I feel like Quix's article was written just for someone like me. I have been having problems for 8 years. I have only been seeking a dx for the last 4 years, though. However, after 4 years and seeing 4 neuros and gads of testing, the clinical picture of my problems has lost it's focus.

I think that the longer you languish as an "atypical" case, the more you just become the sum total of your test results and the less the neuro sees the whole history and clinical presentation.

Reading this and having dialog with Quix has made me see this. Now I realize that I either have to refocus my current neuro or I have to find one who is willing to look past the last atypical or equivocal test.

I am one who has an abnormal but atypical MRI. I have NEVER had a normal neuro exam. Perhaps this information is not for the person who has all normal results, but it is certainly for those of us with abnormal but atypical tests / exams. There are people who have problems but who still have a totally normal neuro exam and normal test results. Those people would not need this information at all.

For me, I was astounded to learn that many of the neuro exams that I have failed should have offered useful information to the neuros regarding lesions in the CNS whether or not the MRI could see them. I even had a neuro tell me that he knew there was a lesion in the spinal cord based on my neuro exam but that the MRI didn't pick it up because the spinal cord is hard to image! This article was corroboration of that.

Drat now I don't even remember what I was really here to state, but this information has given me insight to at least try and start over with my neuro rather than just sitting in this holding pattern. I had totally given up a year ago and figured that there would never be a clear answer possible for me.

I may not get an answer, but at least I am going to try.