A question was asked recently on a forum I visit which got me thinking about some things. While this isn’t the exact question that was asked, I’m curious to know what any (or all!) of you would do when faced with the following scenario:
It is likely that you have a specific medical condition. There is no cure, but the condition is not immediately life-threatening (studies don’t show increased morbidity at all, unless complications arise). Treatments may or may not alleviate the symptoms, which, while annoying, are things you’ve lived with for several years before this possible diagnosis even appeared on the horizon.
What would you do? Would you seek a diagnosis just to have a diagnosis? Or would you just leave well enough alone? If you would seek a diagnosis, would you opt for treatment that may not work and definitely has side effects?
I know I’m being purposely vague here . . . because honestly, there are likely a myriad conditions to which the above scenario can be applied.
Discuss away! 🙂