As a reply to Artist's post, I've kind of always wanted to tell everyone I meet a different name for this disease. So one friend would think I had RSD, one CRPS, one Sudek's atrophy...it would be a way of amusing myself.

I've read all of the statistics, all of the stuff about RSD not being rare like everyone else. Ever heard the old joke that 87% of statistics are completely made up? Yeah, I just put down 87 because those were the first two keys I touched.

I think that the real problem is that we don't know the real incidence of RSD. I've met enough people with it to skew my perception if I let it! Personally, I tend to think that RSD isn't technically rare. I consider it in the realm of uncommon and unknown.

Plus, the people who find this board are possibly the uncommon ones as well. It's easy to forget that there are many people out there who developed the early stages of RSD, were treated quickly, and never had a problem again. I know (as in, have met in person several times) at least two people who fall into that category. One was a girl who went to school with me, one was the mother of a close family friend. Neither of them has spared a second thought about RSD since. It just didn't last long enough to have a huge impression on their lives.

One thing I'd like to know is, if they find a genetic predisposition for RSD, are there certain groups that are more likely to be effected than others? If so, it might account for some regional variability in numbers of people who develop RSD. But I have no idea if that's true or not, and it can't really be seen with any of the data we have right now!

-Betsy