Re: Hope somebody's awake... test dye question

[Guest guest]

I don't know the answer to your question from a medical point of view, but

you are correct to want to protect his thyroid. If the CAT scan is not a

scan of his thyroid, I do not think it would hurt the test. The only

reason people have to get off any iodine before the RAI destruction of

their thyroids, is to make sure that the thyroid is thirsty for iodine and

absorbs the RAI (I get physically sick typing that, btw). So to me it

totally follows that you would want to protect his thyroid in order for any

of the radioactive dye not to absorb into his thyroid.

My vote: Wake him up right now, give big dose. Give big dose in am first

thing. ASAP so it has time to soak in. Doctors won't admit the

radioactive dye is a problem, so they certainly won't validate your

protecting your husband's thyroid. The potassium iodide you give him

absolutely won't hurt him, so there is every reason to give it to him.

best wishes.

--V

At 12:13 AM 10/1/2010, you wrote:

>My husband has to take a CAT scan with radioactive iodine tomorrow.

>(At least, I think that's what the doc said. I was in a bit of a panic.)

>

>I was planning to give him a good, stiff dose of iodine before the

>test, to reduce the risk of his thyroid absorbing the radioactive

>crap. (The potassium iodide does protect from radioactivity, right?)

>I have had him on iodine for a while, so I don't expect detox

>problems, & hopefully the months on a moderate dose of iodine will

>already afford some protection. But then it occurred to me to wonder,

>would that screw up the test? Anybody know anything about this?

>

>Anne

>

>

>------------------------------------

>

>All off topic posts should go to the IodineOT

>group IodineOT/

>

>

>Commonly asked questions: http://tinyurl.com/yhnds5e

[Guest guest]

They are doing a heart study. It seems that the dandy drug they gave him for his prostate has screwed up his heart, & now they need to see how much damage there is. The doc isn't even DENYING that the Avodart caused the problem. They did a stress test, & his heart went so nuts that they told him not to raise his heart rate at all till they can check him out, for fear of a "sudden death event." (As you can imagine, I have been a bit stressed the last few days, watching for a sudden death event!)I have been flooding his body with liposomal vitamin C, Q-Gel (CoQ10) & L-Carnitine Fumarate. I don't want to screw up the test with iodine (if it would screw up the test), because I sure don't want him to have to do it again. But the test itself sounds pretty scary to me. And I can't ask them, because you know the docs wouldn't know what to make of the iodine protocol...I actually cut back his iodine for a few days, in case anybody asked me what he was on, so I could honestly say that he was on a tiny dose of iodine. But I ramped it up again today, & I figure tomorrow I should give him a dose before he has to start fasting... But I was hoping somebody could assure me that it wouldn't affect the test. THis guerilla self-care always poses interesting dilemmas, doesn't it?AnneOn Sep 30, 2010, at 11:09 PM, Baker wrote: I don't know the answer to your question from a medical point of view, but you are correct to want to protect his thyroid. If the CAT scan is not a scan of his thyroid, I do not think it would hurt the test. The only reason people have to get off any iodine before the RAI destruction of their thyroids, is to make sure that the thyroid is thirsty for iodine and absorbs the RAI (I get physically sick typing that, btw). So to me it totally follows that you would want to protect his thyroid in order for any of the radioactive dye not to absorb into his thyroid. My vote: Wake him up right now, give big dose. Give big dose in am first thing. ASAP so it has time to soak in. Doctors won't admit the radioactive dye is a problem, so they certainly won't validate your protecting your husband's thyroid. The potassium iodide you give him absolutely won't hurt him, so there is every reason to give it to him. best wishes. --V At 12:13 AM 10/1/2010, you wrote: >My husband has to take a CAT scan with radioactive iodine tomorrow. >(At least, I think that's what the doc said. I was in a bit of a panic.) > >I was planning to give him a good, stiff dose of iodine before the >test, to reduce the risk of his thyroid absorbing the radioactive >crap. (The potassium iodide does protect from radioactivity, right?) >I have had him on iodine for a while, so I don't expect detox >problems, & hopefully the months on a moderate dose of iodine will >already afford some protection. But then it occurred to me to wonder, >would that screw up the test? Anybody know anything about this? > >Anne > > >------------------------------------ > >All off topic posts should go to the IodineOT >group IodineOT/ > > >Commonly asked questions: http://tinyurl.com/yhnds5e

[Guest guest]

Ok, I've looked and looked and it seems to me that the iodine contrast dye

that is used with CT scans is not radioactive. It seems to me that the

radioactive iodine scan is mainly or only used with imaging of the thyroid.

You seemed somewhat in doubt that it is radioactive iodine they talked

about. I can't find any reference to radioactive iodine dye that isn't

about thyroid imaging.

Here is the wikipedia page for the contrast dye:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodinated_contrast

I read about this recently, kidney function is really important here:

>Iodinated contrast is toxic to the kidneys and kidney function of the

>patient receiving a dose should be considered before the exam. A

>creatinine level in the blood should be no higher than 1.4 to receive

>iodinated contrast. Following up with extra fluids after an injection is

>highly recommended.

Make sure they do the creatinine level test to make sure his kidneys can

withstand the test. I was reading about this recently and they have taken

2 of these dyes off the market, but all of them have kidney implications.

Back to the question of giving him potassium iodide. I do not think they

are giving him radioactive dye. However, the CT scan itself is

radioactive, it's an x-ray machine. So protecting his thyroid for this

test is appropriate and will not affect the test.

best wishes to you both,

--

-------------------------------------------

Here is what I wrote before I thought to check whether it really is

radioactive or not:

I don't see how it can affect the test, Anne, because the radioactive

iodine dye will only be in his veins so they will be in contrast with the

muscle tissue and they can look at his heart function. Iodine in his body

and thyroid is not going to prevent the radioactive iodine from going into

his bloodstream and through his veins. All they want is a physical

contrast. As I mentioned, the only reason there is an iodine withdrawal

for the RAI thyroid destruction is so that the thyroid will soak up the RAI

and be destroyed. You don't want him soaking up any of the radioactive

iodine, so he should be fully saturated with potassium iodide to prevent

that. They aren't dealing with his thyroid, and definitely are not trying

to destroy any tissue. They just want contrast dye in his veins so they can

see what's happening in there. (Not that that is any small issue, I

recognize this must be very frightening, just the test alone.) After the

test the idea is that his body excretes the iodine dye entirely, if

possible. Potassium iodide in his thyroid will increase that likelihood.

btw, I'm very sorry this has happened to him, and to you. I hope you can

sue the drug company.

with all best wishes,

--

>They are doing a heart study. It seems that the dandy drug they gave him

>for his prostate has screwed up his heart, & now they need to see how much

>damage there is. The doc isn't even DENYING that the Avodart caused the

>problem. They did a stress test, & his heart went so nuts that they told

>him not to raise his heart rate at all till they can check him out, for

>fear of a " sudden death event. " (As you can imagine, I have been a bit

>stressed the last few days, watching for a sudden death event!)

>

>I have been flooding his body with liposomal vitamin C, Q-Gel (CoQ10) &

>L-Carnitine Fumarate. I don't want to screw up the test with iodine (if it

>would screw up the test), because I sure don't want him to have to do it

>again. But the test itself sounds pretty scary to me. And I can't ask

>them, because you know the docs wouldn't know what to make of the iodine

>protocol...

>

>I actually cut back his iodine for a few days, in case anybody asked me

>what he was on, so I could honestly say that he was on a tiny dose of

>iodine. But I ramped it up again today, & I figure tomorrow I should give

>him a dose before he has to start fasting... But I was hoping somebody

>could assure me that it wouldn't affect the test. THis guerilla self-care

>always poses interesting dilemmas, doesn't it?

>

>Anne

>

>

>On Sep 30, 2010, at 11:09 PM, Baker wrote:

>

>>

>>

>>I don't know the answer to your question from a medical point of view, but

>>you are correct to want to protect his thyroid. If the CAT scan is not a

>>scan of his thyroid, I do not think it would hurt the test. The only

>>reason people have to get off any iodine before the RAI destruction of

>>their thyroids, is to make sure that the thyroid is thirsty for iodine and

>>absorbs the RAI (I get physically sick typing that, btw). So to me it

>>totally follows that you would want to protect his thyroid in order for any

>>of the radioactive dye not to absorb into his thyroid.

>>

>>My vote: Wake him up right now, give big dose. Give big dose in am first

>>thing. ASAP so it has time to soak in. Doctors won't admit the

>>radioactive dye is a problem, so they certainly won't validate your

>>protecting your husband's thyroid. The potassium iodide you give him

>>absolutely won't hurt him, so there is every reason to give it to him.

>>

>>best wishes.

>>

>>--V

>>

>>At 12:13 AM 10/1/2010, you wrote:

>> >My husband has to take a CAT scan with radioactive iodine tomorrow.

>> >(At least, I think that's what the doc said. I was in a bit of a panic.)

>> >

>> >I was planning to give him a good, stiff dose of iodine before the

>> >test, to reduce the risk of his thyroid absorbing the radioactive

>> >crap. (The potassium iodide does protect from radioactivity, right?)

>> >I hav

>>

>>

>>

>>No virus found in this incoming message.

>>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

>>Version: 9.0.856 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3169 - Release Date: 09/30/10

>>13:34:00

~~~ There is no way to peace; peace is the way ~~~~

--A.J. Muste

[Guest guest]

Doctors and hospitals use the radioactive iodine scanning for prostrate cancer. I know this for a fact.>> >My husband has to take a CAT scan with radioactive iodine tomorrow.>> >(At least, I think that's what the doc said. I was in a bit of a panic.)>> >>> >I was planning to give him a good, stiff dose of iodine before the>> >test, to reduce the risk of his thyroid absorbing the radioactive>> >crap. (The potassium iodide does protect from radioactivity, right?)>> >I hav>>>>>>>>No virus found in this incoming message.>>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com>>Version: 9.0.856 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3169 - Release Date: 09/30/10 >>13:34:00~~~ There is no way to peace; peace is the way ~~~~--A.J. Muste

[Guest guest]

They use RAI for ALL cancer. My husband passed from lung cancer they used it to 'light up' where the cancer had spread. He had a tiny tumor in one lung but it spread everywhere. I saw the xray it showed he only had one kidney (he didn't know that) and the tiny lights all over where lymph nodes are and the two major tumors in hip and bone. Doesn't that emphasize that Iodine is needed everywhere in our bodies? I find it interesting they don't Radioactivate any other nutrient to find cancers. iodine From: pamela.olson@...Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 05:33:33 -0700Subject: Re: Hope somebody's awake... test dye question

Doctors and hospitals use the radioactive iodine scanning for prostrate cancer. I know this for a fact.>> >My husband has to take a CAT scan with radioactive iodine tomorrow.>> >(At least, I think that's what the doc said. I was in a bit of a panic.)>> >>> >I was planning to give him a good, stiff dose of iodine before the>> >test, to reduce the risk of his thyroid absorbing the radioactive>> >crap. (The potassium iodide does protect from radioactivity, right?)>> >I hav>>>>>>>>No virus found in this incoming message.>>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com>>Version: 9.0.856 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3169 - Release Date: 09/30/10 >>13:34:00~~~ There is no way to peace; peace is the way ~~~~--A.J. Muste

[Guest guest]

They do use radioactive iodine for this test. I had it several years ago. Went in for chest pain in the right side, which I thought was gallbladder pain, which I told them I suspected. The second I got to the hospital they figured it for a cardiac event and put me on that track, slapped a nitroglycerin patch on my chest which started an awful set of circumstances that only affirmed my belief in alternative medicine. They forgot to take the nitro patch off during the transfer to a different hospital and I got the worst headache I've ever had in my life and I've had migraines. That caused a shot of morphine and with no food from dinner or breakfast either, I was absolutely loopy, could barely talk much less run on a treadmill so they gave me the chemical test for a stress test and a CT. They are supposed to ask some questions before administering the contrast but all the nurse asked me was if I was allergic to iodine. In the drunken state I was, there was no way she should have taken my answer as verification. I could barely hold up my head and couldn't stay awake through the question. But they went right ahead with the test. I don't understand why they do these chemical stress tests and say that they are safer than the treadmills. I thought my heart was going to literally burst. My heart has never felt like that even when physically pushing myself with a trainer. The killer was that the tests didn't show any cardiac irregularities and when I asked what about it being the gallbladder again, the doc told me to follow up with my doctor. Unbelievable. I told my husband that I never want nitro again, even if I am having a heart attack. I've had natural childbirth and migraines both and the pain from that nitro was indescribable. My doc said it would have been exacerbated since I wasn't having a cardiac event. I also won't have another one of those chemical stress tests. One more reason for me to stay as far away from hospitals as I can. BTW I ended up taking care of my own gallbladder issues because I didn't want to end up in the hospital for that surgery either. Linn On Oct 1, 2010, at 2:44 AM, Baker wrote:

Ok, I've looked and looked and it seems to me that the iodine contrast dye

that is used with CT scans is not radioactive. It seems to me that the

radioactive iodine scan is mainly or only used with imaging of the thyroid.

You seemed somewhat in doubt that it is radioactive iodine they talked

about. I can't find any reference to radioactive iodine dye that isn't

about thyroid imaging.

Here is the wikipedia page for the contrast dye:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodinated_contrast

I read about this recently, kidney function is really important here:

>Iodinated contrast is toxic to the kidneys and kidney function of the

>patient receiving a dose should be considered before the exam. A

>creatinine level in the blood should be no higher than 1.4 to receive

>iodinated contrast. Following up with extra fluids after an injection is

>highly recommended.

Make sure they do the creatinine level test to make sure his kidneys can

withstand the test. I was reading about this recently and they have taken

2 of these dyes off the market, but all of them have kidney implications.

Back to the question of giving him potassium iodide. I do not think they

are giving him radioactive dye. However, the CT scan itself is

radioactive, it's an x-ray machine. So protecting his thyroid for this

test is appropriate and will not affect the test.

best wishes to you both,

--

-------------------------------------------

Here is what I wrote before I thought to check whether it really is

radioactive or not:

I don't see how it can affect the test, Anne, because the radioactive

iodine dye will only be in his veins so they will be in contrast with the

muscle tissue and they can look at his heart function. Iodine in his body

and thyroid is not going to prevent the radioactive iodine from going into

his bloodstream and through his veins. All they want is a physical

contrast. As I mentioned, the only reason there is an iodine withdrawal

for the RAI thyroid destruction is so that the thyroid will soak up the RAI

and be destroyed. You don't want him soaking up any of the radioactive

iodine, so he should be fully saturated with potassium iodide to prevent

that. They aren't dealing with his thyroid, and definitely are not trying

to destroy any tissue. They just want contrast dye in his veins so they can

see what's happening in there. (Not that that is any small issue, I

recognize this must be very frightening, just the test alone.) After the

test the idea is that his body excretes the iodine dye entirely, if

possible. Potassium iodide in his thyroid will increase that likelihood.

btw, I'm very sorry this has happened to him, and to you. I hope you can

sue the drug company.

with all best wishes,

--

>They are doing a heart study. It seems that the dandy drug they gave him

>for his prostate has screwed up his heart, & now they need to see how much

>damage there is. The doc isn't even DENYING that the Avodart caused the

>problem. They did a stress test, & his heart went so nuts that they told

>him not to raise his heart rate at all till they can check him out, for

>fear of a "sudden death event." (As you can imagine, I have been a bit

>stressed the last few days, watching for a sudden death event!)

>

>I have been flooding his body with liposomal vitamin C, Q-Gel (CoQ10) &

>L-Carnitine Fumarate. I don't want to screw up the test with iodine (if it

>would screw up the test), because I sure don't want him to have to do it

>again. But the test itself sounds pretty scary to me. And I can't ask

>them, because you know the docs wouldn't know what to make of the iodine

>protocol...

>

>I actually cut back his iodine for a few days, in case anybody asked me

>what he was on, so I could honestly say that he was on a tiny dose of

>iodine. But I ramped it up again today, & I figure tomorrow I should give

>him a dose before he has to start fasting... But I was hoping somebody

>could assure me that it wouldn't affect the test. THis guerilla self-care

>always poses interesting dilemmas, doesn't it?

>

>Anne

>

>

>On Sep 30, 2010, at 11:09 PM, Baker wrote:

>

>>

>>

>>I don't know the answer to your question from a medical point of view, but

>>you are correct to want to protect his thyroid. If the CAT scan is not a

>>scan of his thyroid, I do not think it would hurt the test. The only

>>reason people have to get off any iodine before the RAI destruction of

>>their thyroids, is to make sure that the thyroid is thirsty for iodine and

>>absorbs the RAI (I get physically sick typing that, btw). So to me it

>>totally follows that you would want to protect his thyroid in order for any

>>of the radioactive dye not to absorb into his thyroid.

>>

>>My vote: Wake him up right now, give big dose. Give big dose in am first

>>thing. ASAP so it has time to soak in. Doctors won't admit the

>>radioactive dye is a problem, so they certainly won't validate your

>>protecting your husband's thyroid. The potassium iodide you give him

>>absolutely won't hurt him, so there is every reason to give it to him.

>>

>>best wishes.

>>

>>--V

>>

>>At 12:13 AM 10/1/2010, you wrote:

>> >My husband has to take a CAT scan with radioactive iodine tomorrow.

>> >(At least, I think that's what the doc said. I was in a bit of a panic.)

>> >

>> >I was planning to give him a good, stiff dose of iodine before the

>> >test, to reduce the risk of his thyroid absorbing the radioactive

>> >crap. (The potassium iodide does protect from radioactivity, right?)

>> >I hav

>>

>>

>>

>>No virus found in this incoming message.

>>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

>>Version: 9.0.856 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3169 - Release Date: 09/30/10

>>13:34:00

~~~ There is no way to peace; peace is the way ~~~~

--A.J. Muste

[Guest guest]

This is really embarrassing. I went to the appointment with my husband, determined to ask good questions & take good notes. At one point, they sent me out of the room, & said they would bring me back in to hear the first set of test results, but they "forgot" & had to call the doc back in to talk to me. (He was really pissed about it, too, like it was an imposition. Well, DUH!)They had done a preliminary stress test, & told me before they started that they thought his heart rate would normalize when his heart rate went up a bit. Instead, it went really wonky -- dangerously so. So the doc told us he mustn't have any stress to the heart until they had a chance to do these other tests, for fear of a "sudden death event." After he said "sudden death event" I kept writing, but I was so scared that I can't really read what I wrote. My hands were shaking, & there was blood rushing in my ears, so all there is on the paper is a meaningless squiggle. (I didn't want to look uncool by dropping the notebook on the floor & crying like a baby. They probably think that I got actual notes on the paper!) I tried to ask questions about the dye, but he told me scornfully that it is very safe, & has been used for years. (Well, DUH! They have used all sorts of toxic crap for years, so that does not reassure me!)No, I don't think we can sue the drug company. Apparently this is common knowledge among docs. I said to the doc, "Wait a minute, I thought that Avodart affected the hormones, & Flomax affected the heart & blood pressure." He replied, "They can all affect the heart to some degree or other." Of course, nobody tells you that when they GIVE you the stuff!That bit about the kidneys is scary, because the prostate issues have not been kind to his kidneys, but nobody said anything about checking creatinine levels! I just called the office to ask about it, & the nurse I talked to gave me this spiel about how the dye is not all that hard on the kidneys, & besides they check his creatinine level before they do it. I said, "So they will check it before he goes in today?" & she said, well, no, they would check his file for recent labs. I think that means in human language that somebody is assuming that somebody else checked his creatinine, dammit, or that somebody else was SUPPOSED to have, but the woman I talked to couldn't give me the actual NUMBER. She told me at 3 different points in the conversation, "I think he'll be all right." I was ready to have a screaming hysterical fit! So now I will have to ask about this before the procedure.As soon as we get home, I will make him drink water & take vitamin C till he begs for mercy, I guess. Is there anything else I can do to protect his poor battered kidneys -- or the rest of him, for that matter?Thanks everybody, for the input!AnneOn Oct 1, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Linn wrote: They do use radioactive iodine for this test. I had it several years ago. Went in for chest pain in the right side, which I thought was gallbladder pain, which I told them I suspected. The second I got to the hospital they figured it for a cardiac event and put me on that track, slapped a nitroglycerin patch on my chest which started an awful set of circumstances that only affirmed my belief in alternative medicine. They forgot to take the nitro patch off during the transfer to a different hospital and I got the worst headache I've ever had in my life and I've had migraines. That caused a shot of morphine and with no food from dinner or breakfast either, I was absolutely loopy, could barely talk much less run on a treadmill so they gave me the chemical test for a stress test and a CT. They are supposed to ask some questions before administering the contrast but all the nurse asked me was if I was allergic to iodine. In the drunken state I was, there was no way she should have taken my answer as verification. I could barely hold up my head and couldn't stay awake through the question. But they went right ahead with the test. I don't understand why they do these chemical stress tests and say that they are safer than the treadmills. I thought my heart was going to literally burst. My heart has never felt like that even when physically pushing myself with a trainer. The killer was that the tests didn't show any cardiac irregularities and when I asked what about it being the gallbladder again, the doc told me to follow up with my doctor. Unbelievable. I told my husband that I never want nitro again, even if I am having a heart attack. I've had natural childbirth and migraines both and the pain from that nitro was indescribable. My doc said it would have been exacerbated since I wasn't having a cardiac event. I also won't have another one of those chemical stress tests. One more reason for me to stay as far away from hospitals as I can. BTW I ended up taking care of my own gallbladder issues because I didn't want to end up in the hospital for that surgery either. Linn On Oct 1, 2010, at 2:44 AM, Baker wrote: Ok, I've looked and looked and it seems to me that the iodine contrast dye that is used with CT scans is not radioactive. It seems to me that the radioactive iodine scan is mainly or only used with imaging of the thyroid. You seemed somewhat in doubt that it is radioactive iodine they talked about. I can't find any reference to radioactive iodine dye that isn't about thyroid imaging. Here is the wikipedia page for the contrast dye: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodinated_contrast I read about this recently, kidney function is really important here: >Iodinated contrast is toxic to the kidneys and kidney function of the >patient receiving a dose should be considered before the exam. A >creatinine level in the blood should be no higher than 1.4 to receive >iodinated contrast. Following up with extra fluids after an injection is >highly recommended. Make sure they do the creatinine level test to make sure his kidneys can withstand the test. I was reading about this recently and they have taken 2 of these dyes off the market, but all of them have kidney implications. Back to the question of giving him potassium iodide. I do not think they are giving him radioactive dye. However, the CT scan itself is radioactive, it's an x-ray machine. So protecting his thyroid for this test is appropriate and will not affect the test. best wishes to you both, -- ------------------------------------------- Here is what I wrote before I thought to check whether it really is radioactive or not: I don't see how it can affect the test, Anne, because the radioactive iodine dye will only be in his veins so they will be in contrast with the muscle tissue and they can look at his heart function. Iodine in his body and thyroid is not going to prevent the radioactive iodine from going into his bloodstream and through his veins. All they want is a physical contrast. As I mentioned, the only reason there is an iodine withdrawal for the RAI thyroid destruction is so that the thyroid will soak up the RAI and be destroyed. You don't want him soaking up any of the radioactive iodine, so he should be fully saturated with potassium iodide to prevent that. They aren't dealing with his thyroid, and definitely are not trying to destroy any tissue. They just want contrast dye in his veins so they can see what's happening in there. (Not that that is any small issue, I recognize this must be very frightening, just the test alone.) After the test the idea is that his body excretes the iodine dye entirely, if possible. Potassium iodide in his thyroid will increase that likelihood. btw, I'm very sorry this has happened to him, and to you. I hope you can sue the drug company. with all best wishes, -- >They are doing a heart study. It seems that the dandy drug they gave him >for his prostate has screwed up his heart, & now they need to see how much >damage there is. The doc isn't even DENYING that the Avodart caused the >problem. They did a stress test, & his heart went so nuts that they told >him not to raise his heart rate at all till they can check him out, for >fear of a "sudden death event." (As you can imagine, I have been a bit >stressed the last few days, watching for a sudden death event!) > >I have been flooding his body with liposomal vitamin C, Q-Gel (CoQ10) & >L-Carnitine Fumarate. I don't want to screw up the test with iodine (if it >would screw up the test), because I sure don't want him to have to do it >again. But the test itself sounds pretty scary to me. And I can't ask >them, because you know the docs wouldn't know what to make of the iodine >protocol... > >I actually cut back his iodine for a few days, in case anybody asked me >what he was on, so I could honestly say that he was on a tiny dose of >iodine. But I ramped it up again today, & I figure tomorrow I should give >him a dose before he has to start fasting... But I was hoping somebody >could assure me that it wouldn't affect the test. THis guerilla self-care >always poses interesting dilemmas, doesn't it? > >Anne > > >On Sep 30, 2010, at 11:09 PM, Baker wrote: > >> >> >>I don't know the answer to your question from a medical point of view, but >>you are correct to want to protect his thyroid. If the CAT scan is not a >>scan of his thyroid, I do not think it would hurt the test. The only >>reason people have to get off any iodine before the RAI destruction of >>their thyroids, is to make sure that the thyroid is thirsty for iodine and >>absorbs the RAI (I get physically sick typing that, btw). So to me it >>totally follows that you would want to protect his thyroid in order for any >>of the radioactive dye not to absorb into his thyroid. >> >>My vote: Wake him up right now, give big dose. Give big dose in am first >>thing. ASAP so it has time to soak in. Doctors won't admit the >>radioactive dye is a problem, so they certainly won't validate your >>protecting your husband's thyroid. The potassium iodide you give him >>absolutely won't hurt him, so there is every reason to give it to him. >> >>best wishes. >> >>--V >> >>At 12:13 AM 10/1/2010, you wrote: >> >My husband has to take a CAT scan with radioactive iodine tomorrow. >> >(At least, I think that's what the doc said. I was in a bit of a panic.) >> > >> >I was planning to give him a good, stiff dose of iodine before the >> >test, to reduce the risk of his thyroid absorbing the radioactive >> >crap. (The potassium iodide does protect from radioactivity, right?) >> >I hav >> >> >> >>No virus found in this incoming message. >>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >>Version: 9.0.856 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3169 - Release Date: 09/30/10 >>13:34:00 ~~~ There is no way to peace; peace is the way ~~~~ --A.J. Muste

[Guest guest]

Anne--

So it sounds like it well may be radioactive. I hope you gave him the

potassium iodide.

Please don't feel embarrassed. You're doing the best you can, that's all

anyone can ask of ourselves. Every hospital patients needs an advocate, so

just remember to keep breathing, and remember that keeping some emotional

distance from what is happening will allow you to be a better advocate for him.

Do insist on the creatinine test. The way hospitals are making more money

is all the staff is forced to do the work of 3 people, so anything that

slows them down upsets them. But you shouldn't care if you upset people,

your concern is correct care for your husband. And studies have shown that

patients with advocates have fewer medical accidents while in care. So,

don't let them make you feel bad or guilty about insisting on care. The

creatinine test is considered proper care at this point for these tests,

esp when someone is known to have kidney weakness for whatever reason.

Here is a medical article I found on preventing adverse reactions from

iodine contrast dyes.

http://patientsafetyauthority.org/ADVISORIES/AdvisoryLibrary/2007/Mar30_4(Suppl_\

1)/Pages/mar30;4(suppl1).aspx

Below is an excerpt about preventive substances, which includes NAC and

ascorbic acid, also hydration. The short answer is, definitely pour fluids

and Vit C in him when he gets home. Also if you have any NAC

(N-Acetyl-Cysteine), and there's still time, 1200mg to 2400mg would be a

good idea today. If no time before, still do it afterward.

with best wishes,

--

>Hydration

>

>Both observational and clinical trials have documented the value of

>hydration supplementation to reduce the risk of CIN.46 It is the most

>widely accepted preventive strategy1,3-8,10-12,16,17,19,45 and is

>inexpensive and safe. Such supplementation can be considered in all

>patients receiving intravenous or intra-arterial contrast media, but it is

>particularly important for patients with pre-existing CIN risk factors.46

>

>Intravenous infusion of isotonic crystalloid is effective. Normal saline

>(0.9% sodium chloride) is generally administered at 1 to 1.5mL/kg/hour for

>3 to 12 hours before and for 6 to 24 hours after the contrast-related

>procedure.2,4,10,39,46 Normal saline (0.9%) appears to be more effective

>than half-normal

>saline (0.45%).5,6,12,16,20,47

>

>Some studies have shown that infusion of isotonic sodium bicarbonate

>solution at 3ml/kg/hour for one hour before the procedure and three to six

>hours after contrast administration has been more effective than saline in

>reducing the incidence of CIN.48 Alkalyzing renal tubular fluid with

>bicarbonate is postulated to reduce free radical formation, thereby

>reducing renal injury.46 Larger, multicenter studies need to be performed

>to determine its true efficacy.17

>

>Insufficient data exist concerning the effectiveness of oral fluids as a

>prevention strategy.5,39 It is suggested that before a contrast-related

>procedure, replacing the routine order for NPO status after midnight with

>an order allowing clear liquids up to two hours before the procedure and

>forcing fluids after the procedure, might enhance hydrated status.10

>

>If the patient has uncompensated congestive heart failure, the clinician

>can consider right heart catheterization for hemodynamic monitoring so

>that the infusion rate can be adjusted appropriately to reduce the risk of

>volume overload.39

>Premedication Regimens

>

>Over time, many drug interventions have been studied in an effort to

>prevent CIN, based on one or more of the pathogenic mechanisms believed to

>be involved in CIN.10 The focus has primarily been on attempts to improve

>renal blood flow or to block mediators implicated in the development of

>CIN.11 For the most part, however, these drugs have either had no effect

>or were detrimental to renal function. The few drugs that have evidenced

>positive results have also yielded conflicting findings in subsequent

>studies.1 (See the sidebar “Efficacy of Premedication Regimens.”) To date,

>no pharmacologic agent has had consistently positive results in preventing

>CIN.8,10 The following drugs are discussed in detail because studies—in

>some cases systematic reviews or meta-analyses—have yielded positive

>findings, and some may judge their effectiveness adequately demonstrated.

>

>N-acetylcysteine (NAC). NAC is an antioxidant and a scavenger of free

>radicals. It also enhances the biologic effect of the endogenous

>vasodilator, nitric oxide, which maintains kidney perfusion. Several

>meta-analyses of study results from randomized controlled trials indicate

>that NAC is effective in preventing CIN,1,6,8,11 but studies continue to

>provide conflicting results.5,10,12,16,17,39

>

>

>NAC is widely used as a prophylactic intervention against CIN in several

>countries as a result of the work of Tepel et al. in which the incidence

>of CIN was reduced considerably with oral use of NAC in patients with

>chronic renal insufficiency following CT.51 NAC is used prophylactically

>in high-risk patients, but is not as a routine in contrast-related

>examinations.11

>

>It is inexpensive, has a low incidence of adverse effects, and is

>generally available and easy to administer.19,52 It is not, however, a

>substitute for close monitoring of renal function and adequate

>hydration.32 NAC, combined with hydration and LOCM or IOCM, may be of

>value in high-risk patients.9,52

>

>NAC doses range from 600mg to 1200mg orally twice daily on the day before

>and day of contrast administration for high-risk patients.8,9,20,52 (Use

>of intravenous NAC poses a risk of anaphylactoid reactions.53)

>

>In a recent randomized placebo controlled trial of 180 patients undergoing

>percutaneous coronary interventions, those receiving oral NAC had a

>significant reduction in the incidence of CIN.6 However, there was no

>influence on the long term clinical events associated with CIN, such as

>myocardial infarction and mortality. Because NAC did not affect long term

>clinical outcomes, the prophylactic use of NAC for CIN prophylaxis remains

>in doubt.

>

>Ascorbic acid. Ascorbic acid, an antioxidant, is widely available and well

>tolerated.6 A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 231

>patients undergoing cardiac catheterization studied the prophylactic

>effectiveness of oral ascorbic acid (3g before and 2g after the

>procedure).54 The incidence of CIN was 20% in the placebo group and 9% in

>the ascorbic acid group. Further study is necessary, however, to clarify

>and confirm ascorbic acid’s effectiveness in reducing CIN related to this

>and other procedures.

>

>Prostaglandin E1 (PGE1). Prostaglandins are vasodilators. Preliminary

>studies have been conducted using PGE1. One pilot study using intravenous

>PGE1 evaluated the effect of three doses on high-risk patients undergoing

>coronary and peripheral angiography. The increase in SCr was less in each

>PGE1 group compared to the placebo group, but no clinically relevant

>changes occurred in the calculated creatinine clearance.6,55 In another

>study, infusion of PGE1 started 30 to 60 minutes before contrast injection

>significantly diminished the SCr increase at 48 hours post radiographic

>examination.

>

>Theophylline.Theophylline, an adenosine antagonist, has been evaluated in

>the prevention of CIN to determine its effectiveness in counteracting the

>action of adenosine. Adenosine is an intrarenal vasoconstrictor, which

>mediates the tubuloglomerular feedback mechanism. A meta-analysis of

>several trials indicated that theophylline or aminophylline significantly

>reduced the risk of CIN after contrast administration.52,56 In several

>other placebo-controlled studies, theophylline prevented contrast-induced

>declines in creatinine clearance, but the subjects were low risk and the

>data were mixed.17 Therefore, further studies are needed to validate this

>drug’s effectiveness.

>

>If prophylactic use of theophylline is considered for patients at high

>risk for CIN, any potential benefits must be balanced in light of the

>potential for serious adverse effects (e.g., gastrointestinal,

>cardiovascular, neurological) and its narrow therapeutic index.5,39 When

>iodinated contrast is required, it may be appropriate for critically ill

>patients with reactive lung disease to continue receiving previously

>prescribed theophylline.6 It has also been given prior to contrast

>administration in emergency situations or when adequate prehydration has

>not been possible.20

>

>

>Statins.Statins maintain nitric oxide production, reduce oxidative stress,

>and beneficially affect endothelial function.57 In one retrospective study

>of more than 1,000 patients with renal impairment undergoing coronary

>angiography, the risk of CIN was significantly decreased in patients

>receiving a statin before the procedure.58 Another study of more than

>29,000 patient records in a percutaneous cardiac intervention registry

>revealed that patients who received statins before the procedure had both

>a lower CIN incidence (p<0.0001) and nephropathy requiring dialysis

>(p<0.03).59 While these studies are promising, further study is necessary

>to determine whether statin use is appropriate for other procedures and

>for imaging patients in which statins are not otherwise medically

>indicated.39,40 Moreover, there have been rare reports of rhabdomyolysis

>leading to renal failure, as well as exacerbated myotoxicity in patients

>with chronic renal failure who were taking statins.33

>

>

>Combination of antioxidant compounds. To determine whether a combination

>of different antioxidant compounds might provide an additive benefit in

>preventing CIN, Briguori et al.60 conducted a randomized, prospective,

>double-blind study. The trial involved 326 patients with chronic kidney

>disease who were at moderate to high risk for CIN. These patients received

>iso-osmolar contrast media during coronary or peripheral procedures, and

>they were randomly assigned to one of three treatment regimens:

>0.9% saline infusion plus NAC,

>Sodium bicarbonate infusion plus NAC, or

>0.9% saline plus ascorbic acid plus NAC

>

>The rate of CIN was significantly lower in the bicarbonate plus NAC group.

>Further study is needed to determine whether the results of this study can

>be reproduced in high risk and very high-risk patients.

>

>

>Hemodialysis/hemofiltration. Patients with severe renal impairment prior

>to contrast-related procedures may develop non-oliguric or oliguric acute

>renal failure requiring dialysis.11 While two to three hours of

>hemodialysis removes from 60% to 90% of the contrast medium,61 many

>studies indicate that hemodialysis provides no prophylactic value in

>reducing either the incidence of CIN6,11,12,16,39,45 or its long-term

>outcomes.5,61 Hemodialysis may even worsen renal injury by promoting

>hypovolemia or activating inflammatory reactions, thus releasing

>vasoactive substances that may promote acute hypotension.8,12,45

>

>Most end-stage renal disease patients on chronic hemodialysis who undergo

>a contrast-related procedure can safely wait 24 to 36 hours after contrast

>exposure for their next hemodialysis treatment.17,44 However, hemodialysis

>patients with some residual renal function may develop permanent loss of

>this function and increased dialysis requirements following radiocontrast

>exposure. Therefore, alternative imaging studies not requiring iodinated

>contrast media would more likely protect such patients’ remaining renal

>function.44

>

>

>On the other hand, hemofiltration for several hours before and after

>contrast injection has been proposed to significantly reduce the risk of

>CIN.12,16,17,62 Hemofiltration provides a continuous form of renal

>replacement therapy, in which large volumes of intravenous isotonic

>replacement fluid exactly match the rate of ultra-infiltrate production.

>Therefore, there is no net fluid loss in the patient, and no overload

>occurs.6,8,45

>

>However, routine use of hemofiltration to prevent CIN is not indicated at

>this time, primarily because of methodologic flaws in study design calling

>into question the value of hemofiltration.19 In addition, it is costly and

>can only be provided in intensive care settings.6,17,39 To improve

>long-term survival, though, some believe that prophylactic hemofiltration

>may be beneficial and cost-effective for patients with severe cardiac and

>renal dysfunction who are undergoing cardiac catheterization if the

>baseline SCr is >4mg/dL.6,19,20

>

>

>Metformin

>

>If the patient’s baseline renal function is normal, metformin-containing

>medications can be discontinued the day of the study and restarted no less

>than 48 hours after contrast administration, once the patient’s renal

>function has returned to baseline.2,8,20,29,39

>

>If the patient’s baseline renal function is abnormal, the drug is stopped

>either the day of or up to 48 hours before the study and restarted no

>earlier than 48 hours after the contrast is administered, if renal

>function is unchanged.39

>

>

>Following the Procedure

>

>Many physicians check high-risk patients (eGFR <60mL/min/1.73m2) for

>diuresis and obtain follow-up SCr 24 to 48 hours after contrast

>exposure.11,63 Usually, people who develop severe CIN experience an

>increase in SCr within the first 24 to 48 hours after contrast

>administration.8 This measurement is compared with the baseline level

>obtained before volume expansion began prior to contrast administration. A

>relative increase in SCr of =25% or a rise in the serum creatinine of >0.5

>mg% identifies patients with CIN.63 Using an absolute change in SCr does

>not accurately reflect patient outcomes.63

>

>If CIN occurs, monitoring renal function (usually daily SCr levels) occurs

>until it returns to baseline levels.63 While the SCr is elevated, avoid

>further insults to the kidneys, such as further contrast studies,

>nephrotoxic drugs, and elective surgery with general anesthesia.63 During

>this time, drugs that alter GFR can be avoided, such as ACE inhibitors,

>and angiotensin receptor blockers, and diuretics.63 Moreover, drugs

>excreted by glomular filtration can be held, if possible.

>

>Because patients who develop CIN should be considered at high-risk for

>cardiovascular events, efforts can be intensified to control blood

>pressure, dyslipidemia, and glycemia.63 Aggressive treatment of other

>conditions that placed patients at risk for CIN may also be beneficial.6

>This is really embarrassing. I went to the appointment with my husband,

>determined to ask good questions & take good notes. At one point, they

>sent me out of the room, & said they would bring me back in to hear the

>first set of test results, but they " forgot " & had to call the doc back in

>to talk to me. (He was really pissed about it, too, like it was an

>imposition. Well, DUH!)

>

>They had done a preliminary stress test, & told me before they started

>that they thought his heart rate would normalize when his heart rate went

>up a bit. Instead, it went really wonky -- dangerously so. So the doc told

>us he mustn't have any stress to the heart until they had a chance to do

>these other tests, for fear of a " sudden death event. " After he said

> " sudden death event " I kept writing, but I was so scared that I can't

>really read what I wrote. My hands were shaking, & there was blood rushing

>in my ears, so all there is on the paper is a meaningless squiggle. (I

>didn't want to look uncool by dropping the notebook on the floor & crying

>like a baby. They probably think that I got actual notes on the paper!) I

>tried to ask questions about the dye, but he told me scornfully that it is

>very safe, & has been used for years. (Well, DUH! They have used all sorts

>of toxic crap for years, so that does not reassure me!)

>

>No, I don't think we can sue the drug company. Apparently this is common

>knowledge among docs. I said to the doc, " Wait a minute, I thought that

>Avodart affected the hormones, & Flomax affected the heart & blood

>pressure. " He replied, " They can all affect the heart to some degree or

>other. " Of course, nobody tells you that when they GIVE you the stuff!

>

>That bit about the kidneys is scary, because the prostate issues have not

>been kind to his kidneys, but nobody said anything about checking

>creatinine levels! I just called the office to ask about it, & the nurse I

>talked to gave me this spiel about how the dye is not all that hard on the

>kidneys, & besides they check his creatinine level before they do it. I

>said, " So they will check it before he goes in today? " & she said, well,

>no, they would check his file for recent labs. I think that means in human

>language that somebody is assuming that somebody else checked his

>creatinine, dammit, or that somebody else was SUPPOSED to have, but the

>woman I talked to couldn't give me the actual NUMBER. She told me at 3

>different points in the conversation, " I think he'll be all right. " I was

>ready to have a screaming hysterical fit! So now I will have to ask about

>this before the procedure.

>

>As soon as we get home, I will make him drink water & take vitamin C till

>he begs for mercy, I guess. Is there anything else I can do to protect his

>poor battered kidneys -- or the rest of him, for that matter?

>

>Thanks everybody, for the input!

>

>Anne

~~~ There is no way to peace; peace is the way ~~~~

--A.J. Muste

[Guest guest]

Oh, I am SO sorry. Is there any way you could find a place for thermography in

the future? CT scans are carcinogenic; just saw an article on them via

Dr.Mercola or n Whitaker. I got so nervous about having a prescribed one a

few years ago--before I knew how radioactive they are--that I walked out just

befoer they called my name, and I never went back!

Likewise, I GOT OFF the table just before they put me under in surgery

once--turned out I DIDN't need it as I thought. But look how far I had to go

before I could muster the force of will to say " no " to the docs and find a

better way. Having the same struggle now over thyroidectomy, even as I barge

ahead with an aggressive iodine protocol.

Good Luck

> >> >> >My husband has to take a CAT scan with radioactive iodine

> >> tomorrow.

> >> >> >(At least, I think that's what the doc said. I was in a bit of

> >> a panic.)

> >> >> >

> >> >> >I was planning to give him a good, stiff dose of iodine before

> >> the

> >> >> >test, to reduce the risk of his thyroid absorbing the radioactive

> >> >> >crap. (The potassium iodide does protect from radioactivity,

> >> right?)

> >> >> >I hav

> >> >>

> >> >>

> >> >>

> >> >>No virus found in this incoming message.

> >> >>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

> >> >>Version: 9.0.856 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3169 - Release Date:

> >> 09/30/10

> >> >>13:34:00

> >>

> >> ~~~ There is no way to peace; peace is the way ~~~~

> >> --A.J. Muste

> >>

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Anne,

I take a tape recorder to appointments where I expect the Dr. will say more than

I can " hear " .

Carina

>

> This is really embarrassing. I went to the appointment with my

> husband, determined to ask good questions & take good notes.

>

After he said " sudden death event " I kept

> writing, but I was so scared that I can't really read what I wrote.

> My hands were shaking, & there was blood rushing in my ears, so all

> there is on the paper is a meaningless squiggle. (I didn't want to

> look uncool by dropping the notebook on the floor & crying like a

> baby. They probably think that I got actual notes on the paper!)

[Guest guest]

That's a great idea, but the big problem now is that they keep sending me out of the room. My husband goes into this weird state where he can hardly tell me anything that happened in the room, & when I ask questions, he can't answer & gets upset. But the medical folks keep telling me there isn't room for me in the room, & to please wait outside. ARGH! I want to change docs, but my husband doesn't want to start over!AnneOn Oct 1, 2010, at 7:25 PM, CRavely wrote: Anne, I take a tape recorder to appointments where I expect the Dr. will say more than I can "hear". Carina > > This is really embarrassing. I went to the appointment with my > husband, determined to ask good questions & take good notes. > After he said "sudden death event" I kept > writing, but I was so scared that I can't really read what I wrote. > My hands were shaking, & there was blood rushing in my ears, so all > there is on the paper is a meaningless squiggle. (I didn't want to > look uncool by dropping the notebook on the floor & crying like a > baby. They probably think that I got actual notes on the paper!)

[Guest guest]

You might try just moving over to the corner of the room and refusing to leave. When my daughter was very ill several years ago I never left her side. At one point she had to be in a private ICU room where they told me that I could not be with her. I convinced them that the only way it would happening was if I was allowed to stay with her 24/7, and they allowed it. You can also request a copy of his chart. You'd be amazed at the things that the docs don't necessarily tell you. LinnOn Oct 2, 2010, at 1:14 AM, Anne Seals wrote:

That's a great idea, but the big problem now is that they keep sending me out of the room. My husband goes into this weird state where he can hardly tell me anything that happened in the room, & when I ask questions, he can't answer & gets upset. But the medical folks keep telling me there isn't room for me in the room, & to please wait outside. ARGH! I want to change docs, but my husband doesn't want to start over!AnneOn Oct 1, 2010, at 7:25 PM, CRavely wrote: Anne, I take a tape recorder to appointments where I expect the Dr. will say more than I can "hear". Carina > > This is really embarrassing. I went to the appointment with my > husband, determined to ask good questions & take good notes. > After he said "sudden death event" I kept > writing, but I was so scared that I can't really read what I wrote. > My hands were shaking, & there was blood rushing in my ears, so all > there is on the paper is a meaningless squiggle. (I didn't want to > look uncool by dropping the notebook on the floor & crying like a > baby. They probably think that I got actual notes on the paper!)

[Guest guest]

MY husband also has heart issues, and is on avodart and flomax too. Could you tell me where I could find info on either avodart or flomax causing heart problems.Thanks, Sandy

In a message dated 10/1/2010 3:03:57 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, anneseals@... writes:

They are doing a heart study. It seems that the dandy drug they gave him for his prostate has screwed up his heart, & now they need to see how much damage there is. The doc isn't even DENYING that the Avodart caused the problem