3 More Questions:

[TOBEY32]

1. If I take the Omeprazole before bed shouldn't it still be in my system when I take my meds in the morning?

2. Is weight gain from Pred all calories (I don't eat that much more)? Keep thinking some of it is water retention, but don't know.

3. We're not to take immune-enhancing vits/supps (C, E, etc.). Of course I'm getting "C" (for example) in OJ. Some things can't be helped. But I wonder about taking my multi-vit?

David

[delorisdoe]

#2. water is part of it

[Sangye]

1. Ask your pharmacist. They are the best ones to answer how long drugs work, etc...
2. It's water retention along with the fact that pred also causes your body to lose muscle and gain fat. Yes, muscle weighs more than fat but it's a LOT of fat.
3. Take your multivitamin. Taking normal amounts of nutrients is a good and necessary thing.

[Dryhill]

1. Both my doctor and pharmacist said that it was ok to take Omeprazole with other medicines, so it should be alright to take it at bedtime. Having just re-read the long speil that comes with every box of Omeprazole, I note that it does state "It is recommended that you take your capsules in the morning."

2. As per Sangye.

3. In the Uk the NHS does not believe in taking multi-vitamins, unless you have a spefic problem (for example taking Adcal which contains vitamin D3 due to the adverse effect of Pred on bone density). The NHS view is if one eats a healthy and balanced diet then one gets all the vitamins needed. In fact there is a move to ban advertising of multi-vitamins.

Jim

[Sangye]

3. In the Uk the NHS does not believe in taking multi-vitamins, unless you have a spefic problem (for example taking Adcal which contains vitamin D3 due to the adverse effect of Pred on bone density). The NHS view is if one eats a healthy and balanced diet then one gets all the vitamins needed. In fact there is a move to ban advertising of multi-vitamins.

Jim

That would be great if we actually still ate like our ancestors did. Here's their menu:
-- Raw animals (including organs, bone marrow, brains, eyes, etc...)
-- Animals that are free of antibiotics, hormones
-- Animals that have not been housed and bred in ways that deplete their bodies for generations
-- Animals that have breathed fresh air, run, bred in natural cycles, basked in sunshine and eaten a natural diet
-- Veg/fruit/plants from soil that has not been depleted by overfarming and fertilizers
-- Veg/fruit/plants that have not been genetically altered to improve their transport and "shelf-life"
-- Veg/fruit/plants that have not been covered with pesticides throughout their development
-- Veg/fruit/plants that have not been covered in chemicals to improve their appearance on the store shelf
-- A diet free of refined sugar, refined flour, trans-fats, artificial coloring/flavors, preservatives, etc....

Our diet has "evolved" but our bodies still have the same requirements. If MDs who make these ridiculous statements reviewed their basic physiology and biochemistry and took 30 seconds to reflect on the state of our food supply, they'd retract such foolishness...or at least have the sense to admit they have NO idea what they're talking about.

[delorisdoe]

well, all sounds good except the only raw i can fathom doing is sushi.

[Sangye]

LOL yup, that's the hardest sell. People just don't wanna walk around chewing on raw adrenal glands these days. Humanity is just no fun anymore.

[Lightwarrior]

LOL yup, that's the hardest sell. People just don't wanna walk around chewing on raw adrenal glands these days. Humanity is just no fun anymore.

ROTFL, Mind if I question your idea of fun???

[Al]

I would add one comment to Sangye's excellent list: True, our ancestors had that menu, but perhaps crucially. not all those items were on the carte du jour. Yes, they ate plenty of (high quality) animal protein (and fat; did you know our large brains could not have evolved without a good source of animal fat?). But not every day. More days than not, most calories consisted of seasonal nuts, berries, roots, and leaves. It is also fact that "three squares" were pretty much unheard of. Feast or famine was not just a figure of speech.

But Sangye's point raises an interesting idea. Our immune systems evolved with our ancestral style of living, and must have been optimized for that way of living. Any--any--major change from that would put large stresses on the immune system and its ability to cope. Diet, nutritional quality, environmental toxins, work styles and schedules, radio frequency pollution, lack of UV expoure, too much UV exposure, our ability to travel the world rapidly, along with free-loading (and quickly evolving) microbial hitchhikers--all of these and a lot more are potential contributors to the putative increase in AI diseases. I realize that my list is too unwieldy to generate testable hypotheses, but, hey, we have to start somewhere. Frankly, I don't think it will be that much trouble to identify some likely suspects. I think the biggest challenge will come when specific culprits are named. Can you imagine the political and economic upheaval if, say, processed foods or airline travel or cell phones turn out to contribute heavily to MS, for example?

Al

[delorisdoe]

I was just talking about what you just said at work last week. well sort of. we were disscussing how people know that sun can cause skin cancer and smoking can cause lung cancer. smokers still smoke and sun seekers continue to seek the sun. I dont see many people changing travel, food, or cell phone useage to prevent anything. It is my experience that most smokers have a zillion excuses. People hold on to the one ounce of proof that smoking is okay and mcdonalds is too. They will point out their sisters roomates uncles dad who never smoked a day in his life yet died of lung cancer. It is not until people have the disease that they admit that "they" were right and smoking kills. Sadly many that I know still chose to smoke.