What's new
By:
Filters
Cystic Fibrosis Forum (EXP)

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Vitamin IV's?

M

Marjolein

New member
I have heard that it is not good to have too many vitamins though, maybe for some vitamins it's ok but i think not for all. I would definately contact your CF doc first.
They should know if it's ok for you to have an extra vitamin boost.
I am on vitam supplement for as long as i know and my levels are checked every year, the dosage that i had to take has changed according to what my levels said.

Good luck with hopefully trying in the future!
 
M

Marjolein

New member
I have heard that it is not good to have too many vitamins though, maybe for some vitamins it's ok but i think not for all. I would definately contact your CF doc first.
They should know if it's ok for you to have an extra vitamin boost.
I am on vitam supplement for as long as i know and my levels are checked every year, the dosage that i had to take has changed according to what my levels said.

Good luck with hopefully trying in the future!
 
M

Marjolein

New member
I have heard that it is not good to have too many vitamins though, maybe for some vitamins it's ok but i think not for all. I would definately contact your CF doc first.
They should know if it's ok for you to have an extra vitamin boost.
I am on vitam supplement for as long as i know and my levels are checked every year, the dosage that i had to take has changed according to what my levels said.

Good luck with hopefully trying in the future!
 
M

Marjolein

New member
I have heard that it is not good to have too many vitamins though, maybe for some vitamins it's ok but i think not for all. I would definately contact your CF doc first.
They should know if it's ok for you to have an extra vitamin boost.
I am on vitam supplement for as long as i know and my levels are checked every year, the dosage that i had to take has changed according to what my levels said.

Good luck with hopefully trying in the future!
 
M

Marjolein

New member
I have heard that it is not good to have too many vitamins though, maybe for some vitamins it's ok but i think not for all. I would definately contact your CF doc first.
They should know if it's ok for you to have an extra vitamin boost.
I am on vitam supplement for as long as i know and my levels are checked every year, the dosage that i had to take has changed according to what my levels said.

Good luck with hopefully trying in the future!
 
K

Keepercjr

Guest
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>lightNlife</b></i>


According to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation 2005 Patient Registry Report, 196 total pregnancies were recorded. However, fewer than 5 live births are recorded. That's not exactly a good track record of CFers and pregnancy.</end quote></div>

I just looked at the report and I see the statistic that you mention. I know of 3 live births including myself in 2005 - if the statistics are true, then that leaves only 2 other CF women to give birth. Also, how can you have between 4 and 5 live births? If they can give a total # of pregnancies (196) then how come they can't give a total # of births instead of saying 1.9 per 100 women? I'm pretty suspect. My guess is that there is something missing. I notice that for live births it says "live births per 100 women age 13 to 45" not live births just in the group of pregnant women. If I do some crude calculations, lets see what we get:

# of Cf patients in the registry = 23347
Percent 18 and over = 43%
% female = 48%

So if you take 43% of 23347 you get 10,039 people over 18.
Take 48% of that to get 4818 women over 18.
# of live births per 100 women is 1.9 so..
4818 divided by 100 = 48
48 times 1.9 = <b>91 live births</b>. THAT number sounds more believable to me that only 5 births recorded for the year 2005. And I don't have the exact statistics for the # of women ages 1-45 so I could only use what was given in the report.

Here is a link to the report so anyone can see for themselves:
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cff.org/UploadedFiles/research/ClinicalResearch/PatientRegistryReport/2005%20Patient%20Registry%20Report.pdf">http://www.cff.org/UploadedFil...0Registry%20Report.pdf</a>
 
K

Keepercjr

Guest
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>lightNlife</b></i>


According to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation 2005 Patient Registry Report, 196 total pregnancies were recorded. However, fewer than 5 live births are recorded. That's not exactly a good track record of CFers and pregnancy.</end quote></div>

I just looked at the report and I see the statistic that you mention. I know of 3 live births including myself in 2005 - if the statistics are true, then that leaves only 2 other CF women to give birth. Also, how can you have between 4 and 5 live births? If they can give a total # of pregnancies (196) then how come they can't give a total # of births instead of saying 1.9 per 100 women? I'm pretty suspect. My guess is that there is something missing. I notice that for live births it says "live births per 100 women age 13 to 45" not live births just in the group of pregnant women. If I do some crude calculations, lets see what we get:

# of Cf patients in the registry = 23347
Percent 18 and over = 43%
% female = 48%

So if you take 43% of 23347 you get 10,039 people over 18.
Take 48% of that to get 4818 women over 18.
# of live births per 100 women is 1.9 so..
4818 divided by 100 = 48
48 times 1.9 = <b>91 live births</b>. THAT number sounds more believable to me that only 5 births recorded for the year 2005. And I don't have the exact statistics for the # of women ages 1-45 so I could only use what was given in the report.

Here is a link to the report so anyone can see for themselves:
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cff.org/UploadedFiles/research/ClinicalResearch/PatientRegistryReport/2005%20Patient%20Registry%20Report.pdf">http://www.cff.org/UploadedFil...0Registry%20Report.pdf</a>
 
K

Keepercjr

Guest
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>lightNlife</b></i>


According to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation 2005 Patient Registry Report, 196 total pregnancies were recorded. However, fewer than 5 live births are recorded. That's not exactly a good track record of CFers and pregnancy.</end quote></div>

I just looked at the report and I see the statistic that you mention. I know of 3 live births including myself in 2005 - if the statistics are true, then that leaves only 2 other CF women to give birth. Also, how can you have between 4 and 5 live births? If they can give a total # of pregnancies (196) then how come they can't give a total # of births instead of saying 1.9 per 100 women? I'm pretty suspect. My guess is that there is something missing. I notice that for live births it says "live births per 100 women age 13 to 45" not live births just in the group of pregnant women. If I do some crude calculations, lets see what we get:

# of Cf patients in the registry = 23347
Percent 18 and over = 43%
% female = 48%

So if you take 43% of 23347 you get 10,039 people over 18.
Take 48% of that to get 4818 women over 18.
# of live births per 100 women is 1.9 so..
4818 divided by 100 = 48
48 times 1.9 = <b>91 live births</b>. THAT number sounds more believable to me that only 5 births recorded for the year 2005. And I don't have the exact statistics for the # of women ages 1-45 so I could only use what was given in the report.

Here is a link to the report so anyone can see for themselves:
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cff.org/UploadedFiles/research/ClinicalResearch/PatientRegistryReport/2005%20Patient%20Registry%20Report.pdf">http://www.cff.org/UploadedFil...0Registry%20Report.pdf</a>
 
K

Keepercjr

Guest
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>lightNlife</b></i>


According to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation 2005 Patient Registry Report, 196 total pregnancies were recorded. However, fewer than 5 live births are recorded. That's not exactly a good track record of CFers and pregnancy.</end quote>

I just looked at the report and I see the statistic that you mention. I know of 3 live births including myself in 2005 - if the statistics are true, then that leaves only 2 other CF women to give birth. Also, how can you have between 4 and 5 live births? If they can give a total # of pregnancies (196) then how come they can't give a total # of births instead of saying 1.9 per 100 women? I'm pretty suspect. My guess is that there is something missing. I notice that for live births it says "live births per 100 women age 13 to 45" not live births just in the group of pregnant women. If I do some crude calculations, lets see what we get:

# of Cf patients in the registry = 23347
Percent 18 and over = 43%
% female = 48%

So if you take 43% of 23347 you get 10,039 people over 18.
Take 48% of that to get 4818 women over 18.
# of live births per 100 women is 1.9 so..
4818 divided by 100 = 48
48 times 1.9 = <b>91 live births</b>. THAT number sounds more believable to me that only 5 births recorded for the year 2005. And I don't have the exact statistics for the # of women ages 1-45 so I could only use what was given in the report.

Here is a link to the report so anyone can see for themselves:
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cff.org/UploadedFiles/research/ClinicalResearch/PatientRegistryReport/2005%20Patient%20Registry%20Report.pdf">http://www.cff.org/UploadedFil...0Registry%20Report.pdf</a>
 
K

Keepercjr

Guest
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>lightNlife</b></i>


According to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation 2005 Patient Registry Report, 196 total pregnancies were recorded. However, fewer than 5 live births are recorded. That's not exactly a good track record of CFers and pregnancy.</end quote>

I just looked at the report and I see the statistic that you mention. I know of 3 live births including myself in 2005 - if the statistics are true, then that leaves only 2 other CF women to give birth. Also, how can you have between 4 and 5 live births? If they can give a total # of pregnancies (196) then how come they can't give a total # of births instead of saying 1.9 per 100 women? I'm pretty suspect. My guess is that there is something missing. I notice that for live births it says "live births per 100 women age 13 to 45" not live births just in the group of pregnant women. If I do some crude calculations, lets see what we get:

# of Cf patients in the registry = 23347
Percent 18 and over = 43%
% female = 48%

So if you take 43% of 23347 you get 10,039 people over 18.
Take 48% of that to get 4818 women over 18.
# of live births per 100 women is 1.9 so..
4818 divided by 100 = 48
48 times 1.9 = <b>91 live births</b>. THAT number sounds more believable to me that only 5 births recorded for the year 2005. And I don't have the exact statistics for the # of women ages 1-45 so I could only use what was given in the report.

Here is a link to the report so anyone can see for themselves:
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cff.org/UploadedFiles/research/ClinicalResearch/PatientRegistryReport/2005%20Patient%20Registry%20Report.pdf">http://www.cff.org/UploadedFil...0Registry%20Report.pdf</a>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top