I am taking a brief respite from the Porphland Survival List posts to engage in a bit of catharsis therapy. indulge me a moment while I take off the tender and diplomatic kid gloves and replace them with the heavy, black, vicious, verbal sap gloves.
There. Ready.
I feel much better about this now. I have dainty, tender hands and I don’t really feel like carrying around deep purple bruises for two weeks. And these tend to be very good at keeping the proverbial gore out from under one’s jewelry and nails, a good point to know when one’s ultrasonic cleaner is on the fritz and someone has absconded with one’s nail brush for dealing with canine oral hygiene. I do regret not being able to find the violet ones. I love and miss those beautiful sap gloves. They always went well with my glasses.
I want to say to each of you that at this moment I am incredibly angry with the way the boy has been treated by what once was his primary care physician. After 3+ years of depending on her and her staff to provide adequate medical care for the boy, building what I perceived as a good working relationship with her through her staff, and doing my best to be proactive at home with nutritional and supportive care to minimize our use of her office time or hospital stays, we were delivered this coup de grace during his last quarterly appointment:
She does not believe he has porphyria of any sort and will not in the future provide accepted and necessary therapies or treatments based on a diagnosis of porphyria.
Those are not her exact words, but after having heard them as through read from a script on two separate occasions, that fateful day in an exam room and a subsequent late evening telephone call, you can be relatively sure that they are incredibly close to, and do sum up both the gist and the tone of her actual statement.
Interestingly enough, she offered no explanation of his symptoms, no alternate or theoretical diagnosis, and no indication of what she, as his Primary Care Physician, intended to do to find an easier to toss asside a more appropriate diagnosis. What she did make perfectly clear was that until one of us magically shat one out and hung it in the Louvre in a rhinestone frame, there would be no hope of getting him any sort of maintenance therapy.
No D-10 infusion will be available to him as an outpatient, either in the
hospital patient services area or in the big new freestanding infusion center in the neighboring upscale bedroom community. No prayer of a chance of ever getting any sort of heme therapy, even if we as a household could afford it.
Under rather pointed and repeated questioning about her intentions toward making a diagnosis and what we needed to do to facilitate arriving at that diagnosis, she made very clear her belief regarding his illness: it is either literally or figuratively all in his head.
(And a great deal of it is in his head, at least if you count up all of the damage he has sustained for lack of treatment.)
- It is a neurological issue or disorder that is somehow causing him to urinate the color of raspberry iced tea,
- It is a neurological issue that makes him consistently intolerant to medications and chemicals known to be porphyrogenic,
- It is a neurological issue or disorder that makes him intensely sensitive to relatively normal fluctuations in both his blood sugar and electrolyte levels.
It fascinates me no end how a person will dismiss the obvious in favor of the unknown when there is some incentive or motivation to do so. What I would like to know is exactly what that motivation is.
There is the probability that the insurance company has brought pressure to bear to ignore the differential diagnosis and demand either a.) the 1984 test results be presented to them by the hospital where the tests were conducted, by the researcher who conducted the tests, by the insurance company which used legalities to seize the records from the hospital, or by the boy who has tried repeatedly to get copies of the results only to be told they simply no longer exist, or b.) we somehow manage to pick the absolute optimal time and circumstance for getting another round of testing completed and get new, improved, and conclusive results which one already knows will be disputed immediately however strong the results are.
There is also the possibility that the physician is streamlining her practice and purging the patients with more obscure, more difficult, more time-consuming, or require more effort to manage in order to concentrate on patients which can be scheduled routinely for maintenance more like the service center at a large automobile dealership. It is, after all, much easier to hire staff qualified to provide regular oil changes than it is to have a staff prepared to do a valve job.
I do not know the ultimate reason for the indifference or for the complete disregard for a patient’s basic rights as a person. The boy has the right to a reasonable expectation that his illness, disease, disorder, whatever it is called today, will be taken seriously and treated seriously and not second guessed when every sign, every family history, every symptom, every quirky reaction to triggers and stimuli both physical and psychological, every mason jar of light reactive urine sitting on the porch ledge point directly and conclusively to only one preliminary diagnosis: An Acute Porphyria.
We know the family history points to AIP. His sibling has a diagnosis of AIP. His father has a differential diagnosis of AIP.
And what on earth is the reason for continuing to utilize a test which has been proven to be so horribly inaccurate that it is now not used as a diagnostic locations outside of the United States?
How many wonderful, talented, intelligent and loved men and women are losing their lives at this very moment, one nerve cell, one breath, one attack or crisis at a time because of cross-purposes, apathy, arrogance, lack of education, intentional ignorance, ineptitude, poor planning, lack of time management, poor use of resources, lack of staff training, and the unavailability of practices, laboratories, and facilities with any expertise in diagnosing at the state level, not some arbitrary regional division?
Why does NORD and the NIH and the FDA not establish and enforce a requirement that every state-run or state assisted university with a medical school and a research laboratory must designate that laboratory as the state testing site responsible for the testing of all specimens submitted for the diagnosis of a rare disease or disorder by physicians and/or private patients residing within that state? By placing all rare disease/disorder testing in central state university operated labs and diagnostic centers, you not only help people who cannot get to regional sites, you also educate more than three or four new people every year in diagnostics and give them practical experience.
Why don’t they require facilities such as these so that people already in physical, emotional and fiscal distress are not bound by the current system of rare disease and disorder testing and expertise being sequestered and contained in small core groups at a few regional centers?
Why aren’t physicians who withhold treatment from patients with only a differential diagnosis held accountable when these patients finally do get a diagnosis that is “good enough”? Shouldn’t they bear some of the responsibility for the losses these patients suffer while waiting with no hope of even a bag of saline?
I can’t write any more. The more I do, the angrier I get, and I, at least, feel an obligation to the boy, which is more than I can say for his hematologist.

One of the things that researchers have found about porphyria attacks is that glucose levels in the body both influence and are influenced by porphyria. Have an attack, your levels drop. Let your levels drop, it causes an attack. It’s like a vicious loop. A really bad record with a scratch. Even a bit like early Phillip Glass where he manipulated the spoken word. Over and over. And over. You know when it starts you’re not going to like it, and the longer you let it go, the worse it gets.
