3 ms·

Those are concerns for a doctor and his/her set of patients. For you, if you're willing to do the stool test, then there's no difference. Right?

shiroiushi 2y ago
I don't follow: I am the patient. For me, a blood test is simpler, because there's absolutely nothing for me to do. A stool test requires me to find not one, but two times before I go to the clinic when I need to poop, and to then go through the task of collecting samples from those poops. (The annual stool test requires 2 samples from two separate BMs.) A blood test literally means absolutely no work or extra time, because I'm already getting a blood draw done at the clinic anyway. It's going to be the same for every patient. The clinic doesn't have to worry about patients forgetting to bring their stool samples, forgetting to do both of them before their appointment, doing them poorly (getting a bad or insufficient sample), etc. The clinic can control everything much better since the blood draw and the handling of the samples is entirely under their control.
- Rastonbury 2y ago
  Yeah stool tests are annoying, I done mine in clinic, having to hold it day before, going to the clinic restroom, laying out toilet paper etc
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  Most of your comments were about patients in general." In fact, your last paragraph is entirely about that. For me (or you) in particular, those concerns are irrelevant. It's just what we prefer. "Everyone" might like Taylor Swift, but if you don't, well... there you go.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    You're still not making any sense. You prefer taking a stool sample on your own time to doing literally nothing at all and (as far as we know) getting the same test result? Really?
    - AlbertCory 2y ago
      > You're still not making any sense. OK, how about this: IF you take a stool sample, the results are just as informative as a blood test. That's what they said. So it's up to the patient. Obviously not doing anything cannot be better. Your second sentence is the one that makes no sense.
      - shiroiushi 2y ago
        Did you not read the exchange before? Yes, not doing anything at all IS better, because they can get a blood sample from the blood they're ALREADY drawing from you. So, you have two choices: 1) do a blood draw AND a stool sample, or 2) do a blood draw only. Which one do you think is less work for the patient and the provider? #2 involves absolutely no extra work for the patient. Is this really that hard for you to understand?
        AlbertCory 2y ago
        Maybe you can drop the insults, so we can take you seriously. Or else just go away. Why do you even care?
        shiroiushi 2y ago
        If you can't understand simple English and basic logic, then I can't help you. There's no insult in my prior message; you just seem to be completely unwilling or unable to understand a simple concept.

shiroiushi 2y ago

I don't follow: I am the patient. For me, a blood test is simpler, because there's absolutely nothing for me to do. A stool test requires me to find not one, but two times before I go to the clinic when I need to poop, and to then go through the task of collecting samples from those poops. (The annual stool test requires 2 samples from two separate BMs.) A blood test literally means absolutely no work or extra time, because I'm already getting a blood draw done at the clinic anyway. It's going to be the same for every patient. The clinic doesn't have to worry about patients forgetting to bring their stool samples, forgetting to do both of them before their appointment, doing them poorly (getting a bad or insufficient sample), etc. The clinic can control everything much better since the blood draw and the handling of the samples is entirely under their control.

Rastonbury 2y ago
Yeah stool tests are annoying, I done mine in clinic, having to hold it day before, going to the clinic restroom, laying out toilet paper etc
AlbertCory 2y ago
Most of your comments were about patients in general." In fact, your last paragraph is entirely about that. For me (or you) in particular, those concerns are irrelevant. It's just what we prefer. "Everyone" might like Taylor Swift, but if you don't, well... there you go.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  You're still not making any sense. You prefer taking a stool sample on your own time to doing literally nothing at all and (as far as we know) getting the same test result? Really?
  - AlbertCory 2y ago
    > You're still not making any sense. OK, how about this: IF you take a stool sample, the results are just as informative as a blood test. That's what they said. So it's up to the patient. Obviously not doing anything cannot be better. Your second sentence is the one that makes no sense.
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      Did you not read the exchange before? Yes, not doing anything at all IS better, because they can get a blood sample from the blood they're ALREADY drawing from you. So, you have two choices: 1) do a blood draw AND a stool sample, or 2) do a blood draw only. Which one do you think is less work for the patient and the provider? #2 involves absolutely no extra work for the patient. Is this really that hard for you to understand?
      - AlbertCory 2y ago
        Maybe you can drop the insults, so we can take you seriously. Or else just go away. Why do you even care?
        shiroiushi 2y ago
        If you can't understand simple English and basic logic, then I can't help you. There's no insult in my prior message; you just seem to be completely unwilling or unable to understand a simple concept.