Illustrative Case Studies in Haematology

Foreword v
Preface vii
Reference Ranges (adult) x

List of Cases

1. An active professional health worker with a serious genetic disorder 1

2. Plot twist from clot missed 5

3. Unstable: but stable 13

4. Nurture and nature 23

5. Patient knows best 29

6. Not only males are affected 36

7. A levels without haemoglobin A 42

8. A hot blood smear 48

9. More yellow than sick 58

10. A blue baby with a normal heart 66

11. Detecting and managing point mutations 73

12. A gush of oxygen for the baby 83

13. PA: not a Power-Act 91

14. Sicily in my blood 99

15. A storm of half-ghosts 106

16. Honora medicum 112

17. Failing to switch 123

18. Rosettes without a trophy 130

19. Too little beta and too much alpha 139

20. Missing something you never knew you ought to have 146

21. Two variants walk into a blood cell ... 154

22. Low GPI, high GPA 159

23. Split A2: a cue to Q 167

24. A Celtic trait? 173

25. Cold may not be cool 178

26. When it rains, a microbe makes it pour 187

27. Double membranes may prove ineffective 192

28. Being less but being dominant 200

29. Two enzymes down, still standing 208

30. Sickle cell disease at 75 215

31. Strong but frail 221

32. Troublesome symbiotic relationship 231

33. Not letting go 240

34. Hellenic class A 247

35. When the sickle stabs the kidney 255

36. Dry cells, fake potassium, real iron 264

37. Hb on target 275

38. Too little beta and too little alpha 283

39. Salt lake and salt bridges 290

40. Small red cells with a difference 298

41. Double jeopardy when facing complement 304

42. Camden town: not just the market 313

43. High on O2 and mutating again 320

44. Epigenetic upheaval can make you alpha-broke 327

For a few of the titles in this list (only a few) we received help from ChatGPT, that we openly acknowledge. Initially we were surprised that AI could be witty: but of course AI has acquired 'data' from e.g. Terry Pratchett and P G Wodehouse, not just from Dante Alighieri and William Shakespeare.

This brings up a sticky issue: in the realm of science, is it advisable or even allowed to use ChatGPT at all? Our short answer is yes. A more articulate answer includes the following. (1) You can ask simple or complex questions, but you must always check ChatGPT's replies by finding and reading the original sources in the scientific literature. (2) You can broach a topic with ChatGPT just for the purpose of elaborating on your own ideas. (3) If you disagree with ChatGPT, consider it may be wrong: stick to your guns.

Artificial intelligence should stimulate, not thwart natural intelligence.