I dont know how medically inclined you are or anything, but one of the millions of things I've been entertaining since this started has been my extremely powerful course of Augmentin 800mg for 10 days just prior to onset of symptoms. Augmentin is unique in that it contains "clavulanate Potassium" ... so its not just Penicillin but Penicillin + clavulanate Potassium. I did find one web site that associates the medication in its "600mg form" with onset of Hyperkalemia (excessive Potassium levels). I was on the 800mg course. And Hyperkalemia I believe is heavily associated with Neuromytonia. Additionally, on my first set of bloodwork about 2 days after this all started, my only abnormal test result was excessively high Potassium levels. Everything else was normal. Any thoughts on this?
You can imagine I was a big fan of the TV show "House". Every symptom has a cause, and reveals a clue, just like every abnormal test result. It can be intellectually challenging and entertaining to try and figure out the riddle!
I would however stress that if the neurologist sees the test as unnecessary that you trust his judgement.
I hear statements like this a lot. Just to play Devil's Advocate here ... what is the thought process behind statements like this? That the doctor is infallible? That if someone requests that the test be run "anyways", something bad might happen? Of course both of those sentiments are nonsense. There is a pervading archaic mentality that Doctors are never wrong. And suggestions like the one above cater to that mentality, even if the person saying it doesn't realize it. You are in fact stating that the doctor is infallible. I can't agree that we should humbly submit ourselves to the extent of whatever life experience they've had, and pray to God that they're right. What would be the downside of ordering an "unnecessary" test? I guess that's the real question here. Money spent is all I can think of. Some people say it taxes the medical system as a whole, but that is nonsense, because Labs run the tests, and they are paid for their service. All it does is increase the income of the Lab. There is no downside. And I probably dont need to recite for everyone the endless stories of doctors who "didnt feel it was necessary" to do something, and it ended up harming the patient. My mother being one of them. Dead the same night. Respectfully, I will order every unnecesary test in the book, if it may reveal clues to the cause, and expedite potential for treatment. I myself was put on HIV Prophylaxis after an exposure. I had 72 hours to get on *proper* treatment or my life was over. The first doctor, a well known physician at a Hospital, put me on the *wrong* medications for post exposure prophylaxis. I went home and spent my first (and most important) 24 hours on medications that were not recommended. Thanks to the evil Dr. Google, I found that out, and was back at the hospital requesting proper medications immediately. Thank God I bothered to check. At my 1 week follow up, one of the most well-known HIV specialists in Miami met with me and told me that he wished me luck, but didn't have much hope the prophylaxis would work. He apparently had no clue of the 98% success rate published in numerous journals. Thank God he was ill-informed. I have stories like these that could fill pages. Sorry to hijack the thread.