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. :glare:

[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.

[Al]

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.
Yeah. You know how hard it is convince someone of something long term that goes against more immediate interests--even if the evidence is overwhelming, or so you would think. Consider the arguments about climate change, for example. Or, historically, how about when John Snow determined the cause of cholera in London: drinking water from the Thames downstream of the sewage line. Parliament dissolved the health board for being to gung-ho about hygiene; The water companies complained that the "theory" was costing them business; and there were even editorials to the effect that, cholera, schmolera, we'll not have health forced upon us by a bunch of government bureaucrats. Jack London wrote a short story about this phenomenon. Seems that two saloon mates were arguing over something trivial, like how ice grows in the river--up or down? Having challenged each other's honor, they were ready to shoot it out. Then, the Malamute Kid stepped in and said, all right, go ahead and have your fight. Then the winner will immediately get strung up on this here tree--no questions asked. That solved it. The point is that, given even very slim odds, people will take truly ugly chances. Given exactly no odds, then they have to concede. The hard thing is how to bridge that gap.

Al

[pberggren1]

Smoking has a lot to do with stress where as sun bathing is more to do with pride.

[gunnyl]

Got some time on your hands? Watch a few of these documentaries and what Sangye said will make more sense... "Fat, Sick and Nearly Dead", "Foodmatters", "Food, Inc", "Dying to have Known". Food Inc will really open your eyes to what we are putting in our bodies these days. I can't believe how hard it is to find truly Organic Veggies....
According to my Rheumy, Vitamin D has more to do with boosting your immune system than Vitamin C and they have me taking 2000IU a day as part of my regimen. I take a multi-vitamin a couple times a week but not every day. Since they switched me to MTX she put me on Folic Acid 1mg every day in addition to what I'm already getting naturally and I take a B Complex a couple times a week.
I juice for most of the raw veggies and I eat a lot of Grapefruit and Oranges. Juicing has made a big difference for me as far as how I feel. Try and avoid salt as much as possible especially while you are on the Pred. Funny because when I first got out of the Hospital everything I craved had salt! Have learned to moderate the intake though. I put on a few more pounds than I wanted to. I take in more C from natural sources so I don't take any extra and don't think I need it. I'm addicted to Pink Grapefruit!
Omeprazole is just to stop acid production in your stomach. I take Pepsid AC myself and I take mine in the morning right along with my Cytoxan. Considering Omeprazole is a once every 24 hour medication I don't think it matters if you take it in the morning or at night. Depends on what works best for you.
I didn't gain a lot of weight right out of the Hospital but put it on over the holidays. I didn't gain a pound when I was on 80mg of Pred. I think everybody is different in how they react to certain medications.

[elephant]

My doctor said either Am or PM, whatever works best for you. I take it at night, because I forgot so many times in the am, along with all the other medication that I take.

[Dryhill]

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. :glare:

They did eventually learn how to use fire and therefore to cook, so not all meat was eaten raw ...... and I hate sushi and my steaks should be almost burnt to a cinder. In Britain more and more farmers are signing up to the Soil Association which lays down very strict rules like no pestercides and only natural organic fertilisers. The latter does mean that we country folk do have to put up with some very strong "country smells" at muck spreading time, especially if the sun is out - thank God for air conditioning in cars!!!!!!!!

The latest bad news for our farmers is all UK pig farms have complied with the new EU laws governing improved space for pigs to move about but only one third of the rest of the EU farms have done so. UK pig farmers have spent over £400 million on improving pig conditions, so our pork/bacon is going to be more expensive than the rest of Europe and just because we follwed their laws.

The real stupidity is the EU are concerned about the over fishing of cod. So in their wisdom they have not increased the size of the holes in the net, NO they have stipulated that all undersized cod is to be thrown back in the sea, even though it is now dead. So in Hastings (a large town on the south coast, and where some French chap came and visited in 1066) last year a fishing boat that had caught a lot of cod that was officially to small ran alongside the beach throwing the dead small cod overboard whilst the towns population were wading out and brining it ashore!

Jim

[Dryhill]

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

Some years ago I took part in a survey of trees and how they were coping with pollution from aircraft (I can see the landing beacons at Gatwick airport from my bedroom window). I was given two areas to check each area being one square kilometere in size, one area was under a flight path the other was not. In the area that was under the flight path I found about twenty dead or badly deformed trees and surprise, surprise in the othert area all the trees were growing nice and healthily. The finding were published but ignored by government and the air industry because we were all amateurs and not qualified arborologists. Clearly I do not know what a dead tree looks like.

Jim

[Sangye]

Some years ago I took part in a survey of trees and how they were coping with pollution from aircraft (I can see the landing beacons at Gatwick airport from my bedroom window). I was given two areas to check each area being one square kilometere in size, one area was under a flight path the other was not. In the area that was under the flight path I found about twenty dead or badly deformed trees and surprise, surprise in the othert area all the trees were growing nice and healthily. The finding were published but ignored by government and the air industry because we were all amateurs and not qualified arborologists. Clearly I do not know what a dead tree looks like.

Jim

Wow, how scary and sad.

[pberggren1]

Jim, you are just as much of an expert as those so called arborolosgists. Of course you know what a dead tree looks like.

[Dryhill]

[COLOR=navy]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

Having said that the UK's NHS is against taking vitamin supplements the following small article appeared in today's (17 January 2012) Sun newspaper:-

Vitamin D c an improve eyesight and slow down ageing, say scientists.
It may also help prevent heart disease and even Alzheimer's.
Eye experts at University College London gave mice Vitamin D for only six weeks and found their vision improved.
It acted to cut levels of a toxic protein linked to ageing and Alzheimer's.
Professor Glen Jeffery, who led the study, urged the government:"Start paying a bit of attention to this. Supplementing vitamin D could save us a lot of money and improve public health."

Of course The Sun is one of the worst daily rags in existence and it would not surprise me if this was something they made up just to fill some of the paper and to make it look better. I hasten to add there is no way I would ever buy a newspaper, it was left in my taxi by a customer.

Jim

[Dryhill]

Jim, you are just as much of an expert as those so called arborolosgists. Of course you know what a dead tree looks like.

Ahh Phil, that is where you are wrong, the UK government and the air industry say I don't know what a dead tree looks like and you surely do not think such august bodies could be wrong now do you? :sneaky:

Jim

[pberggren1]

Glad to see you have that good Brit humour Jim.

[Michael Dean]

David,
I saw my gastroenterologist??? I have no idea if that's right.
I saw him yesterday he put me on 2 Omeprazole pills (instaed of 1) he said take 1/2 hr before breakfast and 1/2 hr before dinner. he said they only work on an empty stomach.
I was told not to take any vitamins expect what my Rhuemy prescribed? Citrical and vitamin D3???

Good Luck, I'm off the pred but still dealing with the weight I gained.

[Al]

Some years ago I took part in a survey of trees and how they were coping with pollution from aircraft (I can see the landing beacons at Gatwick airport from my bedroom window). I was given two areas to check each area being one square kilometere in size, one area was under a flight path the other was not. In the area that was under the flight path I found about twenty dead or badly deformed trees and surprise, surprise in the othert area all the trees were growing nice and healthily. The finding were published but ignored by government and the air industry because we were all amateurs and not qualified arborologists. Clearly I do not know what a dead tree looks like.

Jim

Interesting, Jim. Philosopher Daniel Dennet once opined that life is too short to entertain unsolicited hypotheses. By this, I am supposing that he means that he never answers emails from anyone he doesn’t already know. On the other hand, a large amount of progress is owed to the insights of “outsiders”, who often have a fresh viewpoint compared to specialists who are vested professionally, socially, and, in some cases, financially in what turns out to be a dead-end road. In your case, your opinion was solicited, more or less. But that was probably for show; the conclusions had surely been drawn up before your actual participation.

This history if medical science is replete with stories where vested interests trump truth. Consider one of personal interest to me: In the 1940s and 50s, a lot of researchers looked for, and found, extrinsic carcinogens and mutagens (usually, a substance that is one is also the other). Tobacco is a famous example. Another: Willhem Hueper was a scientist hired by DuPont to study the relationship between aromatic amines and bladder cancer. However, his findings were not in line with DuPont’s marketing needs, so he got the axe. Hueper then joined the National Cancer Institute, studying industrial carcinogens. No doubt embittered from his previous employment experiences, he found his sometimes harsh contributions at the NCI often censored by bureaucrats who had other fish to fry. The matter of environment carcinogens was surely pushed back a number of years. Here’s the personal part: My father was an industrial cabinet maker, consorting with what were even then known (but not widely known) carcinogens--in large part those very aromatic amines. There was no OSHA then; he died in 1959.

Don’t get me wrong: I believe in scientific discovery, and I trust the collective integrity of science even as there is room to suspect the motives of individual scientists. Yet, I realize that a world of evidence often does not stand a chance against twin tides of political and economic expediencies. Sometimes, the truth will out, though it may take decades. Sometimes, even the bureaucrats have to admit that a dead tree is a dead tree.

Al