Short straw (who got the...)

My neurologist and my neurosurgeon have decided to split responsibilities with regards to me. The neurologist has decided that he will now only be responsible for any seizures I may have from now on.

I forgot to say that I have always been interested in the brain and rate among my favourite writers about the brain: Vilayanur Ramachandran and Oliver Sacks. I told my neurologist this and he told me he hated them. I then told him that I'd just read "The Private Life of the Brain" by Susan Greenfield and he told me he hated her too. My neurosurgeon didn't seem too complimentary about them either. I call it lobe envy.

So - the ologist is looking after fits while the surgeon is looking after MRI scans and beyond.

I am very lucky in that I have private health insurance through the company I work for. But I am also very lucky because the ologist and the surgeon have said that they would be willing to continue looking after me, if the private health scheme decided not to, via the NHS, which is not only comforting but also something I am grateful to the two guys about.

What I'm interested to know is - which one drew the short straw? I have two ways of looking at this; in theory (and, I hope, in practice) the likelihood of me having another seizure is quite low, given the drugs I'm taking. So that would mean less income for the ologist. So he might have wanted a bigger slice of the action. On the other hand, touching all sorts of wood, my tumour might do fuck all for years, in which case the surgeon will only get a relatively low income from looking after me. But I'm sure neither of them are money-grabbing or they would never have offered to look after me on the NHS. So, my only conclusion is that the surgeon is most interested because my particular problem is extremely rare and so he wants to study. But I honestly don't care. They're both decent chaps and as long as they look after my brain that's all that matters.

Next scan - November some time.