I read papers on the internet that says that 90% of MC cases go into remission after 2.5 years. Is this true??
http://gut.bmj.com/content/43/5/629
Remission in microscopic colitis?
Moderators: Rosie, Stanz, Jean, CAMary, moremuscle, JFR, Dee, xet, Peggy, Matthew, Gabes-Apg, grannyh, Gloria, Mars, starfire, Polly, Joefnh
-
Gabes-Apg
- Emperor Penguin
- Posts: 8332
- Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:12 pm
- Location: Hunter Valley NSW Australia
Hi Ken
based on the inputs of members here this would be a reasonable timeline for remission.
what we have seen amongst the contributions here is that if people follow the low inflammation eating plan /lifestyle and fix key nutrient defenciences then yes, a good level of remission is attained.
there are good 'real life' examples of this in our members success stories area
http://www.perskyfarms.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=71
based on the inputs of members here this would be a reasonable timeline for remission.
what we have seen amongst the contributions here is that if people follow the low inflammation eating plan /lifestyle and fix key nutrient defenciences then yes, a good level of remission is attained.
there are good 'real life' examples of this in our members success stories area
http://www.perskyfarms.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=71
Gabes Ryan
"Anything that contradicts experience and logic should be abandoned"
Dalai Lama
"Anything that contradicts experience and logic should be abandoned"
Dalai Lama
Re: Remission in microscopic colitis?
Not if you don't change your diet. That link had nothing about changing the diet. Just says it goes away by itself.kenvh wrote:I read papers on the internet that says that 90% of MC cases go into remission after 2.5 years. Is this true??
http://gut.bmj.com/content/43/5/629
Yeah, true.
But i was already on the mc diet for 2 years. And food poisoning gave me this disease anyway.
So diet or not. It is triggered.
Or does my body needs another year now to down regulate the confused inflammation?
My calprotectin was 277, a week later 48, two weeks later 141.
I got stiff small intestine, stings, slight burning, cramps
But i was already on the mc diet for 2 years. And food poisoning gave me this disease anyway.
So diet or not. It is triggered.
Or does my body needs another year now to down regulate the confused inflammation?
My calprotectin was 277, a week later 48, two weeks later 141.
I got stiff small intestine, stings, slight burning, cramps
-
Gabes-Apg
- Emperor Penguin
- Posts: 8332
- Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:12 pm
- Location: Hunter Valley NSW Australia
Ken
as per what we are discussing in your other thread/post about the PPI's, Vit D3, and magnesium - remission means healing, to heal we need to avoid all triggers and have the right nutrients for the body to heal most importantly vit d3 and magnesium.
while ever someone is having a medication that causes MC (in your case PPI's) and they don't have the right nutrients to heal ( first step is Vit D3 and magnesium, and then for some it takes active B's etc) then remission/healing will be very slow or not occur.
even for those people that take ongoing low doses of various medications to help with MC (steroids or other medications) the medications have limited scope of success if the person is deficient in Vit D3 and magnesium.
did you read the posts on the member success stories area to see what others have done to achieve remission?
hope this helps
as per what we are discussing in your other thread/post about the PPI's, Vit D3, and magnesium - remission means healing, to heal we need to avoid all triggers and have the right nutrients for the body to heal most importantly vit d3 and magnesium.
while ever someone is having a medication that causes MC (in your case PPI's) and they don't have the right nutrients to heal ( first step is Vit D3 and magnesium, and then for some it takes active B's etc) then remission/healing will be very slow or not occur.
even for those people that take ongoing low doses of various medications to help with MC (steroids or other medications) the medications have limited scope of success if the person is deficient in Vit D3 and magnesium.
did you read the posts on the member success stories area to see what others have done to achieve remission?
hope this helps
Gabes Ryan
"Anything that contradicts experience and logic should be abandoned"
Dalai Lama
"Anything that contradicts experience and logic should be abandoned"
Dalai Lama
I'm in a pretty solid remission after 8 months. I had a reflare in April of 2016. I am age 56 as reference. April-July 2016 was WD. August of 2016 I went back to the few foods regimen and ate a lot of protein. See Gabes Phase I eating plan. After getting serious I started getting soft stool after just a couple of days on the few foods regimen (eating mostly protein). August-December 2016 I ate about 5 foods. Around January 2017 I added a few more foods.
As of the last several weeks I am in a solid remission and am able to eat more foods but still of course GF, DF, SF and corn free. Once I got serious it took me about 8 months to get into a very solid routine remission.
As of the last several weeks I am in a solid remission and am able to eat more foods but still of course GF, DF, SF and corn free. Once I got serious it took me about 8 months to get into a very solid routine remission.
Hi, sorry to stray off topic, but I was reading the article posted at the top of this thread, and it says:
"Even though no bacteriological investigations were performed and there is no clear evidence for an infectious aetiology of lymphocytic colitis, it is intriguing that all three patients treated with antibiotics showed prompt resolution of their symptoms. Similar results were reported in a recent publication, in which various antibiotics induced clinical remission in 63% of patients with collagenous colitis.17 In another study, bacterial cytotoxins were found in the stool of a patient with collagenous colitis.21 In addition, faecal diversion results in clinical and histological remission, with relapse on restoration of the faecal stream.22 All these findings suggest that a luminal infectious agent may be involved in the pathogenesis of collagenous colitis and lymphocytic colitis."
I thought this was pretty interesting, but am not really sure what "luminal infectious agent" means. Can anyone enlighten me? Does this just mean "bad bacteria in your gut"?
"Even though no bacteriological investigations were performed and there is no clear evidence for an infectious aetiology of lymphocytic colitis, it is intriguing that all three patients treated with antibiotics showed prompt resolution of their symptoms. Similar results were reported in a recent publication, in which various antibiotics induced clinical remission in 63% of patients with collagenous colitis.17 In another study, bacterial cytotoxins were found in the stool of a patient with collagenous colitis.21 In addition, faecal diversion results in clinical and histological remission, with relapse on restoration of the faecal stream.22 All these findings suggest that a luminal infectious agent may be involved in the pathogenesis of collagenous colitis and lymphocytic colitis."
I thought this was pretty interesting, but am not really sure what "luminal infectious agent" means. Can anyone enlighten me? Does this just mean "bad bacteria in your gut"?
Yes it does. The only problem with that claim is that it's based on false information. If it were true, most of us would not be here. We'd be in remission and out enjoying life. It's true that the fluoroquinolones almost always bring temporary remission, especially Cipro. What that claim doesn't say is that the patients almost always promptly relapse unless they keep taking the antibiotic, and that's hazardous to their long-term health. And Cipro causes so many other problems that it should only be used for emergencies.
If you will look at the polls on this site, you'll see that 40 % of the people who responded to the poll about antibiotics believe that antibiotics either did cause or may have caused their MC. Does that sound like antibiotics are a good way to treat MC? A lot of medical researchers are out of touch with the real world. That's one of the reasons why so much bad research is published.
Microscopic colitis was described over 40 years ago. In that 40+ years, they've been trying to find a bacterium to blame the disease on. But they can't find one. They're like Charlie Brown trying to kick that football — he's never gonna be successful, but he's never gonna give up.
But that's just my opinion and you know what opinions are worth.
Tex
If you will look at the polls on this site, you'll see that 40 % of the people who responded to the poll about antibiotics believe that antibiotics either did cause or may have caused their MC. Does that sound like antibiotics are a good way to treat MC? A lot of medical researchers are out of touch with the real world. That's one of the reasons why so much bad research is published.
Microscopic colitis was described over 40 years ago. In that 40+ years, they've been trying to find a bacterium to blame the disease on. But they can't find one. They're like Charlie Brown trying to kick that football — he's never gonna be successful, but he's never gonna give up.
But that's just my opinion and you know what opinions are worth.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
Thanks Tex! I'm glad to see that you are back up and at 'em! :-). Yes, I also found a lot of problems with this report. The study was a very small group to begin with, so not very conclusive in any case, and I also have a real problem with calling something that can cause 2 years of WD "benign"! I know what that means in medical terms, but I really feel like it diminishes the actual impact for people when our doctors act like it's not really a problem. Additionally, there was no indication of what anyone in the group might have been doing as treatment, so pretty much useless information overall....
I was finding the finding about antibiotics interesting in terms of what it might indicate in terms of causes related to dysbiosis, rather than seeing antibiotics as a possible cure. I am planning to avoid antibiotics whenever possible!
I was finding the finding about antibiotics interesting in terms of what it might indicate in terms of causes related to dysbiosis, rather than seeing antibiotics as a possible cure. I am planning to avoid antibiotics whenever possible!
LOL. Yes that's a pet peeve of mine. Why do a fifty-cent study when they could spend a dollar or two and maybe get a result that's actually meaningful.
And the use of the word "benign" to describe the disease is unfortunate because doctors take that to imply that it's a ho-hum disease when it's actually quite debilitating in many/most cases. A disease doesn't have to be fatal to knock your socks off.
IMO an antibiotic always causes at least temporary dysbiosis. If it didn't it would be useless.
Tex
And the use of the word "benign" to describe the disease is unfortunate because doctors take that to imply that it's a ho-hum disease when it's actually quite debilitating in many/most cases. A disease doesn't have to be fatal to knock your socks off.
IMO an antibiotic always causes at least temporary dysbiosis. If it didn't it would be useless.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
-
Pebbledash
- Gentoo Penguin
- Posts: 260
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:37 pm
A few of questions related to the article?
1. Does collagenous collitis ever revert to lymphocytic?
2. Is collagenous "worse"?
3. The article mentions the following treatments: 5-aminosalicylic acid or sulfosalazopyridine, spasmolytics. Are these better to use (ie more conservative, less side-effects) than Budesonide?
I certainly never got remission, and that's after about 6 years, and I "progressed" from lymphotic to collagenous, plus have celiacs. However, I never had any treatment, bar loperamide and pepto bismol. I have had periods that were relatively normal, but these have been unreliable, always a sense that the improvement was delicately balanced.
Before I go onto Budesonide I am considering options. At the moment psyllium is still apparently working quite well.
1. Does collagenous collitis ever revert to lymphocytic?
2. Is collagenous "worse"?
3. The article mentions the following treatments: 5-aminosalicylic acid or sulfosalazopyridine, spasmolytics. Are these better to use (ie more conservative, less side-effects) than Budesonide?
I certainly never got remission, and that's after about 6 years, and I "progressed" from lymphotic to collagenous, plus have celiacs. However, I never had any treatment, bar loperamide and pepto bismol. I have had periods that were relatively normal, but these have been unreliable, always a sense that the improvement was delicately balanced.
Before I go onto Budesonide I am considering options. At the moment psyllium is still apparently working quite well.
The disease can (and does) segue back and forth between the two forms of the disease.Pebbledash wrote:1. Does collagenous collitis ever revert to lymphocytic?
The clinical symotoms are the same. No one has documented that the internal damage is necessarily worse with either form.Pebbledash wrote:2. Is collagenous "worse"?
5-ASA is mesalamine. It sometimes works but it's generally inferior to budesopnide for supressing inflammation. Anti-spazmodics don't address the inflammation that causes MC. All this information is in the book.Pebbledash wrote:3. The article mentions the following treatments: 5-aminosalicylic acid or sulfosalazopyridine, spasmolytics. Are these better to use (ie more conservative, less side-effects) than Budesonide?
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
Hi Pebble,
I read the entire article/study. It is goofy. It is really unclear if the study participants are still on the drugs 2-1/2 years out and that is why they are in remission?
1. I don't think our members have noticed much difference between LC and CC.
2. Regarding the meds:
I've used diet alone, pepto, cholestyramine (not listed in article) and budesonide.
If you are doing ok with psyllium I'd stick with that.
Budesonide won't "heal" us. It helps with the symptoms. Tex has posted how because it actually slows healing since it is a steroid.
In terms of "strongness" I'd rate them
from low to high: pepto, then cholestyramine, then budesonide.
Both cholestyramine and a budesonide allowed me to eat broader categories of foods. The plus to cholestyramine is you don't have to taper off. You can try it for 4-6 weeks and see how you do. The negative to budesonide is that some folks have a tough time getting off of it.
I think Polly likes the cholestyramine as it allows her to eat a broader category of foods and is more benign than the budesonide.
I used the cholestyramine for about 6 weeks and I'll probably use it in vacation situations. I got off of it as it kind of caused me to "zone out." I was on budesonide for about 4.5 months when first diagnosed. I found it to be a pretty strong drug.
MY THEORY IS THAT FORUM MEMBERS, ON DIET ALONE AND/OR WITH DRUGS HAVE A QUICKER BETTER OUTCOME THAN THAT MENTIONED IN THE STUDY. FORUM MEMBERS THAT GO GF AND DF WITH OR WITHOUT DRUGS WILL GET TO REMISSION FASTER THAN NO DIET CHANGE AND DRUGS.
IT IS A REALISTIC EXPECTATION THAT WITH DIET CHANGE FORUM MEMBERS WILL HAVE IMPROVED RESULTS AT 3 MONTHS, 6 MONTHS, 9 MONTHS, 12 MONTHS, 18 MONTHS AND 24 MONTHS. SOMETIMES YOUNGER FOLKS HEAL FASTER AND THOSE WITHOUT OTHER HEALTH SITUATIONS CAN HEAL FASTER.
DRUGS WITH NO DIET CHANGE=HIGH INCIDENCE OF RELAPSE
I read the entire article/study. It is goofy. It is really unclear if the study participants are still on the drugs 2-1/2 years out and that is why they are in remission?
1. I don't think our members have noticed much difference between LC and CC.
2. Regarding the meds:
I've used diet alone, pepto, cholestyramine (not listed in article) and budesonide.
If you are doing ok with psyllium I'd stick with that.
Budesonide won't "heal" us. It helps with the symptoms. Tex has posted how because it actually slows healing since it is a steroid.
In terms of "strongness" I'd rate them
from low to high: pepto, then cholestyramine, then budesonide.
Both cholestyramine and a budesonide allowed me to eat broader categories of foods. The plus to cholestyramine is you don't have to taper off. You can try it for 4-6 weeks and see how you do. The negative to budesonide is that some folks have a tough time getting off of it.
I think Polly likes the cholestyramine as it allows her to eat a broader category of foods and is more benign than the budesonide.
I used the cholestyramine for about 6 weeks and I'll probably use it in vacation situations. I got off of it as it kind of caused me to "zone out." I was on budesonide for about 4.5 months when first diagnosed. I found it to be a pretty strong drug.
MY THEORY IS THAT FORUM MEMBERS, ON DIET ALONE AND/OR WITH DRUGS HAVE A QUICKER BETTER OUTCOME THAN THAT MENTIONED IN THE STUDY. FORUM MEMBERS THAT GO GF AND DF WITH OR WITHOUT DRUGS WILL GET TO REMISSION FASTER THAN NO DIET CHANGE AND DRUGS.
IT IS A REALISTIC EXPECTATION THAT WITH DIET CHANGE FORUM MEMBERS WILL HAVE IMPROVED RESULTS AT 3 MONTHS, 6 MONTHS, 9 MONTHS, 12 MONTHS, 18 MONTHS AND 24 MONTHS. SOMETIMES YOUNGER FOLKS HEAL FASTER AND THOSE WITHOUT OTHER HEALTH SITUATIONS CAN HEAL FASTER.
DRUGS WITH NO DIET CHANGE=HIGH INCIDENCE OF RELAPSE
-
Pebbledash
- Gentoo Penguin
- Posts: 260
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:37 pm
Great answers, thanks!
I have been recommended Budesonide but am presently on psyllium, which has definitely helped. However, until this bloody hemorrhoid goes I just can't think straight--need to heal before I risk a different regime. That is nearly two months of utter discomfort and praying that the damn thing will start to shrink. I HATE it.
I have been recommended Budesonide but am presently on psyllium, which has definitely helped. However, until this bloody hemorrhoid goes I just can't think straight--need to heal before I risk a different regime. That is nearly two months of utter discomfort and praying that the damn thing will start to shrink. I HATE it.