I have a smidge of sympathy for this doc. Let’s face it, he probably get 999 cases where the patient is getting a blood test because they’ve been hoing it up all over town for every one case where someone got stuck with a questionable needle for job related reasons.
And I don’t mean just gays/guys, neither. He probably has the same routine memorized for everyone who comes in for a bloodtest, the vast majority of whom are going to be heterosexuals.
As for not reading the chart, I don’t think it’s that big of a deal. I’m guessing the testing was all done by nurses, and the doc just stepped in for the stern talking to portion of the examination. Odds are he’s more careful when he’s actually administering treatment, and not just unnecessary advice.
All that said, the doctor should have checked the chart instead of making an assumption, even if 99.9% of the time the assumption turns out to be correct. You know what they say, when you “assume” you make an “ume” out of “a” and “ss”.
its possible he got some little peice of paper saying “possible accidental infection” at which a “don’t let this happen again” speach really makes sense, or it would other than the fact you happened to be diffrent than the last million people that he saw… but he didn’t know that
Sometimes it doesn’t matter when they DO read your files. I had one doctor ask me three times if I was allergic to penecillin. In addition to the questionnaire I filled out that said “Allergies:”, next to which I wrote “Penecillin.” And after he handed me the prescription FOR penecillin, I told him again that I was allergic to penecillin. I eventually had to have the pharmacist call in and get the prescription changed.
And I was being treated for an allergic reaction.
I used to have sympathy for doctors, but my last 4 have all been idiot dumb fucks.
Before we get much further, I think this might be one more in a surprising list of “gay things - you wouldn’t understand.” Pretty much every gay man I know who’s expressed an opinion on the subject has an HIV test at every physical regardless of at-risk status. To my mind, it’s just good sense. Taking precautions doesn’t mean you don’t need to know if the precautions failed.
Engaging in any sexual activity at all is a “situation that might require HIV testing”.
Perhaps the situation that you’re mentioning is working in health care? So people should avoid being doctors and nurses? The doctor himself could be stuck with a needle tomorrow, and yes he was being a jerk. He managed to imply that HIV is a gay disease, and that gay people are all promiscuous.
A person should not limit their use of diagnostic tests just to avoid possible false positives. As far as doctors not being able to understand the concepts of probability and outcome, that’s on a case by case basis.
Every sexually active person should consider periodically taking HIV and STD tests to help ensure early detection of any problems. Any health care worker or other person who suffers a needle stick should also take the appropriate tests, to do otherwise would not be in their best interests.
Hell, I’ve seriously considered getting tested, and I’m a chick who’s been with all of three (completely monogamous) partners in her life, all three of whom were clean, and precautions were taken. But still, with risks that big, it’s better to be 99.99999999 percent sure instead of 99.99999998 percent sure.
The doctor, however, should have read the file. I dunno about where you’re at, but here in Lawsuit Country there are slightly different procedures and forms for work-related injuries and such. He should have been aware that it was a work-related problem, whether or not the “put a raincoat on your fireman” speech was needed.
In the US 32% of AIDS patients are intravenous drug users, about 60% are male homosexuals, and most of the remainder have sever clinical or congenital deficiencies, including hemophilia.
Over 80% of the American AIDS patients are 20-44 year olds, of which about 90% are males. Different AIDS risk groups have different AIDS diseases. For example, homosexuals have 20 times more Kaposi’s sarcoma than other AIDS patients, intravenous drug users have a proclivity for tuberculosis, crack (cocaine) smokers exhibit pneumonia, and users of the cytotoxic DNA chain terminator AZT, prescribed to inhibit human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) develop anemia, leukopenia and nausea.
Well, on the bright side Potter, at least you don’t have to hear about how they’ll be glad to refer you to an OB/GYN in a year or two when you’re ready for a baby. Thirty seconds after you tell them you and your husband won’t be having kids at all. Ever. I’m still a little vague on what part of “never” sounds like “in a year or two.”
QGG, you’re not the first person that’s happened to. One of DrJ’s fellow interns had a very similar experience with her GP. She was going on some sort of medication for which pregnancy is DEFINITELY contraindicated, and they kept trying to foist bcp’s on her. She finally had to tell them, “Look, there is ZERO chance of me getting pregnant, 'cuz I’m gay.” To the doctor’s credit, though, she did at least have the good grace to be embarrassed about pestering a lesbian about contraception.
Frankly, though, I’m astounded that your doc wouldn’t congratulate you on taking such an interest in your health care. Far too many women only get pelvics when they want birth control renewed, and far too many of those try to get their doc to just write the script without doing the exam.
This is the reason I have a gay doctor. Let’s say I was hitting the bathhouses. Tell any old doctor that… “Oh my God, you’re going to get infected!” Tell a gay doctor that… “Well, that’s OK, but be careful, especially if you’re taking any club drugs, or using poppers, because they can impair judgment. Do you top or bottom, mostly?” This has been my experience, at least.
No condescending bullshit. Probably because they’ve done all of the same things too.
Just got back from a negative HIV test (my cholesterol is rather high, though, it seems). Being in a serodiscordant relationship, I have to get tested every few months. As usual, we had some nice frank talk about safe sex (but not the kind where they think you’re an idiot), instead of being spoken to like a deviant pervert, or cum-dripping manwhore.
I am with Reuben and Miller - I think this doctor was just trying to do what he perceived as his duty. Doubtless he should have read the file first, and not jumped to conclusions, but at the end of the day it’s not like he was making moral judgements.
He made a specific mistake about your situation, but he actually sounds reasonably gay friendly to me. He may be a little misguided, or old fashioned, but I would cut him some slack. He acted out of care and concern, not prejudice.
samarm, those might be relevant stats to who is already exposed, but my understanding is that the current highest rates of infections are among minorities and women, and that new infections among gay men have levelled off for the most part.
Anyway, Esprix, virusmyth.net, from which these lovely stats came, is one of those “HIV doesn’t cause AIDS - poppers do!” sites. :rolleyes: Well, you know what I mean.
In the 1800’s a French physician named Broussais realized that leeches were the perfect way of draining bad humors from the body. He gained fame, fortune, and devoted students.
To prove his mentor’s teachings, one student had himself infected with syphilitic pus in front of a live audience. Naturally, leeches failed to heal the man. He killed himself severl weeks later.
If these researchers are so convinced that HIV does not cause AIDS, why don’t they just shoot themselves full of the virus?
