WOMENS-HEALTH Messages for April, 2009: Re: ENDOMETRIOSIS: Sampson's Theory

Re: ENDOMETRIOSIS: Sampson's Theory

From: dr.narayan patel (anonymous@obgyn.net)
Tue, 28 Apr 2009 09:31:53 -0500 (CDT)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: anonymous@obgyn.net: "ANYONE?: Fluid found in pelvis by ultrasound"
Previous message: dr.narayan patel: "Re: PREGNANCY: Incompetent Cervix"
In reply to: Scarlett: "ENDOMETRIOSIS: Sampson's Theory"
Next in thread: Scarlett: "Re: ENDOMETRIOSIS: Sampson's Theory"
Reply: Scarlett: "Re: ENDOMETRIOSIS: Sampson's Theory"

At Sat, 25 Apr 2009, Scarlett wrote: >
>Why do most doctors so blindly hold onto a theory that doesn't make
>sense or hold any water? Even just a little logic, knowing what we know
>now and disregarding the multitude of studies that ouright disprove this
>theory, completely discounts Sampson. IF Sampson was right, it would be
>physically impossible for men, prepubescent girls, or menopausal women
>to get endo. It would also be impossible for girls to have endo
>immediately from menarche (such as in my case). Hysterectomy would be a
>cure, and we know full well it is not a cure. The fallopian tubes would
>be the prmary site for endometriosis lesions, and would quicky block
>with scar tissue, no longer allowing the reflux to continue. I could go
>on, but I won't.
>
>As we well know, none of the above is the case by any stretch of the
>imagination. Men, prepubescent girls and menopausal women DO get endo.
>In fact it has even been found (biopsy confirmed) in female fetuses
>(4/36, which is pretty close to the 10% of women who have endo).
>Endometriosis IS present at menarche for many young girls. Hysterectomy
>does NOT cure endo. The fallopian tubes are NOT the primary location of
>endometriosis lesions.
>
>When it is so clear that this theory doesn't make sense, with all the
>research that proves otherwise, why is it STILL the most accepted theory
>by most doctors? What are they getting out of continuing to hold on to a
>theory that just doesn't make sense? I am not asking this to be a bitch,
>but out of really wondering why it is acceptable for doctors to be so
>uninformed and out of touch? You don't see doctors desperately trying to
>hold on to disproven theories in any other context. Do doctors just not
>care, or is the fear of change/admitting they are wrong greater than
>their desire to help the millions of women, girls and men (and their
>social networks) who suffer greatly on a daily basis from this disease?

Endomeriosis is still and un understtod subject.When there are many theories about a disease,it means it is still not fully understoo by medical science We sleep almost 1/3 of our life-- 8 hours a day but even to day, we do not know why we sleep. Still we do not know why labour pains starts. Willium book on obstrerics after writing many pages about why labour pains start,writes at the end that" ONE THING IS CERTAIN YHAT WHEN FRUIT GETS RIPE IT FALLS" Medical science 20 years back told that Asprin is injurous to health,same medical scince now says that low dose asprin preven heart attack. When there are more theories about a disease it means the subject is still ill understoon. Endometriosis is one of such disease. out of many. Dr.Narayan M. Patel M.D. D.G.O. FICS Ahmedabad-380014 INDIA

Next message: anonymous@obgyn.net: "ANYONE?: Fluid found in pelvis by ultrasound"
Previous message: dr.narayan patel: "Re: PREGNANCY: Incompetent Cervix"
In reply to: Scarlett: "ENDOMETRIOSIS: Sampson's Theory"
Next in thread: Scarlett: "Re: ENDOMETRIOSIS: Sampson's Theory"
Reply: Scarlett: "Re: ENDOMETRIOSIS: Sampson's Theory"

Women's Insurance Checklist from Auto Insurance Quote

use when must restrict search to only the women's health forum...
Enter search keywords:
	Returns per screen: Require all keywords: