Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue

  • Thread starter Marciosos6 Probertiosos6
  • Start date



On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 18:11:57 -0600, "SumBuny"
<[email protected]> wrote:

[snip]

>Another of the ingredients listed is "Choline." I looked to see what that
>was and found:
>http://community.healthgate.com/GetContent.asp?siteid=iHerb&docid=/tnp/pg000469
>""Choline has only recently been recognized as an essential nutrient.
>Choline is part of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, which plays a major
>role in the brain; for this reason, many studies have been designed to look
>at choline's role in brain function.
>
>Choline functions as a part of a major biochemical process in the body
>called methylation; choline acts as a methyl donor.
>
>In higher dosages, minor but annoying side effects may occur, such as
>abdominal discomfort, diarrhea, and nausea. Maximum safe dosages for young
>children, pregnant or nursing women, or those with severe liver or kidney
>disease have not been determined.""
>
>
>
>Hmmmm...sounds like one of her ingredients is a drug that affects the brain,
>and affects methyl....and she complains about methylphenidate? Do I see a
>pot calling a kettle black? She is pushing a drug that affects the
>brain...while decrying medications that do the same????
>
>Not to mention that "max safe dosages for young children has not been
>determined..." This is what she is insisting is safer for our kids?
>
>She also lists many types of "friendly bacteria", the most widely known is
>acidophilus...however, this also does not have an established safe level for
>kids:
>http://my.webmd.com/content/drugs/1/4046_1398?src=Inktomi&condition=Drugs_and_Herbs_(New)
>""There is no information available regarding the use of acidophilus by
>children. Do not give any herbal / health supplement to a child without
>first talking to the child's doctor.
>
>Although uncommon, allergic reactions to acidophilus have been reported.
>Stop taking acidophilus and seek emergency medical attention if you
>experience symptoms of a serious allergic reaction including difficulty
>breathing; closing of your throat; swelling of your lips, tongue, or face;
>or hives."""
>
>
>Wow...this woman insists that taking methylphenidate is dangerous, and then
>she offers something that I *know* causes hives topically, and other
>ingredients that have been known to produce anaphylactic shock?? Oh, yea,
>let me stop taking something that has proven useful and not dangerous, and
>give me hives and shock!!!

Yeah, but hers is all natural, Buny--it doesn't come from one of those nasty
pharmaceutical companies!

Besides--what could you have against the poor woman turning a profit?

Joe Parsons
 
"Joe Parsons" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Yeah, but hers is all natural, Buny--it doesn't come from one of those
nasty
> pharmaceutical companies!

<G> So is belladonna, but I don't plan on drinking any of that!

"The famous words of Socrates...'I drank what????' "
--from the movie "Real Genius"


>
> Besides--what could you have against the poor woman turning a profit?


<g> How many poor women work for the pharmaceutical companies are also
needing income that she is decrying?
Buny
 
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:29:27 GMT, "CBI" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> >yet the dcotor does not insist the patient is not in
>> >pain...what do you do when pain cannot be "traced back to something
>> >concrete"?
>>
>> Iam not too sure in the USA where cash..lines of credit and insurance
>> determine the type of treatment if any..
>> but in the UK..where treatment is provided on the basis of clinical
>> need..a common procedure is to refer the patient to a Pain Clinic.
>
>Nice dodge. How about answering the question?

dodge??

what part of

"Q. what do you do when pain cannot be "traced back to something
concrete?

A.a common procedure is to refer the patient to a Pain Clinic."

do you not understand?
 
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:05:13 GMT, [email protected] (David
Wright) wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
>jake <[email protected]> wrote:
>>On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 14:29:03 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos8"
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>Edited for clarity
>>>
>>>> > "jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> > news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>>>Dr. Mary Ann Block
>>>
>>>BTW, in some recent readsing, I came accross this little gem....
>>>
>>>http://www.fumento.com/adhdblock.html
>>>
>>>Imagine if anyone who is pro med used an expert that was this tainted.....
>>
>>Agreed..
>>
>>Michael Fumento must be one of the most tainted authors on the
>>planet..
>
>Ah, the usual "attack the messenger."

indeed..this was precisely the purpose of posting Fumentos
ravings..this is certainly a usual tactic with your clique
when unable to address the arguments..


>Don't attempt to refute the
>message, which you can't anyway, unless you're going to start
>claiming that Block is an MD or something.

the message is that diabetes and the use of insulin is NOTHING like
giving children amphetamines and Ritalin..
no amount of attacks on critics of the practice by paid Novartis hacks
alters this..

>>dealing with the issue of diabetes being qualitatively distinct
>>from a construct such as ADHD..is a far better idea than using smear
>>tactics against those with the temerity to mention it.
>
>Reporting facts about Block is now a smear tactic.

with paid propogandists like Mr Fumento certainly..

>Will wonders never cease?

what is cause for wonder is the audacicity of posting such blatant
commercially motivated ad hominem attacks on Ms Block by a
professional character assassin hired by Novartis..and then whining
about ad hominem attacks when called on it...

You take double standards to a whole new level..

dealing with the issue of diabetes being qualitatively distinct
from a construct such as ADHD..is a far better idea than using smear
tactics against those with the temerity to mention it.
 
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:13:02 -0500, nknisley
<[email protected]> wrote:

>David Wright wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> jake <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 14:29:03 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos8"
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Edited for clarity
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>>>>Dr. Mary Ann Block
>>>>
>>>>BTW, in some recent readsing, I came accross this little gem....
>>>>
>>>>http://www.fumento.com/adhdblock.html
>>>>
>>>>Imagine if anyone who is pro med used an expert that was this tainted.....
>>>
>>>Agreed..
>>>
>>>Michael Fumento must be one of the most tainted authors on the
>>>planet..
>>
>>
>> Ah, the usual "attack the messenger." Don't attempt to refute the
>> message, which you can't anyway, unless you're going to start
>> claiming that Block is an MD or something.
>>
>>
>>>dealing with the issue of diabetes being qualitatively distinct
>>
>>>from a construct such as ADHD..is a far better idea than using smear
>>
>>>tactics against those with the temerity to mention it.
>>
>>
>> Reporting facts about Block is now a smear tactic. Will wonders never
>> cease?
>
>Especially coming from jake--who often attempts discredit peer reviewed
>published studies of medications merely by pointing out that the
>researchers have links to pharmaceutical companies.

you ..presumeably..would wish readers to remain in ignorance of
the fact that these "objective scientific" studies are commissioned
and paid for by the producers of the drug from their billions of
dollars PR budget?

"There's a greater and greater attempt by the pharmaceutical companies
to define normal behaviours as signs of illness and therefore as
something that can be treated by their products,"

Professor Allan Horwitz
 
"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:29:27 GMT, "CBI" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> >yet the dcotor does not insist the patient is not in
> >> >pain...what do you do when pain cannot be "traced back to something
> >> >concrete"?
> >>
> >> Iam not too sure in the USA where cash..lines of credit and insurance
> >> determine the type of treatment if any..
> >> but in the UK..where treatment is provided on the basis of clinical
> >> need..a common procedure is to refer the patient to a Pain Clinic.
> >
> >Nice dodge. How about answering the question?
>
> dodge??
>
> what part of
>
> "Q. what do you do when pain cannot be "traced back to something
> concrete?
>
> A.a common procedure is to refer the patient to a Pain Clinic."
>
> do you not understand?

Yes - you are apparently trying to maintain that ADHD is not real since
there is no objective test yet pain is real despite the lack of an objective
test. He asked you a question regarding this. Your answer is, in essence,
"go ask someone else. "

You made the claim. Now you answer the questions. How do you evaluate pain
with no obvious cause? Specifically, how do you establish that it is real?
How does this differ from the diagnosis of ADHD (i.e why is one valid but
the other isn't?)?

--
CBI, MD
 
"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> >How do you evaluate pain
> >with no obvious cause?
>
> unlike some in this forum who feel quite free to diagnose unmet
> strangers with ADHD and prescribe drugs for them I would not have the
> hubris to even attempt to..

No - You have the hubris to claim that ADHD is not a real entity. You say
that pain is a real entity worthy of treatment but when asked how the
diagnosis/reality of the two differ you just say to ask a pain specialist.
If that is your answer for pain then why is not your solution for ADHD to
just refer the kid to a qualified specialist?


>
> >Specifically, how do you establish that it is real?
>
> I do not..that is a matter for a neurologist..

Then how do you establish that ADHD is not real without also having to
discount pain?


> >How does this differ from the diagnosis of ADHD (i.e why is one valid but
> >the other isn't?)?
>
> one is a medical problem..the other is not a medical problem but the
> medicalization of social issues..

How can you accept pain with no obvious cause (like RSD) as a medical
problem but not ADHD? What criterion are you using other than just starting
with your own presumptions?

--
CBI, MD
 
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 04:13:22 GMT, "CBI" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> >How do you evaluate pain
>> >with no obvious cause?
>>
>> unlike some in this forum who feel quite free to diagnose unmet
>> strangers with ADHD and prescribe drugs for them I would not have the
>> hubris to even attempt to..
>
>No - You have the hubris to claim that ADHD is not a real entity.

No matter how much you go on about it ..the fact reamains there is
no objective test for ADHD and no biological markers to support the
contention it is some sort of disease like diabetes..Diabetes is
discovered..the diagnosis comes after the discovery is confirmed by
evidence..

ADHD is inferred and there is no means of objective verification..


>You say that pain is a real entity worthy of treatment but when asked how the
>diagnosis/reality of the two differ you just say to ask a pain specialist.
>If that is your answer for pain then why is not your solution for ADHD to
>just refer the kid to a qualified specialist?

there are no objective referents for ADHD that a "ADHD specialist" no
matter how qualified ..can discover..

none.



>
>
>>
>> >Specifically, how do you establish that it is real?
>>
>> I do not..that is a matter for a neurologist..
>
>Then how do you establish that ADHD is not real without also having to
>discount pain?

the onus is on the person wishing to put an infant on a lifetime of
amphetamines to establish the reality of their construct..

the existence of referred pain in no way justifies this..

>> >How does this differ from the diagnosis of ADHD (i.e why is one valid but
>> >the other isn't?)?
>>
>> one is a medical problem..the other is not a medical problem but the
>> medicalization of social issues..
>
>How can you accept pain with no obvious cause (like RSD) as a medical
>problem but not ADHD?

The one is a universal medical problem acknowledged and accepted by
medicine world wide..

the other is an epidemic that seemingly exists only in the USA and
the UK and in places where the empire building "ADHD specialists " you
speak of are given credibility..

Chronic pain is a far diffent kettle of fish to kids wriggling in
their seats in a schoolroom..or not paying sufficient attention to thr
pearls of wisdom dispensed by the teacher..

It is a gross insult to diabetics and those with authenticated
medical problems to suggest otherwise..







What criterion are you using other than just starting
>with your own presumptions?
 
[email protected] (Jan) wrote:

>>Subject: Re: Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue
>>From: "CBI" [email protected]
>>Date: 12/20/2003 1:26 PM Central Standard Time
>>Message-id: <[email protected]>
>>
>>
>>
>>"L" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> A drug is addictive owing to it's chemical properties.
>>
>>I guess you are totally unfamiliar with the adage that the dose defines the
>>poison.
>>
>>--
>>CBI, MD
>
>I'm not, it's an old worn out excuse used by organized medicine and dentistry,
>which is now being proven wrong. Even *low* doeses of mercury from amalgams can
>cause mercury poisoning and damage to organs.

Not that we were talking about mercury, of course.

<snip diversion>

--
Peter Bowditch
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight
and The New Improved Quintessence of the Loon with added Vitamins and C-Q10 http://www.ratbags.com/loon
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
 
"SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote
> Hmm...what about those who ingest antihistimines for their stimulating
> effects? They are abusing the OTC meds, but according to this line,
cannot
> be addicting....

Sorry, I just don't know if they are addicting or not.

> Are you just as vocal in decrying all stimulants taken solely for the
effect
> on the brain? I expect to see identical articles posted by you demanding
> that all caffeinated products, all chocolate (has the same chemical as
> marijuana), all alcohol products be treated in the same manner that you
> demand medically prescribed ADHD meds treated...

I do know parents who let their kids eat chocolate on a nearly daily
basis. I also know people who routinely give chocolate to other people's
kids, without checking with the parents. I don't really agree with them.
However, I don't have any research articles one way or the other.
If anyone does, I'd be interested to see them.
 
"SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote
> > > You *are* stating categorically that you have, and will, *refuse all
> > > medications*?
> > No. I take something on rare occasions.
> OK, so you would refuse to take medications for any chronic condition?

No. But all things being equal, I'd much rather avoid a long-term drug
dependency.
 
jake wrote:


> No matter how much you go on about it ..the fact reamains there is
> no objective test for ADHD and no biological markers to support the
> contention it is some sort of disease like diabetes..Diabetes is
> discovered..the diagnosis comes after the discovery is confirmed by
> evidence..
>
> ADHD is inferred and there is no means of objective verification..

that is true of many conditions including autism. your point is moot.

sammi
 
"Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote
> > Hmm...what about those who ingest antihistimines for their stimulating
> > effects? They are abusing the OTC meds, but according to this line,
> cannot
> > be addicting....
>
> Sorry, I just don't know if they are addicting or not.
>
> > Are you just as vocal in decrying all stimulants taken solely for the
> effect
> > on the brain? I expect to see identical articles posted by you
demanding
> > that all caffeinated products, all chocolate (has the same chemical as
> > marijuana), all alcohol products be treated in the same manner that you
> > demand medically prescribed ADHD meds treated...
>
> I do know parents who let their kids eat chocolate on a nearly daily
> basis. I also know people who routinely give chocolate to other people's
> kids, without checking with the parents. I don't really agree with them.
> However, I don't have any research articles one way or the other.
> If anyone does, I'd be interested to see them.

Alcohol, Roger. The poster mentioned alcohol. Well? And caffeine? How
typical of you to focus on chocolate and ignore what anyone with a
functional brain would refer to as "obvious". Some things never change.

Bernstein GA, Carroll ME, Thuras PD, Cosgrove KP, Roth ME.

Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, University of Minnesota Medical
School, F256/2B West, 2450 Riverside Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA.
[email protected]

This study identifies and characterizes symptoms of caffeine dependence in
adolescents. Thirty-six adolescents who consumed caffeine daily and had some
features of caffeine dependence on telephone screen were scheduled for
outpatient evaluation. Evaluation included the Diagnostic Interview Schedule
for Children-IV-Youth Version (DISC-IV) and modified DISC-IV questions that
assessed caffeine dependence based on DSM-IV substance dependence criteria.
Of 36 subjects, 41.7% (n=15) reported tolerance to caffeine, 77.8% (n=28)
described withdrawal symptoms after cessation or reduction of caffeine
intake, 38.9% (n=14) reported desire or unsuccessful attempts to control
use, and 16.7% (n=6) endorsed use despite knowledge of physical or
psychological problems associated with caffeine. There was no significant
difference in the amount of caffeine consumed daily by caffeine dependent
versus non-dependent teenagers. These findings are important due to the vast
number of adolescents who drink caffeinated beverages.

PMID: 11850129 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

le moo
 
"Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message news
> "JG" <[email protected]> wrote
> > I agree. There's *nothing* to indicate that the users weren't addicted,
> > and, while the fact they (all!) chose to continue taking it isn't proof
> > of addiction, it, at least, can be used to support that conclusion.
>
> Mark can read just about any ritalin study, and conclude that it
> shows that ritalin is not addictive. Well, it doesn't show that.
> All the studies are consistent with the notion that ritalin is addictive.

For someone who's spent so much time debating this, this suggests wilful
blindness or blatant intellectual dishonesty. Both of which you're famous
for. What you are furiously dancing up a storm around (and for which you
have been repeatedly metaphorically spanked) is the fact that although
numerous substances are addictive under certain conditions, you exclude them
from your demonizing, logic-abusing attacks. If you just came out with your
political agenda, it would be so much simpler to get like-thinkers (I use
the term "thinkers" very loosely) to understand what you really mean and
line up behind you.

le moo
 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups:
alt.support.attn-deficit,misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2003 3:12 AM
Subject: Re: Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue


> "SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote
> > > > You *are* stating categorically that you have, and will, *refuse all
> > > > medications*?
> > > No. I take something on rare occasions.
> > OK, so you would refuse to take medications for any chronic condition?
>
> No. But all things being equal, I'd much rather avoid a long-term drug
> dependency.

"All things being equal"? WTF is that supposed to mean? If you require a
drug to maintain your health and require it for as long as you live, that's
"dependency" by definition. Watch now as Roger redefines "drug" into
sub-categories that differentiate between to substances which he thinks have
the potential for use as euphorics (very bad), ones that have no
psychoactive properties (good) and ones that have effects that, while not
dangerous, make the user ever cognizant of the message that "drugs are bad
for you" (very good). As long as there's zero possibility that it might be
fun to take, it's safe.

le moo
 
Happy Oyster <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:59:51 GMT, "Marciosos6 Probertiosos6"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >(Please repost for jan to read. She MUST know this!)
> >
> >Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue
> >Mon Dec 15, 7:00 PM ET
> >
> >http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...1216/hl_acs/ritalin_helps_beat_cancer_fatigue
> >
> >The drug methylphenidate -- more commonly known as Ritalin (news - web
> >sites), Concerta, Metadate, or Methylin -- can help cancer patients fight
> >off fatigue, according to researchers from M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in
> >Houston. The best effect comes from taking small doses throughout the day,
> >they report in the Journal of Clinical Oncology (Vol. 21, No. 23:
> >4439-4443).
> >
> >Most patients with advanced cancer will experience fatigue, a symptom that
> >can destroy quality of life. Although the fatigue sometimes stems from
> >anemia and improves with increases in blood counts, most often there is no
> >specific cause and no ready treatment.
> >
> >Methylphenidate is typically prescribed for ADHD, or attention
> >deficit/hyperactivity disorder, but it has been used, with some success, to
> >treat cancer fatigue. In this study, the researchers wanted to better
> >document this success by measuring symptom improvement through the use of
> >specially designed questionnaires.
> >
> >Patients Felt Better Physically and Emotionally
> >
> >The researchers enrolled 30 patients with advanced cancer and fatigue; the
> >participants were given a one-week supply of 5-mg methylphenidate tablets
> >and told to take them as needed for fatigue. After 7 days they had the
> >option of stopping the medication or continuing for 3 more weeks. All the
> >patients reported that the drug helped and all chose to continue taking it.
> >
> >
> >The researchers also found other evidence that the drug was helping. At the
> >beginning of the study, the patients rated their fatigue on a 0-10 scale,
> >with 10 being the worst. The average was 7.2. After 28 days of
> >methylphenidate, their fatigue level had dropped to 4.4.
> >
> >
> >The patients also reported less depression and greater physical and
> >emotional well-being. When the researchers measured patient fatigue during
> >the day, they noted a drop from morning to evening as the effects of that
> >day's treatment took hold.
> >
> >Side Effects Minor
> >
> >Side effects weren't a big problem. Two patients reported restlessness. Two
> >others reported a loss of appetite, although most actually found their
> >appetites improved.
> >
> >
> >The authors acknowledge that bigger studies are needed to understand why
> >methylphenidate works, how long it remains effective, and how long it can
> >safely be taken. But they were encouraged by the clear-cut benefit of the
> >drug in improving both the fatigue and the quality of life of these
> >patients.
> >
>
> Repost.
>
> Regards,
>
> Aribert Deckers


==========

These test results sound "iffy".

The improvement could be due to many things. Getting some attention
from others. People's getting some medication (any medication), &
trying to force it to work, force to help. Trying to have hope that
something, anything, will help.

Ritalin (& other such drugs) had bad sides effects for me, & made me
feel super-sick. So I have no faith in this study.

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

PS It would be a really good thing, if the doctors would focus on the
causes of diseases/disorders/etc., instead of focusing on just
treating the symptoms, ... as things get worse & worse for the
patients, & as we're suffering to death horribly, because of medical
indifference & incompetence, & because of govt & corporate (such as
the PHARMA lobby's) sick/sleazy needs & greeds.

I'd rather have better bloodwork, testing & diagnosis, & a real chance
to fight back & get into better health, ... than be handed another
prescription for the expensive & cr*p-type drugs like Ritalin,
antidepressants, & such.

What is M D Anderson working on now, that isn't PHARMA controlled, &
that might actually help cancer patients?
 
Happy Dog wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]>
> Newsgroups:
> alt.support.attn-deficit,misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health
> Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2003 3:12 AM
> Subject: Re: Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue
>
>
>> "SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote
>> > > > You *are* stating categorically that you have, and will,
>> > > > *refuse all medications*?
>> > > No. I take something on rare occasions.
>> > OK, so you would refuse to take medications for any chronic
>> > condition?
>>
>> No. But all things being equal, I'd much rather avoid a long-term
>> drug dependency.
>
> "All things being equal"? WTF is that supposed to mean? If you
> require a drug to maintain your health and require it for as long as
> you live, that's
> "dependency" by definition. Watch now as Roger redefines "drug" into
> sub-categories that differentiate between to substances which he
> thinks have the potential for use as euphorics (very bad), ones that
> have no psychoactive properties (good) and ones that have effects
> that, while not dangerous, make the user ever cognizant of the message
> that "drugs are bad
> for you" (very good). As long as there's zero possibility that it
> might be fun to take, it's safe.

yes, but the the real question is just how important is chocolate anyway
?

sammi
 
"su-texas, susan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Happy Oyster <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:59:51 GMT, "Marciosos6 Probertiosos6"
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >(Please repost for jan to read. She MUST know this!)
> > >
> > >Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue
> > >Mon Dec 15, 7:00 PM ET
> > >
> >
>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1434&ncid=1434&e=2&u=/acs/2
0031216/hl_acs/ritalin_helps_beat_cancer_fatigue
> > >
> > >The drug methylphenidate -- more commonly known as Ritalin (news - web
> > >sites), Concerta, Metadate, or Methylin -- can help cancer patients
fight
> > >off fatigue, according to researchers from M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
in
> > >Houston. The best effect comes from taking small doses throughout the
day,
> > >they report in the Journal of Clinical Oncology (Vol. 21, No. 23:
> > >4439-4443).
> > >
> > >Most patients with advanced cancer will experience fatigue, a symptom
that
> > >can destroy quality of life. Although the fatigue sometimes stems from
> > >anemia and improves with increases in blood counts, most often there is
no
> > >specific cause and no ready treatment.
> > >
> > >Methylphenidate is typically prescribed for ADHD, or attention
> > >deficit/hyperactivity disorder, but it has been used, with some
success, to
> > >treat cancer fatigue. In this study, the researchers wanted to better
> > >document this success by measuring symptom improvement through the use
of
> > >specially designed questionnaires.
> > >
> > >Patients Felt Better Physically and Emotionally
> > >
> > >The researchers enrolled 30 patients with advanced cancer and fatigue;
the
> > >participants were given a one-week supply of 5-mg methylphenidate
tablets
> > >and told to take them as needed for fatigue. After 7 days they had the
> > >option of stopping the medication or continuing for 3 more weeks. All
the
> > >patients reported that the drug helped and all chose to continue taking
it.
> > >
> > >
> > >The researchers also found other evidence that the drug was helping. At
the
> > >beginning of the study, the patients rated their fatigue on a 0-10
scale,
> > >with 10 being the worst. The average was 7.2. After 28 days of
> > >methylphenidate, their fatigue level had dropped to 4.4.
> > >
> > >
> > >The patients also reported less depression and greater physical and
> > >emotional well-being. When the researchers measured patient fatigue
during
> > >the day, they noted a drop from morning to evening as the effects of
that
> > >day's treatment took hold.
> > >
> > >Side Effects Minor
> > >
> > >Side effects weren't a big problem. Two patients reported restlessness.
Two
> > >others reported a loss of appetite, although most actually found their
> > >appetites improved.
> > >
> > >
> > >The authors acknowledge that bigger studies are needed to understand
why
> > >methylphenidate works, how long it remains effective, and how long it
can
> > >safely be taken. But they were encouraged by the clear-cut benefit of
the
> > >drug in improving both the fatigue and the quality of life of these
> > >patients.

> ==========
>
> These test results sound "iffy".

I did a follow-up medline search, and they confirm other studies testing the
same thing. They are quite crediuble to anyone with an open mind.

> The improvement could be due to many things. Getting some attention
> from others. People's getting some medication (any medication), &
> trying to force it to work, force to help. Trying to have hope that
> something, anything, will help.

The level of consistency among the variouys studies says that this is not
the case.

> Ritalin (& other such drugs) had bad sides effects for me, & made me
> feel super-sick. So I have no faith in this study.

Sorry you had problems. Howevr, what you seem to fail to take into
consideration is that these people were extremely ill, and taking chemo. I
sure hope that you are never in a position where the study becomes
personally relevant.

> Susan, Su_Texas my opinions
>
> PS It would be a really good thing, if the doctors would focus on the
> causes of diseases/disorders/etc., instead of focusing on just
> treating the symptoms, ... as things get worse & worse for the
> patients, & as we're suffering to death horribly, because of medical
> indifference & incompetence, & because of govt & corporate (such as
> the PHARMA lobby's) sick/sleazy needs & greeds.

I see. So you admit that you are uninformed. Medical science is looking into
causes of many diseases, disroders, etc. I suggest that you get up to speed
on it, and stop seeing conspiracies everywhere you go.

> I'd rather have better bloodwork, testing & diagnosis, & a real chance
> to fight back & get into better health, ... than be handed another
> prescription for the expensive & cr*p-type drugs like Ritalin,
> antidepressants, & such.

Your agenda is showing. You should blush.

> What is M D Anderson working on now, that isn't PHARMA controlled, &
> that might actually help cancer patients?

Look it up and get an education. Merely asking loaded questions is ********.

Have a nice day.
 
"Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote
> > > > You *are* stating categorically that you have, and will, *refuse all
> > > > medications*?
> > > No. I take something on rare occasions.
> > OK, so you would refuse to take medications for any chronic condition?
>
> No. But all things being equal, I'd much rather avoid a long-term drug
> dependency.

Hypothyroidism. Diabetes. Coronary Artery Disease. Hypertension.

All use long term medication, but you seem to not have a problem with these.
 
"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 14:29:03 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos8"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Edited for clarity
> >
> >
> >> > "jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>>Dr. Mary Ann Block
> >
> >BTW, in some recent readsing, I came accross this little gem....
> >
> >http://www.fumento.com/adhdblock.html
> >
> >Imagine if anyone who is pro med used an expert that was this
tainted.....
>
> Agreed..
>
> Michael Fumento must be one of the most tainted authors on the
> planet..

Sorry you disagree with him. However, the facts about Block speak for
themselves. She is in bed with the $cienos.

> whilst his payed for attack on Mary Block might not be up there
> with his "myth of heterosexual aids" or his propaganda for the
> pesticides industry its pretty low..
>
> http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Hudson_Institute
>
> Hudson Institute
> From Disinfopedia, the encyclopedia of propaganda.
>
> The Hudson Institute, based in Indiana, is a hard-right activist think
> tank that advocates the abolition of government-backed Social Security
> and an end to corporate income taxes.
>
>
> Funding
> Between 1987 and 2001, the Institute received $12,041,203 in 183
> separate grants from only -- foundations:[1]
>
>
> Castle Rock Foundation
> Earhart Foundation
> JM Foundation
> Koch Family Foundations (David H. Koch Foundation)
> John M. Olin Foundation, Inc.
> Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
> Scaife Foundations (Scaife Family, Sarah Mellon Scaife, Carthage)
> Smith Richardson Foundation
>
> The Hudson Institute's IRS Form 990 for the financial year ending on
> September 30, 2001 showed total income of $7,818,439, most of which
> came in large grants. Other known funders include:
>
>
> Ag Processing Inc
> American Cyanamid
> Archer Daniels Midland
> Cargill
> Ciba-Geigy
> ConAgra
> DowElanco
> DuPont
> Exxon Mobil
> HJ Heinz
> Lilly Endowment
> McDonalds
> Monsanto
> National Agricultural Chemical Association
> Novartis
> Proctor & Gamble
> Sunkist Growers
> United Agri Products
>
> Personnel
>
> Global Food Issues
> Michael Fumento, senior fellow
>
>
> Michael Fumento
> From Disinfopedia, the encyclopedia of propaganda.
>
> Fumento, Michael ([email protected])
>
> Member of the Hudson Institute
>
> Author of :
>
> "City slickers off target in pesticide report" - an article published
> (15 December 1998) in the Idaho Statesman which criticises "...the
> environmentalists' never-ending campaign against pesticides" and
> suggests that if pesticides were banned that "...we'll all be forced
> to eat expensive, ugly, shriveled-looking organic produce...".
>
> According to a brief biographical profile supplied to the National
> Journalism Center Fumento attended a course in fall 1985 and has
> subsequently been "National Issues reporter, Investor's Business
> Daily, legal writer, Washington Times, editorial writer, Rocky
> Mountain News (CO), U.S. correspondent, A3 Umwelt (Austria), senior
> fellow, Hudson Institute, fellow, American Enterprise Institute,
> science advisor, Atlantic Legal Institute, Warren Brookes fellow,
> Competitive Enterprise Institute, author, Science Under Siege, author,
> The Fat of The Land, author, Polluted Science, author, The Myth of
> Heterosexual Aids....
>
> -----
>
> dealing with the issue of diabetes being qualitatively distinct
> from a construct such as ADHD..is a far better idea than using smear
> tactics against those with the temerity to mention it.
>
> It is also far less of an insult to those suffering real diseases..
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back