 |
 |
David, I think my reaction to Sinemet is really strange. I had a real abnormal fear of taking it due to my allergic reactions to chemo and PD agonists so no placebo effect should have been in effect. After the first half dose I felt great, thought it would be great, "normal" could walk to mailbox, etc. so I know what you guys mean about being "on" and why you take it despite dyskinesias. It never helped again and I took it for a year and later tried several versions including CR, carbadopa/levadopa, regular, different dosages and Comtan and I only got twitching in my abdomen. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "DAVID LEWIN" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 7:20 AM Subject: Re: redefining toxicity > Recently, because of a change in my insurance coverage, I tried to fall > back > on an old prescription bottle of dopamine CR that had no effect in the > past > of easing my muscle spasms and rigidity. By the end of the month I was in > constant physical agony, and only the return to my regular dopamine 25/100 > 10 pills a day brought me out of pain, and the effect was instantaneous. > Go > figure. > >>From: Ned Gardner <[log in to unmask]> >>Reply-To: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network >><[log in to unmask]> >>To: [log in to unmask] >>Subject: Re: redefining toxicity >>Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 06:08:31 -0600 >> >>mackenzie wrote: >>>I recently cited the ELLDOPA study which concluded >>>that question of levodopa toxicity was still >>>unresolved. >>> >>>However, upon closer examination of the study and the >>>terminology used, it turns out the question of >>>toxicity as you and i define it was not even >>>addressed. >>> >>>Instead, the authors redefined "toxic" to mean >>>"hastens disease progression." >>> >>>i can see how they got there - if you define disease >>>progression solely as the loss of dopamine neurons and >>>you define toxic solely as something that kills >>>dopamine neurons, you have a nice, neat "if A=B and >>>B=C, then A=C" thang going on. >>> >>>But toxic is not defined as "something that kills >>>dopamine neurons," and toxic things do not, by >>>definition, hasten disease progression - for example, >>>the toxicity of chemo is undisputed, and it, >>>obviously, is used to slow disease progression. >>> >>>Medline Plus medical dictionary defines toxic as a >>>poison (or a toxin, but toxin has a very narrow >>>definition) and a poison as: >>> >>>1 :a substance that through its chemical action >>>usually kills, injures, or impairs an organism, or >>>2 : a substance that inhibits the activity of another >>>substance or the course of a reaction or process >>> >>>anything that causes the kinds of side effects >>>levodopa does can surely be said to be injuring or >>>impairing people (keep in mind that the only place >>>dyskinesias occur without drug inducement is in >>>Hungtington's disease, with the emphasis on >>>*disease.*) it is such a no brainer, it has baffled me >>>how the question can still be under debate. >>> >>>Now i know - the question of toxicity isn't under >>>debate at all. >>> >>>So if you see any headlines claiming that levodopa is >>>not toxic, question how they defined "toxic." it >>>probably does NOT mean that it has been shown that >>>levodopa is not harmful or injurious. >>> >>>And I have one question - every single one of those >>>authors has an MD, or a PhD, or both, which we >>>generally take to be in indication of intelligence. >>>Sooooo... are they being disingenuous, or are they >>>just stupid? >>> >>>Either way, it is not good for us. >>> >>>__________________________________________________ >>>Do You Yahoo!? >>>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >>>http://mail.yahoo.com >>> >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: >>>mailto:[log in to unmask] >>>In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn >>> >>> >> >>mackenzie: >> >>I think that what you have exposed is another example of how those >>responsible have been chosen for their inept leaderless quality s in an >>effort to prove the point that government just cant serve the people, >>and they don't mind stepping over a few bodies in the street, as they >>have demonstrated, in an attempt to convince the majority of that >>misguided conclusion. >> >>Ned >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>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