# Please Help! Swollen/hot/red/ ballooned foreskin in 3 yr old.



## bionicsquirrel (Jan 2, 2003)

For the past few days Ds who is fully potty learned has been having "accidents" that seemed pretty intentional to us. We thought there was some behavior issue going on. Especially because he has been going into the bathroom and peeing all over the floor.

Well, I have noticed that last couple of days that his foreskin has looked quite large when he was going pee, but to me it just seemed like the head of his penis was a little larger...ho hum, I just didn't even think more about it.

Well, last night he had a huge pee all over the bathroom floor and we thought it was because he was being defiant.

Then today, another accident on the floor only this time it was strange to us because he was trying to clean it and fell....obvious that it wasn't intentional.

He just yelled that he had to go and we rushed him to the bathroom, but when we helped him sit down, we saw that his penis isHUGE. Red, swollen like a balloon. About the size of his fist. He won't let us touch it. We sat him in the bath to use the water to relax him, but he can't pee. I just called the doctor and am waiting for him to call back.

Please help. Is this a UTI? Is this a foreskin thing? I am so paranoid about taking him in because of our past incident of forced retraction...that was over a year ago though, so I don't think it is related.

Thanks
Bianca


----------



## lise brit (Apr 8, 2003)

Hi,

Gongrats on your intact little boy! No, balooning is a perfectly normal occurrence in an intact boy. No need to worry, in fact it can be a very fun game for little boys. You can read more about "balooning" in the sticky under web resources. Just go to the nocirc website

Lise Brit


----------



## bionicsquirrel (Jan 2, 2003)

Thank you Lise Bret, for your reply. I don't know if I made myself clear in my OP. This is not normal ballooning. I know that he balloons normally when urinating. This is permanent, not going away ballooning, along with not being able to urinate at all at this point, as well as having issues where he suddenly loses control and pees everywhere. Hi foreskin is balloon, red, hot, swollen and painful.


----------



## lise brit (Apr 8, 2003)

Hi again,

I am sorry about your boy. If he was forcibly retracted, it could be the result of some adhesions. However, did you read the sticky on red/swollen foreskin? OFften it will go away within 48 hours, but if not, it's probably time to take him to the dr's office and have a culture taken. It can be done without retracting, they just need to swab the end of the penis. So, remember to tell them not to retract and bring the paperwork from AAP or NOCIRC if they question you.

Lise Brit


----------



## calngavinsmom (Feb 19, 2003)

Ugh Bianca, I'm sorry to hear your little guy is having a problem. Not being able to urinate is definately not normal and definately needs to be looked at. Is there any type of discharge or anything? It sounds like an infection to me. Because his foreskin is hot, red and painful in addition to being swollen, I think it definately needs to be looked at. If he was urinating freely, I might give him some soaks in some epsom salts ect. But since he is not urinating I would not hesitate to get him seen at a clinic as that could be dangerous.

I hope he is feeling better soon







s,
Tara















:


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

I would call and have him seen, this doesn't sound normal - but just remember the "no retraction" rule and have a conversation with the doctor before your ds' pants come off!

Hope your little guy is feeling better soon....


----------



## bionicsquirrel (Jan 2, 2003)

Well, we went to the doctor...our doctor wasn't in the office today, so I was a little nervous, but his back up doctor was really nice and respectful. I made it clear that there would be no retraction.









Ds was very good about having to be touched on a painful penis, but I know it really hurt him. The diagnosis, "without retraction" as the doctor put it, is that he has phimosis. The doc called the children's urologist and he confirmed the diagnosis. One thing the doctor said that struck me in some way (I don't know what way yet







was when he said, "even if we wanted to retract {to find if it could be yeast or true phimosis} at this stage we couldn't." I am not sure if he meant that he really wanted to retract but was being respectful of our wishes, or if he really recognized that ds's foreskin is just not at all close to naturally retracting.

So, we are starting Augmentin tonight. Plus ds has been having epsom/tto/lavender baths and was finally able to urinate after 8 hours of not going. His poor little penis is still frighteningly ballooned up and a bright red/bluish color. He can't walk normally, so he looks like he just got off of a horse.

If the atbx don't work, then tomorrow we are supposed to call and come in for a culture.

Does this sound par with what you all know? I want to say...it isn't true phimosis...that is extremely rare...etc. but I just don't know. I wish I could take a pic, but that is a little inappropriate, eh?


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

Phimosis doesn't make sense as a diagnosis. Phimosis means the foreskin won't retract. It can either be physiological (either the normal condition of the foreskin at birth, not a medical problem) or pathological (usually as a result of retraction/infection/adhesion cycle).

Phimosis is not an infection by anyone's definition.

If it is an infection they should do a culture to make sure they're using an appropriate antibiotic. If it's yeast abx will only make it worse.

I personally would stay away from TTO/lavender right now because of the irritation they might cause him....

Hope he feels better really soon!


----------



## eightyferrettoes (May 22, 2005)

Yah, phimosis make absolutely no sense at all to me, either. I guess the antibiotics prescription is a good thing, but it's weird that they weren't curious about what caused it. Yeast, maybe??

Heck, if phimosis *caused* infection, every intact baby ever would be in a state of infection.

I guess they think phimosis is a catch-all expression for any problem involving a foreskin.


----------



## bionicsquirrel (Jan 2, 2003)

Well, the doc did say something to the effect of, if ds's foreskin was retractable then he could retract it and see if it is really yeast because the head would be all red/infected with white spots or blotches, but because it is not retractable, he cannot check and so the antbx are the first stage and if they don't do it, we will look into the yeast thing. I knew phimosis seemed off, but I didn't have the information to clarify my thoughts with.


----------



## MCatLvrMom2A&X (Nov 18, 2004)

from what I have read here in the past i thought that a culture should be done before giving antibiotics specific to the infection?? if i am wrong on this please someone let me know. I have also read that they can do a swab at the tip of the forskin without having to do any retraction at all.

phimosis like the pp have said have nothing at all to do with infection it is in reference to unretractable forskin. only most dr seem to be using it a lot without knowing its true meaning.


----------



## hummingbear (Apr 17, 2003)

I am glad your son can pee again. That and pain are the most crucial thing to evaluate whether or not a physician's care is indicated.

The phimosis thing sounds odd to me too. Ask him what he meant.

I am guessing that an antibiotic is given out first because a bacterial infection could get more serious faster than a yeast infection. So it would be a pinch hit until the results come in, and could be a timely intervention. But as Frank has mentioned again and again, it is important that the medication is matched with the culture. Recurring infections can occur when the original infection is never effectively treated. As far as teast goes, I too think that there are ways to determine this without having to retract.

Hope all goes well from here on out.

BTW


----------



## Frankly Speaking (May 24, 2002)

Bianca, part of a diagnosis is ruling out what it is not to narrow down the possible causes.

Your son does not have phimosis. You've been a member here too long. You know not to retract. If your son had had infections that would cause phimosis, you would have gotten them treated and cured many moons ago, so phimosis is out.

Then we have to determine if it is really infection at all and not separation trauma. Since it has been going on more than 36 hours, we have to assume that it is really an infection.

Now, we have to determine what the infection is by considering the symptoms. The one that sticks in my mind is the missing the toilet. I can remember two urinary tract infections I suffered almost 20 years ago. Very suddenly, my bladder would feel very full and my urethra would start burning like urine was already starting down. At that point, I had to get to the bathroom as fast as I could to keep from wetting my pants. I was literally afraid to go anywhere because I was afraid one of these urges would hit so fast that I wouldn't have time to get to a restroom fast enough. Often, the urge would be so intense that I just couldn't totally hold it and I would have some wetness in my underwear.

I think this is what is happening to your son. By the time he gets to the bathroom, he's beyond the last second, he pulls it out and by that time, he's already going, missing the toilet.

I suspect that the bacteria in his urine is irritating his foreskin causing the redness and swelling. I think a urinanalysis is definitely in order and if positive, the appropriate medications and in just a couple of days, everything will be back to normal.

Frank


----------



## bionicsquirrel (Jan 2, 2003)

Well, I got a message when I got back early evening that the doc had also called in a prescription for an ointment. I am assuming this will be some sort of steroidal cream. I definitely do not think we need this.

On a side note...did you all know that Augmentin costs $110. That is outrageous...all because it is a name brand. Makes me even more glad that I rarely turn to antbx to help me and my family.

So, ds is urinating again, but now it is also the tip of the foreskin that is inflamed and infected. Some of the swelling is down, but still aparent. He is sleeping soundly though.

Frank, that is what I think it is also. I would like to get the urinalysis and culture done tomorrow if I can and with his regular doctor. I think I will give the Augmentin 24 hours though. As long as he is going to the bathroom, I feel okay.
I know I have been here a while and I usually feel pretty informed, but I still do that panic thing when it happens to my ds. I am happy to say though, that I was very confident talking to the doctor today and told him exactly how I felt about retraction. I didn't even shake afterwards or start to hyperventilate like I would in the past. As much as I know, there is still so much more to learn.

Thanks all. I will keep you posted in the next day or two.


----------



## crazy_eights (Nov 22, 2001)

I think that many doctors aren't real clear on what 'phimosis' is and isn't. I got a call a while back from a friend whose son is circ'ed. She had taken him to the pediatrician, I think for a diaper rash problem and he was given a diagnosis of phimosis. Um, ok







- I was as puzzled as she was. Even if you want to say they are using it as a 'catch-all' for iritated foreskin - he ain't got one!


----------



## Frankly Speaking (May 24, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bionicsquirrel*
I didn't even shake afterwards or start to hyperventilate like I would in the past.









:

You are a victim of the US medical profession and our culture. It's been drilled into our heads that the foreskin is a naturally defective and problematical structure. Even with the education we get here, it's impossible to push all of the myths and lies out of our heads. It's perfectly understandable that you would have a panic attack because of that.

Frank


----------



## LadyMarmalade (May 22, 2005)

Thinking of you, mama. I hope you get the right answers soon.


----------



## keptwoman (Sep 18, 2004)

The one time either of my boys got an infection in their foreskin (symptoms sounding very much like your sons) we were prescribed oral antibiotics PLUS antibiotic ointment to treat the infection at the site and hopefully get things comfortable quicker. Maybe thats the cream the doc wants you to get?

On a silly side note: That cream, Bactoban, has been called Penis cream in our house ever since


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

Wow, 110 for Augmentin? Is that your co-pay or is that paying all of it yourself? DS has been on Augmentin and it has never been that expensive.

The thing with it, though, is that if you start it you need to finish it to avoid creating abx-resistant germs.

I agree with Frank that you should talk to the doctor again and ask why he didn't suspect a UTI with the urination problems...maybe take him in for a urine specimen and culture (they can bag him or he can pee in a cup, no need for catheters!)


----------



## hummingbear (Apr 17, 2003)

I just reread the post after your visit to the doctor. Was the doctor trying to put the cause of his pain and inability to urinate on a diagnosis of phimosis? But then he gave you an antibiotic prescription? And he didn't take a culture? And if it didn't get better then you were to go in for a culture? Sounds like he was relying on a shot in the dark (that the antibiotic he prescribed would work). Has your son continued to get better or have you gone in for a culture?


----------



## Minky (Jun 28, 2005)

As much as I loathe antibiotic's, I think this may be one case where you need to give them and give the full course. From your description it sounds like some serious infection and your son may need the meds. I think I ould give the antibiotics to DD if she had such an infection.


----------



## bionicsquirrel (Jan 2, 2003)

Okay, so far, so good. He is urinating normally and the swelling has gone down considerably. It is still beet red and hot to the touch though...he doesn't have a fever, though, so I am less worried.

I didn't mention earlier, that for the past month and a half or so, ds had been on a sort of potty strike. He would hold his pee for hours and hours and scream like a banshee if we ask him to potty. We could not figure out why he was being so resistant. I just figured it was some wacky development thing. Now I know that he was probably in some pain because this infection has definitely been building for a while.


----------



## Frankly Speaking (May 24, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mom2seven*
I think that many doctors aren't real clear on what 'phimosis' is and isn't. I got a call a while back from a friend whose son is circ'ed. She had taken him to the pediatrician, I think for a diaper rash problem and he was given a diagnosis of phimosis. Um, ok







- I was as puzzled as she was. Even if you want to say they are using it as a 'catch-all' for iritated foreskin - he ain't got one!

That wasn't as crazy of a diagnosis as it would seem. With the new loose circumcisions, true pathologica phimosis is now much more common in circumcised boys than in intact boys. In the loose circumcisions, the remnant foreskin often covers the glans and the scar tissue from the circumcision is non-elastic. This traps the glans inside the remnant foreskin.

Circumcision is supposed to prevent phimosis and the loose circumcisions are supposed to prevent the problems circumcision caused. In truth, they only exchanged one set of complications for another.

Frank


----------



## kayjayjay (Jul 15, 2003)

to Zep. Hope he feels better soon.


----------



## pdx.mothernurture (May 27, 2004)

They can take a culture by swabbing the tip of the penis without retraction. If it's yeast, antibiotics are going to make the situation way-worse. I'm also totally confused that the diagnosis was "phimosis" but the treatment is antibiotics?

Jen


----------



## channelofpeace (Jul 14, 2005)

Hi









I am in Wichita too! Who is your doc? You can PM me if you don't want to put the name on the thread. I thought my doc was down with the whole not circing thing, she said it was barbaric and when we talked about retraction once, she said she didn't do it. Well, that was until his one year appt







:

Good to know that there are other Mamas in Kansas with intact boys!

I don't have anything else to add to your conundrum, the experts on this board seem to have taken care of it!


----------



## busymomof5 (Dec 12, 2005)

That's great that he's doing better. Kudos to you for taking him in and having it looked at instead of making him suffer a few days longer! It's scarey when things like this happen!


----------



## InDaPhunk (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *busymomof5*
It's scarey when things like this happen!

You're right BM, it is sca_ry_!


----------



## pdx.mothernurture (May 27, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *busymomof5*
That's great that he's doing better. Kudos to you for taking him in and having it looked at instead of making him suffer a few days longer! It's scarey when things like this happen!

Did someone suggest waiting to have him seen for a few days? I must have missed where that was suggested. I can't imagine anyone would have advised she prolong his suffering.









Jen


----------



## Frankly Speaking (May 24, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunflower_mommy*
Did someone suggest waiting to have him seen for a few days? I must have missed where that was suggested. I can't imagine anyone would have advised she prolong his suffering.









Jen

I checked and I saw no one that even hinted at that! Maybe the evil moderator pulled that post! (Sorry, Karen, I'm just kidding!) As a matter of fact, I saw people advocating taking him to the "dawkter."

Now, on the other side, I saw that the "dawkter" did a shoot from the hip diagnosis. He didn't use the basic diagnostic tools available to him. He took a shot in the dark and prescribed a very expensive antibiotic with little regard for the patient's finances without knowing if the antibiotic would even work on the unknown pathogen. It appeared that he was advocating throwing money at the problem and if that didn't work, he would default to a culture which he should have done in the first place. It also appears that the child had the symptoms of a UTI but he didn't bother to take a urine sample. I guess if the outrageously expensive antibiotic didn't work, he would have eventually gotten around to that too, maybe on the 3rd or 4th office visit!

It appears to me that the doctor seriously dropped the ball in this case and the members here gave some very appropriate advice.

Oh, and there is the diagnosis of phimosis! That's just downright scary!

Frank


----------



## bionicsquirrel (Jan 2, 2003)

Okay all, I wanted to give an update on ds.

The Penis is back to normal























I called the doctor the day after so I could speak with our regular doctor and nurse. I expressed my (really your suggestions) disagreement with the phimosis diagnosis and my regular nurse (couldn't talk to the doc, of course) agreed that it was a misdiagnosis. She said that if the antibiotics were started that we should stick with them as long as there was positive change. She also said that she would have had a urine test done, but because we started the abx, that was out of question as it would not be accurate. I told her we would give it another day and if things were not still improving, we would bring ds in. So far, so good though. He is urinating and not in any pain and all the swelling is gone. What a relief. Though there are still so many what ifs and questions about this. frustrating.

I just wanted to say thank you to all of you. Once again I am grateful to this board and especially this forum for the knowledge that I am able to access so easily. You are all a wealth of information and it makes my parenting job so much more enjoyable and easier knowing that my questions can so easily be answered. Thank you so much. This was a very scary experience for us and I feel like we came through this with our confidence and dignity intact, not something that can always be said after a visit to the doctor.


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

Glad to hear everything is getting better! What a relief, for you and for him!

Are you finishing the course of Augmentin? I hope you're upping his probiotic intake, with yogurt and/or kefir and/or probiotics supplements, to help get his gut flora back in balance. I stir probiotic powder into applesauce for ds when he has to take abx.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *busymomof5*
That's great that he's doing better. Kudos to you for taking him in and having it looked at instead of making him suffer a few days longer! It's scarey when things like this happen!


Busymomof5, I really think you have the wrong impression of this board. No one ever suggests that parents keep their children at home, writhing in pain, just to prove a point about how wonderful the foreskin is. All we suggest is that if the child is not having trouble urinating, and is in no apparent pain, to wait out the redness a day, just like any other body part. Most people I know try to give their body a chance to heal itself first, because often it does.

~Nay


----------



## bionicsquirrel (Jan 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quirky*
Glad to hear everything is getting better! What a relief, for you and for him!

Are you finishing the course of Augmentin? I hope you're upping his probiotic intake, with yogurt and/or kefir and/or probiotics supplements, to help get his gut flora back in balance. I stir probiotic powder into applesauce for ds when he has to take abx.


Ah, yes. We are definitely taking care of that. We try to keep it in his diet regularly, but sometimes he knows and won't eat it. He will definitely drink kefir though, so we do that a lot.

We will finish out the antibiotics. I just think that is best. Although, I do feel like the number of doses is a pretty arbitrary number. Anyone have info on how these numbers of days on abx are chosen?


----------



## Frankly Speaking (May 24, 2002)

I think it is determined by the body processes and the life cycle of the bacteria but don't quote me on that. The standard is usually 10 days. I always recommend taking the prescribed dosage for the entire time prescribed so that you don't end up with a bug that is drug resistant. That's medical advice and good research and experience based medical advice. I hope I don't get in trouble for giving that advice!









Frank


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Frankly Speaking*
I think it is determined by the body processes and the life cycle of the bacteria but don't quote me on that. The standard is usually 10 days. I always recommend taking the prescribed dosage for the entire time prescribed so that you don't end up with a bug that is drug resistant. That's medical advice and good research and experience based medical advice. I hope I don't get in trouble for giving that advice!









Frank









I'm reporting you to the cops for recommending someone finish a course of antibiotics!









Actually, one of the scarier things I read recently (in the New York Times health/science section, which I religiously read every week) is that one of the reasons to avoid abx unless absolutely necessary is that they can contribute to abx-resistant bacteria *that live in you* and can cause an abx-resistant infection in you months later after some unrelated illness. So it's not just an altruistic reason of not wanting to unleash abx-resistant bugs on the world, there's also a very selfish reason for avoiding abx unless absolutely necessary.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

So glad he's better, bionicsquirrel!


----------



## Frankly Speaking (May 24, 2002)

Yes, Quirky! One of the practices that has driven the rise of resistant bacteria is that doctors have been writing prescriptions for antibiotics when the patient has a viral infection. Antibiotics are not effective on viral infections. The only reason the prescription is given is because the patient insists on a prescription and the doctors don't have the sperm producing orbs to tell them "no." Instead of giving them a prescription for an antibiotic, they should give them a placebo (sugar pills) instead. That way, the patient is satisfied and none the wiser and we don't get all of these drug resistant bacteria that have now become life threatening.

Frank


----------



## LeosMama (Sep 6, 2005)

Frank! I understand what you're saying about preventing drug resistant bacteria, but the medicos lying to us and deceiving us isn't something to encourage. Don't we have enough of that?!!


----------



## calngavinsmom (Feb 19, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bionicsquirrel*
The Penis is back to normal
























Yeah! I'm so happy for the two of you!









Take care,
Tara















:


----------



## Frankly Speaking (May 24, 2002)

Leosmama, you need to look up "placebo effect." The use of placebos has a long history in medical care and the body has a remarkable ability to heal itself. The placebo makes the patient think that they are getting a miracle cure and that positive thinking helps the body cure itself. After all, isn't the goal of medicine to effect a cure? Does it matter what the means?

Sugar pills and other placebos are very inexpensive, maybe $2 or $3. Isn't it worth that to effect a cure? In my thinking, if a patient thinks they have to have medication to have a cure or to have a quicker relief of symptoms, it is far, far better to give them a placebo than to give them an antibiotic that will do nothing more than a placebo for a cure but may instead, incubate a drug resistant bacteria in their body.

Sometimes, making the customer happy is the important thing. It reminds me of something that happened to me more than 25 years ago. I used to collect antique cars and had two old Cadillacs that I decided to sell instead of restoring. My total cost in the two cars was about $500.00 and decided that that's what I would sell them for. I found a man that was interested in buying both of them. When he asked what I wanted for them, I said $1,200.00. He counter offered at $800.00 and I accepted. We went into the house and I started filling out the paperwork and he wrote the check and placed it in front of me. It was for $1,600.00 or 3.3 times what I would have taken for the cars and twice what I was barganing for. I took the money!

Now, he made that counter offer thinking that the real price he would have to pay for them was more and we would negotiate a price of maybe $900 or $1,000 each so he really got a better price than he was ultimately willing to pay. Obviously, he was happy with the price he had negotiated. Should have told him "No, just make the check for $500.00?

Sometimes a little deception is a good thing. Clearly, I have told some little white lies to GFs when they have asked how they look in a certain dress or with a new hairdo. Is that wrong? If so, to what degree? Is it worse than telling them the unvarnished truth that might be hurtful?

Frank


----------



## LeosMama (Sep 6, 2005)

I'm aware of the long history of the use of placebos (I'm sure not in the detail that you are) and the value they hold.

Quote:

After all, isn't the goal of medicine to effect a cure? Does it matter what the means?
You know very well that the means matters. I've read enough of your posts here to know that you care very much about the means. That you care very much about the ethics of the doctor-patient relationship.

"Do no harm" is important, and I understand that is the concept you are arguing from, that the antibiotics do harm. I agree with this. And I understand you are saying that the placebo acts as a drug by effecting a very real cure. I know a placebo can't work if the prescriber is truthful about it, but I can't stomach the deception here.

This feels like the arrogant MinorDeity at work. "I know what's best for you, and am choosing to disregard your expressed wishes. I will give you what I want to give you and treat you like an ignorant slave." I run into this attitude EVERY time I see a medico of any type, from the medical assistant who pumps the blood pressure cuff FAR tighter than is necessary and scoffs at my discomfort to the doctor who assures me I don't need to know why I should be cleaning my son's glans at every diaper change, I should just do it. I was told by an OB that I read to much and I should stop doing so much research. The same doc tried to give me a routine IV shunt during labor just b/c he had shown up on shift and was checking off boxes.

I want to know EVERYTHING that is going on with my medical health and I don't want some MinorDeity PRESCRIBING what he feels is appropriate without consulting me.

I am an active participant in my health care and to be given a placebo b/c I'm too much trouble is insulting, degrading, and irresponsible. I would rather have the doctor refuse treatment and even fire me as his patient than to be lied to about my treatment.

Believe it or not, as I write this I really am struggling with the concept of a placebo in this situation, unnecessary antibiotics. I do see the reasons a doctor would list to himself to use it, that it is medicine and is curing the symptoms, that it is preventing development of abx resistant bugs (social and individual benefits). But I can't get my head around the ethics of cutting the patient out of active involvement in his healthcare.

-Lindsay

PS - thanks for the debate, I can't get a dr to do it with me, they get offended that I would ever question their ethics.


----------



## Daisyuk (May 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Frankly Speaking*

Sometimes a little deception is a good thing. Clearly, I have told some little white lies to GFs when they have asked how they look in a certain dress or with a new hairdo. Is that wrong? If so, to what degree? Is it worse than telling them the unvarnished truth that might be hurtful?

Frank

I prefer to be told the unvarnished truth, I hate it when someone tells a "little white lie" about how I look. I'd far rather know if something looks hideous on me than be conned into wearing/buying it - although I usually know if something looks bad, the request for information is normally a confirmatory role. I don't think I'll ever understand the "telling a lie to protect them" way of thinking, it just irritates me, and once someone has lied to me, (and I always find out), I find I never trust them to tell me the truth again. I don't understand why people can't just be straight with each other.


----------



## Frankly Speaking (May 24, 2002)

LeosMama, let me explain it another way.

The patients who are demading antibiotics are not educated and informed medical consumers. For instance, my maternal grandmother was a full fledged hypocondiraic but she was not a highly educated woman. She was the type that would demand an antibiotic for a viral infection such as the flu. If the doctor prescribed a placebo and the positive influence of the placebo helped her deal with the symptoms better and thus have a cure sooner, was that not a good thing? Or would it have been better to give her an antibiotic that would have no more effect that a placebo and could lead to a drug resistant bacteria in her system? I would vote for a placebo every time!

Likewise, my father was a borderline hypochondriac. He kept a paper grocery bag of OTC medications in his car all of the time. I doubt he knew that an antibiotic would have no more than a placebo effect on a viral illness. If he were convinced that he had the flu or if the doctor diagnosed the flu, I have no doubt that he would have insisted that he get a prescription for an antibiotic even if he were told that there is no cure for influenza. Should he be denied the placebo effect or just be left to suffer with no apparent help? Again, I'll vote for the placebo effect.

The people like my GM and DF are the ones that the placebos are for. For them, it is sometimes highly effective treatment. I also suspect that hypnosis, accupuncture, faith healing and many other things are mostly about the placebo effect. If they help people, shouldn't they be in the arsenal? I certainly think so as long as there is no harm from using them and they aren't unduly expensive. People do benefit from them.

Frank


----------



## Frankly Speaking (May 24, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daisyuk*
I prefer to be told the unvarnished truth, I hate it when someone tells a "little white lie" about how I look. I'd far rather know if something looks hideous on me than be conned into wearing/buying it - although I usually know if something looks bad, the request for information is normally a confirmatory role. I don't think I'll ever understand the "telling a lie to protect them" way of thinking, it just irritates me, and once someone has lied to me, (and I always find out), I find I never trust them to tell me the truth again. I don't understand why people can't just be straight with each other.

OK, Ok! Let me clarify. I could always pick out clothing for my last GF that were complimentary to her and garnered her scads of compliments. When I would go clothes shopping with her and found something that was that type, other women in the clothing department would compliment her when she came out of the dressing room and then get those articles of clothing to try on themselves. There were other things that looked good but not nearly as good but she liked them and wanted them. I never told her that they looked fabulous like the ones that really did. But I also didn't tell her that they weren't special and did nothing for her even though that would have been an accurate statement.

On the other hand, she was very petite, small hipped and large breasted. She very much liked long dresses and skirts but because of her figure, they made her look very matrionly and dowdy. I did tell her that, so I wasn't being totally dishonest with her.

She also had a face that was full around the jaw. When we met, she had a Dorothy Hamil type hair cut that just did not compliment her face. I convinced her to let her hair grow to between chin and shoulder lenght and it looked great and she got a lot of compliments. I did not tell her the truth that the short hair looked awful but it did. It significantly detracted from her beauty. Was that wrong or was it better to tell a little white lie and show her a better way?

Since we broke up, she has gotten it cut short again just like it was when we met and it makes her look like she has a very thick neck. Although she has been getting a lot of dates on internet dating sites, the guys only want one night with her for the most part and she can't understand it. Should I be totally honest with her and tell her "Your hair cut makes your neck look thick and your jaw line look fat and the clothes you're wearing make you look old and shapeless" to avoid a little white lie? She says "I know you like my hair longer and I know you don't like long skirts." and I simply say "that's not what looks best on you."

Frank


----------



## Daisyuk (May 15, 2005)

Well, since she's gone back to an unflattering hair-style and clothing, maybe you didn't do her any favours by pulling the punches. It sounds like you've done her a disservice actually, because she just thinks it's your tastes that she's not dressing to now, as opposed to something that really doesn't flatter her.

I vote honesty every time, then this sort of thing wouldn't happen. It was someone calling me Shergar (a race horse for anyone that doesn't know) that made me get my teeth fixed, otherwise I really wouldn't have looked at them in quite the same light, after all, I was used to them and didn't notice how much they'd moved from when I was young. I now have straight teeth, that do not protrude over my bottom lip and a much wider smile. I'm very grateful to him for pointing it out, others might have though it rude, but in the end he did me a huge favour.

But I'm not everybody, I don't really do tact very well.


----------



## pdx.mothernurture (May 27, 2004)

When I think of miracle cures/placebos, Windex (ala My Big Fat Greek Wedding) comes to mind.

LOL

Jen


----------



## LeosMama (Sep 6, 2005)

Quote:

but in the end he did me a huge favour.
So I guess I'm just naive about all of this and think that doctors have an obligation to educate their patients.
I had to teach a friend of mine about many medical concepts so that she could understand what doctors were trying to do for her (and her sister, at one point). By explaining Rh incompatibility to her (complete with pieces of lettuce and tomato as antigens and tortilla chips as cells







), she and her sister were able to understand why the injection was important and her sister accepted it (she had been going to decline it as the doc was too busy to explain such a complex concept to an undeducated woman).

I really do understand what you're saying, I just really really really (can I say 'really' enough?) want ALL doctors (that includes YOU, cyber-hunk that you are







) to be very careful about WHY they are deceiving their patients in this manner and to opt for education immediately and the placebo ONLY when that education has failed.

And BTW, I think Daisy is right about being straightforward. My dh tries to be with me and has saved me from many ill-fated fashion mistakes.


----------



## busymomof5 (Dec 12, 2005)

Interesting topic...placebo/vs meds.

I'm just curious....would anyone here be upset if they found out that they had received a placebo by their doc? I consider the doctor/patient relationship to be a weird sort of ...intimate relationship that has to be built upon trust....and I'd be highly offended. When there is nothing wrong with me that medication can help, I would just prefer that my doctor tell me that....I don't think I could go back to a doc that knowingly tried to trick me like that....even if it was in my best interests. Tell me it's psychological, tell me it's a virus.....but don't insult me by prescribing sugar pills.









I guess I won't see a doc that I can't trust to be honest with me whether I want to hear it or not.


----------



## LeosMama (Sep 6, 2005)

you said it, busymom, that's what i've been trying to say.


----------



## Daisyuk (May 15, 2005)

I would be stratospherically angry if I found out a doctor had prescribed me a placebo, and I would be changing doctors and reporting them at the first opportunity. The antibiotic for a virus thing must happen over here too though, because I've been to the doctor where (before I've said anything at all, because I wouldn't ask for antibiotics for a virus) he's told me that he won't prescribe anything because what I have is probably viral.


----------



## Frankly Speaking (May 24, 2002)

If I were prescribed a placebo or if a placebo were prescribed for my Mom, I would be angry. I'm educated and my Mom was the sharpest blade in the box. For us, it would be deceptive.

But, if a placebo were prescribed for my Dad or my GM, I would completely understand and support it. The placebo effect has repeatedly been shown to be an effective form of treatment. Used in the proper context and for the proper reasons, (ie to provide comfort and protection to an insistent patient and to fight drug resistant bacteria) I completely support it.

I understand that it's deceptive on some level but I also believe that sometimes you have to protect others from some peoples ignorance. Isn't that what we are doing here without the deceptive element?

Frank


----------



## busymomof5 (Dec 12, 2005)

It is the job of the doc to educate...unfortunately, some don't or...they don't have the time to. You'd be surprised actually at how little pediatricians earn today, how much debt they have from med school and residency and how many patients that they are required to see/day just to keep their salaries....Most peds earn far less annually than they owe in student loan debt...and they have to pay for malpractice insurance, nursing staff, etc....

Anyway...a good physician will either take the time to educate the patient or use a nurse educator to do so....there's really no excuse for deceiving any patient...even the ones the doc perceives to be 'ignorant'...It's sort of a slippery slope.....and...what if the doc were to think that I was too ignorant to understand? OR....what if the docs simply decided that since it's ok to prescribe placebo pills to 'ignorant' patients it would be easier to not waste time explaining to the less ignorant and simply prescribe placebos to all.

The practice that dh is with has come up with a novel approach to the cold season. They have put together special cold/flu 'care packages'....inside is information about viruses etc written for lay people...but there are also some ibupfrofen/tylenol tablets, cough drops/theraflu, hot chocolate and chicken noodle soup....In the packet it basically has a letter from the practice encouraging the patient that the doc prescribes rest and taking care of themselevs, etc. The reaction has been extremely positive. It seems that people really just need TLC when they go to the doctor for a cold/viral infection...and when they get it, the leave much happier.


----------

