Re: why so hard to diagnose?

[Guest guest]

, many of us have had the same experience. I even had one doctor tell me

that I had no medical reason for having the RA problems I was having just a

month before I was diagnosed. The way my rheumy explained it to me is that

there is criteria you have to meet before you can get a definate diagnosis, and

not everyone has all the symptoms starting off. Also some of the symptoms of RA

are similar to those of many other diseases. Unfotunately unless your doctor

suspects it in the first place, a lot of doctors wont even test you for it. It

took me 2 years to get my diagnosis of RA and the another half a year to get my

lupus diagnosis. It's so frustrating I know. Best wishes, Holly

briandm113 <briandm113@...> wrote: I was diagnosed with RA last year

after suffering pain for over three

years in several joints. Seen my rheumatologist specialists many

times - often told it was just my age (I was only 39!). I've seen so

many other messages etc saying the same thing - why so hard to

diagnose?

brian

www.thearthritiscentre.com

[Guest guest]

I consider myself very lucky. I was diagnosed immediately by a retired rheumy

--was at his home-- at a time I could hardly move. He sent me for tests and all,

except for some tell-tales in the synovial fluids of the knees, were and still

are negative. It seems this is not unusual.

I feel lucky because I have been on a minimum of meds and doing well. RA did

not get worse over the past 2 years.

Holly <hollybgroovin2003@...> wrote:

, many of us have had the same experience. I even had one doctor tell me

that I had no medical reason for having the RA problems I was having just a

month before I was diagnosed. The way my rheumy explained it to me is that

there is criteria you have to meet before you can get a definate diagnosis, and

not everyone has all the symptoms starting off. Also some of the symptoms of RA

are similar to those of many other diseases. Unfotunately unless your doctor

suspects it in the first place, a lot of doctors wont even test you for it. It

took me 2 years to get my diagnosis of RA and the another half a year to get my

lupus diagnosis. It's so frustrating I know. Best wishes, Holly

briandm113 <briandm113@...> wrote: I was diagnosed with RA last year

after suffering pain for over three

years in several joints. Seen my rheumatologist specialists many

times - often told it was just my age (I was only 39!). I've seen so

many other messages etc saying the same thing - why so hard to

diagnose?

brian

www.thearthritiscentre.com

[Guest guest]

Hi :

Sorry for your diagnosis, but you have come to a great

place for support and information. I think that the

reason it is so hard to diagnosis is that so many of

these autoimmune diseases mimic each other in

symptoms, and there is not always blood work that will

show the disease, and sometimes that blood work can

put in a false negative or false positive too. There

is seronegative RA which does not show up as RA.

Lupus and RA are very close in symptomatology. It all

gets very confusing, and my first doctor actually told

me that these diseases very often come along in more

than one (ie like I have RA and Fibro), and they get

all tangled up and it's hard to tell what is what, and

what to treat first. I first got RA and the FM

followed 6 years later. More meds, but many of the

same symptoms, pain and stiffness in the joints as

example. So, that's why these things are so hard to

diagnosis, IMO. Hope this helps.

Kathe in CA

--- briandm113 <briandm113@...> wrote:

> I was diagnosed with RA last year after suffering

> pain for over three

> years in several joints. Seen my rheumatologist

> specialists many

> times - often told it was just my age (I was only

> 39!). I've seen so

> many other messages etc saying the same thing - why

> so hard to

> diagnose?

>

> brian

> www.thearthritiscentre.com

>

>

>

>

>

>

Kathe

" To ride a horse is to borrow freedom. "

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

In the past, RA had not been classified as a disability because of the need

for proof other than the complaints of the patient. The same thing happened

to those suffering from Fibromyalgia. It cannot be proven by normal tests,

x-rays, or MRI's. Only the patient's answers to specific questions can prove

it, but there's always the question of no physical proof. I guess I was

lucky that my GP recognized the RA right off the bat, even before blood

tests were done. When I was investigating Fibro for my sister because her

daughter was complaining of it, I found that I had the same symptoms. When I

went to my Rheumy again, I told him of my findings and finished with, " I

have Fibro " , and he said, " Of course you do " . Apparently he knew but

wouldn't tell me, expecting me to find out for myself, I guess. It's not an

exact science.

Dennis

Re: [ ] why so hard to diagnose?

> , many of us have had the same experience. I even had one doctor

> tell me that I had no medical reason for having the RA problems I was

> having just a month before I was diagnosed. The way my rheumy explained

> it to me is that there is criteria you have to meet before you can get a

> definate diagnosis, and not everyone has all the symptoms starting off.

> Also some of the symptoms of RA are similar to those of many other

> diseases. Unfotunately unless your doctor suspects it in the first place,

> a lot of doctors wont even test you for it. It took me 2 years to get my

> diagnosis of RA and the another half a year to get my lupus diagnosis.

> It's so frustrating I know. Best wishes, Holly

>

> briandm113 <briandm113@...> wrote: I was diagnosed with RA last

> year after suffering pain for over three

> years in several joints. Seen my rheumatologist specialists many

> times - often told it was just my age (I was only 39!). I've seen so

> many other messages etc saying the same thing - why so hard to

> diagnose?

>

> brian

> www.thearthritiscentre.com