Precursor to MS... Too Much Information?

This is really interesting Mandy. 

Although I did have a precursor-to-MS event, a full five years before I was diagnosed, I don't know if I would have wanted to have MS in my records.  With a single occurrence of Optic Neuritis, without evidence of any demyelinating disease, I was able to qualify for an underwritten insurance policy.  If MS had been written in my records at that time, then certainly I would not have qualified.

If that had happened, then I would have had NO OPTIONS beyond getting insurance through the musician's union, very expensive, but everybody's accepted and prescriptions are covered.  If that had happened, then I wouldn't have experienced first hand the "health care crisis" of which we speak so often.

But if I had started on MS medication at the time of Optic Neuritis (assuming I had insurance at the time), maybe I would never have developed a confirmed case of MS.  In 2000, my neuro-opthamologist told me that my chances of developing MS within the next five years had increased a specific percentage (sorry, don't remember the number).  I had almost forgot about that until I was experiencing OBVIOUS symtpoms five years later.

Too many - what if's - involved.  I say that if you haven't developed MS, you don't have MS and it shouldn't be in your records.  Maybe advise to increase Vitamin D and Omega 3 fish oils would be good for those whose brain's show warning signs.

For years, I gently reminded my doctors that, "you know, I did have optic neuritis in 2000 and my mom has lupus.  does that effect anything?"  But I didn't go looking for a diagnosis until I was advised to see a neurologist for a specialist opinion.  My PCP even said to me, "now when you pick up the radiaologist report, don't be frightened by the differential diagnoses at the bottom.  this don't mean that you have any of these diseases, but I do want you get to see a neurologist."

I don't know, but I hope that a lot of people don't get unnecessarily scared by being told that their MRI shows a "precursor to m MS."

This is sort of like the old question, "If you could know in advance when and how you would die, would you want to know?" Not that MS is a death sentence. But the questions are similar in wanting to know the future.

If I had known I would have done a few things differently (like worry more) but would that have been better? I do like taking life as it comes. The potential of MS would have felt so much worse than the reality. The medications out there today are not cures and certainly don't help everyone, and there are no innoculations.

I'm the opposite of the rest of the folks in this post.  I would want to know.  If someone told me that I had a 70% chance of NOT getting MS then I wouldn't worry.  I would be a little paranoid about symptoms, but this would lead to earlier testing and perhaps an earlier intervention.  I've read that many people aer misdiagnosed for years before MS is finally recognized.  If treated earlier, could their symptoms perhaps be better controlled? 

Being the son of an alcoholic with a family history of diabetes and heart disease, I know my odds of developing these diseases are higher - and allows me to change my behavior to prevent them (although I did a terrible job with addiction).  I know you can't prevent MS but it's possible to take early action.

At least, that's my humble opinion.

Curt