Is a plaintiff's description of symptoms inconsistent with a failure to seek medical attention?

In Edmondson v. Payer, 2011 BCSC 118; aff’d 2012 BCCA 114 [Edmondson], Mr. Justice N. Smith expressed a similar view at para. 37: … There certainly may be cases where a plaintiff's description of his or her symptoms is clearly inconsistent with a failure to seek medical attention, permitting the court to draw adverse conclusions about the plaintiff's credibility. But a plaintiff whose condition neither deteriorates nor improves is not obliged to constantly bother busy doctors with reports that nothing has changed, particularly if the plaintiff has no reason to expect the doctors will be able to offer any new or different treatment. Similarly, a plaintiff who seeks medical attention for unrelated conditions is not obliged to recount the history of the accident and resulting injury to a doctor who is not being asked to treat that injury and has no reason to be interested in it.