 |
 |
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------30D046F26853 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Paul, this reply to you was rejected by your local postmaster, with the message "we don't accept spam"- so I'll try this route. Let me know if you receive it, and correct your address if needed. -- J. R. Bruman (818) 789-3694 3527 Cody Road Sherman Oaks, CA 91403-5013 --------------30D046F26853 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]> Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 22:21:55 -0700 From: "J. R. Bruman" <[log in to unmask]> Reply-To: [log in to unmask] X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: paul Schlinker <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: Deprenyl - latest References: <[log in to unmask]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit paul Schlinker wrote: > > This email is addressed to you as one further source of > information about the drug deprenyl used in the treatment of > Parkinson's disease. > I have been treated for the condition for the past five > years and the treatment has included the use of deprenyl. > Recently my medicos have differed in their opinion on its > potential therapeutic effects V mortality risk. The final > decision to continue/discontinue the drug is mine but with such > potentially damaging consequences from an error I wish to be > fully informed before doing so. > Your Jan.96 contribution to the Parkinson's Web has been > most helpful in this regard but are you now aware of any later > studies and/or opinions than those mentioned in 'Current Science > Reviews' - The Eldepryl Debate? > As a working academic (medical science is not my area) I > have access to information retrieval tools so references would > be sufficient. > Paul Schlinker > Faculty of Education > Griffith University Q4111 > AUSTRALIA > Email:[log in to unmask] > 'phone:(07)38755764 > Home: (07)55311888 Dear Paul, First off, I'm no doctor or any other kind of medical professional, so my opinions don't count against those of your doctors. Second, I see from my CSR INDEX that I have posted reviews (and reference citations) of at least 24 published science articles about Eldepryl (look under selegiline, the generic name). Since you mention my posting of Jan 96 I assume you are familiar with both the Current Science Reviews and their subject INDEX. That's a good place to begin learning all that's been said in the past year or two, plus who the contestants are. Third, from there search (or have your librarian do it) MEDLINE for "selegiline" and you will be inundated. Very briefly, the debate over Eldepryl's therapeutic value continues, with issues of MAO, free radical, or antioxidant properties still lingering. I happen to favor the 'pro' side, so I take it along with Sinemet. The mortality scare, on the other hand, has apparently been laid to rest. The first shot, by Dr. Lees, a staunch opponent, was immediately attacked by Dr. Olanow on the other side, who said HIS mortality data directly contradicted those of Dr. Lees. Most lately J. Riggs (cited in this month's CSR) pointed out a fatal analytical blunder by Lees, who after all is a neurologist not a statistician. So the main risk from Eldepryl is of apoplexy or cardiac attack, if you're not a lucky health plan member and learn what it will cost (roughly $3 a tablet). I hope this helps, please don't' hesitate to ask further. Cheers, Joe J. R. Bruman (818) 789-3694 3527 Cody Road Sherman Oaks, CA 91403-5013 --------------30D046F26853--