On July 31, 2007, the New York Times published an article of contradictory opinions in regards to the Chief Justice's July 30 seizure.
Early in the article his epilepsy is characterized as idiopathic while nearer to the end of the article one quoted physician calls it cryptogenic. There is obvious disagreement about whether he should receive antiepileptics.
The Chief Justice by definition has epilepsy, probably cryptogenic localization related epilepsy. On July 30 he had a seizure and as epileptics do, he returned to normal afterward. His evaluation, as I am sure he had 14 years ago, should include an MRI and an EEG. Contrary to the Times article, a CT scan does not offer much to his work-up. Both of these tests can be done as an outpatient. As the article states the MRI will probably be normal but it should be done anyway to rule out any intracranial pathology (tumor, stroke, etc.). An EEG can provide some guidance in this situation. If it is normal, then withholding treatment for now would be prudent. If it shows focal slowing or spikes with a normal MRI, then he likely has an underlying abnormality that cannot be found. With an abnormal EEG, the decision would have to be made whether to treat with an antiepileptic drug or wait. With two seizures in 14 years and the specter of medication side effects (including cognitive), hopefully Justice Roberts and his doctors decide to forgo treatment and wait.
August 1, 2007
Justice Roberts has a Seizure
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
I think it is rather odd that such a supposedly bright guy as Roberts got confused on Obama's oath of office. Perhaps he is now on some medication that is impairing his thinking. Or perhaps the seizures (and who knows how many he really has had) are part of some dementing condition that is currently undiagnosed (or maybe diagnosed but hidden from the public).
Maybe Obama will get an unexpected Supreme Court vacancy to fill.
Post a Comment