14 March 2006

Quelle Difference

Not to belabour this latest shtick about the injuries, since this is after all supposed to be a blog about Ironman preparation, but I thought I would make a short and simple comparison of my recent experiences with a) an osteopath, and b) a GP.

Today I woke up and knew right away that I would not be going to work. My stupid back, which last week was starting to feel better, had been on a downhill slide since saturday (this is tuesday). No 25k run as planned, just rest and a bad mood. Anyway. Today I decided to go to a walk-in clinic to see what they had to say.

The difference between the diagnostic methods employed by the osteopath I saw last week and the GP I saw today were startling.

Osteopath - a one hour treatment session, about half of which was taken up by diagnosis. Lots of probing questions followed by some very careful observation of how my body moved, my balance, strength, pain levels and probably a lot of other stuff I didn't notice at the time.

GP - the doctor asks me to stand up, touch my toes, stand straight and then lean back (which I could not do without pain). Up on the table for some quick reflex tests of the classic cornball variety. Done. Prescription written, x-ray session booked, out we go. Total time: about 5 minutes.

Quite a difference, no? Mind you, the GP visit, the x-ray and the prescription (Naproxen, sold over the counter in the U.S. as Alleve) will all be covered either by OHIP or by my insurance coverage, and the $100 visit last week... not so much. Still.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home