I first had an appointment with my optometrist, who believed that I was probably in an ON attack, or perhaps more likely, just had Uhthoff's from an old attack. I told her I didn't see the point in knowning, as I would have no intention of doing steroids anyway. She said "well, maybe there is something else they can give you now . . . and she referred me to a neuro-opthamologist anyway.

So I met with the N-O, and we talked about my history with ON (which dates back to 2004). She picked up the note from the optometrist, which had about 2 lines on it, and she said "I hear you are not interested in steroids?" I thought that was soooo... funny, because the optometrist said so little on that note, but made the point of tattling on me about not wanting steroids.

I told her that it was my understanding that steroids could not improve the recovery, so I didn't see the point in doing them (given the side-effects and risks). She shocked me by agreeing with me. She said that she would never recommend steroids to a patient UNLESS the person was completely blind and had the potential to "hopefully" realize some recovery from that. Even then, she said she'd leave this to the patient to decide because steroids bring their own set of problems.

I am going to ask about that visual field test, and how it may be different from what I already had. I got the call from the place where I have to go, and I did mention I already had one in Dec, but they said their's was more extensive. I can't imagine that . . . I had a heck of time with the first one. I was so exhausted, I came home and slept for 4 hours!!

Cherie