Guest guest Posted March 15, 2000 Report Share Posted March 15, 2000 Hi , There is movement underfoot to get more scientific about diseases. Initially, newly found illnesses were named after the describing physician. As we learn more and more about diseases, we figure out that there is more under the surface than the "index" case or initial cluster of patients seen by that first physician. Leighs is mitochondrial disease. Eventually it will make more sense to be very specific about the biochemical defects rather than a global name. The best analogy that I can give you is based on my oncology background. Back in the 50's and 60's a child either had leukemia or not. After years of combined clinical and "bench" research with each side helping each other, leukemia became more an issue of lymphoblastic (further divide into 4 subtypes) and non-lymphoblastic (now 7 different sub-types) and undifferentiated leukemia. Eventually treatments were refined to deal more with specific findings common to some types of leukemia and different from others. The same thing will eventually be true for the whole gamut of mitochondrial diseases. Therefore, don't be surprised if people are now being diagnosed with newer, more scientifically correct diseases, rather than the "old-fashioned" general descriptive names. Consider it slow progress to a better way of dealing with things. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.