Hi, newbie here so please forgive me if I'm repeating anything off older forums (I did try looking back quite a way).
So, I went to the GP after suffering post coital bleeding for about a year or so. I have a Mirena fitted so havent menstruated for about 7 years now, so at first I thought it might be to do with that. Anyway, after some chat, my GP gave me a pelvic exam and had a look up there, and said that my cervix looked rather red. I was due for my routine smear later this year,first back on 3 year recall following CIN1 back in about 2009 (that was never treated, just 6 monthly then annual smears for a bit to see if it cleared up), so GP referred me for a colposcopy.
I had that about a week ago, and I'm not good with these things in that when the doctor asks if I have any questions I never can think of any, then about a hundred after I leave! So, the colposcopist had a look, took a smear, then took some biopsies, but I don't know why. He didn't say if he'd seen anything abnormal, just took the tests. He said I only have thin skin on my cervix which could explain the bleeds and that dependant upon the biopsy results they could treat the skin prob with cold coagulation.
My big question is, if he took biopsies does that definitely mean he saw something during the colposcopy?
I am pretty freaked out to be honest. I get a lot of other vague issues like low back ache, peeing a lot more than usual, but never feeling like I emptied (definitely not cystitis though).
Also, two days after the colposcopy I started to bleed extremely heavily. I went to urgent care and was given pills to help with the bleeding and it seems to have calmed down, now it's just a wait of another 3 to 5 weeks for results. This bit is agonising. I can't keep my mind off all of this for any good amount of time, but I digress.
Mainly, I wordered as above, does the fact he took biopsies mean he did see something?
