 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / November 2007Adult Asthma
Hi, My GP has just diagnosed me with asthma, I'm 32 years old and have never had any sign of it before. A couple of months ago I had a bout of flu followed by bronchitis. He prescribed me Ventolin to help with the shortness of breath but also told me that I had a "rattle" and to come back and be checked for asthma. I got over the bronchitis but have still had a bad cough for weeks and occasionally get short of breath. What really scared me was when I started waking up in the early hours of the morning wheezing and short of breath and it seemed to be getting worse. I took myself back to the GP and told him my symptoms. He gave me a preventer puffer to use twice a day along with the Ventolin when needed and told me to come back in 2 weeks. Is that all he needs to diagnose asthma? Is there other tests he should do? I don't really now much about asthma. My Brother had a severe case when he was little but when we moved States to a warmer climate his asthma went away. I'm back in the original state we came from. I'm not sure what my next step should be. Should I get referred to a specialist, change GP's of just stick with the GP? He doesn't seem that knowledgeable about asthma himself. Any advise would be appreciated. Thanks.  SignatureB - Australia ....................................................... To reply remove "SAYNO2SPAM" ....................................................... > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Thanks. The problems is that you can have wheezing for up to 6 weeks after a viral infection. He is right to treat the symptoms and not call it asthma for at least that long. If they persist for longer then he will probably want to do more studies like pulmonary function testing. The only tests I would do sooner is a chest X-ray and possibly a sinus CT. Signature00doc > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > and > told me to come back in 2 weeks. BTDT. :/ good luck! ~u2b On Oct 13, 5:16 am, "Bri" <brionyangusSAYNO2S...@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > Hi, > Is that all he needs to diagnose asthma? Is there other tests he should do? Generally, if there's no sickness, then yea that's probably enough to make an asthma diagnosis. With the complications of being sick, like someone else said, it can take a while to fully recover. I needed to see a specialist for my asthma, but only because the preventative inhaler failed to prevent a series of life-threatening asthma attacks... So I got sent off to a pulmonologist and an allergy specialist. Both of these are "specialists' for asthma, and really if you're doubting the ability of your GP to treat your asthma, you certainly can ask to be referres to one or the other or both. At this point, though I'd say it doesn't seem necessary. See if the preventative works, and head back to your doctor regularly to stay on top of this. Asthma can be pretty scary, especially if it comes out of nowhere... Hang in there, sounds like you're being taken care of and hopefully the wheeing will go away after a few more weeks. Drink lots and rest as you can, that'll help if the sickness is what's still causing problems. Dragonfly Thanks for the responses. I was diagnosed with the Bronchitis 7 weeks ago. I feel like that is gone because apart from the wheezing, coughing and occasionally shortness of breath I'm feeling pretty good. The GP I've seen is good but just doesn't seem too up to date on Asthma. I will go back to him in 2 weeks and see how I go. If I'm not happy I'll find out if there is another GP in that Medical Centre who deals with Asthma more. I guess I'm just a bit confused about being diagnosed with Asthma at my age. I thought it was something you were born with? I'm not sure about taking these medications if I don't have to but it is better than waking up wheezing, that is very scary. How do I work out what triggers an attack? So far I've noticed 2 very strong smelling items that set me off coughing and then I get very short of breath. Exercise also causing me some problems so I've taken to using the Ventolin before I go walking. I want to continue with my walking because I'm trying to loose weight, I'm still about 12kg's overweight. I did ask the GP about my weight also and he said loosing weight might help. Thanks SignatureB - Australia ....................................................... To reply remove "SAYNO2SPAM" ....................................................... > On Oct 13, 5:16 am, "Bri" <brionyangusSAYNO2S...@optusnet.com.au> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Dragonfly > Thanks for the responses. I was diagnosed with the Bronchitis 7 weeks ago. > I feel like that is gone because apart from the wheezing, coughing and [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Thanks It took until I was 25 for me to get a diagnosis, and based on what I know now, I likely have had asthma since I was a kid (I'm the same age as you are). In terms of triggers, I'd say you've already got a handle on three....the strong smells that get you coughing and short of breath and exercise. I've found that losing some weight has helped for me, as has getting active and improving my overall cardio health. Michael > > Thanks for the responses. I was diagnosed with the Bronchitis 7 weeks ago. > > I feel like that is gone because apart from the wheezing, coughing and [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > > > Thanks If you continue to have problems, you should see an allergist and/or pulmonologist (probably the latter, first, given your history). I got asthma in my late 30s, probably from ongoing allergies. When your breathing is compromised it is a BIG problem, i.e. dangerous. Don't fool around. See a specialist. I did and it was a huge help. Good luck. Signature-- Lou Pecora Just thought I'd update. It's been 2 weeks since I started on the preventer puffer. It took a couple of days to take effect and the wheezing went. I still have times when something sets me off but otherwise I'm doing well. There were a couple of days when the kids where really sick and I forgot to use the preventer puffer, I realised I was starting to wheeze when I tried to go to sleep one night so obviously I need to use it for now. I'm due back at the GP to see how I'm doing. When I see him I will enquire about other tests and maybe a referral to a specialist. Thanks for the responses to my post. SignatureB - Australia ....................................................... To reply remove "SAYNO2SPAM" ....................................................... > > > > Thanks for the responses. I was diagnosed with the Bronchitis 7 weeks ago. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Good luck. > Just thought I'd update. It's been 2 weeks since I started on the > preventer [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > about other tests and maybe a referral to a specialist. Thanks for the > responses to my post. If the preventative med is controlling your asthma why do you think you need to see a specialist? Signature00doc > If the preventative med is controlling your asthma why do you think you need > to see a specialist? To see if its possible to correct the cause(s) rather than just treat the symptom. Taking Ventolin daily without knowing the real problem isn't a proper solution but is a common one. Guess what I'm saying is that for decades I did the 'control' method. The issue is that the underlying problem continued to get worse and 25 years later I have major pulmonary issues. Not sure exactly what but am awaiting test results to confirm Dr's suspicions. Had these issues even been looked into earlier its possible a different approach to my treatment could have been found. My earlier Dr's had your logic. If it's 'controlled' then don't look further. Luckily I finally found a great Dr. that is doing what should have been done years ago. >> If the preventative med is controlling your asthma why do you think you >> need to see a specialist? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > 'controlled' then don't look further. Luckily I finally found a great Dr. > that is doing what should have been done years ago. Oh, come now. If your underlying problem was growing progressively worse to the point of now having chronic problems then they weren't doing the "control method" and I am not advocating just using Ventolin. From her description she is well controlled on the initial dose of an inhaled steroid. If there is some suspicion of an allergic trigger that can be avoided then allergy testing may be warranted although a trial of avoidance could be argued to be an even better (and much cheaper) test. Discovering unavoidable allergens is of questionable benefit at best. I'm among the first to suggest people see a specialist (or more than one) if the case sounds complicated or the generalist is just not getting a handle on it but this appears to be a success story. This attitude that everyone should have all problems managed by specialists is part of why healthcare costs so much. Specialists are known to practice much more expensive care, often without increased benefit. They are often so used to seeing the more difficult cases that they are pretty clueless about the simple stuff. Signature00doc > Oh, come now. If your underlying problem was growing progressively worse to > the point of now having chronic problems then they weren't doing the > "control method" BULL. Many underlying causes can be masked by 'controlling' the symptoms. In my case the problems did slowly grow worse. Dr's simply attributed it to age and upped dosage to the point my flow loops appeared fairly normal (controlled). Controlling a symptom does not prevent an underlying problem from becoming worse over the years. > and I am not advocating just using Ventolin. From her > description she is well controlled on the initial dose of an inhaler Yes and you questioned the need to bother going to a specialist. And I question your absurd logic. Just because symptoms can be masked and the patient feels better does not rule out a serious underlying problem that can take years to be evident to the patient without proper diagnostics. > If there is some suspicion of an allergic trigger that can be > avoided then allergy testing may be warranted although a trial of avoidance > could be argued to be an even better (and much cheaper) test. Discovering > unavoidable allergens is of questionable benefit at best. Possibly but allergies are but one trigger of asthma. In mine and many others triggers are just that and not a cause. There maybe a more serious reason why the person is overly sensitive to allergens. That appears to be the case for me. My asthma while triggered in part by allergens, exercise etc., it appears those are merely triggers and not the underlying cause which had been masked by inhalers and other drugs which 'controlled' the symptoms. Too many Dr's seem to treat symptoms and fail to dig deeper to rule out more serious issues. > I'm among the first to suggest people see a specialist (or more than one) > if the case sounds complicated or the generalist is just not getting a > handle on it but this appears to be a success story. A handle to you appears to mean controlled. Without ruling out other possible causes how is it that you are fine just controlling symptoms? Sorry, but your logic is exactly the style I faced for 25 years of going to various Dr's. My current specialist can't believe my other Dr's missed clear signs. He went back through my records, xrays etc. and can't understand why other Dr's did not order further tests or send me to a specialist to perform such tests. > This attitude that > everyone should have all problems managed by specialists is part of why > healthcare costs so much. I'm fine with a primary care Dr. digging deep and performing required tests. However, they often feel that if a symptom is controlled then there is no need. That is the issue I have with so many Dr's. Problems go undiagnosed. Why is that ok with you? Ok 00doc, do you see me as combative as this one? > > Oh, come now. If your underlying problem was growing progressively worse to > > the point of now having chronic problems then they weren't doing the [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > there is no need. That is the issue I have with so many Dr's. Problems > go undiagnosed. Why is that ok with you? > Ok 00doc, > do you see me as combative as this one? No. He is actually in my killfile because his nonsense is rarely worth wading through. His posts here came to my attention only because the ones around him were flagged. This diatribe is a good example of how he totally confuses things to serve his spouting off. I don't advocate merely controlling the symptoms and anyone who has been reading this group for even a short while knows that. If her symptoms were "well controlled" with frequent dilators and that seemed adequate to her doc I would be advocating for seeing a specialist. But her doc is controlling her diseases, not just the symptoms, with an inhaled steroid. She has given us no reason to assume the doc has not considered other factors as would be appropriate to her case. Considering those other factors does not always require further testing. A gratifying response to meds and a reasuringly negative history and physical are often all that is needed. If the the H&P and response to meds are not reassuring then more testing or trial of meds may be indicated. His own history is as jumbled as the protrayal of my views and the care the OP is receiving. He at once says that his docs were applying the same "control approach" I advocate while also claiming they didn't "dig deeper" despite apparently worsening symptoms - self contradictory statements at best. He then turns the whole thing on its head by saying that the problems were obvious. He's an attention seeking troll. I've said my piece and I'm ready to go back to ignoring him. Signature00doc >> Ok 00doc, >> do you see me as combative as this one? [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > doc is controlling her diseases, not just the symptoms, with an inhaled > steroid. I know I don't know anything, so excuse my impertinent reply... but... er, Im confused how someone whos symptoms are being controlled is proof positive that their diseases are being controlled. Obviously I don't know the history, and I don't know the diagnosis, Im assuming you do, however I know as well as anyone else, how wrong doctors can get things. A few years back, I was diagnosed with an underactive thyroid. Two things were paramount to me. One, I didn't want to get diagnosed with hypothyroidism and still have problems three or four years later on after being on the correct dosage, and secondly I didn't want the symptoms treated and have the underlying condition masked. I think it's quite a reasonable thing for any patient to want to know the root cause of their issue, to obtain a correct diagnosis, and to have the underlying condition treated instead of living off medication. I get the impression from the OP that they want to make sure it is asthma and not something else that could be treated instead and hence not live off inhalers. Cya Simon > I know I don't know anything, so excuse my impertinent reply... but... > er, Im confused how someone whos symptoms are being controlled is proof > positive that their diseases are being controlled. My point exactly. For years I did as my Dr's said. Take one drug after another and as long as my pulmonary function tests showed the same as before, the course of action remained unchanged. Problem was I was only masking a more serious issue the Dr's never looked into until recently. > I think it's quite a reasonable thing for any patient to want to know > the root cause of their issue, to obtain a correct diagnosis, and to > have the underlying condition treated instead of living off medication. Thats what I'm trying to point out to Doc. He seems to feel that as long as symptoms are controlled there is no need to look any further. Keep on the same course of action. That logic has cost me. But I finally got rid of my Dr's and sought out ones that would look deeper into causes. > I know I don't know anything, so excuse my impertinent reply... but... er, > Im confused how someone whos symptoms are being controlled is proof > positive that their diseases are being controlled. The short answer is that all by itself it isn't. In the case of asthma the issues are generally: 1) It is asthma ("not all that wheezes is asthma") ? 2) Are there other diagnoses contributing such as reflux and sinus disease? 3) Are there triggers that can be identified and removed such as allergies? For all three of the above the history and physical exam are paramount with testing generally providing confirmations or refutations of clinical suspicions. It is desirable to have PFT's showing reversible obstruction to make the diagnosis (#1) but this is not always possible, especially in mild cases where the PFT's will be normal unless the person can be tested while symptomatic. If it can be concluded to a reasonable certainty that the person does have asthma and that other factors are not contributing to it then treating with inhaled steroids is treating the "underlying cause" of chronic inflammation - at least as far back in the pathogenesis as we understand it today. As we learn more about the genetics and triggers for asthma we may someday be able to call something else treating the cause but right now inhaled steroids are it. if the person has a dramatic response to low to moderate doses of the inhaled steroids then that is reassuring that the treatment is on the right track. If not, or there is an initial response and then a deterioration, then that is reason to reconsider. Signature00doc > If it can be concluded to a reasonable certainty that the person does have > asthma and that other factors are not contributing to it then treating with > inhaled steroids is treating the "underlying cause" of chronic > inflammation - at least as far back in the pathogenesis as we understand it > today. How many Dr's will perform blood tests for various issues such as immune disorders etc. when diagnosing an apparent asthmatic? Very very few. If inhalers and other standard asthma medications 'control' the symptoms thats where diagnoses often stops. Your theory that inhaled steroids treat the 'underlying cause' is misleading. Often the actual cause is merely masked. Just as a Tylenol may mask the cause of chronic headaches, chronic respiratory problems can be masked through inhaled steroids. It most certainly has been the case for me. > The short answer is that all by itself it isn't. <cuts> > -- > 00doc You seem to have a good understanding of asthma, from the posts I've read on this newsgroup. I'm wondering if you might be willing to offer some advice on my particular situation? I do have a doctor I see regularly, but time is far too limited and she's constrained by what the particular clinic and the state agency handling the medical insurance decide is appropriate. I am unsure whether I should be worried and asking questions or not, basically :) Rya > He is actually in my killfile because his nonsense is rarely worth wading > through. His posts here came to my attention only because the ones around > him were flagged. Oh geez. You have me kill filed and yet you reply and try to blame anyone but yourself for doing so! Good grief. Some peoples kids. Learn self control Doc! > his spouting off. I don't advocate merely controlling the symptoms and > anyone who has been reading this group for even a short while knows that In the case at hand you most certainly did. You point blank questioned why bother going to a specialist if an inhaler controls the symptoms. > doc is controlling her diseases, not just the symptoms, with an inhaled > steroid. Typical rhetoric. You have no idea what her diseases maybe. Only that inhalers improved her symptoms. Just what is the underlying cause? Could be anything from minor to major. > She has given us no reason to assume the doc has not considered > other factors u Nor did she give any indication he had yet you questioned the need to see a specialist. You did not ask if there were other factors that were looked into or not. > as would be appropriate to her case. Considering those other > factors does not always require further testing. A gratifying response to > meds and a reasuringly negative history and physical are often all that is > needed. Your absurd logic is all too common with many Dr's. It took me many years but I have found a team of Dr's that questions your logic just as I do. Your rhetoric is exactly why my issues were not diagnosed much sooner. I'm glad not all Dr's subscribe to your approach. Theres a few good ones out there. > If the the H&P and response to meds are not reassuring then more Your method suggests do nothing and don't look for more serious underlying causes unless conditions worsen. Trouble is that by then it can be much too late. Had I had the tests that have been done recently, years ago its quite possible a proper course of action could have been enacted rather than simply controlling the symptoms. > His own history is as jumbled as the protrayal of my views and the care the > OP is receiving. He at once says that his docs were applying the same > "control approach" I advocate while also claiming they didn't "dig deeper" > despite apparently worsening symptoms I never said worsening symptoms. I said worsening of the underlying cause. Big difference there Doc. > best. He then turns the whole thing on its head by saying that the problems > were obvious. My current team of Dr's have gone back and looked at my medical records. They are wondering why so many other Dr's did not order further testing. My guess is that they subscribe to your logic of do nothing unless symptoms worsen. Sorry, agree or disagree. I am now of they type that will fire my Dr. if they do not dig deep enough to find causes of a chronic problem rather than write prescriptions all day. It's called taking control of ones health and following the belief that a Dr. is but one tool in doing so. I am on the road to recovery hopefully so I will not have to 'control' my symptoms. I'll get rid of them and reduce the need for inhalers and such. >> He is actually in my killfile because his nonsense is rarely worth wading >> through. His posts here came to my attention only because the ones around [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > but yourself for doing so! Good grief. Some peoples kids. Learn self > control Doc! I've killfiled a few people (two in this group) to help reduce clutter. It is not a promise to myself or anyone else to never read the persons's responses and/or reply to them. It is a tool, not a contract. I was not blaming anyone else for anything. I was answering the usual next question of, "if you have him killfiled how are you even seeing his messages". The answer is that if you were the only one to respond then I wouldn't have seen the posts (unless I was motivated enough to specifically look). Other people did respond and caused the thread to be flagged so I did see them. I then chose to read them and then chose to respond. I neither blame anyone else nor do I apologise for doing so. It is my right and my choice alone. I can't quite get a handle on about what it is you disapprove - the fact that I don't read the vast majority of your posts or that I did read the ones in this thread? It seems odd to me that you would apparently criticize me both for reading and not reading your work. Lastly, anyone who has been reading this group as long as you should know that I do not advocate just covering up asthma symptoms with relievers. I have always been a strong and consistent proponent of confirming the diagnosis, looking for other contributing issues, proper prevention (both with medication and trigger avoidance), and referal to specialists when appropriate (either due to the condition or the inadequacies of the doctor). Your hysterics to the contrary must be absurd to any but the newest of visitors to this group and further evidence of your killfileworthiness. I'm sorry if you have not enjoyed optimal health and have not been satisfied with your medical care. I had nothing to do with either so please don't take it out on me. I do wish you luck in achieving both even if I chose to usually not read about it here. Signature00doc Jee doc I am doing great. I have found my answer in silent GERD and love my doc at Emory who helped me. thanks for asking.:) Joy > >> He is actually in my killfile because his nonsense is rarely worth wading > >> through. His posts here came to my attention only because the ones around [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > it out on me. I do wish you luck in achieving both even if I chose to > usually not read about it here. > It seems odd to me that you would apparently criticize > me both for reading and not reading your work. I did no such thing. I commented about you having to publicly announce whom you killfiled and then respond anyways because it was 'flagged'. > Lastly, anyone who has been reading this group as long as you should know > that I do not advocate just covering up asthma symptoms with relievers. As I have said, you questioned why someone would go to a specialist if their symptoms are controlled. I simply questioned that logic. It is that exact logic found in so many Dr's that failed me for years. > I > have always been a strong and consistent proponent of confirming the > diagnosis, looking for other contributing issues In this case the fact that inhalers controlled the symptom you were fine with no further diagnoses needed. I strongly disagree with that. > Your hysterics to the contrary must be absurd to any but the newest of > visitors to this group and further evidence of your killfileworthiness. My 'hysterics' come from years of experience with Dr's in the course of finding more than just symptomatic relief for my asthma. I will never agree with your 'why see a specialist if asthma is controlled?' logic. > I'm sorry if you have not enjoyed optimal health and have not been satisfied > with your medical care. I had nothing to do with either so please don't take > it out on me. I do wish you luck in achieving both even if I chose to > usually not read about it here. I never said you did have anything to do with it. But you do seem to advocate exactly the issues that I have had with Dr's for so many years. I can only surmise that many with asthma are going through the same thing with their Dr's. I'm here to say there is a better way. I've found it by seeking out a team of Dr's that will work with each other to dig deeper. I did not accept just masking the symptom with drugs without knowing the exact cause to the best of current medicines ability. Ok so I am trying to help That is all ; even when their docs could look bad, sorry to say,and I certainly understand what they had to go though educationally. > > Ok 00doc, > > do you see me as combative as this one? [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > He's an attention seeking troll. I've said my piece and I'm ready to go back > to ignoring him. > Ok 00doc, > do you see me as combative as this one? Your statement above is combative. Besides, what do you call Doc's "Oh come now"? Just friendly chit chat just as yours is above? One figures when one has been here long enough is...........duh > > Ok 00doc, > > do you see me as combative as this one? > > Your statement above is combative. Besides, what do you call Doc's "Oh > come now"? Just friendly chit chat just as yours is above? > > Ok 00doc, > > do you see me as combative as this one? > > Your statement above is combative. Besides, what do you call Doc's "Oh > come now"? Just friendly chit chat just as yours is above? miles, I suggest that you read the book that is mentioned below. The book is NOT about ashtma or breathing problems. Instead, the book is about inflammation. If you are able to control the inflammation, it's possible that your breathing problems MAY improve. It's up to you to figure out the "triggers" and I hope that you find out all of the triggers. Doctors are usually not helpful in figuring out all of the triggers. "Stop Inflammation Now" by Richard M. Fleming, M.D. > I suggest that you read the book that is mentioned below. The book is NOT > about ashtma or breathing problems. Instead, the book is about > inflammation. If you are able to control the inflammation, it's possible > that your breathing problems MAY improve. It's up to you to figure out the > "triggers" and I hope that you find out all of the triggers. Doctors are > usually not helpful in figuring out all of the triggers. Controlling triggers will help control symptoms. While very important I'm far more interested in learning more about why the triggers exist for me. I have multiple issues that may be the root causes of my respiratory problems. Issues such as immune system disfunction (running tests to see why), reflux (running tests to see why), VCD (possibly caused by reflux), excessive levels of CO2 (O2 is fine), left lung much lower in my chest than the right but not sure what that means and the list goes on much further. I do considerable amounts of reading including the various pulmonary study reports that Dr's get yearly. You're right, learning as much as one can about their own health is paramount to improving it. > > I suggest that you read the book that is mentioned below. The book is NOT > > about ashtma or breathing problems. Instead, the book is about [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > You're right, learning as much as one can about their own health is > paramount to improving it. Have you read any information related to genetics as the possible cause of your problems? For example, did any of your parents or grandparents have asthma? Would a biopsy of your lungs be helpful? Doctors don't always know the cause of various medical disorders which is one of the major reasons many doctors treat the symptoms instead of finding out the cause of various disorders. In relation to disorders caused by inflammation, the best option is for patients to take actions to reduce the inflammation. The book that I referred you to ("Stop Inflammation Now" by Dr. Richard M. Fleming") has a diet that will help you reduce the inflammation. The book is about heart disease and related conditions. However, inflammation is also a major issue in relation to many different breathing disorders--including asthma. If you don't stop the inflammation by a better diet and the use of certain supplements--I doubt that you will ever stop having breathing problems. Jason Jason > Have you read any information related to genetics as the possible cause of > your problems? For example, did any of your parents or grandparents have > asthma? Would a biopsy of your lungs be helpful? Father and brothers all have asthma but very mild. They have none of the other health issues I have and they are all much older than I. > Doctors don't always know the cause of various medical disorders which is > one of the major reasons many doctors treat the symptoms instead of > finding out the cause of various disorders. This is true but too many Dr's fail to even look. However, there are some highly skilled Dr's that do. Took me 25 years to find a few. > > Have you read any information related to genetics as the possible cause of > > your problems? For example, did any of your parents or grandparents have [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > This is true but too many Dr's fail to even look. However, there are > some highly skilled Dr's that do. Took me 25 years to find a few. Have you been to see an allergist? > Have you been to see an allergist? Several. I've seen Dr's of many specialties over the years. Hi, I guess I'm still not that happy with the diagnosis. The GP diagnosed me without any tests and I'm wondering if it could still be something else causing my problems. I may not need to be taking these medications. > If the preventative med is controlling your asthma why do you think you need > to see a specialist? > Hi, > > I guess I'm still not that happy with the diagnosis. The GP diagnosed me > without any tests and I'm wondering if it could still be something else > causing my problems. I may not need to be taking these medications. That is the exact same situation I faced for over 25 years. Dr's just kept prescribing one thing after another. Try this, try that and so on. The only tests given were very quick blow into a tube 3 times and compare results from prior weeks. Even the specialists would only do a full pulmonary function test on 1st visit. I finally got forceful and asked my Dr. to look much further. When he said that wasn't needed I said goodbye and went elsewhere. My current specialist is digging much deeper and doesn't understand why my prior Dr's refused. >> If the preventative med is controlling your asthma why do you think you > need [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > without any tests and I'm wondering if it could still be something else > causing my problems. I may not need to be taking these medications. Its not 100% clear to me that have been given a diagnosis of asthma. As I have been saying coughing and wheezing for weeks after an infection can be a normal part of the course of the infection and so may not need anytbign more than taking the inhlaer as needed. But that would not be asthma. If it is not improving and he is starting to think along the lines of asthma then you should at the very least have a chest x-ray and pulmonary finction tests and conisder starting an every day preventative medication (usually a steroid inhaler). I think you next step should be to see him and see what he thinks. If it is improving and he thinks it is all part of the infection that is fine. You can wait a few weeks to see if it continues to improve. If he is starting to think it is asthma then he should either be doing the things above or eferring you to someone who will. Signature00doc I think seeing a specialist is a good idea for someone with asthma to have in addition to a GP. Other tests can be done to help diagnose asthma like a methacholine challenge. On Oct 13, 7:16 am, "Bri" <brionyangusSAYNO2S...@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > was when I started waking up in the early hours of the morning wheezing and > short of breath and it seemed to be getting worse. ... > Any advise would be appreciated. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > To reply remove "SAYNO2SPAM" > ....................................................... If your symptoms are not well-controlled with "conventional" treatment, and they are growing more and more severe, the following web sites might be of interest: http://www.asthmastory.com (Jim Quinlan's comprehensive site on infectious asthma) http://oshinsky.org/asthma.htm (my page on infectious asthma) Unfortunately, if you find yourself desperate enough to try this treatment, it (still) may be quite difficult to find a physician who can help. Dave Oshinsky Former asthma sufferer > If your symptoms are not well-controlled with "conventional" > treatment, and they are growing more and more severe, the following [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > treatment, it (still) may be quite difficult to find a physician who > can help. Why would a person need tobe desperate to try it? Signature00doc > Why would a person need tobe desperate to try it? > > -- > 00doc Good question CBI. Aren't there possible side effects of taking Zithromax weekly for 12 weeks? (I have had no side effects to speak of, but some people do experience those.) And isn't it still difficult in many cases to find a physician who knows about this treatment, and would be willing to prescribe this much antibiotics for "asthma"? Without some "desperation factor" (and good luck to boot), it's not likely that the average infectious asthma sufferer would find out this treatment exists, and might be of great benefit to him or her. I would like to be wrong about this, some day. Dave Oshinsky Former "asthma" sufferer >> Why would a person need tobe desperate to try it? >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Zithromax weekly for 12 weeks? (I have had no side effects to speak > of, but some people do experience those.) Obviously. There are side effects to everything including doing nothing. For someone easily controlled on ocassional albuterol (salbutamol) and a low dose of inhaled steroids with long symptom free periods and no significant disability from the asthma I can see a lot of doubt about whether the risk of the antibiotics is worth it. For someone whose life is negatively affected and/or is on high doses of inhaled steroids and/or courses of oral steroids then I think the risk calcuation is much different. > And isn't it still > difficult in many cases to find a physician who knows about this > treatment, and would be willing to prescribe this much antibiotics for > "asthma"? Yes. -- 00doc > <daveoshin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > -- > 00doc In that case, we appear to be in some agreement on this. Getting back to the subject of this thread, I quote the original poster "B - Australia": * My GP has just diagnosed me with asthma, I'm 32 years old and have never had * any sign of it before. A couple of months ago I had a bout of flu followed * by bronchitis. He prescribed me Ventolin to help with the shortness of * breath but also told me that I had a "rattle" and to come back and be * checked for asthma. I got over the bronchitis but have still had a bad * cough for weeks and occasionally get short of breath. What really scared me * was when I started waking up in the early hours of the morning wheezing and * short of breath and it seemed to be getting worse. This sounds suspiciously like my early history with adult "asthma", when I had a bout of "pneumonitis" (similar to bronchitis?) followed by really nasty coughing, wheezing, and shortness of breath (worst at night). This was so severe during the first few months that I ended up in the emergency room several times for severe wheezing and shortness of breath. I had a short course of antibiotics, but these symptoms ultimately lasted (with varying degrees of severity) for years, until I apparently nailed the "bug" that remained in my lungs with a 15 week course of Zithromax (actually, I took 9 weeks, followed by 6 weeks). The whole history is reviewed on my web page, http://www.oshinsky.org/asthma.htm This brings me to my next question - how does one determine the root cause of "Brian's" (hope I got his name right) bronchitis? If it is/was viral, there would seem to be no use for Zithromax or any other antibiotics. On the other hand, if "Brian's" wheezing and shortness of breath actually results from a persistent Chlamydia pneumoniae or Mycoplasma pneumoniae (C. pn or M. pn) infection, a longer course of Zithromax could be appropriate. Would it not be appropriate to suggest to "B - Australia" that a lengthier course of antibiotics might help with his current symptoms? I refer to Dr. Hahn's current regimen of 12 weeks of Zithromax (see http://www.asthmastory.com/research/doctor.pdf). This brings me back to the "desperation factor" I mentioned earlier. Clearly, if "Brian's" breathing problems are well-controlled with first-line asthma medications such as inhaled steroids and albuterol, then there isn't much motivation to risk an extended course of antibiotics. It's also possible that the breathing problems will disappear without any treatment, but that wasn't what happened in my case. Dave Oshinsky >> <daveoshin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 92 lines] > disappear without any treatment, but that wasn't what happened in my > case. Most cases of viral bronchitis will last a week or less some up to 6 weeks. The phlegmmy, wheezing, coughing feelings can last for another 6 weeks, so 12 weeks of wheezing is about the maximum that can be attributed tot he viral infection. It sounds like he has surpassed that. he mentions beiong on Ventolin but not an inhaled steroid and clearly is not controlled as of that posting. It does sound like it started with an infection and my reading of the literature suggests that there is at least a 50% that the antibiotics would clear it. Signature00doc |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.