Hi
all good questions
no, and not really and it depends on the person. Alcohol for instance is reported by some as having a significant effect, by others not. I suspect that (while not necessarily related) its rather like the other effects (some get pissed on a glass, others need a whole bottle).
again a difficult question and it depends, not just on you but on how low you were for how long. For instance if you were skudding along at 2.0 and dropped for a week into 1.4 territory it may happen then. If you were testing monthly (I'll get to that) how would you know?
We know that some people seem to just get by with no INR management
I recommend you revise this thread
https://www.valvereplacement.org/threads/how-long-can-you-go-without-it.887951/#post-903896
you can see quickly from that that the propensity for clotting varies from person to person. So it comes down to your risk tolerance for the unknown (the "
she'll be right factor").
My view is that I'd rather not suffer permanent impairment by having my INR drop below 2 for lengthy periods. The only guidance I can honestly give you is the known statistics.
Going with the table from "that graph" I usually cite:
View attachment 889286
an INR of between 1 and 1.4 would be on average 51.8 events per patient year. Last I looked there are 52 weeks in the year so (again, on average) if you were there for a couple of weeks nearly a certainty I'd say.
I'm sure
@dick0236 or
@Protimenow have some views on this.
Allow me to put a betting slant on this. If you bet on a "favourite" you are likely to see odds that don't encourage you to bet, but you can still win. Say your team was the favourite and you saw odds like 1/2 ... that would mean that for every $1 you put on it you'd get your $1 stake and 50c back ... if it was more like those odds above for a event then for a win you'd get your $1 stake and 5c back.
Seeing it that way makes you wonder why would you risk your $1 for a 5c gain?
We do know that even younger patients can have clotting events which have profound consequences by playing fast and loose
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8202806/
I'm frankly amazed with the cavalier attitude of clinics suggesting monthly testing, its in my view a major reason for the statistics and significant contributor to the bad news 'vibe' that being on warfarin has. Further I suspect it comes from the daze (not a spelling error) when vein draw was the primary tool (not that long ago actually) and the documentation and attitudes.
I don't want to instil any anxiety in you but I do instead want to instil the idea of being disciplined and taking it seriously. I have a friend who's a diabetic who does not take his BG readings often, eats badly and drinks. He's not doing so well these days. I'm sure he'd do better if he reversed that approach 10 years ago.
I always advocate for:
- a pill box placed in a position where you will look frequently during the day (so, not in a drawer or by your bed) and see "hey, its Tuesday, why isn't the lid open" which will assist on these issues
- testing weekly just before you fill our your box and determine if any dose change is warranted, document what you decide
- filling out your pill box weekly as a result of your weekly test and double check what you fill out is what you documented (a glance is all that's needed)
It could be that all this safety is not needed ... but the price to pay for wearing my safety glasses while chopping wood is low. I occasionally get struck in the face with a splinter, so far never the eye. But I put them on each time I chop wood (which is daily in winter).
We have a saying here in Australia
View attachment 889287
Also in Australia
View attachment 889288
HTH
and great looking bike too!!