So often nowadays one hears people say *He was diagnosed with walliballi disease*. Is this grammatically correct? What does a doctor diagnose? My own instinct, supported by the OED is that a doctor diagnoses an illness, or a medical condition - he/she does not diagnose a person. The OED definition* of the verb, with examples is: > a. trans. To make a diagnosis of (a disease), to distinguish and > determine its nature from its symptoms; to recognize and identify by > careful observation. > > > 1861 A. Wynter Our Social Bees 339, I was enabled to diagnose the > complaint at once. > > 1877 F. T. Roberts Handbk. Med. (ed. 3) I. 231 Articular > rheumatism has also to be diagnosed from the other forms. > > 1887 Homeop. World 1 Nov. 497, I diagnosed chronic jaundice. So can it be correct to say *He was diagnosed with...*? Would it not be more correct to say: *He was found by diagnosis to have....*. Or what would be an alternative way of saying the same thing? *It would be less than honest not to include the caveat in the most recent edition of OED: 'This entry has not yet been fully updated (first published 1895)'.