3 Responses to Take your allopurinol now

1. mellissa_600 on 2007-01-29 13:31:37.105632

   Hello
   Im new here (Tim in the UK, age 36, 1st gout at 29. father had
   chronic kidney failure so some genetic pre-disposition there, plus I
   used to drink like a fish, like most young men in the UK)
   I have hundreds of questions, and many 'issues' regarding my
   strategy for managing gout - probably broadly similar to 'Arnold the
   skier' ie I will take alluprinol, one day, but only as a last
   resort, but initially attempting everything else (diet, abstinence,
   exercise, high water intake, cherries, accupuncture, supplements -
   bromelain, quercetin, antioxidants etc and yes 'gout cure'!, and
   very importantly - not getting stressed)
   I feel compelled to say I feel the attitude of some ('I have one
   word for you "alupurinol"') mildly offensive and somewhat insulting,
   it is a toxic drug with known side effects, some serious and has to
   be (probably) taken for life - so it is not a decision that can, or
   should be taken lightly.
   I do however understand it is a very effective drug and a non
   nonsense of 'just take the pill and then get on with your life' will
   work for some people.
   A previous GP (and a very good one) said to me 'if you are only
   having 3 mildish attacks a year, then you are doing OK, any more
   than that then consider allopurinol'
   I get the odd twinge when I know Ive overdone it - self inflicted -
   my fault, 3 or 4 diclofenac and it normally goes away - and I have
   about 3 mild-ish bouts a year - so I think Im doing OK?
   with reference to Chandlers original question - I thought is was
   accepted that starting a course of allopurinal 'can' trigger an
   attack, so it is surely prudent to wait until an existing attack
   subsides untill commencing with the allopurinol? Isnt that obvious
   and common sense?
   Weighing up the possibilty of a triggered attack verses the
   perceived slight benefit of starting the medecation straight away -
   surely the risk outweighs the benefit? (I hope Im making sense)
   I have never responded to anything like before (ie any message
   board) so I guess I am effectively sending an email to several
   hundred people? (how many people on this user group roughly? and are
   say 90% of you in US?)
   Apologies for my many typos and spelling mistakes in advance!
   regards
   Tim Smith

2. lynne_15 on 2007-01-29 12:18:10.793383

   As the author of the phrase, "I have one word for your: allopurinol", I would like to refer you to my next three words in that note, which were, "check it out" (which to most people would indicate that they should investigate for themselves). No intent to insult you or anyone else.
   
   Conversely, I take no offense from your statements, nor am I insulted. But I caution you not to quote people out of context.
   
   t1m_sm1thuk <t1m_sm1th@...
   
   Hello
   Im new here (Tim in the UK, age 36, 1st gout at 29. father had
   chronic kidney failure so some genetic pre-disposition there, plus I
   used to drink like a fish, like most young men in the UK)
   I have hundreds of questions, and many 'issues' regarding my
   strategy for managing gout - probably broadly similar to 'Arnold the
   skier' ie I will take alluprinol, one day, but only as a last
   resort, but initially attempting everything else (diet, abstinence,
   exercise, high water intake, cherries, accupuncture, supplements -
   bromelain, quercetin, antioxidants etc and yes 'gout cure'!, and
   very importantly - not getting stressed)
   I feel compelled to say I feel the attitude of some ('I have one
   word for you "alupurinol"') mildly offensive and somewhat insulting,
   it is a toxic drug with known side effects, some serious and has to
   be (probably) taken for life - so it is not a decision that can, or
   should be taken lightly.
   I do however understand it is a very effective drug and a non
   nonsense of 'just take the pill and then get on with your life' will
   work for some people.
   A previous GP (and a very good one) said to me 'if you are only
   having 3 mildish attacks a year, then you are doing OK, any more
   than that then consider allopurinol'
   I get the odd twinge when I know Ive overdone it - self inflicted -
   my fault, 3 or 4 diclofenac and it normally goes away - and I have
   about 3 mild-ish bouts a year - so I think Im doing OK?
   with reference to Chandlers original question - I thought is was
   accepted that starting a course of allopurinal 'can' trigger an
   attack, so it is surely prudent to wait until an existing attack
   subsides untill commencing with the allopurinol? Isnt that obvious
   and common sense?
   Weighing up the possibilty of a triggered attack verses the
   perceived slight benefit of starting the medecation straight away -
   surely the risk outweighs the benefit? (I hope Im making sense)
   I have never responded to anything like before (ie any message
   board) so I guess I am effectively sending an email to several
   hundred people? (how many people on this user group roughly? and are
   say 90% of you in US?)
   Apologies for my many typos and spelling mistakes in advance!
   regards
   Tim Smith

3. gil_900 on 2007-01-30 05:34:12.586303

   I think you are rationalizing.
   Take allopurinol for a year.
   EAt properly and drink a lot of water in that year and then get your
   urate tested. If it is below 5 or so, stop the allppurinol and go
   with your efforts to regulate your gout.
   I think your silly to wait till you are crippled from a gout attack
   before you are moved to start it.

Leave a Reply