> > > Getting ready for micro-dragon war soon with biopsy on March 10th.
> > ...
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
On Feb 22, 9:57 am, "déjà vu déjà vu" <jamf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Cactus Jammies" <cactusjamm...@retinal.circus.orb> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 50 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
If your going to have treatment, what is the point of the biopsy?
I had a biopsy but based my treatment decison on the results. Just my
opinion,
but why have one when you know you are going to treat.
Exactly; a biopsy is not a pleasant experience and not one that is
particularly beneficial for one's overall wellbeing. But, what Dejavu needs
to know is that the biopsy is the only reliable method of determining liver
damage. Plus, some docs will not prescribe tx without evidence of
substantial damage, and some health insurance companies won't pay for the
drugs without the biopsy evidence.
Paul - 24 Feb 2008 17:58 GMT
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 23:52:53 -0800, "Waterspider" <nospam@all.com>, in
message ID <13rvl3og85dg6e7@corp.supernews.com>, in the newsgroup
alt.support.hepatitis-c wrote:
>On Feb 22, 9:57 am, "déjà vu déjà vu" <jamf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Cactus Jammies" <cactusjamm...@retinal.circus.orb> wrote in message
[quoted text clipped - 64 lines]
>substantial damage, and some health insurance companies won't pay for the
>drugs without the biopsy evidence.
If there is no biopsy and the tx fails, you have no baseline to
measure from. If tx fails, people often have a biopsy every few years
to assess the rate of progression. Without an initial biopsy, part of
the equation is missing. However, if tx works OK then the usefulness
of a biopsy is limited. So tx should not be given to people with very
advanced, decompensated cirrhosis, but you would already be aware of
that due to symptoms. In the UK, there has been a movement towards
limiting biopsies for genos 2 and 3 due to the rate of success being
much greater. This would seem to bear out that a biopsy is more
useful for when a tx is going to fail - the obvious problem being, of
course, that no-one has a crystal ball.
On Feb 22, 9:57 am, "déjà vu déjà vu" <jamf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Cactus Jammies" <cactusjamm...@retinal.circus.orb> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>
> I might pass on the biopsy and maybe get cat scan instead. I live alone
and
> they wouldn't let me drive away by myself. I guess they worry about me
> bleeding to death, alone.
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
If your going to have treatment, what is the point of the biopsy?
I had a biopsy but based my treatment decison on the results. Just my
opinion,
but why have one when you know you are going to treat.
******************
Yeah, that's my thoughts also.
Little damage or a lot of damage, I still want to try treatment.
If I was falling out of an airplane without a parachute, would I want to
know my airspeed?
There's no question about, if I have the virus (after antibody and genotype
tests).
With 2.8+ million copies, my liver must be loaded.