Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 I > Does anyone know much about Prednisone?? Does anyone know much about Pre>>> > I have been taking it for a decade. Have never heard about it causing cancer! That is certainly a new one on me, perhaps she misunderstood. All the rest of my meds do! It can cause the body to age, weight gain, cataracts, personality changes, swelling in face, bone thinning, etc. She shoud have bone scans and monitoring if she is on it for any length of time . I have had no side effects. But you should take the smallest dose possible, the shortest time. It is THE best anti inflammatory, but does have those possible side effects. So, it is a balance for some of us...do we want to be miserable or face the possible side effects? tough decision.... how much does she take? That is important. One must be tapered off of it, it effects the adrenals... ask her doctor. Pris's experience ************************************** See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 Hello My mother has RA & she has been taking Prednisone. My mother said that the doctor said this medication can hurt her kidneys & even cause cancer.? It makes her feel sooooooo much better though! Does anyone know much about Prednisone????Anything would be appreciated!! Any An_,___ ________________________________________________________________________ More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 everything depends on the dosage she is taking , i have been on prednisone for 18 years and have never bben able to wean off of it, if she has a competant docyor they will monitor her blood and keep an eye out for problems before they get going ,. i never heard anything about cancer , i did hear that it suppresses the immune system to an extant and also can be a cause of cataracts and of osteoporosis , but i know that in my case , lie your mother i could not survive with out the prednisone , even with all the other drugs i take for the RA. good luck to you mom and tell her to ask her doctor questions about all of her meds dawnmn26@... wrote: Hello My mother has RA & she has been taking Prednisone. My mother said that the doctor said this medication can hurt her kidneys & even cause cancer.? It makes her feel sooooooo much better though! Does anyone know much about Prednisone????Anything would be appreciated!! Any An_,___ __________________________________________________________ More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 my mother is only on 5mg. like 2 times a week! & she just started it like a month ago **************************************See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 > my mother is only on 5mg. like 2 times a week! > & she just started it like a month ago>>>> > That is a VERY low dose! Pris ************************************** See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 Prednisone can be nasty, but much depends on how long you take it, and how much you take - as well as your body's reaction to it. It can cause osteoporosis, brittle bones, diabetes, cataracts, mood swings, and kidney damage, but most people seem to do ok on it. It's important to have your mother's doctor monitor her - blood tests and bone density scans - and to take at least a calcium supplement, and, if her doctor prescribes it, a med to prevent osteoporosis. She should talk to her doctor, and find out what to watch for. My experience with prednisone is that I've been on it for about 4 years now, starting at 20 mg/day and down to 5 mg/day for the last year. I got down to 2 mg/day for a while, but had to go back up. I've developed steroid-induced diabetes that hopefully will go away when I finally get off prednisone, but I was pre-diabetic to start with. One other important thing - never, ever, stop prednisone abruptly. Your body become dependent on it, you must taper off it, even low doses. There are lots of posts about tapering off prednisone if you do a search. Good luck to your Mom! On Dec 26, 2007 8:56 AM, <dawnmn26@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello > My mother has RA & she has been taking Prednisone. > My mother said that the doctor said this medication can hurt her kidneys & > even > cause cancer.? It makes her feel sooooooo much better though! > > Does anyone know much about Prednisone????Anything would be appreciated!! -- South Pasadena, CA / Lilydale, MN You can see my galleries at http://www.pbase.com/arenared986 M. Schulz - " All you need is love. But a little chocolate now and then doesn't hurt. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 > The doc was right about it causing some forms of cancer. here is > what I found but you can probably find more googling it:>>>> > I could not find it at first, this doesn't really concern me, personally, too much... the other side effects are much more common. Unless I missed something, way, WAY down it said " A few people taking Prednisone may develop Kaposi's sarcoma, a form of cancer; it may however disappear when the drug is stopped " . However, getting lymphoma cancer from my Humira does concern me....it is a much more common side effect, it appears, at first blush....at least in my harebrained mind and research (smile). What I personally worry about with prednisone is getting AVN or ON (necrosis of the bone). Rare, but scary. Pris ************************************** See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 I was on prednisone for approximately 5 years. I am now recovering from a broken bone 1 " below my hip. I have bone fragments in the thigh and hip and enough metal to set off every detector there is! I fell in October and had surgery, my bones were so brittle they had to put in a stack, 3 screrws, 13 " rod and nail. I am currently on physical therapy and still using a cane. My Dr. says that the major reason my bone shattered was due to the predisone I had taken!. I am now off pred. and all other RA meds. IT HURTS but surgery, 3 large incisions in my hip and thigh hurts a lot worse. Please be careful, prednisone is really a scarey drug and the side effects can be bad. I am still being cautioned that any slight fall, etc. will cause another broken bone! Gentle Hugs & Prayers, Carol M. in cA **************************************See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 I > I am currently on physical therapy and still using a cane. My > Dr. says that the major reason my bone shattered was due to the predisone I > had taken!>>>>> > Oh, that is sad. We wish you the best of luck, be very careful! I wonder if it could have been prevented? During the 5 years you were on prednisone, how many bone scans did you have in order to see how it was affecting your bone density? I get a Dexa bone scan every other year to measure my bone density and how the prednisone affects it.. I see my doc every couple of months and have blood tests, ALWAYS. Since it is widely known that prednisone causes bone loss, I am surprised you were on it if you had weak bones? Your doc never suggested a bone scan? (In my humble opinion, ANY woman over 50 should have a bone scan done, prednisone or no prednisone.. now they have drugs that can reverse bone loss or keep it stable)... This is what amazes and frustrates me. People are put on drugs and not monitored by the doctors that prescribe them! Painkillers should be monitored, as well as many drugs that are given for RA. Blood tests should be taken regularly, and doctor appointments should be on a regular basis if you are taking drugs that can be harmful. Of course, this is the doctor's responsibility, the patient is not the expert....but sometimes you have to do your own homework, unfortunately! But just because you were not taken off prednisone when you should have been does not mean it is a bad drug for everyone... to me (and it's just a harebrained opinion) your doctor may have been responsible. Or perhaps the prednisone saved your life...who knows, not me! We do not have the information to judge, but when taking any drug with potentially harmful side affects, a patient should be closely monitored. Pris (no doctor) ************************************** See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 Hi An, I am not a huge fan of prednisone. I blame the loss of my hip joint at warp speed on prednisone any many corticosteroid injections. They were given every time I went in for a flare which was often over 10-spann and 5 different rheumatologist but taken sparinglr, rarely should be okay, maybe once a year in a dose pack. I am not for continued use. However, there are many here and other who do really well an no side effects. I started developing a bulging belly pretty quickly and aksed the doctor. I was told prednisone is most likely the cause. I also get the swollen face after just one week of taking them -- quick. I am also very sensitive to meds. those who have success with it will defend it violently. But lets home your mom is one of the lucky ones who can take it. The older population seem to do okay on it from what I have observed. It is no doubt a powerful pain reliever and antiinflammatory or I wouldn't have allowed so many injections and many dose packs. The pain can be quite mind boggling and excruciating where people suffering from RA will do whatever it takes to rid themselves of the pain. The doc was right about it causing some forms of cancer. here is what I found but you can probably find more googling it: http://www.side-effects.ca/prednisone-side-effects.php " Prednisone Side Effects Side effects from using Prednisone cannot be anticipatedin for every person that takes it. If you're taking this prescription drug and notice that any develop, change in intensity, or are particularly bothering, inform a doctor as soon as possible. Only a doctor can determine if it is safe for you to continue taking Prednisone once side effects have been noted. Prednisone may cause insomnia, mood changes, personality changes, euphoria, psychotic behavior, or severe depression. It may even worsen any existing emotional instability in some individuals. At a high dosage, Prednisone may cause high blood pressure and fluid retention. If this occurs, you may need a low-salt diet and a potassium supplement as a counter. With prolonged Prednisone treatment, eye problems may develop (e.g., a viral or fungal eye infection, cataracts, or glaucoma). Additionally, if Prednisone is taken over the long term, the buildup of adrenal hormones in the patient's body may cause a condition called Cushing's syndrome. This condition is marked by weight gain, a " moon-faced " appearance, fragile-thin skin, muscle weakness, brittle bones, and purplish stripe marks on the skin. Women are particularly vulnerable to this problem, however alternate-day therapy may help prevent its development. It is quite possible for side effects other than those listed here to occur. If this happens and/or if any seem particularly strange or bothersome, contact a healthcare provider. Other potential Prednisone Side Effects Convulsions, distended abdomen, face redness, glaucoma, headache, hives and other allergic-type reactions, increased pressure inside eyes or skull, inflamed esophagus or pancreas, bone fractures, bruising, bulging eyes, congestive heart failure, irregular menstrual periods, muscle weakness or disease, osteoporosis, peptic ulcer, poor healing of wounds, stunted growth (in children), sweating, vertigo. Special Prednisone Precautions Prednisone lowers the body's resistance to infections and can make them harder to treat. It may also mask some of the signs of an infection, making it difficult for your doctor to diagnose actual problems, if any. A patient should not take Prednisone if they have ever had an allergic reaction to it. Additionally, you should not be treated with Prednisone if you have a body-wide fungus infection, such as candidiasis or cryptococcosis. Do not get a smallpox vaccination or any other immunization while you are taking Prednisone. The vaccination might not " take, " and could do harm to the body's nervous system. Prednisone may reactivate a dormant case of tuberculosis. If you have inactive TB and must take Prednisone for an extended time, you should be given anti-TB medication as well. If you have an underactive thyroid gland or cirrhosis of the liver, your doctor will probably need to prescribe a lower-than-average Prednisone dosage for you. If you have an eye infection caused by the herpes simplex virus, Prednisone should be used with great caution; there is a potential danger that the cornea will become perforated. A few people taking Prednisone may develop Kaposi's sarcoma, a form of cancer; it may however disappear when the drug is stopped. Long-term treatment with Prednisone may stunt growth. If Prednisone is given to a child, the youngster's growth should be monitored carefully. Also, diseases such as chickenpox or measles can be very serious or even fatal in both children and adults who are taking Prednisone. Avoid exposure to these diseases. Prednisone should also be taken with caution if the patient has any of the following conditions: Diverticulitis or other disorder of the intestine; High blood pressure; Kidney disorder; Myasthenia gravis (a muscle-weakness disorder); Osteoporosis (brittle bones); Peptic ulcer; Ulcerative colitis (inflammation of the bowel). " http://www.side-effects.ca/prednisone-side-effects.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2007 Report Share Posted December 26, 2007 I have been on 5mg of predizone for the last 10 years. Everytime I try to go down I hurt to much. Re: [ ] prednisone my mother is only on 5mg. like 2 times a week! & she just started it like a month ago ************ ********* ********* ********See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food. aol.com/top- rated-recipes? NCID=aoltop00030 000000004) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 I have taken 5mg/day for many years. I have not had any big side effects, but am concerned about the long term usage, even at that low dose. I can't seem to get off it without lots of pain. Now I'm pregnant and not experiencing any remission (as most do) so I'm up to 10mg/day since Azulfadine is about the only other med I can take. I hope to go off everything other than methotrexate after the baby is born. Does anyone know much about Prednisone????Anything would be appreciated!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 Is your mother taking anything else for her RA? Generally speaking, prednisone shouldn't be the sole treatment of RA. Also, while prednisone can be very useful, especially short term while waiting for disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to work and for flares, the long term use of prednisone for RA is controversial. Not an MD On Dec 26, 2007 10:56 AM, <dawnmn26@...> wrote: > > > Hello > My mother has RA & she has been taking Prednisone. > My mother said that the doctor said this medication can hurt her kidneys & even > cause cancer.? It makes her feel sooooooo much better though! > > > Does anyone know much about Prednisone????Anything would be appreciated!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 In a message dated 12/27/07 6:45:12 AM, Rheumatoid.Arthritis.Support@... writes: > Bone scans are an important part of monitoring, but I must repeat > again: even with normal BMD, fractures can and do occur. Prednisone > can affect not only bone quantity, but bone QUALITY as well.>>>>>>> > , this is controversial.... (I left off many of the references). It is believed by many that BMD and quality are inseparable. Because I have taken prednisone for so many years, I read every article I can find on it and osteoporosis. See below. Cheers, Pris Bone Quality: An Empty Term Harri Sievänen, Pekka Kannus, Teppo L. N. Järvinen* Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this article. Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Citation: Sievänen H, Kannus P, Järvinen TLN (2007) Bone Quality: An Empty Term. PLoS Med 4(3): e27 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040027 Published: March 6, 2007 Copyright: © 2007 Sievänen et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Abbreviations: BMD, bone mineral density Harri Sievänen and Pekka Kannus are in the Bone Research Group, UKK Institute, Tampere, Finland. Pekka Kannus and Teppo L. N. Järvinen are in the Division of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Trauma, Musculoskeletal Surgery and Rehabilitation, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland. Teppo L. N. Järvinen is in the Department of Surgery and the Institute of Medical Technology, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland. * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail:teppo.jarvinen@... Although the concept of “bone quality†is at least 15 years old [1], the term has recently sparked much discussion and debate among clinicians and clinical researchers [2–5]. At a recent National Institutes of Health conference on bone quality, the term was defined as: “The sum total of characteristics of the bone that influence the bone's resistance to fracture†[6].Where Did the Definition Come From? This definition arose from the results of multicenter clinical trials that evaluated the effects of two classes of drugs—antiresorptive bisphosphonate therapy (alendronate and risedronate) and selective estrogen receptor modulator therapy (raloxifene)—on the prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures [7,8 ]. While these studies reported consistent reductions in the incidence of fractures, the treatment effects could not be explained by contemporary changes in dual X-ray absorptiometric bone mineral density (BMD), the present clinical standard of bone fragility. These conflicting findings led to speculation that the antiresorptive drugs had additional skeletal effects upon a feature of the bone called “bone quality†[7–12]. The idea of bone quality, and the explanation for the conflicting results, linked together two important notions: (1) antiresorptive drugs acted by suppressing bone turnover through inhibiting bone resorption, and (2) increased bone turnover (mainly the increased bone resorption, as detected by bone markers) compromises the bone strength through deteriorated bone microarchitecture (a trait that cannot be captured by BMD measurement but could potentially be improved by antiresorptive treatment) [4]. Bone quality is now a widely embraced concept that seems to offer a solution to the classic paradox of osteoporosis: while low BMD values are associated with increased relative risk of fracture at the population level, the predictive value of BMD in an individual patient remains quite marginal [13–15]. And to further support the concept of bone quality, inclusion of increased bone turnover in fracture-predicting models has somewhat improved the ability to predict fracture risk independently of BMD [8,16–19].Flaws in the Concept Although the concept of bone quality might seem attractive for all of the reasons discussed above, nevertheless the notion has three major conceptual flaws.BMD and bone quality do not explain fractures. First, although BMD indeed shows a strong correlation with whole bone strength in the laboratory setting (r up to ~0.9) [20], in the clinical setting, paradoxically, the overall proportion of various fragility fractures attributable to low BMD (indicating reduced bone strength) remains modest (from 0% to 44%) [15]. In other words, when looking at all types of fractures combined, over half occur among people who cannot be classified as having osteoporosis in the sense of the World Health Organization's operational definition of osteoporosis (BMD 2.5 standard deviations or more below the young adult reference level). In fact, BMD is only a modest risk factor for fractures; about 85% of the contribution to the fracture risk in general, or to the rise in fracture risk with age, is unrelated to BMD [15,21]. In other words, the concept of bone quality is invoked to explain fracture risk that cannot be attributed to BMD, but it seems impossible that bone quality could realistically explain 85% of all fractures.BMD and bone quality are largely inseparable. Second, the concept of bone quality rests on a commonly held idea that BMD and bone quality would independently account for bone fragility in totality. But this idea is a fallacy. Basically, BMD reflects the bulk of material (bone mass) of which the bone, as an organ, is made [22]. BMD thus denotes a lumped measure of virtually everything within the measured bone site (i.e., bone cross-sectional size and dimensions, cortical thickness and porosity, trabecular thickness and number, mineralization of bone material), but it denotes nothing specifically. Thus, there is not much left to be accounted for by subtle architectural and material properties (i.e., factors that allegedly account for bone quality). This simply means that BMD and most bone quality characteristics, measurable in vivo, are intertwined and largely inseparable.Flaws in defining bone quality. Third, the definition of bone quality is too imprecise, incorporating a pool of “non-BMD†indices of bone fragility (or, even more broadly, the portion of fracture risk that is not predicted by BMD [6]). Neither do we have an established measurement, indicator, or unit for bone quality. We don't even have criteria for defining “good†or “bad†bone quality.The Problem of Measurement “If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.†Lord Kelvin In business and industry, quality is classically defined as “fitness for use†[23] or “conformance to requirements†[24]. Extrapolating from these standard business definitions of quality, “good†bone quality would mean a high level of resistance to fractures, or extrapolating even further [6], resistance to all factors accounting for fracture risk. One might then ask whether the likelihood of a fracture is solely dependent on bone strength, and accordingly, whether a fracture that resulted from mild or moderate trauma is a direct index of “bad†bone quality. However, this kind of simplistic thinking ignores the fact that the etiology of any type of fracture among older adults is multifactorial, involving many extra-skeletal risk factors much stronger than the bone per se (measured by conventional BMD) [25–33]. In this respect, one should recall that bone quality, by definition, cannot be but a bone-based trait only [2]. Even if the problems with the definition of bone quality could be solved, the fundamental problem with the bone quality concept is common to all new diagnostic tests [34]: the clinical value of a new diagnostic test depends on whether it improves patient outcomes beyond the outcome achieved with current diagnostic tests (here, the BMD and other well-known risk factors of fractures). As mentioned previously, it is true that highly increased bone turnover has been shown to improve the ability to predict some types of fractures independently of BMD [8,17,18]. However, so far we have little proof that the biochemical markers of bone turnover would be able to make a clinically relevant impact on the predictive ability of fracture independently of the well-known risk factors of fractures. For example, incorporating a single non-skeletal risk factor (gait speed) into the predictive equation along with BMD and bone markers was shown to clearly diminish the fracture predictive ability of bone markers [17]. Thus, it remains quite utopian to envision that a pure bone-derived measure (e.g., BMD complemented by bone quality) could ever cover all these extra-skeletal risk factors, too, and thus, predict solely the individual occurrence of fractures. The prevailing understanding of bone quality supposes that the primary property of bones is their capacity to resist fractures. But this is a misconception. The human skeleton is basically a locomotive apparatus, which is continually adapting to habitual loadings [35,36] and is particularly fit for endurance activities [37]. Given the intrinsic locomotive function and the metabolic pressure to keep the skeleton light, there is a compromise between the bone's actual, functionally adequate strength and the maximum attainable strength. Bone has a great capacity to become substantially stronger through appropriate structural adaptations whenever needed to cope with increased functional demands [ 36]. However, while the skeleton can be reasonably well adapted to customary, functional loadings (Figure 1A), it is definitely not adapted to unusual loadings caused by occasional falls (or by other similar trauma-related events) [38 ]. Under such circumstances weak bone regions can become unduly stressed, possibly beyond their load-bearing capacity, initiating a fracture (Figure 1C). Fully in line with this fact, the relative risk of hip fracture can rise to up to 30 when the fall-induced impact directly hits the greater trochanter of the proximal femur [26,28,39]. It is thus quite understandable that the external loads from these non-habitual incidents cause most (up to ~90%) hip and wrist fractures [26,30,39] and also account for at least half of vertebral fractures [ 40–42]. Figure 1. Bone Fractures, Car Accidents, and Direction of Impact Analogous to automobiles designed to run on their wheels, the human skeleton is adapted to bipedal gait and the resulting habitual locomotive loadings ( Figure 1A). In terms of safety, the design of cars is optimized to keep the driver and passengers in the cockpit intact during collisions from the typical directions of impact, the front or rear (Figure 1B). However, a similar or even smaller force can cause profound damage to the cockpit if it comes from an atypical (unforeseen) direction (Figure 1C). Analogously, the capacity of the skeleton to resist fractures during accidents is generally good when the loading caused by a traumatic incident is a moderate magnification of the loading experienced during habitual activities (i.e., within the inherent safety margin of bone), except in some cases where the incident force exceeds the bones' capacity to withstand the loading without structural failure (Figure 1B). In many cases of older adults' fractures, however, the incident loading in terms of direction, rate, and magnitude is essentially different from the loading that bones are adapted to (Figure 1C). Such cases can be caused, for example, by careless lifting of a shopping bag with straight knees [42,48] or a sideways fall directly onto the hip [26,30]. Conclusion In the end, the only reasonable mechanism by which any bone-targeted medication reduces fractures is through increasing the whole bone strength (one way or another). Accordingly, if we were able to accurately determine whole bone strength of individuals on antiresorptive therapy, the alleged discrepancy underlying the concept of bone quality would not exist. As the whole bone strength provides the ultimate measure of true bone quality, the paradox of osteoporosis appears to simply stem from our inherent inability to determine directly the actual bone strength of an individual in vivo. However, this inability cannot be taken as a justification to introduce an obscure and ill-defined concept such as bone quality. If it really must be used, the term bone quality should refer only to the capacity of bones to withstand a wide range of loading without breaking—though we already have a proper term for such capacity, the whole bone strength. Therefore, we must strive to reliably estimate the whole bone strength in vivo. In t his context, the new 3-dimensional imaging techniques of the actual bone structure and macroanatomy seem an interesting and promising option [43–47] that will hopefully help in solving the important clinical issue of bone fragility in the near future. Acknowledgments This study was supported by grants from the Medical Research Fund of Tampere University Hospital, the Research Council for Physical Education and Sports, Ministry of Education, and the AO Research Fund, Switzerland. The authors thank Dr. Jarkko Jokihaara for help with preparation of the figure. References 1. Wallach S, Feinblatt JD, Carstens JH Jr, Avioli LV (1992) The bone “quality†problem. Calcif Tissue Int 51: 169–172. Find this article online 2. CJ, Keaveny TM (2006) A biomechanical perspective on bone quality. Bone 39: 1173–1181. Find this article online 3. Kleerekoper M (2006) Osteoporosis prevention and therapy: Preserving and building strength through bone quality. Osteoporos Int 17: 1707–1715. Find this article online 4. Seeman E, Delmas PD (2006) Bone quality—The material and structural basis of bone strength and fragility. N Engl J Med 354: 2250–2261. Find this article online 5. Stokstad E (2005) Bone quality fills holes in fracture risk. Science 308: 1580. Find this article online 6. Fyhrie DP (2005) Summary—Measuring “bone quality†J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact 5: 318–320. Find this article online ************************************** See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 If you are not having any side effects I would just do what the doc advises. Why mess up what's working. I still think it is necessary to use the prednisone, just sparingly. I prefer medrol but last doc wouldn't prescribe it for me, just prednisone. Wouldn't say why, my guess is because I wanted something other than what he prescribed. However, I had excellent care in another state and that is what he would prescribe and that helped. I was used to a different level of care. It isn't worth the long-term health issues it brings from its side effects unless you are lucky enough not to get side effects. What does the doctor say about long-term use for you? I would imagaine since you don't get the side effects you will be lucky enough to use it long-term with no problem as well but I would still inqire. As you know this disease effects us all differently, has different triggers, different levels of the disease. I know someone who has only had one flare and takes just plaquenil. I met her in ER on Christmas after she commented on the multiple deformities with my hands she revealed she had polyarthritis and experiences no pain at all. Some are just lucky that way and I think that's wonderful -- better not to have it all but if you do have to have it, let it be mild, not like this RA from torture-ville or outer space and nothing works or you are allergic to the treatment too sensitive for the treatment or it stops working in 6 to 9 months. You really have to decide if you want to make the trade-off. It is a personal decision. My grandmother takes a many medications for catarct, blood pressure, etc. a day and reacts to nothing. Can take some of her meds on an empty stomach, she has an iron stomach and a very healthy immune system, Working in a hospital watching people bring in their mulitple meds, typing up medical records where patients are on 25 meds a day including prednisone, especially true for the elderly to be on so many meds for conditions similar to my grandmother's, many have arthritis of some type and are more active than many of us and are having absolutely no side effects whatsoever. Sorry to hear you are not in remission. Wondering if you are at a certain point in the pregnancy the remission will kick in. I always wanted another child but thought I would probably be one of the ones who didn't go into remission. I asked my 4th rheumatologist and she told me I would probably get worse so I waited now I think it is a little too late -- for whether reason, the age or the just the condition of the hands and body. I shouldn't have listened to that doctor. Anyway hope you get to experience remission soon. And congratulations. best wishes, Ebony > Does anyone know much about Prednisone????Anything would be appreciated!! > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2007 Report Share Posted December 27, 2007 Pris, Bone scans are an important part of monitoring, but I must repeat again: even with normal BMD, fractures can and do occur. Prednisone can affect not only bone quantity, but bone QUALITY as well. Not an MD On Dec 27, 2007 12:50 AM, <NELLIESTAR@...> wrote: > > I > > > > I am currently on physical therapy and still using a cane. My > > Dr. says that the major reason my bone shattered was due to the predisone I > > had taken!>>>>> > > > Oh, that is sad. > We wish you the best of luck, be very careful! > I wonder if it could have been prevented? > During the 5 years you were on prednisone, how many bone scans did you have > in order to see how it was affecting your bone density? > I get a Dexa bone scan every other year to measure my bone density and how > the prednisone affects it.. I see my doc every couple of months and have blood > tests, ALWAYS. > Since it is widely known that prednisone causes bone loss, I am surprised you > were on it if you had weak bones? Your doc never suggested a bone scan? > (In my humble opinion, ANY woman over 50 should have a bone scan done, > prednisone or no prednisone.. now they have drugs that can reverse bone loss or keep > it stable)... > This is what amazes and frustrates me. > People are put on drugs and not monitored by the doctors that prescribe them! > Painkillers should be monitored, as well as many drugs that are given for RA. > Blood tests should be taken regularly, and doctor appointments should be on a > regular basis if you are taking drugs that can be harmful. Of course, > this is the doctor's responsibility, the patient is not the expert....but > sometimes you have to do your own homework, unfortunately! > But just because you were not taken off prednisone when you should have been > does not mean it is a bad drug for everyone... to me (and it's just a > harebrained opinion) your doctor may have been responsible. > Or perhaps the prednisone saved your life...who knows, not me! > We do not have the information to judge, but when taking any drug with > potentially harmful side affects, a patient should be closely monitored. > Pris (no doctor) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 Pris, These Finnish researchers have a problem with the vague term " bone quality. " I'll concede that it's ill-defined. Yet, they agree with the concept that I'm trying to convey. They write: " Bone quality is now a widely embraced concept that seems to offer a solution to the classic paradox of osteoporosis: while low BMD values are associated with increased relative risk of fracture at the population level, the predictive value of BMD in an individual patient remains quite marginal. " Later in the article, they state: " In fact, BMD is only a modest risk factor for fractures; about 85% of the contribution to the fracture risk in general, or to the rise in fracture risk with age, is unrelated to BMD. " My point is that bone mineral density (BMD) does not tell the whole story about bone health and strength. For two women with the very same BMD, if one is middle-aged and one is elderly, the elderly woman has a greater risk of fracture. In the case of two women with the very same BMD, if one has been a heavy smoker for many years and the other has never smoked, the smoker has a greater risk of fracture. Given two women with the same, even " normal, " BMD, if one is a long-term prednisone user and the other has never taken steroids, the prednisone user has a higher fracture risk. If you prefer, as the researchers do, to refer to " whole bone strength " instead of " bone quality, " that's fine. But as the authors admit, we don't yet have a standard way of measuring that in vivo either. Not an MD On Dec 27, 2007 1:26 PM, <NELLIESTAR@...> wrote: > > In a message dated 12/27/07 6:45:12 AM, > Rheumatoid.Arthritis.Support@... writes: > > > > Bone scans are an important part of monitoring, but I must repeat > > again: even with normal BMD, fractures can and do occur. Prednisone > > can affect not only bone quantity, but bone QUALITY as well.>>>>>>> > > > > , this is controversial.... (I left off many of the references). It is > believed by many that BMD and quality are inseparable. Because I have taken > prednisone for so many years, I read every article I can find on it and > osteoporosis. > See below. > Cheers, > Pris > > Bone Quality: An Empty Term > > Harri Sievänen, Pekka Kannus, Teppo L. N. Järvinen* > > > > > Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this article. > Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests > exist. > Citation: Sievänen H,Kannus P,Järvinen TLN (2007) Bone Quality: An Empty > Term. PLoS Med 4(3): e27 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040027 > Published: March 6, 2007 > Copyright: © 2007 Sievänen et al. This is an open-access article distributed > under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits > unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the > original author and source are credited. > Abbreviations: BMD, bone mineral density > Harri Sievänen and Pekka Kannus are in the Bone Research Group, UKK > Institute, Tampere, Finland. Pekka Kannus and Teppo L. N. Järvinen are in the Division > of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Trauma, Musculoskeletal > Surgery and Rehabilitation, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland. Teppo L. > N. Järvinen is in the Department of Surgery and the Institute of Medical > Technology, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland. > * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail:teppo.jarvinen@... > > > Although the concept of " bone quality " is at least 15 years old [1], the > term has recently sparked much discussion and debate among clinicians and > clinical researchers [2–5]. At a recent National Institutes of Health conference on > bone quality, the term was defined as: " The sum total of characteristics of > the bone that influence the bone's resistance to fracture " [6].Where Did the > Definition Come From? > > This definition arose from the results of multicenter clinical trials that > evaluated the effects of two classes of drugs—antiresorptive bisphosphonate > therapy (alendronate and risedronate) and selective estrogen receptor modulator > therapy (raloxifene)—on the prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures [7,8 > ]. While these studies reported consistent reductions in the incidence of > fractures, the treatment effects could not be explained by contemporary changes in > dual X-ray absorptiometric bone mineral density (BMD), the present clinical > standard of bone fragility. These conflicting findings led to speculation that > the antiresorptive drugs had additional skeletal effects upon a feature of the > bone called " bone quality " [7–12]. > The idea of bone quality, and the explanation for the conflicting results, > linked together two important notions: (1) antiresorptive drugs acted by > suppressing bone turnover through inhibiting bone resorption, and (2) increased bone > turnover (mainly the increased bone resorption, as detected by bone markers) > compromises the bone strength through deteriorated bone microarchitecture (a > trait that cannot be captured by BMD measurement but could potentially be > improved by antiresorptive treatment) [4]. > Bone quality is now a widely embraced concept that seems to offer a solution > to the classic paradox of osteoporosis: while low BMD values are associated > with increased relative risk of fracture at the population level, the predictive > value of BMD in an individual patient remains quite marginal [13–15]. And to > further support the concept of bone quality, inclusion of increased bone > turnover in fracture-predicting models has somewhat improved the ability to predict > fracture risk independently of BMD [8,16–19].Flaws in the Concept > > Although the concept of bone quality might seem attractive for all of the > reasons discussed above, nevertheless the notion has three major conceptual > flaws.BMD and bone quality do not explain fractures. > > First, although BMD indeed shows a strong correlation with whole bone > strength in the laboratory setting (r up to ~0.9) [20], in the clinical setting, > paradoxically, the overall proportion of various fragility fractures attributable > to low BMD (indicating reduced bone strength) remains modest (from 0% to 44%) > [15]. In other words, when looking at all types of fractures combined, over > half occur among people who cannot be classified as having osteoporosis in the > sense of the World Health Organization's operational definition of osteoporosis > (BMD 2.5 standard deviations or more below the young adult reference level). > In fact, BMD is only a modest risk factor for fractures; about 85% of the > contribution to the fracture risk in general, or to the rise in fracture risk with > age, is unrelated to BMD [15,21]. In other words, the concept of bone quality > is invoked to explain fracture risk that cannot be attributed to BMD, but it > seems impossible that bone quality could realistically explain 85% of all > fractures.BMD and bone quality are largely inseparable. > > Second, the concept of bone quality rests on a commonly held idea that BMD > and bone quality would independently account for bone fragility in totality. But > this idea is a fallacy. Basically, BMD reflects the bulk of material (bone > mass) of which the bone, as an organ, is made [22]. BMD thus denotes a lumped > measure of virtually everything within the measured bone site (i.e., bone > cross-sectional size and dimensions, cortical thickness and porosity, trabecular > thickness and number, mineralization of bone material), but it denotes nothing > specifically. Thus, there is not much left to be accounted for by subtle > architectural and material properties (i.e., factors that allegedly account for bone > quality). This simply means that BMD and most bone quality characteristics, > measurable in vivo, are intertwined and largely inseparable.Flaws in defining > bone quality. > > Third, the definition of bone quality is too imprecise, incorporating a pool > of " non-BMD " indices of bone fragility (or, even more broadly, the portion of > fracture risk that is not predicted by BMD [6]). Neither do we have an > established measurement, indicator, or unit for bone quality. We don't even have > criteria for defining " good " or " bad " bone quality.The Problem of Measurement > > " If you can not measure it, you can not improve it. " > Lord Kelvin > > In business and industry, quality is classically defined as " fitness for use " > [23] or " conformance to requirements " [24]. Extrapolating from these > standard business definitions of quality, " good " bone quality would mean a high > level of resistance to fractures, or extrapolating even further [6], resistance > to all factors accounting for fracture risk. One might then ask whether the > likelihood of a fracture is solely dependent on bone strength, and accordingly, > whether a fracture that resulted from mild or moderate trauma is a direct index > of " bad " bone quality. > However, this kind of simplistic thinking ignores the fact that the etiology > of any type of fracture among older adults is multifactorial, involving many > extra-skeletal risk factors much stronger than the bone per se (measured by > conventional BMD) [25–33]. In this respect, one should recall that bone quality, > by definition, cannot be but a bone-based trait only [2]. > Even if the problems with the definition of bone quality could be solved, the > fundamental problem with the bone quality concept is common to all new > diagnostic tests [34]: the clinical value of a new diagnostic test depends on > whether it improves patient outcomes beyond the outcome achieved with current > diagnostic tests (here, the BMD and other well-known risk factors of fractures). As > mentioned previously, it is true that highly increased bone turnover has been > shown to improve the ability to predict some types of fractures independently > of BMD [8,17,18]. However, so far we have little proof that the biochemical > markers of bone turnover would be able to make a clinically relevant impact on > the predictive ability of fracture independently of the well-known risk factors > of fractures. > For example, incorporating a single non-skeletal risk factor (gait speed) > into the predictive equation along with BMD and bone markers was shown to clearly > diminish the fracture predictive ability of bone markers [17]. Thus, it > remains quite utopian to envision that a pure bone-derived measure (e.g., BMD > complemented by bone quality) could ever cover all these extra-skeletal risk > factors, too, and thus, predict solely the individual occurrence of fractures. > The prevailing understanding of bone quality supposes that the primary > property of bones is their capacity to resist fractures. But this is a > misconception. The human skeleton is basically a locomotive apparatus, which is continually > adapting to habitual loadings [35,36] and is particularly fit for endurance > activities [37]. Given the intrinsic locomotive function and the metabolic > pressure to keep the skeleton light, there is a compromise between the bone's > actual, functionally adequate strength and the maximum attainable strength. Bone > has a great capacity to become substantially stronger through appropriate > structural adaptations whenever needed to cope with increased functional demands [ > 36]. However, while the skeleton can be reasonably well adapted to customary, > functional loadings (Figure 1A), it is definitely not adapted to unusual > loadings caused by occasional falls (or by other similar trauma-related events) [38 > ]. Under such circumstances weak bone regions can become unduly stressed, > possibly beyond their load-bearing capacity, initiating a fracture (Figure 1C). > Fully in line with this fact, the relative risk of hip fracture can rise to up to > 30 when the fall-induced impact directly hits the greater trochanter of the > proximal femur [26,28,39]. It is thus quite understandable that the external > loads from these non-habitual incidents cause most (up to ~90%) hip and wrist > fractures [26,30,39] and also account for at least half of vertebral fractures [ > 40–42]. > > Figure 1. Bone Fractures, Car Accidents, and Direction of Impact > > Analogous to automobiles designed to run on their wheels, the human skeleton > is adapted to bipedal gait and the resulting habitual locomotive loadings ( > Figure 1A). In terms of safety, the design of cars is optimized to keep the > driver and passengers in the cockpit intact during collisions from the typical > directions of impact, the front or rear (Figure 1B). However, a similar or even > smaller force can cause profound damage to the cockpit if it comes from an > atypical (unforeseen) direction (Figure 1C). Analogously, the capacity of the > skeleton to resist fractures during accidents is generally good when the loading > caused by a traumatic incident is a moderate magnification of the loading > experienced during habitual activities (i.e., within the inherent safety margin of > bone), except in some cases where the incident force exceeds the bones' > capacity to withstand the loading without structural failure (Figure 1B). In many > cases of older adults' fractures, however, the incident loading in terms of > direction, rate, and magnitude is essentially different from the loading that bones > are adapted to (Figure 1C). Such cases can be caused, for example, by > careless lifting of a shopping bag with straight knees [42,48] or a sideways fall > directly onto the hip [26,30]. > Conclusion > > In the end, the only reasonable mechanism by which any bone-targeted > medication reduces fractures is through increasing the whole bone strength (one way or > another). Accordingly, if we were able to accurately determine whole bone > strength of individuals on antiresorptive therapy, the alleged discrepancy > underlying the concept of bone quality would not exist. As the whole bone strength > provides the ultimate measure of true bone quality, the paradox of osteoporosis > appears to simply stem from our inherent inability to determine directly the > actual bone strength of an individual in vivo. However, this inability cannot > be taken as a justification to introduce an obscure and ill-defined concept > such as bone quality. > If it really must be used, the term bone quality should refer only to the > capacity of bones to withstand a wide range of loading without breaking—though we > already have a proper term for such capacity, the whole bone strength. > Therefore, we must strive to reliably estimate the whole bone strength in vivo. In t > his context, the new 3-dimensional imaging techniques of the actual bone > structure and macroanatomy seem an interesting and promising option [43–47] that > will hopefully help in solving the important clinical issue of bone fragility in > the near future. Acknowledgments > > This study was supported by grants from the Medical Research Fund of Tampere > University Hospital, the Research Council for Physical Education and Sports, > Ministry of Education, and the AO Research Fund, Switzerland. The authors thank > Dr. Jarkko Jokihaara for help with preparation of the figure. References > > 1. Wallach S, Feinblatt JD, Carstens JH Jr, Avioli LV (1992) The > bone " quality " problem. Calcif Tissue Int 51: 169–172. Find this article online > 2. CJ, Keaveny TM (2006) A biomechanical perspective on > bone quality. Bone 39: 1173–1181. Find this article online > 3. Kleerekoper M (2006) Osteoporosis prevention and therapy: > Preserving and building strength through bone quality. Osteoporos Int 17: 1707–1715. > Find this article online > 4. Seeman E, Delmas PD (2006) Bone quality—The material and > structural basis of bone strength and fragility. N Engl J Med 354: 2250–2261. Find > this article online > 5. Stokstad E (2005) Bone quality fills holes in fracture risk. > Science 308: 1580. Find this article online > 6. Fyhrie DP (2005) Summary—Measuring " bone quality " J > Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact 5: 318–320. Find this article online Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2007 Report Share Posted December 28, 2007 Thank you for the great information ! I've had three rheumatologists and not one of them have liked prescribing prednisone. The times they have had to prescribe it it was for very short term and the highest dosage I was prescribed was 10mgs. Even though they have given me a bone scan and everything was fine they were still leery of prescribing it, and do so very little. --- <Rheumatoid.Arthritis.Support@...> wrote: > Pris, > > These Finnish researchers have a problem with the > vague term " bone > quality. " I'll concede that it's ill-defined. > > Yet, they agree with the concept that I'm trying to > convey. They write: > > > " Bone quality is now a widely embraced concept that > seems to offer a > solution to the classic paradox of osteoporosis: > while low BMD values > are associated with increased relative risk of > fracture at the > population level, the predictive value of BMD in an > individual patient > remains quite marginal. " > > > Later in the article, they state: > > " In fact, BMD is only a modest risk factor for > fractures; about 85% of > the contribution to the fracture risk in general, or > to the rise in > fracture risk with age, is unrelated to BMD. " > > > My point is that bone mineral density (BMD) does not > tell the whole > story about bone health and strength. > > For two women with the very same BMD, if one is > middle-aged and one is > elderly, the elderly woman has a greater risk of > fracture. In the case > of two women with the very same BMD, if one has been > a heavy smoker > for many years and the other has never smoked, the > smoker has a > greater risk of fracture. Given two women with the > same, even > " normal, " BMD, if one is a long-term prednisone user > and the other has > never taken steroids, the prednisone user has a > higher fracture risk. > > If you prefer, as the researchers do, to refer to > " whole bone > strength " instead of " bone quality, " that's fine. > But as the authors > admit, we don't yet have a standard way of measuring > that in vivo > either. > > > > Not an MD > > > On Dec 27, 2007 1:26 PM, <NELLIESTAR@...> > wrote: > > > > In a message dated 12/27/07 6:45:12 AM, > > Rheumatoid.Arthritis.Support@... writes: > > > > > > > Bone scans are an important part of monitoring, > but I must repeat > > > again: even with normal BMD, fractures can and > do occur. Prednisone > > > can affect not only bone quantity, but bone > QUALITY as well.>>>>>>> > > > > > > > , this is controversial.... (I left off many > of the references). It is > > believed by many that BMD and quality are > inseparable. Because I have taken > > prednisone for so many years, I read every article > I can find on it and > > osteoporosis. > > See below. > > Cheers, > > Pris > > > > Bone Quality: An Empty Term > > > > Harri Sievänen, Pekka Kannus, Teppo L. N. > Järvinen* > > > > > > > > > > Funding: The authors received no specific funding > for this article. > > Competing Interests: The authors have declared > that no competing interests > > exist. > > Citation: Sievänen H,Kannus P,Järvinen TLN (2007) > Bone Quality: An Empty > > Term. PLoS Med 4(3): e27 > doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040027 > > Published: March 6, 2007 > > Copyright: © 2007 Sievänen et al. This is an > open-access article distributed > > under the terms of the Creative Commons > Attribution License, which permits > > unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction > in any medium, provided the > > original author and source are credited. > > Abbreviations: BMD, bone mineral density > > Harri Sievänen and Pekka Kannus are in the Bone > Research Group, UKK > > Institute, Tampere, Finland. Pekka Kannus and > Teppo L. N. Järvinen are in the Division > > of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of > Trauma, Musculoskeletal > > Surgery and Rehabilitation, Tampere University > Hospital, Tampere, Finland. Teppo L. > > N. Järvinen is in the Department of Surgery and > the Institute of Medical > > Technology, University of Tampere, Tampere, > Finland. > > * To whom correspondence should be addressed. > E-mail:teppo.jarvinen@... > > > > > > Although the concept of " bone quality " is at > least 15 years old [1], the > > term has recently sparked much discussion and > debate among clinicians and > > clinical researchers [2–5]. At a recent National > Institutes of Health conference on > > bone quality, the term was defined as: " The sum > total of characteristics of > > the bone that influence the bone's resistance to > fracture " [6].Where Did the > > Definition Come From? > > > > This definition arose from the results of > multicenter clinical trials that > > evaluated the effects of two classes of > drugs—antiresorptive bisphosphonate > > therapy (alendronate and risedronate) and > selective estrogen receptor modulator > > therapy (raloxifene)—on the prevention of > osteoporotic fragility fractures [7,8 > > ]. While these studies reported consistent > reductions in the incidence of > > fractures, the treatment effects could not be > explained by contemporary changes in > > dual X-ray absorptiometric bone mineral density > (BMD), the present clinical > > standard of bone fragility. These conflicting > findings led to speculation that > > the antiresorptive drugs had additional skeletal > effects upon a feature of the > > bone called " bone quality " [7–12]. > > The idea of bone quality, and the explanation for > the conflicting results, > > linked together two important notions: (1) > antiresorptive drugs acted by > > suppressing bone turnover through inhibiting bone > resorption, and (2) increased bone > > turnover (mainly the increased bone resorption, as > detected by bone markers) > > compromises the bone strength through deteriorated > bone microarchitecture (a > > trait that cannot be captured by BMD measurement > but could potentially be > > improved by antiresorptive treatment) [4]. > > Bone quality is now a widely embraced concept that > seems to offer a solution > > to the classic paradox of osteoporosis: while low > BMD values are associated > > with increased relative risk of fracture at the > population level, the predictive > > value of BMD in an individual patient remains > quite marginal [13–15]. And to > > further support the concept of bone quality, > inclusion of increased bone > > turnover in fracture-predicting models has > somewhat improved the ability to predict > > fracture risk independently of BMD [8,16–19].Flaws > in the Concept > > > > Although the concept of bone quality might seem > attractive for all of the > > reasons discussed above, nevertheless the notion > has three major conceptual > > flaws.BMD and bone quality do not explain > fractures. > > > > First, although BMD indeed shows a strong > correlation with whole bone > > strength in the laboratory setting (r up to ~0.9) > [20], in the clinical setting, > > paradoxically, the overall proportion of various > fragility === message truncated === ________________________________________________________________________________\ ____ Never miss a thing. Make your home page. http://www./r/hs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2007 Report Share Posted December 30, 2007 Pris, I have not had a chance to write back. I very much appreciate your concern. I have had DEXA scans as often as needed, the nearest was last may and it showed the same as the previous one, and that is Osteopenia. I was also taking Actonel daily. I was shocked that my bones were is such bad shape. I walked 1/2 mile everyday, ate well, etc. And even the thought that I had so many old breaks in my ribs that the Dr. started to discuss spousal abuse with me! The only thing is the prednisone, MTX, Lasix combination. The only thing that I can think is that I have been very, very thin, and have small bones. A friend of ours who is an Ortho Dr. operated on my wrist and he told me he didn't want to ever have to operate on me because my bones are like tinker toys. That was 17 years ago and 12 years before I was diagnosed with RA. I guess sometime things just don't make sense, but I am not taking prednisone now and hope never to again. Gentle Hugs & Prayers, Carol M. in CA **************************************See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 My doctor cute each dose in half , 5 days at a time..... 10 mg for 5 days, 5 mg for 5 days... then done. *~ Kami ~* [ ] prednisone how much and how often can you be weaned off prednisone? like if you are on 10 mg then you would take ______mg for _____ long, then _____mg for _____long, and so on to get off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Hi Kami, I was on prednisone for over 6 years, it took its toll on me, thow it helped with the pain. it ended up causing adrenaline problems, which effects the heart, It took me 2 months to ween off the prednisone, It has now been two months later, and I can tell the changes in my body, iot really wacked me out. I am now loosing weight, and have lost almost 20 pounds since getting off it. I put on over 60 pounds in 6 years, Read info on the side effects and be cautious with it. it is a nasty drug. I am sorry I ever took it. Jean ~ Kami ~ <kamilleon@...> wrote: My doctor cute each dose in half , 5 days at a time..... 10 mg for 5 days, 5 mg for 5 days... then done. *~ Kami ~* [ ] prednisone how much and how often can you be weaned off prednisone? like if you are on 10 mg then you would take ______mg for _____ long, then _____mg for _____long, and so on to get off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 When I have been on the 10mg, I believe my doctor would do the full dose for 10 days, then 1.5 pills for 10 days, then 1 pill for 10 days, then .5 pills for the remaining days. --- Petry <mapetry0177@...> wrote: > how much and how often can you be weaned off > prednisone? like if you are on 10 mg then you would > take ______mg for _____ long, then _____mg for > _____long, and so on to get off. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > ________________________________________________________________________________\ ____ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search. http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 hi i have been on prednisone for over 15yrs.,the drs.are just now trying to ween me off & its soo HARD!!!i used to take 10 mg.15yrs.ago .then i to gained 50 pounds in 11 yrs.i soo FREAKED OUT & did not know what to do because i weighed 100pounds & that was after i had my lil girl!!!!im currently taking 4mg. & i have noticed i have been in more PAIN than usual.is this what happens,Jean?I WOULD LOVE YOUR INPUT!!!!!! god bless MelyndaGamez>WROTE Nettleton <pebonejosh@...> wrote: Hi Kami, I was on prednisone for over 6 years, it took its toll on me, thow it helped with the pain. it ended up causing adrenaline problems, which effects the heart, It took me 2 months to ween off the prednisone, It has now been two months later, and I can tell the changes in my body, iot really wacked me out. I am now loosing weight, and have lost almost 20 pounds since getting off it. I put on over 60 pounds in 6 years, Read info on the side effects and be cautious with it. it is a nasty drug. I am sorry I ever took it. Jean ~ Kami ~ <kamilleon@...> wrote: My doctor cute each dose in half , 5 days at a time..... 10 mg for 5 days, 5 mg for 5 days... then done. *~ Kami ~* [ ] prednisone how much and how often can you be weaned off prednisone? like if you are on 10 mg then you would take ______mg for _____ long, then _____mg for _____long, and so on to get off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Kami,hi its MelyndaGamez.long time no chat.how are you doing?the subject is prednisone.that is such a BAD WORD TO ME,i hate it .that med has done soo much damage to my body ,soul,spirit, & MY MIND!!!IM WEENING OF SLOWLY BUT THAT STILL DOES NOT MATTER CUZ IM IN PAIN ALL THE TIME!!!!! I HAVE TRIED what you are doingKami,but it was HARD BUT i left the rest to my lord & now its in hisHANDS!!god bless youKami..MelyndaGamez>wrtote ~ Kami ~ <kamilleon@...> wrote: My doctor cute each dose in half , 5 days at a time..... 10 mg for 5 days, 5 mg for 5 days... then done. *~ Kami ~* [ ] prednisone how much and how often can you be weaned off prednisone? like if you are on 10 mg then you would take ______mg for _____ long, then _____mg for _____long, and so on to get off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I was on 10mg for just over a month and when I went to my RU on Thursday he just said take one pill now 5mg so just like that I went from 10 to 5. Good question I was wondering about weaning myself. Mandi Florida In a message dated 3/1/2008 6:30:58 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, mapetry0177@... writes: how much and how often can you be weaned off prednisone? like if you are on 10 mg then you would take ______mg for _____ long, then _____mg for _____long, and so on to get off. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) 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.