 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / November 2005Blood in Stool
Boy, I can't believe the things I have talked about on this group. Here's another embarrasing moment. I have noticed bright red blood on my stool for the last couple of days. Had radiation 2.5 years ago after an RP for PCa Dr stated at prior checkups that I have a large internal hemoroid I have read that blood in the stool is common for men that receive prostate radiation and even more common for men with internal hemoroids. Whats your opinion - suggestions. Thanks guys - gals. Dave P Sounds like the hemorrhoid popped. In normal, non-irradiated tissue it will stop on its own in anywhere from a couple of days to a week. Don't know if the earlier radiation will alter that. I used to think these things ripped open as the stool slid by but now I believe they burst from the pressure of the MB itself or at least a combination of the two. Try stool softeners and also try to slowly "ease things out" rather than grunt, strain, and push. Works for me. Of course you could do what the constipated mathematian did - work it out with a pencil. :) Dave Perry You probably popped the hemorrhoid. It is common for it to bleed for a couple of days up to a week with a BM. Of course, that is with normal bowel tissue - don't know what effect earlier radiation might mean in healing the hemi. I used to think the bleeding was caused by the stool scraping by and ripping the hemmorrhoid open. I now think it is a combination of this and pressure that gets it bleeding. Try using a stool softener and also try to "ease it out" rather using a big push and grunt. Of course, you could do what the constipated mathematician did - work it out with a pencil :) Dave Perry Dave P, You need a colonoscopy unless you had one recently. It is not safe to assume the bleeding has a benign source unless the serious stuff, like colorectal cancer, has been ruled out. Everybody over 50 should have it anyway. It is a painless test. Steve U I agree with Steve U.... schedule a colonoscopy if you have not had one recently. Hopefully, it's just bleeding from the hemorrhoid... but best be sure! MikeH > Dave P, > You need a colonoscopy unless you had one recently. It is not safe to > assume the bleeding has a benign source unless the serious stuff, like > colorectal cancer, has been ruled out. Everybody over 50 should have it > anyway. It is a painless test. > Steve U I would second Steve's reply regarding the colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy if you haven't had either one done recently. The large hemorrhoid is almost certainly the culprit but if the bleeding doesn't go away within a week then be sure to visit a good doctor. There are a variety of treatments for the hemorrhoid too although I don't know if they are performed on a patient with a radiation compromised rectal wall. Incidently, clues to the source include: A streak of red blood on the stool indicates a source in the rectal/hemorrhoid area, blood deposited as the stool exited. Red blood in the stool indicates a source a bit further up, probably not a hemorrhoid. Off color blood (darker red to brown/black) has a source much further up the colon and can be more serious. Black, tarry stools indicate a source way up nearer the stomach. Also, lots of bright red blood in the bowl and on the toilet paper after a BM indicates a sudden burst of some kind and is almost always from a hemorrhoid, especially if the hemorrhoid was a bit painful before but seems to be pleasantly relieved during the BM. A bit scary but usually benign. Dave Perry I think that, regardless of what a doctor has stated in the past, that I'd have each instance of blood in the stool checked. It is, unfortunately, a possible SE of radiation of the prostate bed. My main fear if they come out with a cure for PCa is what will I go through with all the rad SEs?  SignaturePSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05 PSA .07 .05 .06 .05 non Illegitimi carborundum > Boy, I can't believe the things I have talked about on this group. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Dave P Thanks for your feedback guys. It really helps getting some solid information and support. This has happened to me in the past but it went away in a couple of days. It was a real bad case this time around - I can remember really straining and pain when it started. I am leaning toward the Hemoroid. It has been getting better day-by-day. Changed my diet to include more fiber. I am hoping it will clear. However, I will get things checked out with my Physician. I turn 50 in 7 months - due for the colonoscopy. Looks like I will be getting it sooner than later. I have had and continue to have numerous side effects that can be attributed to the RP and Salvage Radiation. It's not fun but I am lucky to be living. Thanks again, Dave P > Boy, I can't believe the things I have talked about on this group. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Dave P Nuts (any kind) are a natural stool softener. But, if diverticulae have formed in the bowel, nuts can clog them and cause diverticulitis and, later, peritonitis and death. SignaturePSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05 PSA .07 .05 .06 .05 non Illegitimi carborundum > Nuts (any kind) are a natural stool softener. > I can remember really straining and pain when it started. I am leaning > toward the Hemoroid. It has been getting better day-by-day. Changed my > diet to include more fiber. I am hoping it will clear. NEVER "strain at stool", as they call it. I've fought constipation for 50 years, and learned 45 years ago that straining produces two things: hemorrhoids and a few marbles -- insignificant results compared to an intestine-load of fecal material. When your bowels are ready to empty, they will empty, and your doctor can tell you when it's time to try chemical aids. We were all told for decades that extra fluids and fiber helped motility/fought constipation, but recent research says it isn't so. I don't buy it, at least not for me. I stopped my constipation 20 years ago by raising my fiber intake to 30-50 gms a day. Two mistakes plug me up now: buffets with insufficient water & fiber or a big load of white bread. Tip: "white bread" includes any so-called "foods" manufactured from whole grains, including the vast majority of supermarket breads, virtually all pasta, all pastries, essentially all bread/cracker/cake snack foods -- every grain product whose first ingredient on the label is not whole wheat. Virtually any grain product with less than 3 gms of fiber per ~40 gms of product is "white bread", and you can roll and pack some of them into a ball that will bounce . . . and plug your gut like a brick. I.P. > > I can remember really straining and pain when it started. I am leaning > > toward the Hemoroid. It has been getting better day-by-day. Changed my [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > will empty, and your doctor can tell you when it's time to try chemical > aids. Maybe it's your diet? Since I've been a low carber, (no bread or pasta in 7 years), lots of veggies & salad, and of course lots of protein...... I've had very few problems. SignatureJK Sinrod Sinrod Stained Glass Studios www.sinrodstudios.com Coney Island Memories www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories "Glassman" wrote > >> NEVER "strain at stool", as they call it. I've fought constipation for 50 >> years, and learned 45 years ago that straining produces two things: >> hemorrhoids and a few marbles -- insignificant results compared to an >> intestine-load of fecal material. When your bowels are ready to empty, >> they will empty, and your doctor can tell you when it's time to try >> chemical aids. > Maybe it's your diet? That's my point. My docs said I had IBS, but the more I learned about diet, the more convinced my problem was diet, MAYBE complicated by a sensitive colon. My diet included huge quantities of food in general, lots of "white bread" in particular, and little fiber until about 20 years ago. I still eat a lot, but the carbs have been changed to fruit, vegetables, and whole grains. A very experienced dietician who spent an hour studying my diet said not to change it one iota as long as the sheer quantity doen't creep up on me. > Since I've been a low carber, (no bread or pasta > in 7 years), lots of veggies & salad, I hate to break this to you '-) but . . . Foods have three building blocks: fats, proteins, and carbs. Which of those are veggies and salads made of? > and of course lots of protein...... > I've had very few problems. Except for prostate cancer, which emerges every time as correlating with the consumption of red meat. I.P. My buddy I.P. wrote to my buddy the Glassman...when Glassman said that he ate salads and protein... "I hate to break this to you '-) but . . . Foods have three building blocks: fats, proteins, and carbs. Which of those are veggies and salads made of?" Well, veggies have carbs AND protein, broccoli and cauliflower...the brooms for the colon....and there is also protein in veggies...like legumes, (beans, peas, broccoli too.) etc. Not to mention that Elvis died 'straining at stool' and he loved peanut butter (protein and fat) and banana (a carby fruit) sandwiches. 'Course, he fried 'em in butter and ate about 10 of 'em. :-) Also, the King died at 42...I wonder if he would have had any prostate problems? His daddy Vernon didn't. So...it will always be a great mystery. :-) Good Health to all, Ron B. Chicago > My buddy I.P. wrote to my buddy the Glassman...when Glassman said that > he ate salads and protein... [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > I've never heard of anyone getting overweight eating veggies. dale j. SignatureEmail: dalej2@mac.com > I've never heard of anyone getting overweight eating veggies. Guess you haven't tried deep-fried pork'n'beans over potato chips with sides of movie popcorn and candied yams. ;-) I.P. > I've never heard of anyone getting overweight eating veggies. I know a 250 pound woman who is a vegetarian. There are fats in some foods like nuts, and of course lots of starches and sugars in most vegetable foods. I think the main cause of being overweight is that intake of calories exceeds metabolism of calories for physical activity. I'm not sure it makes a huge difference where the calories come from since I believe the body can manufacture fats from both simple carbohydrates (e.g., the sugars in fruits) and complex carbohydrates (starches). Alan >> I've never heard of anyone getting overweight eating veggies. > > I know a 250 pound woman who is a vegetarian. It's always Always ALWAYS from a glandular imbalance. The two glands most frequently found to be in a state of imbalance resulting in weight gain and retention are the salivary and sweat glands. > >> I've never heard of anyone getting overweight eating veggies. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The two glands most frequently found to be in a state of imbalance > resulting in weight gain and retention are the salivary and sweat glands. ??? I would have thought thyroid or adrenal - Cushing's syndrome (glands) J "Brian" > wrote Someone wrote >> I know a 250 pound woman who is a vegetarian. > It's always Always ALWAYS from a glandular imbalance. > The two glands most frequently found to be in a state of imbalance > resulting in weight gain and retention are the salivary and sweat glands. Weight gain is the result of eating more calories than we expend, plain and simple, glands or no glands, genes or no genes, candy or broccoli. How much cheese and butter does this 250 pound vegetarian put on her veggies? I.P. > "Brian" > wrote > Someone wrote >> I know a 250 pound woman who is a vegetarian. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > I.P. Not true for everyone IP. For some it is that simple. You eat 2000 calories a day of candy or starch, and I'll eat 2000 calories a day of vegetables or protein. You think the results will be the same? My diet is quite high in fat, (meats & nuts), and quite low in carbs, (sugar & starch). I don't so this anymore, but there was a time that I ate 3000-4000 calories a day of mostly protein, and still lost 3-4 lbs a week. Try doing this with candy and pasta and bread. For most of us our bodies do not metabolize different food groups the same way. Maybe you're one of the lucky ones that can? Want to see studies that confirm this? Go no further than most of the last 10 years best selling diet books. Atkins, South Beach, Zone, Summers, many others. I know you think this is all a fad, but I know folks that have been eating this way for over 30 years, and have lost and kept off over 100 lbs while eating a high fat, low carb diet. I also know quite a few vegans that are obese & even some with PCa as well. Eating rice and beans and pasta (even without butter) for a carb resistant person is an invitation to gain lots of weight. SignatureJK Sinrod Sinrod Stained Glass Studios www.sinrodstudios.com Coney Island Memories www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories "Glassman" asked > You eat 2000 calories a day of candy or starch, > and I'll eat 2000 calories a day of vegetables or > protein. You think the results will be the same? If our energy expeditures are identical, Yes, according to every nutritionist, obesity researcher, physicist (it's basic thermodynamics), hospital, and university I've ever read, and they number in the hundreds. I.P. But, is it thermodynamics at the same rate for all? And, if thermodynamics, to we lose more wait in the Winter? SignaturePSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05, 5/05, 10/05 PSA .07 .05 .06 .05 .08 non Illegitimi carborundum > "Glassman" asked > > You eat 2000 calories a day of candy or starch, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I.P. Antarctic data indicates the answer is No, if I recall correctly. Our bodies take several steps to combat that hypothesis, and, besides, the only weather that counts is the weather next to our skin (i.e., inside our long johns and coats). I.P. > But, is it thermodynamics at the same rate for all? > > And, if thermodynamics, to we lose more wait in the Winter? > "Glassman" asked > > You eat 2000 calories a day of candy or starch, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I.P. I.P. I want to personally thank you for keeping your response as short as you did. As I made my post, I shuddered as I pushed the SEND button, worried that it would set us off yet again in this never ending debate. I won't post any studies validating my position, and will STOP here.... I promise I will. SignatureJK Sinrod Sinrod Stained Glass Studios www.sinrodstudios.com Coney Island Memories www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories "Glassman" wrote> > I.P. I want to personally thank you for keeping your response as short > as you did. As I made my post, I shuddered as I pushed the SEND button, > worried that it would set us off yet again in this never ending debate. CRAP! I didn't know we had a debate going on the cause of obesity, only the one on the right kinds of foods. To think I passed up a chance for a perfectly good argument . . . ;-) Oh, well, I suspect there are a couple of dozen other folks who are also glad we don't try to decide the issue here. I.P. > "Glassman" wrote> > > I.P. I want to personally thank you for keeping your response as short [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Oh, well, I suspect there are a couple of dozen other folks who are also > glad we don't try to decide the issue here. I for one consider it humorous. We have prostate cancer. By definition, we're a bunch of middle-aged and older men. By definition, we're not going to change out eating habits regardless of the evidence presented us. .... now where's that donut? "We have prostate cancer. By definition, we're a bunch of middle-aged and older men. By definition, we're not going to change out eating habits regardless of the evidence presented us." Pretty true...except that at the same time my PCa was diagnosed...Type 2 diabetes was ALSO found. I now eat the same things almost every day at every meal (not very imaginative I guess) and the donuts have gone bye-bye. Ron B. Chicago > except that at the same time my PCa was diagnosed...Type 2 > diabetes was ALSO found. > > I now eat the same things almost every day at every meal (not very > imaginative I guess) As long as you realize that's neither healthy (we need variety) nor necessary (very few types of food NEED to be cut from our diets to render them healthy), it's your call. I.P. I.P. wrote, about me eating the same foods all the time since I was dx with Type 2 diabetes: "As long as you realize that's neither healthy (we need variety) nor necessary (very few types of food NEED to be cut from our diets to render them healthy), it's your call." I understand I.P. I eat egg whites and veggie burgers, fruits etc. I just don't mind eating healthy...over and over...even without a lot of variety. The CDE (Diabetic Educator) called it "deja food". Some folks eat the same kinds of things all the time without looking to find new, great recipes that will give a varied and exciting pattern of meals. I guess I'm not varied and exciting. :-) Ron B. Chicago "Ron B" wrote > > I just don't mind eating healthy...over and over...even without a lot of > variety. > I guess I'm not varied and exciting. It's not a question of excitement or variety for their own sakes. My wife loves to cook a wide variety for our main meal each day, but I'm on my own for the two lesser meals, and I have to fight the temptation to fall into a tasty rut. The real issue is our need for a wide spectrum of nutrients, especially now that we already have cancer. Each group, and ESPECIALLY each COLOR of fruits and vegetables, has its own set of micronutrients, and the only way to get the wide variety of micronutrients we need is through a wide variety of fruits/veggies/grains. Additionally, no pill can package nutrients -- whether it's the dozens of minerals and vitamins or the thousands of micronutrients -- in the balanced, synergistic ways that Mother Nature does. Healthy FOODS are necessary, but not sufficient, for a healthy DIET. I.P. >" Additionally, no pill can package nutrients -- whether it's the dozens >of minerals and vitamins or the thousands of micronutrients -- in the >balanced, synergistic ways that Mother Nature does. Healthy FOODS are >necessary, but not sufficient, for a healthy DIET. OTOH, wouldn't it be fascinating if all the thousands of micronutrients the medical, health, and food supplement industries have devoted millions of man-years and billions of dollars on exist for the PLANTS' -- not the plant-EATERS' -- benefit? The ever-increasing evidence that many antioxidants do squat for us, or even harm us, makes me wonder . . . I.P. > "We have prostate cancer. By definition, we're a bunch of middle-aged > and older men. By definition, we're not going to change out eating > habits regardless of the evidence presented us." > > Pretty true...except that at the same time my PCa was diagnosed...Type 2 > diabetes was ALSO found. In many, but not all cases, switching to a low carb diet pretty much nomalizes your blood sugar without needing meds.... Talk to your doc to see how he feels about this plan for you. I'm not a doc, but have spoken with hundreds that have accomplished this. Of course you may not like eating filet mignon, lobster tails w/butter, veggies, nuts, whipped cream and such like I do? Diabetes runs on my family big time, but I doubt I'll ever get it with the way I eat. I don't have any bread, pasta, rice, sugar or high carb empty nutritional foods at all. My health and blood chemistry is fine after 7 years of this. Here's a few links if you want to read about it: http://www.diabetes-normalsugars.com/ http://lowcarbdiets.about.com/od/healthstudies/a/diabetes.htm SignatureJK Sinrod Sinrod Stained Glass Studios www.sinrodstudios.com Coney Island Memories www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories > we're a bunch of middle-aged and older men. > By definition, we're not going to change our eating habits > regardless of the evidence presented us. > Where's that donut? By definition? I don't think so. I totally revamped my eating habits in my 40s, when I learned how damaging sat fat is. Even the obvious, relatively immediate changes in my health warranted the effort, more improvements became clear over the next 10-20 years, and if I can just end-run these two damned cancers -- either of which could be due in part to the TON of sat fat I consumed before then -- those changes may add many years of excellent health to my life. Side benefits: I can eat all I want in the knowledge that 98% of it is healthy, and if I get any more serious illnesses not attributable to my first 40 years of ignorant culinary decadence, I can probably comfort myself by saying, "It ain't MY fault; I did all I could." I've long since forgotten, and have almost never missed, that last donut and slice of bacon I ate back in the '80s, but I can still savor that healthy family-sized serving of strawberry shortcake I ate yesterday. Diabetes Type II is overrunning our society, its DIRECT effects are horrendous and often comparable to the effects of PROSTATE CANCER, and it is very often self-induced and usually quickly reversible with moderate changes in our eating and exercise habits. Cardiovascular disease is often reversible . . . i.e. CURABLE . . . with diet and exercise. And our mental and physical vigor and capacity are HUGELY susceptible to improved diet and exercise beginning even in our '90s! It's your call, but I suspect millions of gray-haired people disagree with you . . . especially those who are still alive BECAUSE they disagree with you like my friend Jim. I.P. > I for one consider it humorous. We have prostate cancer. By definition, > we're a bunch of middle-aged and older men. By definition, we're not going > to change out eating habits regardless of the evidence presented us. > > .... now where's that donut? The chocolate one with nuts on the top? Don't have any idea. > "Glassman" wrote> > > I.P. I want to personally thank you for keeping your response as short [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > one on the right kinds of foods. To think I passed up a chance for a > perfectly good argument . . . ;-) "is that the 5 minute argument, or the full 1/2 hour"? Monty Python SignatureJK Sinrod Sinrod Stained Glass Studios www.sinrodstudios.com Coney Island Memories www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories > > I've never heard of anyone getting overweight eating veggies. > It's always Always ALWAYS from a glandular imbalance. > > The two glands most frequently found to be in a state of imbalance > resulting in weight gain and retention are the salivary and sweat glands. I was only referring to vegetables such as green leafy ect, none which are prepared in grease or mixed with cheese bacon bits, ect. Dalej. SignatureEmail: dalej2@mac.com Very interesting. I was a bean pole through school. 6'2" and 175 pounds as a high school sophomore (1970). 6'6" and 197 on my 21st birthday. Had my saliva glands ruptured in an auto accident when I was 17 and now I'm fat. SignaturePSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05, 5/05, 10/05 PSA .07 .05 .06 .05 .08 non Illegitimi carborundum > >> I've never heard of anyone getting overweight eating veggies. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The two glands most frequently found to be in a state of imbalance > resulting in weight gain and retention are the salivary and sweat glands. Hmmmm. Interesting. When Brian wrote about getting heavy: "It's always Always ALWAYS from a glandular imbalance. The two glands most frequently found to be in a state of imbalance resulting in weight gain and retention are the salivary and sweat glands.", I thought it was a joke about EATING too much and exercising too little. (Salivary glands, sweat glands?) But then again...I could be wrong. Ron B. Chicago > When Brian wrote about getting heavy: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > (Salivary glands, sweat glands?) I assumed that was a clever and accurate joke. I.P. >> When Brian wrote about getting heavy: >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > I.P. It was! There are folks where the glands involved are pancreas or thyroid, but for MOST (not all) folks, it's the salivary (*drool* *munch*) and sweat (*oof* *grunt*) glands that are in a state of imbalance. > > I've never heard of anyone getting overweight eating veggies. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > cause of being overweight is that intake of calories exceeds > metabolism of calories for physical activity. The main cause of obesity is having more fat cells...then filling them. http://home.howstuffworks.com/fat-cell1.htm Your body contains two types of fat tissue: * White fat - important in energy metabolism, heat insulation and mechanical cushioning. * Brown fat - found mostly in newborn babies, between the shoulders; important for thermogenesis (making heat). Fat tissue is made up of fat cells. Fat cells are a unique type of cell. You can think of a fat cell as a tiny plastic bag that holds a drop of fat: * White fat cells are large cells that have very little cytoplasm, only 15 percent cell volume, a small nucleus and one large fat droplet that makes up 85 percent of cell volume. * brown fat cells are somewhat smaller, are loaded with mitochondria and are composed of several smaller fat droplets. The mitochondria are able to generate heat. Fat cells are formed in the developing fetus during the third trimester of pregnancy, and later at the onset of puberty, when the sex hormones "kick in." It is during puberty that the differences in fat distribution between men and women begin to take form. One amazing fact is that fat cells do not multiply after puberty -- as your body stores more fat, the number of fat cells remains the same. Each fat cell simply gets bigger! > "Glassman" wrote > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Foods have three building blocks: fats, proteins, and carbs. > Which of those are veggies and salads made of? Almost all my carbs come from veggies & nuts. Maybe more carbs in those then you may realize. I eat broc or caulif or asparagus or Zuccini probably 5-6 times a week, and pecans-macadamia-almonds-pistacios every day. I may eat meat 2-3 times a week, eggs 2 times, and chicken or seafood 2-3 times. Despite all this, my last colonoscopy revealed the need for more fiber, according to the GI doc. I think he's wrong. I have not been constipated once in 7 years eating this way. I don't think you will argue with how I eat. I think the only thing you and I will fight about is the fruit issue. Tastes great, but so high in sugar and calories, not unlike candy. The only fruit I eat is some berries now and then. That's right no fruit to speak of in 7 years. Still alive and kicking! Blood test and echo cardiogram last week showed everything fine. SignatureJK Sinrod Sinrod Stained Glass Studios www.sinrodstudios.com Coney Island Memories www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories As long as onlookers base their diets on research, rather than the skimpy anecdotal stuff seen in non-nutrition forums such as this one, it's moot here. Weight gain = calories consumed minus calories expended, but weight, within reason, is a small part of the overall health picture. Nutrition and exercise are generally more important, as long as weight is in the ballpark. I.P. > Boy, I can't believe the things I have talked about on this group. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Dave P Sure it's a common side effect of several things, but damn man..... get yourself to a GI doc for a colonoscopy ASAP.... why mess around with questions here? SignatureJK Sinrod Sinrod Stained Glass Studios www.sinrodstudios.com Coney Island Memories www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories >> Boy, I can't believe the things I have talked about on this group. >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >yourself to a GI doc for a colonoscopy ASAP.... why mess around with >questions here? I read an article that stated that men who have had radiation following RP (such as myself) have a much higher rate of rectal cancer later. At my last colonoscopy my doc found and removed a rectal polyp. He said he read the same article and I now have to return much sooner than normal for my next borescope job. brody > and I now have to return much > sooner than normal for my next borescope job. While my doc was trying to decide whether my next colonoscopy should follow in 5 years or 10, a PC CT settled the issue by revealing a very large carcinoid tumor in my colon just three years after a negative/clean colonoscopy. I wouldn't have survived until the 5-year scoping (it would have been next fall), let alone the 10, if it hadn't been for my PC workup. That's not meant to scare you, and it's purely anecdotal, but it does establish the possibility that the experts can be way off on their timing. OTOH, bright red blood smeared down a stool is more indicative of hemorrhoids than cancer, as the man said. OTOH, the usual sodium phoshate-based bowel preps such as Fleet's Phospho Soda and Visicol carry serious rsks of dizziness, fainting, colon ulceration, and maybe kidney failure, especially in diabetics (Medical Letter on Drugs and Theraputics, July). The old, familiar, daunting gallon jug of Golytely (lytely, my a.s!) polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution is significantly safer, but less daunting if taken as a half gallon of PEG solution (OK, two liters for you folks on the SENSIBLE measuring system) plus 4 delayed release tablets of the laxative bisacodyl. The nice people of Golytely even market the latter combination as Halflytely (no kidding). My wife will be taking this info to her assman (for you Seinfeld fans) at her initial consult next month. I saw it in "Consumer Reports On Health", October issue). I.P. I.P. is our resident "Colon Guy" so his thoughts are worth listening to. I'm the resident 'scared as sh.t guy' so I'll just say this: The colonoscopy is a good thing and for SURE it's painless and not to be feared. And If "I" say so...it's the truth. (You can also say anything here...don't be embarrassed) Get it done to ease your mind. The guys are right...it sounds like the hemoroid. We all wish you the best, Ron B. Chicago I can't add much to what the others have said, but I did see the inside of my rectum imaged with a borescope of some kind and shown on a video monitor (this wasn't as much fun to watch as Seinfeld - but bear with me here.) A year after radiation, the tissue looked pretty raw. I'm guessing it will always look that way, and will always be a little more sensitive to further damage than it was before the radiation. However, I've had worse hemmorhoids before the radiation than I've had since, and the same drug store remedies that worked for me before still seem to be about as effective. Alan |
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
|
©2008 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.