Guest guest Posted June 12, 2005 Report Share Posted June 12, 2005 No .. definitely not .. for maximum effect it has to be taken between 9PM and 3AM .. > I was wondering...after reading some of the posts, noticed that an LDN study was done in the A.M. Since I work a full-time job, I could not tolerate not sleeping at night. So, do you think I could try it in the A.M. for a month, take a couple of days off, and try after 9:00 p.m.? > > > --------------------------------- > Discover > Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news & more. Check it out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 12, 2005 Report Share Posted June 12, 2005 One would have to wait for the official videos before Dr.Mir's presentation can be scrutinized. I will post my comments on the scientific presentations (on my site soon). Based on my reading the comments so far.. the trial was a failure. No matter which way you sweeten the findings, a 30 % rate is known in professional circles as the sugar pill rate... (I have previously indicated that the expected rate is no where near 98-99% that is claimed). In the meantime, I continue to pound the table for a trial by medical professionals who know what they are doing. Private physicians dabbling in science have the potential to cause more harm than good. IMHO, if the AM dose was chosen, it should have been at a higher dose. A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 12, 2005 Report Share Posted June 12, 2005 In a message dated 6/12/2005 2:30:13 PM Central Daylight Time, aegis_on_ms@... writes: Based on my reading the comments so far.. the trial was a failure. No matter which way you sweeten the findings, a 30 % rate is known in professional circles as the sugar pill rate... +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ A, Don't the CRABs claim something like a 30% rate also? Marcie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 12, 2005 Report Share Posted June 12, 2005 The German trial if you read it correctly was for SYMPTOM relief only/had nothing to do with progression. I believe the 98% is cessation of progression . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 --- In low dose naltrexone , " aegis_on_ms " <aegis_on_ms@y...> wrote: > > One would have to wait for the official videos before Dr.Mir's > presentation can be scrutinized. I will post my comments on the > scientific presentations (on my site soon). > > Based on my reading the comments so far.. the trial was a failure. No > matter which way you sweeten the findings, a 30 % rate is known in > professional circles as the sugar pill rate... > > (I have previously indicated that the expected rate is no where near > 98-99% that is claimed). > > In the meantime, I continue to pound the table for a trial by medical > professionals who know what they are doing. Private physicians > dabbling in science have the potential to cause more harm than good. > > IMHO, if the AM dose was chosen, it should have been at a higher dose. > > A ======== The LDN in the AM hours was to test for symptom improvement, not halt disease progression. Dr. Bihari's way, LDN given between the hours of 9PM and 3AM approximately 2/3 of his individual patients see symptom improvement. The percentage of halted progression was not tested for in the German trial. I just wish they'd(Germans) done it correctly to begin with as to not have started utter confusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 Each of the 4 of them, yep, from what I've read. Re: [low dose naltrexone] Re: LDN in the A.M. In a message dated 6/12/2005 2:30:13 PM Central Daylight Time, aegis_on_ms@... writes: Based on my reading the comments so far.. the trial was a failure. No matter which way you sweeten the findings, a 30 % rate is known in professional circles as the sugar pill rate... +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ A, Don't the CRABs claim something like a 30% rate also? Marcie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 In chemo treatment for cancer, 30% is roughly the “successful” norm for the last 50 odd years. If you are seeing significantly higher numbers with evening hours, the morning hour tests tend to validate that evening is by far a better choice. I am going to make a quantum leap in understanding and assume the evening hours is relational to your own body clock. I would almost bet that a certain percentage of people, say 10-15%, have a body clock that works at a different time than most. If this is the case, part of the 30% response could be due to that factor. Again, this is merely a supposition on my part and is a question that needs be asked of those doing the research. Bruce Guilmette, Ph.D. Survive Cancer Foundation, Inc. http://www.survivecancer.net From: low dose naltrexone [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of LarryGC Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 8:51 PM low dose naltrexone Subject: Re: [low dose naltrexone] Re: LDN in the A.M. Each of the 4 of them, yep, from what I've read. Re: [low dose naltrexone] Re: LDN in the A.M. In a message dated 6/12/2005 2:30:13 PM Central Daylight Time, aegis_on_ms@... writes: Based on my reading the comments so far.. the trial was a failure. No matter which way you sweeten the findings, a 30 % rate is known in professional circles as the sugar pill rate... +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ A, Don't the CRABs claim something like a 30% rate also? Marcie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 > A, > > Don't the CRABs claim something like a 30% rate also? >> Marcie Yes the CRABS have a 30 % rate too..that's why many feel that they dont work. To be sure, I think the trial was done incorrectly.but the damage will be harder to repair. Trials done incorrectly in the UK have also yielded poor results. Most folks dont realize, but one needs scientific training to do trials correctly..otherwise the results will almost never be valid. A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 No, that question was asked when I got my script. I work 12-8am. FQA question #4 was mine... http://www.low dose naltrexone.org/further_q_and_a.htm Q: If I have to work on a night shift, for example from midnight to 8a.m., at what time should I take my LDN? A: Continue to take LDN as recommended above; i.e., between 9pm and 3am. This relates to the fact that the endorphins for each day are always produced in the pre-dawn hours, regardless of the hours when one is awake or sleeping. I take my LDN around 1-1:30AM most nights, even if I'm going to sleep instead of waking up around that hour. RE: [low dose naltrexone] Re: LDN in the A.M. In chemo treatment for cancer, 30% is roughly the “successful” norm for the last 50 odd years. If you are seeing significantly higher numbers with evening hours, the morning hour tests tend to validate that evening is by far a better choice. I am going to make a quantum leap in understanding and assume the evening hours is relational to your own body clock. I would almost bet that a certain percentage of people, say 10-15%, have a body clock that works at a different time than most. If this is the case, part of the 30% response could be due to that factor. Again, this is merely a supposition on my part and is a question that needs be asked of those doing the research. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 Which leads to my next question...how is it that the recommended dose for chemical dependency is 50 mg? Am assuming this is taken during the day. Now, rest assured I am a novice at this. Just trying to understand how 3 mg could have such an adverse effect, when some folks are tolerating 50...Bren <TwisterAlley2@...> wrote: > > One would have to wait for the official videos before Dr.Mir's > presentation can be scrutinized. I will post my comments on the > scientific presentations (on my site soon). > > Based on my reading the comments so far.. the trial was a failure. No > matter which way you sweeten the findings, a 30 % rate is known in > professional circles as the sugar pill rate...> > (I have previously indicated that the expected rate is no where near > 98-99% that is claimed).> > In the meantime, I continue to pound the table for a trial by medical > professionals who know what they are doing. Private physicians > dabbling in science have the potential to cause more harm than good.> > IMHO, if the AM dose was chosen, it should have been at a higher dose.> > A========The LDN in the AM hours was to test for symptom improvement, not halt disease progression. Dr. Bihari's way, LDN given between the hours of 9PM and 3AM approximately 2/3 of his individual patients see symptom improvement. The percentage of halted progression was not tested for in the German trial.I just wish they'd(Germans) done it correctly to begin with as to not have started utter confusion. Discover Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing more. Check it out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 --- In low dose naltrexone , " aegis_on_ms " <aegis_on_ms@y...> wrote: > > A, > > > > Don't the CRABs claim something like a 30% rate also? > >> Marcie > > Yes the CRABS have a 30 % rate too..that's why many feel that they > dont work. To be sure, I think the trial was done incorrectly.but the > damage will be harder to repair. Trials done incorrectly in the UK > have also yielded poor results. > > Most folks dont realize, but one needs scientific training to do > trials correctly..otherwise the results will almost never be valid. > A ========= I too believe this trial was botched and fear it will do harm to our current LDN status. Dr.Bihari and Dr.Gluck have worked too hard for too long to have people using the medication INCORRECTLY and causing negative thoughts from newcomers to LDN whether it be scientists, doctors or patients. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 --- In low dose naltrexone , Fontenot <kitefest5@y...> wrote: > Which leads to my next question...how is it that the recommended dose for chemical dependency is 50 mg? Am assuming this is taken during the day. Now, rest assured I am a novice at this. Just trying to understand how 3 mg could have such an adverse effect, when some folks are tolerating 50... > > =========== The 3.0mg and 4.5mg at night only do a small amount of blockade needed to up endorphins. 50mg blocks way too long and a study was done on 50mg given 2 or 3 times per day of Naltrexone for MS and the results came back showing it makes MS worse given in the higher doses and during the daytime hours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 i agree- how can such a simple protocol beimplemented in the wrong manner? [low dose naltrexone] Re: LDN in the A.M. > > One would have to wait for the official videos before Dr.Mir's > presentation can be scrutinized. I will post my comments on the > scientific presentations (on my site soon). > > Based on my reading the comments so far.. the trial was a failure. No > matter which way you sweeten the findings, a 30 % rate is known in > professional circles as the sugar pill rate...> > (I have previously indicated that the expected rate is no where near > 98-99% that is claimed).> > In the meantime, I continue to pound the table for a trial by medical > professionals who know what they are doing. Private physicians > dabbling in science have the potential to cause more harm than good.> > IMHO, if the AM dose was chosen, it should have been at a higher dose.> > A========The LDN in the AM hours was to test for symptom improvement, not halt disease progression. Dr. Bihari's way, LDN given between the hours of 9PM and 3AM approximately 2/3 of his individual patients see symptom improvement. The percentage of halted progression was not tested for in the German trial.I just wish they'd(Germans) done it correctly to begin with as to not have started utter confusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.