Hey Marco! Check this out (from
http://www.parkinson.org/site/pp.asp?c=9dJFJLPwB&b=100091): 

80. Is coffee good for PD?


There have been studies that suggest that caffeine protects against PD.
Thus, if your drink several cups of coffee a day, and have been doing so
for many years, you are 30% less likely to have PD. However, care must
be taken in how these data are interpreted. Although it was found that
people who drank coffee or other caffeine containing beverages such as
tea, cocoa, and cola had lower incidences of PD, other explanations are
possible. It could be that as PD develops, with its tremors and sleep
problems, people with PD begin to avoid caffeine. PD. Another
explanation might be that people with a tendency to develop PD have a
physiological or psychological intolerance to caffeine.

In one study, men who drank large quantities of coffee or caffeinated
beverages had a lower risk of PD than men who drank only a little. The
study suggested that it is the caffeine consumed before the onset of PD
that provides the protection: caffeine consumed after PD develops
provides no protection. In women, the protective effects of caffeine are
harder to evaluate. In moderate amounts, caffeine, in women, appears to
offer some protection from PD. However, at increased levels of
consumption, the benefit is lost, and a reverse effect is observed. This
may have a biological explanation, or perhaps women have a different
susceptibility to PD. Obviously more studies are needed.

If you enjoy drinking coffee, continue to do so. If you don't, don't
start drinking it because it might prevent PD. And, if you have PD,
drinking or not drinking coffee will not make a difference. Starbucks is
a wonderful place: but it' not the answer to PD.

81. Is smoking good for PD?

Several studies suggest cigarette smoking may protect against developing
PD. Thus, if your smoke one or two packs a day and have been doing so
for many years you are about 50% less likely to have PD. These studies
indicate the degree of protection is related to the number of packs
smoked per day, and the number of years smoked. here is no evidence,
however, that once PD begins, smoking is protective. At different times
it has been proposed that certain chemicals in cigarette smoke, not yet
identified, may have a protective effect. Some researchers noting the
loss of smell in people with PD have proposed PD may result from an
"inhaled" agent, and smoking may block this agent. Some researchers have
noted that nicotine, by stimulating nicotine receptors in the brain, may
lessen some of the symptoms of PD. Other researchers are skeptical. They
point out that cigarette smoking by decreasing life span, may "kill off"
those people who would have developed PD. Other researchers point out
that PD is a slowly evolving disease and the disease begins years before
it is diagnosed. These researchers think that an early loss of desire to
smoke may, actually, be an early symptom of PD. Instead of viewing
smoking as "neuro-protective", they believe that people who do not take
up smoking or stop smoking may already have PD.

To test the idea that cigarette smoking may protects against the
development of PD, in 1999 a study was conducted by Drs. Carly Tanner
and J. William Langston of the California Parkinson Institute. The study
is summarized below:

Smoking has been inversely associated with PD, but whether this reflects
a biologic effect on the underlying disease process or merely selection
bias is uncertain. The he authors compared smoking histories in male
twin pairs identified from the National Academy of Sciences-National
Research Council World War II Veteran Twins. The amount of cigarettes
smoked (in pack-years) was collected until the time of PD onset in the
affected twin or until the time of death for the unaffected twin.
Differences in pack-years smoked until PD onset and until 10 and 20
years before onset were compared using standard statistical methods. To
assess the role of shared environment, correlation for smoking behaviors
was compared between pairs both of whom had PD and pairs where only one
of twins had PD. Detailed smoking histories were available for 113 twin
pairs.

There were 43 identical twins and 50 non identical twins in which at
least one twin had.

There were 10 identical twins and 10 non identical twins in which both
twins had PD. In 33 identical twins and 39 non-identical twins in which
at least one twin had PD and smoked, the twins without PD smoked more
than the twins with PD. This was more marked in the identical twins than
in the non identical twins. In twins the risk of PD is inversely
correlated with the dose (in pack-years) of cigarette smoking: the less
you smoke the more likely you are to develop PD. Because identical twins
are genetically identical and are similar behaviorally, this difference
is unlikely to result from either genetic or other environmental
factors. These results are compatible with a true protective effect of
cigarette smoking.

Although studies suggest smoking may be protective against PD, the risk
of smoking in causing cancer, heart disease, and stroke, far outweigh
any benefit from preventing PD. If you don't smoke, don't' start smoking
because of PD. If you have PD and if you don't smoke, don't start
smoking. More needs to be understood about how smoking protects against
PD.

-----Original Message-----
From: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Marco DeMichiel
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2005 1:14 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: survival of fittest/Mary Ann

Mary Ann,

How did you arrive at such a conclusion? Who's to say your husband would
even had had PD and died in his 38th year? The fact is PD has, I
believe,
up until the late 1970's affected older people (>65), predominately men.
Who's to say the rest of you would have had a  serious illness. What we
should be doing is looking at identifying the cause/s and,  only by
doing
so, produce effective cure/s and therapy/s; and not a cocktail of drug's
and in some cases surgery that only suppress/control the symptoms.

It is true that Science and Technology will develop the answers but it
is
also true that they are responsible for many of the causes too. From the
invention of the steam engine in the late 1700's to the techhnology
supporting/enabling the world-wide internet, today, Science has
generated
much good but also much pollution and destruction; and I believe is a
factor in increased stress levels, in that we are expected to do things
much faster with less resources; and we have to adapt more freequently
to
advancements in our lifetime than say a 100years.

You say'humankind' is fighting(my word) mother nature with science. The
thing is we are part of nature but we are arrogant and believe we can
control her. We never will, just like we never will develop a computer
more powerful than the brain; even mine.

I believe we, today, are paying the price for the so called advances,
which have only one goal/objective: profitability - short term, i.e.
1year; We are it's victims which have no place on any balance sheet.

I don't think we should look back but forward; use science but also get
them to identify, accept and correct their mistakes

I speak from personal experience in that the anti-depressant,
Prothiaden,
which I took fo 18 mths, induced my PD. The drug was (quietly)
withdrawn.

So, I think allowing the development of SC therapy, aside of the moral
and
ethical issues, is highly dangerous. Why? Because each case of PD is
unique, therefore, how much do they implant? To little=(possible)
little/no change; to much=hyper activity; and it can't be reversed.

These are my personal thoughts and are in no way a criticism of you or
any
member.

Finally, I do believe in God and have never blamed him; never said why
me?
The day I was diagnosed I looked up to the heavens and said, "this is a
tough one which you'(god) are going to have to help me with". The Neuro
said, the part of the brain was prematurely dying. It wasn't dead. My
glass was half-full, not empty. That was 12yrs ago and other than weak
legs I'm ok. Cigarettes, Cigars, Espresso coffee and wine will kill me
first. Unforunately there's no 'women or song' LOL.

best wishes,

Marco
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ray, what attitude are your talking about????  This is not a discussion
> about the modern methods of medicine - this is a discussion about
natural
> selection.
>
> Not more than 50 years ago, children with diabetes and cystic fibrosis
> died
> at an early age.   I never implied that was good - I was merely
pointing
> out
> that the weak and infirm died early in the natural, or medically
inferior,
> environment.  Mother Nature is not kind.  Science  has intervened to
> insure
> that humankind survives despite weaknesses in genetic make-up.
>
> In our family, we have had the discussion of who would have survived
had
> we
> been born 100 years ago.  The only person in our family of 9
(including
> in-law kids and 1 grandchild) was my husband (with PD) who would have
died
> at the age of 38 (from appendicitis).  The rest of us would have died
in
> childbirth or would have never been born.  That's pretty shocking for
all
> of
> us.   Science and medical research are good things.
> ---------
> God bless
> Mary Ann (CG Jamie 66/26 with PD)
> -----------
>> While it is true that aging brings about deterioration and that
>> complicates
>> PD, young people are born with cystic fibrosis, a hideous disease
which
>> took
>> my  cousin's son's life at age 35.  35 was once life expectancy.  45
was
>> life expectancy around 1900. 18 was supposedly life expectancy in the
>> Stone
>> Age and Roman Empire..
>>
>> This is the same mind set exhibited by people who have no knowledge
of
>> disease and think you just get old and have to die of something.
Mary
>> Ann,
>> as




























nurse and CG I'm surprised at your attitude.  As you must know young
>> people get PD too.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn