 |
In Remembrance
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SE Kansas.
Posts: 374
|
|
|
In Remembrance
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SE Kansas.
Posts: 374
|
This is the first of a series of posts discussing the information found in Allen’s post on page 4. It is a long post and it presents a lot of opportunities to discuss the contrasts between nerve injury and IRI as the cause of RSD. I hope these posts help people sort out facts from fiction about RSD.
The underlying causes of the syndrome have yet to be defined, and no definitive diagnostic test exists even though CRPS was first described in the late 19th century by the neurologist Silas Weir Mitchell. Mitchell referred to the cluster of symptoms he noticed in some of the Civil War soldiers who were under his care as "causalgia."1 The soldiers persistently complained of severe, burning pain long after their wounds had healed.2 They also experienced swelling, redness, and temperature fluctuations at the injured site, typically a limb.
no definitive diagnostic test exists. Neurologists are experts at designing tests that diagnose neurological disorders, but they can’t find any way to diagnose any neurological dysfunction in RSD; perhaps because the neurological dysfunctions in this disease are the result, NOT the cause of RSD,
The IASP further divides CRPS into CRPS I, in which major nerve damage is not present, and CRPS II, in which major nerve damage is present. [Emphasis added]. The vast majority of RSD patients are diagnosed with CRPS-I, in which no nerve injury is present, yet every RSD “expert” who writes about this disease continues to explain RSD/CRPS-I as the result of a nerve injury they admit isn’t there.
If there is no nerve injury in CRPS-I, what causes it?
"You diagnose CRPS I only when there is no medical explanation for the symptoms," said Jose Ochoa, MD… In his view, it means that the clinician simply has failed to diagnose the true cause of pain-whether it be nerve injury, arthritis, phlebitis, hysteria, or malingering.
Ochoa is a former RSD “expert” who once argued that this disease is caused by damage to sympathetic nerves. He eventually realized that this is not a neurological disorder, but instead of looking for the actual cause, he decided he could make more money by becoming an insurance empire expert and testify that RSD patients are either malingering or mentally ill.
He uses his knowledge that this isn’t a neurological disorder to blow RSD “experts” out of the water by asking questions like: “You say this is a neurological disorder, but can you provide any evidence at all that it is?” The RSD “expert” is forced to admit that he/she has absolutely no evidence at all. The RSD patient loses because the RSD “expert” can’t even prove RSD/CRPS-I even exists.
The fact that cyanosis isn’t mentioned in any diagnostic criteria of RSD means that the patient can’t even point at her/his purple skin and say “Of course it exists. Look at my arm”; the insurance empire lawyer can simply reply “Cyanosis isn’t mentioned in the RSD literature, so whatever is turning your arm purple can’t be part of RSD”. The patient/victim loses the case.
My next post on Allen’s post will talk about diagnostic criteria…Vic
__________________
The great end of life is not knowldege but action. T. H. Huxley
When in doubt, ask: What would Jimmy Buffett do?
email: :
.
|