On Aug 13, 4:35 pm, RadioactiveSeat...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Poster "Dave", directly above, is exactly correct.
>
> Actually, while following the late Ms. Allen's story over the years, I
> wish the coverage had more emphasized her being the victim of a
> (nearly) life-long illness, rather than always focussing on that
> condition's most conspicuous consequence (i.e., her record-setting
> tallness).
>
> I mean, it was nothing larger than a pituitary tumor which caused her
> profound plight, which to her everlasting credit she seemed to deal
> with remarkable poise and dignity.
>
> While anatomy has never been my strong suit, is it not true that the
> pituitary gland is about the side of a pod's pea? And if that's the
> case, the tumor (assuming it was of her pituitary, rather than merely
> adjacent to it) was likely tiny, yet with virtual life-ruining
> capacity.
You're right about the size of the pituitary, but a pituitary adenoma
is often not caught until it's much bigger than the gland itself. This
was even more true back when Ms. Allen was diagnosed.
wd44
|
