The Lemon Fool

If you have had, or come across anyone who has had shingles, what do you think of the NHS description ?
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/shingles/

It’s reasonably accurate, although the pain is variable, tending to be nothing more than an itch in youngsters to excruciating in the elderly. Also the pain can (rarely) develop some weeks before the rash, and can (not so rarely) last months extending to (again, rarely) years thereafter.

The rash I had was on my back, and didn't spread anywhere else.

Scott.

swill453 wrote:The rash I had was on my back, and didn't spread anywhere else.

Scott.

Where was the pain ?

stockton wrote:

swill453 wrote:The rash I had was on my back, and didn't spread anywhere else.

Where was the pain ?

About kidney height, about 2 inches to one side of the spine.

Scott.

I've had shingles more than once. It's always been very minor compared to what is described on the NHS site. More discomfort than pain.

I had shingles on my back/shoulder about four years ago aged 44 about a decade after I first had chickenpox. The surface rash was small but the area was painful and IIRC shifted between the feeling of being stabbed, electrical shocks and boiling water. The corresponding flu and malaise lasted a couple of weeks, was very bad at first, with a gradual recovery of 5% per day in health. I made the mistake of trying to get back to work too soon and it knocked me back several days. It deserves respect.

Hmm ...

It was about 5am in the morning when I was woken by a significant pain in my right "side". Ladies please look away. Side = testicle . I went back to sleep until 7am when I got a shower. The pain worsened upon the application of soap. Very quickly I realised that I had obviously managed to get sand in my boxers the day before when I had spent a considerable amount of time jet washing my friends driveway.

Eventually the sore healed. I was pleased.

Two weeks later I was sat in my car for a day and kept getting a pain in my lower back. I inspected it late that night. It was a bit of a mess. I popped to see my GP who diagnosed shingles and gave me some cream and medication. It wasn't painful. But I did have to wear my boxers in the shower and allow them to get thoroughly soaked before I could peel them off as they stuck to the open sore area. Which made me draw another conclusion ... my earlier "right hand side issue" wasn't sand. That too needed delicate removal of boxers, three times a day

For over three years after that every time I got stressed or felt anxious I felt tingling in my back. But not further outbreaks.

AiY

stockton wrote:If you have had, or come across anyone who has had shingles, what do you think of the NHS description ?
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/shingles/

I'm not quite sure what sort of answer you want to your question. I know a lot about shingles from being involved in two different drugs that were used to treat it. Mrs RS has also had shingles as have several relatives. In each case the experience was different. The NHS description gives a reasonable overview IMHO but many cases would lie at the edges of their description which is quite brief. The biggest omission is any mention of post herpetic neuralgia which can cause debilitating pain that is difficult to control.

John

If you are between 70 and 78 the NHS will give a vaccine against shingles. Not 100% effective it would seem, but from the descriptions of symptoms above it seems worth getting. Might be better to leave to for a few months though, GPs are probably a bit busy at the moment.

The lack of guidance is deliberate as I did not wish to influence the replies.

In reality I find the article appallingly inaccurate and not unlikely to prejudice the outcome for someone who has the misfortune to develop shingles.
Shingles develops as a pain and/or rash, and the two may or may not be in the same place. Anyone looking for a “painful rash” may well be misled and fail to detect shingles.

This is important because doctors are clearly not very good at diagnosing shingles, and also because shingles can be treated easily during the first hours following symptoms. If treatment is not received during the first day or two, the disease can commonly take six painful months out of someones life.

The second shortcoming is the failure to emphasise the potential seriousness of the disease. The article leaves the impression that there is a rash which is gone in a few weeks – in reality shingles is far more serious than that and symptoms can last for many months.

Thirdly, who would write “this works best when taken within 3 days” when the pills simply do not work after 3 days.

Looks like I need to add that I would like to see some comment on my opinions - in particular, has anyone actually had "a painful rash".

Your comments see fair to me. Looking at the NHS information, it doesn't seem to be as comprehensive as it used to be - although that could be my mind playing tricks as I looked at many other sites for information around the time.

You reminded me that my wife had a brief mild case of shingles a few years before me. She had a circular rash and visited a junior doctor who told her that it could be a spider bite. I had next to no knowledge of shingles but guessed it was the cause immediately.

Again my recollections are poor, but I can't recall that my rash itself was painful but the deep neuralgia definitely was and the exhaustion lasted several weeks.

I would consider the vaccine to avoid reoccurence but I think it's only available to over 50s at present.