Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Vibrating plate+Actonel
Vibrating plate+Actonel
I have seen in the local gym a new machine which claims to be very helpful,
among other things, in re-enforcing the bone mass. You step on the plate
and
it starts vibrating (it has a panel where you can select the frequency of
vibration
and the power). An Italian named Dr. Bosco (Ph.D) states that this
treatment is
very good for athletes and it is also good for osteoporosis. Other
(reliable?)
source states that this treatment/system was used by the Russians to help
their
astronauts recover the bone mass they had lost in space.
Does anyone know something/have used this vibrating step?
I had been receiving Actonel for 4.5 years and I stopped 6 months ago, when
I discovered
a stone in my left kidney and a tumor in my right (tumor was removed by
laparoscopic surgery).
Ever since, I did not take Actonel at all. The doctor says I have to
continue for 6 months
more, to complete "5 years of Actonel" which is the limit.
I feel that I must give priority to my kidney.
Have you heard/read - whatever - that Actonel is responsible for the
formation of stones
in the kidneys?? I have never taken Calcium tablets. I thing that this
will definitely harm
my kidneys.
I am male, 57 and my osteoporosis problem is not severe. Actually they class
it " Osteopenia".
Any information will be appreciated (To point 1 or 2 or both).
Thanks
AP
I have seen in the local gym a new machine which claims to be very helpful,
among other things, in re-enforcing the bone mass. You step on the plate
and
it starts vibrating (it has a panel where you can select the frequency of
vibration
and the power). An Italian named Dr. Bosco (Ph.D) states that this
treatment is
very good for athletes and it is also good for osteoporosis. Other
(reliable?)
source states that this treatment/system was used by the Russians to help
their
astronauts recover the bone mass they had lost in space.
Does anyone know something/have used this vibrating step?
I had been receiving Actonel for 4.5 years and I stopped 6 months ago, when
I discovered
a stone in my left kidney and a tumor in my right (tumor was removed by
laparoscopic surgery).
Ever since, I did not take Actonel at all. The doctor says I have to
continue for 6 months
more, to complete "5 years of Actonel" which is the limit.
I feel that I must give priority to my kidney.
Have you heard/read - whatever - that Actonel is responsible for the
formation of stones
in the kidneys?? I have never taken Calcium tablets. I thing that this
will definitely harm
my kidneys.
I am male, 57 and my osteoporosis problem is not severe. Actually they class
it " Osteopenia".
Any information will be appreciated (To point 1 or 2 or both).
Thanks
AP
Re: Vibrating plate+Actonel
Anyone knows something, please!
> I had been receiving Actonel for 4.5 years and I stopped 6 months ago,
> when I discovered
> a stone in my left kidney and a tumor in my right (tumor was removed by
> laparoscopic surgery).
> Ever since, I did not take Actonel at all. The doctor says I have to
> continue for 6 months
> more, to complete "5 years of Actonel" which is the limit.
> I feel that I must give priority to my kidney.
> Have you heard/read - whatever - that Actonel is responsible for the
> formation of stones
> in the kidneys?? I have never taken Calcium tablets. I thing that this
> will definitely harm
> my kidneys.
> I am male, 57 and my osteoporosis problem is not severe. Actually they
> class it " Osteopenia".
>
> Any information will be appreciated (To point 1 or 2 or both).
> Thanks
> AP
>
>
>
>
>
>
Anyone knows something, please!
> I had been receiving Actonel for 4.5 years and I stopped 6 months ago,
> when I discovered
> a stone in my left kidney and a tumor in my right (tumor was removed by
> laparoscopic surgery).
> Ever since, I did not take Actonel at all. The doctor says I have to
> continue for 6 months
> more, to complete "5 years of Actonel" which is the limit.
> I feel that I must give priority to my kidney.
> Have you heard/read - whatever - that Actonel is responsible for the
> formation of stones
> in the kidneys?? I have never taken Calcium tablets. I thing that this
> will definitely harm
> my kidneys.
> I am male, 57 and my osteoporosis problem is not severe. Actually they
> class it " Osteopenia".
>
> Any information will be appreciated (To point 1 or 2 or both).
> Thanks
> AP
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Vibrating plate+Actonel
"AP" <andrepyr@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:f3clnv$kra$1@mouse.otenet.gr...
> Anyone knows something, please!
>
>> I had been receiving Actonel for 4.5 years and I stopped 6 months ago, when I discovered
>> a stone in my left kidney and a tumor in my right (tumor was removed by laparoscopic surgery).
>> Ever since, I did not take Actonel at all. The doctor says I have to continue for 6 months
>> more, to complete "5 years of Actonel" which is the limit.
>> I feel that I must give priority to my kidney.
>> Have you heard/read - whatever - that Actonel is responsible for the formation of stones
>> in the kidneys?? I have never taken Calcium tablets. I thing that this will definitely harm
>> my kidneys.
>> I am male, 57 and my osteoporosis problem is not severe. Actually they class it " Osteopenia".
>>
>> Any information will be appreciated (To point 1 or 2 or both).
>> Thanks
>> AP
The reason you haven't heard a reply is because nobody has come across this.
And if everyone reading your post replies, you'ld never find a helpful response.
Observations:
1) you haven't reported what your doctor said s/he will know more than
anyone in this news group. Ask him/her.
2) you've been taking Actonel for 4.5 years without a kidney stone - I doubt
that they are related.
3) Your doctor prescribed Actonel but didn't tell you to get more calcium?
Art
"AP" <andrepyr@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:f3clnv$kra$1@mouse.otenet.gr...
> Anyone knows something, please!
>
>> I had been receiving Actonel for 4.5 years and I stopped 6 months ago, when I discovered
>> a stone in my left kidney and a tumor in my right (tumor was removed by laparoscopic surgery).
>> Ever since, I did not take Actonel at all. The doctor says I have to continue for 6 months
>> more, to complete "5 years of Actonel" which is the limit.
>> I feel that I must give priority to my kidney.
>> Have you heard/read - whatever - that Actonel is responsible for the formation of stones
>> in the kidneys?? I have never taken Calcium tablets. I thing that this will definitely harm
>> my kidneys.
>> I am male, 57 and my osteoporosis problem is not severe. Actually they class it " Osteopenia".
>>
>> Any information will be appreciated (To point 1 or 2 or both).
>> Thanks
>> AP
The reason you haven't heard a reply is because nobody has come across this.
And if everyone reading your post replies, you'ld never find a helpful response.
Observations:
1) you haven't reported what your doctor said s/he will know more than
anyone in this news group. Ask him/her.
2) you've been taking Actonel for 4.5 years without a kidney stone - I doubt
that they are related.
3) Your doctor prescribed Actonel but didn't tell you to get more calcium?
Art
Re: Vibrating plate+Actonel
On Sun, 27 May 2007 21:53:21 GMT, "Art S" <thedabbler02@earthlink . net >
wrote:
>Observations:
>1) you haven't reported what your doctor said s/he will know more than
> anyone in this news group. Ask him/her.
>2) you've been taking Actonel for 4.5 years without a kidney stone - I doubt
> that they are related.
>3) Your doctor prescribed Actonel but didn't tell you to get more calcium?
Lots of people (and, unfortunately some doctors) still believe that
calcium kidney stones are caused by too much calcium in the patient's
diet. Not so. They're caused by too much oxalic acid in the
patient's diet. The oxalic acid grabs the calcium as it runs through
the kidneys and bonds with it, forcing the growth. Actually, the
stones can be kind of pretty.
The OP should look up oxalic acid and what foods contain it. Then
stop eating any rhubarb, chocolate, or peanuts and stop drinking colas
and tea (tisanes are probably still just fine), if concerned about
kidney stones. There are a lot of foods / drinks that should be
avoided, but those are the ones I remember off the top of my head. And
not all kidney stones are calcium stones, so asking the doctor what
the pathologist said about the stones would be a good idea, too.
Tumors probably have no relationship to either calcium or stones.
The OP should definitely talk to a doctor and a specialist in urology
before giving up either actonel or calcium. Particularly calcium. I
know. I gave it up for years after my first couple of calcium stones.
My GP agreed that was wise. That was before it started coming out
about oxalic acid. Bah. My GP and I were both unhappy about that
when the osteoporosis started being evident.
BTW, the 5 years is not a minimum. It's a maximum. So 4 1/2 years
probably did almost as much good as the full 5 would have. And the
reason the 5 years is a maximum is that they've discovered that it
just doesn't do any more good after that time. Maybe after a 5 to 10
year break of no actonel it'll prove worthwhile to do another time of
it. Maybe not. Keep in touch with the latest with the doctor?
Doctors really hate giving patients medicines that aren't going to do
them any good.
--
r.bc: vixen
Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher.
Almost entirely harmless. Really.
* w w w .visi . com /~cyli
On Sun, 27 May 2007 21:53:21 GMT, "Art S" <thedabbler02@earthlink . net >
wrote:
>Observations:
>1) you haven't reported what your doctor said s/he will know more than
> anyone in this news group. Ask him/her.
>2) you've been taking Actonel for 4.5 years without a kidney stone - I doubt
> that they are related.
>3) Your doctor prescribed Actonel but didn't tell you to get more calcium?
Lots of people (and, unfortunately some doctors) still believe that
calcium kidney stones are caused by too much calcium in the patient's
diet. Not so. They're caused by too much oxalic acid in the
patient's diet. The oxalic acid grabs the calcium as it runs through
the kidneys and bonds with it, forcing the growth. Actually, the
stones can be kind of pretty.
The OP should look up oxalic acid and what foods contain it. Then
stop eating any rhubarb, chocolate, or peanuts and stop drinking colas
and tea (tisanes are probably still just fine), if concerned about
kidney stones. There are a lot of foods / drinks that should be
avoided, but those are the ones I remember off the top of my head. And
not all kidney stones are calcium stones, so asking the doctor what
the pathologist said about the stones would be a good idea, too.
Tumors probably have no relationship to either calcium or stones.
The OP should definitely talk to a doctor and a specialist in urology
before giving up either actonel or calcium. Particularly calcium. I
know. I gave it up for years after my first couple of calcium stones.
My GP agreed that was wise. That was before it started coming out
about oxalic acid. Bah. My GP and I were both unhappy about that
when the osteoporosis started being evident.
BTW, the 5 years is not a minimum. It's a maximum. So 4 1/2 years
probably did almost as much good as the full 5 would have. And the
reason the 5 years is a maximum is that they've discovered that it
just doesn't do any more good after that time. Maybe after a 5 to 10
year break of no actonel it'll prove worthwhile to do another time of
it. Maybe not. Keep in touch with the latest with the doctor?
Doctors really hate giving patients medicines that aren't going to do
them any good.
--
r.bc: vixen
Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher.
Almost entirely harmless. Really.
* w w w .visi . com /~cyli
Re: Vibrating plate+Actonel
Thanks for your response.
To be frank, I am very confused. I have 1 point something kidneys and my
good kidney
has a stone and a cyst. The other 0 point something was taken out.
There is no way to see what kind of stone it is, unless it goes out
(propably through urethtra).
I used to scan my kidneys every year since I was 40 (17 years ago) and never
had anything.
The only thing that changed in my life and diet is " Actonel". And the last
scan showed
stone. (and a tumor, which presumably has nothing to do with Actonel).
Since I have almost completed the cycle of Actonel (4.5 years) I think about
disontinuing it.
As to your statement : "Doctors know more than anyone in this newsgroup", it
sounds very logical.
However, I have seen more than 8 doctors (urologists and nephrologists) and
their recomendations
vary a lot. I have no choice but use common sense only, which says that if
kidneys get worst, I will
get into bigger trouble, than that of less stronger bones.
I want to thank you again and wish all the best everyone in this newsgroup.
AP
"Cyli" <cylise@gmail . com > wrote in message
news:s1pk531duanjrk84hv43fdbqhm0go529r4@4ax . com ...
> On Sun, 27 May 2007 21:53:21 GMT, "Art S" <thedabbler02@earthlink . net >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Observations:
>>1) you haven't reported what your doctor said s/he will know more than
>> anyone in this news group. Ask him/her.
>>2) you've been taking Actonel for 4.5 years without a kidney stone - I
>>doubt
>> that they are related.
>>3) Your doctor prescribed Actonel but didn't tell you to get more calcium?
>
>
> Lots of people (and, unfortunately some doctors) still believe that
> calcium kidney stones are caused by too much calcium in the patient's
> diet. Not so. They're caused by too much oxalic acid in the
> patient's diet. The oxalic acid grabs the calcium as it runs through
> the kidneys and bonds with it, forcing the growth. Actually, the
> stones can be kind of pretty.
>
> The OP should look up oxalic acid and what foods contain it. Then
> stop eating any rhubarb, chocolate, or peanuts and stop drinking colas
> and tea (tisanes are probably still just fine), if concerned about
> kidney stones. There are a lot of foods / drinks that should be
> avoided, but those are the ones I remember off the top of my head. And
> not all kidney stones are calcium stones, so asking the doctor what
> the pathologist said about the stones would be a good idea, too.
>
> Tumors probably have no relationship to either calcium or stones.
>
> The OP should definitely talk to a doctor and a specialist in urology
> before giving up either actonel or calcium. Particularly calcium. I
> know. I gave it up for years after my first couple of calcium stones.
> My GP agreed that was wise. That was before it started coming out
> about oxalic acid. Bah. My GP and I were both unhappy about that
> when the osteoporosis started being evident.
>
> BTW, the 5 years is not a minimum. It's a maximum. So 4 1/2 years
> probably did almost as much good as the full 5 would have. And the
> reason the 5 years is a maximum is that they've discovered that it
> just doesn't do any more good after that time. Maybe after a 5 to 10
> year break of no actonel it'll prove worthwhile to do another time of
> it. Maybe not. Keep in touch with the latest with the doctor?
> Doctors really hate giving patients medicines that aren't going to do
> them any good.
> --
>
> r.bc: vixen
> Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher.
> Almost entirely harmless. Really.
>
> * w w w .visi . com /~cyli
Thanks for your response.
To be frank, I am very confused. I have 1 point something kidneys and my
good kidney
has a stone and a cyst. The other 0 point something was taken out.
There is no way to see what kind of stone it is, unless it goes out
(propably through urethtra).
I used to scan my kidneys every year since I was 40 (17 years ago) and never
had anything.
The only thing that changed in my life and diet is " Actonel". And the last
scan showed
stone. (and a tumor, which presumably has nothing to do with Actonel).
Since I have almost completed the cycle of Actonel (4.5 years) I think about
disontinuing it.
As to your statement : "Doctors know more than anyone in this newsgroup", it
sounds very logical.
However, I have seen more than 8 doctors (urologists and nephrologists) and
their recomendations
vary a lot. I have no choice but use common sense only, which says that if
kidneys get worst, I will
get into bigger trouble, than that of less stronger bones.
I want to thank you again and wish all the best everyone in this newsgroup.
AP
"Cyli" <cylise@gmail . com > wrote in message
news:s1pk531duanjrk84hv43fdbqhm0go529r4@4ax . com ...
> On Sun, 27 May 2007 21:53:21 GMT, "Art S" <thedabbler02@earthlink . net >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Observations:
>>1) you haven't reported what your doctor said s/he will know more than
>> anyone in this news group. Ask him/her.
>>2) you've been taking Actonel for 4.5 years without a kidney stone - I
>>doubt
>> that they are related.
>>3) Your doctor prescribed Actonel but didn't tell you to get more calcium?
>
>
> Lots of people (and, unfortunately some doctors) still believe that
> calcium kidney stones are caused by too much calcium in the patient's
> diet. Not so. They're caused by too much oxalic acid in the
> patient's diet. The oxalic acid grabs the calcium as it runs through
> the kidneys and bonds with it, forcing the growth. Actually, the
> stones can be kind of pretty.
>
> The OP should look up oxalic acid and what foods contain it. Then
> stop eating any rhubarb, chocolate, or peanuts and stop drinking colas
> and tea (tisanes are probably still just fine), if concerned about
> kidney stones. There are a lot of foods / drinks that should be
> avoided, but those are the ones I remember off the top of my head. And
> not all kidney stones are calcium stones, so asking the doctor what
> the pathologist said about the stones would be a good idea, too.
>
> Tumors probably have no relationship to either calcium or stones.
>
> The OP should definitely talk to a doctor and a specialist in urology
> before giving up either actonel or calcium. Particularly calcium. I
> know. I gave it up for years after my first couple of calcium stones.
> My GP agreed that was wise. That was before it started coming out
> about oxalic acid. Bah. My GP and I were both unhappy about that
> when the osteoporosis started being evident.
>
> BTW, the 5 years is not a minimum. It's a maximum. So 4 1/2 years
> probably did almost as much good as the full 5 would have. And the
> reason the 5 years is a maximum is that they've discovered that it
> just doesn't do any more good after that time. Maybe after a 5 to 10
> year break of no actonel it'll prove worthwhile to do another time of
> it. Maybe not. Keep in touch with the latest with the doctor?
> Doctors really hate giving patients medicines that aren't going to do
> them any good.
> --
>
> r.bc: vixen
> Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher.
> Almost entirely harmless. Really.
>
> * w w w .visi . com /~cyli
Re: Vibrating plate+Actonel
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:05:43 +0300, "AP" <andrepyr@otenet.gr> wrote:
>Thanks for your response.
>To be frank, I am very confused. I have 1 point something kidneys and my
>good kidney
>has a stone and a cyst. The other 0 point something was taken out.
>There is no way to see what kind of stone it is, unless it goes out
>(propably through urethtra).
Which, if you've never had one do it, you'll find to be very painful.
Be prepared.
>I used to scan my kidneys every year since I was 40 (17 years ago) and never
>had anything.
Now that's a scary statement. You had scans of your kidneys every
year? X-ray? CAT? What does that do to otherwise healthy tissue?
>The only thing that changed in my life and diet is " Actonel". And the last
>scan showed
>stone. (and a tumor, which presumably has nothing to do with Actonel).
>Since I have almost completed the cycle of Actonel (4.5 years) I think about
>disontinuing it.
Don't forget that you also aged. Aging shows up things that never
happened before in your body.
>
>As to your statement : "Doctors know more than anyone in this newsgroup", it
>sounds very logical.
Not my statement. Please don't attribute that to me. Doctors usually
know a lot, but.... It was someone else who said it.
>However, I have seen more than 8 doctors (urologists and nephrologists) and
>their recomendations
>vary a lot. I have no choice but use common sense only, which says that if
>kidneys get worst, I will
>get into bigger trouble, than that of less stronger bones.
Truth in that. And the interactions and the parts that fail and the
meds for it all start being one big snarly web, gaining in complexity
every year.
>I want to thank you again and wish all the best everyone in this newsgroup.
You're welcome. If it was useful in any way, I'm sure we're all happy
to have helped some.
--
r.bc: vixen
Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher.
Almost entirely harmless. Really.
* w w w .visi . com /~cyli
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:05:43 +0300, "AP" <andrepyr@otenet.gr> wrote:
>Thanks for your response.
>To be frank, I am very confused. I have 1 point something kidneys and my
>good kidney
>has a stone and a cyst. The other 0 point something was taken out.
>There is no way to see what kind of stone it is, unless it goes out
>(propably through urethtra).
Which, if you've never had one do it, you'll find to be very painful.
Be prepared.
>I used to scan my kidneys every year since I was 40 (17 years ago) and never
>had anything.
Now that's a scary statement. You had scans of your kidneys every
year? X-ray? CAT? What does that do to otherwise healthy tissue?
>The only thing that changed in my life and diet is " Actonel". And the last
>scan showed
>stone. (and a tumor, which presumably has nothing to do with Actonel).
>Since I have almost completed the cycle of Actonel (4.5 years) I think about
>disontinuing it.
Don't forget that you also aged. Aging shows up things that never
happened before in your body.
>
>As to your statement : "Doctors know more than anyone in this newsgroup", it
>sounds very logical.
Not my statement. Please don't attribute that to me. Doctors usually
know a lot, but.... It was someone else who said it.
>However, I have seen more than 8 doctors (urologists and nephrologists) and
>their recomendations
>vary a lot. I have no choice but use common sense only, which says that if
>kidneys get worst, I will
>get into bigger trouble, than that of less stronger bones.
Truth in that. And the interactions and the parts that fail and the
meds for it all start being one big snarly web, gaining in complexity
every year.
>I want to thank you again and wish all the best everyone in this newsgroup.
You're welcome. If it was useful in any way, I'm sure we're all happy
to have helped some.
--
r.bc: vixen
Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher.
Almost entirely harmless. Really.
* w w w .visi . com /~cyli
Next: Negroids much less likely to get Osteoporosis
Previous: Milk basic protein promotes bone formation
