Altitude and CF, low PFT

catalinaohara · Oct 7, 2009

Hi everyone,

Am supposed to head up to Stratton Mountain this weekend with some friends. It just occurred to me that the altitude may bother me, and I am nervous. Currently my pft's are about 30%, but I present like I am better than that. I am on oxygen, 2L at night. Some nights I dont use it. My O2 sats during the day are consistently at 98-99% unless I'm sick.

The elevation where I will be staying is 1,900 ft., as opposed to Boston where I live, about 340ft. I realize 1900 is not enough to make anyone without issues notice a difference, but I am wondering if it will bother me.

Thanks, I need to make a decision about whether to go and any input, especially from anyone who has similar lung function and has been in high altitude areas lately, would be really appreciated.

Caitlin

catalinaohara · Oct 7, 2009

Hi everyone,

Am supposed to head up to Stratton Mountain this weekend with some friends. It just occurred to me that the altitude may bother me, and I am nervous. Currently my pft's are about 30%, but I present like I am better than that. I am on oxygen, 2L at night. Some nights I dont use it. My O2 sats during the day are consistently at 98-99% unless I'm sick.

The elevation where I will be staying is 1,900 ft., as opposed to Boston where I live, about 340ft. I realize 1900 is not enough to make anyone without issues notice a difference, but I am wondering if it will bother me.

Thanks, I need to make a decision about whether to go and any input, especially from anyone who has similar lung function and has been in high altitude areas lately, would be really appreciated.

Caitlin

catalinaohara · Oct 7, 2009

Hi everyone,

Am supposed to head up to Stratton Mountain this weekend with some friends. It just occurred to me that the altitude may bother me, and I am nervous. Currently my pft's are about 30%, but I present like I am better than that. I am on oxygen, 2L at night. Some nights I dont use it. My O2 sats during the day are consistently at 98-99% unless I'm sick.

The elevation where I will be staying is 1,900 ft., as opposed to Boston where I live, about 340ft. I realize 1900 is not enough to make anyone without issues notice a difference, but I am wondering if it will bother me.

Thanks, I need to make a decision about whether to go and any input, especially from anyone who has similar lung function and has been in high altitude areas lately, would be really appreciated.

Caitlin

catalinaohara · Oct 7, 2009

Hi everyone,

Am supposed to head up to Stratton Mountain this weekend with some friends. It just occurred to me that the altitude may bother me, and I am nervous. Currently my pft's are about 30%, but I present like I am better than that. I am on oxygen, 2L at night. Some nights I dont use it. My O2 sats during the day are consistently at 98-99% unless I'm sick.

The elevation where I will be staying is 1,900 ft., as opposed to Boston where I live, about 340ft. I realize 1900 is not enough to make anyone without issues notice a difference, but I am wondering if it will bother me.

Thanks, I need to make a decision about whether to go and any input, especially from anyone who has similar lung function and has been in high altitude areas lately, would be really appreciated.

Caitlin

catalinaohara · Oct 7, 2009

Hi everyone,
 
 Am supposed to head up to Stratton Mountain this weekend with some friends. It just occurred to me that the altitude may bother me, and I am nervous. Currently my pft's are about 30%, but I present like I am better than that. I am on oxygen, 2L at night. Some nights I dont use it. My O2 sats during the day are consistently at 98-99% unless I'm sick.
 
 The elevation where I will be staying is 1,900 ft., as opposed to Boston where I live, about 340ft. I realize 1900 is not enough to make anyone without issues notice a difference, but I am wondering if it will bother me.
 
 Thanks, I need to make a decision about whether to go and any input, especially from anyone who has similar lung function and has been in high altitude areas lately, would be really appreciated.
 
 Caitlin

MicheleGazelle · Oct 7, 2009

If it bothers you, it is likely to bother you the most while you are trying to sleep. When I moved to a place about 3000 feet above sea level (a few years before my diagnosis), I had trouble getting enough sleep and woke up in the middle of the night a lot for the first few weeks (maybe months). I was waking up feeling like I couldn't breathe. So I would encourage you to make sure you use your O2 at night if you go.

Good luck with this.

MicheleGazelle · Oct 7, 2009

If it bothers you, it is likely to bother you the most while you are trying to sleep. When I moved to a place about 3000 feet above sea level (a few years before my diagnosis), I had trouble getting enough sleep and woke up in the middle of the night a lot for the first few weeks (maybe months). I was waking up feeling like I couldn't breathe. So I would encourage you to make sure you use your O2 at night if you go.

Good luck with this.

MicheleGazelle · Oct 7, 2009

If it bothers you, it is likely to bother you the most while you are trying to sleep. When I moved to a place about 3000 feet above sea level (a few years before my diagnosis), I had trouble getting enough sleep and woke up in the middle of the night a lot for the first few weeks (maybe months). I was waking up feeling like I couldn't breathe. So I would encourage you to make sure you use your O2 at night if you go.

Good luck with this.

MicheleGazelle · Oct 7, 2009

If it bothers you, it is likely to bother you the most while you are trying to sleep. When I moved to a place about 3000 feet above sea level (a few years before my diagnosis), I had trouble getting enough sleep and woke up in the middle of the night a lot for the first few weeks (maybe months). I was waking up feeling like I couldn't breathe. So I would encourage you to make sure you use your O2 at night if you go.

Good luck with this.

MicheleGazelle · Oct 7, 2009

If it bothers you, it is likely to bother you the most while you are trying to sleep. When I moved to a place about 3000 feet above sea level (a few years before my diagnosis), I had trouble getting enough sleep and woke up in the middle of the night a lot for the first few weeks (maybe months). I was waking up feeling like I couldn't breathe. So I would encourage you to make sure you use your O2 at night if you go.
 
 Good luck with this.

JazzysMom · Oct 7, 2009

My PFT is below 30 & I was recently on a plane. I was extremely nervous.

I did use 5 liters on pulse, no continuous (wasnt an option on a portable concentrator for me) & my lungs still felt funny.

I felt like there were butterflies in my chest. I am not sure how much was anxiety. I cant say I had problems breathing & I didnt know what my 02 sat was.

JazzysMom · Oct 7, 2009

My PFT is below 30 & I was recently on a plane. I was extremely nervous.

I did use 5 liters on pulse, no continuous (wasnt an option on a portable concentrator for me) & my lungs still felt funny.

I felt like there were butterflies in my chest. I am not sure how much was anxiety. I cant say I had problems breathing & I didnt know what my 02 sat was.

JazzysMom · Oct 7, 2009

My PFT is below 30 & I was recently on a plane. I was extremely nervous.

I did use 5 liters on pulse, no continuous (wasnt an option on a portable concentrator for me) & my lungs still felt funny.

I felt like there were butterflies in my chest. I am not sure how much was anxiety. I cant say I had problems breathing & I didnt know what my 02 sat was.

JazzysMom · Oct 7, 2009

My PFT is below 30 & I was recently on a plane. I was extremely nervous.

I did use 5 liters on pulse, no continuous (wasnt an option on a portable concentrator for me) & my lungs still felt funny.

I felt like there were butterflies in my chest. I am not sure how much was anxiety. I cant say I had problems breathing & I didnt know what my 02 sat was.

JazzysMom · Oct 7, 2009

My PFT is below 30 & I was recently on a plane. I was extremely nervous.
 
 I did use 5 liters on pulse, no continuous (wasnt an option on a portable concentrator for me) & my lungs still felt funny.
 
 I felt like there were butterflies in my chest. I am not sure how much was anxiety. I cant say I had problems breathing & I didnt know what my 02 sat was.

jdubbs · Oct 8, 2009

Hey there -

I thought this was an interesting question, so I did some googling. Here are three links I thought were useful.

1.)

A study was done on CF patients going LOWER in altitude, where they took CFers to the bottom of the Dead Sea (down 400 meters). Here is the link followed by a quote lifted from the article.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17583473
">http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17583473
</a>
"Tests at the Dead Sea were performed 72 hr after arrival. No differences between sites were observed in lung function at rest. Peak oxygen consumption was significantly improved at the Dead Sea compared with sea level (1.68 ± 0.73 vs. 1.57 ± 0.74 l/min, respectively, P= 0.05), along with an improvement in the ventilatory equivalent for oxygen (41.2 ± 6.3 vs. 46.1 ± 7.1, respectively, P<0.05). During submaximal exercise, blood oxygen saturation improved at the Dead Sea compared with sea level at all exercise intensities (P < 0.05). In conclusion, these results suggest that even a brief stay at the Dead Sea area may have physiological benefits for CF patients with moderate to severe lung disease"

I am guessing you will see about about the same effects in the opposite direction UP 400 meters. I think you're going up a little higher than that, but not wildly higher. So a "brief stay at Stratton will probably have some physiological detriments for CF patients with moderate to severe lung disease."

2.)

A general idea about acclimatizing to altitude

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness
">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness
</a>
"Once the climber has acclimatised to a given altitude, the process is repeated with camps placed at progressively higher elevations. The general rule of thumb is to not ascend more than 300 metres (1,000 ft) per day to sleep. That is, one can climb from 3,000 (10,000 feet = 70 kPa) to 4,500 metres(15,000 feet = 58 kPa) in one day, but one should then descend back to 3,300 metres (11,000 feet = 67.5 kPa) to sleep."

3.)

The graph at the bottom of the page give you an idea of how much the 02 will decline at 1800 ft.
It looks like it will decline by about 3% to me.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/decarlo/EarthToMoon/pages/maxbreathablealtitudeactivity.htm#graphs
">http://www2.ignatius.edu/facul...deactivity.htm#graphs
</a>
Anyway, it sounds to me like you probably will notice a negative difference, particularly if you exercise. That said, it seems to be within the realm of reason to try. I mean, I presume they brought the kids back up from the bottom of the Dead Sea at the end of the study.

You should probably ask your doctor, he/she will probably make you feel better about the decision.

-James

jdubbs · Oct 8, 2009

Hey there -

I thought this was an interesting question, so I did some googling. Here are three links I thought were useful.

1.)

A study was done on CF patients going LOWER in altitude, where they took CFers to the bottom of the Dead Sea (down 400 meters). Here is the link followed by a quote lifted from the article.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17583473
">http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17583473
</a>
"Tests at the Dead Sea were performed 72 hr after arrival. No differences between sites were observed in lung function at rest. Peak oxygen consumption was significantly improved at the Dead Sea compared with sea level (1.68 ± 0.73 vs. 1.57 ± 0.74 l/min, respectively, P= 0.05), along with an improvement in the ventilatory equivalent for oxygen (41.2 ± 6.3 vs. 46.1 ± 7.1, respectively, P<0.05). During submaximal exercise, blood oxygen saturation improved at the Dead Sea compared with sea level at all exercise intensities (P < 0.05). In conclusion, these results suggest that even a brief stay at the Dead Sea area may have physiological benefits for CF patients with moderate to severe lung disease"

I am guessing you will see about about the same effects in the opposite direction UP 400 meters. I think you're going up a little higher than that, but not wildly higher. So a "brief stay at Stratton will probably have some physiological detriments for CF patients with moderate to severe lung disease."

2.)

A general idea about acclimatizing to altitude

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness
">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness
</a>
"Once the climber has acclimatised to a given altitude, the process is repeated with camps placed at progressively higher elevations. The general rule of thumb is to not ascend more than 300 metres (1,000 ft) per day to sleep. That is, one can climb from 3,000 (10,000 feet = 70 kPa) to 4,500 metres(15,000 feet = 58 kPa) in one day, but one should then descend back to 3,300 metres (11,000 feet = 67.5 kPa) to sleep."

3.)

The graph at the bottom of the page give you an idea of how much the 02 will decline at 1800 ft.
It looks like it will decline by about 3% to me.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/decarlo/EarthToMoon/pages/maxbreathablealtitudeactivity.htm#graphs
">http://www2.ignatius.edu/facul...deactivity.htm#graphs
</a>
Anyway, it sounds to me like you probably will notice a negative difference, particularly if you exercise. That said, it seems to be within the realm of reason to try. I mean, I presume they brought the kids back up from the bottom of the Dead Sea at the end of the study.

You should probably ask your doctor, he/she will probably make you feel better about the decision.

-James

jdubbs · Oct 8, 2009

Hey there -

I thought this was an interesting question, so I did some googling. Here are three links I thought were useful.

1.)

A study was done on CF patients going LOWER in altitude, where they took CFers to the bottom of the Dead Sea (down 400 meters). Here is the link followed by a quote lifted from the article.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17583473
">http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17583473
</a>
"Tests at the Dead Sea were performed 72 hr after arrival. No differences between sites were observed in lung function at rest. Peak oxygen consumption was significantly improved at the Dead Sea compared with sea level (1.68 ± 0.73 vs. 1.57 ± 0.74 l/min, respectively, P= 0.05), along with an improvement in the ventilatory equivalent for oxygen (41.2 ± 6.3 vs. 46.1 ± 7.1, respectively, P<0.05). During submaximal exercise, blood oxygen saturation improved at the Dead Sea compared with sea level at all exercise intensities (P < 0.05). In conclusion, these results suggest that even a brief stay at the Dead Sea area may have physiological benefits for CF patients with moderate to severe lung disease"

I am guessing you will see about about the same effects in the opposite direction UP 400 meters. I think you're going up a little higher than that, but not wildly higher. So a "brief stay at Stratton will probably have some physiological detriments for CF patients with moderate to severe lung disease."

2.)

A general idea about acclimatizing to altitude

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness
">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness
</a>
"Once the climber has acclimatised to a given altitude, the process is repeated with camps placed at progressively higher elevations. The general rule of thumb is to not ascend more than 300 metres (1,000 ft) per day to sleep. That is, one can climb from 3,000 (10,000 feet = 70 kPa) to 4,500 metres(15,000 feet = 58 kPa) in one day, but one should then descend back to 3,300 metres (11,000 feet = 67.5 kPa) to sleep."

3.)

The graph at the bottom of the page give you an idea of how much the 02 will decline at 1800 ft.
It looks like it will decline by about 3% to me.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/decarlo/EarthToMoon/pages/maxbreathablealtitudeactivity.htm#graphs
">http://www2.ignatius.edu/facul...deactivity.htm#graphs
</a>
Anyway, it sounds to me like you probably will notice a negative difference, particularly if you exercise. That said, it seems to be within the realm of reason to try. I mean, I presume they brought the kids back up from the bottom of the Dead Sea at the end of the study.

You should probably ask your doctor, he/she will probably make you feel better about the decision.

-James

jdubbs · Oct 8, 2009

Hey there -

I thought this was an interesting question, so I did some googling. Here are three links I thought were useful.

1.)

A study was done on CF patients going LOWER in altitude, where they took CFers to the bottom of the Dead Sea (down 400 meters). Here is the link followed by a quote lifted from the article.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17583473
">http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17583473
</a>
"Tests at the Dead Sea were performed 72 hr after arrival. No differences between sites were observed in lung function at rest. Peak oxygen consumption was significantly improved at the Dead Sea compared with sea level (1.68 ± 0.73 vs. 1.57 ± 0.74 l/min, respectively, P= 0.05), along with an improvement in the ventilatory equivalent for oxygen (41.2 ± 6.3 vs. 46.1 ± 7.1, respectively, P<0.05). During submaximal exercise, blood oxygen saturation improved at the Dead Sea compared with sea level at all exercise intensities (P < 0.05). In conclusion, these results suggest that even a brief stay at the Dead Sea area may have physiological benefits for CF patients with moderate to severe lung disease"

I am guessing you will see about about the same effects in the opposite direction UP 400 meters. I think you're going up a little higher than that, but not wildly higher. So a "brief stay at Stratton will probably have some physiological detriments for CF patients with moderate to severe lung disease."

2.)

A general idea about acclimatizing to altitude

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness
">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness
</a>
"Once the climber has acclimatised to a given altitude, the process is repeated with camps placed at progressively higher elevations. The general rule of thumb is to not ascend more than 300 metres (1,000 ft) per day to sleep. That is, one can climb from 3,000 (10,000 feet = 70 kPa) to 4,500 metres(15,000 feet = 58 kPa) in one day, but one should then descend back to 3,300 metres (11,000 feet = 67.5 kPa) to sleep."

3.)

The graph at the bottom of the page give you an idea of how much the 02 will decline at 1800 ft.
It looks like it will decline by about 3% to me.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/decarlo/EarthToMoon/pages/maxbreathablealtitudeactivity.htm#graphs
">http://www2.ignatius.edu/facul...deactivity.htm#graphs
</a>
Anyway, it sounds to me like you probably will notice a negative difference, particularly if you exercise. That said, it seems to be within the realm of reason to try. I mean, I presume they brought the kids back up from the bottom of the Dead Sea at the end of the study.

You should probably ask your doctor, he/she will probably make you feel better about the decision.

-James

jdubbs · Oct 8, 2009

Hey there -
 
 I thought this was an interesting question, so I did some googling. Here are three links I thought were useful.
 
 1.)
 
 A study was done on CF patients going LOWER in altitude, where they took CFers to the bottom of the Dead Sea (down 400 meters). Here is the link followed by a quote lifted from the article.
 
 <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17583473
">http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17583473
</a> 
 "Tests at the Dead Sea were performed 72 hr after arrival. No differences between sites were observed in lung function at rest. Peak oxygen consumption was significantly improved at the Dead Sea compared with sea level (1.68 ± 0.73 vs. 1.57 ± 0.74 l/min, respectively, P= 0.05), along with an improvement in the ventilatory equivalent for oxygen (41.2 ± 6.3 vs. 46.1 ± 7.1, respectively, P<0.05). During submaximal exercise, blood oxygen saturation improved at the Dead Sea compared with sea level at all exercise intensities (P < 0.05). In conclusion, these results suggest that even a brief stay at the Dead Sea area may have physiological benefits for CF patients with moderate to severe lung disease"
 
 I am guessing you will see about about the same effects in the opposite direction UP 400 meters. I think you're going up a little higher than that, but not wildly higher. So a "brief stay at Stratton will probably have some physiological detriments for CF patients with moderate to severe lung disease."
 
 2.)
 
 A general idea about acclimatizing to altitude
 
 <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness
">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness
</a> 
 "Once the climber has acclimatised to a given altitude, the process is repeated with camps placed at progressively higher elevations. The general rule of thumb is to not ascend more than 300 metres (1,000 ft) per day to sleep. That is, one can climb from 3,000 (10,000 feet = 70 kPa) to 4,500 metres(15,000 feet = 58 kPa) in one day, but one should then descend back to 3,300 metres (11,000 feet = 67.5 kPa) to sleep."
 
 3.)
 
 The graph at the bottom of the page give you an idea of how much the 02 will decline at 1800 ft.
 It looks like it will decline by about 3% to me.
 
 <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/decarlo/EarthToMoon/pages/maxbreathablealtitudeactivity.htm#graphs
">http://www2.ignatius.edu/facul...deactivity.htm#graphs
</a> 
 Anyway, it sounds to me like you probably will notice a negative difference, particularly if you exercise. That said, it seems to be within the realm of reason to try. I mean, I presume they brought the kids back up from the bottom of the Dead Sea at the end of the study.
 
 You should probably ask your doctor, he/she will probably make you feel better about the decision.
 
 -James

Altitude and CF, low PFT

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member