital admissions. In addition, minor emergencies will never become major ones if you stick to wearing your medical ID. The perfect candidate for wearing this special piece of jewelry is the person who has ongoing medical conditions, allergies or who takes several different drugs at a time. If you wonder about if you should be wearing a medical ID bracelet, the only thing you need to do is to consult your doctor or pharmacist. If you worry about the way this bracelet will look, you should know that its design has incredibly changed during the past years coming in a wide variety of styles. Thus, you can be sure that you will be able to find one, which will perfectly match your style and taste.


------

Having a medical id bracelet can save your life. Here at medicid.com we take pride in offering medical id jewelry. We have many different styles to choice from to meet your style. Please visit http://www.medicid.com it could actually save your life!

This article is free for republishing
Source: http://www.a1articles.com

What is the Unconscious Mind?

There are thousands of theories about what the unconscious mind is and can do. Some believe that it is the “soul” of the person, and is unique to we humans. It separates us from the “lower” animals on this planet. Others believe further that it makes us unique in the universe, but in my opinion (IMO), that 's just our ego.

The plain and simple truth is that no one knows, and few even suspect the awesome power of the unconscious. We do know that it can “cure” a person, or “kill” that same person in different circumstances. We know that it may be affected by life experiences, hypnosis, and/or subliminal repetition. We also know that traumatic life events can cause future problems, even seemingly unrelated problems, including allergies! Why and how is just a part of what we don't know.

We also know that as the mind thinks, it emits signals generated by different neurons in the brain moving around as we think and act. Different frequencies are involved in certain areas, and most of these are in the audible range. This movement has been called “A Symphony in the Brain” and there's even a book with that title, about this “brain orchestra”.

The composite of all these constantly changing brain wave “notes” is always present, although this “orchestra” of different notes and waves of notes composes the full spectrum of what we call “audible sound”. These notes that make up these waves are so very weak that it takes expensive equipment to amplify such brain waves enough so that we can use them in EEG Biofeedback (AKA Neurofeedback), The raising of one band of such frequencies (SMR - 12-14 Hz), and the lowering of another (Theta - 4-8 Hz) is used in EEG BF and in the Bate Auditory Training system. Both systems are very effective in solving most of the “brain problems”.

As a sidelight to these brain waves, we also know that they only begin in human babies around the 24th to 26th week of pregnancy. Up to that time, there are no brain waves present. This is the general argument against 3rd trimester abortion. This theory has the soul entering that infant body making it a “human being” at that point, and up to then, it is simply an animal body, and not a human life. This theory has one fallacy. Animals show brain waves at appropriate times in their gestation, so perhaps, this has nothing to do with the “soul”.

Scientists have labeled this entity as the “unconscious” or “subconscious”, but this part of the mind is neither of these things. We have labeled this part of the mind according to our ego and for our convenience. It would be better named “superconscious”, as this part of our mind is the real “control” of what we are; what we do (and not do); how we react to various stimuli of living, etc. Our ego makes us think our conscious mind is in control of our actions, but that's simply not true. Our conscious mind is constantly controlled by our unconscious.

There are many theories about this “soul” part of the unconscious. The one I like is from Jung. It theorizes a “universal” mind, perhaps the mind of all of earth, or even of earth itself. All these minds are one conglomerated entity in effect, composed of all the (unconscious) minds that exist now or have ever existed. Perhaps this “universal mind” is another name for God, or Nature, or whatever - a force that is mostly unknowable by we humans. (I wonder why this is?)

The evidence of supernatural “powers”, and “abilities” of some “gifted persons” is simply overwhelming. What is called miracle(s) may be only another different manifestation of this universal mind. Thomas Sugrue, the author of the well-written biography of Edgar Cayce, named his book, “There is a River”. There is no question that Cayce was able to “tap into” this river of unconscious knowledge, even though he didn't understand how he did it, how it worked, and most of the knowledge he received while in “trance”. But, in over 20,000 writings of medical diagnosis, he was never proven wrong. That's impressive.

There have been many prophets over time that accurately foretold the future besides Cayce. Nostradamos and many others, biblical and secular have done what may be called miracles by lesser folk. (Hypnosis was a “miracle” to me. An automobile or airplane or TV would be a miracle to primitive persons.)

A lot of hardheaded scientific folk tend to scoff at all such “anecdotal” evidence, and refuse to even look as anything that they cannot verify by sight, feel, hearing, or by effect on something else.

But, even with the hardheads, evidence is piling up that's hard to ignore. In the fields of EEG Biofeedback Training and Auditory Training, we now know that by changing the amplitudes of certain brain waves, large changes in several aspects of some person's lives and personalities are also changed. A huge amount of research over the past 35 years has shown clearly that this simple therapy can solve many of the “brain problems” such as the ADD-Autism continuum, depression in all forms, insomnia, epilepsy, addictions and even schizophrenia.

The Autonomic Nervous System

If we accept the concept of a “universal mind”, then we have to look at two parts of this mind:

A computer part (called the Autonomous Nervous System or ANS). This system controls the “housekeeping” functions automatically.
The “universal mind” (soul?) part that is in some type of communication with that universe (whatever or wherever it may be).

(Could Freud have been on the right track? Are there three parts to the mind, with limited or poor communication between them?)

If we look at the computer (ANS) part, we find that the analogy is pretty good. If a computer virus gets in, it can screw up normal programs. If a bad “ideation” gets into the human computer mind part, it can also screw up normal programs. If we get garbage in as data, then we get garbage out as behavior.

Most people think that computers are smart, but the plain fact is that all computers are very dumb. They only do exactly what we tell them to do, and if we program them wrong, we get wrong answers. (We could wish that they would always do what we want instead of what we actually ask, but that would undoubtedly be even more frustrating.)

There has to be a definite separation between the computer (ANS) part of the unconscious mind and the Universal mind. And we have to add to both of these “entities” the factor of INDIVIDUALITY. This is a concept that many MD's don't fully understand. They are trained to get height and weight, and prescribe according to “volume” of the patient. This “gross” measure, which does not take into account individuality, is often wrong.

Let's consider the programming of the computer (ANS) first. There is a genetic component, which varies the basic program accordingly. Then, there is a “learned” component, which provides several other variables. All this “data” combined determines your health in dozens of ways. How much of a particular nutrient you, as an individual require, how a deficiency of any kind will affect you as an individual. What your immune responses will be. How it is, and how it will be, what diseases you are liable to get, etc.

The Orthomolecular Theory of Sickness has 3 conditions necessary for sickness or poor health.

NUTRITIONALLY DEFICIENT OR TOXIC. (Our modern diet leaves all of us somewhat nutritionally deficient, and many persons are toxic due to environmental pollution).

STRESS. (In our world, who doesn't have stress. The caveman only had a few real emotional stresses. We face saber-toothed tigers every day.)
PREDISPOSITION. (What is your family history, and what has your unconscious mind (ANS) learned as you've gone thru life?)

This theory made sense to me the first time I heard of it. If the body chemistry (nutrition) isn't correct, the immune system can't work right. If there is stress present, then the body needs even more good nutrition to handle it. (A downward spiral in effect - stress causing more deficiency, and more deficiency causing more symptoms/illness causing even more stress.)

The particular illness that may affect you from this stress is determined by the predisposition. One person gets chronic headaches, another gets heart problems, and another gets cancer. Life is a big crap game with loaded dice.
So, to become an Orthomolecular clinician, I found that I had to learn about nutrition down to the chemical and biological level. I also had to become an “expert” in allergy, and sensitivity, as this is a huge factor in stress. I found myself in the early 80's reading from 3-6 books a week, with another 3-6 on order from libraries around the country. There are still few to no schools or universities devoted to this new science, and what nutrition is taught is often poor to wrong.

“Nutritionists” and “dieticians” are still being taught that the basic four food groups are “good” nutrition in many schools. (A meal at McDonalds can be “good” by this measure!) MD's get at most one hour on nutrition (with very little time on vitamins and minerals and other supplements) compared to thousands of hours on pharmacology (drug use). Few psychologists know (or care) anything about allergy/sensitivity, thus cannot deal effectively with any of the more serious brain problems of ADD/ADHD, Autism, insomnia, epilepsy, depression and schizophrenia.

Both MD's and PhD's are “educationally handicapped”. At least half of what they learned in school is at least partially false, but they are “programmed” to follow it because of their education. Oh well, it was the same in the Middle Ages, and even recently (in history), any doctor who didn't bleed his patients was called a quack. Looking at the history of medicine, you'll find that; virtually all-major advances in medical science were done by a doctor who was called a quack by his contemporaries. I'm proud to have been called a quack. I'm in excellent company!

An alternate theory to the above is that the ANS is simply the “computer part” of the universal mind that handles the “housekeeping” for the body. This theory is supported by the interactions between these two entities. Both affect each other's functioning it would seem. Bad ideation in the universal mind certainly may create havoc in the immune system and the body.

Extra Sensory Perception

In the 1930's Dr Joseph Banks Rhine, a psychologist at Duke University set up a set of experiments designed to prove that “mental telepathy” didn't exist. To his surprise (and horror), he found that not only did mental telepathy exist, but so did clairvoyance, and all the other “impossible” psychic phenomena. He named these as a group - Extra Sensory Perception (ESP). He also invented the Rhine cards for ESP testing.

In 1973, I did a lot of experiments with Rhine cards, and I found that hypnosis definitely could improve ESP ability in some persons. I was shocked to read that Rhine had done several experiments that clearly showed hypnosis did NOT increase ESP ability. How can this disparity be?

In 1974, I had a lovely dinner with Joe and his wife Louise, and spent the night as a guest. After dinner and well into the night, Joe and I argued. Neither of us could credit the other's data, yet we both credited each other's beliefs, so to speak. We argued many other subjects, and I know that I learned from him, and hope that he learned from me as well.

In 1979, I wrote my doctoral dissertation. My thesis was on hypnotic phenomena of course. During the research, I was somewhat surprised to find such disparity in actual experimentation results. Experimenter A did experiment A, and got results A. Experimenter B did experiment A, but got results B. This happened over and over in the literature and history of hypnosis. How can this be? After documenting so many of such differences, I finally realized - In hypnosis, the experimenter is always part of the experiment.

I postulated two conditions (both of which are pretty well accepted as fact):

Most hypnotized persons are “desperately eager” to please the hypnotist, a father figure of sorts. This is why a good subject will do stupid, even abnormal things when asked.
The unconscious communication between the experimenter and the subject allows the subject to (at least sometimes) “know” what outcome is “desired” by the experimenter.

Both Joe and I were working with good hypnotic subjects, and these were also above average in ESP ability. I am very sorry that Joe died before I realized this truth. He'd have gotten it, and enjoyed it. We were both right! Of course he got his data as negative and I got mine as positive.

Think about “double blind” testing of drugs that is used by drug manufacturers. Is it really “blind”. Cold logic says it is, but the above postulates (and actuality) say it isn't. At least one-third of all manufactured drugs on the market don't what they were designed for chemically, although they may be effective as placebo.

The “logical” scientific mind believes that if the doctor and the patient both are unaware (consciously) which is the drug, and which is the placebo, then the so-called “double blind” test is valid. They ignore the above and simply take the data as being correct. That data is definitely “compromised”. I've seen a lot of that since then, by biased doctors getting biased data and publishing it as “truth”. (Negative nutritional studies about vitamins C and E are prime examples of “biased” experiments - using “wrong” dosages is also a common example of ignorance and bias.)

As an interesting aside, when Joe first published his statistical results of his ESP experiments, his mathematics were questions and condemned by a large group of psychologists at a major convention. Months later, at a convention for mathematicians, it was resolved that:

They didn't believe the results either!
The psychologists were wrong about his statistical usage. That was absolutely correct mathematically!

That's scientific thinking? No, but it's typical of too many ignorant scientists who let their beliefs overcome facts.

Placebo Medicine

Another amazing “trick” of the unconscious is placebo effect. This is where a sugar (or other harmless) pill is given a patient. If the patient believes in the doctor, the sugar pill works as well as an actual drug. Of course, hypnosis also can work to remove pain, and to aid healing. If the unconscious mind believes, the patient gets well. If the unconscious mind believes that they are dying, they probably are. This is the almost frightening power of the unconscious.

In Orlando in the 1980's, there was one surgeon at one hospital whose record with patients was “different” from all other surgeons. His surgery patients took less painkillers; were ready to leave the hospital a day or so before other doctors patients; and were much less problem to nurses. What was his secret? (And, more importantly, why didn't all other MD's know and use it?)

After surgery, while the patient was in recovery, and still “dopey”, he went in to that room, sat down, held the patients hand, and said, “Don't worry, it was a very simple operation, no problems at all, and you're doing very well now. It was so easy that you'll need very little pain-killer, and you'll be out of here in no time.”

The patient believes, and it becomes so. This speech was the same, even though the actual surgery may have been the most difficult of his career. But, his little five-minute speech did as much good for recovery as his surgery.

Any doctor whose patient gets cured gets an ego boost and believes that he cured the patient, making him godlike. The truth is that no doctor EVER cures anybody. If he's good, makes the right decisions, he does HELP the patient to self-cure. The cure is done by the unconscious mind; the doctor only assists this “internal doctor”. As a doctor (PhD), I was helpful to many patients, and undoubtedly my help saved a few lives. I always tried to remind myself that the major credit belonged to the patient. I only assisted. (Too many doctors already think they're godlike.)

Few MD's realize that no patient is completely “out of it” by anesthetic. The conscious mind may be, but the unconscious mind never is. At a hypnosis seminar, many years ago, the speaker expressed this fact to the audience. At the murmurs of disbelief from some MD's, he asked for any volunteer in the audience who had had surgery. One MD came forward. He was hypnotized, and he was taken back in memory to that surgery. He then was asked to repeat all conversations or words spoken during his operation. He then did so, and the words were pretty typical of that type of operation. The MD's in the audience were stunned, as was he on awakening.

This leads us to the need for care in the operating room. A casual comment about the patient could have life threatening consequences. Let's look at a few sample negative comments that might even kill a patient.

“I don't think this guy will make it.”

“This woman is too fat to live”

“His heart is pretty bad”

“Her liver is shot”

Bill Cosby had a comedy routine where a doctor was operating on a patient. During the simple operation, the doctor said things like, “hemostat,. …frabulator….dismogle …OOPS!”. Of course, this scared the hell out of the patient, who said “What'd you say? You said OOPS! I know what OOPS means. Am I gonna die?”

Such negative comments might actually kill a patient. It's individual of course, but the effects of such negative comments can do as much harm to a patient as the good of those positive comments of the surgeon above. We tend to forget the power of the unconscious, and doctors shouldn't. Every word spoken in an operating room should be positive.

Positive Thinking and Visualization

There's an old psychological saying, “If you think you can't, you're right!”

Every top professional athlete knows the value of positive thinking. And, he also knows the effect of negative thinking. If a golfer thinks, “I've got to watch out for that bunker on the right”, he may very well slice his ball. The professional golfer just looks at the direction he wants the ball to go, ignoring the hazards, and visualizes that flight. That's the way to do it. In sports lingo, that's called “getting your mind out of the way”. Of course, this refers to the conscious mind. Your unconscious mind knows all the muscle movements needed for each task from the hours (years?) of practice. Stop thinking, and let the unconscious take over. That's the key to athletic success.

Everyone who has studied hypnosis knows that only positive self-statements and positive visualizations are effective. Such negative phrases as: “I won't eat as much”, puts the idea of eating into the mind. Substitute the phrase, “I feel full”, as a positive thought. That, at least has a chance to do what you want to do.

Article Source: http://www.ArticleJoe.com

Phil Bate PhD - Retired Orthomolecular Psychologist Inventor and Patent Pending Holder for Brain Wave Amplitude Changing via Auditory Training BateAudio.com Alternate-Health.com Retired Orthomolecular Psychologist - Inventor and patent holder of "Brain Wave Amplitude Change via Subliminal Training". full resume at: Subliminals-Training.com or at: Alternate-Health.com

General information about appendicitis

The affection known as appendicitis means in fact the inflammation of the appendix, the smallest and shortest part of the large intestine hanging on the right side of the Ilion. Although its importance in the human body only lies in containing parts of the lymphoid system, it can easily become ill and cause major problems if not treated. Without a surgical intervention at the right time, the appendix can get infected, break open or can even lead to death. Around 1 of 500 persons makes appendicitis every year.

The most common occurrence of appendicitis is due to a viral infection inside the intestines or to a foreign body blocking the connection between appendix and Ilion.

The inflammation in the appendix can cause major damages for the entire organism; it can get infected, can ease the formation of blood clots and can perforate affecting the entire peritoneum. Appendicitis is a surgical emergency! Anyone with the following symptoms should see a surgeon as soon as possible:
1. Pain in the right side of the abdomen, medical called right ileac fosa. The initial pain is situated around the navel and moves down and to the right while becoming worse. Pains increase when moving, sneezing, deep breathing or being touched in the area.
2. Nausea
3. Vomiting states
4. Diarrhea or constipation according to the particular case.
5. Stopped intestinal transit for food and gases.
6. Low fever after the appearance of other symptoms.
7. Abdominal distension

Symptoms vary from case to case and are never the same. People suspecting they have appendicitis shouldn’t take laxatives to combat constipation because the appendix can be forced and burst; also they shouldn’t take pain-killers that could mask important symptoms the surgeon must know.

A medical diagnosis of appendicitis is based on several most important steps: 1. The consulting physician must observe and well interpret all signs and symptoms.
2. A complete and careful physical exam must be performed.
3. Para clinical investigations are required:
A. Blood analysis for high white blood cells and also searching for signs of inflammation (VSH, protein C, leukocyte formula)
B. Urine tests to eliminate a urinary tract infection
C. Ultrasound investigation to see if the appendix is swollen

The treatment for appendicitis is surgical appendectomy. It can be done classical through a larger cut or more modern by laparoscopy. The newer laparoscopic surgery creates small incisions on the abdomen where the surgeon can insert a minicamera and instruments. The surgeon can extract the appendix without esthetical consequences.

The patients can have a perfectly normal life without their appendix. Diets are not needed, no special care or exercises. Just a little time to adjust to the thought.

Article Source: http://www.ArticleJoe.com

For more resources about acute appendicitis or even about appendicitis please visit this website www.appendicitis-center.com/

Nanotechnology boost for medical diagnosis

Don't tell Prince Charles, but scientists in the US have turned to nanotechnology in the fight against cancer. While HRH's worries over the science of the very small sparked headlines last year about the world being consumed by "grey goo", doctors at Harvard medical school have been injecting magnetic nanoparticles to track tumours.

The millions of miniature metal balls flood the body and concentrate in healthy lymph nodes. Using medical imaging equipment, the scientists then scan cancer patients for the particles to see if their nodes are normal or malignant, which show a different pattern. This tells the doctors how far the disease has spread and influences how it is treated.

Mukesh Harisinghani, who leads the research, said: "In any type of cancer there are two things you want to know more about - the best treatment to offer the patient and the long-term prognosis. Each of those two things is related to the presence or absence of lymph node metastasis."

This metastasis, or spread, is usually determined by removing pieces of lymph tissue under anaesthetic. "This technology is a non-invasive and accurate way of doing it without cutting open your patient," Dr Harisinghani said.

The nanoparticles, each the size of a small virus and more than 1,000 times smaller than the thickness of a human hair, are made from iron oxide. They are given a sugary coating to stop them breaking down too quickly, mixed with water, and slowly injected.

The particles migrate to the lymph nodes, where they stay for up to five days before degrading. The sugar is then excreted and the iron built into red blood cells. Scientists say each nanoparticle dose provides roughly the same boost in iron levels as two steaks a week for a month.

Dr Harisinghani said it was the first clinical application of the technology for patient care.

Together with his colleague Ralph Weissleder, Dr Harisinghani gave the nanoparticles to 25 men and nine women with a range of cancers, and scanned their lymph nodes with a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machine.

Healthy and cancerous nodes look different because the iron oxide particles are taken up by immune cells (macrophages), which are common in normal lymph nodes but largely absent from those with cancer.

The patients in the trial had already received standard exploratory surgery to examine their lymph nodes for tumours, meaning the scientists could compare the results. The nanoparticle method identified malignant tissue 98% of the time. The results appear in the journal PLoS Medicine.

Other scientists have experimented with the iron oxide nanoparticles to image brain tumours before surgery. The Harvard pair say they are the first to train a computer to spot the difference between the healthy and diseased patterns, and to present the results as 3D reconstructions.

Radiologist Andrea Rockall is using the iron oxide balls to image gynaecological cancers at St Bart's hospital in London. "It looks a bit like Guinness and I tell the patients it's because of all the iron so they're not shocked," Dr Rockall said.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1380106,00.html

Getting an accurate diagnosis

It is essential to the good health and well-being of our seniors if they and their caregivers detect emerging problems early and get an accurate diagnosis. That’s why it’s important to know what to look for and when to advocate for medical intervention.

How often does misdiagnosis occur? Frequently. Delirium is misdiagnosed 95 percent of the time by doctors. This results in a serious problem for the elderly because the underlying disease or condition causing the delirium then goes untreated.

Research shows that 15 to 26% of all elderly people who become delirious die within a year, usually of the disease or condition that caused the delirium. This means that it’s very important that the diagnosis is correct so that the underlying cause can also be diagnosed, treated, and usually prevented from recurring.

This means that delirium is a huge red flag that can be a tremendous asset to the elderly and their caregivers if they recognize that the sudden onset of confusion is a fire alarm to get medical doctors involved in diagnosis and treatment.

On February 22, 2006, the New York Times published an article by David Leonhardt wrote titled “Why Doctors So Often Get It Wrong.” It illustrates the importance of advocating for a correct diagnosis.

“[W]e still could be doing a lot better. Under the current medical system, doctors, nurses, lab technicians and hospital executives are not actually paid to come up with the right diagnosis. They are paid to perform tests and to do surgery and to dispense drugs.

“There is no bonus for curing someone and no penalty for failing, except when the mistakes rise to the level of malpractice. So even though doctors can have the best intentions, they have little economic incentive to spend time double-checking their instincts, and hospitals have little incentive to give them the tools to do so.”

“You get what you pay for,” Mark B. McClellan, who runs Medicare and Medicaid, told me. “And we ought to be paying for better quality.”

There are some bits of good news here. Dr. McClellan has set up small pay-for-performance programs in Medicare, and a few insurers are also experimenting. But it isn’t nearly a big enough push. We just are not using the power of incentives to save lives. For a politician looking to make the often-bloodless debate over health care come alive, this is a huge opportunity.”

You can read the entire article here.

To download Appendix D from my book Taking Charge: Good Medical Care for the Elderly and How to Get It, click here. You’ll find this appendix useful in pinpointing the underlying causes of delirium. As Taking Charge makes clear: the hallmark of delirium is the sudden onset of confusion. Most family members can pinpoint the day, and sometimes the hour that their loved one became delirious. As a family caregiver, you’ll be in the best position to make sure that a doctor or nurse doesn’t confuse delirium with dementia.

History of Medical Diagnosis and Diagnostic Imaging

Radiology began as a medical sub-specialty in first decade of the 1900's after the discovery of x-rays by Professor Roentgen. The development of radiology grew at a good pace until World War II. Extensive use of x-ray imaging during the second world war, and the advent of the digital computer and new imaging modalities like ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging have combined to create an explosion of diagnostic imaging techniques in the past 25 years.

Film Cassettes

For the first fifty years of radiology, the primary examination involved creating an image by focusing x-rays through the body part of interest and directly onto a single piece of film inside a special cassette. In the earliest days, a head x-ray coul d require up to 11 minutes of exposure time. Now, modern x-rays images are made in milliseconds and the x-ray dose currently used is as little as 2% of what was used for that 11 minute head exam 100 years ago. Further, modern x-ray techniques (both anal og film screen systems and digital systems, described below) have significantly more spatial resolution and contrast detail. This improved image quality allows the diagnosis of smaller pathology that could not be detected with older technology.




An x-ray system from the pioneering days.
Patients still had to hold the cassettes themselves.

Fluorescent Screens

The next development involved the use fluorescent screens and special glasses so the doctor could see x-ray images in real time. This caused the doctor to stare directly into the x-ray beam, creating unwanted exposure to radiation. In 1946, George Sc hoenander developed the film cassette changer which allowed a series of cassettes to be exposed at a movie frame rate of 1.5 cassettes per second. By 1953, this technique had been improved to allow frame rates up to 6 frames per second by using a special "cut film changer."

Contrast Medium

A major development along the way was the application of pharmaceutical contrast medium to help visualize organs and blood vessels with more clarity and image contrast. These contrast media agents (liquids also referred to as "dye") were fir st administered orally or via vascular injection between 1906 and 1912 and allowed doctors to see the blood vessels, digestive and gastro-intestinal systems, bile ducts and gall bladder for the first time.

Image Intensifier

In 1955, the x-ray image intensifier (also called I.I.) was developed and allowed the pick up and display of the x-ray movie using a TV (television) camera and monitor. By the 1960's, the fluorescent system (which had become quite complex with mirror optic systems to minimize patient and radiologist dose) was largely replaced by the image intensifier/TV combination. Together with the cut-film changer, the image Intensifier opened the way for a new radiologic sub-specialty know as angiography to bloss om and allowed the routine imaging of blood vessels and the heart.

Nuclear Medicine

Nuclear Medicine studies (also called radionuclide scanning) were first done in the 1950s using special gamma cameras. Nuclear medicine studies require the introduction of very low-level radioactive chemicals into the body. These radionuclides are taken up by the organs in the body and then emit faint radiation signals which are measured or detected by the gamma camera.

Ultrasound Scanning

In the 1960's the principals of sonar (developed extensively during the second world war) were applied to diagnostic imaging. The process involves placing a small device called a transducer, against the skin of the patient near the region of interest, for example, the kidneys. This transducer produces a stream of inaudible, high frequency sound waves which penetrate into the body and bounce off the organs inside. The transducer detects sound waves as they bounce off or echo back from the internal st ructures and contours of the organs. These waves are received by the ultrasound machine and turned into live pictures with the use of computers and reconstruction software.

Digital Imaging Techniques

Digital imaging techniques were implemented in the 1970's with the first clinical use and acceptance of the Computed Tomography or CT scanner, invented by Godfrey Hounsfield. Analog to digital converters and computers were also adapted to conventional fluoroscopic image intensifier/TV systems in the 70's as well. Angiographic procedures for looking at the blood vessels in the brain, kidneys, arms and legs, and the blood vessels of the heart all have benefited tremendously from the adaptation of digital technology.

Over the next ten to fifteen years a large majority of conventional x-ray systems will also be upgraded to all digital technology. Eventually, all of the film cassette/film screen systems will be replaced by digital x-ray detectors. This technology i s currently works-in-progress and is only available at a handful of sites worldwide. An intermediate step called phosphor plate technology in currently available at hundreds of sites around the world. These plates trap the x-ray energy and require an in termediate processing step to release the stored information so it can be converted into a digital picture.

Benefits of digital technology to all x-ray systems:

• less x-ray dose can often be used to achieve the same high quality picture as with film
• digital x-ray images can be enhanced and manipulated with computers
• digital images can be sent via network to other workstations and computer monitors so that many people can share the information and assist in the diagnosis
• digital images can be archived onto compact optical disk or digital tape drives saving tremendously on storage space and manpower needed for a traditional x-ray film library
• digital images can be retrieved from an archive at any point in the future for reference.

Some modalities like mammography require extremely high resolution film to show the small breast cancers. Digital detectors capable of a similarly high resolution are under development and will hopefully be available in the future. However, digital imag ing is already being used in parallel to high resolution film in breast imaging and breast biopsy systems.

Computed Tomography (CT)

CT imaging (also called CAT scanning for Computed Axial Tomography) was invented in 1972 by Godfrey Hounsfield in England. Hounsfield used gamma rays (and later x-rays) and a detector mounted on a special rotating frame together with a digital compute r to create detailed cross sectional images of objects. Hounsfield's original CT scan took hours to acquire a single slice of image data and more than 24 hours to reconstruct this data into a single image. Today's state-of-the-art CT systems can acquire a single image in less than a second and reconstruct the image instantly.

The invention of CT was made possible by the digital computer. The basic algorithms involved in CT image reconstruction are based on theories proposed by the scientist Radon in the late 1700's. To honor his remarkable discovery, Hounsfield was awarde d the Nobel Prize and was granted Knighthood by the Royal Family of England.

An original head-only CT scanner from 1974

Magnetic Resonance (MR)

MR principals were initially investigated in the 1950s showing that different materials resonated at different magnetic field strengths. Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging (also know as MRI) was initially researched in the early 1970s and the first MR im aging prototypes were tested on clinical patients in 1980. MR imaging was cleared for commercial, clinical availability by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1984 and its use throughout the U.S. has spread rapidly since.

Countless scientists have been involved in the innovation of magnetic resonance. The development of MR imaging is attributed to Paul Lauterbur and scientists at Thorn-EMI Laboratories, England, and Nottingham University, England.

http://imaginis.com/faq/history.asp

About DiagnosisPro

Introduction

DiagnosisPro 6.0 is the most comprehensive, reliable and easy-to-use diagnostic tool available today. With this program's powerful search engine, healthcare professionals can quickly generate a differential diagnosis from practically anywhere: in the office, at home, at the hospital, or even while on the run with the help of handheld devices like Pocket PCs.

By simply entering one or more findings or conditions, DiagnosisPro instantly generates a hierarchical list of diagnoses from its database of over 11,000 diseases, 30,000 findings, and 300,000 relationships. To explore a medical diagnosis further, you can utilize the valuable Disease Review and Disease Comparison features of DiagnosisPro.


Multiple Platforms Available

DiagnosisPro can easily be installed on multiple platforms:

* On Windows (desktops and laptops)
* On Pocket PC handheld devices
* Online from any computer with an Internet connection
* On a Palm (currently under development)

All diagnostic results can be saved, printed, or E-mailed to a colleague. Utilizing Web Services, the program can be integrated with medical applications such as electronic medical records (EMRs) as well as billing and charting software.


The Best Tool for a Busy Physician

DiagnosisPro is not intended to make the final diagnosis for a medical practitioner; nothing can replace a physician's expertise and experience. However, a medical doctor is expected to not only know the answers to every medical situation learned way back in medical school, but also to be aware of the most recent developments and advancements.

DiagnosisPro is simply a powerful reference tool that was designed to quickly remind busy medical practitioners of all of the possibilities and conditions which they might have forgotten or overlooked -- especially in complicated or rare cases that fall outside of their specialties.

You can rely on DiagnosisPro because its data is updated regularly. Its database has been compiled by reputable physicians over the past 30 years from more than 90 prestigious medical resources, including Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine, Stein Internal Medicine, Cecil Textbook of Medicine, Oxford Textbook of Medicine, The Merck Manual, The New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, The Lancet, and many more.

Powerful, Fast and Easy to Use

You do not have to be a computer whiz to use DiagnosisPro. It requires no previous computer experience. The program is very intuitive and it's easy to generate the information you need at your fingertips.

The three valuable cornerstones in this program are:

* Generating a Differential Diagnosis
* A detailed Disease Review in outline format
* A side-by-side Disease Comparison of any two diseases

To generate a search for a Differential Diagnosis, you enter one or more findings such as signs, symptoms, lab values, patient's characteristics, the patient's occupation if a condition could be attributable to a job, travel location for regional diseases, or X-ray and EKG results. DiagnosisPro then provides a list of differential diagnoses. You can narrow down the list of diagnoses or expand it depending on the findings you enter.

When you choose a diagnosis, you may then evaluate a Disease Review in a detailed outline format. Each Disease Review includes clinical presentations, demographic information, abnormal lab values, pathophysiology, rule-outs, complications, treatments and much more. DiagnosisPro conveniently provides ICD-9 and CPT codes from its database of over 15,000 codes.

You can save the Disease Review of a case with the click of a button for future reference or pending additional test results. You have the option to type in additional information or comments that you want included in the "case file" for a particular patient. You may also print-out the Disease Review at any time or E-mail it to a colleague (it will arrive as an attachment).

DiagnosisPro 6.0 also includes a Disease Comparison feature -- a side-by-side comparison of the data for two conditions so you can easily discern the similarities and differences. You can choose to see all of the data pertaining to the two diseases next to each other, or you can choose to see only the similarities of the two diseases or only the differences.

When you select a particular disease or condition, we provide hot links for easy access to abstracts and other research materials at important medical reference websites with the search-and-results pertaining going directly to the disease you selected. These websites are: PubMed (with citations from MEDLINE and additional life science journals), Harrison's Online, e-Medicine, National Guideline Clearinghouse, as well as Google.

The Ultimate Differential Diagnosing Tool

DiagnosisPro is designed to make your practice safer, enhance the quality of care, reduce misdiagnosis and billing errors, and save time -- especially in diagnosing complicated cases. It is the ultimate differential diagnosis tool for a busy physician.



http://www.diagnosispro.com/introduction/DiagnosisPro.html

What Is Diagnosis

"Diagnosis" is a fancy name given to the process of identifying diseases. It is a Greek name. Break it down; "dia" means "by" and "gnosis" means "knowledge". How do I diagnose my illness? You don't! Diagnosis is for doctors and physicians only. They determine your disease by the signs and symptoms that it gives you.

If it is unclear by symptoms as to what you are sick with, you will consult a physician. A physician will take their best guesses as to your problems name, and medically test you for it. After your diagnosis is complete through blood test, medical imaging, saliva samples, biopsy, electrocardiogram, stool samples, or urine tests, the physician will decide which is the best way to treat you.

A Diagnosis is sometimes made by process of elimination. This is called a "differential diagnosis". Through investigation of symptoms and consultations with other doctors or physicians, they are able to tell what you DO NOT have, thus leaving them with your most likely disease.

In the 1900's, a man named William Osler began to "practice" medicine. He used the principles of diagnosis and treatment to reduce suffering and increase life expectancy. Osler decided that to practice medicine you must learn to identify diseases, understand where they come from and how they work, and then decide which is the best way to cure them. This is known today as "The Oslerian Ideal". And we have this man to thank for medicine practice today. I suppose, howeverHealth Fitness Articles, we could also thank him for waiting rooms...

Source: Free Articles from ArticlesFactory.com

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Feel free to reprint this article as long as you keep the article, this caption and author biography in tact with all hyperlinks.Tyler Brooker is the owner and operator of The Diagnosis site - http://www.diagnosisspot.com, which is the best site on the internet for all Diagnosis related information.

What to expect from your doctor when you are diagnosed with hypertension.

Dr. Crawford describes the diagnosis of hypertension (high blood pressure) and the tests that you should expect when you are diagnosed with the condition. He also summarizes the treament of hypertension which consists of lifestyle modifications as well as appropraite medication.

Hypertension (high blood pressure) affects about 50 million individuals in the United States. Of these, about 70% are aware of their diagnosis, but only about a half of those are receiving treatment and only 25% are under control using 140/90 as the cutoff guideline. A new category has been designated as “pre-hypertension” and that is when the blood pressure is 120-139 systolic over a diastolic of 80-89.

Blood pressure readings vary greatly in individuals depending on the time of day, where the patient is at when they get it checked, how soon they have eaten, smoked, or even drank a cup of coffee. A diagnosis of hypertension should not be based on one reading unless that reading is extremely high and/or there is evidence of end organ damage such as renal (kidney) or heart involvement. The diagnosis of hypertension should be made only after two or more readings on two or more office visits.

The frightening thing about hypertension is that it usually does not cause any symptoms. Unless you are getting your blood pressure regularly checked, you could be walking around for years with elevated blood pressure and not know it. That is why it is referred to as the silent killer.

If you are being diagnosed with hypertension for the first time, there are certain tests that your doctor should order. Blood tests including a complete blood count, fasting lipids (cholesterol), fasting blood sugar, renal (kidney) functions, liver functions, and electrolytes (potassium, sodium levels), along with a urinalysis should be checked. You should also have a chest xray to check for enlargement of your heart which can occur over time with hypertension, and an electrocardiogram to check for any cardiac (heart) abnormalities.

Treatment of hypertension is multi-faceted. Lifestyle modification should include smoking cessation, daily exercise implementation, dietary changes, alcohol moderation, and sodium restriction. One should consume a diet with plenty of vegetables, fruit, and low dietary fat. Exercise should consist of daily brisk exercise such as walking at least 30 minutes per day most days of the week. A 10% weight loss can make a significant difference in blood pressure readings. Alcohol consumption should be limited to no more than two drinks per day (24 oz. of beer, 10 ounces of wine, or 3 oz. of “hard” liquor such as gin, whiskey, or vodka). You should also reduce salt intake to no more than 2.4 grams of sodium per day. I tell my patients not to add any salt to any foods and restrict high sodium items.

If your blood pressure is not extremely elevated, say in the 145/95 range, and you are determined to make substantial lifestyle changes, then perhaps you can bring your blood pressure down to normal range with these measures. I always give my patients in these situations the option to try lifestyle modifications first if they wish as long as their blood pressure is not seriously high. Most patients, however, end up having to take a medication for their hypertension.

There are a wide variety of medications available that we can prescribe and the majority of patients require more than one type of medication to reach a desired blood pressure goal. Discuss with your physician the side effects of each and what would be the most suitable medication for you. Medications have come a long way for treating blood pressure in the past twenty years and the side effect profiles are much more favorable than they used to be overall. I have found that a good portion of my patients have an aversion to taking a pill everyday for the rest of their lives. But what I tell them is that they ought to look at it like a vitamin, or better yet, an insurance policy. If it prevents you from having a heart attack or stroke and from either premature death or perhaps becoming confined to a wheel chair and not being able to take care of yourself, then taking a daily pill or two should not even be an issue.

Don’t be afraid to talk to your doctor about treatment and asking about the tests I have discussed. Most importantly, please get into your physician at least once a year to get your blood pressure takenFree Reprint Articles, and more often if it has been on the high end of normal.

Source: Free Articles from ArticlesFactory.com

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr. Ted Crawford is a family practice physican in Tucson, Arizona and has a website devoted to helping patients find reliable health information and products. His article "What to expect from your doctor when you are diagnosed with hypertension" can also be found at http://www.babyboomersdoc.com

Obesity an increasing obstacle to medical diagnosis

Oak Brook, Ill. -- The increase of obesity in the United States doubled the number of inconclusive diagnostic imaging exams over a 15-year period, according to a study featured in the August issue of Radiology.

Researchers assessed all radiology exams performed at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) between 1989 and 2003 to determine the effects of obesity on imaging quality and diagnosis.

In an effort to quantify how obesity affects diagnostic imaging quality, Dr. Uppot and colleagues analyzed radiology records from a 15-year span at MGH. They searched for incomplete exams that carried the label "limited by body habitus," meaning limited in quality due to patient size.

"While 0.10 percent of inconclusive exams were due to patient size in 1989, by 2003 the number had jumped to 0.19 percent, despite advances in imaging technology," said Raul N. Uppot, M.D., lead author and staff radiologist at MGH. "Americans need to know that obesity can hinder their medical care when they enter a hospital."

An estimated 66 percent of adults in the United States are overweight, obese or morbidly obese, according to the Department of Health and Human Services. Additionally, more than 12.5 million American children and adolescents are overweight. Hospitals are feeling the strain--they now require larger wheelchairs and beds. Additionally, standard operating tables and imaging equipment are not suited for obese patients.

By 2003, the modality that yielded the most difficulties in rendering a diagnosis was abdominal ultrasound (1.90 percent), followed by chest x-rays (0.18 percent), abdominal computed tomography (CT), abdominal x-rays, chest CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (all anatomic regions included).

CT and MRI can be problematic because of weight limitations of the imaging table and the size of the opening on the imager (patients are inserted through a small "hole in the doughnut"). Standard CT tables can accommodate patients weighing up to 450 pounds, and MRI machines can typically obtain diagnostic-quality images in patients weighing up to 350 pounds.

For exams that require radiation exposure, such as x-rays and CT, the power can be increased on standard machines in an attempt to acquire a higher-quality image. However, this leads to an undesirable increase in radiation dose.

Incomplete examinations related to obesity can lead to serious consequences for the patient, as in the case of misdiagnosis or failure to be able to assign a diagnosis at all.

There can also be economic ramifications. Further testing might be required in the event of an inconclusive exam, as well as increased hospitalization time.

Obesity also increases stress on the imaging systems, due to increased power output and more rapid burnout (as in the case of x-ray tubes).

Dr. Uppot believes that the prevailing lifestyle in the United States and other industrialized nations that facilitates a poor diet and lack of exercise has led to our current obesity crisis.

"In the short term, the medical community must accommodate these patients by investing in technology to help them," Dr. Uppot explained. "In the long term, this country must make cultural shifts that promote more exercise and a healthier diet."




http://chc.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/6/4/245

Medical Diagnosis and Treatment of Alcoholism

The tragic societal losses caused by alcohol affect the work of all physicians. To what extent does this book meet the formidable challenge of enhancing the medical care system's responses?

Babor's chapter succinctly and readably presents for the generalist the complex controversies regarding definitions and diagnosis of alcoholism. The delightful geriatric vignettes in Ofman's chapter vividly describe the pathos and show how coordination of services produces dramatic outcomes, even with the cognitively impaired elderly. Unfortunately, the text immediately preceding these stories iterates the lack of data on this admittedly understudied group.

Lewis writes dynamically about treatment. He focuses on primary care and presents behavioral interventions and valuable "how-to" clinical notes, backed by rationale and data. Schuckit's chapter features academic and dry writing that outlines well the elements and principles of treatment. However, some unsubstantiated treatment suggestions are debatable; for example, he theorizes that generalists might treat patients in medical or psychiatric units without groups or counselors.

Addiction specialists will appreciate the up-to-date reviews of the medical aspects of alcoholism, such as the encyclopedic endocrine chapters, which integrate animal and bench research with clinical data and interpret them as well. The book also includes fascinating current findings on molecular mechanisms of tolerance, pharmacokinetics, and neurotransmitters, but the presentations lack a consistent clinical orientation. The otherwise fine, extensive neurologic chapter is marred by reliance on "classic" data. The editors redress the field's male bias in four of the 17 chapters; editor Mello's chapter on the female neuroendocrine system is a well-organized goldmine, with strong clinical relevance and a good summary.

In place of the abundant duplications in the book (for example, definitions, listings of medical complications, and withdrawal treatment), I would have welcomed chapters on psychiatric issues or the "dual diagnosis" patient, the "disease"/abstinence versus controlled drinking controversy, or family issues as encountered by physicians.

Mendelson and Mello take a more academic, less clinical orientation than their title suggests. The abilities of researchers who need a current review, or addictionists who wish in-depth reading are more enhanced than generalists' skills. Primary care physicians might prefer a chapter in a medicine textbook, or a short primary care text on alcoholism; excellent editions of these have been recently published.




http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/119/5/443-a

Medical Diagnosis

I decided to start this, to inform those who may experience one day a medical situation. In this day and age, one has a vast amount of information right at their finger tips. All that is required to spend the time and do the research. Never take the first persons opinion, or in my case keep searching for the truth. What has led me to this point, was having a motorcycle accident on 7-7-76 in Hays, KS. Having two arthroscopic surgeries on my right knee one on 12-29-2003 and the other one 8-19-2005.

Now, here is what I would like to know. How can three [3] doctors look at MRI’s, the narrative written about the MRI‘s, the x-rays taken, the narrative written by the doctor who preformed the last surgery and the actual pictures taken inside my knee, can all come to the same conclusion? That being the only thing wrong is my knee cap. Which is out of alignment and that the right half of it is bone on bone. There is about 1/16 of an inch clearance, when the normal clearance is ½ to 5/8 of an inch. The left half of the right knee cap has about 3/8 of an inch clearance if that.

I basically have very, very little meniscal cartilage and articular cartilage left in the knee area. Then on top of this I have arthritis, which is on the very top of the tibia [shin bone]. How’s does it come to be, that three [3] of these doctors never said any thing about having arthritis or factoring in the cartilage. Plus the fact each one said that I was to young to have a total knee replacement, but that the only thing I needed was a knee cap replacement, but wouldn‘t do it for various reasons. Hmm, on Nov 13th I will be 53.

On Tue the 17th, I had finally found someone who for 25 minutes explained to me in great detail about my condition and what was wrong. He showed me in the x-ray, MRI and the pictures that were taken last year. Then explained what the narratives said. I was asked if I had a computer, I said yes. Then he said, go into a medical dictionary and look up these terms used in these narratives, pointed to what I need to look up. He also said, that don’t take his word 100 percent go look for yourself. He said that it was obvious that I had done some research into this subject and that if I did this on my own, that I would feel more comfortable in knowing the facts and understanding them better. First time that I ever had a doctor explain to me in detail on what was wrong, plus telling me to look up the terms used.

Well, I have just done that, looked for myself. The man was telling me like it was, no more, no less, just the plain simple truth of the facts. What I am going to do? Hard to say, but I do know this, I will not be off from work 4 to 6 weeks like I was told. I told them that I can sit and work just as well as I can at home. Only difference is that at work I am being productive and making money. Being at home, I am making not any money and not being productive. Besides, I have a sister who at the age of 60 had hers done on a Monday and went back to work at the office the following Monday. She turned 70 this last April. If she can do it at the age of 60, then I can at 53.

I have been persistent in searching out the true facts. I am lets say very PO’d, in the fact that the first three [3] doctors didn’t tell the whole story. I do know this, if I have this done, I will have it in writing that I can go back to work after a week of being off. I do know that the day of the surgery, the day after you kept in the hospital. Then on the third usually discharged in the afternoon. So, bottom line, at this point in time I have no idea if I will have a total knee replacement done or not. That depends on this doctor and the time off issue.

Bottom line, just keep searching for the truth until you have found it!!



http://www.saljournal.com/blogs/?p=1444

Medical Diagnosis Of Erectile Dysfunction

There are no formal tests to diagnose erectile dysfunction. Some blood tests are generally done to exclude underlying disease, such as diabetes, hypogonadism and prolactinoma.

A useful and simple way to distinguish between physiological and psychological impotence is to determine whether the patient ever has an erection. If never, the problem is likely to be physiological; if sometimes (however rarely), it is more likely to be psychological.

Duplex ultrasound is used to evaluate blood flow, venous leak, signs of atherosclerosis, and scarring or calcification of erectile tissue. Injecting prostaglandin, a hormone-like stimulator produced in the body, induces erection. Ultrasound is then used to see vascular dilation and measure penile blood pressure. Measurements are compared to those taken when the penis is flaccid.

The diagnosis of male impotence is fairly easy. Determining why ED is occurring, on the other hand, can be more difficult. To accurately identify why a patient is suffering from ED, a medical professional will usually conduct a comprehensive patient interview, followed by a physical examination, and possibly laboratory testing.

The interview may include the following types of questions:
Questions relating to the specific erectile complaint
Questions relating to medical factors that could be contributing to ED
Questions relating to psychosocial factors that could be contributing to ED
Questions relating to prior evaluation or treatment

Tests such as the bulbocavernosus reflex test are used to determine if there is sufficient nerve sensation in the penis. The physician squeezes the glans of the penis, which immediately causes the anus to contract if nerve function is normal. A physician measures the latency between squeeze and contraction by observing the anal sphincter or by feeling it with a gloved finger inserted past the anus. Specific nerve tests are used in patients with suspected nerve damage as a result of diabetes or nerve disease.

Nocturnal penile tumescence (NPT) is normal for a man to have five to six erections during sleep, especially during rapid eye movement (REM). Their absence may indicate a problem with nerve function or blood supply in the penis. There are two methods for measuring changes in penile rigidity and circumference during nocturnal erection: snap gauge and strain gauge.

Penile biothesiometry test uses electromagnetic vibration to evaluate sensitivity and nerve function in the glans and shaft of the penis. A decreased perception of vibration may indicate nerve damage in the pelvic area, which can lead to impotence.

Penile erection is managed by two different mechanisms. The first one is the reflex erection, which is achieved by directly touching the penile shaft. The second is the psychogenic erection, which is achieved by erotic stimuli. The former uses the peripheral nerves and the lower parts of the spinal cord, whereas the latter uses the limbic system of the brain. In both conditions an intact neural system is required for a successful and complete erection. Stimulation of penile shaft by the nervous system leads to the secretion of nitric oxide (NO), which causes the relaxation of smooth muscles of corpora cavernosa (the main erectile tissue of penis), and subsequently penile erection.

Additionally, adequate levels of testosterone (produced by the testes) and an intact pituitary gland are required for the development of a healthy male erectile system. As can be understood from the mechanisms of a normal erection, impotence may develop due to hormonal deficiency, disorders of the neural system, lack of adequate penile blood supply or psychological problems. Restriction of blood flow can arise from impaired endothelial function due to the usual causes associated with coronary artery disease, but can also include causation by prolonged exposure to bright light or chronic exposure to high noise levels.

A few causes of impotence may be iatrogenic. Various antihypertensive (medications intended to control high blood pressure) and some drugs that modify central nervous system response may inhibit erection by denying blood supply or by altering nerve activity. Antidepressants, especially SSRIs, can cause impotence as a side effect. Surgical intervention for a number of different conditions may remove anatomical structures necessary to erection, damage nerves, or impair blood supply. Some studies have shown that male circumcision may result in an increased risk of impotence, while others have found no such effect and another found the opposite.

Excessive alcohol use has long been recognized as one cause of impotence, leading to the euphemism "brewer's droop"; Shakespeare made light of this phenomenon in Macbeth.

A study in 2002 found that ED can also be associated with bicycling. The number of hours on a bike and/or the pressure on the penis from the saddle of an upright bicycle is directly related to erectile dysfunction.

Article Source: http://add-articles.com

Pacific Herbals in a manufacturer and distributor of fast acting all natural male enhancement supplements. Visit Vicerex Labs

Your Mesothelioma Diagnosis: What’s Next?

In order to cope with a diagnosis of Mesothelioma, it is crucial to know three important facts about this disease. First, one needs to know what Mesothelioma is. Second, it is imperative to know what causes this deadly cancer. Lastly, one must know as much as possible about the three forms of Mesothelioma. They are Pleural Mesothelioma, Peritoneal Mesothelioma and Pericardial Mesothelioma.

Mesothelioma is a rare cancer that is attributed to repeated exposure to asbestos. Individuals most susceptible for developing Mesothelioma are those who work in shipyards, asbestos mines, manufacture asbestos products, and those employed in the heating and construction trades. Mesothelioma does not usually become evident until 20 to 60 years after exposure to asbestos.

Mesothelioma gets its name from the word mesothelium. The mesothelium is the
protective lining that covers and helps to protect most of the body's internal
organs. This form of cancer invades the mesothelium. Pleural Mesothelioma, Peritoneal Mesothelioma and Pericardial Mesothelioma are aggressive forms of cancer that attack the protective lining of the lungs, abdomen and heart, respectively.

Pleural Mesothelioma is the most prevalent form of Mesothelioma. It presents itself in the Pleura, or lining of the inside of the chest that house the lungs. When asbestos is mined, manufactured or disturbed, asbestos particles escape into the air. These particles are easily inhaled or swallowed. Over an extended period of time, these inhaled and ingested asbestos particles may eventually cause normal cells in the Pleura to become abnormal, causing Pleural Mesothelioma.

Peritoneal Mesothelioma is a more rare form of Mesothelioma. This type of cancer
originates in the Peritoneum or the membranous lining of the abdomen that
encloses the stomach, intestines, liver, spleen, and pancreas. Peritoneal
Mesothelioma accounts for less than a quarter of all Mesothelioma cases.

Pericardial Mesothelioma is a cancer invades the Pericardium, or the membrane that surrounds the heart. This condition causes severe heart problems, and most people who contract this asbestos-related cancer eventually die from heart failure.

The Pleura is thought to be most susceptible to Mesothelioma. Due to this membrane surrounding the lungs it is in direct contact with asbestos fibers when inhaled. This would explain why Pleural Mesothelioma is the most common form of this deadly cancer.

It has been suggested that when asbestos-containing fibers are ingested or inhaled they can be picked up by the lymph nodes and spread to other parts of the body. This may account for cases of Peritoneal Mesothelioma and Pericardial Mesothelioma.

Chronic exposure to asbestos, after a latency period of approximately 20 to 60 years, can cause Mesothelioma. If you have been diagnosed with Mesothelioma it is imperative to know what it is, what causes it and its three major forms; Pleural Mesothelioma, Peritoneal Mesothelioma and Pericardial Mesothelioma. Once you know what form of this asbestos related cancer you are up against it will aid you in seeking appropriate treatment options.

In addition to seeking aggressive medical treatment, you need to find out the cause of your asbestos-related cancer. Since all three forms are caused by contact with asbestos, think back on all the jobs you've had, and where you were exposed to asbestos. Next, seek the advice of an attorney who is familiar with litigating Mesothelioma lawsuits. Your attorney will help you in documenting your exposure to asbestos even if it occurred many years ago, and also documenting the physical and emotional damage that your diagnosis of Pleural Mesothelioma, Peritoneal Mesothelioma or Pericardial Mesothelioma has caused for you.

About the Author

Nick Johnson serves as lead counsel with Johnson Law Group, a prominent personal injury law firm with principal offices located in Houston, Texas. Johnson specializes in representing plaintiffs with injury cases involving mesothelioma, nursing home abuse, medical malpractice and defective drugs. Contact Nick Johnson at 1-888-311-5522 or visit http://www.johnsonlawgroup.com for a free case evaluation.



http://www.give-me-articles.com/health/your-mesothelioma-diagnosis-whats-next.html