protruding disks

[Guest guest]

I have 3 protruding disks in my cervical spine, and bone spurs on my

thoracic spine.

My ortho told me this shouldn't cause pain.

Does anyone have this, and does it cause you pain?

[Guest guest]

> I have 3 protruding disks in my cervical spine, and bone spurs on

my

> thoracic spine.

> My ortho told me this shouldn't cause pain.

> Does anyone have this, and does it cause you pain?

Did he say the protuding disks shouldn't, the bone spurs shouldn't,

or both? More importantly, do YOU have any pain?

And I beg to differ with him about " this shouldn't cause pain. " It

might, it might not. It depends entirely on the degree and angle of

protusion or the location of the spurs. I don't know enough about

your specifics to comment one way or the other. But I can safely

say that a blanket statement that protruding disks or bone spurs

shouldn't cause pain is nothing but sheer nonsense.

Without going into a detailed anatomy lesson here, just consider

that the spine is a semi-flexible pipe or tube made up of

interlocking vertebrae. Nerve innervation for the entire body runs

through that tube with major nerve " roots " exiting the spine through

Foramen. (That's just a Latin word for " hole " that the doctors use

to keep the rest of us in the dark. I told one of my anatomy

instructors once that the subject would be a lot easier to

understand if it weren't in a language that's been dead for 2000

years. "

Disk " protrusion " is a function of either subluxation or

degeneration, probably more often the former than the latter.

The " disk " is like a gelatinous, fluid filled donut that sits

between the vertebrae, providing a shock absorber cushion and

keeping the vertebrae from rubbing against each other. They also

help provide the spacing for things like nerves to enter and exit

the spinal column.

Basically, a subluxation is when a vertebrae shifts out of its

normal position. As it does this, the angle of the vertebral bone

changes, putting greater pressure on one part of the disk. As the

disk is compressed in one spot, it bulges or protudes on the

opposite side. A herniated disk is when the protusion is such that

it applies pressure to a nerve root or the spinal cord itself. A

ruptured disk is one in which the the disk actually breaks and the

fluid within the disk leaks out, essentially allowing the disk to

collapse.

Again, the degree and/or angle of protusion determine whether or not

any pressure is applied to adjacent nerves, and with the that

pressure, whether or not any pain is involved..

A degenerated disk is one that, for whatever reason and there are

many, has deteriorated over time. In advanced stages of

osteoarthritis, it is not uncommon for some disks to be virtually

non-existent.

Bone spurs are simply a build up of bony or calcium deposits. They

can happen anyplace in the body where bone exists. Whether they

will or will not, can or can not, might or might not, cause pain in

the back depends on where they are, how large they are, etc. They

could very easily cause no pain whatsoever, as long as the spinal

column is stable. Add a subluxation or degenerated disk to the

picture, however, and everything can and probably will change.

Treatment for subluxations runs all over the map. I will address

that in a separate post later today. Have to leave now for

something else.

[Guest guest]

> I have 3 protruding disks in my cervical spine, and bone spurs on

my

> thoracic spine.

> My ortho told me this shouldn't cause pain.

> Does anyone have this, and does it cause you pain?

Did he say the protuding disks shouldn't, the bone spurs shouldn't,

or both? More importantly, do YOU have any pain?

And I beg to differ with him about " this shouldn't cause pain. " It

might, it might not. It depends entirely on the degree and angle of

protusion or the location of the spurs. I don't know enough about

your specifics to comment one way or the other. But I can safely

say that a blanket statement that protruding disks or bone spurs

shouldn't cause pain is nothing but sheer nonsense.

Without going into a detailed anatomy lesson here, just consider

that the spine is a semi-flexible pipe or tube made up of

interlocking vertebrae. Nerve innervation for the entire body runs

through that tube with major nerve " roots " exiting the spine through

Foramen. (That's just a Latin word for " hole " that the doctors use

to keep the rest of us in the dark. I told one of my anatomy

instructors once that the subject would be a lot easier to

understand if it weren't in a language that's been dead for 2000

years. "

Disk " protrusion " is a function of either subluxation or

degeneration, probably more often the former than the latter.

The " disk " is like a gelatinous, fluid filled donut that sits

between the vertebrae, providing a shock absorber cushion and

keeping the vertebrae from rubbing against each other. They also

help provide the spacing for things like nerves to enter and exit

the spinal column.

Basically, a subluxation is when a vertebrae shifts out of its

normal position. As it does this, the angle of the vertebral bone

changes, putting greater pressure on one part of the disk. As the

disk is compressed in one spot, it bulges or protudes on the

opposite side. A herniated disk is when the protusion is such that

it applies pressure to a nerve root or the spinal cord itself. A

ruptured disk is one in which the the disk actually breaks and the

fluid within the disk leaks out, essentially allowing the disk to

collapse.

Again, the degree and/or angle of protusion determine whether or not

any pressure is applied to adjacent nerves, and with the that

pressure, whether or not any pain is involved..

A degenerated disk is one that, for whatever reason and there are

many, has deteriorated over time. In advanced stages of

osteoarthritis, it is not uncommon for some disks to be virtually

non-existent.

Bone spurs are simply a build up of bony or calcium deposits. They

can happen anyplace in the body where bone exists. Whether they

will or will not, can or can not, might or might not, cause pain in

the back depends on where they are, how large they are, etc. They

could very easily cause no pain whatsoever, as long as the spinal

column is stable. Add a subluxation or degenerated disk to the

picture, however, and everything can and probably will change.

Treatment for subluxations runs all over the map. I will address

that in a separate post later today. Have to leave now for

something else.

[Guest guest]

I was thinking about asking my dr to do another mri. The last one was 2 years

ago. The pain hasn't gotten any better.

I swear something is messed up with some nerves.

About the spine being compresses, well, I don't know. But, when the pt holds my

head and pulls gently, I can feel my spine opening up all the way down to my

tailbone. It feels so good. He said my spine may be compressing. But, he's

just a pt.

Re: protruding disks

Hi ,

if those discs or spurs are pressing on nerves or on your spinal cord, YES,

they will cause pain!! I was once told that IF I had compression of my spinal

cord ( which I did ) then it would need to be fixed but it WOULDN " T /COULDN " T

be the cause of my migraines or neck pain!!

Boy were they wrong!!!! Get another opinon or two or three. That's what I

did but not until I found out my spine was compressed to almost nothing and I

was in danger of paralysis. Don't let that happen to you , !!

In a message dated 1/2/04 12:27:36 PM Eastern Standard Time,

monica-jb@... writes:

> I have 3 protruding disks in my cervical spine, and bone spurs on my

> thoracic spine.

> My ortho told me this shouldn't cause pain.

> Does anyone have this, and does it cause you pain?

[Guest guest]

I was thinking about asking my dr to do another mri. The last one was 2 years

ago. The pain hasn't gotten any better.

I swear something is messed up with some nerves.

About the spine being compresses, well, I don't know. But, when the pt holds my

head and pulls gently, I can feel my spine opening up all the way down to my

tailbone. It feels so good. He said my spine may be compressing. But, he's

just a pt.

Re: protruding disks

Hi ,

if those discs or spurs are pressing on nerves or on your spinal cord, YES,

they will cause pain!! I was once told that IF I had compression of my spinal

cord ( which I did ) then it would need to be fixed but it WOULDN " T /COULDN " T

be the cause of my migraines or neck pain!!

Boy were they wrong!!!! Get another opinon or two or three. That's what I

did but not until I found out my spine was compressed to almost nothing and I

was in danger of paralysis. Don't let that happen to you , !!

In a message dated 1/2/04 12:27:36 PM Eastern Standard Time,

monica-jb@... writes:

> I have 3 protruding disks in my cervical spine, and bone spurs on my

> thoracic spine.

> My ortho told me this shouldn't cause pain.

> Does anyone have this, and does it cause you pain?

[Guest guest]

> This is exactly what he told me -

> " You have 3 protruding disks, and bone spurs (showed me the xray)

and a slight tear in your shoulder. But, none of these things

should be causing you pain. I want you to see a psychiatrist, dear "

> That's an exact quote.

>

> And yes, I do have pain. All the time.

>

> He also said the bone spurs are the begining of arthritis. Then

he said, " but everyone gets arthritis " .

> Well, I say maybe, but not when they are 40.

(1) How soon thereafter did you change doctors?

(2) If not, why not?

(3) After he told you to see a psychiatrist, I assume you returned

the favor by suggesting a good proctologist to him? I hope so,

because he sure has his head up his ass!

(4) Yes, I know I could get my license pulled from questioning

a " primary care provider " but this moron should have his license

pulled from sheer incompetency. What a blooming idiot.

(5) And as general information for you, age is not a detirmining

factor for arthritis. It may be more prevalent as one progresses

from the peak years to the creak years, but it can hit at any age. .

[Guest guest]

IT MAKES ME FURIOUS!!!!! Why is it that when a doctor doesn't know

what to do, he sends the patient to a psychiatrist?

>

> -Barb

Why limit your anger to just being sent to a psychiatrist?

I do not mean the following to any way say that the meds that many

of you are taking are not helping you COPE.

But the blatant fact is that in many cases that is all they are

doing. They are masking SYMPTOMS - they are NOT affecting a cure.

They are NOT making you better. And far too frequently, the side

effects can be worse than the initial problem.

And that is one of the biggest single problems with western so-

called health care. By entirely too large a degree western medicine

is geared toward maintenance. The reality is that pharmaceutical

companies have absolutely zero financial incentive to develop drugs

that cure anything. They have enormous financial incentive to

develop drugs that the takers thereof are going to need for the rest

of their lives. The ideal drug in their perspective is one which

time releases " benefit " in an exactly equal ratio to the drain on

your checkbook.

From the doctor's side of the house, they also all too frequently

prescribe medications for the same reason they say " go see a

psychiatrist. " It is because they DON'T KNOW HOW to fix the

problem. It is far easier (and more profitable for them) to simply

fill out a prescription than to figure out what is going on. If

your pain goes away, you feel better, they have done their job. But

the reason for your pain hasn't gone away. It is still there and

when the drug wears off, there it is again.

And let's not forget the top of the food chain - the surgeon, or

more specifically, the specialist surgeon. In their minds, you

haven't gotten to them until you have run through all " the lesser

lights " in the chain beneath them. Their attitude is " I am a

surgeon. I have a knife. Therefore I cut. " Or, looking at it

another way, " I am a surgeon. I have a Beemer. I have a country

club membership. I have outrageously high malpractice premiums. I

have a knife. Therefore I cut. " They, too, have absolutely no

incentive to recommend anything other than surgery. Why should

they? Why would they?

Do not misunderstand me, there are many situations where surgery is

the only option, such as massive trauma. And in that context,

western medicine does excel. But it has generally failed miserably

where chronic conditions exist.

How many of you know the biggest single difference in philosphy

between western medicine and traditinal Chinese medicine? In the

west, we pay only we get sick or injured. Traditionally, in China,

the doctor was paid ONLY as long as the patient stayed healthy. It

was like a retainer. If you got sick - you didn't pay. And you

didn't pay him again until you got well, however long it took him to

get you well.

My apologies, but I know too many horror stories. Some second-hand,

some first-hand.

My " passion " for bodywork and alternative approaches is in many ways

fueled by anger. I said in a post earlier this evening that my wife

just had cataract surgery about ten days ago. I didn't say why it

was necessary. It was obviously necessary because she had a

cataract. But she GOT the damn thing in the first place as a side

effect of a drug that was used to fix an eye hemorrage that was

itself caused as a side effect for a drug prescribed to reduce her

high cholesterol.

I can't " prove " the one, but she was TOLD by the doctor on the

other. Specifically, she was put on Lipitor. Three weeks later, she

had a massive hemorrage in her left eye. I grabbed the PDR and

started checking. At the very bottom of three pages of very fine

print, it said that in about 3 percent of patients, one side effect

was possible eye hemorrage. Some of the other potential side

effects were far worse. I insisted that she immediately stop taking

it.

She discussed it with her doctor who was adamant that there was no

possible connection. Didn't matter - she stayed off the Lipitor

anyway. She then went through a variety of treatments, including a

shot in the eye to reduce swelling and bleeding. This took a couple

of months to get it back under control. Well, she got the hemorrage

back under control and then let her doctor talk her into going back

on the Lipitor. Two weeks later - a second hemorrage in the same

eye, only worse. This time, I made her take a copy of the page in

to her doctor and shove it in her face. Doc's reaction? " Oh, my

God. " Needless to say, she was off Lipitor for good that time.

But this " problem " has been going on now for about a year. During

the second go-round to get the hemorrage under control, they

discovered in one of her exams that she had a good cataract

started. Her doctor, very matter of factly, told her " Yes, that's

one of the side effects of the drug we used. " He then blew the

cataract off as " a minor operation. " Needless to say, she had never

been informed prior to that time that developing a cataract was even

a possibility, let alone a known risk.

Like I said, I can't " prove " that the Lipitor caused the hemorrage.

But that the second drug caused the cataract is indisputable by the

doctor's own statement.

Like I also said, I know too many horror stories.

But the flip side is that I also know many success stories, both

second and first hand, involving various alternative, non-invasive

approaches. And what angers me here is that the vast majority of the

public has never even heard of most of them. What's even worse, is

that to the extent that the regular medical profession has heard of

them, more often than not they are just dismissed out of hand as

placebo effect nonsense. And to further compound the problem, they

are frequently considered " outside the standard of care " and

therefore not covered by insurance.

I have seen things done with " bodywork " and alternatives that the

regular medical people would say are impossible. I have even had a

hand in doing some of it myself. And I can think of one or two of

you out there who would support me on that statement.

Attitudes are changing. There is a growing awareness, both with the

general public and the medical profession. But it has a long way to

go yet. One of the ways change will occur will be when patients

DEMAND some of the alternatives. But you can't demand what you

don't know about. And that is part of my reason for being as heavily

involved with the list as I have become lately.

OK - I'm off my soap box. This subject obviously touched a raw

nerve with me. I have received many open-post and off-list emails

thanking me for getting involved with the list, and believe me, I do

appreciate them. But the price you are going to have to pay for

that is that every once in awhile, something (like this) is going to

set me off and I am going to just sit down, type it out, and hit the

send button.