5 ms·

> But Murray told NPR in October 2019 that he had a lung disease that was not caused by working underground in mines. > “It's idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. IP

by jgwil2 6y ago

> But Murray told NPR in October 2019 that he had a lung disease that was not caused by working underground in mines. > “It's idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. IPF, and it is not related to my work in the industry. They've checked for that,” Murray told NPR. “And it's not — has anything to do with working in the coal mines, which I did for 17 years underground every day. And until I was 76, I went underground twice a week.” How could they have "checked for that," given that IPF seems to be a diagnosis of exclusion (someone more knowledgeable than I can correct me if I'm wrong).

hinkley 6y ago
Idiopathic means we looked at the things we know how to diagnose and it wasn’t those. The exclusion process is an elimination process. Test for all the plausible causes, and if there’s nothing left you shrug and call it idiopathic. So either he was tested, or the doctors thought his symptoms were very atypical and didn’t run the test. (I know two people and a pet with idiopathic something or other. In the cat’s case, the treatment was the same as the least invasive treatments for the common cause. The humans are just SOL.)
StavrosK 6y ago
They could have excluded that specific cause, perhaps? Odd, though, since "idiopathic" means "we don't know why this happened".
AaronFriel 6y ago
If he attested in October 2019 that his disease was unrelated to working in coal mines, it's curious that he's a black lung claimant under a statute that requires the miner to have or have had pneuomoconiosis and for some causal link to exist between that and their work as a miner. Seems he wants to have it both ways. Jeopardizing the safety of his employees with his opposition to regulations is justified - except when it affects him personally. Then, he should be entitled to benefits and remedies under the law.
larrywright 6y ago
You're correct. In fact, it seems odd to me that a doctor would have diagnosed IPF in someone who had worked in coal mines for that long. As far as I know, the symptoms of black lung are basically indistinguishable from IPF. I'm not a doctor, but my father died of IPF, and his father died from black lung (steel industry, not coal, but they have the same risks).

by jgwil2 6y ago

hinkley 6y ago

Idiopathic means we looked at the things we know how to diagnose and it wasn’t those. The exclusion process is an elimination process. Test for all the plausible causes, and if there’s nothing left you shrug and call it idiopathic. So either he was tested, or the doctors thought his symptoms were very atypical and didn’t run the test. (I know two people and a pet with idiopathic something or other. In the cat’s case, the treatment was the same as the least invasive treatments for the common cause. The humans are just SOL.)

StavrosK 6y ago

They could have excluded that specific cause, perhaps? Odd, though, since "idiopathic" means "we don't know why this happened".

AaronFriel 6y ago

If he attested in October 2019 that his disease was unrelated to working in coal mines, it's curious that he's a black lung claimant under a statute that requires the miner to have or have had pneuomoconiosis and for some causal link to exist between that and their work as a miner. Seems he wants to have it both ways. Jeopardizing the safety of his employees with his opposition to regulations is justified - except when it affects him personally. Then, he should be entitled to benefits and remedies under the law.

larrywright 6y ago

You're correct. In fact, it seems odd to me that a doctor would have diagnosed IPF in someone who had worked in coal mines for that long. As far as I know, the symptoms of black lung are basically indistinguishable from IPF. I'm not a doctor, but my father died of IPF, and his father died from black lung (steel industry, not coal, but they have the same risks).