Guest guest Posted February 15, 2000 Report Posted February 15, 2000 In a message dated 2/15/00 2:47:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, onelist writes: << There was also this blurb: Cancer risk point: 10 points according to following Cancer Risk Chart Cancer Risk Chart: low >40 points moderate 20-40 points high 10-20 points extremely high < 10 points Scary stuff. >> Was this based on the oxidative stress assay? If not, what test was it based on.? And how seriously can you take the 'cancer risk points'? I think I can assure you that if there were a reliable cancer risk test, the life insurance companies would be all over it. And they aren't. Mike Quote
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2004 Report Posted February 16, 2004 ette, I have not heard this but I have been on AP for over 16 years, and my breast exams are fine. I am not sure I am right but I think the antibiotics help with the heart, fight infection and for viruses. Geoff or someone may have more info on this. All I can say is I am glad I have been able to have a full life since AP and walk, sooo as none of us are getting out of here alive I guess it is personal choice to walk and live or not move and die. Oh just some humor here sorry Just My View have a great day from Ohio Quote
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2004 Report Posted February 16, 2004 Hi ette, The story was on my local news tonight and first off, don't get too upset. The reporter on my news stressed that it was a preliminary study and the results weren't conclusive. Apparently, they discovered that women who had taken antibiotics at some point in their lives had a higher incidence of breast cancer, however, it did not in any way conclude that antibiotics had caused the cancer. In fact, the reporter said the infections the antibiotics were prescribed to treat may have been the cause of the cancer increase. Two doctors were interviewed and both said that this study should in no way scare people away from taking antibiotics. What I do think is important for people in this group to be aware of is that there MAY be some increased risk for breast cancer so the prudent thing to do would be to be more vigiliant about preventative care, such as self-exams and mammograms. My news station has not yet posted the story on their website but I'll keep watching and when they do, I'll forward a link to the group. Hugs a rheumatic Cancer risk > Have any of you heard the report that taking antibiotics for extended periods of time can increase the risk of breast cancer? I just heard this on the evening news and was very upset to say the least. > > ette Quote
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2004 Report Posted February 16, 2004 Hi ette, not only that but antibiotics suppress to immune systemy.Maybe that is why they help my SD. Lynne Quote
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Posted February 17, 2004 Hi Lynne, Why do you say that antibiotics suppress the immune system? As the antibiotics are eliminating infection, the end result of reducing or eliminating infection is that the immune system is better off. Chris. On 17/02/2004, at 6:22 PM, Lynneandsantos wrote: > Hi ette, not only that but > antibiotics suppress to immune > systemy.Maybe that is why they help my > SD. Lynne > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Posted February 17, 2004 Thanks, Chris. Lynne's statement had me baffled! I started thinking that I had been wrong about the antibiotics strengthening my immune system! Patti Re: rheumatic Cancer risk > Hi Lynne, > > Why do you say that antibiotics suppress the immune system? As the > antibiotics are eliminating infection, the end result of reducing or > eliminating infection is that the immune system is better off. > Chris. > > On 17/02/2004, at 6:22 PM, Lynneandsantos wrote: > > > Hi ette, not only that but > > antibiotics suppress to immune > > systemy.Maybe that is why they help my > > SD. Lynne > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, email: rheumatic-unsubscribeegroups > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Posted February 17, 2004 The following appeared in today's Los Angeles Times, Tuesday, February17, 2004 STUDY LINKS CANCER, ANTIBIOTICS From Times Wire Services CHICAGO - Antibiotic use is associated with an increased risk for breast cancer, a new study has found, raising the possibility that women who take the widely used medicines are more likely to develop the disease. The study of more than 10,000 Washington state women concluded that those who used the most antibiotics had double the chances of developing breast cancer, that the association was consistent for all forms of antibiotics and that the risk increased with the number of prescriptions. A variety of experts quickly cautioned, however, that the findings should not stop women from taking the often lifesaving drugs when they need them to treat infections. There could be other explanations for the association, and much more research is needed before scientists understand what the surprising results mean, they said. " This is not saying that women should stop taking antibiotics. Women should take antibiotics for infections, " said Taplin, a senior scientist at the National Cancer Institute who helped conduct the study. " We need to follow up and find out if this is a real association. " Nevertheless, the study was so well designed and the findings so striking that it could be that antibiotic use is an important, previously unrecognized risk factor for breast cancer, experts said. The results, which will appear in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Assn., were released Monday. Researchers said the findings provide another reason for doctors to more judiciously prescribe antibiotics, which are often used unnecessarily. Quote
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Posted February 17, 2004 Patti, the antibiotics do not strengthen your immune system. Your immune system is strengthened through diet and appropriate supplements, and adequate hydration to keep the intestinal tract clean. Ethel Re: rheumatic Cancer risk > > > > Hi ****e, > > > > Why do you say that antibiotics suppress the immune system? As the > > antibiotics are eliminating infection, the end result of reducing or > > eliminating infection is that the immune system is better off. > > Chris. > > > > On 17/02/2004, at 6:22 PM, ****eandsantos wrote: > > > > > Hi ette, not only that but > > > antibiotics suppress to immune > > > systemy.Maybe that is why they help my > > > SD. ****e > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, email: rheumatic-unsubscribeegroups > > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Posted February 17, 2004 So this is supposed to be an example of the FDA conspiring to influence as a prelude towards gaining control of supplements??? Hmmmm....... What exactly do you mean by the " AP is a chemical drug? " Tetracyclines are made biologically from living cells, rather than through chemical synthesis. They are chemical compounds not unlike vitamins or other supplements. I view this research the same as all other research - just that its worth considering. Not sure that your own family's experience carries the equivalent weight of the records and data of hundreds of other women. Even if it doubles the risk - like all cancer risk just put it into perspective. Move to Denver and your cancer risk triples. Move in to a house located on or near a granite formation and your risk of lung cancer goes up ten-fold. And the list goes on. If you can't evaluate risk intelligently, you'll be bound by your own baseless fears. Jeff ----Original Message Follows---- From: Courtgav@... rheumatic Subject: rheumatic Cancer Risk Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:16:33 EST l did some research as alot you have done. l called CNN in Atlanta Georgia and they told me that there were no clinical trials done on AP/Breast Cancer. They gave me a phone number 1-312-464-4416 stating that it appeared in the Journal of AMA. Then went onto Boston.Com and found yet another article by Rob Stein, The Washington Post, 2-17-04. It does not state clinical trials, it says a study done by Velicer, an epidermiologist with Group Health ative's Center for Health who was the lead author of the study, also Taplin, a senior scientist at the National Cancer Institute who helped conduct the study. Their colleagues examined computerized pharmacy and cancer screening records of 2,266 women in the Group Health ative, a seatle-area health plan, who developed breast cancer, and 7,953 similar women who did not get breast cancer. (ls this another insurance company?) JMO, but l would not base too much on this finding. Cancer is prevalent in my family and l have myself and family members been on AP for years without problems. l have never heard before yesterday that AP causes breast cancer in some women. But l have heard of all their other drugs causing cancer. With the FDA trying to gain control of all the alternative suppliments, although AP is a chemical drug, lt makes me a bit leary and l question any and all articles regarding breast cancer and AP. Just My Opinion Only. Quote
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Posted February 17, 2004 , Thank you for researching this issue and reporting to us. When I read the article in the paper this morning, I was alarmed at the headlines. When I read the rest of the article I felt it told me really nothing. There was this statistical connection, but nobody can say what it means. Ethel's post has more useful information on the subject. There were some speculations in the article in the paper that maybe cancer is more prevalent in less healthy women (duh); or maybe the antibiotics may kill good bacteria in the gut which normally helps the body to use the protective agents in broccoli and lentils. (Our antibiotic protocol addresses gut health and the need for probiotics.) I found this article total speculations without much merit other than a statistical link that could mean anything or nothing. I'm not losing sleep over that one. Take care, Ute Quote
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Posted February 17, 2004 I recall reading some time ago that minocycline modulates the immune system by supressing T-cell function, interferring it by blocking receptors. Other antibiotics affect immunity by other means and also in some cases by powerfully inhibiting the inflammation process. It is possible that this is the basis, wholly or in part, behind the positive results experienced with the AP. ----Original Message Follows---- From: " Patti McCool " <pmccool@...> " Lynneandsantos " <lynneandsantos@...>, " Adlard " <cadlard@...> CC: <rheumatic >, " Warren Portnoy " <wport@...> Subject: Re: rheumatic Cancer risk Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 11:38:26 -0500 Thanks, Chris. Lynne's statement had me baffled! I started thinking that I had been wrong about the antibiotics strengthening my immune system! Patti Re: rheumatic Cancer risk > Hi Lynne, > > Why do you say that antibiotics suppress the immune system? As the > antibiotics are eliminating infection, the end result of reducing or > eliminating infection is that the immune system is better off. > Chris. > > On 17/02/2004, at 6:22 PM, Lynneandsantos wrote: > > > Hi ette, not only that but > > antibiotics suppress to immune > > systemy.Maybe that is why they help my > > SD. Lynne > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, email: rheumatic-unsubscribeegroups > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Posted February 17, 2004 Yes l have read that to about Minocycline, and that is because Minocycline is a DMARD, stated by the Arthritis Foundation several years ago when it was accepted as a legitimate treatment due to the O'Dell studies. l have never seen information stating antibiotics interfer with the immune system. lf you have documentation on this, it would be nice to share it with us. Thank you. Quote
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Posted February 17, 2004 This is absolutely true and the real reason why antibiotics help a few people with arthritis. The rest is just hype and smoke. We have a serious problem in boarder states in flue season because people go to Mexico and get Penicillin injections when they have the flu. This is the worse thing you can do and many people, usually children, die every year. Herxing is nonsense, just the prevalent allergic reaction to the antibiotic. That's why people supplement Benadryl. Telling people you have to get worse before you get better is irresponsible. If you are taking antibiotics and not improving I suggest you talk to your RD about Enbrel or another biologic drug before you have irreversible joint damage. Re: rheumatic Cancer risk > > > > Hi Lynne, > > > > Why do you say that antibiotics suppress the immune system? As the > > antibiotics are eliminating infection, the end result of reducing or > > eliminating infection is that the immune system is better off. > > Chris. > > > > On 17/02/2004, at 6:22 PM, Lynneandsantos wrote: > > > > > Hi ette, not only that but > > > antibiotics suppress to immune > > > systemy.Maybe that is why they help my > > > SD. Lynne > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, email: rheumatic-unsubscribeegroups > > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Posted February 18, 2004 Jeff....At the risk of upsetting you... I disagree with the statement Antibiotics help a " few " with arthritis. I have sent 12 people to my AP doc and 11 of them are in remission or have radically improved. The 12th one only went twice before deciding she was not getting well fast enough and therefore it would not work for her. Before rushing off to take Embrel, remicade or a host of other standard arthritis meds may I recommend a book entitled " Worst Pills, Best Pills " (or maybe it was worst meds best meds) put out by consumer guide with the help of the national health organization. It is an eye opener and is worth a look. I imagine most librarys have copys. A few years ago I read a study from europe that said just the opposite of this new cancer study. They found that people on long term antibiotics had LESS cancer, and in those patients with cancer it did not tend to metastize (spread) as readily. I did not keep it but remember thinking.. " That's good " !!! I believe that if they have found that people who take more antibiotics have more cancer it is probably because those people are taking antibiotics because they are constantly ill with various bacterial problems that their immune system is not dealing with effectively. My sister has had both skin and colon cancer, she is sick a lot and takes various meds, it is obvious to me her immune system is somehow not working right and not protecting her body. I am eight years older than her and have been on minocin for three years now. I am almost never sick, even with colds and flu. I have never had any cancers. My immune system, now that I am off all meds, is functioning well and I eat and take supplements to keep it that way. Unfortunately, in that study most of the people were not on AP for arthritis, but instead were probably sickly people who had multiple health problems and were given numerous prescriptions for various antibiotics (flagyl is known to be under suspician for being a possible carcinogenic I believe) and who knows what else. Obviously sickly people DO develop more diseases than generally healthy people! If I was a biologist discussing plants it would be resistant plants vs standard plants, a vetenarian would say some breeds of horses are " hardy " and others are prone to certain problems. With people in the U.S. you can bet your bottom dollar that the majority who get sick with even minor illnesses, run to their doc (like my sister) and get numerous prescriptions everytime she sneezes!! Saying its the antibiotics is really a stretch in my opinion. Quote
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Posted February 18, 2004 Hi Ronnie, Sorry, do not agree with you.I will never ask for Enbrel or the like as that almost killed me the first time around. The damage that drug does is just amazing! I have lost a good friend to a sinus infection as she was on enbrel was never told the risk when another infection is present and that she needed to go off that drug. I will stick with minocin and tweaking the protocol when necessary as thats all it needs. Good healthy lifestyke and some supplements usually do the trick. Marge > > > > > > > Hi ette, not only that but > > > > antibiotics suppress to immune > > > > systemy.Maybe that is why they help my > > > > SD. Lynne > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, email: rheumatic-unsubscribeegroups > > > > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Ronnie, I was just wondering what substantiates your expertise on this subject. Have you ever done studies to prove that AP does not work? Many medical establishments have done these studies and have proven otherwise. Have you ever taken it yourself? I am also curious to know if you, yourself, have ever taken such a 'life-saving, wonderful' drug such as Enbrel or Remicade? Would you damage your own immune system? Think about it. The reason that people take Benadryl is to keep the body from releasing histamines. The die off of the mycoplasma (the hidden cause of rheumatic diseases) releases toxins in the body and sets off a release of histamines (the body's defense system) which, in turn, leads to more pain or an 'allergic reaction'. You should educate yourself with the research before replying. It would be irresponsible to do otherwise. This is a posting board for information regarding the use of AP and other non-mainstream treatments including holistic, homeopathic and orthomolecular among others. If you do not support this type of treatment, then why are you here. Do you have something to gain from confusing people who are sick of living a compromised lifestyle, and who have come here seeking support from others who have benefitted from this treatment? That would be sad. Only best wishes to everyone, Mel Re: rheumatic Cancer risk > > > > > > > Hi Lynne, > > > > > > Why do you say that antibiotics suppress the immune system? As the > > > antibiotics are eliminating infection, the end result of reducing or > > > eliminating infection is that the immune system is better off. > > > Chris. > > > > > > On 17/02/2004, at 6:22 PM, Lynneandsantos wrote: > > > > > > > Hi ette, not only that but > > > > antibiotics suppress to immune > > > > systemy.Maybe that is why they help my > > > > SD. Lynne > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, email: rheumatic-unsubscribeegroups > > > > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Mel, Well said. sharon Re: rheumatic Cancer risk > > > > > > > > > > Hi Lynne, > > > > > > > > Why do you say that antibiotics suppress the immune system? As the > > > > antibiotics are eliminating infection, the end result of reducing or > > > > eliminating infection is that the immune system is better off. > > > > Chris. > > > > > > > > On 17/02/2004, at 6:22 PM, Lynneandsantos wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi ette, not only that but > > > > > antibiotics suppress to immune > > > > > systemy.Maybe that is why they help my > > > > > SD. Lynne > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, email: rheumatic-unsubscribeegroups > > > > > > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2004 Report Posted February 19, 2004 Maybe I should refrain, but since I am an addressee.... I thought that Ronnie was supporting my statement, " It is possible that this (minocin's affect on T-cells) is the basis, wholly or in part, behind the positive results experienced with the AP. " It is certainly possible to accept some degree of positive results as a result of the AP, and at the same time not accept the theory that the antibiotics are counteracting mycoplasms. After all the theory is far from widely accepted. Modulating the immune sytem such that it counteracts the effects of autoimmunity is a plausible argument. Favoring one theory or the other, or both, is mostly opinion at this point. How many have been helped by the AP? Who knows.....a lot....a few? How many have not been helped? Again who knows. Makes it difficult to talk factually about how well something works when the supporting data is limited. I gave it a shot because there's nothing else out there for me. But no way is there enough research on this to satisfy my threshold, which is a bit higher than the average person's for most things anyway. If somebody wants to accept theories on more simplistic terms - fine, but I prefer to question and keep an open mind. And I'm at a loss to understand what the difficulty is in talking to your doctor about any treatment. This would trouble someone - discussing options??? Lose the fear. jeff ----Original Message Follows---- From: " Mellanie Henschel " <mhenschel@...> " Jeffery scott " <jefferysa@...>, <rheumatic >, " Ronnie " <ronevans@...> Subject: Re: rheumatic Cancer risk Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:44:22 -0500 Ronnie, I was just wondering what substantiates your expertise on this subject. Have you ever done studies to prove that AP does not work? Many medical establishments have done these studies and have proven otherwise. Have you ever taken it yourself? I am also curious to know if you, yourself, have ever taken such a 'life-saving, wonderful' drug such as Enbrel or Remicade? Would you damage your own immune system? Think about it. The reason that people take Benadryl is to keep the body from releasing histamines. The die off of the mycoplasma (the hidden cause of rheumatic diseases) releases toxins in the body and sets off a release of histamines (the body's defense system) which, in turn, leads to more pain or an 'allergic reaction'. You should educate yourself with the research before replying. It would be irresponsible to do otherwise. This is a posting board for information regarding the use of AP and other non-mainstream treatments including holistic, homeopathic and orthomolecular among others. If you do not support this type of treatment, then why are you here. Do you have something to gain from confusing people who are sick of living a compromised lifestyle, and who have come here seeking support from others who have benefitted from this treatment? That would be sad. Only best wishes to everyone, Mel Re: rheumatic Cancer risk > > > > > > > Hi Lynne, > > > > > > Why do you say that antibiotics suppress the immune system? As the > > > antibiotics are eliminating infection, the end result of reducing or > > > eliminating infection is that the immune system is better off. > > > Chris. > > > > > > On 17/02/2004, at 6:22 PM, Lynneandsantos wrote: > > > > > > > Hi ette, not only that but > > > > antibiotics suppress to immune > > > > systemy.Maybe that is why they help my > > > > SD. Lynne > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, email: rheumatic-unsubscribeegroups > > > > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2004 Report Posted February 21, 2004 Regarding the proposed risk of cancer to past use of antibiotics - I choose not to worry. In fact, there may be reason to celebrate. If you're interested, read the article titled " Leveraging Human Cancer Research to Treat Pets with Tumors " at http://www.angio.org/newsandviews/archive2002/July2402.html Leveraging Human Cancer Research to Treat Pets with Tumors The Angiogenesis Foundation believes that anti-angiogenic therapy - cutting off a tumor's blood supply - may be useful in treating pet cats and dogs suffering from cancer. Scientific evidence suggests that animal tumors survive and proliferate using the same mechanisms of angiogenesis as human tumors, with 80% of dog tumors being biologically identical to their counterparts in humans. Elevated levels of angiogenesis growth factors, such as VEGF and bFGF, are found circulating in the blood of human cancer patients. The Foundation has made the same finding in pet dogs and cats with cancer. Biopsies of animal tumors reveal a dense network of blood vessels similar to those found in human cancers. Based on their findings, Foundation researchers have focused their efforts on developing antiangiogenic treatments for animals with tumors. Antiangiogenic drugs, aimed at the tumor blood supply, generally possess low toxicity and can be administered over long periods of time as chronic therapy. The Foundation has developed a proprietary treatment protocol, designated OLCAT-007, combining three drugs with antiangiogenic properties: Celebrex (celecoxib), Nolvadex (tamoxifen citrate), and doxycycline. Each drug is FDA-approved for non-oncology indications, and attacks a distinct set of targets along the angiogenesis pathway. " These three drugs comprise a powerful 'multiple warhead' attack against cancer, " said Dr. Li, President and Medical Director of the Foundation, " and they work against several different targets simultaneously to have an amplified effect on tumors. " In November 2000, the Angiogenesis Foundation administered OLCAT-007 to Navy, a young Golden Retriever with a recurrent fibrosarcoma on her leg. Navy's owner had declined conventional treatments out of concern for her dog's quality of life. Thirty days after starting the treatment, Navy's tumor had halved in size, and after thirty more days was no longer visible. Follow-up examinations, blood tests, and x-rays found a decrease in the angiogenic growth factors VEGF and bFGF in Navy's blood. There has been no recurrence of the tumor after nine months of treatment, and Navy is the world's first successful case of antiangiogenic therapy in pet dogs. The Angiogenesis Foundation is currently testing OLCAT-007 in a number of dogs with various types of cancer. To access an additional, more patient oriented description of angiogenesis: http://www.angio.org/patients/cancer/cancer.html ~Connie Quote
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2004 Report Posted February 24, 2004 Good answer and humor, Chris-you almost always make me laugh! Thanks, Sally in Little Rock Re: rheumatic Cancer risk > ette, > I have not heard this but I have been on AP for over 16 years, and my > breast exams are fine. I am not sure I am right but I think the antibiotics help > with the heart, fight infection and for viruses. Geoff or someone may have > more info on this. All I can say is I am glad I have been able to have a full > life since AP and walk, sooo as none of us are getting out of here alive I guess > it is personal choice to walk and live or not move and die. Oh just some > humor here sorry Just My View have a great day from Ohio > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2004 Report Posted February 24, 2004 Well put! I suffer from very few ailments and have been on AP since 12-99. 1st on Doxycycline for 2 yrs, which was not strong enough and when my rheumie would NOT switch me to mino, and prescribed ARAVA for me, I took one ARAVA pill, got on the i-net and looked up this group that my hubby had found for me in '98. Rose from Australia, to whom I am forever grateful, sent me info on Dr. Gabe Mirkin, in the DC area and I went to him and got on minocin in Jun. '02, built up to his AP (100mg mino, twice daily, and 500 mg Zithromax, twice wkly) and w/in 3 months I was driving again, w/out fear of my hands swelling so badly that I couldn't hold the steering wheel and would have to take muscle relaxers and narcotics-Hallelujah-it's been pretty much uphill since then. I've needed some short term steroid therapy, but am now volunteering to teach water aerobics, 2x a wk, work out with weights, help with foster children, maybe even go back to teaching college psych, part time.... Well, I'm rattling on but can you tell I'm happy?! Good luck to all-Sally in Little Rock Re: rheumatic Cancer risk > Jeff....At the risk of upsetting you... I disagree with the statement > Antibiotics help a " few " with arthritis. I have sent 12 people to my AP doc and 11 > of them are in remission or have radically improved. The 12th one only went > twice before deciding she was not getting well fast enough and therefore it > would not work for her. > Before rushing off to take Embrel, remicade or a host of other standard > arthritis meds may I recommend a book entitled " Worst Pills, Best Pills " (or > maybe it was worst meds best meds) put out by consumer guide with the help of > the national health organization. It is an eye opener and is worth a look. I > imagine most librarys have copys. > A few years ago I read a study from europe that said just the opposite > of this new cancer study. They found that people on long term antibiotics had > LESS cancer, and in those patients with cancer it did not tend to metastize > (spread) as readily. I did not keep it but remember thinking.. " That's good " !!! > I believe that if they have found that people who take more antibiotics have > more cancer it is probably because those people are taking antibiotics because > they are constantly ill with various bacterial problems that their immune > system is not dealing with effectively. My sister has had both skin and colon > cancer, she is sick a lot and takes various meds, it is obvious to me her immune > system is somehow not working right and not protecting her body. I am eight > years older than her and have been on minocin for three years now. I am almost > never sick, even with colds and flu. I have never had any cancers. My immune > system, now that I am off all meds, is functioning well and I eat and take > supplements to keep it that way. Unfortunately, in that study most of the > people were not on AP for arthritis, but instead were probably sickly people who > had multiple health problems and were given numerous prescriptions for various > antibiotics (flagyl is known to be under suspician for being a possible > carcinogenic I believe) and who knows what else. > Obviously sickly people DO develop more diseases than generally healthy > people! If I was a biologist discussing plants it would be resistant plants vs > standard plants, a vetenarian would say some breeds of horses are " hardy " and > others are prone to certain problems. With people in the U.S. you can bet your > bottom dollar that the majority who get sick with even minor illnesses, run to > their doc (like my sister) and get numerous prescriptions everytime she > sneezes!! Saying its the antibiotics is really a stretch in my opinion. > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2004 Report Posted February 25, 2004 Hey, Marge! Sally here-So sorry to hear of the loss of your friend. I get so angry at docs who don't get their patients off these autoimmune destroyers and then needless tragedy strikes!! Did NOT realize how long you were on the big guns girl-so glad you're in the group, as you always have lots of good info and opinions, and glad you're doing so well. Keep it up! Sally in Little Rock rheumatic Re: Cancer risk > Hi Ronnie, Sorry, do not agree with you.I will never ask for Enbrel > or the like as that almost killed me the first time around. The > damage that drug does is just amazing! I have lost a good friend to a > sinus infection as she was on enbrel was never told the risk when > another infection is present and that she needed to go off that drug. > > I will stick with minocin and tweaking the protocol when necessary as > thats all it needs. Good healthy lifestyke and some supplements > usually do the trick. > > Marge > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi ette, not only that but > > > > > antibiotics suppress to immune > > > > > systemy.Maybe that is why they help my > > > > > SD. Lynne > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, email: rheumatic-unsubscribeegroups > > > > > > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2004 Report Posted February 26, 2004 Hi Sally, Was sick a long time before I went online an found AP( No thanks to any doc). 2 1/2 yrs of cytoxan and 8yrs of mtx really took its toll and never ever did I get better for long beforr needing more. (17yrs of pred too. I have RA SLE SS and Fibro. I began this journey in 1996 and by 1997 was off the pred and mtx. AP has been a literal lifesaver for me as well as others here. I am glad to be a part of this group. We all have a lot fo offer each other. Love Marge Quote
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.