Posts by Jacob Fox6

mellowraven32 said:From what I can tell, that DKC was just kicked out of the analyzer automatically, which means it’s basically a magnet for errors and doesn't actually mean anything useful at all... The white blood cell count and sedimentation rate are slightly elevated, but honestly, it's nothing to worry about and definitely isn't a reason to hold off on surgery...

I felt the exact same way when I wrote that... honestly, I just couldn't see any reason to push things back at all... luckily, everything worked out perfectly in the end... 🙂

northernviper12 said:Thanks, I'm definitely gonna need it. Just gotta hang on for another 8.5 hours until I'm officially checked into the hospital🙏
(I actually made it through in the end)

I guess I just wanted to cover my bases in case anything went sideways... 🙂

Sending all the good vibes your way... 🙂

northernviper12 said:Jacob Fox6:
I did some digging and realized this "CRP" test wasn't actually on the list (at least not under that specific name), but my aunts back at the lab suggested I get it since it’s supposedly a much more "precise indicator" than just checking "sedimentation levels," though they don't run it there, so I ended up going to a private clinic instead. They even took a look at my old files to compare them with the new ones and pointed me in the right direction for the rest of my tests. It was interesting because while the private clinic staff were nice, they felt a bit "coldly professional," whereas the ladies at the lab were way more friendly... plus, everything at the private place is super modern and sleek, and the organization is just top-notch since they handle so much more volume and have way more cash 😁...
I wasn't looking for any definitive answers, just some insight or a little clarification on what the results meant (since I know asking for a real diagnosis is totally unrealistic), and I really appreciate you giving me exactly that! 👍👍👍
Considering how much I didn't know over the weekend (from Friday afternoon through Monday morning—basically when everything was closed anyway), every single thing you said helped me out mentally just as much as it did technically... 👍👍👍

Thanks. 🙂

Honestly, thinking about it later, I feel like in trying to answer your question, I might have gone a bit too deep when I probably shouldn't have, seeing as I'm just a student and not a doctor... so I'm really glad my response didn't cause any trouble. 🙂

Wishing you nothing but the best... 🙂

northernviper12 said:Bummer, looks like the anesthesiologist isn't really on the same page as you... 🤷
Popped in to see my doctor today and her diagnosis was...I'm not seeing any clinical signs of an infarct here, so maybe we should just run those labs again, like the CBC, coagulation profile, and CRP...So, I finally knocked out everything on my to-do list this afternoon, but man, things still feel just a little bit off... plus some of these numbers are looking way higher than they should be...

Just saw my red blood cell count hit 6.18... definitely feels like things are moving a bit fast lately...
Just saw my white blood cell count hit 11.5... honestly feeling pretty good though, so I'm just riding that wave and hoping for the best...

So my CRP came back at 7.45 when the normal range is basically up to 5.00, and since it wasn't even showing up on my first set of labs, I was just wondering what exactly that's supposed to be telling us...

Since I didn't pass my checkup today, there's no way I'm getting a clean bill of health tomorrow with these even worse results, so my appointment this Wednesday is probably gonna fall through... 😠
Since I'm stuck waiting three whole months, it looks like my next one won't happen until August unless I can track down some super talented surgeon who doesn't even need an anesthesiologist to get the job done... 😂
anyone actually doing that kind of thing at a local dive bar... 🤣]

Look, you clearly didn't post the full lab results... or maybe you just weren't sure what they actually meant, I can't really tell... but honestly, seeing some elevated white blood cells or red blood cells on its own shouldn't be enough to put a surgery on hold... though that’s just my take based on the little bit of data you actually shared here. You can't just drop a few numbers on a forum and expect a definitive answer from us when there are actual specialists who know your whole medical history... and besides, your anesthesiologist and the rest of the surgical team at the hospital definitely have a much better handle on your situation since they're focused on minimizing any risk to you. If they decided to postpone, then there's probably a good reason for it, and there's really no point in pushing for the procedure if the doctors feel like you aren't quite ready yet...

Edward Chase5 said:Why did my hematologist order these tests for me?

My white blood cell count is a bit high at 11.8, which totally made me spiral thinking about leukemia... My hematologist told me there's a 99% chance I'm fine, but since I was clearly stressing out, she sent me for more testing just to put my mind at ease... Does that actually make sense?

Look, I gotta be real with you, I honestly feel like posting something like this on a public forum isn't really the move because we're talking about something super sensitive and incredibly specialized...

Plus, like I mentioned before, I'm just a college student and I definitely don't have the training to break down subspecialty lab results... High white blood cell counts don't automatically mean leukemia—that's just one of those common misconceptions patients have where they think it's always bad news, but that's totally not true... I honestly have no clue what specific reasons your doctor had for ordering those follow-ups...🤷

But yeah, this is strictly hematology territory that only a specialist can truly read... I've been digging through my textbooks trying to help out as much as I can, but I can't give you any guarantees on what these numbers mean because my medical knowledge isn't even close to being on that level—honestly, I feel like I might have overstepped by even replying since I'm just not qualified for this...

The only answer I could offer is the one I gave you, because beyond that, I'm stuck... I'm not a hematologist (which takes like seven extra years of school compared to where I am now)... Your hematologist is going to give you the only real, precise answer based on your actual labs, and I'm seriously crossing my fingers that everything comes back great for you... 🙂

I'm sorry, but I really just don't have the expertise to interpret subspecialty findings... 🙂

bluehawk37 said:A pharmacist's job description includes giving advice; if they don't do that, it's their own fault.
Yet, nobody blames them.

Kindness is always extended to a kind patient. But there is nothing in the manual
stating I have to kiss the feet of a patient who is arrogant or rude.
As my namesake colleague would put it: arrogance must be earned. 😁

Look, House—I'm honestly getting tired of typing out how much I agree with you...😁

What you said is spot on... 👍

Kate Collins67 said:Look, I expect a salary that actually reflects my level of education, but as for a medal? You can have it, or give it to someone else if they want it.
In other fields, people don't undergo the same kind of mandatory, continuous specialization required in medicine—and I'm not even talking about the extra certifications, because those exist everywhere, not just in the medical field.
Was your college degree paid for by the government or out of your own pocket? Since specialization is essentially just an extension of medical school—and you literally cannot practice without it in any reasonable timeframe (actually, in most cases, you can't even start without it)—who exactly is supposed to foot the bill? Me? Or the government/company I work for?

Exactly!
That’s honestly what I was getting at when I brought this up a few pages back... It's pretty rare to find a profession where you spend so many years constantly studying, mastering new techniques, and keeping up with the latest research like doctors do, so they definitely deserve the financial reward for it—which is just a fancy way of saying a high salary...

From what I’ve gathered so far, they’re moving toward making specialization mandatory, if they haven't already decided... This even applies to those "general practitioners" who are required to specialize in family medicine, so soon enough, they won't even be called general practitioners anymore because everyone will officially be a specialist in family medicine... I feel like the term "general practitioner" is basically becoming obsolete on paper, and if it still exists, it probably won't in a few years...

And unfortunately, up until now, the standard has mostly been paying for those specializations out of your own damn pocket...

jadesailor14 said:Are you having trouble reading? 😁
I already mentioned that it's a job just like any other!
I make sure to book my appointments properly, wait patiently in the lobby, and when I'm called in, I keep things short and sweet so I don't waste anyone's time (I actually write down bullet points so I don't forget anything or ramble too much 😁). All I expect is a solid check-up and some professional advice on what steps to take next
. I truly couldn't care less if that doctor had a rough morning, what their salary is, or what kind of drama they have going on at home... none of that matters to me
. I just want a straightforward, professional conversation that results in a solution
. And no, I'm definitely not volunteering for an AIDS test 😬
.
From my own experience running around various hospitals, I've noticed a bit of a pattern
. Most of the time, my issues were actually with staff members who weren't quite hitting the mark
. The rudest ones were usually the junior doctors and nurses
. On the flip side, the ones who have built successful careers and actually earned their positions have always been totally great
.

bluehawk37, love the username! Do you feel like you live up to it with your skills and hard work?
Because that's exactly the kind of doctor I need right now! 🤣

It's not a reading problem, because I wasn't even talking to you... I was just agreeing with what bluehawk37 wrote and adding my own thoughts which had absolutely nothing to do with you...

You totally misread me because I was building on the part where bluehawk37 was addressing you, so it looked like I was disagreeing with you, but that wasn't it at all...🙂

northernviper12 said:Thanks for getting back to me!
These are just my pre-op tests (bloodwork, urine, EKG, X-ray) for my upcoming knee surgery that I have to hand over to the anesthesiologist.
Regarding the red blood cells, it shows this:

RBC 5.51 (4.34-5.72)

Which seems to be right within those "normal" ranges.
Now I'm just sitting here wondering if I should be stressing more about my knee or my blood counts... 🙄
Is there any chance these results could cause the anesthesiologist to pull the plug on the surgery? (I've been waiting three months for this)
Thanks again!

🙂

Well... look, I'm definitely not an anesthesiologist, but I really doubt they'd push back a surgery because of numbers like those... 🙂

Honestly, now that you mentioned the knee, everything makes way more sense... 🙂your bloodwork is likely just reacting to the issues with your knee, and you seriously shouldn't sweat it since everything is basically sitting right on the edge of the normal range without showing anything actually alarming... 🙂

If I were in your shoes, I wouldn't be worrying one bit, that's all I can say... 🙂
And I'm crossing my fingers that everything goes perfectly with your surgery. 🙂

Edward Chase5 said:Sample Prep: Mononuclear cell isolation
Panel : CLL/NHL

Description:
The cytogram shows a uniform population of cells based on size and granularity within the lymphocyte gate. Immunophenotyping revealed the following markers:

B-cell:
Kappa chains 4%
lambda chains 3%
CD19 8%
cd20 9%
CD22 9%
T-cell:
cd3 60%
cd4 35%
cd8 24%
cd5 58%
Other markers:
cd16+56 25%
cd10 0 %

CONCLUSION:
Immunophenotyping of the peripheral blood sample identified a homogeneous lymphocyte population (26%). Findings include T-cells at 60% (comprising 35% helper and 24% cytotoxic), approximately 9% B-cells, and about 25% NK cells.

Can someone give me a simple explanation? There aren't any reference values listed on the report, so I have no idea what these numbers actually mean or if they point to a specific disease... THANKS

It’s looking like the same situation again... honestly, this is really a question for a hematologist, and since that’s such a super niche specialty, it’s basically impossible to answer unless you’re an expert in the field. I’ll try to weigh in based on what I've picked up from my textbooks, though...

From what I can tell, it looks like this test was ordered to figure out which type of Non-Hodgkin lymphoma we're dealing with, especially given the suspicion of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL). In my opinion, those CD8 levels (cytotoxic lymphocytes) seem way too high, and the NK cell count does too...

With Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL), you typically see B-cells expressing CD19, CD20, and CD23 (or sometimes CD22), along with CD5 expression—which is weird because CD5 is normally found on T-cells, but in CLL, it shows up on the B-cells...

Since your results show those specific B-cell markers (CD 19, 20, and 22), it seems like this could actually be used to confirm a diagnosis of CLL...

The only thing tripping me up is the T-cell data... but man, it’s so hard to say for sure without knowing why the test was even requested in the first place, because that clinical context is everything when you're trying to make sense of these numbers. I'm definitely not a hematologist or an internist, just an enthusiastic student over here, so I'm basically just grasping at straws and trying to guess what might be going on...

Please feel free to jump in and correct me or add anything else, since I was definitely checking a few books to put this together...

northernviper12 said:The title is just how the blood work results are labeled.

Values outside the normal range:
White Blood Cell Count 10.9H (3.4-9.7)
Neutrophils 6.59H (2.06-6.49)
Eosinophils 0.60H (0.00-0.43)
Neutrophil percentage 60% (44-72)
ESR 22H (2-13)
Fibrinogen 4.3H (1.8-3.5)

Can someone explain what this means?
Thanks in advance!

Oh man... you really need a hematologist for an interpretation like this, and those guys are a whole different level beyond regular internal medicine specialists...

Let me try to share what I know from my own perspective, keeping in mind that I’m just a student and definitely not a hematologist, so please feel free to jump in if I missed anything...

Those reference ranges are more like general guidelines... and things being slightly out of bounds doesn't always mean it's some huge drama...

But looking at your numbers, all the granulocytes are elevated... which might suggest there's something messing with your hematopoiesis due to some underlying factor... I wouldn't go jumping to conclusions about leukemia or lymphoma, but it's pretty clear something is throwing your blood production off balance... do you happen to have the rest of your CBC handy so we can see how your red blood cells look?

And honestly, it would be a ton easier to help if you could mention why your doctor even ordered these tests in the first place, rather than just posting the raw data...🙂

bluehawk37 said:Brandon Newman95 - It’s not incomprehensible to me. I always demand a detailed medical history and full clinical background. I don't play games. But once they start projecting their own issues onto me and drifting away from the actual problem, then we have an issue.
I work as a physician for the Maltese humanitarian organization. I move around frequently. I go wherever a doctor is needed. I don't hold a permanent position. I doubt we've met, but it doesn't matter.

jadesailor14 - I don't unload my frustrations on patients, so where are you getting that from? Sure, I raise my voice and I can be arrogant, but that lady at Chase Bank knows how to be, and so does the officer at the police station. Still, you get patients who
are experts at shifting the blame onto the doctor, but I put up with them because they're ridiculous.

Angela Wright - Generally speaking, I don't like oncologists or their literature. I have nothing against them personally, and I know it's a massive shock for anyone involved, and I empathize, but I avoid them. I would never do that job, regardless of the money.
Knowing that most of your patients are going to die and having to deal with that every single day is horrific. Respect to those people. I believe it would be a massive shock for anyone.

You definitely have a pretty wild job dynamic...🙂
I'd love to do something like that once I graduate... 🙂

I am totally with you on what you said, jadesailor14. I just don't get why people insist on denying the fact that being a doctor is a job, just like any other profession. You get up in the morning, head into the office, deal with a mountain of patients all with different issues, then go home to your family, and that's it. Any demand placed on a doctor outside of basic professional courtesy feels completely absurd to me...

And about those oncologists... man, that has to be the toughest job on the planet... you do everything in your power and still know the odds are stacked against them... facing death and seeing families fall apart every single day is heavy, and I honestly think the only way to mentally survive and stay sane is to just become a bit numb... I don't see any other way... every patient and their family is going to look for a shoulder to cry on, but nobody really understands where the doctor is standing in all of that. It's not just that outsiders—people who aren't doctors—can't wrap their heads around it, it's that even other doctors who aren't in oncology or hematology struggle to grasp what their colleagues are going through since they aren't staring down those specific problems quite as often...

I'm seriously signing my name to everything you just said...

Peter Stewart6 said:Apso, man, it’s been way too long! 😁
Bold is basically 95% medical student material. He "has every disease under the sun," depending on what they're lecturing about that day.
Which departments? 😬
I think you really mean it. You put some actual soul into those statements, so that's why I reacted the way I did.
P.S. Knowing how you operate, I honestly think this is just coming from burnout and exhaustion rather than any actual malice.
I'll give you this much: working with people can be genuinely exhausting sometimes. But when you finally figure it out...
It’s just easier when you have someone to do it for. 🙂

From a spiritual standpoint, that’s absolutely true, and I’ve never denied it. I still hold onto those beliefs, and I have a lot of respect for Professor Golub. Because of that, I've started looking at healthcare more through the lens of care and service.

🙂
In the hospitality industry, they always say the customer is always right. But honestly? I have my doubts. Is that actually true? 🤦
I’m not trying to make a direct comparison here, but I suppose there might be some overlap with healthcare, if you look at it as a specific type of care or service. It really comes down to the core idea of what "service" actually means—the act of serving others. I'm not talking about how qualified someone is to provide medical care or nursing, nor am I trying to compare those skill sets. I just think it's worth reflecting on where we stand and what our actual level of service looks like.
It’s almost like an automatic reflex, you know? Like some kind of programmed response. 🙂 Is it just empty politeness, or what? 🤷 I tend to write quite a bit. Maybe I'm just being a dreamer when I say things could actually be better—that we could do things differently. 🤷

People in hospitals—whether they’re staying long-term or just passing through—are all cut from different cloth. One of the guys on this forum tried to categorize doctors, so I figured I’d take a crack at categorizing patients instead. You’ve got your critically ill patients who actually need to be there, you’ve got the occasional visitors, and then you have the hypochondriacs. Honestly? Most of them fall into that last group. They can be incredibly rude, arrogant, and just plain unpleasant to deal with. I'll put my money on this: when you're actually sick and genuinely worried about your health, you don't really have the energy to go around being insulting. When things get heavy, you see people differently. It’s easy enough to deal with folks who are actually going through it—you can talk to them, connect with them. But those people who just show up and start making up illnesses? They’re honestly unbearable. The other day, my grandmother was sitting in the waiting room and told me she wanted an AIDS test. She said she’d noticed some symptoms that seemed to match up, but she doesn't really understand what AIDS actually is. Still, she wants the test. And honestly, who am I to tell her no? It feels completely pointless and useless... but there it is.

It really comes down to the individual; everyone is different, and everyone has their own temperament.
Divisions—yeah, those divisions can lead straight into prejudice. It’s true that there are people
who constantly project illnesses onto themselves; hypochondriacs. Their trigger is fear, and the roots go deep into the spirit. They look for answers on a physical level, but we need to investigate the spiritual
dimension and help free people from that fear. If we used a more thoughtful approach and better triage for these patients in primary care, we could actually make their lives easier, which would also shorten the wait times in various specialist clinics.
The trigger is fear, and sometimes that "copy-paste" mentality is justified, but more often than not, it's just hypochondria.

Bold, watch your step. You might want to walk that statement back; I've seen and heard enough
that I can't say I agree with you. Especially when it comes to offering a hand for this or anything else. I think I'm allowed to tell you that.
And honestly, if a grandmother wants to get tested for AIDS, then let her get tested once she can't be reasoned out of it. Anyone who has reasons to
be suspicious can go in for an AIDS test. Either help ease her fear or just send her on her way so you can have a clear conscience.
Then just move on without wasting your energy. 🙂

Man, you have no idea how much you cracked me up... 😁
But seriously, you're hitting the nail on the head.
If you actually want to master something, you kind of have to "survive" the mental grind first...😁
And honestly, it's just part of being a student... like, 95% of them probably felt like they were catching all 90% of the diseases they studied in pathology or pathophysiology, but hey, that's exactly why they'll remember it forever... 😁

mistymarlin86 said:thanks for getting back to me.
but if my labs look fine and all my other allergy tests came back negative—and I've actually done three different rounds of testing by now—how am I supposed to figure out what's actually triggering this or what I need to stay away from? has anyone else dealt with having totally normal lab results while the allergy just keeps hanging on... any ideas on what to do next? it's a skin allergy issue.

Kate Collins67 gave you some solid advice there. If your IgE levels are totally normal but you're still pretty sure it's an allergy, it's likely not an allergic reaction since those IgE numbers usually tell the whole story... maybe it's time to get a second opinion from a different dermatologist?🙂

mistymarlin86 said:hey there,
not totally sure if I'm in the right spot, but since everyone seems to be talking about lab results, I figured I'd toss my question out there too...
I just went in for some blood work to check my total IgE levels because of my allergies, and this is all they gave me on the printout:

Immunology IgE
Result 6.94
Ref. range 0-122kU/L

does anyone know if these numbers look normal or what they actually mean?

Your results look totally fine to me. If you were having some seriously massive allergic reactions, that IgE number would have shot way past the reference range, but yours is looking good... everything seems perfectly normal...

Nancy Hughes7 said:Hey there 🙂
Can someone let me know if these results look alright:
CBC
WBC: 9.9 (3.4-9.7)
neut.: 6.70 (2.06-6.49)

Band cells
unsegmented: 8 (0-2)
Everything else seems to be within the normal range.
I'm five months pregnant.

The lab work could totally be accurate because it's definitely possible you're fighting off some kind of infection given those high neutrophils and the uptick in unsegmented white blood cells, so you might have dealt with—or maybe still are dealing with—some sort of localized inflammation or even a little abscess somewhere...

ruggedscout91 said:I didn't have to pay because I managed to navigate things "differently."
The price list in Washington, D.C. is roughly $1,000 for a basic gynecological procedure. They say it's around $500 in Miami. It's much cheaper down there, and word is they are more skilled too.
How can some random news anchor earn a $6667 salary that rivals what doctors make? We are already paying double for media fees anyway (between cable and the TV tax).
Regardless, this isn't really the topic at hand.
It just irritates me that this can happen to a woman or a person who has absolutely no money. What is that supposed to mean? Just drop dead?
And Vixen—this happens constantly, like an addiction.

I'm with you on that. But that’s exactly why I hate making broad strokes about everything, because even if a doctor is crooked, his own peers and the medical community are usually the first ones to call him out. Still, we end up circling back to politics and how much the government meddles in healthcare, so even when colleagues try to do the right thing, they often find themselves completely powerless or targeted by political schemes that make it impossible to actually work... I don't know what else to say besides the fact that we live in such a messy, disorganized country...

Kate Collins67 said:Look, if most of you actually sat down in my office in real life, you’d probably walk away feeling pretty satisfied. Why? Because my self-control is through the roof—I don't go around blabbing my unfiltered thoughts to people; I just get my job done.
But just because I perform my duties doesn't mean I'm some saintly humanitarian; it just means I'm a professional. What I really think about patients while I'm on the clock stays between me and my work, but why on earth should I hold back here?

You don't need to be out here defending the doctors or the patients—just defend the integrity of the process itself, and maybe then we'd actually have a functional country.

I'm with you on that one...

Kevin Garcia12 said:I didn't go to college just because of that (it might sound that way if you read it literally, but that’s not what I mean) — that’s just a side effect of the whole situation. There are plenty of examples of "bad management" in my own backyard, but I honestly think there are even more instances of successful treatment and recovery, whereas the failure or negligence of a few people doesn't mean we should tear down the entire system. Instead, we need to call out those individuals by their first and last names when they aren't doing their jobs properly, so the system can actually fix itself where it matters...

For instance, if there were public lists of good and bad doctors, and everyone started avoiding the bad ones (since, as a patient, you actually have the right to refuse treatment from a specific doctor), those practitioners would quickly have to rethink their methods because they'd be out of a job if nobody wanted to see them. But, of course, that kind of refusal needs to be backed up by actual reasoning, rather than just following the principle of "I don't like them because they didn't give me exactly what I thought I needed," because that kind of attitude just makes the next person examining you even less interested in looking for anything concrete... Besides, there's also the legal right for a doctor to refuse to treat a patient (except in life-threatening emergencies, obviously), so even the arrogant or aggressive patients really ought to think twice about how they act...

Man, I think this is the first time I've ever agreed with someone word for word...

But honestly, I feel like even though that principle exists on paper, it doesn't really happen in the real world (though sometimes, sadly, it does), and I truly believe that if it actually worked in practice, things would be totally different for both doctors and patients, and it feels like someone finally hit on a potential solution for the doctor-patient relationship that works for everyone, so patients wouldn't be whining about one specific doctor and making generalizations, and doctors would find it much easier if they could just turn away an annoying patient, which might make that same patient realize they shouldn't be so rude next time, because no doctor has a problem treating someone in a life-threatening crisis, but that arrogant, high-strung, disrespectful type is always going to be a struggle, so yeah, it would be such a positive thing if it actually became reality... 🙂

borna07 said:Raymond Nguyen5, hey, don't get all worked up now...
Just try to see that even though some of our forum mods might be doctors, they aren't necessarily experts on every single breakthrough or new way to diagnose and treat every illness out there, especially when it comes to MS.
They could just as easily be dermatologists or eye specialists who don't deal with MS at all in their daily practice...
Searching for stuff online—you know, using Google to find info—has made things so much easier for everyone, from us patients to actual MDs, letting us catch onto new medical news super fast.
But man, Google is full of absolute garbage. It only takes one quack to post some fake study claiming you can cure cancer with, I don't know, apricot pits or something (just an example here!) and if they format it to look scientific enough, it shoots right to the top of the search results...
Because of that, patients constantly get flooded with info that either has zero basis in medicine or is stuck in some experimental phase that’s already been tossed aside as irrelevant to actual treatment. (And I'm not talking about apricot pits, I mean real clinical trials)...
MS is being researched like crazy all over the world. I bet every single day somewhere on the planet, a new theory pops up about why it happens and how to stop it. But 99.9% of those theories end up getting debunked after more research. For the few that actually work, the studies take forever before they can be used in a hospital, and it takes even longer before those findings become the standard baseline medicine used globally...
Only then would you have a reason to be mad that your doctor doesn't have all the answers right away.
Plus, a doctor's word carries so much weight, even when people treat it like a trend on a forum, so they really have to watch what they say.
I mean, you react totally differently if a random person tells you, "Hey, I heard about this new thing that helps with diagnosis," versus when a doctor says it. No matter what their specialty is, their word carries way more "heft," which is why they're always so incredibly careful with what they put out there...

Totally agree. I'd just add that this goes for pretty much any illness... it's always the same old story where people struggle to stay objective when looking at info coming from different, sometimes sketchy, sources...