Dear James: Do I Need to Share My Diagnosis?
Don't want to miss a single column? Sign up to get 'Dear James' in your inbox.
Dear James,
After a series of unsettling events, including what I (falsely) believed was a hit-and-run—a belief that had me Googling 'hit and run' and sent me into a tailspin, convinced that the police were after me—I was diagnosed with a form of obsessive-compulsive disorder characterized by mostly mental (rather than physical) compulsions.
Now, with medication and therapy, I've started revisiting the neurotic behaviors I've lived with for most of my life, like the year I was convinced I had HIV until a friend, tired of hearing about it, dragged me to get tested, or the time I was sure a swollen lymph node was cancer but my doctor refused to biopsy it.
Now that I have some clarity, I wonder: Do I need to explain all of this to my friends, family, and colleagues? Or should I just keep moving forward armed with my new sense of understanding?
Dear Reader,
First of all: congratulations. I, too, have committed crimes that never happened and almost died of illnesses I didn't have. Once, in a bar in London, I groped in my pocket for some cash, felt a lump in my thigh, and immediately blacked out. Clang, onto the floor, full length. I came around gazing into the neutrally concerned face of an EMT. As Morrissey says: 'Oh, I can smile about it now, but at the time it was terrible.'
And it's not like I can't still feel it, right next to me, right under me, that whipping, lashing realm of contingency, all the ghastly possibilities blah blah. But somehow, it's no longer at the center of my awareness. I'm not sure what happened—maybe I displaced it with alcohol and pro wrestling. Or maybe it was the 10 years of therapy. Or maybe I finally figured out what D. H. Lawrence meant when he wrote 'If only, most lovely of all, I yield myself and am borrowed / By the fine, fine wind that takes its course through the chaos of the world.'
The point is: We made it. We can look back on these crises with rue and wonderment. I don't think you need to explain anything to anybody. To those who accompanied you through it (like your friend who insisted you get tested), the change in you, the strengthening in you, will be self-evident. The time to use your new understanding will come when you encounter someone in similar difficulties. At that moment, you'll be able to plug right into the regenerative power of the universe—the countercurrent to all of the fear and destruction—and help somebody out.
On the mend,
James
Dear James,
I'm 61, and I retired from full-time work four years ago—not to move toward anything in particular but to find relief from a lifestyle that was no longer physically or mentally healthy. I was well compensated for work, but the toll it was taking on my body, mind, and psyche resulted in a risk-benefit imbalance.
Four years later, I'm still figuring out how to live in retirement. Mental-health professionals and well-meaning advice dispensers all seem to encourage a retired life filled with service to others, and devoted to maintaining or strengthening social contacts. I'm all for those activities, and some of them are and will be part of my retired life.
However, I'm on the far end of introvert on the introvert-extrovert continuum. And I'm perfectly happy in my little corner of the world, minding my own business, enjoying the sights and sounds of my environment, and appreciating still being alive. I'm never bored and rarely lonely. Do you see anything wrong with a small, quiet, do-no-harm existence, or must I force myself out into the world more often than I wish to?
Dear Reader,
Bollocks to service, and bollocks to strengthening social contacts. Be untroubled by these buzzwords. By cultivating so exquisitely your own portion of consciousness, you're doing more for the collective than any number of noisy humanitarians. Relish your solitary days!
Strewing petals,
James
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
2 hours ago
- Medscape
Novel Peptides Expressed in HIV Could Drive Treatment
Genetic sequencing of peptides in rebound virus in individuals with HIV who had analytic treatment interruptions (ATIs) confirmed the peptides' expression in HIV-1 infection, according to data presented at the International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Science. Previous research has shown that HIV-specific CD8 T-cell responses directed against five genetically conserved HIV-1 protein regions (Gag, Pol, Vif, Vpr, and Env) are associated with viral control, wrote Josefina Marín-Rojas, PhD, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, and colleagues in their abstract. However, data on whether these peptides are expressed in rebound virus among individuals with HIV who experienced ATI are limited, they wrote. The researchers applied an immunoinformatics analysis pipeline (IMAP) to select 182 peptides (IMAP-peptides) from structurally important and mutation-intolerant regions of HIV-1 proteins, said senior author Sarah Palmer, PhD, co-director of the Centre for Virus Research at the Westmead Institute for Medical Research and professor in the Faculty of Medicine and Health at the University of Sydney, in an interview. 'Our studies indicate if the immune system targets these structurally important and mutation-intolerant regions of HIV-1 proteins, this can contribute to virological control in the absence of HIV-1 therapy,' she explained. The researchers reviewed data from the PULSE clinical trial, which included 68 men who have sex with men living with HIV in Australia. The study participants underwent three consecutive ATIs. A total of seven participants' transiently controlled HIV rebound during the third ATI. The researchers examined whether the IMAP peptides were present in the HIV-1 RNA sequences of the rebound virus in four noncontrollers (patients who had viral rebound in all three ATIs) and five of the seven transient controllers who showed viral control during the third ATI. The technique of near full-length HIV-1 RNA sequencing of rebound virus from three noncontrollers and two transient controllers identified the Gag, Pol, Vif, Vpr, and Env IMAP-peptides in 52%-100% of the viral sequences obtained from these participants across three ATI timepoints. 'We assumed that cells from people living with HIV that experience virological control after treatment interruption would have the immune response to our IMAP-peptides that we observed; however, we are amazed and encouraged by the level and extent of this immune response,' Palmer told Medscape Medical News . The researchers also compared CD8 T-cell response between the IMAP peptides and a control peptide pool without the IMAP peptides. The CD8 T-cells from three transient controllers had a 15- to 53-fold higher effector response to the IMAP-peptides than the CD8 T-cells from two noncontrollers, the researchers wrote in their abstract. The relative response to the IMAP-peptides in noncontrollers was 20 times lower than that to the control peptides, but the IMAP-peptide response in transient controllers group was similar to that in the control group, the authors noted. The results highlight the potential of IMAP in developing treatment strategies. Although the results are too preliminary to impact clinical practice at this time, the findings from the current study could lead to the development of an mRNA vaccine to clear HIV-infected cells from people living with HIV, Palmer told Medscape Medical News . 'Our next steps include developing and testing mRNA vaccine constructs that contain our IMAP-peptides to assess the immune response of cells from people living with HIV to these vaccines,' Palmer told Medscape Medical News . 'From there we will conduct studies of the most promising mRNA vaccine constructs in a humanized mouse model,' she said. Data Enhance Understanding of Immunity The current study may provide information that can significantly impact understanding of the immune responses to HIV, said David J. Cennimo, MD, associate professor of medicine & pediatrics in the Division of Infectious Disease at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, in an interview. 'The investigators looked at highly conserved regions of multiple HIV proteins,' said Cennimo, who was not involved in the study. 'Conserved regions and antibody responses to them may play a role in controlling HIV viral replication and rebound,' Cennimo told Medscape Medical News . 'The investigators showed these regions were present in rebounding viremia, and individuals that exhibited greater immune recognition of these regions suppressed rebound viremia longer, and perhaps targeting these regions could impact HIV prevention or cure strategies,' he said. Secondarily, the study showed the success of the novel technique (IMAP) to identify conserved peptides, said Cennimo. The technique could potentially be applied to other viruses that mutate to escape host response, he said. The study was funded by the US National Institutes of Health, the Foundation for AIDS Research, the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, and Sandra and David Ansley. The researchers disclosed no financial conflicts of interest.
Yahoo
16 hours ago
- Yahoo
Kennedy could soon reconstruct US preventive care panel, STAT News reports
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could imminently overhaul a key federal advisory panel that recommends which preventive services insurers must pay for, health and medical news website STAT News reported on Tuesday, citing a person familiar with the plans. Federal health officials are vetting new members for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the report said. It also cited David Mansdoerfer, who advises a group allied with Kennedy, as saying he knew people being considered for the panel but that he declined to name them. Mansdoerfer, who served during President Donald Trump's first administration as deputy assistant secretary at the Department of Health and Human Services, later told Reuters that he knew "a couple" of those being considered. He added that he was not actively involved in the process, which he said could take from a few weeks to two or three months. The Office of the White House Liaison at HHS is in charge of the vetting, said Mansdoerfer, now the chief strategy adviser to the Independent Medical Alliance, a group of physicians allied with Kennedy. This was also the case with candidates for advisory committees during his time at the department, he said. Asked if the people he knew of who were under consideration were physicians, Mansdoerfer said they were all clinical health professionals. He had earlier told STAT that the existing panel was "MD heavy" and that the reorganized one was likely to include other kinds of healthcare providers. The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that Kennedy planned to remove all of the panel's 16 members. An HHS spokesperson said Kennedy had not yet made a decision. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force includes medical experts serving staggered four-year terms on a volunteer basis. Its role in choosing what services will be covered by insurers was established under the 2010 Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. The 40-year-old group, whose recommendations provide guidance to doctors, looks at everything from routine screenings for breast cancer to drugs to prevent HIV infection. Solve the daily Crossword
Medscape
20 hours ago
- Medscape
Judge: Trump Must Restore Federal Health Websites
The Trump administration has begun restoring health-related websites and datasets that it removed in January in order to comply with an order from a federal judge, who said that agencies such as the CDC unlawfully deleted treatment guidelines and other critical data that impaired doctors' ability to care for patients. Federal agencies report that they now have restored 67 of the 212 webpages that plaintiffs included in their list, according to a court document filed on July 18. Those sites include pages about adolescent and school health, endometriosis, and health disparities among LGBTQ youth. The administration's initial purge of online health information prompted a lawsuit from the medical advocacy group Doctors for America and the city and county of San Francisco, which sought to force the government to restore the information. 'With this ruling, we can provide care for our patients and protect public health based on evidence, rather than ideology,' said Reshma Ramachandran, MD, MPP, MHS, a Doctors for America board member, in a statement. The legal battle began when President Trump issued an anti-transgender executive order on his first day in office. The order denies transgender people government recognition, stating, 'It is the policy of the US to recognize two sexes, male and female.' The Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the federal government's human resources agency, told federal agencies to comply with Trump's order. In a memo issued on January 29, the OPM gave agency heads until January 31 to 'take down all outward-facing media' that recognize or reference transgender identities. As part of a temporary restraining order issued in February, Judge John D. Bates of the US District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the federal agencies to restore missing websites on which the plaintiffs relied. Although the agencies said they followed the judge's order, plaintiffs reported that some webpages are still missing. Information Remains Missing Months later, some of the deleted webpages are still blank. A CDC webpage with information about HIV and transgender patients says 'the page you're looking for was not found,' for example. An FDA webpage about health equity in artificial intelligence contains no data. And an FDA webpage with guidance for increasing the number of minorities in clinical trials was found. 'In an order on July 2, Bates vacated the federal health agencies' directives calling for the removal of public information. In an accompanying legal opinion, Bates found that federal agencies did not follow federal law when they stripped medical information from government websites in January. He ordered the plaintiffs to compile a list of websites and datasets that they needed to treat patients by July 11 and for the federal agencies to file an update on their progress restoring the sites. In their legal response, the federal agencies said they will finish restoring the webpages that fall under the judge's order 'as soon as practically possible,' but that the pace of the restoration 'is limited by staffing and other resource constraints, as well as by agency safeguards that require multiple layers of approval in order to modify a website.' But the federal agencies also said they haven't been able to restore some webpages because the plaintiffs haven't given them a specific web link, according to court documents. In other cases, the agencies argue in court filings that certain missing websites are exempt from the judge's order because they were deleted for reasons other than now-vacated orders. In his opinion, Bates wrote that while presidents have the right to issue executive orders, the removal of 'hundreds or even thousands' of webpages and datasets upon which doctors, researchers, and policymakers rely failed to follow a federal law that regulates how agencies act. 'The decision serves as a reminder that the government must follow the law, just like the rest of us,' said Zach Shelley, a Public Citizen Litigation Group attorney and lead counsel for the plaintiffs, in a statement. But in a court document filed in March, the federal agencies defended the purge by saying the health websites and datasets were 'inconsistent with administration policy' both in terms of sex and gender, as well as Trump's executive order barring activities that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion. In the document, the agencies wrote, 'Forcing [US Department of Health and Human Services] HHS to host websites with information contrary to current policy would severely impinge the government's authority to choose what to say and not to say.' 'Arbitrary and Capricious' In their lawsuit, several physicians in Doctors for America described how the loss of professional medical guidelines on the CDC website harmed patient care. For example, Stephanie Liou, MD, FAAP, a member of the group's board, said the sudden loss of online resources for treating sexually transmitted infections stymied her efforts to combat an outbreak of chlamydia at 'one of the most underserved high schools in Chicago,' according to court documents. Ramachandran described how the abrupt disappearance of CDC resources delayed her care of a patient with a complex medical history. Without access to the CDC's professional guidelines, Ramachandran had to search elsewhere for specific instructions on prescribing medication to prevent HIV for this patient, according to court documents. In an article in The New England Journal of Medicine , a physician and two legal scholars noted that 13% of CDC datasets disappeared between January 21 and February 11, which left researchers and policymakers unable to assess key measures of American health, identify outbreaks of infectious disease, or spot trends in overdoses. The removals also impaired the ability of state and local agencies to monitor public health. 'Without access to accurate and timely, scientists' work will become more difficult, and we will understand less about the world,' the authors wrote. Bates questioned why government officials acted with such haste in January. Trump's executive order set a timetable of 120 days — not 48 hours — to rid federal websites of references to what the president calls 'gender ideology.' OPM's rushed directives were 'arbitrary and capricious,' Bates wrote in his opinion. 'This case involves government officials acting first and thinking later.' Federal officials didn't need to order the 'bulk removal of health care resources' to comply with the executive order, Bates wrote in the opinion. The judge noted in court documents that some agency officials took a measured approach by simply replacing terms to which Trump objects, such as 'gender' and 'pregnant people,' with alternatives such as 'sex' and 'pregnant women.' Other agency officials, Bates wrote in his opinion, took a 'slapdash approach' by 'fully removing any webpage with offending language, no matter how minimal, without any stated intent to modify and republish the webpage.' 'The government is free to say what it wants, including about 'gender ideology,'' Bates wrote in his opinion. 'But in taking action, it must abide by the bounds of authority and the procedures that Congress has prescribed.' Not the Last Word Bates noted in his opinion that federal agencies can head 'back to the drawing board' to 'craft a lawful policy with similar objectives.' And Janet Freilich, a professor at the Boston University School of Law, Boston, described the court decision as 'a partial win' for doctors and public health staff, noting that federal agencies are likely to appeal the decision. Bates' ruling 'does not entirely prevent these datasets and webpages from being taken down in the future,' Freilich said. 'The government could find a lawful way to modify and take down datasets.' Freilich also noted that the ruling won't necessarily resurrect all the data that have disappeared this year. That's because federal agencies are only obligated to restore the specific webpages on the plaintiffs' list. Yet Bates left the door open to recover additional webpages, Shelley said. For example, other doctors or public health leaders could potentially sue to force the Trump administration to restore webpages that are particularly important to them. 'The reasoning is that all of these removals are unlawful,' Shelley said in an interview. 'This administration has been incredibly careless. It's been, at times, just outright malicious. Carelessness and maliciousness don't hold up well in court.' Although many of the health webpages are back online, they now display a prominent yellow warning label noting that the health agencies were legally required to restore the pages and that their content may not be reliable. In his ruling, Bates wrote that federal agencies do not need to remove the disclaimers, which read, 'Any information on this page promoting gender ideology is extremely inaccurate and disconnected from the immutable biological reality that there are two sexes, male and female….This page does not reflect biological reality, and therefore the administration and this department reject it.' Critics of the Trump administration have filed more than 300 lawsuits to block his policies, according to Lawfare, a nonprofit multimedia publication. Two Harvard Medical School researchers sued the Trump administration in March after their research was removed from an online patient safety resource on the website of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, part of HHS, because of the agency's attempt to comply with the anti-transgender executive order. One of the deleted articles, which focused on endometriosis, noted that physicians should be aware that the painful condition can occur in transgender and nonbinary patients. Another article noted that people who identify as LGBTQ have a higher risk for suicide. In May, federal judge Leo Sorokin ordered the administration to restore the articles while the case is litigated. In his order, Sorokin wrote that 'the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in proving that the removal of their articles was a textbook example of viewpoint discrimination by the defendants in violation of the First Amendment.' Although judges in lower courts have put many of Trump's policies on hold, the Supreme Court has reversed several of these decisions. The sudden disappearance of masses of public data has undermined faith in government health agencies, said Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, PhD, LLB, law professor at the University of California, San Francisco. 'If government needs a court decision to provide good science, we cannot trust that it will provide it in cases when people don't sue,' Reiss said.
