Re: Recognition of LDN

[Guest guest]

Maureen,

There is an article in the "Philadelphia Inquirer" about how the FDA has now gotten

very conservative in its policies and two doctors, one from University of Penn and

another from Pennsylvania Hospital said that patients are trying to find other out-

lets to reduce pain (e.g. surgery, holistic medicine) I was thinking it was rather

chaotic for a lot people today looking for pain relief. Why is it so important that

low dose naltrexone is FDA approved for MS? FDA approval in the general

public's mind does not mean that a drug will not harm you. We know LDN

does not harm any one, so why is it so important that it is FDA approved

for MS? It might help more people to try it, but that is all.

I personally think that the FDA ruined its reputation when it approved Vioxx and

knew for four years that it caused heart attacks and strokes. JMHO. I don't think

FDA approval means what people use to think. They know the FDA is just as

screwed up as many other "honorable" institutions.

[Guest guest]

,

Good answer. Someone is looking for a script and he is from Canada. I sent him

to two places to find you. You seem to be the best one to ask.

[Guest guest]

Aletha,

I know from my experience trying to find a treatment for MS that you and are

correct. It would be much better for the MS community that people are given the op-

tion of LDN at diagnosis. And it would also be better for the newly diagnosed not to

be misled any more by the NMSS. So we'll have to get the FDA to approve it.

I don't think this is how the system is suppose to work, but we must "tweak" it, in order

for it to function properly. Welcome to the world of MS! It is strange both internally and

externally.

Goodnight,

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 4/10/05 9:43:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time, N164@... writes:

So we'll have to get the FDA to approve it.

I don't think this is how the system is suppose to work, but we must "tweak" it, in order for it to function properly. Welcome to the world of MS! It is strange both internally and externally.

Goodnight,

and LDNers.

It seems that the FDA is actually motivated by 3 different forces.

1 political

2 public opinion

3 pharmaceutical COs

IF 2 of the 3 can align themselves, the third loses and the FDA gets it done.

I think it was Vioxx that was approved after long trials and some failures but pushed through by the Pharma COs and politicians

Tysabri was approved after short trials but big Public demand and Pharmaceuticals

I heard this from an ex-FDA woman on C-SPAN 2 "book" today. She didn't mention Tysabri, but that is what I thought of. She also said that everyone is looking for the right combination which gets the FDA moving toward approvals and she says that it is the Washington Post, or was it the New York Times. The more times a drug is mentioned in this paper, the more likely it is to be approved.

As far as the supplement world is concerned. The early 90's almost had the FDA regulating the industry, but the Public outcry was loud enough that the Politicians aligned with us and locked out the FDA, thus the Pharma COs.

This gave rise to the surge of vitamins, herbs, supplements, etc. which seem mostly based in Utah. The only way to regulate these now is when enough people Die like the diet drugs, and of course these Steroid athletes and the high school geeks & athletes who want Hollywood bodies without the honest work.

-

[Guest guest]

> Maureen,

>

> There is an article in the " Philadelphia Inquirer " about how the FDA has now

> gotten

> very conservative in its policies and two doctors, one from University of

> Penn and

> another from Pennsylvania Hospital said that patients are trying to find

> other out-

> lets to reduce pain (e.g. surgery, holistic medicine) I was thinking it was

> rather

> chaotic for a lot people today looking for pain relief. Why is it so

> important that

> low dose naltrexone is FDA approved for MS? FDA approval in the general

> public's mind does not mean that a drug will not harm you. We know LDN

> does not harm any one, so why is it so important that it is FDA approved

> for MS? It might help more people to try it, but that is all.

>

> I personally think that the FDA ruined its reputation when it approved Vioxx

> and

> knew for four years that it caused heart attacks and strokes. JMHO. I don't

> think

> FDA approval means what people use to think. They know the FDA is just as

> screwed up as many other " honorable " institutions.

>

>

===========

FDA approval for LDN would make it a choice for patients along with the

CRAB's(Copaxone, Rebif, Avonex and Betaseron) and Novantrone. Doctors would no

longer say no to LDN when their patients ask for a prescription. Get LDN FDA

approved and more people benefit because doctors will start saying yes to it's

use.

Also, Dr. Bihari owns the patent for LDN as a treatment for MS. The only way

the price can be gouged up on LDN even if it were to be FDA approved is if

Bihari's protocol is changed and the drug would most likely not work then. I

think Bihari has secured us a cheap and easy way to help ourselves.

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

It is just that doctors don't take is seriously, and the NMSS won't acknowledge it, and people are generally weary of things that are not approved (some think it is snake oil). It was difficult to talk my husband into trying it and not letting him go with what the Nero wanted him to do. I am so glad for this group, without the support and talking things out, I would not have been able to be so strong about his trying it. Thank you everyone!!!

Aletha

Re: [low dose naltrexone] Recognition of LDN

Maureen,

There is an article in the "Philadelphia Inquirer" about how the FDA has now gotten

very conservative in its policies and two doctors, one from University of Penn and

another from Pennsylvania Hospital said that patients are trying to find other out-

lets to reduce pain (e.g. surgery, holistic medicine) I was thinking it was rather

chaotic for a lot people today looking for pain relief. Why is it so important that

low dose naltrexone is FDA approved for MS? FDA approval in the general

public's mind does not mean that a drug will not harm you. We know LDN

does not harm any one, so why is it so important that it is FDA approved

for MS? It might help more people to try it, but that is all.

I personally think that the FDA ruined its reputation when it approved Vioxx and

knew for four years that it caused heart attacks and strokes. JMHO. I don't think

FDA approval means what people use to think. They know the FDA is just as

screwed up as many other "honorable" institutions.

[Guest guest]

I am happy without the FDA's approval. That doesn't mean anything to me...except higher prices and more dangerous drugs.... those who want to find it will!!

Re: [low dose naltrexone] Recognition of LDN

In a message dated 4/10/05 9:43:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time, N164@... writes:

So we'll have to get the FDA to approve it.

I don't think this is how the system is suppose to work, but we must "tweak" it, in order for it to function properly. Welcome to the world of MS! It is strange both internally and externally.

Goodnight,

and LDNers.

It seems that the FDA is actually motivated by 3 different forces.

1 political

2 public opinion

3 pharmaceutical COs

IF 2 of the 3 can align themselves, the third loses and the FDA gets it done.

I think it was Vioxx that was approved after long trials and some failures but pushed through by the Pharma COs and politicians

Tysabri was approved after short trials but big Public demand and Pharmaceuticals

I heard this from an ex-FDA woman on C-SPAN 2 "book" today. She didn't mention Tysabri, but that is what I thought of. She also said that everyone is looking for the right combination which gets the FDA moving toward approvals and she says that it is the Washington Post, or was it the New York Times. The more times a drug is mentioned in this paper, the more likely it is to be approved.

As far as the supplement world is concerned. The early 90's almost had the FDA regulating the industry, but the Public outcry was loud enough that the Politicians aligned with us and locked out the FDA, thus the Pharma COs.

This gave rise to the surge of vitamins, herbs, supplements, etc. which seem mostly based in Utah. The only way to regulate these now is when enough people Die like the diet drugs, and of course these Steroid athletes and the high school geeks & athletes who want Hollywood bodies without the honest work.

-