Need advice: amenorrhea, Femara, no diagnosis

[ghostmonkey]

Feb 17, 2015 23:18:14 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 17, 2015 21:17:55 GMT -5 ghostmonkey said:

If you don't know, you shouldn't be handing out advice. 

She came off birth control in June. 

Try reading the whole post next time instead on knee jerk reacting.

I read the whole thing, here AND in WTDS. She has had 3 periods since coming off BCP. I still stick with not enough time for her body to regulate. Not a knee jerk reaction. I can admit when I don't have expertise, but I do have knowledge. 

Then pay attention to details. She clearly stated the cycle she had were controlled by Provera and didn't happen on their own.

She hasn't had a real cycle in 9 months. 9. 9. Not 3. 9.

[mainewifey]

britterrss, I just wanted to say that my OB is also one of the most highly regarded doctors in my area and he "specializes in infertility". Now that I've been on here I know that in all reality, he really doesn't know jack over and above handing out some clomid with out proper monitoring. We did some testing with him, got our referral and are moving on.

I would really look into seeking out a referral for an RE.

Good luck.

[cateyes]

Feb 18, 2015 10:28:06 GMT -5 ghostmonkey said:

Feb 17, 2015 23:18:14 GMT -5 cateyes said:

I read the whole thing, here AND in WTDS. She has had 3 periods since coming off BCP. I still stick with not enough time for her body to regulate. Not a knee jerk reaction. I can admit when I don't have expertise, but I do have knowledge. 

Then pay attention to details. She clearly stated the cycle she had were controlled by Provera and didn't happen on their own.

She hasn't had a real cycle in 9 months. 9. 9. Not 3. 9.

I did pay attention GM, she has had 2 long cycles and one shorter one, all started with provera. She said and I quote "Since Oct, I had 2 extra long cycles and 1 regular all regulated with Provera (I tried to give my body time to O the first 2 times, and then I tried rapid fire). I'm at CD 28 with no O in sight, currently."

3 cycles, 9 months. I see the numbers. 

All I said was a couple of cycles may not be enough and if she does decide to go to the RE, check her insurance because it will be coded IF and no longer coded as from her PCP. 

[aprilz81]

Feb 18, 2015 10:44:53 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 18, 2015 10:28:06 GMT -5 ghostmonkey said:

Then pay attention to details. She clearly stated the cycle she had were controlled by Provera and didn't happen on their own.

She hasn't had a real cycle in 9 months. 9. 9. Not 3. 9.

I did pay attention GM, she has had 2 long cycles and one shorter one, all started with provera. She said and I quote "Since Oct, I had 2 extra long cycles and 1 regular all regulated with Provera (I tried to give my body time to O the first 2 times, and then I tried rapid fire). I'm at CD 28 with no O in sight, currently."

3 cycles, 9 months. I see the numbers. 

All I said was a couple of cycles may not be enough and if she does decide to go to the RE, check her insurance because it will be coded IF and no longer coded as from her PCP. 

If they were ended with Provera they were NOT REGULAR/NATURAL cycles, no matter how long or short they were.  I think her use of "regular" is confusing you.

[cateyes]

Feb 18, 2015 10:48:11 GMT -5 aprilz81 said:

Feb 18, 2015 10:44:53 GMT -5 cateyes said:

I did pay attention GM, she has had 2 long cycles and one shorter one, all started with provera. She said and I quote "Since Oct, I had 2 extra long cycles and 1 regular all regulated with Provera (I tried to give my body time to O the first 2 times, and then I tried rapid fire). I'm at CD 28 with no O in sight, currently."

3 cycles, 9 months. I see the numbers. 

All I said was a couple of cycles may not be enough and if she does decide to go to the RE, check her insurance because it will be coded IF and no longer coded as from her PCP. 

If they were ended with Provera they were NOT REGULAR/NATURAL cycles, no matter how long or short they were.  I think her use of "regular" is confusing you.

I don't think that is causing confusion. Everyone agrees none of the 3 were "regular". The issue is to see an RE or not. GM says yes, I said I didn't think so yet but if she does decide to go make sure insurance will cover at an RE's office opposed to her PCP. 

[britterrss]

Feb 18, 2015 10:52:35 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 18, 2015 10:48:11 GMT -5 aprilz81 said:

If they were ended with Provera they were NOT REGULAR/NATURAL cycles, no matter how long or short they were.  I think her use of "regular" is confusing you.

I don't think that is causing confusion. Everyone agrees none of the 3 were "regular". The issue is to see an RE or not. GM says yes, I said I didn't think so yet but if she does decide to go make sure insurance will cover at an RE's office opposed to her PCP. 

Sorry I meant "regular" length - I should not have used that word or at least specified I meant the length of the artificial cycle I had. I haven't had a natural cycle since I was like 14 or 15. So yeah, at this point, regardless of whether I'm TTC, I think anyone would qualify to get that checked out. I'm going to an RE and yes my insurance covers it because it's an abnormal medical issue.

Thanks for all the input ladies.

[ghostmonkey]

Feb 18, 2015 10:52:35 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 18, 2015 10:48:11 GMT -5 aprilz81 said:

If they were ended with Provera they were NOT REGULAR/NATURAL cycles, no matter how long or short they were.  I think her use of "regular" is confusing you.

I don't think that is causing confusion. Everyone agrees none of the 3 were "regular". The issue is to see an RE or not. GM says yes, I said I didn't think so yet but if she does decide to go make sure insurance will cover at an RE's office opposed to her PCP. 

OMFG, stop talking about shit that you don't understand. You don't have knowledge in this.

[daisy818]

I think GM et al. have covered all the advice, so britterrss, I just wanted to say GL with the RE!

[Rama]

Feb 18, 2015 10:52:35 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 18, 2015 10:48:11 GMT -5 aprilz81 said:

If they were ended with Provera they were NOT REGULAR/NATURAL cycles, no matter how long or short they were.  I think her use of "regular" is confusing you.

I don't think that is causing confusion. Everyone agrees none of the 3 were "regular". The issue is to see an RE or not. GM says yes, I said I didn't think so yet but if she does decide to go make sure insurance will cover at an RE's office opposed to her PCP. 

Sorry, cateyes, I'm going to have to disagree with you, too.  Maybe I'm biased, though, because I also haven't had a natural cycle on the same timetable as britterrss.  We've been going through this together.

In the original post, she wasn't asking for thoughts about her going to see a RE, she was asking for testing and reasonable treatment of her condition.  There are definitely exceptions to the 1-year "rule", so why wouldn't this be one?  How can you even ever get to a year if you have a 0% chance of getting pregnant?  That's not TTC time, because you are doing NOTHING to TRY TO GET PREGNANT.  What is the benefit of waiting a year?  All the patience in the world won't make her body spontaneously decide it's going to "work normally", if there's a deeper problem.

Better yet, take TTC out of the equation.  If any woman were going months without a period, you NEED to see a doctor to fix that shit.  Carrying your lining for too long creates a risk for cervical cancer.  TTC just happens to present a different set of circumstances -- you want a solution that can give you the opportunity to ATTEMPT your goal, not just "kay, you've gotten rid of your uterus flesh, buhbye".

[cateyes]

Feb 18, 2015 12:05:47 GMT -5 Rama said:

Feb 18, 2015 10:52:35 GMT -5 cateyes said:

I don't think that is causing confusion. Everyone agrees none of the 3 were "regular". The issue is to see an RE or not. GM says yes, I said I didn't think so yet but if she does decide to go make sure insurance will cover at an RE's office opposed to her PCP. 

Sorry, cateyes, I'm going to have to disagree with you, too.  Maybe I'm biased, though, because I also haven't had a natural cycle on the same timetable as britterrss.  We've been going through this together.

In the original post, she wasn't asking for thoughts about her going to see a RE, she was asking for testing and reasonable treatment of her condition.  There are definitely exceptions to the 1-year "rule", so why wouldn't this be one?  How can you even ever get to a year if you have a 0% chance of getting pregnant?  That's not TTC time, because you are doing NOTHING to TRY TO GET PREGNANT.  What is the benefit of waiting a year?  All the patience in the world won't make her body spontaneously decide it's going to "work normally", if there's a deeper problem.

Better yet, take TTC out of the equation.  If any woman were going months without a period, you NEED to see a doctor to fix that shit.  Carrying your lining for too long creates a risk for cervical cancer.  TTC just happens to present a different set of circumstances -- you want a solution that can give you the opportunity to ATTEMPT your goal, not just "kay, you've gotten rid of your uterus flesh, buhbye".

I didn't mean the issue she was asking about, sorry I can see how that was confusing in the quoted post, I meant the one GM and I were arguing about. I am ok with people having a different opinion than me, I dropped that a long time back because she has to make a decision, she does have a pre-existing condition, and she is close to one year. I never said anything to you ether about going in early because for the same reasons (pre-existing, close to a year, knowledgeable decision made). 

The only thing I was trying to make sure she saw in this whole clusterfuck of a discussion is to check with her insurance and make sure that when the RE codes it, the insurance will cover it. I work in medical billing and coding, so I have knowledge on this one and also I know from my own personal story it gets coded different and sometimes insurance wants that one year mark at an RE's office. That was my whole intent was just to make sure she didn't get stuck with a huge medical bill, as we all know IF testing and treatment is expensive as fuck! 

I gave my opinion on her treatment in the beginning, that yes she should go get the testing and treatment from a real expert, not her current doctor. I also said the treatment sounded right, once all testing was done and everything else was ruled out. Then warned her about the one year on insurance side. That is when this whole thing spiraled into a crazy mess. 

[ghostmonkey]

Feb 18, 2015 12:05:47 GMT -5 Rama said:

Feb 18, 2015 10:52:35 GMT -5 cateyes said:

I don't think that is causing confusion. Everyone agrees none of the 3 were "regular". The issue is to see an RE or not. GM says yes, I said I didn't think so yet but if she does decide to go make sure insurance will cover at an RE's office opposed to her PCP. 

Sorry, cateyes, I'm going to have to disagree with you, too.  Maybe I'm biased, though, because I also haven't had a natural cycle on the same timetable as britterrss.  We've been going through this together.

In the original post, she wasn't asking for thoughts about her going to see a RE, she was asking for testing and reasonable treatment of her condition.  There are definitely exceptions to the 1-year "rule", so why wouldn't this be one?  How can you even ever get to a year if you have a 0% chance of getting pregnant?  That's not TTC time, because you are doing NOTHING to TRY TO GET PREGNANT.  What is the benefit of waiting a year?  All the patience in the world won't make her body spontaneously decide it's going to "work normally", if there's a deeper problem.

Better yet, take TTC out of the equation.  If any woman were going months without a period, you NEED to see a doctor to fix that shit.  Carrying your lining for too long creates a risk for cervical cancer.  TTC just happens to present a different set of circumstances -- you want a solution that can give you the opportunity to ATTEMPT your goal, not just "kay, you've gotten rid of your uterus flesh, buhbye".

This. 9 months without a cycle needs to be checked into. They did the basic try of using Provera to try to right things and it didn't work. Time to move on to different measures, and those measures are far out of the realm of knowledge of an OB. Even without the TTC aspect, this is beyond the skill level of an OB.

[ghostmonkey]

Feb 18, 2015 12:25:28 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 18, 2015 12:05:47 GMT -5 Rama said:

Sorry, cateyes, I'm going to have to disagree with you, too.  Maybe I'm biased, though, because I also haven't had a natural cycle on the same timetable as britterrss.  We've been going through this together.

In the original post, she wasn't asking for thoughts about her going to see a RE, she was asking for testing and reasonable treatment of her condition.  There are definitely exceptions to the 1-year "rule", so why wouldn't this be one?  How can you even ever get to a year if you have a 0% chance of getting pregnant?  That's not TTC time, because you are doing NOTHING to TRY TO GET PREGNANT.  What is the benefit of waiting a year?  All the patience in the world won't make her body spontaneously decide it's going to "work normally", if there's a deeper problem.

Better yet, take TTC out of the equation.  If any woman were going months without a period, you NEED to see a doctor to fix that shit.  Carrying your lining for too long creates a risk for cervical cancer.  TTC just happens to present a different set of circumstances -- you want a solution that can give you the opportunity to ATTEMPT your goal, not just "kay, you've gotten rid of your uterus flesh, buhbye".

I didn't mean the issue she was asking about, sorry I can see how that was confusing in the quoted post, I meant the one GM and I were arguing about. I am ok with people having a different opinion than me, I dropped that a long time back because she has to make a decision, she does have a pre-existing condition, and she is close to one year. I never said anything to you ether about going in early because for the same reasons (pre-existing, close to a year, knowledgeable decision made). 

The only thing I was trying to make sure she saw in this whole clusterfuck of a discussion is to check with her insurance and make sure that when the RE codes it, the insurance will cover it. I work in medical billing and coding, so I have knowledge on this one and also I know from my own personal story it gets coded different and sometimes insurance wants that one year mark at an RE's office. That was my whole intent was just to make sure she didn't get stuck with a huge medical bill, as we all know IF testing and treatment is expensive as fuck! 

I gave my opinion on her treatment in the beginning, that yes she should go get the testing and treatment from a real expert, not her current doctor. I also said the treatment sounded right, once all testing was done and everything else was ruled out. Then warned her about the one year on insurance side. That is when this whole thing spiraled into a crazy mess. 

::massive eyeroll::

Yeah, that's totally what you said. Nice backpeddling.


Feb 17, 2015 22:22:37 GMT -6 cateyes said:
Exactly. IMO 3 cycles isn't enough, but I am not a doctor, it is not my life, make your own choices.

[cateyes]

Feb 18, 2015 12:30:55 GMT -5 ghostmonkey said:

Feb 18, 2015 12:25:28 GMT -5 cateyes said:

I didn't mean the issue she was asking about, sorry I can see how that was confusing in the quoted post, I meant the one GM and I were arguing about. I am ok with people having a different opinion than me, I dropped that a long time back because she has to make a decision, she does have a pre-existing condition, and she is close to one year. I never said anything to you ether about going in early because for the same reasons (pre-existing, close to a year, knowledgeable decision made). 

The only thing I was trying to make sure she saw in this whole clusterfuck of a discussion is to check with her insurance and make sure that when the RE codes it, the insurance will cover it. I work in medical billing and coding, so I have knowledge on this one and also I know from my own personal story it gets coded different and sometimes insurance wants that one year mark at an RE's office. That was my whole intent was just to make sure she didn't get stuck with a huge medical bill, as we all know IF testing and treatment is expensive as fuck! 

I gave my opinion on her treatment in the beginning, that yes she should go get the testing and treatment from a real expert, not her current doctor. I also said the treatment sounded right, once all testing was done and everything else was ruled out. Then warned her about the one year on insurance side. That is when this whole thing spiraled into a crazy mess. 

::massive eyeroll::

Yeah, that's totally what you said. Nice backpeddling.


Feb 17, 2015 22:22:37 GMT -6 cateyes said:
Exactly. IMO 3 cycles isn't enough, but I am not a doctor, it is not my life, make your own choices.

From the WTDS thread where this all started:

I said

Yay for a plan!!!! I would call and get an SA done as well. In 3 months you could find out there are some MFI and then have to wait 3 more months at least for corrections. Get the SA now, and yes just call and say you would like to schedule one. The doc will need to put the order in for it, but advocate for yourself! Does your H need a yearly physical, if he does have him get one and ask for it (then it tends to be covered by insurance). If not your OB will need to put the order in.

-------
And no anov=/=unexplained infertility. Unexplained infertility is having run ALL tests, waiting a year, and still no BFP. Since you are still in the 12 month mark, insurance may not pay for fertility

----------
So I said get more testing, advocate for what you need, don't jump on femera without the tests and diagnosis, and check with insurance.....

Not back pedaling

[britterrss]

cateyes, it sounded like you were telling me I needed to wait 6 more months at one point. My main question here was not whether my timeline was appropriate, it was:

1. What else should I get tested for if I don't have PCOS?
2. Does Femara sound like a reasonable plan considering the circumstances if all bloodwork is normal?

I do feel I need to see an RE. I have felt that way ever since my doctor first muttered Femara - but she made it seem like wweeee it's no big deal we're a fertility clinic, too and this is what we do all the time.

[ghostmonkey]

Feb 18, 2015 12:36:58 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 18, 2015 12:30:55 GMT -5 ghostmonkey said:

::massive eyeroll::

Yeah, that's totally what you said. Nice backpeddling.


Feb 17, 2015 22:22:37 GMT -6 cateyes said:
Exactly. IMO 3 cycles isn't enough, but I am not a doctor, it is not my life, make your own choices.

From the WTDS thread where this all started:

I said

Yay for a plan!!!! I would call and get an SA done as well. In 3 months you could find out there are some MFI and then have to wait 3 more months at least for corrections. Get the SA now, and yes just call and say you would like to schedule one. The doc will need to put the order in for it, but advocate for yourself! Does your H need a yearly physical, if he does have him get one and ask for it (then it tends to be covered by insurance). If not your OB will need to put the order in.

-------
And no anov=/=unexplained infertility. Unexplained infertility is having run ALL tests, waiting a year, and still no BFP. Since you are still in the 12 month mark, insurance may not pay for fertility

----------
So I said get more testing, advocate for what you need, don't jump on femera without the tests and diagnosis, and check with insurance.....

Not back pedaling

So glad you think everyone else is too stupid to read the shit you wrote.

[Deleted]

Feb 18, 2015 11:47:52 GMT -5 ghostmonkey said:

Feb 18, 2015 10:52:35 GMT -5 cateyes said:

I don't think that is causing confusion. Everyone agrees none of the 3 were "regular". The issue is to see an RE or not. GM says yes, I said I didn't think so yet but if she does decide to go make sure insurance will cover at an RE's office opposed to her PCP. 

OMFG, stop talking about shit that you don't understand. You don't have knowledge in this.

Hey ghostmonkey,

[cateyes]

Feb 18, 2015 12:41:00 GMT -5 britterrss said:

cateyes, it sounded like you were telling me I needed to wait 6 more months at one point. My main question here was not whether my timeline was appropriate, it was:

1. What else should I get tested for if I don't have PCOS?
2. Does Femara sound like a reasonable plan considering the circumstances if all bloodwork is normal?

I do feel I need to see an RE. I have felt that way ever since my doctor first muttered Femara - but she made it seem like wweeee it's no big deal we're a fertility clinic, too and this is what we do all the time.

For that I do apologize. I am sorry you thought I meant you should wait 6 more months. It was more insurance related. When you get all the other testing done it should give you a better picture of what if anything outside of PCOS could be causing it.

[ghostmonkey]

Feb 18, 2015 12:41:00 GMT -5 britterrss said:

cateyes, it sounded like you were telling me I needed to wait 6 more months at one point. My main question here was not whether my timeline was appropriate, it was:

1. What else should I get tested for if I don't have PCOS?
2. Does Femara sound like a reasonable plan considering the circumstances if all bloodwork is normal?

I do feel I need to see an RE. I have felt that way ever since my doctor first muttered Femara - but she made it seem like wweeee it's no big deal we're a fertility clinic, too and this is what we do all the time.

You do need to see an RE. "Fertility clinics" are usually OBs with a God complex. Every once in a while you will run across one that is actually run by an RE that went back to OB because they preferred the work, but not often.

1. FSH, LH, and E2 at a minimum, usually prolactin, progesterone, TSH, T3, T4, Total Testosterone, Free Testosterone, DHEAS, and insulin. There are a couple others they may throw in as well. Some practices will do an ultrasound then as well to make sure there are no cysts that could be altering the levels and some will check antral follicle counts (some only look at this when you do treatment. Both ways are acceptable).

2. I really doubt your bloodwork will be normal. You aren't cycling and Provera didn't act as a reset. Something is off. Treatment plans need to be held off until they figure out what. Femara/Clomid might be a good starting place for you, but that's something that needs to be determined after getting the tests back. (I know you had tests done, but frankly I wouldn't trust an OB telling me it's fine. I've seen them tell people with a CD3 FSH level of 10 that it's fine, and technically it in is "normal" values, but that indicated diminished reserve). 

[britterrss]

Feb 18, 2015 12:50:25 GMT -5 ghostmonkey said:

Feb 18, 2015 12:41:00 GMT -5 britterrss said:

cateyes, it sounded like you were telling me I needed to wait 6 more months at one point. My main question here was not whether my timeline was appropriate, it was:

1. What else should I get tested for if I don't have PCOS?
2. Does Femara sound like a reasonable plan considering the circumstances if all bloodwork is normal?

I do feel I need to see an RE. I have felt that way ever since my doctor first muttered Femara - but she made it seem like wweeee it's no big deal we're a fertility clinic, too and this is what we do all the time.

You do need to see an RE. "Fertility clinics" are usually OBs with a God complex. Every once in a while you will run across one that is actually run by an RE that went back to OB because they preferred the work, but not often.

1. FSH, LH, and E2 at a minimum, usually prolactin, progesterone, TSH, T3, T4, Total Testosterone, Free Testosterone, DHEAS, and insulin. There are a couple others they may throw in as well. Some practices will do an ultrasound then as well to make sure there are no cysts that could be altering the levels and some will check antral follicle counts (some only look at this when you do treatment. Both ways are acceptable).

2. I really doubt your bloodwork will be normal. You aren't cycling and Provera didn't act as a reset. Something is off. Treatment plans need to be held off until they figure out what. Femara/Clomid might be a good starting place for you, but that's something that needs to be determined after getting the tests back. (I know you had tests done, but frankly I wouldn't trust an OB telling me it's fine. I've seen them tell people with a CD3 FSH level of 10 that it's fine, and technically it in is "normal" values, but that indicated diminished reserve). 

THANK YOU.

[becwheat]

Feb 17, 2015 23:22:37 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 17, 2015 23:12:18 GMT -5 @debthelibrarian said:

My reading comprehension is fine. I'm thinking that most of our cycles have changed as we've gotten older, gone on and off bcp, rinse/repeat.

I find it interesting that some people get flamed for going in sooner than 1 year, for wasting resources, and increasing the cost of health care.

I don't have a dog in this fight, just noting some hypocrisy.

I'm glad you are covered - but since that info wasn't provided until asked, all Cat did was warn about costs. Not flame worthy, IMO.

Exactly. IMO 3 cycles isn't enough, but I am not a doctor, it is not my life, make your own choices. I just wanted to warn about the potential cost, but it sounds like you have great insurance (you did ask if this covered IF right, not just the plan?) as soon as you go to an RE it gets coded as IF, no longer treatment by an OBGYN or PCP. I do have that expertise. So make sure you are covered when it gets coded as IF. 

3 cycles that only happened because of provera. She has had ZERO natural cycles in 9 months ZERO. that is not a knee jerk reaction. 

People get flamed for being inpatient, not for having a health concern with genuine evidence of there being an issue. This is something a woman she investigate whether she is TTC or not.

[ghostmonkey]

Feb 18, 2015 13:53:03 GMT -5 becwheat said:

Feb 17, 2015 23:22:37 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Exactly. IMO 3 cycles isn't enough, but I am not a doctor, it is not my life, make your own choices. I just wanted to warn about the potential cost, but it sounds like you have great insurance (you did ask if this covered IF right, not just the plan?) as soon as you go to an RE it gets coded as IF, no longer treatment by an OBGYN or PCP. I do have that expertise. So make sure you are covered when it gets coded as IF. 

3 cycles that only happened because of provera. She has had ZERO natural cycles in 9 months ZERO. that is not a knee jerk reaction. 

People get flamed for being inpatient, not for having a health concern with genuine evidence of there being an issue. This is something a woman she investigate whether she is TTC or not.

But she does medical coding, so she knows all about this stuff. Better listen.

[cateyes]

Feb 18, 2015 13:53:03 GMT -5 becwheat said:

Feb 17, 2015 23:22:37 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Exactly. IMO 3 cycles isn't enough, but I am not a doctor, it is not my life, make your own choices. I just wanted to warn about the potential cost, but it sounds like you have great insurance (you did ask if this covered IF right, not just the plan?) as soon as you go to an RE it gets coded as IF, no longer treatment by an OBGYN or PCP. I do have that expertise. So make sure you are covered when it gets coded as IF. 

3 cycles that only happened because of provera. She has had ZERO natural cycles in 9 months ZERO. that is not a knee jerk reaction. 

People get flamed for being inpatient, not for having a health concern with genuine evidence of there being an issue. This is something a woman she investigate whether she is TTC or not.

Yes I agree, it should be investigated. It needs to be, that was never an issue, at least not to me. As I have said, when things get coded with an RE they can get coded as IF and so to be careful. That is it, call ahead (which she did), find out if it is covered (which it is), done, case closed.  

[becwheat]

Feb 18, 2015 14:02:47 GMT -5 ghostmonkey said:

Feb 18, 2015 13:53:03 GMT -5 becwheat said:

3 cycles that only happened because of provera. She has had ZERO natural cycles in 9 months ZERO. that is not a knee jerk reaction. 

People get flamed for being inpatient, not for having a health concern with genuine evidence of there being an issue. This is something a woman she investigate whether she is TTC or not.

But she does medical coding, so she knows all about this stuff. Better listen.

so? I work in cardiology which makes me super qualified in IF. 

j/k

[treble]

britterrss, I'm happy you have a plan.

cateyes, you are sounding pretty dumb. In the beginning of the thread you without a doubt said that 3 cycles was not enough to see an RE even after ghostmonkey and others repeatedly told you it was because she had a preexisting condition.

[cateyes]

Feb 18, 2015 14:48:44 GMT -5 treble said:

britterrss, I'm happy you have a plan.

cateyes, you are sounding pretty dumb. In the beginning of the thread you without a doubt said that 3 cycles was not enough to see an RE even after ghostmonkey and others repeatedly told you it was because she had a preexisting condition.

Just let the conversation die already. I have already said I agree she needs to seek more testing. Yes in the beginning I didn't think an RE was right, 3 cycles didn't seem enough time...IMO. But after hearing what other people thought, I realized I was wrong, and then all I said was make sure it gets coded correctly. I stopped saying anything about going to an RE. I can admit I was wrong.....for the last page and a half that is all I have said is just to make sure the coding is right and covered. 

[treble]

Feb 18, 2015 14:58:38 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 18, 2015 14:48:44 GMT -5 treble said:

britterrss, I'm happy you have a plan.

cateyes, you are sounding pretty dumb. In the beginning of the thread you without a doubt said that 3 cycles was not enough to see an RE even after ghostmonkey and others repeatedly told you it was because she had a preexisting condition.

Just let the conversation die already. I have already said I agree she needs to seek more testing. Yes in the beginning I didn't think an RE was right, 3 cycles didn't seem enough time...IMO. But after hearing what other people thought, I realized I was wrong, and then all I said was make sure it gets coded correctly. I stopped saying anything about going to an RE. I can admit I was wrong.....for the last page and a half that is all I have said is just to make sure the coding is right and covered. 

There are two posts from you on this page where you are fighting with GM only about the number of cycles and seeing an RE. Nothing to do with coding.

Whatever.

[britterrss]

Thyroid panel, CMPP, CBC, Lipids, and Prolactin all normal! Just waiting on a call back from the RE to get an appointment and schedule CD3 bloodwork.

[ghostmonkey]

Feb 18, 2015 14:58:38 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 18, 2015 14:48:44 GMT -5 treble said:

britterrss, I'm happy you have a plan.

cateyes, you are sounding pretty dumb. In the beginning of the thread you without a doubt said that 3 cycles was not enough to see an RE even after ghostmonkey and others repeatedly told you it was because she had a preexisting condition.

Just let the conversation die already. I have already said I agree she needs to seek more testing. Yes in the beginning I didn't think an RE was right, 3 cycles didn't seem enough time...IMO. But after hearing what other people thought, I realized I was wrong, and then all I said was make sure it gets coded correctly. I stopped saying anything about going to an RE. I can admit I was wrong.....for the last page and a half that is all I have said is just to make sure the coding is right and covered. 

About fucking time. Admitting you are wrong doesn't entail acting like you didn't misspeak in the first place.

She isn't the one doing the coding, so how would she check that? And other that RE's just out for cash, from what I have seen they are fantastic about coding and know alternatives to get things covered.

Maybe next time when it gets pointed out to you that you misread or missed the big picture completely, you admit it next time instead of trying to spin it into something unrelated.

[Deleted]

Feb 18, 2015 14:58:38 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Feb 18, 2015 14:48:44 GMT -5 treble said:

britterrss, I'm happy you have a plan.

cateyes, you are sounding pretty dumb. In the beginning of the thread you without a doubt said that 3 cycles was not enough to see an RE even after ghostmonkey and others repeatedly told you it was because she had a preexisting condition.

Just let the conversation die already. I have already said I agree she needs to seek more testing. Yes in the beginning I didn't think an RE was right, 3 cycles didn't seem enough time...IMO. But after hearing what other people thought, I realized I was wrong, and then all I said was make sure it gets coded correctly. I stopped saying anything about going to an RE. I can admit I was wrong.....for the last page and a half that is all I have said is just to make sure the coding is right and covered. 

Yes, because if ghostmonkey says it, it MUST be true. 

Back the fuck off cateyes and let the shit drop. She's as much an expert as anyone else dealing with TTTC. And yes, because she does medical billing and coding she does know it is important for it to get coded correctly so insurance covers it. And you as a patient does have the ability to ask about how it is coded.

/rant

[ghostmonkey]

Feb 18, 2015 15:22:32 GMT -5 @debthelibrarian said:

Feb 18, 2015 14:58:38 GMT -5 cateyes said:

Just let the conversation die already. I have already said I agree she needs to seek more testing. Yes in the beginning I didn't think an RE was right, 3 cycles didn't seem enough time...IMO. But after hearing what other people thought, I realized I was wrong, and then all I said was make sure it gets coded correctly. I stopped saying anything about going to an RE. I can admit I was wrong.....for the last page and a half that is all I have said is just to make sure the coding is right and covered. 

Yes, because if ghostmonkey says it, it MUST be true. 

Back the fuck off cateyes and let the shit drop. She's as much an expert as anyone else dealing with TTTC. And yes, because she does medical billing and coding she does know it is important for it to get coded correctly so insurance covers it. And you as a patient does have the ability to ask about how it is coded.

/rant

You do realize that she has since changed her stance on what you were agreeing with, which means you were wrong too right? Oh, I doubt it.

And doing data entry for the medical field does not make one an expert on a specific medical topic.



Speaking of checking ones self, you have already wrecked. Might be time to slow down just a touch. And I'm curious why you have such a hard on for me when others told her the exact same shit. Oh. I have my theories on that.