Tramadol Cold Turkey

[barq2]

Barq you went in to see the senior doctor at the practice who issued your tr@3@d0l and there was a brief discussion about the pain medicine to the effect that she doesn't think this pain medicine is helping with your neural pain?  She would rather you take paracetamol for you pain condition?  "We should cut this out". Are you sure that was exactly what she said?  Either the other one has said something to her Colleague or written something about cutting this out on your file and the 2nd doctor echoed this.  

Do you think she may have been discussing the possibility of cutting tr@390l? and you were not quite getting all the Part of the sentences?  Paracetamol wouldn't work for a chronic pain issue,  you'd get a few weeks and then it would not work any longer except not more than dosages 2 days of the week.

You're reducing g@b@p3n - the medicine I reduced was l#r#c@ and marked different levels of reduced amounts in Calendar.  

Something has caused a very strong reaction at a previous appointment there.  Sounds like there's been a volcanic level of rage?  It has got spiteful?  OK Take care Barq

I've not been clear enough about who said what. The senior doctor issued tramadol without any problem. We mostly talked about other things. The doctor who suggested paracetamol was the original doctor (let's call her the evil doc!). She's the one who talked about cutting it out. No other staff have approached that topic. No reason to think she has put anything awkward on my medical record.

But evil doc seriously seems to think that paracetamol is an adequate replacement, which makes no logical sense. If she is only focusing on the neural pain, then paracetamol will do nothing. And if we are talking about my back pain (separate to neural), then I'm hardly going to waste a doctor's time if paracetamol worked! I suppose codeine would cover the back pain, but in the early days of sorting out which meds worked, it emerged that it blocked me up far more than tram and was more sedating. So I've got quite concrete reasons for wanting tram over the other meds. I also think pointing out that we spent three months sorting out an acceptable cocktail of medication, and then I went back to work. Messing with what works at a time when I'm super busy at work isn't helpful.

Anyway, I see evil doc in a couple of days. The good news is that thanks to her senior colleague writing the tram script I am not in there begging for a repeat. I'll be honest and say that cutting down caused the pain to break through (interfering with my job). If it is still treating pain, then I'm on safer ground than if she thinks I'm simply addicted. Also I don't think she is at all sympathetic to the off-label antidepressant effects, so I don't see any point in mentioning it. I'll keep it simple... cause and effect... I took less tram, so I was in pain. If necessary I might remind her that I chose to go back to work as early as possible, and we accomplished that because I had sufficient pain control.

If necessary I'll tie up the rest of the appointment with something innocuous. You might question why I'm seeing her at all! It is mostly so that medical practice can see I've kept monthly contact with them. It was just unfortunate she was the only person available. Luckily my October appointment is with a nicer doctor.

If it all goes horribly wrong then I have a hospital appointment in a couple of weeks. They think I'm on the right medication, so if I tell them she's been screwing me around and it caused unnecessary pain and disruption at work then I don't think they'll be impressed. I'm on good terms with the hospital since they found me an interesting case.