Need advice, quickly (and re: Peter)

[Priestess]

Tommorow, I have the conference with the radiologist that they'd cancelled out on a few months ago. The hospital admin's description of this meeting strongly implies that this will just be them officially covering their behinds, and that nothing I say or evidence I present will matter for much.

I have already presented evidence that the extra canal on my mri scans is too close to the trailing edge of my pubic bone to be my rectum. Only 30mm as compared to a measurable 3 inches for my rectum. I don't know that this has changed anything

I have one extra piece of evidence to offer them, but I'm not sure if I should, if it has any chance of helping my case or not. That's why I'm asking all of you.

The evidence is that one month ago, I used the simple techiniques of piercing to break the surface skin at the exact spot where the "extra" canal should exit. And I now have a small entrance into a vagina that seems normal-sized. I've measured at least 4 inches of depth, without hitting the end. There's also self-lubrication. And this canal never merges with my rectum. It doesn't open into my urinary tract either.

What say you all, should I try to use this as evidence, if the meeting goes as badly as it sounds like it might? Pros? Cons?

(And Peter, this was the source of my comment about sex. Though to be honest, that was only half the truth. The sensation of touch in this canal sometimes feels very pleasant. And sometimes like a nightmare.)

[Priestess]

The meeting came and went. Some new information. A lot of the same old thing.

As it turns out, my original mri report was done by a team of radiologists, because they immediately noticed a lot of contradictory things. That was the one spotting numerous female structures in addition to some male-ish ones.

But now, with my doctor saying my dna made it "impossible", the team leader says he no longer thinks the female structures were there. Though after a long discussion, he's not 100% sure they aren't there, and he recommended a full physical exam by some expert versed in intersex. Who that is wasn't said. when I mentioned having corresponded with experts well versed in genetics, who's opinions supported the idea that it was possible, he said that wasn't his field.

He said the evidence of my rectum being observably 2 inches further away from my pubic bone than this mystery canal, doesn't matter. I revealed that this mystery canal is now open, all that changed is that he became not completely certain of the canal being the rectum. When I discussed the matter of the colonoscopy, he said that these two things could be proof of there being an extra canal, but that it's something not obvious in his mind, from looking at my pictures.

He found the fork in my colon, which my account of the colonoscopy depended on, which he described as a little discussed feature of normal anatomy. One branch going up to the small intestine, the other down slightly, usually to a dead end. Except that dead end looked like it had a small tear in it, in me. I examined the tear on his very nice monitor, and a path could be followed down to the mystery canal.

He said the uterine-looking thing above my bladder "couldn't" be that, it had to be fat. Though fat was represented by a different shade of grey over the rest of my body. And that interpetation depended on the idea of the canal being a rectum, which he was reluctant to budge from. He pointed out the spots he'd thought were ovaries. When I mentioned all the hormonal evidence that maybe they still are, he said that wasn't his field. He just looks at pictures.

He said the male structures he now thinks are there, are all in completely the wrong places and wrong shapes. But of course they must still exist.

My doctor was horrified when she heard I do have an open canal. But I expected this meeting to suck. Basically, I feel like I'm up a creek and too sick to paddle.

[neko2]

I got told my uterus was fat also. Which was pretty stupid since the MRI was done both with and without fat suppression and it was quite obviously not fat. Did all these doctors study at the same school of lies?

I made it pretty clear that I wasn't going to buy that nonsense. Especially since the MRI was done mid-cycle (I wasn't bleeding) and the fluid inside was almost completely black on the T1-weighted images (fat would have been white). And of course still had a strong signal on the T2W images with fat suppression, as would be expected for watery fluid without blood.

So the radiologist admitted it wasn't fat after I pointed this out, but seemed convinced that there had to be some explanation other than mullerian duct remnants. So now I'm supposed to get another MRI when I'm actually bleeding. My periods have been a bit irregular lately, so scheduling that is going to be interesting.

[Priestess]

Oh Neko, they just do not want to know the truth.
They might have to admit that this stuff is a lot more common than the few well-documented cases already in the medical journals. If the medical journals included all the cases they don't want to document, the number of cases might rise quite a lot. School of Lies sounds like a good description.

[RGMCjim]

Hi Priestess,
I was 44 when my vagina was discovered. It was closed over and didn't need much more than a few snips to open either, although I was in a Doctor's office. I've never had periods and have been on testosterone since I was a teen so I've got totally complete male secondary characteristics. Once my vagina showed up they did MRI and ultra-sounds and came up with a tiny uterus and maybe ovaries - none of it works and my vagina is dry.
Your doctor keeps telling you he's the wrong doctor because he is. You need a gynecologist with some serious experience in unusual anatomy. I was sent to a uro-gynecologist who along with my urologist presented my case to andrology, pediatric urology, urology and gynecology departments to determine what my body contains and what my health care needs are. They also looked into fertility for me although I didn't ask (the answer was no anyway).
People tend to see what they want to see. If you've got a doctor who can't believe you could have a few female parts then even if he's looking right up your alley he may not recognize it for what it is. Seems crazy, but it's true.
Make a few calls and find yourself a gynecologist who's willing to ask the question, "what is this stuff?" without thinking about whether or not it "should" be there.

Jim C.

[Priestess]

Thanks Jim. It's good to hear from you again. I'm not sure if anyone at that meeting really intends to follow up on the radiologist's recommendation of sending me to better experts. I'm not even sure of who there is available for me to go to. I tried to get in touch with specialists that some of the people here have mentioned, but as soon as the discussion gets to "what seems to be the problem?", I've been getting the silent treatment.