Sorry, hit the wrong button before completing the posting
Anyway, tonight I initially retaliated by taking 1 grm paracetamol and 30 mg of codeine (as prescribed by my GP and Neuro, possibly because of other health problems). This sometimes takes the edge of the CH enough for me to live with it until it fades of it's own accord and used in conjunction with oxygen for 20 to 25 mins at 8 l/m will push it well into the background 80 to 90% of the time  -  when that doesn't work I hit the triptan tabs. After 4 hours the HA began creeping back again so, instead of taking more paracetamol and codeine I hyperventilated on 25 l/m of oxygen for 10 minutes and, hey presto !!, HA gone.
Based on my experience I can only recommend it to other sufferers  -  nothing to lose except painful times  -  give it a whirl !!
Cheers,
JoeKen.

And I'm willing to bet that you go higher than 25 lpm when you first jump on it. Joe.

Demand valves are THE way go, but I don't think that folks understand just how much O2 they are pulling in when they use them. Try using a 25 lpm regulator now and tell me that it keeps up with you.........

Joe,

I only made the comment because it was a long haul to get people to think about numbers higher than about 8-12 lpm. Now, people are thinking "wow, all the way to 25 lpm" and yet many people will not get the full benefit at that LOW flow.

I do not have a demand valve, so I rigged two 25 lpm regulators together with a "T" in the tubing because 25 lpm was way short.

This has made me acutely aware of what it takes to hyper-ventilate for a very few minutes during the initial "oh shit, here it comes!" phase. (Shortly thereafter, I crank down the flow to an easy breathing pace) I have worked hands-on with two other CH'ers who sucked the 3 liter bag flat in 1 to 1.5 breaths at 25 lpm. They are convinced now........

Again, the required flow will vary wildly per person. It just needs to be enough to forcefully hyper-ventilate with pure O2 for a few minutes at whatever that flow rate happens to be.

That first few minutes are the crucial component of my incredible success with O2. Until I decided to try it that way, I said "oxygen doesn't work well for me" for about 11 years.

THAT was a whole bunch of needless daily agony. Now it's so simple, hit the O2 and add an abortive med of choice if needed. No more long, drawn out high level hits - for me at least.

Marc

Hi All,
Just going to drift this post a little, if that's all right  -  if not I don't mind if the Mod moves it to an appropriate place. I have wondered for a long time why breathing pure oxygen, irrespective of flow rate, should kick a CH into the long grass for many sufferers. I have heard that oxygen contracts/narrows (right word ?) the swollen blood vessels, so reducing the pressure on the adjacent nerve endings and so reducing pain  -  is there unambiguous clinical evidence for the effect of blood vessel contraction?  -  I'm not being 'cute', I just don't know. I have also read on this forum that it has the effect of 'flushing out' excess levels of carbon dioxide which cause CH. Which is true, either , neither or both to some extent?
The reason I ask is that 19 months ago I was found to have a 'hole in the heart'. The Consultant who diagnosed it (using trans-cranial doppler examination if I remember correctly) said "It's a large hole but the good news is that it's a 'normal' hole". By this he meant that the wall between the ventricles did not fully close shortly after birth, which is what it is supposed to do. The net effect of this is that it allows blood which should be pumped to the lungs where it is finely filtered (getting rid of potentially dangerous 'debris' collected on it's journey round the body) and reoxygenated. What this means is that blood relatively rich in carbon dioxide is allowed to recirculate round the body where it will collect even more carbon dioxide. I suspect (I have no medical training) that, in extremis, it may be possible for this to build up to levels which may not reach dangerous but may reach levels in some more susceptible people to trigger CH. It is also a fact that, under physical stress (muscular effort) the undesirable blood flow increases markedly.
A further (maybe) relevant fact is that, statistically, a higher proportion of migraine sufferers have 'holes in the heart' than the public at large  -  is the same true of CH sufferers? There is also clinical evidence, according to the above referenced Consultant, that people who have their 'hole in the heart' surgically repaired for non-headache reasons often report a reduction in migraines  -  again, is the same true of CH sufferers?
The question I am trying to raise, I think, is: -
Is undiagnosed 'holes in the heart' a major cause (maybe even THE cause) of CH? Put another way, do any CH sufferers KNOW FOR A FACT they do NOT have a hole in the heart. It is often not easy to diagnose, requiring special equipment and skilled practitioners, and usually has no obviuos symptons.
Anybody any thoughts?

I recall when that was being looked at by respected researchers several years ago.

A few of us here on this site have suspected that they were on to something, but the older conventional assumptions were deeply rooted.