But the response to this might be, if there's a chance that it *isn't* cancer, then maybe it's something that's less life-threatening, so why just pts out of hand? I realize that it is most likely lymphoma :-(, but when our Luc was so sick last year his ultrasound (he didn't get an Xray) showed a "bright" spot that they thought was going to turn out to be a tumor. The needle biopsy said no tumor -- his liver was whacked, we had to bring him back from hepatic lipidosis -- but it was certainly less dire than a tumor would have been.
Diane R. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nina Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 1:16 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Spencer and irony I forgot to mention that I did ask Michelle's question about why, when they would recommend pts, they would be unwilling to treat something without a definitive diagnosis. Her answer was, (and this was not the vet, so...), they would not want to put me through the expense, or Spencer through the treatment if he did not indeed have cancer. N This electronic mail transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged. They should be read or retained only by the intended recipient. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the transmission from your system. In addition, in order to comply with Treasury Circular 230, we are required to inform you that unless we have specifically stated to the contrary in writing, any advice we provide in this email or any attachment concerning federal tax issues or submissions is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, to avoid federal tax penalties.
