Jeeeez, I guess I'm living on this board!!!!! Hey, if you don't mind, I have another one for you!! My sonogram came back and showed a fatty liver. Is this diagnosis really bad in conjunction with HepC? I am trying to cut out fat and loose weight, but in the meantime, this is very slow going, and can HepC have a much more rapid course with fatty liver?? My next question is, have any of you ever heard that Peanut Butter is not good for your liver? I have read in a couple of places that something to do with mold or something that grows on peanuts contributes to liver cancer. I remember hearing that years ago, and that is one reason why we have always refrigerated our peanut butter. I like it, so I was just wondering. Thanks again for all the help!!!!!!!!!!! Val
yup, fat on the bod and fat on the liver are an extra strain on the liver. the studies say especially abdominal fat--more common in men than in women--is by itself a risk factor for the liver, and combined with hep, or drinking, or the other risk factors we know of, isn't so good. by and large, you're better off shedding some pounds.
BUT, it's not a life-and-death issue, just one of the health recomendations we should be mindful of.
the other thing is called aflatoxin, and for peanuts to get the mold they have to be VERY stale, and it happens to peanuts still in the shell, not after they've been roasted and made into butter. I've never heard of a case of aflatoxin poisoning in america. but most fatty or oily foods keep better if kept cool, so why not refrigerate if it seems better to you?
i think peanut butter is a very good food, but I'd, personally, avoid the ones with added sugar--or the ones with hydrogenated fats--especially if you're trying to lose weight.
How's your dad?
sean
[This message has been edited by sean (edited 04-15-2002).]
Hi, and thanks for the reply!! So, fat on the liver, showing up on a sonogram like I had, is another indicator of HepC, right? I heard that HepC can cause this. Is this common in people without HepC, though, if they are overweight? Is it common in overweight people that don't drink alcohol? I was wondering if it was something that was mostly connected with HepC, or if it's common in people without that. Also, thanks for asking, my Dad is doing great!!! He got out of the hospital before we got a chance to go out there, and he and my Mom are actually on a trip right now to the Bay Area (San Francisco). They said that it wasn't congestive heart failure or a blockage, but just diet, and he had lots of salt, and bad things in his diet, that caused the swelling, and accumulation of fluid around his heart. Otherwise, he's in great health. I think they have him on like 3 pills a day now. So, one other thing, I think I remember you saying you are genotype 2, isn't that right? I don't know what I am yet, but if it's 1, isn't that a lot quicker progressing? So, I'm worried, that, combined with fatty liver, I could be in bad shape, right? And, so sorry, but one other thing, do you know what your viral load is? If you went to the doctor, and he said you had an undetectable viral load, would that mean just a variation in it, or that it was cleared? I was reading about this, and it seems like most people have viral loads in the millions, is that right? Thanks so much for the patience you guys have with me!! Yikes, I AM pushing it, aren't I?? Anyway, thanks! Val
Good about Dad. My dad suffered congestive heart failure--the real thing. He lived many more healthy years, though, before passing away of something entirely different. The body is a wonderful, resilient machine.
As to the fatty liver stuff, well, it can occur with hep c, or without it, can accompnay alcohol overuse or occur in teetotalers. In the case of non-drinkers, yes, it seems to be linked to being overweight. I'm sure there can be a fatty liver without the person drinking or being overweight, but I believe this would be unusual. hep c does NOT seem to cause it, it just complicates things for hep c folks who also have these fatty deposits.
The viral genotype seems to matter most when predicting (or explaining) response to treatment, not so very much in predicing the course of the disease. Although geno 1 is considered the toughest to treat, I have seen conflicting reports on which genotype progresses (damages the liver) most rapidly--geno 3, for instance in some studies. I don't think it makes a profound difference which genotype when it comes to rapidity of fibrosis--there may be some diff., but not enough to affect our personal health planning in most cases. my opinion.
yes, viral counts in the millions are common. Mine is usually around four or five mil. In New York we like to do things in a big way--whoops, sorry, that's Texas's line. As you know, with hep c, viral load is not such a critical factor as it is with hiv for measuring our progress in fighting the disease. But still, a real low number seems better to have than a real high number, and there is evidence that for folks with counts as high as mine, response to tx is somewhat less likely. Some researchers put the critical point at two million or above, some at four mil. I'm above either of these. Them's the breaks.
Your viral load was under a mil, yes? this would be considered low. be thankful.
Undetectable is usually taken to mean zero, although it really means, "as close to zero as our tests allow us to measure." In most, but not all cases, reaching undetectable means you have a good chance of still being there in a year or three, or ten. This in turn (5 or 10 yrs of undetectable) would mean you'd be as good as "cured,"--at least for a disease which has no announced, accepted "cure."
I want to emphasize that, although treatment's record is spotty (to be polite) in achieving good response in most of us, and although some people find it so hard to take that they quit, still for those who DO achieve a real viral response--achieve "undetectable,"--the porgnosis is encouraging. these folks will likely stay "clean," damage to the liver will cease, and there is a reasonable, measurable fraction of responders who will even show some reversal of fibrosis, over time.
the challenge is getting there. so, the weight thing--slimming down a bit does improve a bit your chances for doing better without treatment, and it does improve a bit your chances for achieving response if you do decide to treat. That's why it's worth thinking about. it's not the major challenge facing you right now, though. take it on as an optional activity if you're interested.
Getting a biopsy? Did you say already in an earlier post and I missed it??
Sean, Hi, thanks for the response, so helpful as usual!!! I actually had to read through it really fast as I have dinner on and kids things going on, etc., but just to let you know what's going on..... it's weird cause my viral load was actually "undectable" at two different labs, so right now I don't think we know what's going on. He said that's unusual for someone who hasn't had treatement yet, so he ran an additional set of blood work, so I'm waiting for that to come back. The one blood work that I got a copy of says less than 600, and that was the range that I was in, less than 600, so he called that a negative, so it's kind of like a roller coaster to be on here. I had another qualitative test just come out negative also, so that confuses things even more. So, I have one positive qual, and one neg qual, and two neg viral loads. Very weird. Well, gotta go, but I'll write more later, thanks for the response again, and letting me know what you think!! I hope you are doing ok!! Val
Fatty Liver/Peanut Butter 
Linear Mode
