--sorry about several of those links not working with the ellipses; I copied them from another post on this board in which they did seem to be working.

Let's try again:

http://intl.neurology.org/cgi/content/abstract/60/1/108

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en..._uids=16448668

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/c...TRY=1&SRETRY=0

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...d_AbstractPlus

Couldn't get the original link for the fifth one, for reason, but these four should provide a basis if you ever need one.

Here's another link:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...RVAbstractPlus

And I think Brian Paul's post is a very cogent explanation of why so many of us have had to go through the diagnosis merry-go-round that Dahlek talks about.

Still, an informed patient who is willing to challenge a doctor for not looking beyond the borders of the box is still in a better position, even if the doctor's hackles get raised, than an uniformed patient who just unquestioningly follows every physician pronouncement. It is absolutely vital that one always gets one's test results, that one examines them closely, and that one not feel intimidated in suggesting certain other tests to a physician or in contributing to the running of a protocol. Good doctors do not mind an informed patient--most rather appreciate it. Those that object and take the "I'm the expert--just do what I say" route are generally not only forgetting that we are the ones who live in our own bodies, and so are, in the end, the final experts on them, but are engaging in an egoistic and obvious self-justification.