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)'.