6 mg

[Guest guest]

, I was a little stunned to read that you're taking 6 mg of LDN. In all his years of practice, Dr. Bihari has rarely prescribed this high a dosage. I'm curious to know who suggested it.

[Guest guest]

Personally I have tried 6 mgs for 2 weeks at a time and have stopped.

Like everything else, My body adjusts and after a time stopps responding to it after an initial burst of energy, zilch!

2, 3mg capsules.

I even tried the imprecise 4.5 dose.

-

[Guest guest]

I understood that a dose above 4.5 suppresses endorphins/ blocks opiod reception so gives the opposite effect from the one hoped for to treat MS related problems [by boosting endorphin production].

The MS Resource Centre site [uK] suggests in their info. pack [designed to give one's physician to inform about LDN] that you skip the LDN once per week to avoid getting used to it.

LDN site mentions no such effect in those using if for years, so not sure which is best.

[Guest guest]

at the ldn  conference in dc Dr Gluck was adamant about pointing out not to skip a day of ldn.i've also been told that Dr Lawrence changed his protocol also.cyndiOn Jun 6, 2006, at 1:55 PM, Kerry Gibson wrote:I understood that a dose above 4.5 suppresses endorphins/ blocks opiod reception so gives the opposite effect from the one hoped for to treat MS related problems [by boosting endorphin production]. The MS Resource Centre site [uK] suggests in their info. pack [designed to give one's physician to inform about LDN] that you skip the LDN once per week to avoid getting used to it.  LDN site mentions no such effect in those using if for years, so not sure which is best.  

[Guest guest]

I skipped 1 day of LDN just last week and my good leg has been having new bothersome sensations, and the afternon event of burrning/painfull feet returned.

I'll let you know when I have 1 week free of untroubled feet. BUT my first worry was that rather than restarting the LDN benefits, that I had only lowered my guard against MS.

-Chris

[Guest guest]

IS IT STILL KINDA ROUTINE TO SKIP 2 DAYS A MONTH? I

READ THIS 2 YEARS AGO. JUST CURIOUS

DONNA

[Guest guest]

Hi Donna,

Dr. Lawrence used to recommend taking breaks, but he no longer recomentds

this. It is better to go without breaks.

Aletha>

IS IT STILL KINDA ROUTINE TO SKIP 2 DAYS A MONTH? I

> READ THIS 2 YEARS AGO. JUST CURIOUS

> DONNA

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

nothis is something Dr Lawrence came up with and he has since changed his mind-this was clarified at the LDN conference by Dr GluckcyndiOn Jun 18, 2006, at 10:07 AM, donna chopyak wrote:IS IT STILL KINDA ROUTINE TO SKIP 2 DAYS A MONTH? IREAD THIS 2 YEARS AGO. JUST CURIOUS :)DONNA

[Guest guest]

It takes a long time to run clinical research (even on a small scale)

to comfirm/refute the benefits of a new dosages.

Eg: For several years, Minoxidil 2 mg was all you got, until they

approved the 5 mg... but I knew pharmacists in manhatan who were

preparing 5 mg for people who wanted to try more .

I suspect Bihrani started with 3 mg, then added 50% more (4.5) and

tried it for several months on several people. I speculate he is

running tests with 50% more, i.e. 6mg and it will be another year or 2

before confirming it.

maybe we should contact Bihrani and volunteer for clinical trials for

6 mg, (or more !) heh ??

>

> , I was a little stunned to read that you're taking 6 mg of

LDN. In all his years of practice, Dr. Bihari has rarely prescribed

this high a dosage. I'm curious to know who suggested it.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I think what people really need to understand is that is drug naltrexone at the low dose does something different than at the high dose because of its low dose and because of the way it is taken at nighttime and what it does .there are a few people on the six but its because of their size- they are larger than normal. in particular case i really do not believe that more is bettercyndiOn Jun 23, 2006, at 3:37 PM, Eli wrote:It takes a long time to run clinical research (even on a small scale) to comfirm/refute the benefits of a new dosages. Eg: For several years, Minoxidil 2 mg was all you got, until they approved the 5 mg... but I knew pharmacists in manhatan who were preparing 5 mg for people who wanted to try more . I suspect Bihrani started with 3 mg, then added 50% more (4.5) and tried it for several months on several people. I speculate he is running tests with 50% more, i.e. 6mg and it will be another year or 2 before confirming it. maybe we should contact Bihrani and volunteer for clinical trials for 6 mg, (or more !) heh ?? >> , I was a little stunned to read that you're taking 6 mg of LDN. In all his years of practice, Dr. Bihari has rarely prescribed this high a dosage. I'm curious to know who suggested it.> > >

[Guest guest]

This was discussed a while back. Dr Bihari had, I think, three patients on 6mg, but it wasn't due to their size. None of the other doses seemed to help, so they tried it. Help me out . You have first hand experience with Dr B! Kiki was one on 6mg, but she has dropped off the board. I'll try to get in touch with Kiki. MarcieCyndi Lenz <psychrn@...> wrote: I think what people really need to understand is that is drug naltrexone at the low dose does something

different than at the high dose because of its low dose and because of the way it is taken at nighttime and what it does . there are a few people on the six but its because of their size- they are larger than normal. in particular case i really do not believe that more is better cyndi On Jun 23, 2006, at 3:37 PM, Eli wrote: It takes a long time to run clinical research (even on

a small scale) to comfirm/refute the benefits of a new dosages. Eg: For several years, Minoxidil 2 mg was all you got, until they approved the 5 mg... but I knew pharmacists in manhatan who were preparing 5 mg for people who wanted to try more . I suspect Bihrani started with 3 mg, then added 50% more (4.5) and tried it for several months on several people. I speculate he is running tests with 50% more, i.e. 6mg and it will be another year or 2 before confirming it. maybe we should contact Bihrani and volunteer for clinical trials for 6 mg, (or more !) heh ?? >> , I was a little stunned to read that you're taking 6 mg of LDN. In all his years of practice, Dr. Bihari has rarely prescribed this high a dosage. I'm curious to know who suggested it.> > >

[Guest guest]

Yes, I know of a few who are using 6 mg as well, they're NOT large people.

Re: [low dose naltrexone] Re: 6 mg

This was discussed a while back. Dr Bihari had, I think, three patients on 6mg, but it wasn't due to their size. None of the other doses seemed to help, so they tried it.

Help me out . You have first hand experience with Dr B! Kiki was one on 6mg, but she has dropped off the board. I'll try to get in touch with Kiki.

MarcieCyndi Lenz <psychrn@...> wrote:

I think what people really need to understand is that is drug naltrexone at the low dose does something different than at the high dose because of its low dose and because of the way it is taken at nighttime and what it does . there are a few people on the six but its because of their size- they are larger than normal. in particular case i really do not believe that more is better

cyndi

On Jun 23, 2006, at 3:37 PM, Eli wrote:

It takes a long time to run clinical research (even on a small scale) to comfirm/refute the benefits of a new dosages. Eg: For several years, Minoxidil 2 mg was all you got, until they approved the 5 mg... but I knew pharmacists in manhatan who were preparing 5 mg for people who wanted to try more . I suspect Bihrani started with 3 mg, then added 50% more (4.5) and tried it for several months on several people. I speculate he is running tests with 50% more, i.e. 6mg and it will be another year or 2 before confirming it. maybe we should contact Bihrani and volunteer for clinical trials for 6 mg, (or more !) heh ?? >> , I was a little stunned to read that you're taking 6 mg of LDN. In all his years of practice, Dr. Bihari has rarely prescribed this high a dosage. I'm curious to know who suggested it.> > >

[Guest guest]

Cyndi Lenz wrote: " ...there are a few people on the six but its

because of their size - they are larger than normal. "

If body size determined dosage, smaller people would take 3.0,

larger people would take 4.5, and the largest people would take

6.0.

But it doesn't seem to work that way!

In our recent Height/Weight/Gender/Dosage poll, three out of 47

respondents reported that they took 6.0mg.

All three are female. One has a Body Mass Index of 18.5, which is

at the " small " extreme of body proportion. The other two have BMIs

of 23.9 and 24.1, which is in the middle of the BMI spectrum.

(To see the whole Poll, go here: http://gazorpa.com/HWGDPoll.html)

If body size determined dosage, then the poll would've revealed that

patients with a larger BMI would take a larger dose.

But that's not the case. There doesn't seem to be a correlation

between body size and dosage size.

Of course, without any hard clinical data, we're all just

guessing...

Maureen

(Gazorpa = Guessing)

[Guest guest]

this is just info from the conference -- and stuff that was discussed --but what discussed in length  was the dose and how to get there. cyndiOn Jun 24, 2006, at 12:37 PM, bentleyfam26 wrote:Cyndi Lenz wrote: "...there are a few people on the six but its because of their size - they are larger than normal."If body size determined dosage, smaller people would take 3.0, larger people would take 4.5, and the largest people would take 6.0. But it doesn't seem to work that way!In our recent Height/Weight/Gender/Dosage poll, three out of 47 respondents reported that they took 6.0mg. All three are female. One has a Body Mass Index of 18.5, which is at the "small" extreme of body proportion. The other two have BMIs of 23.9 and 24.1, which is in the middle of the BMI spectrum. (To see the whole Poll, go here: http://gazorpa.com/HWGDPoll.html) If body size determined dosage, then the poll would've revealed that patients with a larger BMI would take a larger dose. But that's not the case. There doesn't seem to be a correlation between body size and dosage size. Of course, without any hard clinical data, we're all just guessing... Maureen (Gazorpa = Guessing)

[Guest guest]

FYI, my wife started on 3.0 (for 3 weeks), moved-up to 4.5 (for 3

weeks), and then moved-up to 6.0 (as an experiment since she had

extra 1.5 mg tablets). She has been on 6.0 for 5 months and is

doing great! (Thank you Dr. Bihari) Someone on the list mentioned

to get the pills in 1.5mg increments so that one could adjust the

dosage when initially starting. Overall, the experiment has worked

well and she has noticed a huge improvement over the 4.5 mg dose.

Each 1.5 mg step she has taken has exponentially increased her

symptom relief (ie, she can actually run again, <numbness, can

handle the heat much better!). She was diagnosed about a year ago

and is 5'9.5 " , 131 lbs. and she has had no side effects from LDN.

We have no plans to increase the dosage any higher (at the moment)

and I realize this pushes the current 4.5 ceiling.

I just wanted to share our experience and perhaps there is something

to higher doses for some (male/female, High/Low BMI, Waxing/Waning

Moon?). Dr. Skip mentioned to me that he has individuals on doses

up to 10mg.

" ...there are a few people on the six but its

> > because of their size - they are larger than normal. "

> >

> > If body size determined dosage, smaller people would take 3.0,

> > larger people would take 4.5, and the largest people would take

> > 6.0.

> >

> > But it doesn't seem to work that way!

> >

> > In our recent Height/Weight/Gender/Dosage poll, three out of 47

> > respondents reported that they took 6.0mg.

> >

> > All three are female. One has a Body Mass Index of 18.5, which is

> > at the " small " extreme of body proportion. The other two have

BMIs

> > of 23.9 and 24.1, which is in the middle of the BMI spectrum.

> >

> > (To see the whole Poll, go here:

http://gazorpa.com/HWGDPoll.html)

> >

> > If body size determined dosage, then the poll would've revealed

that

> > patients with a larger BMI would take a larger dose.

> >

> > But that's not the case. There doesn't seem to be a correlation

> > between body size and dosage size.

> >

> > Of course, without any hard clinical data, we're all just

> > guessing...

> >

> > Maureen

> > (Gazorpa = Guessing)

> >

> >

> >

>