I saw this after I had posted. I think the "blending" of SD and SCI may make it easier for folks whom really don't understand their own spinal conditions - not a put down - only SD and SCI are so totally different.

But... when it was decided that SCI would become a sub-forum of SD, others far more experienced tried explaining it - that it was a mistake since the two are distinct. It did no good then, so... I'll hold my breath and save my energy.

I'm sorry to see this happen. Now, I'll move on.

BTW: I'd like to see what would happen if progressive neurological conditions were to be "lumped" into a single forum. I don't think that that would set well - with people dx'd with, i.e., MS or Parkinson's. The common ground would be the progressive nature of neurological conditions. They no more belong "grouped" than do SD and SCI.

But, if it's the spine, it's all the spine and can be "grouped" nicely? Was there a poll? the members' feedback that led to lumping SD with SCI?

I give... I haven't the time to beat my head against a wall - or spending energy on something not important here to others. But, there is a huge difference. People with SCI know they have SCI and folks with SD shall be glad they don't have all that encompasses SCI. It's really a no-brainer.

For people who truly don't know the distinction? Check the "Sticky" thread links. You wanted SD together with SCI and now... you got it .