I understand of course. You have to make the decision that you think is right for you. That's all we can ever do. That's definitely a long wait, and continued damage would be terrible. I recently had an endoscopy and colonoscopy done. The first GI gave me an appointment 7 months down the road. I then found another GI, called the office, and got an appointment 2 weeks later for both procedures on one day. And this is in Canada where wait times are as long as they get. So if you want to procedure, perhaps another physician can provide you with an earlier appointment.

Regarding the dangers of endoscopy and infection that MrsD. mentions, it's the first time I'm hearing about it. Are there studies/evidence for this? It would seem like immense incompetence when it comes to first world medicine. I've had three scopes done and my family and friends have them done frequently (especially those who are older) and I've not heard of one problem over the years. I find it difficult to believe that this level of immense basic incompetence is wide spread, namely, improper sterilization. I walked into a room that stunk of chemicals and they had taken 30 minutes to clean the room. Anyway, perhaps it's wide spread in the USA, I don't know, but it would be good to see some data on this. I suppose I'm never shocked at medical incompetence, but this would seem to take the cake. I mean, a failure of basic sterilization practices? But hey, I've seen some disturbing and sad stuff when it comes to conventional medicine, so I wouldn't be too surprised if what MrsD says is the case. I've just not seen or heard any evidence for it myself.

As for why Canada has changed its recommendations with respect to colonoscopies, it has much more to do with funding and the politics behind that than anything else. It's unfortunately a mainstay of socialized medicine. In recent years many services have been cut or reduced. There may be medical reasons for the change too, and I do think the testing is too frequent for a number of conditions, but it's important to note the leading reason for many of these policy recommendations and changes, which have nothing to do with patient care.

In the end, the endoscopy is used for diagnosis, simple as that. Without it, there is no diagnosis. This is what I've read and been told by a number of physicians since. I'll just say how I've been disadvantaged in not having known this when all this began. I don't have a diagnosis yet and I'm still searching. This results in my spending a great amount of time, effort and money seeking out a cause for my SFN that could just be Celiac. Perhaps it's not Celiac, and I'd need to do this anyway, but Celiac is quite likely, so it's possible that I'm wasting money, time and effort, which is not negligible. Moreover, not having a diagnosis means that I can't access certain services and may undergo certain procedures and drug trials that could possibly be unnecessary and harmful (and in fact any harm from a endoscopy should be set against such harm, etc.). It could also mean that I can't gain access to certain medications that come out in the future and that may be helpful. Some of this is general, some applies to Celiac specifically. Not having a diagnosis puts me in limbo in various ways. And there is a psychological dimension to not knowing one's diagnosis. This is important too. Finally, after I've healed my gut, or made a good attempt, I plan to reintroduce various things, and if I do have Celiac, reintroducing gluten and even various other grains and things like dairy may just put me back to where I am, which would be tragic. If I knew I had CD, I would not touch it ever again and I would have testing done for any cross-reactivity issues, so I'd know what else to avoid.

All this has led me to seriously consider reintroducing gluten for 6-8 weeks, at least two slices of bred as they say, and then have the endoscopy done. This is where I am. I wish I didn't have to consider this, but the other option is not good either, and I've mentioned the issues with that. Perhaps it's not CD for me, I don't know, but it's possible and it's becoming more of an option for me at this point. Of course, I feel what you're going through and I understand what you say here, which is why I still don't know if I'm willing to damage my body more with 2 months of gluten. It's a difficult and crappy decision to have to make, and I may just end up deciding like you to never know. That's for sure possible.

Anyway, that's my two cents. Good luck to you!