Posts by quietbison7

Melissa Kern6 said:EU and AP
Has anyone actually tackled this yet?

Basically, you're looking at an endoscopic ultrasound combined with a "fine needle aspiration."
It’s when they grab a sample from any suspicious lymph nodes—think abscesses, tumors, or just those weird, unclear lumps—that are too hard to reach otherwise. Using EUS is pretty much the only easy way to get in there. It’s definitely uncomfortable, kind of like a long-ass endoscopy. But the upside? You get to see everything—the pancreas, the pancreatic ducts, all the stuff a standard ultrasound shows, but with the added bonus of being able to actually aspirate stuff for cytology, microbiology, or biochemical testing. Honestly, it's a top-tier diagnostic tool.

swiftbear86 said:So why is it that one doctor treats you like they can't even be bothered to look at you when they're at the local hospital, but suddenly becomes charming and attentive once they move to a private practice? That tells you everything you need to know about their character. I won't argue about their technical skill—expertise is one thing—but I truly believe that regardless of where you work, you should act professionally and be decent to people. We touched on this ten pages ago, and doctors hate hearing it. They seem to think being kind isn't part of the job, only being smart is. Personally, I think the most important thing is that they actually show interest in solving your problem. Once they do that, their expertise really starts to shine.

Look... that’s up to the doctor themselves, but from what I've seen, colleagues aren't all cut from the same cloth. That attitude you're describing? Unfortunately, it’s there about 50% of the time. Half of them are perfect—great bedside manner in private practice—but the other half are the same way whether they're in a clinic or a hospital. And even with private docs, without naming names here, some don't even look at the patient for five minutes, yet patients are still freaking happy to be there... it's not just about the doctors, it's also about what's going on in the patient's head. I haven't read this whole thread closely, so I'm just jumping in based on this. Believe me, in plenty of cases, the hospital staff ends up fixing the mistakes made by private practitioners, and the reverse happens less often. What’s missing in medical school education is teaching interpersonal skills, which is a total disaster in any hospital collective around here. If anyone tries to tell me otherwise, I've got nothing to say to them. One more thing: whatever our healthcare system is like, it’s still socially better than, say, the American system... because over there, if you don't have money, you die, whereas here, you don't necessarily. A colleague of mine ended up in the hospital for a few days in the US just for a common cold and got hit with a $20,000 bill... so now you're sick over there, but here it's almost all free or very cheap; if you can't pay, things get overlooked or patients just put it off as long as they can. It doesn't work like that over there. I'm speaking broadly, but regardless of us not being top-tier in terms of medical care, we are still much more socially sensitive than, for example, "Americans".

vividsailor7 said:Finally, someone actually gets it.

...man, I wasn't even gonna weigh in on this, but look—half the people working in private clinics are my actual colleagues. If you think you'll get better service at a private facility, go for it, by all means. Health is the top priority, period. But don't go thinking "private" automatically equals "better." It's a trap. What patients really crave is feeling like a human being instead of just another number or some "bottle" rolling down an assembly line. That’s exactly where private clinics hit the jackpot. Look, the medical knowledge, the expertise, the actual treatment? It's identical whether you're at a public hospital or a private clinic. The only real difference is the attitude. It's the same specialists doing the work. So, the difference is really just in your head, the waiting room lines, the crowds, and how polite they are to you. At the end of the day, that's what patients are actually paying for. Honestly, as long as things stay this way, it works out for everyone. 🙂

fadedmarlin402 said:It comes down to the anatomy. Look, during a colonoscopy, they have to pump air into the colon because the walls are all folded up. Because of how big the colon is, a capsule can just spin around any which way, and you might miss a whole section of the gut. Sure, you can swap a colonoscopy for a capsule, but you're sacrificing reliability. Science has already shown that capsules are way worse at spotting polyps and tumors compared to a standard colonoscopy, so if you want to take that risk, fine. In medicine, some tools are just more reliable than others. And let's be real, there are different types of capsules out there, ranging from low-tier to high-tier accuracy. When we're talking about the small intestine, it's a different story—it's thin enough that a capsule actually works great for what we need to see. For the small intestine, the capsule is basically our best bet. But for the colon? That's the bottom line.

The thing might catch it, or it might not. Either way, if it does find something, you're heading straight for a colonoscopy anyway, because that's the only way to actually get it out.

Colonoscopies are hands down the best way to find polyps in the large intestine and perform a polypectomy if they find anything. Gastroscopy is also irreplaceable. If those two methods—which usually happen in a hospital setting—don't show why you're having issues or bleeding, even though the clinical signs point toward something like small intestine bleeding, then you move to the capsule. A polypectomy doesn't hurt, and honestly, it's incredibly useful.

Nicole Sullivan59 said:I need some advice!
Among all the test results (it's for my son), a cytology report from a lymph node biopsy raised suspicions of NBA (he was admitted to the hematology ward because of swollen neck lymph nodes). The clinic where the tests were done referred us to another hospital to have the node actually removed and sent for pathology, since they can't do that here, and they stressed we shouldn't delay this.
In the medical records from this second hospital, the doctor is asking for a consultation from another female physician, whom he verbally tells him to come back for a check-up in two weeks. And (the doctor requesting the consultation—the one writing the history where he asks for the consult) says it’s nothing urgent... Nothing was given to us in writing, which feels weird to me, because how are you supposed to get a referral for a specialist follow-up if there's nowhere stating it's even needed?
That finding I mentioned at the start doesn't seem harmless to me, so I'm asking if anyone knows what to do? Should we go back to the doctor who requested the follow-up and demand it be put in writing? Or maybe look for a second opinion somewhere else? It's strange to me that something is urgent at one hospital but not at the other. Thanks for any response.

Go back to the doctor who asked for the follow-up and demand it in writing. And obviously, if you can, get a second opinion. This whole thing where doctors just do verbal "consultations" over the phone is way too common in American medicine. If someone ordered a pathology report, then it needs to happen. That's just my take on it. NBA isn't considered "urgent" by some colleagues, sure, but regardless of that initial finding, you absolutely need that pathology and a second opinion instead of being this superficial... (which always pisses me off 🙂)...

amberheron64 said:been dealing with my period for like 11 years now. 🙂
I had it last week. 🙂 So, I was having this whole breathing issue—basically felt like I was suffocating—and my doctor started suspecting anemia or some other crap. He sent me off for blood work, but told me to wait until after my period is over before getting it done.

My bad on that question.🙂
So, look, at least you’ve got some results that actually fall within the normal range now. Even if you’re still missing those other vital pieces of the puzzle—you know, stuff like your HSBC and Apple data that really helps paint the full picture—it's a start. But honestly? You can't just ignore the big stuff. You really ought to listen to what your lungs and heart are telling you. Getting an EKG wouldn't be a bad idea either. And seriously, go get an ergometry test done. Don't skip it.
Look, that's just my two cents. I don't know what your other test results look like or what your actual medical history is, so take it with a grain of salt.

amberheron64 said:that's why I stuffed myself with pudding and those chocolate banana snack packs last night, and my sugar levels actually looked fine🙂)

but
my post from yesterday
so I just got my lab results back
RBC is 3.84 (normal range is 3.86-5.08) (last time it was 4.39)
hemoglobin is 119 (normal is 119 to 157) (previously it was 135)
platelets are 238 (normal is 158 to 424) (before it was 309)

everything else looks basically the same as before, maybe slightly lower

what do you guys think about these three things? any reason to freak out?

Look, since you're female, the difference in these numbers could easily be because you had your period in the meantime (sorry, maybe you did, I don't know how old you are🙂 ) which would cause a slight dip in values, but honestly, everything looks fine to me. My only real question is why you even went in for these tests in the first place. If you aren't feeling crappy or having symptoms, then ignore my question.

Casey Richardson55 said:Hey guys, I really need some help here! Just got my blood work back yesterday and I’m totally lost. One part of the report has this note under ACLU: ANISOCYTOSIS TRC. Does anyone actually know what that means? Honestly, I’m freaking out a bit and my doctor is out on vacation right now. ANY HELP PLEASE?

Based on just that one little detail, there isn't much you can conclude other than your red blood cells are showing some changes, which they've labeled as anisocytosis... you haven't provided any other results and the causes could be anything from totally benign to something else entirely. Basically, once your doctor gets back, you should probably get more tests done or at least run them again to see if this is nothing or something worth worrying about.

Casey Richardson55 said:My bloodwork shows my CRP is up at 124.23 when it should be under 5.00
iron is 7.3 instead of 11.0 to 32.0
electrolytes are 1-3
white blood cell count is 3-5 instead of 1 to 2

PLEASE HELP ME OUT HERE

Look, you haven't given us much to work with here, but you seriously need to call your doctor right now to figure this out. Both your white blood cell count and your CRP are elevated, which means there's some kind of process happening in your body—could be something starting up or something winding down, who knows. You haven't even mentioned any symptoms or how you've been feeling lately.

Brandon Chavez31 said:The internist claims it’s got nothing to do with them, basically telling me to go back to my infectious disease specialist—except I already have a note from the infectious disease specialist saying it has nothing to do with them. Pointless loop. Fine, I'll take your advice and hunt down a referral for an immunologist; apparently there are two specialists practicing over in Phoenix.

Just remember, as a patient, you have every right to demand whatever is being recommended to you. We’re all here to help, but most people seem to forget that part.
Bottom line? Get that immunologist's opinion.

Quick side note on the CDC levels—Google actually works if you use it... CDC stands for C-reactive protein, obviously. Any spike in those levels is taken extremely seriously during diagnosis, unless—and this is still serious, mind you—you're tracking the patient over several days and finally see the numbers dropping.

velvetdriver30 said:so I'm 17 and my ESR is at 30............what does that even mean........help.....thanks in advance

Look, an elevated ESR is usually just a sign that there’s some acute inflammation going on. That’s pretty much all you can say based on what you told me... though honestly, having high levels at your age could be linked to a bunch of different things. That's just my take from that one sentence you wrote.

vividowl13 said:Hey, first time posting on this board, but hopefully not my last.
Two months ago I dealt with infectious mononucleosis, and man, my liver enzymes were through the roof—we’re talking triple digits, somewhere around 700. Fast forward two months and everything seems back to normal, except my ALT is still a little high at 53, and my blood work is mostly fine, though my RBC is hovering right on the edge.
I haven't sat down with my specialist yet, so I'm wondering if anyone else has been through this. Is it normal for things to be lingering like this after they were that high?
Later.

Look, once you've had a diagnosis like that, your numbers are always going to be dancing right on the line. You just have to be careful from here on out. That elevated ALT means there's still some lingering damage that's normalizing pretty slowly.

Brandon Chavez31 said:Hey everyone!
I really need some help here...
Since the start of the year, I’ve been stuck with this low-grade fever hovering between 98.6 and 99.5. It started with what felt like the flu, and they just told me to sleep it off. The flu symptoms went away, but the fever wouldn't budge. So, about ten days later, I went back to my doctor. In the meantime, I dropped 18 pounds and felt totally wiped out. They ran a CBC, which looked fine, but my urine showed slightly elevated white blood cells, so they put me on a broad-spectrum antibiotic because they suspected "some kind of inflammation." While taking that, I ended up with an oral yeast infection and thrush, so I had to get gel and then pills for that. That cleared up, but the fever didn't. After that, they sent me to an infectious disease specialist to check for mono. My appetite slowly came back, and I gained about 6 pounds. The specialist said there were no visible symptoms, so he told me to wait another week and keep a temperature log. He ran another CBC and urinalysis. My white blood cell count jumped to 12, but the urine was okay. Then he prescribed Zithromax—a different antibiotic—without even doing a blood or urine culture first. While on the Zithromax, I got diarrhea, the fever stayed, and I started dealing with random sweats, fatigue, and mood swings. A week later, I went back to the specialist; my white blood cell count had dropped back into the normal range, but they didn't even bother checking my urine again. They sent me for a chest X-ray, which was clear, and told me to wait another 3-4 weeks, and if the fever persists, see an internist. It’s been three weeks now and the fever is still there. Now my primary doctor thinks maybe it's hyperthyroidism since they have no clue what else it could be. I just got my thyroid labs back and everything looks perfectly normal. I am seriously at a loss. This fever has been hanging around for two months now and I feel like nobody is taking me seriously. Please, any advice?

Looks like everyone is just chasing shadows of infections, but honestly? Go see an immunologist. Looking at these results, it doesn't look like anyone actually checked the CDC levels—an internist definitely should have looked at that if no one else did. You need immunological testing for specific antibodies because that fever could easily be autoimmune rather than just an inflammatory issue from bacteria or some other bug.

neonridge55 said:.

I've got zero clue what you're talking about regarding protein in urine.

👍

Protein in urine is all about kidney function. If it shows up, it matters—specifically how it relates to glomerular filtration and general kidney health. That's the short version.

Joshua Sanchez14 said:Hey everyone... I need some help here. I've got this intense pain right under my ribs, and now my arm muscles are aching too. Plus, my stools have been soft. I did some blood work and everything looks fine except for my AST (118), ALT (105), and GGT (250). Had an abdominal ultrasound done—just showed a little bit of fatty liver—and ran tests for hepatitis, but those came back negative. The technician suggested I go get a gastroscopy. I rarely drink and I don't smoke.

Look, your ALT, AST, and GGT levels are definitely up, which means there’s some kind of damage happening inside you. You really ought to check your triglycerides, LDL, and HDL levels too. Might as well get an EKG just to be safe. Once you finish that gastroscopy, drop the results here.

Kevin Hernandez10 said:Hey!!
got my blood work back today... was out with the club in Chicago and 8 girls came home with stomach pains, vomiting, diarrhea...

doc sent me to get blood drawn..
so I'm wondering if this points to anything bad, should I be worried??

MCV- 75 (76.5-92.1)
MCH- 24 (24.3-31.5)
WBC- 3.4 (4.4-11.6)
Bilirubin- 5.2 (6-26)

and CRP-24 (<5.0)

The CRP is what worries me most...

Thanks in advance

CRP is elevated but relatively minor, you need to monitor it. Everything looks like some kind of virus... based on the results you provided, nothing too crazy.. watch your temperature, stay hydrated, and check the CRP again, that's the basics.

Emily Ortiz27 said:No problem at all.
>>It's true, we're tackling this from a few different angles. We're waiting on the anti-gamma GT results from the GI specialist before they decide if a small bowel biopsy is necessary.
Meanwhile, over at the hematologist's office, the follow-up showed the hemoglobin actually bumped up to 105 after a month on the new treatment—and that’s even with some major diet changes thrown in.
The kid hasn't been vomiting, and bowel movements are pretty steady daily, nothing too hard or too loose.
We already ruled out parasites right off the bat, along with those hidden urinary tract infections or whatever else might be lurking.
Seriously, thanks again.

Don't mention it. I just help decode this stuff whenever I can.🙂Best of luck to you guys.

Susan Diaz91 said:Can someone please explain this...

My 7-month-old just had bloodwork done:

Lymphocytes are high at 74 (normal range is 18-60)
Granulocytes are low at 17 (normal range is 23-66)

What does this actually mean????

Look, based strictly on what you just posted, it looks like there's some kind of inflammation going on with the baby. Those lymphocyte numbers aren't even that crazy high. Basically, the immune system is just a bit run down right now. You definitely need more lab work—especially looking into actual immunological markers—to get the full picture. Don't just stop here.

Emily Ortiz27 said:Guys, seriously, can someone repost that massive wall of text from the last page? I’m not gonna quote it myself because it’s freaking huge and I don’t want to waste half the screen. pleeease!
Nobody has to write an essay here, just chime in if you know something. Even just one or two points would help. please

Look, I’m no pediatrician, but looking at these lab results, the diagnostic algorithm is pointing in a few different directions.
The big thing is figuring out what's actually causing the anemia. Based on the labs, they haven't nailed it yet because they're still moving toward hemoglobin electrophoresis to see if there's some genetic defect in the structure. You can also see signs that they're checking for absorption issues or malabsorption. An acute infection is off the table. Iron metabolism is definitely messed up, and they're trying to figure out why—whether it's happening in the gut or if it's a metabolic issue (genetic). Might even need biopsies at this point. Also, you didn't give the full history, like what the stool looks like or if the kid is vomiting and stuff... based on the erythrocyte appearance and the MCV, it looks like microcytic anemia. Right now, they're basically just hunting for a diagnosis... that's all I can say generally without making any definitive calls.

Olivia Robinson6 said:I'm 11 weeks pregnant and just got my blood work, urine sedimentation, and iron levels back. Here’s the breakdown:

1. CBC: neutrophils 76.6 (ref range 44.0-72.0)
lymphocytes 12.7 (ref range 20.0-46.0)

2. urine sedimentation: erythrocytes 4-6 (ref range 0-2)
note says: rare bacteria

3. biochemistry: iron 14 (ref range 8-30)
TIBC 72 (ref range 49-75)
UIBC 58 (ref range 26-59)

My questions are:

What could be causing these neutrophil and lymphocyte shifts, plus the extra red blood cells in my urine? And what does "rare bacteria" actually mean?🤷

Am I right to assume my iron is fine? Also, what are these TIBC and UIBC numbers that are sitting right at the top end of the range?🤷

Look, TIBC and UIBC values usually bump up during pregnancy, so everything looks normal there. As for the neutrophils and lymphocytes, those readings are also totally fine based on what you posted, even without other markers. Regarding the urine, it's mostly okay, though maybe run a culture just to be safe, but nothing to stress about. Bottom line: just keep tracking your labs and comparing them; no signs of inflammation here yet.