# Should the Name Be Changed ?



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

For those people that are given anti-depressants , for depression and "D" issue's , that is Ok to be on anti-depressant medication .But , could the name be " MisLeading " , when you know you don't suffer from depression , even though it has other use's besides that.Maybe the Drug Manufactures need to have an Aleternative name for this .Something to ponder over.


----------



## overitnow (Nov 25, 2001)

I only know what I read in the paper. I am under the impression that doctors are over-prescribing these kinds of meds, in much the same way as there are too many ADHD diagnoses--"Give him Ritalin"--at this time. Certainly, this is the one place I have found discussions of what they do and why they do that. If the Health Pages editors either don't know or don't present this, it really is hard to tell just how widespread any overuse really is.As to renaming them, perhaps it would remove the "mental stigma" from their use, in much the same way as St. John's Wort or Griffonia Seed sound much less problematic than Valium or Prozac; then again, it just might make any over-prescription that much easier. Maybe "Low-Dose SSRI" would work for us, a la "Low-Dose Aspirin" for cholesterol control. It would be most useful if the cause for serotonin production problems could be found; but that would still make any medication to address that available only to the next generation of sufferers, given the length of time it takes to get meds approved. Not that my happiness has anything to do with this; but I would be happiest if the kinds of solutions we have found here and in similar places were in some way codified by what they do from least invasive to most, and that circulated through the GI organizations. At least then the results we have seen from calcium and hypno and other therapies could be integrated into the GIs' list of possible treatments.Mark


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

Great point Mark , perhaps it would remove the mental stigma from it's use !!I know as soon as I personally hear the word anti-depressant , I say: NO.I say NO because I am not depressed in any form.Now , even though this med has other use's , it chief function is an :Anti Depressant.I won't take it. And that is my right to do so.I just wonder if they need to give it another name, for people that need to take it for another reason , other then depression that doesn't exist for them.This might be something that could be referred to the Drug manufactures and get their InPut on calling it a different name for different situations.Yes I have seen Ritalin be prescribed like tic-tac's for school children of all ages.My son's doctor tried to put him on it back in the early 90's because the teacher said : he was always tired in class and wasn't paying attention > due to fatigue from his heart condition MVP (Mitral Valve Prolapse).I told the doctor he was out of his friggin' mind. The doctor said it would make him alert so he could be more attentive in class.I said your Masking the problem , the issue here is the heart condition.My son is 27 now and his heart condition makes him very fatigued and ill looking and he sleeps excessivly 10-12 hours daily.Ritalin is over prescribed because these teachers don't want to deal with children that don't have full attention on them 8 hours a day. Their attitude is : Give um' a pill.On my King5 news channel in Seattle on Monday they said > Drug use has gone up 75 % in children. And they are seeing 1 and 2 year old's that are found to be clinically depressed . Now why is that happening ? Enviormental factors ? Something is making these toddlers ill. And they are also finding the mothers are depressed and take anti dep's.Passing it on down the line in my opinion.Getting back to anti'dep's , I think they should be given a different name for those folks that don't have depression.But keep the name anti-dep if you are depressed.Again , something to think about.


----------



## Kathleen M. (Nov 16, 1999)

Because of the stigma some drugs with more than one approved use have a different brand name for the non-depression use.Prozac was rebranded as Sarafem for prescribing it for PMDD.Wellbutrin was relabeled as Zyban for use in smoking cessation.I believe the tricyclics were originally developed for allergy relief before their psychiatric use was discovered. Cymbalta at one time in its development (from what I understand) was considered as an IBS drug but once the FDA got all pissy about Lotronex they decided to go for the depression approval because that is something the FDA thinks needs to be treated so will let it come to market.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

It's good to see afew of these drugs being given a different name.And it's nice to know they help other conditions , but it still boils back down to them originally being 1st classified as an anti depressant.It's ashame they just couldn't find a drug that targets that single perticular problem situation and market it with that type of a name , if you get what I'm saying. And I am sure they do in many case situations.All these old drugs that are being used for different things all go right back to originally being the anti depressant med.Then possible re-named because tests show they help other things.The name Anti-depressant just gives off a bad reputation , in My opinion.Hopefully these drug manufactures can continue to develope new med's that will work , and not have names that can be linked backwards to things that you just don't want to take.It might be worth sending letters to these guy's and see how they feel about it.I doubt we'll make a difference , but it's worth checking out.My cousin is a Medical Examiner in California , I will have to ask her what I could do to actually get my letter to the proper dept. for consideration in re-naming afew of these pills.My letter would probably be laughed at and tossed in the can.But atleast it gets brought to their attention that people actually do see this could be misleading information.


----------



## Kathleen M. (Nov 16, 1999)

It is virtually impossible to make a drug that effects one and only one thing in the body and have that one and only one thing be only screwed up in one and only one disease or disorder. Like I said with the tricyclics often they are working on one path for a drug then find it does something else and that takes things in a different direction even before they are approved. Sometimes you see the new use coming after approval but sometimes that shows up during the development process and they usually go for the use that will generate the most revenue.The body reuses the same basic things over and over again and so that means that everything is going to have multiple effects.The drugs I mentioned that were renamed went through the entire approval process for the new use. They were all newer drugs where the new use was found while it was still under patent and they could get back the costs of getting the new use approved.A lot of the times they don't discover other uses until after the drugs are available as cheap generics. Spending tens of millions of dollars you can't make back from sales of the drug means most off-label use (using it for something other than the originally approved for thing) will be with the drug under its original name and listed for whatever it was originally approved for. If you want to completely redesign all of biology so everything in the body has one and only one use then go right ahead. Until someone does that we will have to put up with drugs that do several things in the body.If you spend some time in Pubmed http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ you can find the studies used for every single drug used for something other than the first thing the FDA approved it for. Doctor's don't choose off-label drugs at random for no reason. The ones that are commonly used are used because there are clinical studies that show that X can work for Y as well as Z. Our news feed grabs from pubmed as well as other things for IBS news. There was an abstract just published on pubmed that showed up on the news feed to day for a Tricyclic antidepressant and its use for IBS. http://www.ibsgroup.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=108419It is a small study and has some issues (lots of people dropped out in both the placebo and the study end of the trial) but it helped a lot more people than the placebo did so if you had the money to scale that up and it held it would very easily be approved for IBS, if only they would use the same criteria to approve IBS drugs that they use for everything else. (per-protocol: 80.6% vs 48.0%, P = 0.01)Good luck contacting the FDA and convincing them IBS is something that needs to be treated. This board has had several campaigns trying to convince them that IBS is disruptive and they still think we are all a bunch of whiners that need to eat more fiber. Maybe you can change their minds. http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ContactFDA/default.htm is their contact us page.


----------



## Jeffrey Roberts (Apr 15, 1987)

Sorry, I haven't read everything posted here so not sure if this has come up.I've heard the name *central analgesic* come up as a name in place of antidepressants. That seems like a considerably better name for treating pain related conditions where antidepressants are commonly used now, like in IBS.Jeff


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

I hadn't thought of contacting the FDA about the re-naming issue , I was thinking about the actual drug maker themself.Then they could submit their new findings and name to the FDA for approval.I will see what my medical examiner cousin thinks I could do , to possibly put the information out there that there might be somethings that could just be re-named as it might be abit misleading to some people. (Confusing)Oh Jeff , that is a Great Name for this : central analgesic .That sure sounds better to me then that word: anti-dep.But , does it still link right back to Anti-Dep ? I'll look into it. That's real great information , thanks so much for posting it.


----------



## Jeffrey Roberts (Apr 15, 1987)

I believe the thinking was that the new class of antidepressants will be start to be called central analgesics, but I'm not sure of the logistics of the name change.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

Thanks so much Jeff for the additional post , I would rather see these med's called: Central Analgesics.It doesn't sound as bad as the other word could imply.It's worth further looking into to. I think atleast.I know the public will never convince the Drug Manufactures and the FDA to do anything.But it worth calling it to their attention as a possibility.


----------



## keycat (Apr 6, 2009)

While I agree that re-naming anti-depressants might remove some of the stigma associated with them, I believe we have to ask ourselves - why does that stigma exist in the first place? Are we that disturbed by mental illness that we can't look past the name of a drug to its possible benefits?If a doctor said to me, "There's a tuberculosis medicine that people have been using to treat IBS with great success. I think you should try it," it wouldn't bother me that the medicine had originally been used to treat tuberculosis.Incidentally, the first anti-depressant was originally a tuberculosis medicine. Anti-depressants are not the devil. Doctors who prescribe them weigh the benefits and risks for the patient as best they can. Patients must also take some responsibility in educating themselves about what their doctor is prescribing and why. In that regard, anti-depressants are just like any other drug.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

Well , I'll stir the pot alittle , if a doctor told me there was a medication that was used to treat TuberC. and was beneficial for that condition , and New studys show that it is now possibly treating IBS , I still wouldn't take it , sorry to say.You have to kinda look at the real reason the drug was initially developed for.Even though now further studys show other benefits from it.Maybe I am just set in my ways and strong bull headed , If I ain't got it , I ain't taking that.This is just how I view it though.You say the 1st developed anti dep was initally developed for TuberC. , You need to provide background proof if possible.Any information would be awesome to read.


----------



## Thai (Aug 22, 2007)

I agree Keycat.Just because a drug was originally developed for one purpose is no reason to not use it for it's secondary or additional properties.....IMODifferent conditions, different doses equal different results.I for one don't care what the label calls it....if it works, it works.Mental illness stigmas are the problem not what the pill is called......again, JMOThai


----------



## Kathleen M. (Nov 16, 1999)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IproniazidIt is wikipedia, but it is a referenced article.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

patients given iproniazid became "inappropriately happy".Sounds like a side effect to me.A reaction of some sort , possibly.Sure there are all sorts of drugs on the market that were spicifically intened and targeted to go after a perticular ailment.And Yes they now show they can help with other situations from the studies they've performed.But the way I still look at it , it was originally targeted for that one specific condition.And if I personally know I have never suffered from that , I just don't take that medication.Untill these drugs manufactures , and research developers , come out on the market , with a drug , for that One sole purpouse , then I just don't want to take part in it.I have always been ANTI DRUG.And that is Not a bad thing.Atleast for ME it's Not.And I do support those that require medication. I just want to see them use caution when they use it.


----------



## keycat (Apr 6, 2009)

Glenda, you and others who consider themselves anti-drug have the extremely good fortune not to rely on drugs to survive. I am pro-drug. That doesn't mean that I believe that everyone should be on drugs, or that drugs can't be abused. What I do know is that medication - when used appropriately and responsibly - has the ability to save lives. Furthermore, it has the ability to improve the quality of life for those for whom life otherwise might not be worth living. If it weren't for drugs, I would be dead - and I'm not the only one. Millions of people who are alive today might have lost their lives if it weren't for the availability of antibiotics, vaccines, and yes, anti-depressants. You may never share my opinions about the use of drugs in our society, but at the very least you must have some respect for the breakthroughs in modern medicine that have saved countless people from death and suffering. For every child who is prescribed Ritalin but may not really need it, there are at least a thousand children who would be dead if they had not been prescribed antibiotics.And as for your assertion that you would never take a medicine that was not invented specifically for your ailment - you should know that chemotherapy was not invented to treat cancer. It was originally developed for the treatment of soldiers exposed to mustard gas in World War I:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChemotherapyGod forbid that you ever need chemotherapy, but if you did, I sincerely hope that you wouldn't refuse it for that reason.


----------



## Kathleen M. (Nov 16, 1999)

Yep, the vast majority of scientific and medical breakthroughs are because something did something in addition to what was expected. Sometimes we don't even know something is possible to effect in a given way until we do so inadvertently.Another one that isn't going to give up my asthma drugs that keep me alive and well just because something thinks it is wrong to take anything like them. I don't care what they were working on when they inadvertently discovered they would treat asthma. As long as I can maintain breathing I will do so. I'm not going to die young just to make someone happy that my tox report said I wasn't taking anything from a drug company.


----------



## Thai (Aug 22, 2007)

ditto!!!!Well said Keycat and Kathleen.Thai


----------



## Patman75 (Mar 9, 2008)

Are we sick becuase our body lacks a certain drug? I think not. Drugs may be necessary to get the problem under control or suppress it enough to be able to live or improve our qualtiy of life. But many drugs still don't address the root cause of the problem. When I was having all my IBD problems I was depressed. I was never depressed until I my IBD started. Now that I addressing my main core problems with diet, supplements and removal of enviromental toxins I fell great. Anti-depressant averted.3 years ago I had total trust in my doctors and would of taken any medication they prescribed to me because I had total blind trust for my doctors. They are doctors with years of training, why wouldn't I trust them? We are taught as kids to trust our doctors.I have had doctors prescribe me antibiotcs knowing I have IBD and say they won't interfer with my meds. Well that just great but you made my IBD 10 times worse!I have asked my old GI "I have been reading about probiotics, can they help?" his answer "If you think probiotics can work I can write you a prescription for that? Come on! If I think?? You are the GI, if they can be helping me why aren't I taking these to begin with?!?If all your doctor does is pull out his prescribtion tab and tries one drug after another you need to find a new doctor. You will never get better with that approach.


----------



## Kathleen M. (Nov 16, 1999)

Humans are not identical. We all have a slightly different set of genes to metabolize chemicals (whether in food or supplements, we make ourselves or we take as drugs).Some people get rid of things too quickly to be effective, some people don't get rid of things fast enough. I don't see the difference between a doctor trying a few different medications until they find the one that you metabolize right (since we don't have the tests developed to the point we can screen people yet) or a naturopath running you through a few dozen herbs until they find some that work. Because we are going to have the same problem with plant chemicals whether then are still in the dried plant or the drug company extracted them out. A heck of a lot of drugs are just something someone found in some plant or fungus. If you need each treatment to always work in all people there isn't a single one of those on the planet no matter where you buy it or how it is regulated. There will always be some trial and error just because humans have too much variability in how we interact with chemicals. Every natural treatment is still chock full of chemicals, everything is made of chemicals, after all. Our body still has to distribute it, use it, metablolize it and excrete it no matter what section of the store you got the thing from (the food aisle, the supplement aisle or the pharmacy aisle).


----------



## keycat (Apr 6, 2009)

Patman, I was not taught as a kid to trust doctors. My mother is a nurse. She taught me that doctors can be wrong, that arrogance can blind their judgment, and to always get a second (or third, or fourth) opinion when you are in doubt. Even good doctors are human; they often can't foresee what effect a drug may have on you until you try it. They can't be blamed for every bad effect a drug has on a patient. Unfortunately, at this point treatment for IBS is often a case of trial and error. Having said that, my gastroenterologist has always been very frank in telling me that there's no miracle pill for IBS, only a long list of drugs that may or may not give some relief to some people. However, he hasn't prescribed any of them, but recommended that I continue trying to manage my symptoms with diet, exercise, and Imodium. I take Effexor XR, but that was prescribed to me for anxiety, not IBS. Other doctors have tried to prescribe me drugs for my IBS, but I've refused - not because I believe that it's wrong for a doctor to prescribe drugs for IBS, but because I felt I could manage my IBS sufficiently without them. Other people might not be so lucky - some people go through years of trying different drugs and treatment programs hoping to find the one that will allow them to live a decent life. If a drug can give that to them, I think it's fantastic.


----------



## BQ (May 22, 2000)

> But many drugs still don't address the root cause of the problem.


True.. they control or manage the symptoms. Which, in turn, has the potential to improve our quality of life.Don't see what's wrong with that... especially since the "root cause" of IBS hasn't really been established for ALL of us. And in SOME cases the Doc's know what the root cause was/is but damage has been done that they don't yet know how to fix.I think it is entirely up to the individual whether or not to take "medications". But I would keep in mind... loads of "natural" products are plant based... but SO are many medications. I don't think it matters. Whatever works for someone is a good thing.And if by some chance the original intention of a medication isn't what it is currently being prescribed for... and it is being prescribed for it's unintentional "side effects" that control someone's symptoms..... really and truly, IMHO, there isn't a thing wrong with that.So Patman if you think what you do "fixes" the "root cause" of _your_ problem... amazing & GREAT!That just isn't possible for all of us.BQ


----------



## Patman75 (Mar 9, 2008)

If anyone can find a medication out of this bunch that fixes the root cause please show me. These are my wonderful choices if I go see a GI.*Remicade*This medication is used to treat certain types of arthritis (rheumatoid arthritis, arthritis of the spine, psoriatic arthritis), certain bowel diseases (Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis), and a certain severe skin disease (chronic plaque psoriasis). In these conditions, the body's defense system (immune system) attacks healthy tissues. Infliximab works by blocking the actions of a certain natural substance (tumor necrosis factor alpha) in the body. This helps to decrease swelling (inflammation) and weaken your immune system, thereby slowing or stopping the damage from the disease. *side affects*This medication can decrease your body's ability to fight an infection. This effect can lead to very serious (possibly fatal) infections (e.g., fungal infections, tuberculosis). You should have a tuberculosis (TB) skin test before starting this medication. Also tell your doctor your medical history, especially of past/recent/current infections. You should also tell your doctor if you have lived or traveled in areas where certain infections (e.g., coccidioidomycosis, histoplasmosis) are common or if you have been near someone with tuberculosis.*Humira*This medication is used to reduce pain and swelling due to certain types of arthritis (e.g., rheumatoid, psoriatic, and ankylosing spondylitis). This medication is also used to treat psoriasis (plaque-type). It works by blocking a protein (tumor necrosis factor or TNF) found in the body's immune system that causes joint swelling and damage.Early treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with more aggressive therapy, including this type of medication (TNF blockers), helps to reduce further joint damage and preserve joint function.This medication is also used to treat a bowel condition called Crohnâ€™s disease. It is used in cases that are moderate to severe and/or keep coming back.*side affects*This medication can decrease your immune system's ability to fight infections. Though unlikely, this drug may slightly increase your risk of developing serious, possibly fatal, infections. This risk is higher if you are also taking other drugs to suppress the immune system such as cyclosporine.*Asacol*This medication is used to treat ulcerative colitis, a type of bowel disease. It does not cure ulcerative colitis, but it may decrease symptoms such as stomach pain, diarrhea, and rectal bleeding caused by irritation/swelling in the colon/rectum. Mesalamine is an aminosalicylate anti-inflammatory drug. It is believed to work by blocking the production of certain natural chemicals that may cause pain and swelling. *side affects*Flu-like symptoms, vomiting, nausea, dizziness, weakness, headache, constipation, abdominal/back pain, upset stomach, diarrhea, or gas may occur. If any of these effects persist or worsen, notify your doctor or pharmacist promptly. *Azulfidine*Sulfasalazine is used to treat a certain type of bowel disease called ulcerative colitis. This medication does not cure this condition, but it helps decrease symptoms such as fever, stomach pain, diarrhea, and rectal bleeding. After an attack is treated, sulfasalazine is also used to increase the amount of time between attacks. This medication works by reducing irritation and swelling in the large intestines. *side affects*Stomach upset, nausea, vomiting, loss of appetite, mouth sores, headache, dizziness, or unusual tiredness may occur. If any of these effects persist or worsen, notify your doctor or pharmacist promptly.This medication may cause your skin and urine to turn orange-yellow. This effect is harmless and will disappear when the medication is stopped.*Colazal*Balsalazide is used to treat a certain bowel disease (ulcerative colitis). It helps to reduce symptoms of ulcerative colitis such as diarrhea, rectal bleeding, and stomach pain. Balsalazide is an anti-inflammatory drug that works by decreasing swelling in the colon. *side affects*Headache, nausea, vomiting, joint pain, abdominal pain, trouble sleeping, or loss of appetite may occur. If any of these effects persist or worsen, notify your doctor or pharmacist promptly.Infrequently, balsalazide can worsen ulcerative colitis. Tell your doctor immediately if your symptoms worsen after starting this medication (e.g., increased abdominal pain, rectal bleeding).*Entocort*This medication is used to treat mild to moderate symptoms of a bowel condition called Crohn's disease. While budesonide does not cure this condition, it may help relieve symptoms such as abdominal pain and soft/liquid stools and may decrease the need for anti-diarrhea medications. Budesonide is a corticosteroid that works by decreasing swelling (inflammation). *Side affects*Headache, nausea, stomach upset, or dizziness may occur. If any of these effects persist or worsen, notify your doctor or pharmacist promptly.Tell your doctor immediately if any of these unlikely but serious side effects occur:signs of infection (e.g., fever, persistent cough, persistent sore throat, frequent/painful urination) mental/mood changes (e.g., depression, mood swings, agitation, confusion) chest pain shortness of breath severe dizziness fast/pounding/irregular heartbeat headache tingling of the hands/feet shaking (tremor) seizures muscle/joint cramps or pain severe stomach/abdominal pain easy bruising/bleeding puffy face unusual facial hair growth increased thirst/urination increased sweating swelling of the ankles/feet slow wound healing thinning skin menstrual period changes unexpected weight gain unusual tiredness vision changes black stools vomit that looks like coffee grounds unusual skin growths *Lialda*This medication is used to treat ulcerative colitis, a type of bowel disease. It does not cure ulcerative colitis, but it may decrease symptoms such as stomach pain, diarrhea, and rectal bleeding caused by irritation/swelling in the colon/rectum. Mesalamine is an aminosalicylate anti-inflammatory drug. It is believed to work by blocking the production of certain natural chemicals that may cause pain and swelling. *Side affects*Flu-like symptoms, vomiting, nausea, dizziness, weakness, headache, constipation, abdominal/back pain, upset stomach, diarrhea, or gas may occur. If any of these effects persist or worsen, notify your doctor or pharmacist promptly. Whole or partial tablets may occasionally be seen in your stool. If this occurs frequently, notify your doctor. You may not be receiving enough of the medication. Remember that your doctor has prescribed this medication because the benefit to you is greater than the risk of side effects. Many people using this medication do not have serious side effects. Infrequently, this medication may make symptoms of your condition worse rather than better (acute intolerance syndrome or sensitivity reaction). Tell your doctor immediately if you experience any of these unlikely but serious side effects: worsening stomach pain/cramping worsening bloody diarrhea fever headache Tell your doctor immediately if any of these unlikely but serious side effects occur: vomit that looks like coffee grounds black/tarry stools vision changes eye pain tingling of the hands/feet painful straining during a bowel movement Tell your doctor immediately if any of these rare but very serious side effects occur: dark urine persistent nausea/vomiting severe stomach/abdominal pain yellowing of the eyes/skin signs of infection (e.g., fever, persistent sore throat) easy bruising/bleeding chest pain shortness of breath change in the amount of urine a man's ability to father a child A very serious allergic reaction to this drug is unlikely, but seek immediate medical attention if it occurs. Symptoms of a serious allergic reaction may include: rash itching swelling severe dizziness trouble breathing *Pentasa*Mesalamine is used to treat ulcerative colitis, a type of bowel disease. It does not cure ulcerative colitis, but it may decrease symptoms such as stomach pain, diarrhea, and rectal bleeding caused by irritation/swelling of the colon/rectum. Mesalamine is an aminosalicylate anti-inflammatory drug. It is believed to work by blocking the production of certain natural chemicals that may cause pain and swelling. *Side affects*Diarrhea, headache, nausea, vomiting, or loss of appetite may occur. If any of these effects persist or worsen, notify your doctor or pharmacist promptly.Infrequently, this medication may make symptoms of your condition worse rather than better (acute intolerance syndrome or sensitivity reaction). Tell your doctor immediately if you experience any of these unlikely but serious side effects:worsening stomach pain/cramping worsening bloody diarrhea fever headache Tell your doctor immediately if any of these rare but very serious side effects occur:unusual tiredness fast/pounding heartbeat chest pain shortness of breath unusual bleeding/bruising change in the amount of urine dark urine persistent nausea/vomiting severe stomach/abdominal pain yellowing of the eyes/skin signs of infection (e.g., fever, persistent sore throat) A very serious allergic reaction to this drug is unlikely, but seek immediate medical attention if it occurs. Symptoms of a serious allergic reaction may include:rash itching/swelling (especially of the face/tongue/throat) severe dizziness trouble breathing *Rowasa*This medication is used to treat ulcerative proctitis, a type of bowel disease. It does not cure ulcerative proctitis, but it may decrease the number of stools, the amount of mucus/blood in the stools, and the rectal bleeding caused by irritation/swelling of the colon/rectum. Mesalamine is an aminosalicylate anti-inflammatory drug. It is believed to work by blocking the production of certain natural chemicals that may cause pain and swelling. *Side affects*Dizziness, rectal pain, pain when inserting the suppository, headache, gas, diarrhea, and mild hair loss may occur. If any of these effects persist or worsen, notify your doctor or pharmacist promptly.Infrequently, this medication may make symptoms of your condition worse rather than better (acute intolerance syndrome or sensitivity reaction). Tell your doctor immediately if you experience any of these unlikely but serious side effects:worsening stomach pain/cramping worsening bloody diarrhea fever headache Tell your doctor immediately if any of these rare but very serious side effects occur:chest pain difficulty breathing severe stomach/abdominal pain (especially if spreading up the back) change in the amount of urine easy bruising/bleeding signs of infection (e.g., fever, persistent sore throat) a man's ability to father a child A very serious allergic reaction to this drug is unlikely but seek immediate medical attention if it occurs. Symptoms of a serious allergic reaction may include:rash itching/swelling (especially of the face/tongue/throat) severe dizziness trouble breathing


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

This is abit off topic , but relates in some ways , my Brother was in the VietNam War , and he was sprayed with Agent Orange daily , he was sent home from "Nam" deathly ill , and was discharged from the army for medical reasons.He was put on Chemo therapy , and within about 3 weeks his Hair was completely gone and he dropped his weight to 80 to 90 pounds , a skeleton with a sheet draped over it , was how he looked , he spent the last few months of his life on the bathroom floor as he was constantly puking his guts out.I saw exactly what Chemo did to him.Would I ever refuse Chemo ? You bet your sweet bottom I Would*I would never endure the catastropic things he went thru from the Chemo.When he died and had his autopsy , his organs were saturated with Agent Orange , my cousin the Medical Examiner obtained a copy of the Reort.And Yes his death was attributed to the Agent Orange , but his Hair loss and weight loss and vomiting was a direct result of the Chemo.So I WOULD REFUSE IT* I called my cousin , the medical examiner , last night 8/5 , and asked her what her opinion was , about changing the names of some of these medications , and her response was : If you start changing the names of commenily known Drugs , people might think they have been discontinued , and there fore stop treatment , without further consulting their doctor , who could tell them it is now known by another name.I thought that was a great reson for why they wouldn't do this.


----------



## Kathleen M. (Nov 16, 1999)

I dunno, I'm glad a little 7 year old precious girl I know has the opportunity to live and won't die from her tumor. She would almost certainly die a painful death if it wasn't for the chemotherapy. With the treatment she has a very good chance of surviving her cancer. It is one that responds really well to those treatments, but rarely just goes away by itself, and tends to kill fairly quickly if left untreated.It isn't fun watching her go through that but pumping her with more and more morphine to try to stop the pain as the tumor eats her alive wouldn't be much fun to watch, either.As for the list of immuno-suppressive drugs, they block the inappropriate action of an immune system that attacks the body. Some people are lucky enough to go into remission from auto-immune diseases, others are not. Lifestyle changes probably help with going into or maintaining remission but I think it is a lie to say everyone can achieve remission without any medical intervention. Some people are on the mild end of the autoimmune disease and naturally go in and out of remission no matter what they do. Some people never go into remission unless something pretty powerful wrestles the immune system into submission.Are you saying that autoimmune diseases can't be cause by the immune system losing tolerance? Because that is the problem those drugs are designed to treat. Heck most of those aren't even they accidentally found out they did that. At least the drug companies have to tell you every single thing that ever happened to anyone during the drug trials (even if some of them may have nothing to do with the drug). Alternative medicine people can continually lie about the side effects of their treatments and there is nothing anyone can do about it as they don't have to tell you if there are side effects and usually lie and say there are none even when the side effects are well known.And with that I'm out of here because nothing I say will change anyone's mind I just ask people watch how they talk about their own strongly held beliefs and try to make sure people who disagree are respected.


----------



## BQ (May 22, 2000)

Oh I sincerely hope it works for her K. I'm watching my 42 yr old neighbor going through her second round. She was diagnosed a little under 1.5 yrs ago w/Stage 3 cervical. It was discovered on her 6 week post natal OB visit via a routine Pap. She obviously has a 1.5 yr old and also has a 6 yr old.Two months ago they discovered she has mets to her pericardial lymphs.If anything she says.. she'd do whatever she could to have as much time as possible with her family. She knows she is gonna be very sick.. lose all of her hair... lose weight... go through the vomitting etc. ....yet.. she still wants to go through it all.. for her family. And I can understand why she is choosing this treatment. And for now... I'm grateful she is at least here still with her hub and lil ones.I'm hoping all the best for her too.We all make our own choices and it is nice when all of the choices of others are at least respected even if they wouldn't necessarily be our own.BQ


----------



## M&M (Jan 20, 2002)

FYI Chemotherapy has changed tremendously in the past 40-50 years. To make an truly informed decision on chemotherapy in this day and age, you'd have to research what chemo is NOW, and then decide based on that. Not only that, but there are numerous types of chemotherapy. There are numerous drug combinations used now, some of which do not cause the kind of damage that chemo caused 40 or 50 years ago. Many, many people have saved their lives by undergoing chemotherapy treatments. Being bald (to me) and alive, beats having hair and being dead from cancer.


----------



## overitnow (Nov 25, 2001)

There are any number of wonderful stories of people who have gotten their lives back through medical interventions, and certainly cancer recovery is the most compelling of these. I am sure that if I had developed that in my 20s or 30s, I would have headed straight for the Chemo Bar and had a double, and not worried about my hair. Now, I don't know what I would do. I don't think another 6 months of dinners would be enough to go through all of that sickness; but I will have to see what happens when my shoulder gets tapped. But for a 7 year old or BQ's neighbor, by all means fight it. What they have to lose is so much more than a head full of hair. Still, somewhere along the line of treatments, should they not be told of the possible good effects of Essiac or green tea? Would the story of Rompin' Ronnie Hawkins' deliverance from pancreatic cancer via the internet not be at least interesting? In BQ's neighbor's case, after her first treatment did she take preventative measures to strengthen her immune system and eliminate low level (and therefore "FDA-safe") carcinogens and toxins out of her home and personal care products? Did her oncologist suggest this?This is not to pick a fight. Life is tough enough without someone tsking over your back that you should have used supplements, or you were a fool to use supplements, that you should have eliminated Cocomide DEA from your shampoo or that you are just falling for marketing and it is still considered safe in rinse off products below a certain level, that chlorine from the dishwasher vented into the air is safe/not safe, blah blah blah. It just seems that for most of us, if we walk into a doctor's office we are going down the path to Pat's list. If we walk into a naturopath's office, we are likely to be given a different list. I would like to walk into a caregiver's office and be told about all of them. And if you have something a little less final than cancer, it might be useful to have these listed by their side effects. I am not completely in despair, for I know that Kaiser Hospitals now have wellness nurses on staff and that, as the health care debate rages in your country, preventative treatments will finally begin to be more widely recommended. I also don't think you can assume that everyone who promotes modern medicine or modern alternatives is lying. But, as our current financial mess indicates, oversight seems to be a variable in the marketplace and it is never to be assumed that just because a regulator says it is so, that makes it so. And as long as there is a financial relationship between the pharmaceutical companies, research facilities, and the medical industry, it will continue to be difficult to get alternative results in front of the doctors. CMAJ on Essiac: http://www.ecmaj.com/cgi/search?andorexact...0&submit=GOCMAJ on Green Tea: http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/reprint/158/8/1033?...ourcetype=HWCITRonnie Hawkins story from Toronto Globe and Mail: http://www.healthwatcher.net/Quackerywatch...503hampson.html (I just wanted to get this in before the topic got locked up...)Mark


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

When my brother had his Chemo , it was right after coming home from "Nam" , and that was over 40 + years ago.Not only did he do Chemo , he had "Cobalt" too.He was so far gone from the Agent Orange eating his organs up , then by doing the Chemo & Cobalt , it just kicked everything into over-drive. Watching a 175 pound 6.3" young guy go to about 83 pounds (the autopsy report stated) and he was a rack of bones.The Chemo was the chief reason for this dramatic weight loss. And hair loss too. Plus the vomiting when he try to eat.It was a blessing from god when he died.I remember he lived on the bathroom floor so he could be next to the toilet to vomit.Not that this means anything , I use to have to go to the gas station down the street to pee , as he couldn't get his head out of the bowl.Yes these cancer treatments have advanced Wonderfully over the last few decades and continue to do so all the time.If I were a person that need Chemo , I wouldn't give a rats behind about the hair loss , that can grow back , if not , buy a wig.As for the vomiting , yes that is troublesome , as you under go weight loss , which is great for those that are Obese.For those that are thin , that can be abit alarming , but you can always Put weight back on too.For those individuals that Chemotherapy Saves their lives , or that of a Family memeber , that is Excellent to hear.Hopefully your cancer won't return. But take it mind > It can return.For myself , having a Genetic Tumor Disease , I have Thousands of Tumors externally and Internally.I have had people tell me > Oh you should have Chemo to shrink them.No thankyou , I'll just under go surgery to remove them.I have had hundreds removed since Birth.Why would I want to try to under go Chemo to shrink them , if I can just go in and have them removed instead.The type of Tumors I have are abit different then those of Tumors just the average person might get.Mine can be removed. But risk the potential of regrowing because you can never get all of them off the nerve.I personally wouldn't do Chemo for any reason. I would rather die. My tumor disease is going to be the cause of my death anyway , unless I get killed in a car wreck.I think everyone should be alloud to make their choices for what ever they want to do with their life.And folks do need to respect that.As we should respect what they chose to do in their life.This discussion kinda went off topic here.I was looking for opinions on the change of drug names.But that's ok it took on other avenues.


----------



## Patman75 (Mar 9, 2008)

Chemo... once again not fixing the root of the problem. Weaking the immune system and setting yourself up for more Chemo & more drugs in the future. My nieghbor is dealing with cancer, had surgery, had chemo. Cancer came back, had more surgery. Now he trying some medical trial, God help him.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

Thanks for the Great Post "Mark" with all the links. Very good reading material.I think I would prefer to investigate some of the "Removal" aspects of organs , verses under going Chemo.Such as , women with: Cervical Cancer , Ovarys . etc.They need to first see if a Hysterectomy would eliminate the need for Chemo.If not , by all means : under go it.I was a Very young person when I had my total Hyst. that was the best thing in my life I feel.I didn't require Chemo either , cause my 2 ovarys exploded.Like in Patrick Swayze's case , it's ashame you can't remove the pancrease and still live with out it , (You cannot though).I feel Bad for this Man. The Cancer and the Chemo are eating him alive.Maybe afew organ removals Might totally eliminate the need for chemo. Investigate it before you let them do this to you*People do fine without many of their organs , I can vouch for that one.There are Good and Bad things associated with Chemo for Cancer treatment.Sadly you hear about the bad more often.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

PatMan , that was a Great post addition.Yes , it does Not fix the root of the problem.And Yes it does weaken the Immune System.My poor brother was so sick and he would catch any bug at home or the doctor's office.My Horseback buddy has Testicualr cancer and he's under going chemo / radiation treatments , it is frying his Testicals , they are hot and burning constantly since he begun treatment.He said if he'd of known this > He'd of never done something so foolish in his opinion.He said he'd rather die then have his "Stuff" on fire.So chemo is not the ultimate cure for all of this.Yes it Can Help , but it can make things worse too , in the long run.


----------



## Kathleen M. (Nov 16, 1999)

I said I wasn't going to come back but for the most part if you go to someone that will treat your cancer with diet and herbs they will also convince you not to see a surgeon and usually by the time people realize there cancer isn't going away it is way too late for surgery or anything else.Surgery is always the first line of treatment. Sometimes you can't remove the tumor without killing someone, and often by the time they found it it has already spread to other organs.Many cancers are lethal when untreated or under-treated. Untreated Pancreatic cancer eats you alive, it isn't JUST the medications making people with that disease ill.You all keep talking about cancer like it can't ever kill anyone. It is fine if you would rather die than be treated, but don't pretend that no one ever dies unless they are treated by an MD with allopathic medications.There are so many cases of people who didn't go to the real doctor until way to late and were so maimed by their cancer by the time a real doctor saw them the judge won't even let the jury see their picture because they can't be reasonable after seeing what the "never take any medication an MD would give you" practitioner did to them by keeping them from early and proper treatment. http://www.chirobase.org/05RB/AYOR/00p.htmlNow I really have to not come back but check out http://www.whatstheharm.net if you think telling people to change their diet and never go to a real doctor or take allopathic medicine is completely harmless. Alternative practices are not completely harmless, and if anyone that tells you that you must stop getting all medical tests and fire all your doctors, run. At least keep getting real medical tests done so you know exactly when your crossed the line into you only have X months to live territory, please.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

No one is saying don't go to the doctor and try to treat yourself.But, if alternatives are available first , atleast Consider them , before you jump in head first for the other ways.I am sure everything has possible dangers , no matter what it is.Wether it be prescribed med's , and treatments like Chemo etc , or wether you want to try the herb / vitamin route , or even a combination.There are always options.And if all of this fails , then I guess you are basically out of luck.


----------



## keycat (Apr 6, 2009)

Glenda, if people with cancer try alternative treatments first, by the time that they realize that those treatments are not working it may be too late for conventional medicine to save them. Some cancers can progress very rapidly. Surgery alone is often not sufficient to treat cancer because cancer can send out microscopic pieces of itself that attach to different parts of the body. In such cases, chemotherapy is needed to kill the metastasized tumors.


----------



## Thai (Aug 22, 2007)

Glenda said:


> So chemo is not the ultimate cure for all of this.Yes it Can Help , but it can make things worse too , in the long run.


It can MORE than help Glenda, it can save your life, in the long run.We all get where you are coming from, you have pounded it in to us enough.Even in topics where people ask for help on dosage and experience, you seem to have the need to interject the negatives whether asked for or not.At the same time not answering the question.I hesitate to ask a question anymore because I know that you will come in and tell me the CONS of whatever it is I am asking about.According to you, we all need to get a grip, not think think about our IBS and get on with life, get out there and enjoy.Glad to hear that is working for you BUT we are not all alike and this theory of yours will NOT work for us all.Please let us ask our questions and get the support that we came here for.......PLEASE.To the moderators, I realize that I have probably crossed the line with this post and before you kick me out, I will bow out of this thread as of this post.Thai


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

When I say : Try alternatives first > Go to your doctor ,and get OTHER OPTIONS that might be available , before you have to take the final step and do Chemo / Radiation.I would rather try these things first , before I have to go further and do chemo.If it doesn't doesn't work , then you can do chemo. ( I won't be doing it though)You always have Options.I have a near by neighbor , that lives near my other house, and she has Non-Hodgekins Limphoma , she is very poor financially and can't afford insurance or go to tons of doctor's and go thru chemo.But she does have a sister that is a Nutrapathic and has been given a handfull of things to try.She is doing extremely well right now , it appears these remedys have actually sent her cancer into remission right now.For how long , that is unknown.Yes I am very glad I have been able to aquire the attitude : That I am Not going to let my IBS or any other ailment affect me to where it takes controll over me.If you work really hard at this , it can easily be obtainable. If you can't > Then keep at it till you do.


----------



## Nikki (Jul 11, 2000)

Glenda,What you have said here about chemo is absolute trash.The whole point of chemotherapy is to kill your cancer cells. To do that, it will kill the fastest replicating cells in your body too (mucous membranes/hair etc) which is why people on chemo get D+V, hair loss, ulcers etc. Yes, its taxing and it is hard. But if you don't do something aggressive, sometimes the aggressive cancer might get there first.It is not all black and white as you seem to think Glenda.Alternative medicine does not always mean SAFE glenda. And in terms of 'try alternatives first' there is not always time for this, parcticulaly in things like pancreatic cancer or other fast growing things time is of the absolute essence.


> I have asked my old GI "I have been reading about probiotics, can they help?" his answer "If you think probiotics can work I can write you a prescription for that? Come on! If I think?? You are the GI, if they can be helping me why aren't I taking these to begin with?!?


No real evidence to show that probiotics help or hinder either way. ? placebo effect? Who knows. If you want to take it, take it. If you don't want to take it, don't. Simple.


----------



## M&M (Jan 20, 2002)

Glenda said:


> If you work really hard at this , it can easily be obtainable. If you can't > Then keep at it till you do.


Glenda, That's what people here are trying to do. They're trying to keep at it until they find something that works for them. Continuously beating people over the head with negative comments about what they're trying does not help. I appreciate that you are enthusiastic because you have been able to get rid of your IBS symptoms. That is the same thing everyone else here is trying to do. We must, however, keep our commentary from sounding negative, and when people are following the protocol set out by their doctor, you should not tell them to stop it. You're not a doctor. Imagine if someone here stops taking their medication in order to try something you've suggested. What if they end up being allergic to what you've suggested here, and suffer an allergic reaction so severe they become ill. You wouldn't feel very good, would you? So just stick to saying "this worked for me". Don't judge people regarding the treatment they're trying, because they're just trying to get better like you.


----------



## Patman75 (Mar 9, 2008)

For all you medication lovers out there, you still haven't been able to say that medications can correct the root cause of our problems. There is alot of "treatments" and "problem suppressing". I'm not interested in taking medications for the rest of my life and just barely enjoying life. I was told "there is no cure, we dont know why you have IBD" That is BS! Doctors tell you that to give you the feeling of no hope so you only take their meds.Don't settle of just making you problems managable. There is such a word called a "CURE" SSHHHHHH your not supposed to know that.


----------



## BQ (May 22, 2000)

Actually Mark just wanted to tell you all... in the interest of their being SOME hope of the melding of both kinds of treatments..... My neighbor has an entire team she meets with and has at her disposal (FROM her onco's office) a listing for accupuncturists, of course wig specialists, massage therapists, chiropractors, nutritionists, dieticians, meditation classes etc and also of course self help groups and contacts. So in a way she was told about all kinds of treatment to supplement her chemo.As far as the "toxins" in her home??? I don't know what you mean by that.. but .. she actually isn't home all that much.. nor are her children. I see her hub and... that's it... lately. I think she is staying closer to the onco's office with her Dad with the children.It's kicking her tail this time but I'm praying it works. And she IS one to take advantage of all of the other satellite services offered. Last time I talked to her she said her self help group is wonderful and she gets even more referrals for more help there.So.. I think the tide in medicine is beginning to turn to include _many_ more things besides just medications. And through her experience I see that the "whole" person is being treated. I think there is reason for much hope in the future.BQ


----------



## M&M (Jan 20, 2002)

Patman75 said:


> For all you medication lovers out there,


I don't know any "medication lovers", but if I meet any, I will share your post with them.


----------



## keycat (Apr 6, 2009)

Patman, I find your use of the term "medication lovers" to be extremely insensitive. Is someone with cancer a "medication lover" because he or she uses chemotherapy? Are the numerous people on this forum who use medication to control their IBS "medication lovers?" As for "barely enjoying life," many people would have no life at all if it were not for medications. Drugs can allow people to enjoy life when they might otherwise be condemned to intolerable suffering or death.No one here is suggesting that drugs don't have side effects or that mainstream medicine is perfect. But alternative medicine is not perfect, either, nor does it provide the answers that you are looking for.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

In Home Toxins : You Bet there is :Radon is a cancer-causing natural radioactive gas that you can’t see, smell or taste. Its presence in your home can pose a danger to your family's health. Radon is the leading cause of lung cancer among non-smokers. Radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in America and claims about 20,000 lives annually. Learn how you can protect your family Test Your Home for Radon - It's easy and inexpensive Fix your home if you have a radon level of 4 pCi/L or more.The U.S. Surgeon General and EPA recommend that all homes be tested. You can test your home yourself or hire a professional. Fix your home if you have a radon level of 4 pCi/L or more. Radon test kits are available from the National Safety Council (or call 1-800-SOS-RADON). Some home improvement stores sell test kits. To find a qualified testing or mitigation contractor, contact your state radon office (see our list of state contacts) or either of the national private radon programs. Read about Radon-resistant New Construction. Read about training opportunities at the Regional Radon Training Centers.Exposure to Radon Causes Lung Cancer In Non-smokers and Smokers AlikeLung cancer kills thousands of Americans every year. The untimely deaths of Peter Jennings and Dana Reeve have raised public awareness about lung cancer, especially among people who have never smoked. Smoking, radon, and secondhand smoke are the leading causes of lung cancer. Although lung cancer can be treated, the survival rate is one of the lowest for those with cancer. From the time of diagnosis, between 11 and 15 percent of those afflicted will live beyond five years, depending upon demographic factors. Being that my husband is a Chemist , and In charge of a Water treatment plant , he provided this above information from:www.epa.gov/radonIt's the air we breath , and the food we eat , and the stuff we drink , that are making people sick.It's all the chemicals and pesticides and pure pollution that is behind a good part of our problems.This is why I won't wear make up and why I won't use hand lotion potions. It all seeps into your blood stream with all these chemicals. Check out the ingrediants in this stuff and cross refrence it and check the health hazzards.I won't even wear spray or roll on deoderant for these reasons. I use pure Alo-vera gel. Works great*The reason woman mainly get pimples is because they put so much make up on their face and it clogs their pours.Again this goes back to chemicals seeping into your blood stream.The hazzards from all of this should be frightening to most people.I prefer to "GO NATURAL".And I agree with PatMan , alot of people , (NOT ALL THOUGH) , are pill lovers.They do pop pills, because they are looking for either a quick fix to their problem , or they just don't value their health and are trying to find a way to get a possible high.I did state > Not All Though.I have a relative , My dad's sister's girl , and she was a pill junkie , and her sister , the one who is the Medical Examiner in California , she took her sister to the Coroners office and showed her the open cavity of a deceased person that was a drug abuser, This person's organs looked like something out of a horror movie , this literally SCARED HER STRAIGHT.I think using medication is just fine if you have conditions that warrents their use.Just use commen sense when you do it.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

I don't have any problem at all with people trying all the medications available at hand for their perticular problem.And Chemo does save lives , But Not my Brother's , God rest his sole.It either helps and you go into remission , or it don't help and you die anyway.But start at the beginning , and work your way to the advanced.If you can start with herbs and what nots 1st . Try it , see if it works.Then progress upwards.But when you do this > Consult your doctor for approval at all times.Don't just go on line and buy everything under the sun and start taking it.Or the vitamin store and start grabbing stuff on the shelf just cause someone said it might work.This is why I preach the words : Investigate and Research*My original thread here has sure gotten way off topic for "Should the name be changed".


----------



## keycat (Apr 6, 2009)

Glenda, I can't debate with you about this anymore. This:


> And I agree with PatMan , alot of people , (NOT ALL THOUGH) , are pill lovers.They do pop pills, because they are looking for either a quick fix to their problem , or they just don't value their health and are trying to find a way to get a possible high.


... is just too much. I believe that you are judging people, both in the forum and in general, for using medication to address their health problems. You may say that you don't judge them, but statements like the one quoted above indicate otherwise.If you really had respect for people who use medication, you wouldn't accuse the majority of them of using their drugs to get high or of having no value for their own health.While I respect your opinion, I think you are out of line.I'm out of here.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

Most of the people I see here on the board are really in need of some help for their IBS problems.That is why we come here.We recommend medications , we suggest procedures , we suggest alternatives , and we talk about what has worked , and hasn't worked.Everyone's case is different , what works for one , sure won't work for the next guy in many cases.That's why we keep trying stuff.And I urge all of you to keeping trying untill you hit the nail with the hammer and get it done.This thread may as well be locked and closed too , it's just turning to heated.


----------



## Patman75 (Mar 9, 2008)

Nikki said:


> No real evidence to show that probiotics help or hinder either way. ? placebo effect? Who knows.


LMFAO.I'm not going to even waste my time posting countless medical studies that show mountians of real evidence. I see some sentitive people are upset over the term "Medication lover" would you fell better if I used another term? I used to be one. There is no shame in it.*Your missing my point still on getting to the root of the problem. Western, Eastern, Modern or Alternative getting to the root of the problem and removing/fixing the problem should be the doctors and our goal. You can treat or suppress the problem using Western, Eastern, Modern or Alternative to improve you quality of life and to make sure you don't die but after that we need to fix the root of the problem.*I personally am still "treating" my IBD with medication and supplements, it is necessary at this point in my life/healing. But I'm also trying to get the root. It took years to F-up this body, it going to take time to fix it.Good health to all.


----------



## Nikki (Jul 11, 2000)

But earlier it was suggested that chemotherapy was 'problem suppressing'. There is absolutely no way you can reverse somebodys genetic predisposition to cancer. You can't 'cure' cancer with alternative medicine! While chemotherapy may not be a 'cure', you can go into remission and live a normal lenthed life- sound like a pretty good bet to me.


----------



## Nikki (Jul 11, 2000)

That is fine Patman- I'm sure there is a ton of papers and studies that show probiotics are effective. I am also sure I could find a ton of papers and studies and show it is not.Swings and roundabouts.Ultimately, the choice to take it is yours. But for every study that says it works, there is another one that says it doesn't.


----------



## Patman75 (Mar 9, 2008)

Nikki said:


> But earlier it was suggested that chemotherapy was 'problem suppressing'.


Chemo is a "treatment" I think we can agree on that. Chemo can save your life and kill the cancer. BUT.... why did we get Cancer in the first place? Chemo does not remove the root. I don't care how or which approach we take but removing the root of the problem needs to be the #1 priority.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

I'm going to take the time to explain this here , so people can understand how they get Cancer , and other diseases.With my husband being a chemist and running a water treatment plant for 25 years , here is how people get cancer , and or , get sick in general.It's CHEMICAL POISONING.It's in the AIR you breathe , The Food you Eat , and the Drink you consume daily.The Air > Look at all the Pollution in the Air that is pumped out from Factorys and Automobiles and the Airplanes Dumping Jet fuel into our Air Supply.Your breathing this stuff , there comes Asthma and Allergys. From chemicals. And Lung Cancer.The Food you Eat > All these toxins go onto the vegetables / friut that you injest.The ground absorbs it , via the water (Rain) which comes from the air above.Animals Eat the Hay that Ranchers grow , Ranchers use pesticides on their Hay to keep the bugs from eating it , again , your eating meat that is now Toxic.The animals are eventually sent to the Meat house for YOU to consume , OR they are sent to the Rendering Plant and made into Protine / dog food For which helpless Dogs and Cats eat which contains Cancer.There fore They get Cancer , why > cancerous Meat.I just lost my big Quarter Horses Mare in May , had to have the Vet euthanise her , she was in 4th stage Cancer.The vet said it's the damn chemical ladden hay they eat with persticides on the hay to keep the bugs off it.Some is washed off by rain , but it seeps right back into the ground and is reabsorbed by the hay and comes backk out thru the hay again , like a double dose of the drug.I know this to be true , I grew up on a Ranch.The Drink you consume > This goes back to my Thread . "Treated Water" with Chlorine , Fluroide.And just any general beverage. Look at what goes into making it. The color , the sweet desirable taste > It's Chemical additives.And what "PatMan and I" both mean when we say Pill Poppers / Lovers , We mean WORLD WIDE POPULATION.Not the folks on this Board. Everyone one world wide.You can go to NBC to their health dept and they have a doctor there that says Drug use has gone up 75% over the last few years and we have now become 'A Pill Popping Nation".This all goes right back to Chemicals poisoning us , which requires medications to eliminate the problem.And unfortunatly CHEMO.They use some pretty nasty stuff to make it.Why do we get sick from it ? Chemical Poisoning*


----------



## Kathleen M. (Nov 16, 1999)

I swore I wasn't going to come back in here. I really need better will power. Must be all those years going to Environmental Mutagen meetings. You cannot ever avoid all toxins.A fair proportion of cancer is from the nasty toxic compounds your own body makes every single day of your life that you cannot ever avoid.Every single food you eat has carcinogens and mutagens in it no matter how organic or pure it is. Plants engage in chemical warfare to keep pests and herbivores from eating them. Many of these compounds are as carcinogenic (and a few a lot more carcinogenic) than any chemical made in any lab. Everything has pesticides and toxins in it. Just because the plant made it all by itself doesn't make it non-lethal and non-toxic.Luckily most plants also have a few anti-carcinogens in them and overall eating plants does you more good than harm, but there is damage from every single food you eat every single day of your life.The body has a lot of mechanisms to deal with it's own toxins (and I'm not suggesting people just go roll around in carcinogens by any means) and most of us do a good job of keeping everything under control and repairing the damage. We can repair what our own body does to itself every day, and all of that also does a pretty darn good job of dealing with the damage whether it comes from within or without.Some cancer is genetic. Some genes may be good for one thing but are bad for cancer. All your biology really cares about is that you make it to reproductive age. Biology isn't geared to all of us living to 120 years old, but occasionally someone hits the lottery and has an extraordinarily long and healthy life.Cancer is seen in all critters and all humans from all eras. It didn't just come into being with the industrial revolutionOf course too much externally applied toxins are bad for everyone, but the idea that if we could just all eat organic and never pollute anything again no human will ever get cancer is false. Our bodies make more than enough toxins to kill us every single day. Luckily nature knew that and we have some pretty robust repair mechanisms to deal with that and enough excess capacity that most of us do just fine without being fearful of every single thing.That being said there is no point taking more risks than you should just because a lot of us will get cancer no matter what we do or how well we purify our environment.Best thing to do to reduce cancer is reduce the internal toxins. Best way we know to do that is eat fewer calories. Doesn't even really matter what less you eat. Just eat a lot less. Easiest way to prevent cancer in lab critters is restrict the amount of food they can get their paws on. Stuffing them silly with a pure diet in a toxin free environment will cause a lot more cancer than a standard diet in low amounts that keeps them just a bit hungry all the time. Unfortunately calorie restriction is something humans are bad at and most people would rather die a couple of years early then never really get to eat a big meal ever again.I know it is wikipedia, but it has a good summary of the calorie restriction experiments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie_restrictionI know some people like the feeling of control they get thinking they can just find and remove the one thing that will kill them. The most lethal thing of all is just being alive.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

I'll add abit more information o any of you ladies use "PAM' cooking spray ?When this is sprayed , you "do" breathe some of this.Not only do you breathe this , the meat in the frying pan "absorbes" it.Do you use Dish dert's , Dust sprays , Bleach as a whitener , Laundry Dert's ? (All the Liquid and Sprays.)This all contains chemicals to make them.Why does laundry dert. cause itching and redness , it's an allergic reaction to chemical's.Many asthma inhailers have been pulled off the market because of the Chemical propellant that is used to eject them from the canister and it is depleting the Ozone layer.That inturn also affects the air we breathe.Before my husband worked in water treatment , he did Hazzardous waste , that is how he became a chemist.It's sad the world has become Chemical dependant.Back in the 1800's , My Native American Cherokee Relatives weren't sick with all these crazy ailments.Why > because the Air wasn't polluted , it was Pure.The meat wasn't toxic from animals injesting poisons.Fish weren't toxic because the water was Clean.And the water again itself was clean.As soon as "Man" invened Poison , that is when all these diseases started cropping up, and continue to worsen with each passing day.Hope this was an interesting read.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

In regards to the word ORGANIC , that just means the rancher didn't use pesticide / chemicals to grow it.But people forget the chemicals that are already in the ground that have come in thru rain water from polluted air.Your still injesting poison.Now days , Nothing is hazzard free , thanks to mans Invention of Chemicals.You mention Genetics play apart it your health.Why did your body get sick in the first place then ? It was passed on down by your parents , and why did they get sick ?It was what they ate , breathed and drank.And if it was passed on to them from their folks , Look at the enviorment.


----------



## Kathleen M. (Nov 16, 1999)

Why did people get sick with cancer, anything else, even genetic disease since the beginning of recorded history?Certainly the ancient greeks and chinese and everyone else weren't lying about getting sick and they certainly didn't have any modern pesticides in their environment?Gene mutation is how evolution occurs and I really don't even want to go there with anyone as that will really get me in trouble?And with that I really am out of this thread, I'm done.


----------



## Patman75 (Mar 9, 2008)

Kathleen M. said:


> And with that I really am out of this thread, I'm done.










Come on Kathleen, you know you will be back.














Past civilizations used toxic substances in every day life too. They just did not know who bad it was for them. Mercury was some super healing substance that the Chinese used. Lead was used cooking utensils and dishes. Arsentic is naturally found in water. A good nutritious balanced diet was hard to come by. Not everyone had a constant 74 degree living enviroment back then.What was this thread about again? I'm really surprised that this thread isn't locked yet. Usually when you disagree with a moderator, suggust natural healthy living and bash on medications and modern medical industry the thread get locked. I very impressed that we have been able to keep this conversation and healthly debate going.


----------



## BQ (May 22, 2000)

> I don't care how or which approach we take but removing the root of the problem needs to be the #1 priority.


Sure .. of course. But... today??? That would take much more research.... and.... that research costs>>>> $$$$.And therein lies the problem.(It IS so frustrating that many of our problems DO come down to that ($). But...I'm afraid it is true.)If the people who dole out research dollars (OR the folks who have influence over them) don't think this is a worthy cause... it just simply doesn't get the attention or funding it needs.Therefore....finding the "root cause" isn't a priority. So until it is..... I'll just try my best to manage my symptoms. BQ


----------



## M&M (Jan 20, 2002)

Glenda,If you're going to post the "history of how we get cancer" you'd better have some serious links to back that up. Everything you said is your opinion. You have to include some serious factual information to support that.Patman,Watch the snide comments. THOSE are what get threads closed, not adults talking about something. And don't taunt other members.


----------



## Patman75 (Mar 9, 2008)

M&M said:


> Watch the snide comments. THOSE are what get threads closed, not adults talking about something. And don't taunt other members.


My appoligies if I taunted anyone. That was not my intent. Emotion is hard to read on a post. I'm just enjoy the debate and everyone's personal opinions on this wonderful public forum. Who else can I talk about GI issues with not come across as a nut or some kind of poop freak..... Hhmmm, I probably still come across as a nut.





















Anyhooo, love ya all!


----------



## overitnow (Nov 25, 2001)

So it's a dangerous world out there. Not only can we not eat the food and not drink the water without putting ourselves at risk; but obviously, we shouldn't breathe the air, at least in any kind of industrial setting. (Didn't we all already know this?) Here are just a few of the tons of studies listed on Google Scholar about this.Role of oxygen free radicals in cancer developmenthttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=A...97f4f6c56ce48caRole of Oil Fly Ash in creating airborn source of free radicalshttp://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx970049rRole of subway dust in heavy metal absorptionhttp://www.springerlink.com/content/qx12u3536l447967/Role of coal fly ash in iron absorption and respiratory degradation http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx9901736It just seems to me that it is prudent to eliminate as many sources of pollution as you can. For me, I try to stay biodegradable with naturally sourced anti-bacterials and surfactants and if an ingredient may cause problems, I try to avoid it. I also dump as many anti-oxidants down me as I can and with products that don't create more oxidized free radicals than they can neutralize. (I would provide clinical references as to that; but then I would be crossing over the "marketing line." Suffice to say that there was significant work done last year in developing a mineral chelation that reduces OFR production by up to 80% and may go some distance in explaining why anti-oxidation has not been a success up to this point.) I try to spend my time in environments that expose me to less of the pollutants; and while I know that most people feel that they have little choice over the environment in which they live and work, I did spend 4 years using the Toronto subway as a means of getting around before I moved to the banks of the Yukon River and I think I benefited from that change. So far it is working for me and, hopefully, will head off the need for chemo as I get into my 70s and 80s. As far as the toxins under the sink, here is something from the EPA on that:http://www.epa.gov/iaq/voc.htmland Radon:http://www.epa.gov/radon/index.htmlI created my own problems with poor choices as a young and aging man. If I had known then what I know now, I could have saved myself years of misery. Supplements and medicines are two sides of the same coin. We benefit most if we attend to the proactive and hold the doctor in reserve, rather than waiting for the diseases to develop and then placing all of our chips on one spin of the wheel. IMO.(Now how could anyone complain about this?)Cheers,Mark


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

Mark , I LOVED Your Post.Excellent addition to this Hot debate.Great links to kinda back me up with what I am trying to put a message out with. Here I go again with these 2 words > ReSearch and Investigate it.Being married to someone that has been in the hazzardous chemical field , and water treatment field as well , I have abit more access to this information which my husband is able to provide me with , this comes from his 30 years of training.It's in his class books and desk refrence manuals. As to what and how this stuff interacts with each other. Or by itself alone.Your Commen sense , should also tell you this is true , if you know anything about Chemicals and the dangers of them that is.But I see Most Don't , as they don't work with this stuff.They think most everything is safe , I guarentee , it's not.Check the ingrediants on the products you purchase , No matter what they are , then go home and get on your computer and "Research" the Hazzards associated with their use.I shouldn't have to provide computer links for these facts. But I am glad Mark was kind enough to post some. Good Job Mark*You can do these kinda things yourself , by being in contact with the EPA and the FDA and all of their associates."Investigate" this stuff in depth , and you will finally learn for yourself, the Real Truth , behind most all of these illnesses.Sure it's true , there's No way to eliminate this Crud out of our lives, the world is obcessed with using these damn things.And I can bet it will eventually cost all of us our lives unfortunatly.Too bad we could go back in time 200 years and be man made chemical free. We'd all be alot healthier to some extent.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

I went thru your web links Mark , and I see some are EPA , like I said to contact , for more information.www.epa.govwww.fda.govThis information is out there , you just have to know the correct way to obtain it.Hense forth my words > Research and Investigate it.Growing up on a Cattle Ranch , I saw how the Beef would be affected by the Orchard Grass and Alfalfa that they would eat.They would get very ill because of the pesticides used on the grass to keep the bugs from eating the new growing grass shoots.They would either vomit their guts out or have diarrhea, and if they injested to much sand from eating hay off the ground , they would get impacted and lay down , roll , twist a gut , and I would have to put a 44 slug in their poor head.These are some of the reasons we got out of the Cattle business. We wouldn't sell tainted beef to the Public.You eat tainted meat > Your gonna catch what they have.Don't belive me , call a Cattle Ranch Vet and ask.The reason my sister's husband got out of the Fruit business along with his family , was the use of Pesticides used to grow the fruit better.They knew the dangers of the damn chemicals and they didn't want any thing linked back to them for being the cause of someone's cancer by eating their produce.So they got out of it too.We are a Nation Obcessed with Chemicals.Many don't give a rats rear what they use in their products as long as they can get the all mighty dollar buck from it.I don't wash my hair with shampoo , I use straight Water.I don't wash my clothes in dert. I use Warm water.I don't wash dishes in det either. I use Hot Boiled Water and a scrub pad.I won't use Make up , never have and I am 52.If I have chapped lips , I use Alovera gel straight from the plant. I get them from the Cherokee Rez in Oklahoma.There are afew ways to eliminate some of this nasty stuff out of your life.Sadly ya can't get it all out though.Search for alternatives that might be available.Above all > Just do your homework*


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

For those that are interested , this is why Eating Meat is dangerous:Beef can be sold at low prices because ranchers can raise large numbers of cattle by pumping them full of hormones and antibiotics. Hormones promote growth in cattle. Gary Kuhl, quoted in Orville Schell's Modern Meat: Antibiotics, Hormones, and the Pharmaceutical Farm (1983), states: I don't think that there is a producer who can afford not to use implanting as a management tool. If you can increase that rascal [a steer] by thirty to forty pounds with a two dollar bill, there isn't a rancher in the world who wouldn't trade places with you for that kind of deal, because that's a ten-dollar return for every dollar invested.Antibiotics are also making it possible for ranchers to raise meat that can be sold at low prices. The drugs enhance the growth of the animals. Cattle can be kept in very confined areas while staying healthy and disease free. These drugs are instituted at every possible opportunity and it seems as though most ranchers couldn't or wouldn't be able to raise meat without them. Today about nine million pounds of antibiotic feed additives are used annually, and the rancher who doesn't use them is an exception. But this overuse of antibiotics could be potentially dangerous for our health. An editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine states that research demonstrates a connection between the drugs that are given to animals and the creation of superbugs that are immune to some antibiotics.The hormones used in cattle can also be transferred to humans through eating beef. For example, estrogen is commonly injected into cattle, resulting in humans receiving large doses of it through consumption. Estrogen is naturally produced in the female's ovary and placenta; it stimulates the growth of these organs and also regulates the menstrual cycle. During the past three decades, it has been used in livestock to promote growth (although scientists still aren't completely sure why the hormone works this way). Now studies show that human consumption of estrogen from hormone-fed beef can result in cancer and premature puberty.It's not just the drugs put into beef that endanger our health; it's also the amount of beef we consume. Because this meat is economical, we buy more of it with little thought for how it was produced.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

For those that would like to read about the dangers of eating Vegetables and Fruitaul G. Auwaerter, MD, Clinical Director, Division of Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, and website advisor for Medscape infectious diseases, cautions us that fruits and vegetables are probably the most dangerous foods that we can eat. Fruits and vegetables are not closely supervised. They come to the US from all over the world. There are over 3000 agricultural distribution centers, which do not have the ability to monitor the hygiene of what comes to our plates, unlike slaughter houses, which are fewer in number. Washing fruits and vegetables won’t solve the problem. Fruits and vegetables cannot be irradiated. Dr. Auwaerter admits that the risk of infection from fruits and vegetables is low, but in comparison to meat, they are the most dangerous foods to eat. According to Dr. Auwaerter, he solution seems to lie in getting the attention of regulatory agencies. He urges our government to take a more active role in managing the safety of fruits and vegetables. Most of us really don’t think much about the danger of eating fruits and vegetables.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

All of this information was obtained by going to GOOGLE , and typing in : What are the Dangers of eating Meat , and , What are the Dangers of eating Vegetables and Fruit.Hope you find this a good Read*


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

Here is another good read , about Drinking Water FAQ's.What dangers can there be in drinking water?There are several problems that can endanger the quality of drinking water. A number of these problems are summed up here. Someone can detect coliform bacteria in drinking water. Coliform bacteria are a group of microrganisms that are normally found in the intestinal tract of humans and other warm-blooded animals, and in surface water. When these organisms are detected in drinking water this suggests contamination from a subsurface source such as barnyard run-off. The presence of these bacteria indicates that disease-causing microrganisms, known as pathogens, may enter the drinking water supply in the same way if one does not take preventive action. Drinking water should be free from coliform. Yeasts and viruses can also endanger the quality of drinking water. They are microbial contaminants that are usually found in surface water. Examples are Giardia and Cryptosporidium. Giardia is a single cell organism that causes gastrointestinal symptoms. Cryptosporidium is a parasite that is considered to be one of the most significant causes of diarrhoeal disease in humans. In individuals with a normal immune system the disease lasts for several days causing diarrhoea, vomiting, stomach cramps and fever. People with weakened immune systems can suffer from far worse symptoms, caused by cryptosporidium, such as cholera-like illnesses. Nitrate in drinking water can cause cyanosis, a reduction of the oxygen carrying capacity of the blood. This is particularly dangerous to infants under six months of age. Lead can enter the water supply as it leaches from copper pipelines. As the water streams through the pipes, small amounts of lead will dissolve in the water, so that it becomes contaminated. Lead is a toxic substance that can be quickly absorbed in the human systems, particularly those of small children. It causes lead poisoning. Legionella is a bacterium that grows rapidly when water is maintained at a temperature between 30 and 40 degrees for a longer period of time. This bacterium can be inhaled when water evaporates as it enters the human body with aerosols. The bacteria can cause a sort of flue, known as Pontiac fever, but it can also cause the more serious deathly illness known as legionellosis. Read more: http://www.lenntech.com/Drinking-Water-FAQ.htm#ixzz0NYEX4yR3


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

The reason I have taken the time to provide this information , I am trying to give Crediable reasons for WHY peole thru out the World are sick.I hope you enjoy reading it , I did alot of Research to find this.


----------



## Tallgirl (Nov 14, 2007)

Glenda.Are you trying to scare the **** out of everyone on here, because you certainly seem to be doing a good job of it







Every post I have read of yours is a warning of some sort.If everything is so dangerous to eat and drink, what exactly do you suggest we live on?I know you are just probably trying to help, but a lot of people on these forums are on very restrictive diets as it is and worry about food making them ill (myself included). Having you point out how dangerous everything is does not help my anxiety levels







Tallgirl.


----------



## Glenda (Aug 15, 2000)

I am trying to create PUBLIC AWARENESS to the POSSIBLE , REASONS WHY people are so ill .And show them How it occures.


----------



## Thai (Aug 22, 2007)

Glenda,You might be TRYING to create awareness.But what you ARE creating is some very bad vibes.You send post after post after post after LENGTHYYYYYYYY post.You pound us with negativity at every turn.You take every opportunity to use this as your forum to promote your cause, regardless of what the topic of the thread is.If you are so interested in making people aware of your beliefs, then I am sure there are many better places on line to further that cause.We get what you believe in BUT we don't need to hear about it with every post.We know your hubby is a chemist, you tell us often enough.We are sympathetic to the fact that you had a bad reaction to some drugs in your lifetime, BUT we don't need to be reminded of it when we ask for input on a drug.We also know of your heritage (again, you seem to have a need to tell us frequently), and I am VERY sure that you are proud of that, as you should be.......as we all should be of ours, regardless of what that heritage is. But we don't all interject it in to every post!!And we know what our ancestors did and lived by and so on............let it go, we get it!!!!Wash your clothes and hair and dishes without soap, by all means, that is your choice.As it is my choice to use laundry detergent, shampoo and dish soap.Thai


----------



## bartek (Aug 8, 2009)

Just quicklyibs can apparently be as much a physical disorder (brought on by use of narcotics or stomache flu) which then may develop into a psychosematic disorder or it may both BOTH and you may not even be aware you are depressed or anxious, because it may be your subconscience or only background but it affects your mind and your general condition, people with ibs-d myself are frequently on high alert in flight or flight mode and they think that is the right way to deal with ibs when in fact its the worrying, the planning and the fear which in time becomes the problem or more so than the original or root causeGPs know very little, so you should always ask for a referal to a speciliast, ie psychiatrist or gastoenterologist. my local GP just gives out zoloft wheras my shrink identified an AD more suitable tailored specifically for IBS-D which a lot of posts in this forum confirmMy psychiatrist explained that the term AntiDepressant is old fashioned and it should be changed because it does a lot of things as wellIm anti-drugs i try not to use anything, but i must say that ADs are helping Lastly my own experience of IBS has been more or less trial and error with me as own guinea pig, some bad consequences, some good, its definately a long frustrating process, do what i did try all the low risk ideas like herbal and supplments etc, use the man made chemicals as a last resortin fact my psych told me that reading other ppls stories is a double edged sword and you get more worried when its the worrying that is the main problemif you change ur lifestyle to suit then youll be ok, if your chronically affected u may need a multilateral approachbest of luck


----------

