 |
 |
Philip Connors wrote: > - Carol's situation, including the potential pallidotomy, came up. He asked > if we had considered Tasmar and when we said that we had and Carol had used > it, but her neuro had taken her off it when the liver damage fatalities had > come up. He said fine compared to another drug, but now we were comparing > the Tasmar risk (which has apparently not continued with many patients using > it under close liver function monitoring) to BRAIN SURGERY. He then backed > off and said that he did not want too interfere in some other DR's area, but > suggested that we rethink it and discuss it (the possibility of restarting > Tasmar) with Carol's local (15 years) neuro who we are seeing next week. I'd vote for Tasmar, despite the fact I gave it up myself because of the liver damage risk and dubious value of blood tests. Statistically the risk from Tasmar is hundreds of times smaller than the risk of permanent or fatal damage in the brain surgery, and I wouldn't go for that until ALL else failed. Cheers, Joe -- J. R. Bruman (818) 789-3694 3527 Cody Road Sherman Oaks, CA 91403-5013