On one hand I'm 'okay' with it, on the other, I'm sick about it! :ymad:
Stephen's been well, no real change. He had 2-3 nights, a couple of weeks ago where he had pain, diarrhea and vomitting - I was afraid it was narrowing but, as it hasn't happened again, I'm back to thinking it was the amount of food he ate, when he ate it (just before starting EN) and the type of food (heavy, greasy).
I think the biggest factor is that Stephen is 18 and I have to accept his decision. In explaining the consequences of not getting the inflammation under control, the GI convinced Stephen remicade was essential or he would eventually face surgery. Stephen was very upset and scared when we left that apptmt. I think the GI was extreme and manipulative (saying things like you cannot live without a small bowel :ack
in how he presented the issues to an 18 year old boy. Especially as this was in October, GI said nothing else would be effective and we couldn't risk leaving the inflammation simmering so didn't want to try anything that might not work (LDN, entocort, flagyl, etc.) but yet left Stephen on nothing more than supplemental EN until today!!!!
But, the fact is that three MREs did show chronic inflammation, EN seemed to be controlling the crohns but not enough to eliminate the inflammation. The GI is correct in that continued inflammation will eventually cause more serious issues so 'something' had to be added. While I don't believe the situation is quite as urgent as the GI described it to be, Stephen now believes surgery is very likely if we don't move ahead with a 'real' medicine (as per GI comments, Stephen doesn't believe LDN has 'real' success :ymad
.
The GI really pushed remicade opposed to humira, imuran, metho, etc. If I have to choose from these meds, then I'm as 'happy' with remicade as I am with any of these other choices.
There have been studies that have shown the cancer risk is increased if biologics AND immunosuppressants are used (whether together or not) so, if we're going to go with immunosuppressants only to later move on to the biologics, I may as well start with the biologics and, perhaps, avoid using immunosuppressants and the 'higher' risk. (However, I have read of, at least, one other study that showed the same risk with biologics alone. Who knows???)
I've also read that remicade is most successful if used within two years of diagnosis and before other meds are used. If I'm going with any med, I may as well give it (remicade) the greatest chance of being successful. Again, simply a case of accepting the lesser of two evils...
Stephen is convinced he needs remicade, he may not be wrong??? At his age, I can't/won't take on the responsibility of telling him 'no, not remicade, you're going to do LDN' and then have him face surgery in a year's time.
So, in a (longish) nutshell... this is how I have come to a grudging acceptance.
As far as what you are attempting with the SCD diet... I don't have an opinion on whether it can or can't work. I know it wouldn't work for Stephen as he's too picky an eater and between our schedules and him leaving for university in September, it would be completely unrealistic to think it would be a change Stephen could make now. Perhaps, if he was much younger or when he's older...