Great post CayoKay. You covered off a lot of the reasons, and I think it is especially important to get a 2nd opinion in case the dx delay is mostly related to doctor bias.

My questions are:

1. What would others consider a "reasonable" timeframe in which to expect a confirmed dx of MS?

2. What should the min dx requirements be, if what we have to work with is not adequate?

In retrospect, many of us can probably go back several years and see some "possible/probable" symptoms of MS . . . but chances the pieces of the puzzle couldn't have come together for a dx at that particular time anyway.

So, how long did most of us (that currently have the dx) live in "true" limbo with this disease, once it became abundantly obvious that something serious and ongoing was wrong with our health?

I know a large % of the people are dx relatively quickly (0 - 6 months), but the definition of "quickly" is probably subjective too.

Cherie