It's a risk/benefit ratio: taking drugs with a remote possibility of serious side-effects vs. untreated Crohn's disease. I can safely say that untreated Crohn's is far, far, far more likely to end up killing you than any drug. I developed toxic megacolon: that crap routinely killed people with severe UC or Crohn's colitis in the past. Now steroids and vastly safer surgeries ensure a mortality rate of less than 1%.
Bear in mind that there are alarmists all over the internet who seek to capitalise on people's very real fears about
medication: whether it's to sell supplements or because they have an axe to grind or personal ideology to propagate, they are everywhere. In truth, Remicade has been out for about
15 years and countless
studies have been done on biologics and the risk of lymphoma: some studies say there is no associated cancer risk, while others say there are. Here are a few of them: www.lymphomainfo.net/lifestyle/research/anti-tnf-blockers-lymphoma
There is also an excellent analysis of the subject by a user called rslnights in this thread. (She also addresses the issue of serious infections as well.)www.healingwell.com/community/default.aspx?f=17&m=2016891
In a nutshell, we don't yet know the very long term (20+ years) side-effects of Remicade, but I would have absolutely no problem with taking it for 10-20 years from the data we currently have.
Post Edited (NiceCupOfTea) : 2/5/2014 5:57:14 AM (GMT-7)