Medical Acronyms: Enough, Already (EA)

Is It Just Me, or are we getting too chummy with our ailments?

Back when I was a kid, my parents had pretty much stopped referring to tuberculosis as "consumption" about the time it got shortened to "TB." In later years, muscular dystrophy became familiar as MD, multiple sclerosis was MS and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (admittedly a mouthful) morphed into Lou Gehrig's Disease and then just ALS.

But now I fear a line has been crossed. I wasn't too upset when deep vein thrombosis was transformed into DVT; but when the ads started to refer to erectile dysfunction as "ED" - as if it were an old friend we'd be helping out if we took those little blue pills - I'd had enough.

Sad to say, though, there doesn't seem to be an end in sight. Just about every TV advertisement for a new drug now refers to the condition it treats by an acronym. We're not dealing with psoriatic arthritis, but PsA. It isn't coronary heart disease, it's CHD. Now I grant you I'm not entirely neutral on this abbreviation thing to begin with; we didn't name our firstborn child Eric largely because I knew he'd never escape "Rick" or (gag me with a spoon) "Ricky." Still, all this sudden cozy familiarity with our health conditions has gone too far (GTF) and it's not okay with me (OWM).

I don't know the reasoning behind it all, but I strongly suspect it's rooted in saving seconds on those aforementioned TV commercials. Say "irritable bowel syndrome" six times in a 30-second spot, and you've used up some very expensive time. So IBS it is.

Actually, there's some evidence that this curtailment really does have time implications. My frame of reference comes from many years ago as a large local company was making a big push toward higher productivity (does Just-In-Time inventory, lean manufacturing and Quality Circles ring some bells?) As part of that process, the powers-that-be determined that from that day forward, the word "employee" would be shortened to "employe" in all the company correspondence such as news releases (yes, really). The stated reason? That second "e" was nothing more than a waste of time (yes, really). At the end of the day, just think how much extra work could be performed with all that leftover "e" time? At the end of the month? A year? Oh my, the possibilities are endless (PAE).

In the pharmaceuticals industry, there may be another reason. The more familiar people are with something, the more they're likely to like it is just common sense. Thus, thinking of your barely functioning carpel-tunnel damaged wrist as an RSI instead of a repetitive strain injury is somehow endearing. And if all goes as planned, TV viewers will come to associate those warm fuzzies with the product that's being touted.

Honestly, I don't have the answer, and it sure doesn't look as if this ailment rebranding thing is going to stop any time soon. And maybe someday I'll cave. Should I develop leaky bladder, for instance, it might be more comforting to speak of it as LB (if I must speak of it at all). But for now, I'm not quite ready to be good buddies with things that hurt me.

Or Is It Just Me?