Guest guest Posted January 1, 1998 Report Share Posted January 1, 1998 Theo, I think you'll be fine depending on when you have the surgery.. It actually took me about a good month to feel up to alot, after the inplant you'll be sore and probably feel weak for at least a week afterwards, of course mine is in my abdomen.. If your's is in your upper chest it may be different. I know any abdominal surgery takes a bit longer to heal. Harry Abrams books are beautiful, have fun taking those pictures. Re: Digest Number 218 In a message dated 3/30/01 3:32:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, writes: joetech@...That was helpful . I didn't know yet, that I would have to take it easy for a while after the battery change. I will find that out I guess at my pre-op. They did postpone me until this bronchial bug is over. I am planning several overnight trips in late April until early June. This to see and photograph some iris gardens for a new book that my colleague and I are doing for Harry Abrams, our publisher. It is not strenuous work ... just strolling through gardens, my photographer colleague, does all the stooping and climbing. But the drives will be long (in the northeast). I expect I"ll be ok on that. But if you have any input I'd appreciate it. Thank you very much for your kind consideration. As I read some of the input here, I am so grateful that I am fortunate and have minimal problems. ... so far that is. Best regards, Theo1415@... Please visit the Zapper homepage athttp://www.ZapLife.org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 1999 Report Share Posted July 20, 1999 no message was forwarded... Lynn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 1999 Report Share Posted July 20, 1999 Wow...that was brief and not to the point...LOL > -----Original Message----- > From: onelist [mailto:onelist] > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 10:40 AM > onelist > Subject: [] Digest Number 218 > > > > --------------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2000 Report Share Posted July 17, 2000 Thanks Marty. You've answered alot of my concerns that I couldn't even put into questions. Tricky virus this is. Come to think of it my Dr. did seem anxious to start me on treatment. I was a little more hesitant and suggested the biopsy. I really don't want to do either.....this whole thing sucks! I see your point about trying to stop the virus before it gets worse. Thanks again.............Dee Dee >From: 2byteme@... >Reply-Hepatitis Cegroups >Hepatitis Cegroups >Subject: Re: Digest Number 218 >Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 17:23:32 -0400 > >Dear Dee Dee: > The latest, and generalized research on treatment, is quickly >leaning towards at least 24 weeks of treatment for anyone who is HCV >positive. Basically, the fact that you have HCV is enough to treat, and >the sooner treatment is begun, the better chance someone has of being >placed in full remission. The longer treatment is held, from onset of >infection, and especially when the viral load begins to increase, or is >at level to become a " viral load " , the potentially harder it will be for >the body to control, or for treatment to be truly effective. > There are some other factors to consider, but, age, liver condition, >when you were infected and how, sex, etc., are not part of them. The >main focus is on any other illnesses or problems you may have, that >could render therapy more harmful. The condition of the liver, (except >for some specific medical problems), is not a factor for treatment. >Basically, whether you have 10% or 95% liver damage, and whatever type, >the object is to protect whatever normal liver tissue is there, before >it can become infected. > This all makes sense, because if you look at the liver as an organ >that is not fully used, and questionably can regenerate if not infected. >Since current therapy does not harm the liver, although while on therapy >it may not allow it to be as effective, you want to keep working >whatever you got. > While medicine does not exactly know why and when the virus turns >itself on, and that's when liver damage occurs, it may be 1 year or 40 >years, or never. But, with the liver not replaceable, and nothing else >to do the work it does, does anyone want to take a chance that time and >damage is going to be on their side? > This is an opinion that I can support with articles and give you a >long bibliography to support it. There are different views, and that >dumps the question back to you! It is your life, your liver, and not >your providers. Are you comfortable in doing nothing and taking a >chance?, or, forcing treatment for 6-12 months, which will make you feel >terrible, and will have many temporary side effects, and may, or may not >be helpful? > These are tough issues, but, it is your liver, and/or, life, and >while your provider may offer some opinions, he/she is not the victim. >So, I would encourage you educate yourself as much as possible, and, >whatever decision you make, just realize none of us knows the future, >and you have to be comfortable with whatever decision you make, and >whatever outcome occurs. > If you want, keep us informed and let us know if we can help. Marty > > > ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2000 Report Share Posted July 17, 2000 Thanks Marty. You've answered alot of my concerns that I couldn't even put into questions. Tricky virus this is. Come to think of it my Dr. did seem anxious to start me on treatment. I was a little more hesitant and suggested the biopsy. I really don't want to do either.....this whole thing sucks! I see your point about trying to stop the virus before it gets worse. Thanks again.............Dee Dee >From: 2byteme@... >Reply-Hepatitis Cegroups >Hepatitis Cegroups >Subject: Re: Digest Number 218 >Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 17:23:32 -0400 > >Dear Dee Dee: > The latest, and generalized research on treatment, is quickly >leaning towards at least 24 weeks of treatment for anyone who is HCV >positive. Basically, the fact that you have HCV is enough to treat, and >the sooner treatment is begun, the better chance someone has of being >placed in full remission. The longer treatment is held, from onset of >infection, and especially when the viral load begins to increase, or is >at level to become a " viral load " , the potentially harder it will be for >the body to control, or for treatment to be truly effective. > There are some other factors to consider, but, age, liver condition, >when you were infected and how, sex, etc., are not part of them. The >main focus is on any other illnesses or problems you may have, that >could render therapy more harmful. The condition of the liver, (except >for some specific medical problems), is not a factor for treatment. >Basically, whether you have 10% or 95% liver damage, and whatever type, >the object is to protect whatever normal liver tissue is there, before >it can become infected. > This all makes sense, because if you look at the liver as an organ >that is not fully used, and questionably can regenerate if not infected. >Since current therapy does not harm the liver, although while on therapy >it may not allow it to be as effective, you want to keep working >whatever you got. > While medicine does not exactly know why and when the virus turns >itself on, and that's when liver damage occurs, it may be 1 year or 40 >years, or never. But, with the liver not replaceable, and nothing else >to do the work it does, does anyone want to take a chance that time and >damage is going to be on their side? > This is an opinion that I can support with articles and give you a >long bibliography to support it. There are different views, and that >dumps the question back to you! It is your life, your liver, and not >your providers. Are you comfortable in doing nothing and taking a >chance?, or, forcing treatment for 6-12 months, which will make you feel >terrible, and will have many temporary side effects, and may, or may not >be helpful? > These are tough issues, but, it is your liver, and/or, life, and >while your provider may offer some opinions, he/she is not the victim. >So, I would encourage you educate yourself as much as possible, and, >whatever decision you make, just realize none of us knows the future, >and you have to be comfortable with whatever decision you make, and >whatever outcome occurs. > If you want, keep us informed and let us know if we can help. Marty > > > ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2000 Report Share Posted July 17, 2000 Thanks Marty. You've answered alot of my concerns that I couldn't even put into questions. Tricky virus this is. Come to think of it my Dr. did seem anxious to start me on treatment. I was a little more hesitant and suggested the biopsy. I really don't want to do either.....this whole thing sucks! I see your point about trying to stop the virus before it gets worse. Thanks again.............Dee Dee >From: 2byteme@... >Reply-Hepatitis Cegroups >Hepatitis Cegroups >Subject: Re: Digest Number 218 >Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 17:23:32 -0400 > >Dear Dee Dee: > The latest, and generalized research on treatment, is quickly >leaning towards at least 24 weeks of treatment for anyone who is HCV >positive. Basically, the fact that you have HCV is enough to treat, and >the sooner treatment is begun, the better chance someone has of being >placed in full remission. The longer treatment is held, from onset of >infection, and especially when the viral load begins to increase, or is >at level to become a " viral load " , the potentially harder it will be for >the body to control, or for treatment to be truly effective. > There are some other factors to consider, but, age, liver condition, >when you were infected and how, sex, etc., are not part of them. The >main focus is on any other illnesses or problems you may have, that >could render therapy more harmful. The condition of the liver, (except >for some specific medical problems), is not a factor for treatment. >Basically, whether you have 10% or 95% liver damage, and whatever type, >the object is to protect whatever normal liver tissue is there, before >it can become infected. > This all makes sense, because if you look at the liver as an organ >that is not fully used, and questionably can regenerate if not infected. >Since current therapy does not harm the liver, although while on therapy >it may not allow it to be as effective, you want to keep working >whatever you got. > While medicine does not exactly know why and when the virus turns >itself on, and that's when liver damage occurs, it may be 1 year or 40 >years, or never. But, with the liver not replaceable, and nothing else >to do the work it does, does anyone want to take a chance that time and >damage is going to be on their side? > This is an opinion that I can support with articles and give you a >long bibliography to support it. There are different views, and that >dumps the question back to you! It is your life, your liver, and not >your providers. Are you comfortable in doing nothing and taking a >chance?, or, forcing treatment for 6-12 months, which will make you feel >terrible, and will have many temporary side effects, and may, or may not >be helpful? > These are tough issues, but, it is your liver, and/or, life, and >while your provider may offer some opinions, he/she is not the victim. >So, I would encourage you educate yourself as much as possible, and, >whatever decision you make, just realize none of us knows the future, >and you have to be comfortable with whatever decision you make, and >whatever outcome occurs. > If you want, keep us informed and let us know if we can help. Marty > > > ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2000 Report Share Posted July 17, 2000 Thanks Marty. You've answered alot of my concerns that I couldn't even put into questions. Tricky virus this is. Come to think of it my Dr. did seem anxious to start me on treatment. I was a little more hesitant and suggested the biopsy. I really don't want to do either.....this whole thing sucks! I see your point about trying to stop the virus before it gets worse. Thanks again.............Dee Dee >From: 2byteme@... >Reply-Hepatitis Cegroups >Hepatitis Cegroups >Subject: Re: Digest Number 218 >Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 17:23:32 -0400 > >Dear Dee Dee: > The latest, and generalized research on treatment, is quickly >leaning towards at least 24 weeks of treatment for anyone who is HCV >positive. Basically, the fact that you have HCV is enough to treat, and >the sooner treatment is begun, the better chance someone has of being >placed in full remission. The longer treatment is held, from onset of >infection, and especially when the viral load begins to increase, or is >at level to become a " viral load " , the potentially harder it will be for >the body to control, or for treatment to be truly effective. > There are some other factors to consider, but, age, liver condition, >when you were infected and how, sex, etc., are not part of them. The >main focus is on any other illnesses or problems you may have, that >could render therapy more harmful. The condition of the liver, (except >for some specific medical problems), is not a factor for treatment. >Basically, whether you have 10% or 95% liver damage, and whatever type, >the object is to protect whatever normal liver tissue is there, before >it can become infected. > This all makes sense, because if you look at the liver as an organ >that is not fully used, and questionably can regenerate if not infected. >Since current therapy does not harm the liver, although while on therapy >it may not allow it to be as effective, you want to keep working >whatever you got. > While medicine does not exactly know why and when the virus turns >itself on, and that's when liver damage occurs, it may be 1 year or 40 >years, or never. But, with the liver not replaceable, and nothing else >to do the work it does, does anyone want to take a chance that time and >damage is going to be on their side? > This is an opinion that I can support with articles and give you a >long bibliography to support it. There are different views, and that >dumps the question back to you! It is your life, your liver, and not >your providers. Are you comfortable in doing nothing and taking a >chance?, or, forcing treatment for 6-12 months, which will make you feel >terrible, and will have many temporary side effects, and may, or may not >be helpful? > These are tough issues, but, it is your liver, and/or, life, and >while your provider may offer some opinions, he/she is not the victim. >So, I would encourage you educate yourself as much as possible, and, >whatever decision you make, just realize none of us knows the future, >and you have to be comfortable with whatever decision you make, and >whatever outcome occurs. > If you want, keep us informed and let us know if we can help. Marty > > > ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2000 Report Share Posted July 17, 2000 Dear Dee Dee: The latest, and generalized research on treatment, is quickly leaning towards at least 24 weeks of treatment for anyone who is HCV positive. Basically, the fact that you have HCV is enough to treat, and the sooner treatment is begun, the better chance someone has of being placed in full remission. The longer treatment is held, from onset of infection, and especially when the viral load begins to increase, or is at level to become a " viral load " , the potentially harder it will be for the body to control, or for treatment to be truly effective. There are some other factors to consider, but, age, liver condition, when you were infected and how, sex, etc., are not part of them. The main focus is on any other illnesses or problems you may have, that could render therapy more harmful. The condition of the liver, (except for some specific medical problems), is not a factor for treatment. Basically, whether you have 10% or 95% liver damage, and whatever type, the object is to protect whatever normal liver tissue is there, before it can become infected. This all makes sense, because if you look at the liver as an organ that is not fully used, and questionably can regenerate if not infected. Since current therapy does not harm the liver, although while on therapy it may not allow it to be as effective, you want to keep working whatever you got. While medicine does not exactly know why and when the virus turns itself on, and that's when liver damage occurs, it may be 1 year or 40 years, or never. But, with the liver not replaceable, and nothing else to do the work it does, does anyone want to take a chance that time and damage is going to be on their side? This is an opinion that I can support with articles and give you a long bibliography to support it. There are different views, and that dumps the question back to you! It is your life, your liver, and not your providers. Are you comfortable in doing nothing and taking a chance?, or, forcing treatment for 6-12 months, which will make you feel terrible, and will have many temporary side effects, and may, or may not be helpful? These are tough issues, but, it is your liver, and/or, life, and while your provider may offer some opinions, he/she is not the victim. So, I would encourage you educate yourself as much as possible, and, whatever decision you make, just realize none of us knows the future, and you have to be comfortable with whatever decision you make, and whatever outcome occurs. If you want, keep us informed and let us know if we can help. Marty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2000 Report Share Posted July 17, 2000 Dear Dee Dee: The latest, and generalized research on treatment, is quickly leaning towards at least 24 weeks of treatment for anyone who is HCV positive. Basically, the fact that you have HCV is enough to treat, and the sooner treatment is begun, the better chance someone has of being placed in full remission. The longer treatment is held, from onset of infection, and especially when the viral load begins to increase, or is at level to become a " viral load " , the potentially harder it will be for the body to control, or for treatment to be truly effective. There are some other factors to consider, but, age, liver condition, when you were infected and how, sex, etc., are not part of them. The main focus is on any other illnesses or problems you may have, that could render therapy more harmful. The condition of the liver, (except for some specific medical problems), is not a factor for treatment. Basically, whether you have 10% or 95% liver damage, and whatever type, the object is to protect whatever normal liver tissue is there, before it can become infected. This all makes sense, because if you look at the liver as an organ that is not fully used, and questionably can regenerate if not infected. Since current therapy does not harm the liver, although while on therapy it may not allow it to be as effective, you want to keep working whatever you got. While medicine does not exactly know why and when the virus turns itself on, and that's when liver damage occurs, it may be 1 year or 40 years, or never. But, with the liver not replaceable, and nothing else to do the work it does, does anyone want to take a chance that time and damage is going to be on their side? This is an opinion that I can support with articles and give you a long bibliography to support it. There are different views, and that dumps the question back to you! It is your life, your liver, and not your providers. Are you comfortable in doing nothing and taking a chance?, or, forcing treatment for 6-12 months, which will make you feel terrible, and will have many temporary side effects, and may, or may not be helpful? These are tough issues, but, it is your liver, and/or, life, and while your provider may offer some opinions, he/she is not the victim. So, I would encourage you educate yourself as much as possible, and, whatever decision you make, just realize none of us knows the future, and you have to be comfortable with whatever decision you make, and whatever outcome occurs. If you want, keep us informed and let us know if we can help. Marty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2000 Report Share Posted July 17, 2000 Dear Dee Dee: The latest, and generalized research on treatment, is quickly leaning towards at least 24 weeks of treatment for anyone who is HCV positive. Basically, the fact that you have HCV is enough to treat, and the sooner treatment is begun, the better chance someone has of being placed in full remission. The longer treatment is held, from onset of infection, and especially when the viral load begins to increase, or is at level to become a " viral load " , the potentially harder it will be for the body to control, or for treatment to be truly effective. There are some other factors to consider, but, age, liver condition, when you were infected and how, sex, etc., are not part of them. The main focus is on any other illnesses or problems you may have, that could render therapy more harmful. The condition of the liver, (except for some specific medical problems), is not a factor for treatment. Basically, whether you have 10% or 95% liver damage, and whatever type, the object is to protect whatever normal liver tissue is there, before it can become infected. This all makes sense, because if you look at the liver as an organ that is not fully used, and questionably can regenerate if not infected. Since current therapy does not harm the liver, although while on therapy it may not allow it to be as effective, you want to keep working whatever you got. While medicine does not exactly know why and when the virus turns itself on, and that's when liver damage occurs, it may be 1 year or 40 years, or never. But, with the liver not replaceable, and nothing else to do the work it does, does anyone want to take a chance that time and damage is going to be on their side? This is an opinion that I can support with articles and give you a long bibliography to support it. There are different views, and that dumps the question back to you! It is your life, your liver, and not your providers. Are you comfortable in doing nothing and taking a chance?, or, forcing treatment for 6-12 months, which will make you feel terrible, and will have many temporary side effects, and may, or may not be helpful? These are tough issues, but, it is your liver, and/or, life, and while your provider may offer some opinions, he/she is not the victim. So, I would encourage you educate yourself as much as possible, and, whatever decision you make, just realize none of us knows the future, and you have to be comfortable with whatever decision you make, and whatever outcome occurs. If you want, keep us informed and let us know if we can help. Marty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2000 Report Share Posted July 17, 2000 Dear Dee Dee: The latest, and generalized research on treatment, is quickly leaning towards at least 24 weeks of treatment for anyone who is HCV positive. Basically, the fact that you have HCV is enough to treat, and the sooner treatment is begun, the better chance someone has of being placed in full remission. The longer treatment is held, from onset of infection, and especially when the viral load begins to increase, or is at level to become a " viral load " , the potentially harder it will be for the body to control, or for treatment to be truly effective. There are some other factors to consider, but, age, liver condition, when you were infected and how, sex, etc., are not part of them. The main focus is on any other illnesses or problems you may have, that could render therapy more harmful. The condition of the liver, (except for some specific medical problems), is not a factor for treatment. Basically, whether you have 10% or 95% liver damage, and whatever type, the object is to protect whatever normal liver tissue is there, before it can become infected. This all makes sense, because if you look at the liver as an organ that is not fully used, and questionably can regenerate if not infected. Since current therapy does not harm the liver, although while on therapy it may not allow it to be as effective, you want to keep working whatever you got. While medicine does not exactly know why and when the virus turns itself on, and that's when liver damage occurs, it may be 1 year or 40 years, or never. But, with the liver not replaceable, and nothing else to do the work it does, does anyone want to take a chance that time and damage is going to be on their side? This is an opinion that I can support with articles and give you a long bibliography to support it. There are different views, and that dumps the question back to you! It is your life, your liver, and not your providers. Are you comfortable in doing nothing and taking a chance?, or, forcing treatment for 6-12 months, which will make you feel terrible, and will have many temporary side effects, and may, or may not be helpful? These are tough issues, but, it is your liver, and/or, life, and while your provider may offer some opinions, he/she is not the victim. So, I would encourage you educate yourself as much as possible, and, whatever decision you make, just realize none of us knows the future, and you have to be comfortable with whatever decision you make, and whatever outcome occurs. If you want, keep us informed and let us know if we can help. Marty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 19, 2000 Report Share Posted July 19, 2000 2byteme@... writes: << The latest, and generalized research on treatment, is quickly leaning towards at least 24 weeks of treatment for anyone who is HCV positive. >> More and more studies are saying that no matter which geno type you have, it's best to try and stay on treatment for 48 weeks, It allows for a smaller amount of patients to relapse. My question is who are running these studies and knowing the pharmaceutical companies will ultimately benefit, does it really benefit the patient to live through the side effects in hope of a remission? With that said, I am a genotype 3a and I'm only trying REBETRON for the 24 weeks! I can't handle it much more than that! I had to stop for 2 weeks because my blood count went to low! Marty, I really enjoy your words of wisdom, and share them with others often, both online and off line. I wish more providers had your point of view! Like your statement... >>>>>Basically, the fact that you have HCV is enough to treat, and the sooner treatment is begun,<<<<<< Right now I am trying to fight for a few patients regarding starting treatment because their insurance companies and providers are telling them " they are not sick enough " Can you believe that! That's HMO's and " managed care's " idea of proper patient treatment! Thanks Marty and keep em coming! Sharon Nicholson Hepatitis Education & Patient Coalition (H. E. P. C. in AZ) Executive Director <A HREF= " http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/hepatitis_abc " >Hepatitis A, B, C's - Editor</A> http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/hepatitis_abc Are you in ARIZONA? Then Join our e-group mailing list online! <A HREF= " ArizonaHepatitis C " >eGroups : ArizonaHepatitis C</A> ArizonaHepatitis C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 --- Hepatitis CinAZ@... wrote: > More and more studies are saying that no matter > which geno type you have, > it's best to try and stay on treatment for 48 weeks, > It allows for a smaller > amount of patients to relapse. My question is who > are running these studies > and knowing the pharmaceutical companies will > ultimately benefit, does it > really benefit the patient to live through the side > effects in hope of a > remission? The pharmaceutical companies will benefit either way! If you stay on 24 weeks and relapse, they benefit when you have to buy their meds again to retreat, and since retreatment is often for a longer time period, they REALLY benefit! And if you stay on the treatment for 48 weeks, then you've bought twice as much medicine as you would have for 24 weeks. The only time they don't get a bonus benefit is if you are a sustained responder. Hopefully you will be a sustained responder! Claudine ===== Claudine claudinecrews@... __________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 DeeDee.... at least get your pcr, genotype and biopsy done.. then make an informed decision. If you decide not to do it at this time, then that is what is right for you. I however wanted to get aggressive and try to kill the virus while I felt I was fairly healthy, tho I had some bad hep symptoms, which influenced my decision to begin treatment. Good luck alley/ ICQ 12631861 alleypat@... http://www.flash.net/~alleypat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2001 Report Share Posted March 30, 2001 In a message dated 3/30/01 3:32:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, writes: joetech@... That was helpful . I didn't know yet, that I would have to take it easy for a while after the battery change. I will find that out I guess at my pre-op. They did postpone me until this bronchial bug is over. I am planning several overnight trips in late April until early June. This to see and photograph some iris gardens for a new book that my colleague and I are doing for Harry Abrams, our publisher. It is not strenuous work ... just strolling through gardens, my photographer colleague, does all the stooping and climbing. But the drives will be long (in the northeast). I expect I"ll be ok on that. But if you have any input I'd appreciate it. Thank you very much for your kind consideration. As I read some of the input here, I am so grateful that I am fortunate and have minimal problems. ... so far that is. Best regards, Theo1415@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2002 Report Share Posted April 13, 2002 hI ,, I like your thinking.My daughter , is about to have her 4th mastoidectomy , on tuesday.Her problem for the last surgeries has not been recurrence of cholesteatoma, but infection in the resulting massive mastoid cavity.This is usually pseudomonas, but some of those nasty s words have also been found.We had endless topical treatments and all they did was irritate her ear, but in feb they hospitalised for massive doses of antibiotics intravenously for 7 daays ,and then continued them oral;ly for 2 more weeks.Altho she still has some pain theres been no swelling or discharge.She wioll still have surgery as part of her graft has died and needs replacing ,so that 1 day she can swim again.MY unders taanding is that people with cholesteatoma get caught in a cycle wher infecction plays ssome part in causing the condition,surgery makes the ear more vulnerable to infection ,and the condition returns-----II wwould haave insisted on more aggressive drug treatment earlier if I had known it would help., but AFTER EVERY SURGERY em got an infectionand her symtoms were dismissed as normal post op stuff.Also Ive read disturbing stuff about a cavalier attitude to hygiene in English hospitals but have never asked if equipment or haands are sterile. It seems you cant avoid one surgery, but you may be in a strong position to avoid repeats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2002 Report Share Posted April 14, 2002 English hospitals do seem to get rather bad press when it comes to levels of cleanliness.....but these are isolated..albeit unacceptable pockets. these cases tend to be in/on general wards...where there is frequent coming and going of staff, patients and public. this is in part due to prioritising where the greatest need is, when there is a shortage of domestic staff. fortunately theatres are one of the places of greatest need! before use, each autoclave...or steriliser is checked, they are stripped and maintained regularly. most instruments used during operations these days are pre-packed, previously sterilised. sterile operative drapes are used, and aqueous based " clean up " solution is applied to the surgical site....ie. ears. in more general operation sites an alcohol based cleaner is used. all surgeons and surgical assistants " scrub up " for a minimum of three minutes using a chlorhexidine or iodine based wash. per-packed sterile gloves are used and masks are still worn, although there is evidence to say they are largely useless. for the most part theatre techique isnt too bad......obviously there are exceptions, one cannot speak for individuals, but i think this is across the board, not just the UK. i wonder if the problem lies in the many, many people who over a number of years have been using anti-biotics incorrectly?? not finishing a prescribed course.....using when not really required....causing a rise in the " super strains " and " multi-resistant " bugs??? the terrible " flesh eating bug " , necrotising fasciatis, is caused by a fairly simple, already widespread bug. i also wonder if part of the problem lies with the doctors who when they are happy to offer anti-biotics...offer there and then a broad spectrum one. it seems so rare these days that someone will take a swab, send for culture and actually prescribe a specific drug. i'm not a fan of " blanket " anti-biotic therapy. just a thought...what do you think?? julie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2002 Report Share Posted April 14, 2002 hey. i agree! and not just because my mother works in a medical laboratory! one time i obviously had a pseudomonas infection (the discharge was kind of green) but the people gave me ceftin, which didn't work on pseudomonas. there's gram positive and gram negative bugs, and not all antibiotics work on both. but they don't even test to see what infects. i think part of that is, for people with history of ear infections, when the ear is irritated, they will give antibiotics just in case, cause a virus or allergies or whatnot affecting the ear can make conditions good for a bacterial infection. yet i think it's time they did more to understand what is underlying all of these problems. it seems like its much easier (especially with parents) to prescribe some antibiotics rather than to do more thorough investigations into lifestyle and other medical problems such as allergies or sinus issues. it's time we push the medical community into prevention mode, especially with ear troubles, cause we all know where repeated attempts to correct the problem leads us. > i also wonder if part of the problem lies with the doctors who when they > are > happy to offer anti-biotics...offer there and then a broad spectrum one. > it > seems so rare these days that someone will take a swab, send for culture > and > actually prescribe a specific drug. i'm not a fan of " blanket " > anti-biotic > therapy. > > just a thought...what do you think?? > > julie > __________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 5, 2002 Report Share Posted July 5, 2002 In a message dated 7/5/02 3:37:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time, medicaid writes: > Are you > saying you are working with only one chamber manufacturer and that if this > particular chamber is used it will no longer be considered " off label " > treatments for brain injury? Dear Lois Bowen, Unfortunately yes, that is what I am saying. And the reason it is one chamber company at a time is that the FDA will not allow an outside source (the IHMA) to petition for the changes we want. We (the IHMA) had to work with a chamber manufacturer to get them to request the change on their equipment. Of course now that it is done other companies will want the same status as well. If all goes like we expect, other manufacturers will jump onboard until no matter what chamber a patient is in, their treatment will not be considered " off label " . The label will simply read that a device is designed to administer Oxygen under pressure. If that's all a label says then you can't treat off label. Every time you treat a person with Oxygen under pressure you will be using the equipment exactly like it was designed. Now you see how ridiculously simple this all is. It was just a matter of requesting the changes and following administrative procedures. This is a huge step forward for our field and one that will need a lot of follow-up to ensure it is handled responsibly because labeling of equipment for safety is still different from marketing a device. This gets complicated in the details but it is all a good step forward. I also wanted to let you know that I answer these messages from this screen name instead of the IHMA because this is the original screen I signed on from. Anything having to do with legislative affairs or policy changes is me working under the IHMA. Anything else about stories is me representing the Hyperbaric Medicine Today journal. I will do my best to make sure I do not cloud the two because our field still needs an unbiased news source. If you have any specific questions for me or Dr. Harch on IHMA specific initiatives, feel free to e-mail us at IHMAceo@.... Thank you for your interest. Sincerely, R. Locklear, Editor Hyperbaric Medicine Today journal <A HREF= " www.hbomedtoday.com " >www.hbomedtoday.com</A> 4500 Belvedere Road, Suite H West Palm Beach, FL 33415 USA (561) 640-4546 Phone (561) 640-4457 Fax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2002 Report Share Posted July 6, 2002 Ken, This leads to more questions. Do we then have to look for a clinic that uses one of these particular chamber? If we can get the Dr. to write the script. Do they write it for hyperbaric oxygen treatments, or oxygen provided under pressure? Will it make a difference to the insurance companies how the scripts are written? Will they even know that it will know longer be considered " off label " if treatment is done in this particular chamber? This is like the dog chasing its tail! Round and Round. I would like to thank you for all the work you are doing! Lois Bowen-Arizona > In a message dated 7/5/02 3:37:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > medicaid@y... writes: > > > > Are you > > saying you are working with only one chamber manufacturer and that if this > > particular chamber is used it will no longer be considered " off label " > > treatments for brain injury? > > Dear Lois Bowen, > Unfortunately yes, that is what I am saying. And the reason it is one > chamber company at a time is that the FDA will not allow an outside source > (the IHMA) to petition for the changes we want. We (the IHMA) had to work > with a chamber manufacturer to get them to request the change on their > equipment. Of course now that it is done other companies will want the same > status as well. If all goes like we expect, other manufacturers will jump > onboard until no matter what chamber a patient is in, their treatment will > not be considered " off label " . The label will simply read that a device is > designed to administer Oxygen under pressure. If that's all a label says > then you can't treat off label. Every time you treat a person with Oxygen > under pressure you will be using the equipment exactly like it was designed. > Now you see how ridiculously simple this all is. It was just a matter of > requesting the changes and following administrative procedures. > > This is a huge step forward for our field and one that will need a lot of > follow-up to ensure it is handled responsibly because labeling of equipment > for safety is still different from marketing a device. This gets complicated > in the details but it is all a good step forward. > > I also wanted to let you know that I answer these messages from this screen > name instead of the IHMA because this is the original screen I signed on > from. Anything having to do with legislative affairs or policy changes is me > working under the IHMA. Anything else about stories is me representing the > Hyperbaric Medicine Today journal. I will do my best to make sure I do not > cloud the two because our field still needs an unbiased news source. > > If you have any specific questions for me or Dr. Harch on IHMA specific > initiatives, feel free to e-mail us at IHMAceo@a... > > Thank you for your interest. > > Sincerely, > > R. Locklear, Editor > Hyperbaric Medicine Today journal > <A HREF= " www.hbomedtoday.com " >www.hbomedtoday.com</A> > 4500 Belvedere Road, Suite H > West Palm Beach, FL 33415 > USA > (561) 640-4546 Phone > (561) 640-4457 Fax > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 21, 2005 Report Share Posted July 21, 2005 Do you know if the pizza crusts are also egg free? Would love to eat pizza again! -----Original Message----- From: [mailto: ] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:03 AM Subject: [ ] Digest Number 218 There are 4 messages in this issue. Topics in this digest: 1. Mike Goff's pizza crust at Maggiano's From: " Hersom, A. " <susan.hersom@...> 2. Re: Mike Goff's pizza crust at Maggiano's From: " A. Haumann " <laumann@...> 3. Restaurant From: aheath333@... 4. Re: Restaurant From: " A. Haumann " <laumann@...> ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Message: 1 Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:21:36 -0700 From: " Hersom, A. " <susan.hersom@...> Subject: Mike Goff's pizza crust at Maggiano's Good news everyone! Mike Groff's (I Can Eat That) pizza crusts are now being served at Maggiano's Restaurant in Santana Row. If you are ever in the mood for a real, good ol' pizza, Maggiano's is the place to go for lunch or dinner. Hooray!!!!! Hersom Litigation Secretary Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP 2475 Hanover Street Palo Alto, CA 94304 (650) 233-4783 susan.hersom@... [This message contained attachments] ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:38:41 -0700 From: " A. Haumann " <laumann@...> Subject: Re: Mike Goff's pizza crust at Maggiano's On 7/20/05 1:21 PM, " Hersom, A. " <susan.hersom@...> wrote: We¹ll be visiting UC and I¹d love to know the name of the restaurant that serves gluten free meals in . I forgot to write it down. Thanks for any help, Haumann > Good news everyone! Mike Groff's (I Can Eat That) pizza crusts are now being > served at Maggiano's Restaurant in Santana Row. If you are ever in the mood > for a real, good ol' pizza, Maggiano's is the place to go for lunch or dinner. > Hooray!!!!! > > > Hersom > Litigation Secretary > Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP > 2475 Hanover Street > Palo Alto, CA 94304 > (650) 233-4783 > susan.hersom@... <mailto:.hersom@...> > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 21, 2005 Report Share Posted July 21, 2005 I will contact Mike and ask him and let everyone know. (Note email address change due to our law firm's merger) Hersom Litigation Secretary Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP 2475 Hanover Street Palo Alto, CA 94304 (650) 233-4783 susan.hersom@... -----Original Message----- From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Steve & Sinclair Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 12:16 PM Subject: RE: [ ] Digest Number 218 Do you know if the pizza crusts are also egg free? Would love to eat pizza again! -----Original Message----- From: [mailto: ] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:03 AM Subject: [ ] Digest Number 218 There are 4 messages in this issue. Topics in this digest: 1. Mike Goff's pizza crust at Maggiano's From: " Hersom, A. " <susan.hersom@...> 2. Re: Mike Goff's pizza crust at Maggiano's From: " A. Haumann " <laumann@...> 3. Restaurant From: aheath333@... 4. Re: Restaurant From: " A. Haumann " <laumann@...> ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Message: 1 Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:21:36 -0700 From: " Hersom, A. " <susan.hersom@...> Subject: Mike Goff's pizza crust at Maggiano's Good news everyone! Mike Groff's (I Can Eat That) pizza crusts are now being served at Maggiano's Restaurant in Santana Row. If you are ever in the mood for a real, good ol' pizza, Maggiano's is the place to go for lunch or dinner. Hooray!!!!! Hersom Litigation Secretary Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP 2475 Hanover Street Palo Alto, CA 94304 (650) 233-4783 susan.hersom@... [This message contained attachments] ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:38:41 -0700 From: " A. Haumann " <laumann@...> Subject: Re: Mike Goff's pizza crust at Maggiano's On 7/20/05 1:21 PM, " Hersom, A. " <susan.hersom@...> wrote: We¹ll be visiting UC and I¹d love to know the name of the restaurant that serves gluten free meals in . I forgot to write it down. Thanks for any help, Haumann > Good news everyone! Mike Groff's (I Can Eat That) pizza crusts are > now being > served at Maggiano's Restaurant in Santana Row. If you are ever in > the mood > for a real, good ol' pizza, Maggiano's is the place to go for lunch or dinner. > Hooray!!!!! > > > Hersom > Litigation Secretary > Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP > 2475 Hanover Street > Palo Alto, CA 94304 > (650) 233-4783 > susan.hersom@... <mailto:.hersom@...> > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2005 Report Share Posted November 7, 2005 Hey Group: I began taking the FLU shot years before the Gleevec life and was told to continue by all of my Doctors due to my numerous health issues. As for the Pneumonia shot, over the years I have been told every 3 - 5 years; until this year during my hospitalization, I was told that I would only need one for life. I haven't found out if the vaccine has been updated, I do plan to have one this year and the flu shot every year. After all, it hasn't hurt me, and I need all the help I can get. I have been told also that it doesn't protect one from the new strains of flu. Question: Has anyone been made aware that some restaurants and/or markets are cutting down or not serving and selling chicken??? As always, you are all in my prayers. " K " " I AIN'T FINISHED YET " !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.