|
本帖最后由 pengxc 于 11-9-23 22:05 编辑
虽然,个案没有统计学意义,他们的故事不能证明什么。但是,我会见了患者家庭,并听取了他们的故事,我才更深刻地理解,为什么 苏珊是如此的肯定她的理论,罗杰说。
例如,在新泽西州的一个10岁的女孩,她的症状表现好像介于儿童强迫症与普通强迫症之间。女孩的母亲说孩子有二次强迫症发作,分别在4岁和8岁的时候,当时她可爱孩子脑子里充斥着令人不安的想法,比如“我的嘴腔充满了虫牙''或者“服务员在我的苏打饮料里放了毒药。”
第一次,母亲说,女儿的医生不确定疾病原因。但他的母亲,自己在网上做了一番研究以后,怀疑可能是儿童强迫症,然后给NIMH研究所打电话,某人证实了她的怀疑。然后,女孩开始了抗生素治疗,她的母亲说,治疗7个月后症状消失。第二次发病的时候,花了将近一年时间治疗。但是女孩使用的是行为治疗,没有采取任何强迫症的药物,因为孩子母亲认为没有必要。但是这个家庭采取的一个预防措施是在家里留有快速链球菌检测试剂盒,和定期检测孩子的口腔细菌。
知道她的女儿患有儿童强迫症后她仍然保持了清醒,这位母亲说, “当人淹没在海洋当中的时候,你会抓住任何能够漂浮救命的东西。”
这位母亲说,女孩的第二次强迫症发作不是因为链球菌而是因为病毒。罗杰辩解道,按照苏珊的理论,这个不应该属于儿童强迫症。这提示了细菌理论的缺陷。孩子母亲说,无论引起强迫症发作的原因是什么——- 链球菌也好,病毒感染也好——对我而言,最重要的是,现在我的女儿很好。
individuals are not statistics, and their stories are not proof. But as I met families and heard their tales, I came to more deeply understand why Swedo is so certain of her theory and Kurlan is so wary of it.
One 10-year-old girl in New Jersey, for instance, illustrates the hazy, sometimes illusory, difference between Pandas and O.C.D. The girl's mother (who asked that her name not be used to protect her daughter's privacy) describes two distinct times, at age 4 and age 8, when her bubbly child became riddled with disturbing thoughts: ''My mouth is full of cavities'' or ''The waiter put poison in my soda.''
The first time, the mother says, her daughter's doctors were uncertain of the cause. But the mother, after doing her own research and suspecting that it might be Pandas, called the N.I.M.H. Someone there confirmed her suspicions. Soon after, the girl took antibiotics, and, her mother says, the symptoms went away in seven months. The second time it took almost a year. The girl has had behavioral therapy but is not taking any medication for O.C.D. because her mother does not think it is necessary. The one precaution the family takes is keeping a supply of rapid strep test kits in the house and using them regularly.
Learning that her daughter had Pandas saved her own sanity, the woman says. ''It was like drowning in the middle of the ocean, and you grab onto something that will help you float.''
And yet. The second of the girl's two episodes, the mother says, was not brought on by strep but by a virus. By Swedo's definition, this would mean that the child did not have Pandas; that her parents think otherwise, Kurlan would argue, shows the danger of a bacterial scapegoat. The mother says that whatever caused the outbreaks -- strep infection, viral infection -- all that matters is that, at the moment, her daughter is fine. |
|