Dexa Tech phone call

[RStevrock]

I spoke with the Dexa Tech aobut my results. She said that they never compare
the results with the ones more recent -- that they always go back to the
original. Is that what your results show? I had a scan in 2000, 2001, and a
few weeks ago. I have had a decrease from 2001, but all the comparisons are
with the 2000 scan. I ahve requested the 2001 results so I can compare for
myself.
She also said that walking was better exercise than weight lifting because
when you gently pound the pavement, it breaks down the bone and builds it up.
Does that make sense? Perhaps I misquoted her a little, but that was the idea.
Anyway my doctor has had me go from 5 mg a day to 70 mg a week. That in
itself possibly will help. Now at 5:18 in the afternoon it is 105 heat index
98 real temp. Tomorrow the heat index could be up to 120. Weight lifting is
rather appealing now. Besides my little goldens shouldn't walk in this heat.
Sammy

[Art S]

"RStevrock" <rstevrock@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030817182005.25368.00000140@mb-m15.aol.com...
> I spoke with the Dexa Tech aobut my results. She said that they never compare
> the results with the ones more recent -- that they always go back to the
> original. Is that what your results show? I had a scan in 2000, 2001, and a
> few weeks ago. I have had a decrease from 2001, but all the comparisons are
> with the 2000 scan. I ahve requested the 2001 results so I can compare for
> myself.

Comparing only two scans when more are available can be misleading
because either (or both) can be off by 3%. It would be better to chart all
of the scans looking for a trend.

> She also said that walking was better exercise than weight lifting because
> when you gently pound the pavement, it breaks down the bone and builds it up.
> Does that make sense? Perhaps I misquoted her a little, but that was the idea.

The most effective (best) exercise is, by definition, the one you are willing to
do. If you don't want to walk because of the heat, it doesn't matter if walking
is the most effective one or not.

That said, the last I heard was that weight lifters (talking about world-class
lifters) have the greatest bone density because their bodies have had the
greatest need for the increased bone density. If someone only lifts 5 - 10
lbs, then it is probably comparable to walking (because of the impact, which
is missing from most types of weight lifting using low weights.) (Translation:
IMO, the tech doesn't know what she is talking about.)

Are you willing to do a weight lifting program? If so, how much are you
willing to lift? As much as you can lift properly and safely? If so, it would
be better than walking. Although it may take time before you can lift
enough to make it as good as jumping ;^)

> Anyway my doctor has had me go from 5 mg a day to 70 mg a week. That in
> itself possibly will help. Now at 5:18 in the afternoon it is 105 heat index
> 98 real temp. Tomorrow the heat index could be up to 120. Weight lifting is
> rather appealing now. Besides my little goldens shouldn't walk in this heat.
> Sammy

I've got a simple question for you Sammy (although I realize the answer isn't
quite as simple): What kind of meaningful exercise routine _that you will
stick to, week after week, month after month_ are you interested in doing?
If you stick to an exercise program of "second best" exercises, you will be
doing better than if you fail to do an exercise program of "the best"
exercises.

Is there a gym/health club in your area? Do they have an indoor track?
(note that treadmills aren't as good because they are designed to absorb
some of the impact). Or would you prefer to buy a weight vest, and do
weighted jumps? Any neighbors that you can exercise with? (Keep in
mind that they need to be serious, because if they don't continue, you
are less likely to continue.)

Art

[bj]

"Art S" <TheDabbler01@att.net> wrote in message
news:aoX%a.104218$0v4.7283679@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> The most effective (best) exercise is, by definition, the one you are
willing to do. If you don't want to walk because of the heat, it doesn't
matter if walking is the most effective one or not.
>

Note that this also applies to the question of "what is the best time of day
to exercise".

It's no good knowing that Dawn Is Best if you won't get out of bed until
noon -- but you are willing to take that walk (or run, or whatever) at 1pm
and are discouraged from doing so because it's "not the best".
bj

[TonyB]

> Art, I was hoping that you were still reading. I have begun the weight
lifting
> program again. It will supplement my gardening better than other
exercises.
> All the time that the tech was talking, I was thinking that she didn't
want to
> get sued. I don't have any restrictions on exercise at this time yet she
kept
> talking to me about osteoporosis. My lumbar is into the normal range, and
my
> arm never was out of the normal range. But my hip measurement has lost
ground.
> It is -1.9 and I want to turn it around. Also I stopped hormones last
Oct.
> and that could have an effect on the test results.
> Actually I live next door to a gym -- even my husband can walk over
> there. That is where I learned the proper weight lifting styles
(precautions).
> It's just that I teach in a high school in this area, and the health club
is
> loaded with my students. I tstopped going a year ago even though we kept
up
> our membership because so many of the kids were watching me and talking to
me.
> They are really so sweet, but I was getting self conscious. If I went
around
> the track, they would all wave. When I did aerobics, they would get on
the
> track and wave. I have no complaints with the kids -- I love them, I just
> wanted some privacy and stopped going. When I think about it, my going to
the
> health club and taking care of myself is a good lesson to be teaching my
> students. I need to go back sometimes. I still have my weights here.

Art is exactly right in all he said.

However, you do seem to have a big difference between lumbar & back. Are
these T-scores you refer to?
Have you ever injured or especially have you ever dislocated that hip joint?

TonyB

[TonyB]

"RStevrock" <rstevrock@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030820065948.06399.00000288@mb-m28.aol.com...
> >However, you do seem to have a big difference between lumbar & back. Are
> >these T-scores you refer to?
> >Have you ever injured or especially have you ever dislocated that hip
joint?
> >
> >TonyB
> >
>
> No, I have never had an injury -- so far. After the initial diagnosis 3
years
> ago I fell at least twice before I learned how to control my big dog. I
just
> cannot allow him to be beside me outside. He suddenly pushed right into
me and
> I fell hard onto a rock.
> Here are my scores on the cover letter. There are more throughout
the
> report.
> Femoral Neck Right BMD ---0.812
> Tscore is -0.33
> Total Hip Right BMD 0.927 Tscore is -0.12
> Lumbar spine BMD is 0.929 Tscore is -1.99
> Distal Forearm BMD is 0.630 Tscore is +0.67
> The report says that I had a -2.6%decline in th eright hip and
+2.5%increase in
> the lumbar. Arm is the same.
> My doctor changed the Fosamax to 70 mg weekly from (5 a day).
> Someone wrote that the hip is thicker and does not respond to Fosamax as
well
> as the lumbar. Also I weaned off of Prempro from last July to Oct. That
could
> have an effect. And I stopped weight lifting which I have restarted.
> Sammy

OK Sammy I have an issue with your spine T-score.

This (Turkish) paper just happened to be the first one I found but it gives
normal values thus:

In women the mean BMD (g/cm(2))+/-standard deviation (SD) of the normal
reference group between 20 and 39 years of age was 0.963+/-0.121 g/cm(2) in
the lumbar spine....

Your spine bmd of 0.929 therefore falls within the normal range which they
say would be between 0.842 (0.963 - 0.121) and 1.084 (0.963+0.121).

Therefore your T score should be greater than -1, ( possibly -0.34 but I'm
not sure of the calculation) which is nowhere near osteoporotic. Ask your
tech to check all figures, there's something wrong there somewhere.

Here's the reference:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_ui
ds=12541124&dopt=Abstract

TonyB

[Art S]

"TonyB" <p@q.com> wrote in message news:bi0o8p$a3p$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "RStevrock" <rstevrock@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20030820065948.06399.00000288@mb-m28.aol.com...
> > >However, you do seem to have a big difference between lumbar & back. Are
> > >these T-scores you refer to?
> > >Have you ever injured or especially have you ever dislocated that hip
> joint?
> > >
> > >TonyB
> > >
> >
> > No, I have never had an injury -- so far. After the initial diagnosis 3
> years
> > ago I fell at least twice before I learned how to control my big dog. I
> just
> > cannot allow him to be beside me outside. He suddenly pushed right into
> me and
> > I fell hard onto a rock.
> > Here are my scores on the cover letter. There are more throughout
> the
> > report.
> > Femoral Neck Right BMD ---0.812
> > Tscore is -0.33
> > Total Hip Right BMD 0.927 Tscore is -0.12
> > Lumbar spine BMD is 0.929 Tscore is -1.99
> > Distal Forearm BMD is 0.630 Tscore is +0.67
> > The report says that I had a -2.6%decline in th eright hip and
> +2.5%increase in
> > the lumbar. Arm is the same.
> > My doctor changed the Fosamax to 70 mg weekly from (5 a day).
> > Someone wrote that the hip is thicker and does not respond to Fosamax as
> well
> > as the lumbar. Also I weaned off of Prempro from last July to Oct. That
> could
> > have an effect. And I stopped weight lifting which I have restarted.
> > Sammy
>
> OK Sammy I have an issue with your spine T-score.
>
> This (Turkish) paper just happened to be the first one I found but it gives
> normal values thus:
>
> In women the mean BMD (g/cm(2))+/-standard deviation (SD) of the normal
> reference group between 20 and 39 years of age was 0.963+/-0.121 g/cm(2) in
> the lumbar spine....
>
> Your spine bmd of 0.929 therefore falls within the normal range which they
> say would be between 0.842 (0.963 - 0.121) and 1.084 (0.963+0.121).
>
> Therefore your T score should be greater than -1, ( possibly -0.34 but I'm
> not sure of the calculation) which is nowhere near osteoporotic. Ask your
> tech to check all figures, there's something wrong there somewhere.
>
> Here's the reference:
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_ui
> ds=12541124&dopt=Abstract
>
> TonyB
>
>

Possible causes:
1) The Turkish study was on a Hologic DEXA, and Sammy's were on
a different type of machine (see
http://courses.washington.edu/bonephys/opbmd.html)
2) "Something funny" is going on. Note that on the same page, Sammy's
BMD for right hip is greater than the cutoff BMD for any of the
machines listed (Hologic: .820; Lunar: .800; and Norland: .800).


Art

[TonyB]

"Art S" <TheDabbler01@att.net> wrote in message
news:NMY0b.107844$0v4.7611073@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "TonyB" <p@q.com> wrote in message
news:bi0o8p$a3p$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> > "RStevrock" <rstevrock@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:20030820065948.06399.00000288@mb-m28.aol.com...
> > > >However, you do seem to have a big difference between lumbar & back.
Are
> > > >these T-scores you refer to?
> > > >Have you ever injured or especially have you ever dislocated that hip
> > joint?
> > > >
> > > >TonyB
> > > >
> > >
> > > No, I have never had an injury -- so far. After the initial diagnosis
3
> > years
> > > ago I fell at least twice before I learned how to control my big dog.
I
> > just
> > > cannot allow him to be beside me outside. He suddenly pushed right
into
> > me and
> > > I fell hard onto a rock.
> > > Here are my scores on the cover letter. There are more
throughout
> > the
> > > report.
> > > Femoral Neck Right BMD ---0.812
> > > Tscore is -0.33
> > > Total Hip Right BMD 0.927 Tscore is -0.12
> > > Lumbar spine BMD is 0.929 Tscore is -1.99
> > > Distal Forearm BMD is 0.630 Tscore is +0.67
> > > The report says that I had a -2.6%decline in th eright hip and
> > +2.5%increase in
> > > the lumbar. Arm is the same.
> > > My doctor changed the Fosamax to 70 mg weekly from (5 a day).
> > > Someone wrote that the hip is thicker and does not respond to Fosamax
as
> > well
> > > as the lumbar. Also I weaned off of Prempro from last July to Oct.
That
> > could
> > > have an effect. And I stopped weight lifting which I have restarted.
> > > Sammy
> >
> > OK Sammy I have an issue with your spine T-score.
> >
> > This (Turkish) paper just happened to be the first one I found but it
gives
> > normal values thus:
> >
> > In women the mean BMD (g/cm(2))+/-standard deviation (SD) of the normal
> > reference group between 20 and 39 years of age was 0.963+/-0.121 g/cm(2)
in
> > the lumbar spine....
> >
> > Your spine bmd of 0.929 therefore falls within the normal range which
they
> > say would be between 0.842 (0.963 - 0.121) and 1.084 (0.963+0.121).
> >
> > Therefore your T score should be greater than -1, ( possibly -0.34 but
I'm
> > not sure of the calculation) which is nowhere near osteoporotic. Ask
your
> > tech to check all figures, there's something wrong there somewhere.
> >
> > Here's the reference:
> >
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_ui
> > ds=12541124&dopt=Abstract
> >
> > TonyB
> >
> >
>
> Possible causes:
> 1) The Turkish study was on a Hologic DEXA, and Sammy's were on
> a different type of machine (see
> http://courses.washington.edu/bonephys/opbmd.html


Granted there are differences between machines and between reference
databases but even using the worst figure from this website (the lunar one)
would still make Sammy only just osteopaenic, not osteoporotic.

> 2) "Something funny" is going on. Note that on the same page, Sammy's
> BMD for right hip is greater than the cutoff BMD for any of the
> machines listed (Hologic: .820; Lunar: .800; and Norland: .800).

Yes & later the figure given for converting mg/cm2 to T scores would
indicate that Sammy's 0.929 would equate to around -0.19 rather than -1.99,
could this be the error Art?


TonyB