 |
 |
I don't have an answer as such but I'd like to offer my opinion. As most of you know Jeff has been taking NADH along with the prescribed meds and vitamins and herbs. Since he started the NADH, the vitamins/herbs and Amantadine we have noticed a good deal of improvement in his symptons. Jeff's feeling right along has been, "...so what if it is a placebo effect. . . I FEEL BETTER!" And because he feels better physically, his mental outlook is better and that contributes to him feeling better. Can you see the circular effect on his well-being? We feel we need to buy time until the cure is 'discovered'. And that 'time' needs to be as high a 'quality' time as we can manage. We feel that the NADH, vitamins/herbs, etc., whether placebo effect or not, has had a great impact on that 'circle' concept I referred to earlier. NADH, vitamins/herbs, etc. may very well not be for everyone. But as I maintain in general terms, we all (parkies and non-parkies) must be our own biggest advocates in our physical, mental and spiritual well being. No one can give us all the answers be they medical, psychological or spiritual - it's incumbant upon us as individuals to keep searching. Conventional practices are not inherently bad or wrong- but we feel there are other elements that can/may complement conventional practices. Your message is very interesting and thought provoking and you're right, there's no obvious answer. It all goes back to the individual. . . . . . Regards, Lisa Carper >I have proposed that those who are trying alternative, unapproved, and >nonprescribed medications do so in such a manner as to enhance the >scientific meaning of their home trial. Specifically, I have proposed >the use a form of the "double blind" procedure in order to eliminate the >placebo effect. > >I thought that it would be useful to develop a database of the home >trials of various alternative treatments (an example, NADH) if these >home trials conform to minimal scientific standards. Inferences >concerning the value of such alternative treatments could be based on >these public data. > >But a problem has been gnawing at me: If a treatment relieves symptoms >via the placebo effect, why debunk it? Maybe, what we should do is >develop better, more effective, and longer lasting placebos, capable of >giving greater pleasure and/or relief to the afflicted, rather than to >spend our time demonstrating the truth that a certain treatment has >little or no effect other than that of a placebo. > >Is it sensible to evaluate alternative treatments in order to know that >possibly Substance X has no effect after the placebo effect is eliminated? > >My Halloween question is, "Truth or Treat?" > >The answer is not obvious. Reminds me a little of Jack Benny's pause to >consider the robber's option, "Your money or your life?" > >Do you have any answer? > >Allan Netick email [log in to unmask] > > --