 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / September 2007Uncontrolled Asthma, despair...
Hello al, newbie here, and desperate for somewhere to write about my asthma problems... I'm 25, I was diagnosed with random and exercise-induced asthma about a year ago. I've had asthma all my life, but as a young child, my father was convinced that my breathing problems were just me "being lazy" and never bothered to take me to a doctor or do more than scream at me to quit being pathetic and put more effort into keeping up with him. Ick :/ My beloved dragged me kicking and screaming to a doctor, and I was given Qvar and an albuterol inhaler when I got diagnosed. It worked fairly well, I was using my rescue inhaler maybe once every two weeks or so, aside from the using it right before strenuous physical activity. The past six months, though, everything gradually changed for the worst. Two weeks ago, I had three major, almost lethal asthma attacks that made my partner cry (he's never ever expressed such distress as long as I've known him) and left me absolutely terrified. My doctor gave me advair to use along *with* my Qvar inhaler. As well she got her hands on a used nebulizer, and my partner ordered the hoses and components needed for it. I absolutely detest my inhalers, because I've had too many bad experiences with drugs from idiot doctors only making whatever problem the doctor is trying to solve much worse than before the meds. I'll die if my inhalers make it even harder to breathe... So that's where I'm at right now. With the Qver 2 puffs twice a day and one of the Advair twice a day, I end up using my rescue inhaler only once or twice. Before the Advair, I was using it five or more times a day. Once my partner was just reaching for the phone to call 911 when I starting gasping in enough air to slowly make the albuterol work, though that attack took uh... 3?4? puffs of the inhaler, each one successively opening up a bit more of my lungs and getting deeper into my lungs each time. Terrifying... I don't realy know what I want from here... Advice and suggestions are welcome. Encouragement would be real nice. I'm constantly on the verge of either hysterical tears or absolute despair because of how badly my breathing problem is and how frightning all of this is to me. If I was living alone, as I'd planned to before unexpectedly falling in love, and if I was living alone, I'm not sure that I'd still be breathing right now. My partner has saved ,y life so many tmes, I've lost count. I often get incoherent, disoriented and unable to think or concentrate when an asthma attack begins, and that makes it so hard to get to my rescue inhaler on time. Sigh... I don't know what more to do. I'm slowly forcing myself to get used to yet another daily-use inhaler, though it isn't easy. But beyond that, I don't have a clue. I don't want to die... I'm too young to die... There are so many things I want to do with my life, so many dreams yet to be fulfilled.... My asthma problems combined with my chronic pain condition have completely destroyed my life and made almost all of my future goals and life dreams entirely impossible to acheive... :( *Dragonfly* http://dragonflychaos.deviantart.com/ http://glitterychaos.livejournal.com/ "I don't realy know what I want from here... Advice and suggestions are welcome. " You didn't like the advice and suggestions given to you in your other post, which was almost identical to this one? "I absolutely detest my inhalers, because I've had too many bad experiences with drugs from idiot doctors only making whatever problem the doctor is trying to solve much worse than before the meds. " I have news for you. You have a disease which requires the use of medication in order to live. You have a disease which also requires you to depend on doctors. You can either keep fighting those facts and making yourself miserable, or you can accept those facts and be grateful we live in a time where such advances in medicine allow you to breathe. Detesting the things that aid you seems a bit immature, in my opinion. Please look back at the responses to your first post here. > I have news for you. You have a disease which requires the use of > medication in order to live. You have a disease which also requires you to > depend on doctors. You can either keep fighting those facts and making > yourself miserable, or you can accept those facts and be grateful we live in > a time where such advances in medicine allow you to breathe. In many cases the Dr's don't understand asthma at all. It's a disease with a ton of ideas but no solutions. Some are helped, others are not but given tons of drugs, often 6-12 inhalers, pills etc all at once with little to no improvement but plenty of side effects. It's a complex disease that current medicine does not understand. > In many cases the Dr's don't understand asthma at all. It's a disease > with a ton of ideas but no solutions. Some are helped, others are not > but given tons of drugs, often 6-12 inhalers, pills etc all at once with > little to no improvement but plenty of side effects. It's a complex > disease that current medicine does not understand. I might have posted before, thanks to fibro-fog, I don't remember. Things have a way of disappearing from my mind a lot these days, what with the added stress of not breathing well on top of the illness I have. :/ See, that's one thing that really bothers me about the inhalers, and why I hate them... My doctor doesn't understand WHY I get asthma attacks. And so, without knowing the cause at all, we are just treating the symptoms. That scares me shitless. If I don't kow why I get asthma attachs, thenhow am I supposed to prevent them? It feels far too much like taking the inhalers is the same type of deal as when I had a bad repetitive strain injury and the doctor just prescriped serious pain killers and nothing else. I was hurting because of damage, and taking painkillers erased the hurt, not the damage being done. Three inhalers full of steroids of varying sorts that were never explained to me, either what they are, what they are supposed to do beyond opening my lungs, or how they work. Plus side medications for things like acid reflux. No explaination of WHY I need said side mediations to improve my asthma. And yea, side effects. sh.t. I inhale too many steroids every day for me to ever be comfortable with this. I guess that its better than not being able to breathe, but at this point, not by much. *Dragonfly* http://dragonflychaos.deviantart.com/ http://glitterychaos.livejournal.com/ > And yea, side effects. sh.t. I inhale too many steroids every day > for me to ever be comfortable with this. I guess that its better than > not being able to breathe, but at this point, not by much. Yep. The side effect of not breathing is worse than the side effect from those inhalers. >> In many cases the Dr's don't understand asthma at all. It's a disease >> with a ton of ideas but no solutions. Some are helped, others are not >> but given tons of drugs, often 6-12 inhalers, pills etc all at once with >> little to no improvement but plenty of side effects. It's a complex >> disease that current medicine does not understand. Now miles - What 12 inhalers have you ever seen anyone on at once? Sequentially - maybe. At once? > I might have posted before, thanks to fibro-fog, I don't remember. > Things have a way of disappearing from my mind a lot these days, what [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > why I hate them... My doctor doesn't understand WHY I get asthma > attacks. That's a half truth that a lot of people seem to take great pleasure in tossing about. it rerally isn't fair to say that we don;t know "the" cause of asthma. The first part that is not fair is that it assumes that there is one "the" cause. Asthma is probably a bunch of related problems that all end up with a similar result. Doctors usually refer to them as "triggers" rather than causes and we know about quite a few of them. This relates to the second thing that is only half fair about the claims that we do not know the cause. For most asthmatics we understand a good but of the process going back several steps to cellular and molecular dynamics. However, every time research fills in another hole the detractors just state that there are now two wholes and every time they go back further in the chain of events they just say, "yeah, and what happens before that". It is probably most fair to say that we understand different types of asthma to varying degrees. The vast majority of people do very well - and then never seek out support groups. > And so, without knowing the cause at all, we are just > treating the symptoms. That really isn't true either. "Just treating the symptoms" would be if they gave you a med that reduced the coughing and chest tighness and breathlessness without affecting the process. When we give morphien to a dying short of breath patient to help with the discomfort without aiding the breathing we are just treating the symptoms. When we give albuterol for acute attacks we are acting on the final common pathway and relaxing the smooth muscels that are contricting and causing the wheezing. When we give other preventatives such as inhaled steroids and leukotriene blockers (which don't directly or immediately affect symmptoms so certainly can't be said to just be treating them) we are going further back into the chain if events and affecting things there. > That scares me shitless. If I don't kow why I > get asthma attachs, thenhow am I supposed to prevent them? Of course it is scary. It sounds to me like you should be seeing at least a pulmonologist and possibly an allergist as well. I hate it when some people here claim that all asthmatics should be seeing a specialist. Dependiong on the asthmatic and the doctor I don't think that is true even half (or 75%) of the time. However, someone who has had life threatening episodes and is still poorly controlled should be under specialist care. They can identify triggers that primary care docs cannot. > It feels > far too much like taking the inhalers is the same type of deal as when > I had a bad repetitive strain injury and the doctor just prescriped > serious pain killers and nothing else. I was hurting because of > damage, and taking painkillers erased the hurt, not the damage being > done. That is my point above - it is not the same thing. The pain killers did nothing to fix the cuase of the pain (except possible anti-inflammatories) and possibly contributed to it bu making less awareof your body's signals. The asthma meds are doing more than just relieving the symptoms, especially the preventative meds. > Three inhalers full of steroids of varying sorts that were never > explained to me, either what they are, what they are supposed to do > beyond opening my lungs, or how they work. Plus side medications for > things like acid reflux. No explaination of WHY I need said side > mediations to improve my asthma. Well that is the doctor's fault and another reason why you should see a new doc, probably a specialist. He is supposed to be explaining these things to you. Of course, that is usually done at asthma follow-up visits which means the patients need to go and see the docs when they are feeling well, not just sick, and not have lists of other things they wish to discuss. > And yea, side effects. sh.t. I inhale too many steroids every day > for me to ever be comfortable with this. I guess that its better than > not being able to breathe, but at this point, not by much. It is better than not being able to breath and it is better than taking them by mouth. Better yet would be to find was to get the doses down.  Signature00doc > "Dragonfly" <snow_fi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > two wholes and every time they go back further in the chain of events they > just say, "yeah, and what happens before that". I didn't mean THE cause for asthma, I meant MY cause for asthma. Its not allergies and its not limited to physical activity. I'd like to know what factors in my life are behind the sudden worsening of my asthma. I'd like to know what triggers my asthma has. This is what I meant when I said no one cares to find the cause of asthma. I meant in me specifically. Once the doctor determined it wasn't allergies and wasn't entirely physical activity, she stopped there and din't bother to keep looking for more reasons why. I'm not trying to be a bitch, but I don't think its too much to ask for from the doctor to have a little help in figuring out what triggers my asthma attacks and a little help resorting my life however I need to to start preventing asthma attacks from happening, BEYOND just taking a bunch of inhalers and medications. > It is probably most fair to say that we understand different types of asthma > to varying degrees. The vast majority of people do very well - and then > never seek out support groups. Yea, and we know my asthma is not a typical type, nor is it one that is commonly known, otherwise either rmy doctor or I would have figured out the causes of my asthma by now. > > And so, without knowing the cause at all, we are just > > treating the symptoms. > > That really isn't true either. It is, in that we are treating the attacks, and not dealing with the cause of the attacks, because the cause is unknown. > "Just treating the symptoms" would be if they > gave you a med that reduced the coughing and chest tighness and > breathlessness without affecting the process. That *is* the case though. Sure, we're treating the lungs collapse, the actual asthma attack. But the fact that I continue to have severe, locasionally almost life-threatening asthma attacks means that whatever is causing my asthma attacks is still here, still very "active" and is undealt-with. The base issue is whatever is causing the attacks, and that is what I need to figure out to be able to get my asthma under control. Without knowing that, I am simply treating the attacks as they come, not preventing further attacks as I should be. > > That scares me shitless. If I don't kow why I > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > It sounds to me like you should be seeing at least a pulmonologist and > possibly an allergist as well. Uh. Yea. Its not allergies, so I've no need to see an allergist (been there already). Never saw a pulmonologist, though I've been asking for a referral to an asthma/breathing specialist with little result. > I hate it when some people here claim that > all asthmatics should be seeing a specialist. Dependiong on the asthmatic > and the doctor I don't think that is true even half (or 75%) of the time. Yea, everyone else I know who has asthma does fine just with their GP doctor and a regular maintenance inhaler and albuterol, or even just the rescue inhaler. Me, however. Well. I've been actively treating my asthma for about two and a half years now, and it only gets steadily worse even with the maintenance inhalers. > However, someone who has had life threatening episodes and is still poorly > controlled should be under specialist care. They can identify triggers that > primary care docs cannot. Exactly. That's what I was talking about above where you said I was wrong! Without finding the root cause of my asthma, then we're just treating the symptoms, the asthma attack, and not changing that which is causing the asthma attacks. Short of this clearing up all on its own, I'll continue to have breathing difficulty until the specific causes get figured out and my life re-sorted to minimize exposure to the things/situations that cause asthma attacks in me. > That is my point above - it is not the same thing. The pain killers did > nothing to fix the cause of the pain (except possible anti-inflammatories) > and possibly contributed to it bu making less awareof your body's signals. > The asthma meds are doing more than just relieving the symptoms, especially > the preventative meds. The preventative inhalers "do nothing to fix the cause of the [asthma attacks]" ... exactly the same thing. The preventative meds make the attacks less severe, and improve my breathing between attacks, but they do not prevent asthma attacks. > It is better than not being able to breath and it is better than taking them > by mouth. Better yet would be to find was to get the doses down. That was kindof the entire point of my post, that the root cause that was triggering my asthma attacks needs to be found and dealt with. Sure, the inhalers keep me alive, but they don't get at what is causing the attacks because if they did, I'd not still be having asthma attacks! *Dragonfly* http://dragonflychaos.deviantart.com/ http://glitterychaos.livejournal.com/ whether you know it or not your talking to professionals from DR and drug companies. >> "Dragonfly" <snow_fi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 131 lines] > http://dragonflychaos.deviantart.com/ > http://glitterychaos.livejournal.com/ > whether you know it or not your talking to professionals from DR and drug > companies. The term 'professional' means they work in the industry. It does not mean what they say is correct. Hello there, So sorry you are struggling so much with asthma on top of your illness. I, along with most with asthma, have had periods of great struggle. Finding the right combination of medications and lifestyle changes is a slow (and sometimes quite scary process). One of the things that I have found that helped me identify triggers is to keep a brief journal (I carry a pocket calendar) and jot down when I have an attack, what may have triggered it (was I exercising, exposed to strong bathroom deodorizer, getting into a hot car...) and what kind of symptoms I had (cough, wheezing, heavy breathing). Then I could go back and take a look to see if there were commonalities, etc. This also helped me to put my asthma symptoms into perspective... was I doing worse or better than I perceived (b/c, yes, I too seem to get foggy-headed when lacking O2, like most I would imagine). Oh, yes -- and I finally gave in to my mother's suggestion that stress was aggravating my asthma (didn't want to believe that one! So.. my suggestion is to track your symptoms and listen to family and friends... and try to lower stress levels. Good luck and hope you're feeling better soon. "Dragonfly" <snow_fires@yahoo.com> wrote in message > I didn't mean THE cause for asthma, I meant MY cause for asthma. Its > not allergies and its not limited to physical activity. I'd like to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and wasn't entirely physical activity, she stopped there and din't > bother to keep looking for more reasons why. > Hello there, > So sorry you are struggling so much with asthma on top of your illness. > I, along with most with asthma, have had periods of great struggle. > Finding the right combination of medications and lifestyle changes is a > slow (and sometimes quite scary process). Not sure if the OP's asthma is similar to my own. For me my breathing is difficult 24/7. I don't have attacks per se. I have days that are worse than others. I do not have any good days. On pulmonary function tests I range from 30%-50% of expected from my worst to my best days. Dr's do not know why no current medications provide any significant relief. > It sounds to me like you should be seeing at least a pulmonologist and > possibly an allergist as well. I hate it when some people here claim that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > controlled should be under specialist care. They can identify triggers that > primary care docs cannot. That is not what I have been reading. More are uncontrolled than controlled if you look at the recent research. http://www.news-medical.net/?id=25833 >> It sounds to me like you should be seeing at least a pulmonologist and >> possibly an allergist as well. I hate it when some people here claim that [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > http://www.news-medical.net/?id=25833 There are many reasons for the asthma to be uncontrolled. In my experience the vast majority of uncontroled asthmatics are not coming in for regular preventive visits, prematurtely stop their preventative meds (usually as soon as they feel better), and are doing things like continuing to smoke. Referal to a specialist is likely to help when the complexity of the person's problem calls for care that exceeds the primary doc's ability to give. It won't help if the person does not go for he visits, take the meds, or follow the life-style advice. The problem with judging medicine by outcomes is that it avoids the non-medical/social issues. The report you mention was a survey of moderate to severe asthmatics so the percentage of uncontrolled people is higher than the whole population since presumably mild asthmtics will have fewer ER visits etc. It also does not specificy whether they were seeing specilists and if that made a difference (bt I think the full report probably does). It says they saw their doctor "regularly" but does not get into exactly what that means (for attacks? for other things?). Niether the news report nor the abstract that is available online (http://www.jacionline.org/article/PIIS0091674907006197/abstract) gets into exactly how they idenitifed pts and what the response rate was. It would also be interesting to know if their docs were satisfied with their treatment or if they were acxtively trying to get things in better control. Signature00doc you mean you discovered bacteria causes asthma again too? How about you do some breathing exercises and take some anti bacteria meds and start your own group. I wouldn't want to decieve you on purpose again even though its a greater laugh listening to you ignore me when you really don't want to. . >>> It sounds to me like you should be seeing at least a pulmonologist and >>> possibly an allergist as well. I hate it when some people here claim [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > treatment or if they were acxtively trying to get things in better > control. Ps . I don't think using a different name will happen again. lol >>> It sounds to me like you should be seeing at least a pulmonologist and >>> possibly an allergist as well. I hate it when some people here claim [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > treatment or if they were acxtively trying to get things in better > control. > >> It sounds to me like you should be seeing at least a pulmonologist and > >> possibly an allergist as well. I hate it when some people here claim that [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > would also be interesting to know if their docs were satisfied with their > treatment or if they were acxtively trying to get things in better control. I don't know if the study was related, but one with this same conclusion was presented at the AAAAI conference last year - I just can't find it again. That was in Miami I think. There are more people than just Dragonfly here who have this problem with uncontrolled asthma and no answers. As a matter of fact, it was because I had been referred to many doctors and no one seemed to have answers that I started learning about asthma by reading the recent literature and posting to this newsgroup (going to a specialist doesn't always help, I can tell you from personal experience). I have concluded that you can't always get the answer and it is probably better to just accept that (I can say that now that I am in a good period). I have to say that venting didn't really help me - although I have had discussions with the moderator of a newsgroup for another health issue that they sometimes lets derogatory (to doctors) posts stand even though the poster is "just venting"- because she feels it helps some people. It certainly isn't that doctors don't want to know. Most of them probably entered the medical profession because they hoped to help. We just don't have all the answers. Then those altmeds capitalize on that. That is another issue. Whose posts to delete when it is an altmed suggestion????? I get the feeling you all don't understand the complexity of being a moderator. Back to the issue at hand. I guess we need to look for a study about compliance, but I am certain the AAAAI presented study did say the people were compliant yet there were many uncontrolled asthmatics. Of course being uncontrolled as defined as "fearing for your life" is a concern and should tell you something about the severity of the problem. I find it hard to believe that someone who is having that kind of problem wouldn't be compliant - if the drugs in fact work for them - you know there are people who report that they don't. On the other hand, I can certainly understand people going off their meds when they are $40 a pop and there are so many of them. Why can't I find that report??? My latest thing is the fights for meds. I just got a letter from my heath insurance company that they are not covering three of the meds people in my family take - just another thing I have to spend time on - fighting with those jerks. Their CEO makes 1.7 BILLION a year. Like denying me meds is the fix to the increasing health care cost problem - their "reason" for denying those meds. I have a suggestion - why don't we take the extra cost of my meds out of his salary? Certainly he is a major contributor to the increase in health care costs, don't you think? At his salary, we could cover the costs of everyone who reads here I bet. This would be the same company Whirlpool thinks has so screwed their employees that they are changing next year. At this point I don't believe that a market approach is even appropriate for medical issues. They don't have your best interest at heart - they are just trying to satisfy the stockholder by cutting costs for those of us who they view can't fight back. And next year I will change to a company who will, half way through the year, do the same thing to me. I had three different doctors write these same prescription last year, but couldn't get them filled. Now that I know what works, I am not happy to go without. I can tell you for a fact it isn't always the doctors fault that you can't get treatment. It is a conspiracy!!!! LOLOL I think that about covers it all. Now you guys can all killfile me. > I don't know if the study was related, but one with this same conclusion > was > presented at the AAAAI conference last year - I just can't find it again. > That was in Miami I think. There is plenty of research involving a lot of different problems that show the control is not what we would like. Most of them just assess the level of control and not why it is as it is. While I'm sure that the elvel of poorly controleld asthma is higher than most docs think and higher than most would agree it should be I'm sure that th eblame for that can be fairly evenly spread between physician error, patient error, and the general inadeuqacy of the currently available treatments. The particular study you cited, like many studies, had several factors that ensured it would find a higher percentage of poorly controlled asthmatics than is probably generally presented. This is not surprising when you consider the most researchers would rather have a "positive" study than a "negative" study and that they get validation, both as a researcher and as a specialist, by giving worst case scenarios. This is not to say that we should be satified with the currect state or that it could not and/or should not be better. Clearly it could and should be better. My point is that these studies tend to present "worse case" (if not worst case) scenarios and that they should be read critically and taken with a grain of salt understanding that the researchers have an interested in the largest magnitude of findings they can muster. On the other hand they should not be dismissed as they usually do illustrate true problems. > There are more people than just Dragonfly here who have this problem with > uncontrolled asthma and no answers. I agree. For many the problem is that they have not been adequately diagnosed and treated. For many the problem is that they have somehow complicated their diagnosis and treatment. For many they and their docs have done everything humanly possible but the current state of the science is not adequate to control them. Of course, for many it is varying degress of all three. It is generally nearly impossible to tell on the Internet how much of each in contributing (and often very hard in real life). > As a matter of fact, it was because I > had been referred to many doctors and no one seemed to have answers that I > started learning about asthma by reading the recent literature and posting > to this newsgroup (going to a specialist doesn't always help, I can tell > you > from personal experience). You are preaching to the choir. Many specialists are no better, or even worse, than many generalists in asthma treatment. That is part of my objection when peoipel claim all asthmatics should seeign a specialist - many of the people would be better off with their generalist. > I have concluded that you can't always get the > answer and it is probably better to just accept that (I can say that now > that I am in a good period). I agree for the most part. I think their is a fine line between "just accepting it" and taking a tempered approach to the continued search for an effective treatment. > I have to say that venting didn't really help > me - although I have had discussions with the moderator of a newsgroup for > another health issue that they sometimes lets derogatory (to doctors) > posts > stand even though the poster is "just venting"- because she feels it helps > some people. I'm sure venting does help some people. However, I'm sure unduly negative posts also discourage others. I can't imagine it helps the morale of a newly diagnosed person to come to a support group and read how all docs are ignorant quacks who can't help and there is no hope for an effective treatment. > It certainly isn't that doctors don't want to know. Most of > them probably entered the medical profession because they hoped to help. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I get the feeling you all don't understand the complexity of being a > moderator. I think the best approach is the old adage that if it sounds too good to be true it probably is. Nothign is 100% effective for anything much less everything. > Back to the issue at hand. I guess we need to look for a study about > compliance, but I am certain the AAAAI presented study did say the people > were compliant yet there were many uncontrolled asthmatics. If that is true I missed it. I don't have access to the whole study so it may have been assessed in the main article and just not mentioned in the abstract. Even if it is I would keep in mind that this is self reports from the patients so not likely to be completely accurate. Teh study would be stronger if there was some objective reality check like getting the doctor's records and pharmacy records of at least a sampling of patients to see how their self reports stack up to reality. > Of course being > uncontrolled as defined as "fearing for your life" is a concern and should > tell you something about the severity of the problem. For most patients it will indicate severity. For some it will indicate other things. That also suggests that this population is worse off than average since generally, if anything, asthmatics tend to not take their disease seriously enough. > I find it hard to > believe that someone who is having that kind of problem wouldn't be > compliant - if the drugs in fact work for them - Trust me - I see it all the time. They come in with an exacerbation, you start meds, they come back better (or just don't come back), you tell them to continue the meds and come back in some time to reassess. They then dissapear only to return over-due for follow-up with another exacerbation saying they felt well so they stopped their meds and didn't come in. I get the part about feeling well so they stop their meds and don't come in. What I don't get is why they don't restart their meds absent prompting from me when they start to feel badly again. It is incredibly common - to the point of being the steriotype for a typical asthma patient amongst doctors. Diabetics are famous for ignoring all advice regarding their dose of insulin - but at least they take it. Asthmatics are famous for stopping their meds as soon as they feel well and only comming in with exacerbations. > you know there are people > who report that they don't [have the drigs work for them]. Yes, that is all too common as well. > This would be the same company Whirlpool thinks has so screwed their > employees that they are changing next year. At this point I don't believe > that a market approach is even appropriate for medical issues. They don't > have your best interest at heart - they are just trying to satisfy the > stockholder by cutting costs for those of us who they view can't fight > back. I think a totally unregulated market approach is problematic for amny reasons. I'm not sure a single payor government run program is likely to be any better but that is a different discussion. Signature00doc > Trust me - I see it all the time. They come in with an exacerbation, you > start meds, they come back better (or just don't come back), you tell them [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > when they start to feel badly again. It is incredibly common - to the point > of being the steriotype for a typical asthma patient amongst doctors. See, I see that as "blame the victim". It is not a fair stereo-type in my opinion. Don't express that to a patient who has been to doctors for more than 10 years and who has no answers. You won't get a good reception. > Diabetics are famous for ignoring all advice regarding their dose of > insulin - but at least they take it. > > Asthmatics are famous for stopping their meds as soon as they feel well and > only comming in with exacerbations. I actually know, or knew, three asthmatics who died and 2 of them were without albuterol when the time came. Neither of them intended to be without albuterol - one was without due to school system rules and one had the famous Proventil empty canister. They were all compliant otherwise. I realize I don't have your experience with patients, but my own experience is that even taking your meds is no guarantee you will be saved. That doesn't even begin to address the psychological effects of fearing for your life on a regular basis. > I think a totally unregulated market approach is problematic for amny > reasons. I'm not sure a single payor government run program is likely to be > any better but that is a different discussion. Anything is better than watching some billionaire walk off with your health care. >> Trust me - I see it all the time. They come in with an exacerbation, you >> start meds, they come back better (or just don't come back), you tell [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > See, I see that as "blame the victim". Yep. Just because the person is a victim does not mean they are never to blame. It would be wrong to automatically blame them just because they are the victim. However, when it becomes clear that their own behavior is bringing about much of their own trouble there is no reason for them to be exempt from it either. > It is not a fair stereo-type in my > opinion. It would not be fair to automatically assume it applies. On the other hand, it exists for good reason. > Don't express that to a patient who has been to doctors for more > than 10 years and who has no answers. I didn't say it applied to you (or not - I really have no way of knowing). > You won't get a good reception. There was a chance I would? >... my own experience is > that even taking your meds is no guarantee you will be saved. No, I never claimed it was. I also pointed out very clearly and very consistently that sometimes the doc is at fault and sometimes it is a failure of the best of medicine. If you go back and read my post you'll see that I generally attempted to list them first, before patient issues. Always mentioning them and in that order was a very conscious attempt to be fair and make accusations of "blaming the patient" unwarranted. I knew they would come - I just wanted to make sure they were unwarranted for my own piece of mind. >> I think a totally unregulated market approach is problematic for amny >> reasons. I'm not sure a single payor government run program is likely to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > health > care. I'm not sure watching some politician or incompetant government beaurocrat do it is any better. At least when the billionaire takes it the problem is understandable and due to someone's Machiavellian competance. Under government programs it is often just incomprehensibly stupid. Signature00doc . > > Anything is better than watching some billionaire walk off with your > > health [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > understandable and due to someone's Machiavellian competance. Under > government programs it is often just incomprehensibly stupid. You are probably right - I would be mad at whoever ran off with my health care. Well, I guess I will know what it is like in a dozen years when I get on Medicaid. Have you personally had more trouble with Medicaid than private insurers? It seems like they cover just about everything for my Mother-in-law, even though she has about the worse health of anyone I know. > . >> > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Mother-in-law, even though she has about the worse health of anyone I > know. Medicaid programs differ from state to state. In my experience their drug coverage can be a bit quirky. Some don;t cover whole classes like cough syrups but it is usually hard to completely fault the things they don't cover. I find they are better than many commerical insurances. Signature00doc Well, I guess I f-uped and got the worst of the worst insurers when I changed last year. Or I thought that I was improving my status when I dumped the last private insurer who wouldn't cover my prescriptions. I hope they (the jerks who work for these companies) have family members who suffer while they make us go without. Does anyone want me to see a lawyer and I could post this company's name so you all could avoid them? I am now willing to do that. I have money now that I can't afford my drugs which were $40 a pop and now the entire cost is passed on to me so I am going without altogether. Do you know who I am referring to Doc? Steer your patients clear of this company. I am looking into Military insurance which I "qualify under". And they don't cover my drugs either. What is the problem with Nexium? My neighbor has a son with major medical problems is on Medicaid, and they pay for all his costs (like knee transplants) in OTHER CITIES because they are experimental (that would be the up and coming place like Pittsburg for that) while I have to go without and spend my life coughing. My private insurer would not pay for experimental treatments - heck, they don't pay for proven treatments. I just think we are paying money out the wrong way - I am still in my productive years- and/ or, I have 3 kids in college and I would like to see them finish. All this while I know a couple of 90 year olds who have gotten triple bypasses. If I make it to 65, I'll get treated. Like I even care if I make it since I have gone back to coughing my head off because I have no coverage and can't pay for my meds. My neighbor's son shouldn't have gotten care IMHO because he is not yet out of high school, but has had 6 unsuccessful knee surgeries (and PT therapy) because his genetic condition means all his joints will need replacing several times thu his lifetime. You have to be realistic about what you are facing - I know a couple of people who have million dollar Medicaid bills for KIDS medical problems - kids who are unlikely to live past 18. AT any rate, they are being told not to pass this problem on by having more kids and their kids should not have kids. Hey, but if they pay for me when the time comes, I'll be happy. So maybe the gov't bureaucrat isn't as bad as the billionaire. I know that bureaucrat doesn't make a anywhere the jerk makes, but probably has a more advanced degree, at least statistically speaking since Federal Employees are more educated than the general population, in general. So msc and I disagree about EPA because I personally know several EPA employees and THAT (getting yourself sued in court) is a political appointee problem and not an EPA problem. Isn't it great when you have the inside track? By the way, everyone who is watching the CDC vs. Speaker debate. CDC is right. The Atlanta Constitution should have never run his story if they had checked the facts. > > . > >> > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > syrups but it is usually hard to completely fault the things they don't > cover. I find they are better than many commerical insurances. > Well, I guess I f-uped and got the worst of the worst insurers when I > changed last year. Or I thought that I was improving my status when I [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > passed on to me so I am going without altogether. Do you know who I am > referring to Doc? Steer your patients clear of this company. It usually isn't libelous to express your opinion. The best defense against slander and libel is the truth. It could be in the form of: "My experience with ....... was terrible, and I absolutely wouldn't recommend them." >> Well, I guess I f-uped and got the worst of the worst insurers when I >> changed last year. Or I thought that I was improving my status when I [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > experience with ....... was terrible, and I absolutely wouldn't recommend > them." I agree. Established facts can't be libel. Untrue facts are and opinions may or may not be. X insurance company denied my claim for Y and Z meds cannot be libel if it is true. X insurance company is a bunch of dirty rotten scoundrels who like to see their patients suffer may or many not be depending on how well you can convince a judge that it is ture. Signature00doc I have an idea. That would be an employee of Whirlpool who told me they are changing from UnitedHealthcare. HA. But the Pharmacy told me there are many people today who are fighting with their health insurers. I was told there was a news report that that company had lost hundreds of thousands and the moderator couldn't figure it out because the CEO was supposed to be so smart. So don't know. Is everyone else going through this? > >> Well, I guess I f-uped and got the worst of the worst insurers when I > >> changed last year. Or I thought that I was improving my status when I [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > their patients suffer may or many not be depending on how well you can > convince a judge that it is ture. > I am looking into Military insurance which I "qualify under". And they > don't cover my drugs either. What is the problem with Nexium? My organization has the local Tricare/ USFHP contract and a large percentage of our patients are military so I have experience with their, as well as the VA's, formulary. Tricare has a three tier plan with very few prior authorizations and flat out uncovered meds. Needing an authorization to use statins other than generic simvastatin for cholesterol is the only example that comes up commonly that I can think of. Generic meds are $3 for three months, prefered brands are $9 for three months and non-prefered brands are $22 for threee months. So under tricare you nexium would be either $9 or $22 for a three month supply. I'm not sure how many other military plans there are. Signature00doc Tricare is the only insurer of which I am aware for the Military. And it looks like they don't cover Nexium unless it is "medically necessary", so there is supposed to be a form online I have my doctor fill out. Now the only problem will be if they decide what the doctor writes doesn't qualify. Today my husband got his meds for nothing while we used to pay $40 each. > > I am looking into Military insurance which I "qualify under". And they > > don't cover my drugs either. What is the problem with Nexium? [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > I'm not sure how many other military plans there are. > Tricare is the only insurer of which I am aware for the Military. And it > looks like they don't cover Nexium unless it is "medically necessary", so > there is supposed to be a form online I have my doctor fill out. Now the > only problem will be if they decide what the doctor writes doesn't > qualify. > Today my husband got his meds for nothing while we used to pay $40 each. I just looked it up on their website. Nexium is Non-formulary at the military pharmacies. At retail stores or mail order it would be $22.00 for a three month supply. Aciphex, Protonix and Prevacid would be free at a military pharmacy and $9 per 3 mos at a retail pharmacy. Omeprazole (generic Prilosec) would be $3 per 3 mos at retail pharmacies. http://www.tricare.mil/pharmacy/form_info.cfm# Did you know: AstraZenica introduced Nexium (esomeprazole) as their patent for Prilosec (omeprazole) was running out. Esomeprazole was supposed to be the active form of omeprazole (it comes in two mirror images (enatiomers)- es- it one of them) so they tested it head to head against omeprazole at the usual dose for omeprazole (20mg daily). The omeprazole was superior. So they next went back and tested 40mg of esomeprazole against 20mg of omeprazole and got the superior result they sought. They then went on to do a lot of head to head trials with other drugs showing that their double dose was superior to the normal doses of other meds. This is all well and good if the cost of Nexium 40mg is comparable to Prevacid 30mg, Aciphex 20mg, Protonix 40mg and Prilosec 20 mg - but it isn't. 40mg of Prilosec daily (double the usual dose) costs about $40/ month and should be, according to the manufacturer's own published studies, superior to Nexium 40mg daily at $140/ month (or for you $1 vs $7 in co-pays per month). I'm guessing that around the time the patent for Nexium runs out we will suddenly see a confession that they had it all worng the whole time and levomeprazole (Lastium? Finalium? Ultium?) will be introduced (probably around year 2015). Signature00doc Thanks. So a double dose is the answer? That is why I am not seeing the improvement on Prilosec I saw on Nexium? I don't mind that is OTC. I just am sick to death of coughing I so I feel that I can't go without. The doc at Emory told me 1/3 of his patients need the double dose, but is surgery not a better option - get rid of the problem? I have an appointment in 6 weeks for a consult - I should be looking into that to know what to expect. > > Tricare is the only insurer of which I am aware for the Military. And it > > looks like they don't cover Nexium unless it is "medically necessary", so [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > levomeprazole (Lastium? Finalium? Ultium?) will be introduced (probably > around year 2015). Ok so that isn't the answer. www.erj.ersjournals.com/cgi/reprint/11/5/1070.pdf Maybe this is the answer. http://www.druginfozone.nhs.uk/Record%20Viewing/viewRecord.aspx?id=549411 > Thanks. So a double dose is the answer? That is why I am not seeing the > improvement on Prilosec I saw on Nexium? I don't mind that is OTC. I just am [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > levomeprazole (Lastium? Finalium? Ultium?) will be introduced (probably > > around year 2015). The literature on whether acid suppression has a role in treating asthma is widely divergent. I don't think you can look at one study that leans one way and a second that goes the other and draw any conclusions about the relative merits of the meds involved. Signature00doc > Ok so that isn't the answer. > [quoted text clipped - 72 lines] >> > levomeprazole (Lastium? Finalium? Ultium?) will be introduced (probably >> > around year 2015). Many of the old studies are not really as valid as they could be because the current thought is that it takes about 5 months before improvement, while the earlier trials were for shorter periods of time and therefore the results would be variable. The current NIH Phase 3 studies are following asthma patients on Nexium for 6 months. And the tests they have to diagnose this condition are being refined. Dr Irwin considers a positive result - indicating that GERD is causing cough - to occur when the esophageal pH drops below 4 and when the patient then coughs within 3 minutes of the event , not esophagitis. Us usual we have the problem of identifying what is really asthma, so I expect to see variability until they figure that out. Regardless, all I know is that my problem is improved on Nexium (though not gone) and I am only now looking into which drug will do the job. The cost is $40 a month to me regardless of which drug I am taking. But I don't want to go back the way I was (no air and coughing) if the Prilosec doesn't work and this formulary change may result in just that. I started looking into the studies about the effectiveness of surgery vs. medication and it looks like that might be the way to go in the end. I wonder if they realize I am now actively seeking information about surgery?You know that will cost them more than covering the med. And we both lose when I have to fill additional Proventil prescriptions. I see the billionaire has lost his job. What a shame. > The literature on whether acid suppression has a role in treating asthma is > widely divergent. I don't think you can look at one study that leans one way [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > > > Maybe this is the answer. http://www.druginfozone.nhs.uk/Record%20Viewing/viewRecord.aspx?id=549411 > >> Thanks. So a double dose is the answer? That is why I am not seeing the > >> improvement on Prilosec I saw on Nexium? I don't mind that is OTC. I just [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > >> > levomeprazole (Lastium? Finalium? Ultium?) will be introduced (probably > >> > around year 2015). > Now miles - > > What 12 inhalers have you ever seen anyone on at once? Sequentially - maybe. > At once? I said inhalers and pills. Yes I have been prescribed a combination of 12 inhalers and pills at once. That to me is overload and more than one Dr. has done that and I know I'm not the only one. > That's a half truth that a lot of people seem to take great pleasure in > tossing about. it rerally isn't fair to say that we don;t know "the" cause > of asthma. The first part that is not fair is that it assumes that there is > one "the" cause. Not so. There are scores of 'causes' or triggers of asthma and therein lies the problem. Dr's today have extreme difficulty in finding the 'cause' for a particular patient. Often a patients asthma is from a combination of problems that may even change from month or year to year. I know my asthma is severely worsened from quite a number of conditions. Exercise, allergies, humidity, temperature, reflux, VCD, just to name a few all play a role. Trying to identify which is a main cause and which is minor is difficult. Truth is that the medical industry has a long ways to go to understanding Asthma. They've only scratched the surface. > However, every time > research fills in another hole the detractors just state that there are now > two wholes and every time they go back further in the chain of events they > just say, "yeah, and what happens before that". There are probably 100's of holes to fill and each patient showing asthma symtoms is effected by a different combination of those 100's of triggers. Most of the people I know who have been 'cured' did not have severe chronic asthma. They either had occasional severe episodes but normal otherwise, or they had chronic light to moderate asthma. Possibly those people had far fewer triggers so it was less difficult to find and resolve. I have joined support groups for those with severe chronic asthma. Very very few have had their symptoms significantly reduced in the past 10 years. Dr's just do not know what to do. It's currently too complex and not understood. > It is probably most fair to say that we understand different types of asthma > to varying degrees. I'll agree with that. Some forms of asthma can be dealt with effectively. > The vast majority of people do very well The vast majority of asthmatics only have occasional attacks where asthma doesn't greatly effect their day to day living. > - and then > never seek out support groups. I think there are many asthmatics who have seeked help for many many years without any improvement. Their Dr's go by the book over and over rather than look deeper at alternatives. This year I had to go through 4 Dr's before finding one that would look at something different rather than redo what has already been tried and failed. I don't know if my current Dr is onto something but I'd much prefer trying different approaches. > That really isn't true either. "Just treating the symptoms" would be if they > gave you a med that reduced the coughing and chest tighness and > breathlessness without affecting the process. Most asthma treatments such as Albuterol, Advair etc. go after symptoms. Drugs such as singular, Xolair etc. go after a cause but they are in the minority. > It sounds to me like you should be seeing at least a pulmonologist and > possibly an allergist as well. I hate it when some people here claim that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > controlled should be under specialist care. They can identify triggers that > primary care docs cannot. Thats true but most chronic asthmatics I know of do see specialists. Primaries around here rarely would try to treat such patients themselves. Most pulmonologists here are also allergists or have one in their same office. I currently see 3 specialists, a pulmonologist, a respitory therapist and a gastroenterologist who work together to try to help my asthma. So far, no luck. Been doing this for over 20 years without improvement. My asthma is completely uncontrolled. I don't blame the Dr's. It's the industries lack of knowledge regarding asthma thats the problem. >> It feels >> far too much like taking the inhalers is the same type of deal as when [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > It is better than not being able to breath and it is better than taking them > by mouth. Better yet would be to find was to get the doses down. > I might have posted before, thanks to fibro-fog, I don't remember. > Things have a way of disappearing from my mind a lot these days, what > with the added stress of not breathing well on top of the illness I > have. :/ i have fibromyalgia as well. and chronic depression. and allergies and asthma...geez, is it all related?!!!! :/ ~u2b > > I might have posted before, thanks to fibro-fog, I don't remember. > > Things have a way of disappearing from my mind a lot these days, what [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > ~u2b I'll take a guess--I believe it is all related. When a person is sick--it could cause that person to have chronic depression. My 1000 page medical book indicates that a doctor should conduct tests to rule out rheumatoid arthritis and polymyalgia. I also suggest that you doctor rule out Lupus. There are various types of Lupus. When a person has Lupus, various organs (including the skin and lungs) can be effected. You may want to google Lupus. If emedicine is one of the choices, download that report. Jason > I also suggest that you doctor rule out Lupus. There are various types of > Lupus. I've developed rather sudden non-inflammatory arthritis (thats what my Dr. called it). Had a general blood screening and the ANA scores were very high. So I then was tested for Lupas which came up negative. So far the Dr.'s can't explain the sudden rather severe onset of arthritis (I'm only 46) and the consistently high ANA without finding a cause for it. I gotta believe somehow its all related with severe uncontrollable asthma just part of a bigger picture. > > I also suggest that you doctor rule out Lupus. There are various types of > > Lupus. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > it. I gotta believe somehow its all related with severe uncontrollable > asthma just part of a bigger picture. You are very young to be suffering from arthritis. Try to find a book written by a doctor that is a specialist in arthritis. There is a type of arthritis that is called Septic Arthritis that is caused by a bacteria infection or a fungi infection. I doubt that you have that type of arthritis but you should ask your doctor to rule out bacteria and fungi infections. You should google "septic arthritis". If emedicine is one of the choices--download that report. After reading the book, you will probably be able to figure out the cause of the arthritis. There are at least 7 types of arthritis and the book should help you figure out the exact type of arthritis that you have. Also google "Lyme Arthritis". On Jun 7, 7:51 pm, "NorthShoreCEO" <NorthShore...@NOSPAMaol.com> wrote: > "I don't realy know what I want from here... Advice and suggestions > are welcome. " > > You didn't like the advice and suggestions given to you in your other post, > which was almost identical to this one? Forgot. blame fibro-fog, overstress, exhaustion, plain bad memory, whatever. I'll need to go back and look, though I'm sure if I'd posted before and gotten quick replies, I probably read them. > "I absolutely detest my inhalers, because I've had too many bad > experiences with drugs from idiot doctors only making whatever problem [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > medication in order to live. You have a disease which also requires you to > depend on doctors. Yes and no. Dependent on doctors? Hells, if I was, I'd be dead now. I have lung and breathing problems. It got diagnosed as asthma. But I have yet to hear any doctor tell me why I get asthma ttacks. Its not limited to exercise-induced (not anymore at least), and its not allergies, and that's the only two causes of asthma attacks a doctor has ever given me. I don't fit. > You can either keep fighting those facts and making > yourself miserable, or you can accept those facts and be grateful we live in > a time where such advances in medicine allow you to breathe. Detesting the > things that aid you seems a bit immature, in my opinion. You don't understand. The inhalers don't help much. I'd not be protesting something that was helpful, that made sense and helped treat the root cause as well as the dangerous symptoms. I hate them because they make me feel awful, because they help but only barely so, because no doctor seems to care to find out why I get asthma attacks. > Please look back at the responses to your first post here. That I will, but I would have remembered if someone had posted any suggestions as to what's going on... *Dragonfly* http://dragonflychaos.deviantart.com/ http://glitterychaos.livejournal.com/ >> Please look back at the responses to your first post here. > > That I will, but I would have remembered if someone had posted any > suggestions as to what's going on... You are unlikely to find that on the Internet. Beware of anyone that claims they can tell you what is wrong on-line. Signature00doc > On Jun 7, 7:51 pm, "NorthShoreCEO" <NorthShore...@NOSPAMaol.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > http://dragonflychaos.deviantart.com/ > http://glitterychaos.livejournal.com/ Dragonfly, One of the things that you could do is to buy a notebook and write down the time that you had an asthma attack and the circumstance--including what may have triggered the asthma attack. After about two months, take a close look at the notebook and see if you can figure out the triggers. The reason your doctor can not tell you the triggers for your asthma attacks are because the triggers are different for various people. For example, dust mites may be trigger for one child but pollen may be trigger for his sister. I hope this helps you, Jason > In article <1181353789.139903.248...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > I hope this helps you, > Jason That's a good idea, and not one I had thought of before, for some reason. Seems kinda obvious now that you mentioned it! :/ One more medical journal to keep (I've two others, for other problems). Still, if it has a chance of helping me figure out this asthma thing, it's worth it. Thanks! Dragonfly run don't walk to the cleanest city you feel comfortable in going. I think there is a good chance of relief. I have had three people thank me. > Hello al, newbie here, and desperate for somewhere to write about my > asthma problems... [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > http://dragonflychaos.deviantart.com/ > http://glitterychaos.livejournal.com/ > run don't walk to the cleanest city you feel comfortable in going. I think > there is a good chance of relief. I have had three people thank me. scuse me.. I don't understand. Run to the cleanest city I feel comfortable in going? Uh, I'm breathing better now that I'm not in a city than back when I lived in a city. The air's definitely cleaner up here in my small town surrounded by forested mountains and bright blue ocean. I'm guessing you assumed I lived in a big city... I used to! *Dragonfly* http://dragonflychaos.deviantart.com/ http://glitterychaos.livejournal.com/ and so your worse off now or better? If your worse off now, are you sure your air is clean or not allergic ?. Which things make your asthma worse? >> run don't walk to the cleanest city you feel comfortable in going. I >> think [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > http://dragonflychaos.deviantart.com/ > http://glitterychaos.livejournal.com/ > and so your worse off now or better? If your worse off now, are you sure > your air is clean or not allergic ?. Which things make your asthma worse?" Hmm.. I am worse off, yes. But why is still up for debate. No doctor I've seen seems to be interested in helping me figure out why I have asthma attacks, beyond establishing that it is not allergies, pets, or limited to physical activity, and on my own I have been unable to figure it out. What makes my asthma worse? The phase of the moon, the alignment of the planets, the patterns of stars, totally random... In short, I really do not know, aside from the usual physical activity. I know what doesn't: walking through fields of blooming wildflowers, hiking (slowly!) through forests, being outside in wilderness areas, doesn't make my asthma worse. Playing with friends' cats and dogs doesn't make my asthma worse. Any physical activity makes me have an asthma attack, though taking the albuterol inhaler a few times before, and often during helps me able to at least not stop breathing while I am active. Going back to the Bay Area (San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, etc), the air is harder to breathe there than where I live now, and even frequent use of my inhalers doesn't alleviate the coughing/ choking, though it does at least ensure that I don't actually suffocate. What helps? Well, sunlight? Being outside on a warm sunny day, resting and not active, in the sun, I never get asthma attacks in such a setting. After a full night's restful sleep, I generally wake up and can breathe more or less alright, for the first few hours of the day, totally regardless of whether I've been taking my inhalers regularly or not. I can't ever seem to breath really easily, I am always aware of the air I breathe being "heavy" in my lungs. Even on the best of days, with proper inhaler use, my breathing is difficult. Does any of this make sense to you? I've tried telling my doctor all this, but she is typically too busy working on my fibromyalgia that, admittedly, does generally take priority during doctor visits. I've wondered if there aren't asthma specialist doctors that I might be able to go see, since clearly my asthma is not typical or easily solved.. :/ The more my breathing worsens, the more scared I get, which in turn raises my stress and stress is definitely a factor in causing asthma to get worse, so I have done quite a few things to reduce my stress. One of these things is writing about my fears about not breathing, whether in a place where I'll get feedback or just my private journal, and it helps at least with my stress level, along with the other de-stressing things I do. But nothing I have tried has made a super-significant impact on my breathing.. *Dragonfly* http://dragonflychaos.deviantart.com/ http://glitterychaos.livejournal.com/ > run don't walk to the cleanest city you feel comfortable in going. I think > there is a good chance of relief. I have had three people thank me. I moved to where the Dr's told me. Pollution isn't the cause of my asthma and isn't the cause more millions of others. People already know that pollution isn't a good thing. They won't thank you for your 'revelation'. well >> run don't walk to the cleanest city you feel comfortable in going. I >> think there is a good chance of relief. I have had three people thank [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and isn't the cause more millions of others. People already know that > pollution isn't a good thing. They won't thank you for your 'revelation'. I have no idea what you just sai they have , so your inquiry about knowing what consensus is , is dead wrong but I guess that defeats your assumption about the world outside the same ten who might agree with you.. I didn't even know the correlation till I read the links to damage. I use to run outside and never took one glance of the air readings. IN fact they never even had the air ratings till a few years ago ( five or six years ago?__)There are many people who know and many people who don't know how the pollution figures affect their asthma. My girlfriends mom never ever correlated how the change in pollution affected her and even though she hates technology she says to her husband that I am on to something. These things are foreign to many people who get their information from their local papers and tv. Your tv might tell you about pollution and its affects but mine don't and those affects by the way I think cause more grief then practically anything except cigarettes. so if your trying to tell me that everytone knows pollution affects asthma but not to the extent I think it does, YOU simply don't know that to be true. I see complete contradictions in how I breath based on where I am and the actual level of pollution. At the shore when only the air is coming off the ocean is like therapy the air is so clean... often in a good HVAC system inside a department store with air conditioning the same clean air makes me feel better. But Here like today in PHILLY our particulate level is over moderate 70? and its just another day without clean air. I can call my girls mom up and I know she will be experiencing stiff lungs. she is over 60. and subsequently to not my suprise has been diagnosed with many ailments.. . allot of this is overall accumulation of breathing moderare or worse pollution that i suggest kills people . Many people do not have this bad air and for them I tell them stay out of this polluted hell.. .. he I know more then life itself it causes onselt adult asthma. Now does it cause all asthma? NO but more people are affected from polluted air then what bacteria does to people. and worms thats for sure. > I have no idea what you just sai > they have , so your inquiry about knowing what consensus is , is dead wrong > but I guess that defeats your assumption about the world outside the same > ten who might agree with you.. I didn't even know the correlation till I > read the links to damage. Is that you MCS? There is no correlation. There have been worldwide studies to which I already pointed out. Cities such as Athens, Mexico City, Los Angeles that are heavily pollution have few asthmatics per capita than average. Understanding why that is, is essential rather than making assumptions without fact. http://www.lapublichealth.org/wwwfiles/ph/hae/ha/childasthmabrief_1004.pdf close to tenpercent of male children have asthma in LA, there is a big population of poor people who might not go for treatment.. Still the percentage of pollutants in different cities might not be the same even though they call it particulates. I assure you the reason we have most asthma is the pollution day after day after day without good air.. >> I have no idea what you just sai >> they have , so your inquiry about knowing what consensus is , is dead [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > capita than average. Understanding why that is, is essential rather than > making assumptions without fact. > I assure you the reason we have most > asthma is the pollution day after day after day without good air.. You assure me? Sorry. I read the medical journals regulary not news articles or posts from nicks on usenet that 'assure' me. L.A. does not have a higher rate of asthmatics per capita than average for the USA as a whole. The highest rates are actually in lesser polluted areas. Possibly because of allergens such as pollens and molds. From the medical journals on asthma the correlation simply isn't there for the USA. There are also strong indications against such correlations worldwide. Studies were conducted in Mexico City and Athens, both of which are two of the most polluted cities in the world yet have low rates of asthmatics. Ps I see allot of this nonsense on the net,, the people who complain are being coopted by worms and asthma from bacteria and cockroachs bs... The people who know and seek comparisons can easily show cause and affect My city is perfect example. day after day of particulate pollution above the good zone. shows the most asthma and respiratory effects in the nation, If you take the same componets of air pollution in this city and give it to another population you will see same effects. What I have learned is people post things to make a profit.. not that which is correct or objective. When I see comparisons of health between people who live in most consistent days of pollution like Philly and on a crowded street with much emission and from pollution from coal out west... and you show me conclusively they don't get asthma more compared to people who live in clean air , then I will believe , Untill those studies are done in the US ( not mexico) I think its best to look at links that show and tell of damage from pollution Tens of thousands of people are suppose to die from its affects. The semantics of trying to disapprove the association with asthma and pollution is a perfect example of lies and decpetions and proving the one time people don't die to show the whole concept is wrong. The concept is right,.the tens of thousands of people who migrate to unpolluted cities are saving their familes life... not maybe definitely... from getting so few good days of air? I bet my life they can if they wanted to where a state and city has higher death rates and illness rates and asthma rates and pumping of medications and hospitals all day and night by hosptials and health care,,.. and not a lawyer in the land can't or won t prove it or damages and why.. I know why If you tell me a lawyer can't compare our health to others in clean air and compare our death rates and output and expsense towards of health care costs to clean air states and deduct conspiracy to poison people at least and or show harm, and at most the conspiracy to poison and keep hidden from the people the effectsfrom pollution ( car companies, diesel emission, coal production) then I say something is not true or right.I remember there was a power outage and a scientist sent inspectors in planes over PA and those most affected from pollution ...and power plants and coal ... and showed the time the production plants closed because of power outtages the air to be much much cleaner,,, and this was suppose to show damages when these plants operate to Congress. what happened to that study.. there could be much more studies done too. as you sit back and take for granted your clean air know many people don't > have it. We have not had one full day of clean air ( below moderate) in > over [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > >Quote: Originally Posted by zur Philly's way better... looking to improve. way better ? Rose colored glasses. Lets see some stats that make Philly better? What makes Philly better then the rest? History ? Yep Weather NO air quality : NO The number of people who committed murder? NO The number of people with disease on percentage basis? NO Giving your family clean air after a long day from work? Hell NO Nice easy going people who are happy because so many families have full employjent? NO Lots of professionals who live amongst us? NO Politicians who are on the take! YES Most asthma then every city in the entire US? YEs Most depression then every city in the US YES Most hospitals to hark their lung centers ? Hell YES and other goodies Most people who committed murder and have not been caught cause the community don't snitch? YEP probably.. Most graffatti? Who knows but its not good Empty store fronts? well its not getting better I can't remember was it the head of teachers who said basically our cities teachers no longer teach, they are paid baby sitters so if you can call this good , I still ask what weed you take? They tell me I need different weed,,,, which kind? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >from getting so few good days of air? I bet my life they can if they wanted to where a state and city has higher death rates and illness rates and asthma rates and pumping of medications and hospitals all day and night by hosptials and health care,,.. and not a lawyer in the land can't or won t prove it or damages and why.. I know why >> I assure you the reason we have most asthma is the pollution day after >> day after day without good air.. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > conducted in Mexico City and Athens, both of which are two of the most > polluted cities in the world yet have low rates of asthmatics. even with more links from deniers like you who want to think that by finding the one time the exact amount of illness of asthma is not linked to pollution somehow suggests there is not a real cause for concern about asthma and or respiratory disease from pollution , there is enough evidence to show cause and affect. The problem is you can twist words and one study to show no cause of concern but when everything is equal not only is there cause of concern, its been proven in court. I think its much much worse then whats been proven. Why after all these years they just proved it in court? Its because they had so much money and power ( the oil and gas and car companies lobbies) . So all these hospitals who say asthma is complex and no association between pollution would rather hype meds instead ..But the smartest and people affected who don't have money to promote commercials with music in background,,,.know the effects between respiratory health and illness and death and POllution... EVEN, from a conservattive supreme court and state courts... they have shown cause and affect in court recently. Now if you want to believe that people in Mexico city and LA are thus safe from pollution affects because someone says they don't suffer from asthma as much, you probably didnt' compare rates of morbidty, rates of illness from all illness, you probably had people there who were too poor to go for treatment or didn't distinguish between adalt onset asthma and regular asthma or just plain respiratory disease. The numbers can be skewed but this much I assure you.life itself, the association between pollution and lost respiratory illness is one of the largest association of risk of lost health in the world today and those affected. >> I assure you the reason we have most asthma is the pollution day after >> day after day without good air.. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > conducted in Mexico City and Athens, both of which are two of the most > polluted cities in the world yet have low rates of asthmatics. > Why after all these years they just proved it in court? No court ever made a ruling that says Asthma is caused by pollution. The courts don't decide those things! Too funny. Duh. Look at the current Autism court battle. Yes, sometimes the court does decide those things. Their problem is proving there was a conspiracy between what! -that would be all the studies from all the countries who tried to lie to the Autism parents about vaccinations. Right. > > Why after all these years they just proved it in court? > > No court ever made a ruling that says Asthma is caused by pollution. > The courts don't decide those things! Too funny. > Duh. Look at the current Autism court battle. Yes, sometimes the court does > decide those things. Thats entirely different. It was a deliberate forced action and the courts are being asked to award damages for said actions. Not the same with regards to air pollution. Now a court could go after a particular company who polluted a region and award anyone effected by it. There was one case I can recall that had to do with a popcorn factory and the resulting respiratory problems of the workers > > Duh. Look at the current Autism court battle. Yes, sometimes the court does > > decide those things. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > with regards to air pollution. Now a court could go after a particular > company who polluted a region and award anyone effected by it. > http://www.lapublichealth.org/wwwfiles/ph/hae/ha/childasthmabrief_1004.pdf > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > though they call it particulates. I assure you the reason we have most > asthma is the pollution day after day after day without good air.. This appears to be mcs as well. Double pathetic. Signature00doc |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message