Is This The Reason Why Endometriosis Treatments Are So Ineffective?

2 thoughts on “Is This The Reason Why Endometriosis Treatments Are So Ineffective?”

  1. Thanks for an interesting post. The points you raise about scans are a good point, I think though that they say surgical observation is best, because there aren’t as many general consultants and technicians that seem to be able to spot endometriosis on external scans.

    It’s certainly possible, but most of the consultants and I’ve seen, spoken to or observed in talks seem to conclude that you have to have the expertise and knowledge to spot endometriosis in this way. Unless it’s very severe endo as you say, but some clever bods can spot mild endo too.

    It seems to be mainly limited to those working in specialist endometriosis centres (although no exclusively so). Something that most women with endometriosis in the UK don’t have access to yet. I hope this knowledge will be more widespread in the future. I certainly something that I hope is reviewed in the NICE guidelines for endometriosis (where visual confirmation for endometriosis is currently recommended) – which would probably be the main tool to see this changed in the UK.

    Like

    1. Thanks for reading; this wasn’t something I’d ever expected to write.

      I totally understand what you’re saying about diagnostic tools; and there is a clear lack of Endometriosis experts, leaving most of us to deal with gynaecologists with a ‘special interest’. Professor Garry himself has now left the UK for his native Australia.

      My main reason for writing the article, though, was to highlight the findings of both Cullen and Garry. Because, if they are right and Endometriosis is two separate ailments, then the subsequent treatment surpasses, in importance, the techniques for diagnosis. If they are both correct then fibrosis cannot be treated like lesions and vice versa. As the initial research is 96 years old, now, it puzzles me that doctors are viewing the differing syndromes as being one and the same. It’s almost like knowing that TB exists, but still choosing to treat it like Bronchitis – referring to it as Bronchitis stage III or IV and expecting the same treatments to work for both.

      On the plus side, Professor Garry is doing his best to educate and push for meaningful research (his paper, which is linked in the article, is really worth reading) so, hopefully, the rest of the medical community will catch up in our lifetime.

      Sorry if I went on a bit! Finding Professor Garry’s paper, after 13 years of hospitals and ‘specialists’, nearly tipped me over the edge…

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s