please ignore if this blood test question is too ridiculous (not a recent test)

Hi. This question, if possible, is non-clinical related. I mean that as I don't know if results can be categorized as anything with no other context. the context is quite hairy, and also involves a second CBC that was either done with the exact same blood or the previous day's blood. But if possible, and not too annoying, I would be grateful to learn from you. i feel that it's possible I would gain so much by understanding what just this one result means if a result in itself can mean anything. If i had a local vet to ask this to, please know I would and thank you so much (I have initiated some communication with a past country in hopes of clarification on very troubling tests- just so you know i am not doing nothing but i am still clueless yet hopeful). I can't even google my way to how those reds and those platelets are mutually possible, but when i just googled the reds i got to something called polycythemia vera. and if this is just too ridiculous to respond to, please know i understand. The other cbc is quite different, but i think even understanding whatever possible about this one be incredible. In the game called 'what matters,' I am guessing probably my dog's 7 echos are more important but any clarity is so appreciated on any level sorry. thanks  (i had never seen a blood test in this form before, so i dont know if those lines at the bottom mean anything (if so, there were more)). sorry, again thanks so much

if it matters, the other test had both hemolysis and the word for zero monocytes and that both blood draws were very strange (and that based only on that piece of paper i was told both that her blood was very thick and that she was anemic). sorry. i feel terrible asking questions on things that may be super twilight zoney and of course please ignore this as there are people on planet earth whose results i am guessing are much more normal and would benefit more from your time. im sorry

im sorry. i think you should ignore this. i think that her other blood tests are so crazy that whether it's her blood parasites doing wacky things or some disorder, that unless i'm able to find a vet able to look at all of her tests, it's unfair to think anyone will wizard her wackiness. i'm sorry. it's just that neither the clinical today nor her results on any possible tests have been helpful for anyone. i'm sorry. i think i need to give up. im misusing your time. it's unfair and disrespectful. im sorry. ignore this. sorry

Hello - and first, I want to send you a hug, because we all know what it's like to have something going around in your head, espeically when it's about someone you love, and be unable to articulate or get your head around the bit that isn't making sense.  I am the same when one of my close humans is ill (it seems that humans don't work the same way as animals in a lot of fields).  Please could you be explicit about what you don't know and want to know?  I am unclear on this at the moment and it clearly is bothering you.  While we are not likely to diagnose your dog without enough information, we might just say the right thing to direct your thinking a bit.  I think you're telling me that the blood results look inconsistent with what? - another blood test?  Something you were told? But that there was a time gap between the two incidences (which came first?  What happened in that time gap)?   You said that you thought the low platelets could not exist at the same time as a slightly raised Haematocrit - why is that?  Who was the patient (breed / age perhaps)?   Meanwhile, it's worth saying that there is a large gap between polycythaemia and high red blood cells.  Many dehydrated individuals have high haematocrit, but not the primary disease called polycythemia.  Out of context, it is difficult to understand how I can help, but we could try a little.   (If this relates to an earlier post, please do post me a link or let me know what it's called).   Thinking of you.

this is too long. it will have typos. i am so sorry. but totally get it if not even skimmable. thank you so much I am so sorry, and you are so wonderful and empathetic.   I was unable to google to anything with high blood red cells and low platelets.  I don’t know what it means but it’s not the big thing I don’t know and want to know. None of my past posts are- I’m sorry.I  have been asking about random weird things because I have no thinking direction and am the only one with my dog’s past.       I also am worried about asking about the big ‘what I don’t know’ and want to know as I feel like I can’t write in a way that you may not perceive it as being critical. Please, please know that I don’t intend anything to be critical as that would not benefit my dog.       What you wrote is my dream- for an incredibly smart vet to direct my thinking. . If you could do that, you would be doing more for my dog than you could ever imagine.  But please know that I understand if  the below is too weird or vague- and because it’s likely that most suggestions are not doable within our context, thinking directions would mean so so much to me.   This is my shortest response attempts, but it’s still long- I am so sorry.       Of the four very different responses to my dog’s 7th echo, one of those three vets changed their minds after I showed her my dog’s early tests. I imagine it’s possible she may have spoken to one or two others of our many past vets in our small city.       Without knowing the specifics of why her response changed drastically, or what exactly she was suggesting, it changed to what I feel is most represented by dog’s past.  When I recapped it to a past oncologist, she suggested we find an oncologist, which I did, but his response was quite different in ways that were not doable, but I respect that everyone has different opinions of course.       I would benefit so so much by any directions in how/what/where to think to  finding/learning whatever a next, unplanned,  vet would need to reduce pain- as that is what I understand is all that is possible, which I didn’t know when I felt the revised response made the most sense.         My understanding of what she said is that my dog’s ’today’ is a consequence of a  combination of toxicity (which I imagine to include anything used petrol/PAH can do to a very young/ill puppy + immune disorder/deficiency/disease + drug hypersensitivty- and that some part of that was evident / revealed by my dog’s circumstances pre-me and her early tests.   She asked me to provide her a list of all past drugs and label them as ones that did good or bad things. For many reasons, I didn’t feel I could create that list, which she seemed to agree with after I showed her a few clinical notes of the many injections on about 10 is specific long ago days, shared that 9- ish of those months included multiple prescribed daily and changing drugs, and I summarized my dog’s three acute symptoms phases since we moved to this country almost two years ago.   I was then told that she cannot have any drugs/vaccinations ever again and to bring her back when next acutely ill.   I have spent the last few months trying to create some type of usable medical record. It has all of the past many tests, but adding drugs and symptoms going back to the past has been very bad/troubling and I feel hopeless, lost, devastated, but also unable to wait until my dog is next sick and hope maybe before that time I can learn something to at last help a vet know how/with what to reduce pain. Whatever she thought or whatever is in my dog, I don’t want pain and any directions based on that vague and long story that could direct me- thank you, so so so much.       I absolutely understand if I haven’t given you anything to work with and fear that anything specific I could add may make you regret being so wonderful but please know I am so grateful for what you wrote and those words made me feel heard and less isolated and I didn’t imagination either was possible. So please understand that no response is totally fine, as your words already did so much for me. Sorry . Thank you....

but sorry. in response to your specific question about that test- as i realize you probably didn't imagine me to go in that direction- that above test was done four days after she was injected with many drugs and diagnosed with bladder sand (i brought her in as her gums were pale after her long time and very weird incontinence symptom became an acute one that exceeded her water intake. The above test was done on blood minutes after it was extracted by a vet who was given very specific and careful instructions by a man in fancyish street clothes who i later learned was the hospital boss/owner person (he just wasn't dressed as a vet so his identity was mysterious at first. His instructions to the vet were specific  in ways that made me imagine the fancy man was a professor at a vet school and the vet was a first year student. Except the vet was experienced. He was also one of the two vets the prior day, when blood was taken. there are no vet techs where we live so whoever i bring and I or maybe the secretary are the ones holding her down. she has had at least 15 blood tests before the prior day's blood draw. I had never seen anything like it, and neither of those vets was new nor incompetent. All i can say is that they both seemed very concerned while attempting to extract her blood, as if it was like doing a surgery. a bit of blood went on the table, no biggie, and one made an oopsy face and a very small bottle tube of blood was all that was extracted. i was told it was enough, which i found surprising.  One of the vets shook that small tube, kinda like a bartender shakes a drink. I was called that night and asked to come back the next day as they needed more blood. The paper you see was done on the second day with the fancy boss giving instructions, it was done minutes after the blood was drawn. the rest of that blood, and the previous day's small shaken tube were sent to. lab. That lab, that day, also did a CBC. this is that CBC. That lab also did a biochem and sent some blood to another city to do some other tests that i got back a month later. I don't know which blood was used for which of those tests, but if vets shake blood in a tube for either thyroids or biochem, then the above test and this test were done on the same day, with the same blood. and OMG, im sorry. i meant to try to make this short and clear and look where i am now. im sorry. i think this may clarify what i wrote above maybe in terms of how hairy things are, but i realized that maybe you weren't asking for my dream of dreams but now i have turned my attempt to answer what you may have been asking about into a nightmare. sorry. this is the other cbc, which i kinda thing was done with the same blood on the same day, just as i feel like one doesn't shake a teeny tube for a cbc but i really have no idea and sorry. this was a terrible and very long/weird response. im so sorry. i am sure you can understand why i deactivated social media- it was my only support network/lifeline but things like this were understandably weird and annoying to those who share my language and nothing else. sorry. 

Hi!  You're doing your best and you don't need to apologise.  High red blood cells CAN just mean that a dog is a dehydrated (ie the fluid % of the blood is less, increasing the red blood cell percentage) or recently contracted their spleen (releasing lots of RBCs) or is a fit sighthound.  Polycythaemia is a disease in which dogs produce far too many red blood cells, giving rise to "thick" blood.  It is very rare - I have seen one case in my career; we improved things by periodically giving fluids.    However, if I saw a PCV in the low 50s I might worry about dehydration first - this is a far more common cause.   Old lab machines  were often unreliable counters of red blood cells and many vets would double-check a haematology test by spinning the blood down in a tube and checking the PCV.  If there was a discrepency, the latter was usually the one to pay attention to.  Therefore, simply having a 'red' reading on a machine blood result is a far cry from a diagnosis of polycythaemia.  On the other hand, platelets often stick ('clump') together, so low platelet readings, particularly on very old blood machines were common, to the point that vets routinely ignored them back then.  There were other tests of platelet function available if the vets had cause to be concerned about it.   Historically it was not uncommon to look at a blood test with lots of the readings flagging up 'red', to be told 'dont worry - we're not worried about all those red readings' which I think was quite stressful for those owners who like to understand details.

Hmmm I could have said that much more simply.  Here goes:

• Most dogs with high RBCs are simply dehydrated and need fluids ; true polycythaemia (I have actually seen it once) is extremely rare.
• Blood machines 20 years ago often read 'wrong' (the machines were designed for humans) and if vets wanted to double-check a reading, they would spin down tubes and check % red blood cells that way, which could be done on a tiny drop of blood (the vet or nurse just sucked it up in a very thin glass tube) and gave a much more accurate and reliable reading.
• Low platelet readings in animals with normal platelets used to be a common machine error that vets simply ignored.  However, there were other ways of checking platelets eg looking at blood smears, which your vets may have done at the time, particularly if they had a reason to worry about platelet function - which they may or may not have had.  Platelets are usually connected with blood clotting.
• I dont understand enough about what went on in this case to be able to comment on it.  However, you may already have the answers you need now.
• I hear that you are greiving - and it is ok to be upset and greive.  Please never feel you have to apologise for it.  Greif has 'phases,' including a bargaining phase where mourners (do not want the sad outcome to happen, so we) try to find technical reasons why it shouldn't have happened.  I suspect that you are looking for such reasons in these notes, and it sounds incredibly frustrating that the facts are not available in a way that is clear to you .
• I feel that you may be right; in absense of useful data about what was really going on, it may be that you have to come to terms with not understanding the details of the 'why.'  Acceptance can still be reached and counselling may help you to do that.  Mourning does not always relate to a death, by the way - sometimes it can be connected to a disease, or to aging or other change.
• I wish you the very best of luck

thank you so much- if possible one last time- I think adding a picture version of this is more eye friendly and I feel I was able to identify some specific thinking deficits that any direction would be invaluable.... this is what I should have tried to learn instead of past posts and I apologize for not knowing that then.... and a big abrazo from all three of us...... 

sorry. I now feel like I should clarify something in the hopes you may not think i am as crazy as I suspect you may feel. I mean, I am definitely crazy, but I think I may imagine you could think that trying to find a hematologist to review past blood tests is overkill. It may be as I don’t understand anything, but I think I feel like I should say I wouldn’t do it because of these two tests or even five.  And I wouldn’t do it because I think there is any simple answer nor is there any cure.       A very quick example of a very tiny reference -Her first ever blood test, mild iron deficiency anemia. Her second test, two weeks later (while on too high a dose of two drugs) revealed only one abnormality- a 590 platelets when the range was up to 500 (those were all fancy machines as it was a capital city).         the majority of her blood tests were done on fancy machines that listed a wide variety of methods next to each blood result. the extent of abnormalities was quite notable, both in individual results as well as in quantity. a few of them led to diagnoses in themselves- well several have, but some were based on results only and some in combo of symptoms and results.   we have false positives, presumed false negatives, and such an abnormally high result on one test, well two,  and low on another test that very smart vets were truly baffled.   I wouldn’t be seeking a hematologist’s review, even if that has any purpose, because I think there is a cure, or an easy answer, or that tests without the context of those moments may matter.   I think it’s possible that we have amassed enough tests that only with time and tests, can patterns and abnormalities be noted, as they were in those data tables in whatever ways led to specific instructions regarding specific drugs and vaccinations that were not able to be followed.       I have definitely spent time trying to google those results, what can skew certain methods and the possibility of drug interaction or xyz  gene thing I had never imagined or even with her two hemotropic mycoplasmas, even though I know one being a candidatus one, but spelled right, I think suggests that not much can be known about it.   I think It’s possible that her body is probably such a mess of who knows what that it’s possible that history could be irrelevant, but that it’s also possible that a review of her past could help someone learn something- beyond a hope of less pain but maybe to help other dogs (but I am guessing that is unlikely just at how messy everything is).   But I don’t want you to think, as your words seem so thought out and intentional, and I value that so much- that I am on some hunt for answers that I think could ever lead to my dog prancing around in 10 years, even though she isn’t a prancer now.   An additional motivation, to me, that is a factor in my hopes of fine-tuning  / fleshing out whatever it is I have two tabs over from here stem from some tests that were suggested by an expert  of two vector borne guys I had not thought about in a long time.  I was surprised to see their names mentioned and the mentioning of those names has added a puzzling factor to a puzzling history.  I have deleted the rest of what was below, as the specific aren’t relevant to my hope that you may not imagine me on a hunt for answers or thinking something will cure my dog.       I’m sorry, I wasn’t planning to write more and maybe I shouldn’t have. You have been such a rare an incredible voice and please know that I am going to to each or both of those local vets and will find a way to try to express ‘please help’ in ways that hopefully won’t inspire reactions I hope to avoid. I think it’s important for me to express to you- 1. Thank you 2. I don’t want you regret your suggestions or words and I absolutely do not expect or need more 3. They were wonderful in moments I needed to read them 4. I’m not thinking whatever I am trying to create has any  possible use that = happily ever after 5. And thank you. So much. I feel that I can create a few versions. 6. I won’t write again under any circumstance. 7. your words about grieving really impacted me since reading them and thank you for sharing those words.  

I hear you.  Good luck and you may want to look up a website called The Ralph Site, set up when a fabby vet called Shailen lost his own pet, a cat called Ralph, and realised how hard all of this is for owners and how little support was out there at the time.  I can see the links coming together in your head - and hope that you can resolve some of these feelings soon.  Wishing you the very best from here.