3 ms·
I understand why it was ludicrous from your perspective. It was not, however, ludicrous for them to spend time ruling it out. New onset seizures (particularly
by JshWright 10y ago
I understand why it was ludicrous from your perspective. It was not, however, ludicrous for them to spend time ruling it out.
New onset seizures (particularly a string of seizures) are unusual for a kid. Methamphetamine causes seizures. There are ways a child could have been exposed to meth that a parent wouldn't know about (another caretaker left it lying around, a preschool friend brought it in for "show and tell" and no one noticed, etc...). It was prudent on their part to consider it as a possible cause of your daughter's seizures. A positive meth test for a seizure patient (of any age) would certainly raise my index of suspicion enough to thoroughly explore the possibility of intentional or accidental ingestion.
I totally get why you would perceive them as "wasting time" (and obviously I wasn't there, it's entirely possible they were), but it's very likely they were running down all the other "normal" differential diagnoses in parallel.
- TillE 10y agoYou're vastly overestimating the average competence and concern that most human beings have when doing their jobs. I've seen multiple instances with family members where the doctor's dumbass hypothesis absolutely did not match the symptoms, but they persisted in trying the worthless treatment anyway. Took 'em months to find and start treating the slightly rare form of cancer. Bring on the diagnostic computers, I say.
- JshWright 10y agoI know a lot of ER docs (I assume this story took place in an ER). Some are better than others, but I can't think of any that I wouldn't consider "above average" relative to "most human beings". I'll absolutely agree with you in terms of primary care docs... As someone who routinely transports patients out of doctor's offices when the doc is in over their head, there is a _much_ broader variation in competency...
- tptacek 10y agoSorry, I forgot that this is HN, where the default mode of discussion is "how dare they". :) I'm not outraged that it happened. But: we obviously knew for a fact that methamphetamine exposure was not involved in her seizures. We did, however, have to deal with ER staff entertaining it as their primary hypothesis. That was frustrating, and, in hindsight: indeed a waste of time. I think the only real problem I have here is that whatever test they use to detect meth, it obviously falses a lot. (Her seizures were idiopathic and never repeated; our working theory is that it was a reaction to a benzocaine medication she got a day earlier.)