It is good that you are following the advice of your specialist, but are you following the advice of your specialist by not taking Fumaderm on weekends? I find that arthritis and missed doses coincide.

(Sat-12-03-2016, 01:51 AM)Bill Wrote: It is good that you are following the advice of your specialist, but are you following the advice of your specialist by not taking Fumaderm on weekends? I find that arthritis and missed doses coincide.

Thanks Bill but I've stopped intermittent dosing with the Fumaderm as I had signs of it coming back....I am back to 480mg 7 days a week...... So no more experimenting for me

Fair enough, Jim. Your specialist is just trying to find the best evidence-based treatment for you and not treat you like a guinea pig. That would be unethical. What I dont understand is why you would be put on mtx again. Is the rheumatologist aware that you had been treated with it previously?

Of course on point #2 of Fred, He thinks he is going the correct proven road with MTX but he doesn't know how dangerous it is. Ask him if he will start using it for two weeks.
It is the DMF that is not dangerous.

I would forever refuse MTX, really the dermatologists should try it themselves for a few weeks, then they would know, make that proposition to him

At this point you even have the industry with you. Biog*n earns so much money on DMF that they never will release anything that will damage the name of DMF. Which of course anyway cannot be found, we have decades of history over here in the Netherlands.

Go search on the Internet for calamities with MTX those are easy to find and take that with you next time.

(Sat-12-03-2016, 09:08 AM)Caroline Wrote: Of course on point #2 of Fred, He thinks he is going the correct proven road with MTX but he doesn't know how dangerous it is. Ask him if he will start using it for two weeks.
It is the DMF that is not dangerous.

I would forever refuse MTX, really the dermatologists should try it themselves for a few weeks, then they would know, make that proposition to him  

At this point you even have the industry with you. Biog*n earns so much money on DMF that they never will release anything that will damage the name of DMF. Which of course anyway cannot be found, we have decades of history over here in the Netherlands.

Go search on the Internet for calamities with MTX those are easy to find and take that with you next time.

 

Thanks Caroline I will arm myself with everything I can find thanks for the pointers, but I appear to be   but I will give it my best arguement in July

You might mention this case of mtx possibly activating prostate cancer.

Methotrexate therapy leading to a rapid progression of a previously indolent prostate cancer: is immunosuppression to blame?

(Sat-12-03-2016, 11:03 AM)Bill Wrote: You might mention this case of mtx possibly activating prostate cancer.

Methotrexate therapy leading to a rapid progression of a previously indolent prostate cancer: is immunosuppression to blame?

Thanks Bill I will look that up and use it, as a prostate cancer survivor I don't want to place myself at further risk

(Sat-12-03-2016, 09:08 AM)Caroline Wrote: Of course on point #2 of Fred, He thinks he is going the correct proven road with MTX but he doesn't know how dangerous it is. Ask him if he will start using it for two weeks.
It is the DMF that is not dangerous.

I think I'm misunderstanding that comment.  

But just to clarify I wasn't suggesting for one minute Jim goes back onto Methotrexate. I was just saying that no matter what we think they have to follow the rules.

(Sat-12-03-2016, 13:08 PM)Fred Wrote:

(Sat-12-03-2016, 09:08 AM)Caroline Wrote: Of course on point #2 of Fred, He thinks he is going the correct proven road with MTX but he doesn't know how dangerous it is. Ask him if he will start using it for two weeks.
It is the DMF that is not dangerous.

I think I'm misunderstanding that comment.  

But just to clarify I wasn't suggesting for one minute Jim goes back onto Methotrexate. I was just saying that no matter what we think they have to follow the rules.

Indeed they are incapable of thinking outside the box ......which is a shame and could widen there knowledge

I am ready to move on to something else ( not methotrexate) if it can be shown that what I'm going onto is less dangerous than Fumaderm and the side effects are manageable....... My reluctance to change is based on studying the drug and knowing how I react to it, I would have thought if there was a chance that Fumaderm could control the psoriatic arthritis they would try it ......it's not like I'm asking to go onto something new .

(Sat-12-03-2016, 13:08 PM)Fred Wrote:

(Sat-12-03-2016, 09:08 AM)Caroline Wrote: Of course on point #2 of Fred, He thinks he is going the correct proven road with MTX but he doesn't know how dangerous it is. Ask him if he will start using it for two weeks.
It is the DMF that is not dangerous.

I think I'm misunderstanding that comment.  

But just to clarify I wasn't suggesting for one minute Jim goes back onto Methotrexate. I was just saying that no matter what we think they have to follow the rules.

True, but the rules do not state that you are allowed to place the patient deliberately in a more dangerous situation that is necessary.