Maybe it isn't of interest to the majority of the (few) readers, but I happen to suffer from "mildly severe eczema" (quote from the consultant I saw two days ago). I normally treat it with topical steroids, of which the strongest I have used so far is Eumovate cream.
Now, I suffer from flare-ups quite often, which has been treated with both flucloxacillin and erythromycin. And the skin doc says it ain't enough, I've gotta be more aggressive with my treatment to keep it under control.
It's funny how you get used to a certain condition, as I am. I first had this problem over four years ago - actually, it started when I moved. Within half a year, my skin was getting worse and worse, until I became very good friends with corticosteroids.
Anyway, after a session with a consultant where he gave me three options - (1) go under a sunbed (uv treatment works for some cases of eczema); (2) use a stronger topical steroid; (3) use an immunosuppresant such as cyclosporine.
My idea was definitely (2), as I can't be bothered to go to the hospital every week to do (1), and immunosuppressants - the name scares me. He gave me another option this time, which was to use both an oral and topical form of corticosteroid to keep it under control once and for all.
That is why I am on steroids...not.
Well, I am now taking Prednisolone, starting high-ish and gradually decreasing it. The side effects list is quite exciting - I think the sore throat I have might be a side effect. It might just be that I have an early symptom of a cold.
Anyway. I was telling my colleagues (all postdocs) about my adventures, when one of them noted that I have had more options and various explanations about things - more than what she was given (before the doc knew that she was a scientist). So, it pays to tell people what you do for a living, especially if it is a doctor - they treat you with respect. Well, I did tell him at the first meeting that I was going to go and check out the pros and cons of each of the three treatment options.
I wonder if physicians appreciate this kind of patient? I mean, I listen to the doctor, and rather than argue with him about the pros and cons of each treatment, I tell him that I'll go look up at information myself (from PubMed) and come to a decision. That decision will not solely be due to efficacy of course - it depends on personal favour, like my fear of immunosuppressants (which probably isn't totally scientific and illogical).
I don't know what I will do if the doctor didn't listen to poor ol' me - the doc is probably right, but I'd like to make up my own mind. After searching through PubMed.