LDN in Canada

August 18, 2006

Cria,

No. I can't make a strong connection here. No, I didn't avoid it, but no my kids didn't eat it big time. My kids were never big ceral eaters and still aren't. They may eat it on occassion and before the box is finished they have had enough. She has always been a eater. Other kids go through phases that they don't eat-she never did. Food is her life. Some people eat to live-she on the other hand had always lived to eat. I am really not sure how things are going to come back. She does bleed rectally-not all the time, but when she does she can big time. She has no abdominal pain, she is s very gasey child-much more than her 17 month younger brother. Apparently, there is some kind of relationship between the gas and Chron's.

Thnks for butting in-I put this oout there because I needed help in working through it. I appreciate everyones 2 cents!

-- [low dose naltrexone] Re: LDN in Canada

Hi ,

I'm sorry to hear your daughter has Crohn's, and I apologise for jumping in like this but I'm a terribly curious beast.

I remember reading long, long ago that babies and toddlers should not eat full wheat breakfast cereals until (gosh, can't remember 2 or 3 at least) because their digestive system was too immature to cope.

My nephew was given Weet-Bix/Vita-Brits (Oz brands) as a baby/toddler and later developed Crohn's at a young age. I'm not suggesting a connection - I'm just curious.

I avoided wheat based cereals for my own children when they were young - just in case. They had bread, toast, but not full wheat breakfast cereals, only rice-based as babies, then rice or corn-based as toddlers.

Regards,

Cris

.........

I know LDN is being used for Crohn's. My daughter is 10 and just had acolonoscopy Tuesday. She has a problem of bleeding rectally occasionally. The doctor took a specimen for biopsy, we get the results Tuesday. The onlything he mentioned so far is there is one area that appears like Crohn's buthe doesn't want to talk yet until he gets the biopsy results (which will benext Tuesday). I know LDN is being used for Crohn's. Is it possible thatshe has Crohn's due to me having MS (an autoimmune disease) or is it justone of those things she could have anyway-that's the way our cookiecrumbled? Do you think she should start on LDN?I would appreciate any feedback I could get.

August 18, 2006

Dear Cyndi .. You are correct .. if you think about our situation it

is enough to make you absolutely crazy! it looks like there are many

paths to getting the word out .. in the end though we need the

clinical study otherwise the majority of Doctors will never consider

LDN because it will not be in their rule book and most people who

need it yesterday will never get it. Dr Zagons lab rats will lead to

a clinical study .. Also it could happen that someone else jumps the

gun and proceeds with a clinical study before him .. the race is

literally on .. feelers are out by many people in search of funds to

prove LDN works .. It all comes down to funding though. That is why

people get mad that the little funding received is going on the lab

rats instead of people .. personally I think that everyone involved

in this endeavor is doing their best, their way to get the drug to

the people .. People have different ideas as to what way is best ..

I don't care who is right or wrong (I think everyone is right

actually) as long as they just get the job done .. Dr Bihari's 20

years plus of clinical evidence and Dr Zagons years of lab

experiments should make it very tempting for someone to get this

into the doctors rule book .. how hard can it be!!

>

> juice

> don't apologize for having a bad day. i've been watching

vacination videos all week. I'm a little blown away by the protocols

and also by the amount of adverse reactions reported and how that is

ignored.

> there are thousands of drugs on the market and many are used off

label. if ldn was a psych drug it would not be a problem. beleive

me. i'm not happy that my moms a mess but its indeed a pleasure to

have a conversation with other people about a drug that i know works

at small doses for older folks that become uncontrollable without a

lot of side effects. remember when i first got here - i said how i

was so confused about doctors not wanting to write prescriptions.

> and just because the fda says its so -is it really so.

> and i do not want to be sour grapes against anyones research. but

antedoctal evidence should be good enough. especially for you guys-

how anyone could deny any of you is beyound me. its just plain cruel.

> cyndi

> at 6,000 ft (she's crazed not enough 02)

>

> Re: [low dose naltrexone] Re: LDN in Canada

> >

> >It seems to me that everyone on this board would be enough for

the FDA to approve LDN for MS. I mean we have all the information

they need right? Years of information. They could collect it all

and then approve it. Our information would be better than anything

they could gather. And people would believe it too. I mean what

exactly does it mean when a drug wins Food and Drug Administration

approval? Isn't it supposed to mean that the medication is

absolutely safe? That the FDA knows all of its possible side

effects? That it's better than older drugs on the market? The

answers are: No, no and no.

> >

> >A

>

August 18, 2006

I understand the lab rat thing and i'm all this is getting done-hopefully at the

next ldn conferance i'll be taping some very exciting research studies.

the one thing I love about LDN besides the fact that it works is that it is

PEOPLE POWERED -correct me if I'm wrong -i don't know any other medication that

people feel so passonately about.

i just think about my friend margaret who is sitting in a wheel chair -her hands

are curled up and her doctor refused period end of story.

to me that cruel.

cyndi

[low dose naltrexone] Re: LDN in Canada

>

>Dear Cyndi .. You are correct .. if you think about our situation it

>is enough to make you absolutely crazy! it looks like there are many

>paths to getting the word out .. in the end though we need the

>clinical study otherwise the majority of Doctors will never consider

>LDN because it will not be in their rule book and most people who

>need it yesterday will never get it. Dr Zagons lab rats will lead to

>a clinical study .. Also it could happen that someone else jumps the

>gun and proceeds with a clinical study before him .. the race is

>literally on .. feelers are out by many people in search of funds to

>prove LDN works .. It all comes down to funding though. That is why

>people get mad that the little funding received is going on the lab

>rats instead of people .. personally I think that everyone involved

>in this endeavor is doing their best, their way to get the drug to

>the people .. People have different ideas as to what way is best ..

>I don't care who is right or wrong (I think everyone is right

>actually) as long as they just get the job done .. Dr Bihari's 20

>years plus of clinical evidence and Dr Zagons years of lab

>experiments should make it very tempting for someone to get this

>into the doctors rule book .. how hard can it be!!

>

>>

>> juice

>> don't apologize for having a bad day. i've been watching

>vacination videos all week. I'm a little blown away by the protocols

>and also by the amount of adverse reactions reported and how that is

>ignored.

>> there are thousands of drugs on the market and many are used off

>label. if ldn was a psych drug it would not be a problem. beleive

>me. i'm not happy that my moms a mess but its indeed a pleasure to

>have a conversation with other people about a drug that i know works

>at small doses for older folks that become uncontrollable without a

>lot of side effects. remember when i first got here - i said how i

>was so confused about doctors not wanting to write prescriptions.

>> and just because the fda says its so -is it really so.

>> and i do not want to be sour grapes against anyones research. but

>antedoctal evidence should be good enough. especially for you guys-

>how anyone could deny any of you is beyound me. its just plain cruel.

>> cyndi

>> at 6,000 ft (she's crazed not enough 02)

>>

August 18, 2006