 |
 |
To Paul and Ben: Paul's comments are very insightful. My purpose in presenting the other side is to achieve what I did: the recognition that BOTH sides base their recommendations on opinion unsupported by scientific data. Today, it is still all a matter of opinion. Much like a political campaign, the incumbent candidate (levodopa) has an honorable but not perfect track record which the other candidates (agonists) want to discredit by shouting louder and mudslinging. Candidate levodopa is called upon to defend its track record, when the burden of proof really should fall upon those making the unsubstantiated claim that they are better than levodopa. Requip is a very good drug. It is a useful alternative, which we are fortunate to have. I use it frequently in my patients. I am delighted that it works for Paul. But remember that what works in one person doesn't work in all. Jorge ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Lauer" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2000 9:08 PM Subject: Re: question for Paul Lauer > Ben: I don't remember anymore what it was I read since it was probably 9 or > 10 months ago but it was all from this list or from a reference made on the > list. If you're willing to spend time in the archives you could duplicate > what I did. I also did not mean to imply that there was an overwhelming > volume of material but the debate went on for quite some time, much of it > based on anecdotal information. The clincher occurred when I discussed it > with Dr. Stanley Fahn who is way up there in the movement disorder specialist > world. At the time, I was taking one Sinemet 50/200 CR in the morning and one > Sinemet 25/100 CR in the afternoon. I asked him if he thought I should switch > to Requip and he said absolutely, as long as my quality f life was not > affected by reducing or altogether eliminating Sinemet. There are those on > this list of a more scientific bent who would probably require more than I > just outlined to make a decision. For me it was simple: Sinemet causes > problems over time and the logic said that if that time could be extended, it > made sense to do so. I know that Dr. Jorge Romero said earlier today that he > believes that extending the time when Sinemet is taken does not extend the > time when problems occur. I certainly respect his opinion but considering he > gave no proof for this hypothesis, it seemed to me to be nothing more than an > opinion. I choose to accept the counter opinion. Actually, Requip is probably > too new to even know yet what the long term ramifications of taking it are. > Additionally, since Requip is unaffected by Protein intake, my quality of > life has improved since I can eat as I please for lunch (I still take Sinemet > in the morning), and most particularly, I can have Sushi which I had stopped > having for lunch before I switched to a Requip regime. Quality of life can be > measured in many ways. > > Regards, > > Paul H. Lauer >