What is your reason for not doing Remicade?

I think it increases chances of lymphoma cancer but at least lymphoma has one of the highest cure rates if I remember right. I'm taking Humira and would be worried about taking it any more than a couple years, although it's not working for me and surgery is in the near future.

     My reason is more involved.  I worked in a hospital lab back in the 60's and was exposed to the TB virus.  My friend and I went on a European trip back in 67 and had to have the skin patche test.  Mine tested positive and I had to undergo a chest xray, etc.  It showed no active TB but the doctor told me at the time that my system is harboring the virus somewhere.  I am not contagious but if I should receive Remicade there is a chance of activating that virus and it actually could kill me.  There is some controversy about this.  My present GI doctor has been pushing Remicade on me for the past two years.  However, his associate, who took care of me in the hospital last year, said "absolutely..NO REMICADE".  Apparently his associate had a patient expire while on Remicade who was also harboring the TB virus.  It is a real problem here since the 6MP seems to have stopped helping, but now the doctor increased the dose to 100mgm.  Right now I will just sit tight and see if I can manage to stay out of the hospital with this present flare (just got over a flare last Nov).  Oh and when I saw my GI last Tuesday for the results of my sigmoidoscope, he did admit to me he heard of two cases at the Univ of PA hospital who took Remicade WHILE on 6MP with fatal results. So there ya have it.  Good enough reasons for me.

    If Remicade was the CURE, which it certainly is not.  I may just have given it a shot since I am a lot older than most of you (63 in August).  But not quite willing to throw in the towel just yet.

All things being equal, if I were in my seventies or older, I would probably opt for Remicade. If I needed Remicade to act as a bridge to surgery, I would probably take it. As an open-ended treatment for uc, I refuse.

-- It's too new.
-- The side effects are disproportionately severe.
-- It's extremely inconvenient.
-- Even with excellent health insurance, I cannot in good conscience undertake a therapy that may well cost millions of dollars -- and it doesn't cure the disease.

I would rather have surgery than take Remicade.

I had an allergic reaction to remicade(low blood pressure, swollen eyes, numb lips) during an infusion in 2008. I have since had a severe flare and nothing was working to get it under control. I decided to try the remicade again and I was given meds before the infusion(plus the nurse said a prayer for me) and was closely monitored. No allergic reaction this time. It has been 5 days since the infusion and I am feeling some better. I was on the Humira for 5 months and it didn't help me at all. The remicade is the only thing that gets my flares under control.

For some of us it's either surgery or Remicade. It's that simple.

Many of you have milder forms of UC. Those of use with severe UC ( Pancolitis ), Remicade is a lifesaver...or colon saver.

I am concerned about side effects. Prednisone has done far worse by my body so far then Remicade ( at least as I can tell..who knows whats really going on ). Perhaps in a year or so I'll opt for surgery but until that time I'll ride the Remi in hopes of some new discoveries in the C&C field.