“The ramblings and grumblings of author Ad Hudler”

Now this won't hurt a bit ...
Saturday, September 25, 2010

(NOTE: The author is writing this in third person so it's easier to deal with.)

So this guy walks into a urologist because he's had trace amounts of blood in his urine for three years. All tests show that nothing is wrong, and he's been told that some guys just have traces of blood in their urine. But he goes anyway because his GP has asked him to.

And the urologist says, "Well, I think we need to look at your bladder, just in case."

"And how do we do that?" the big bald guy asks.

"Oh, simple, non-invasive procedure."

"Which is ..."

"We insert a camera up your penis and then up into your bladder."

"And you don't call that invasive? I call that invasive."

"Oh, but we use a local anesthetic."

"And a local anesthetic, when referring to a man's penis ... hmmmm. That doesn't comfort me in the least."

"We can't do it today, but you need to make an appointment."

"So, you actually think that I will leave this place and call you back after I look at my calendar ... so I can schedule an appointment for shoving a camera up my pecker? ... even though we're almost certain there's no reason for the procedure."


"Boy, you're naive," the patient said. "And very trusting."

As I ....errr, HE left the urologist's office he noticed that the parking lot for this mega, many-urologist practice was largely empty. Hmmmmm .... was there a connection between economics and the compelling need for this "non-invasive" test?

Will the man schedule his own session of torture? Or will the urologist never see him again?

Stay tuned ...


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home