When a drug is in use, and there exists doctors who can produce evidence of individual patient sucesses, then the clinical evidence exists. When this is the case for a drug orphaned by the licencing system, we need a corrective measure to enable such a drug to get into mainstream use.
This is especially true when the safety trials have been successfully completed at a 10 times higher dose. Then, once granted a 'provisional' licence, we can get on with the research to prove the case one way or the other.
Anecdotal evidence, as they sneer, is when your granny reckons it works, clinical evidence is where doctors are giving you the 'anecdotes'. Hah, more proof, it is cynicism that is the root of all evil - which of course leads to the love of money etc. Since LDN fits this argument perfectly, it must be the drug that changes the system forever! The tragedy though is that while we twiddle our thumbs waiting, people are suffering, so all you politicians, work to be done here! Get on the case, and Now!!
Everyone else, please go to www.ldnnow.com and sign the petition. Thank you!
Thursday, 19 November 2009
First Do No Harm - The Prime Directive!
“First Do No Harm”. The prime directive of medicine is also the biggest reason why we should be using LDN as a first treatment in all autoimmune related conditions, which includes most cancers. Even if it was only a tenth as successful as it seems to be – pending the scientific proof – it would still be important to make it the front line approach to these diseases.
The only thing needed to make this therapy approach reliable is a bit of research to work out how to use it properly and how to spot when it doesn’t work well. It would be intelligent to do some large scale trial type research, and double blinded randomised crossover trials, to answer the many questions surrounding dosing, retention of metabolites and malabsorption issues.
But my point in this blog is to make it clear that there is no barrier to prescription of this therapy except the paranoia of GP’s who think they might get sued if it doesn’t live up to the hype.
Well, the answer to that is simple, tell the patient that it might work, it is not a cure and if you are early in your disease, you might not notice it working because nothing will be happening – including the progression of your disease.
LDN is completely safe to use and also we know it is safe to use long term. There are going to be people who don’t respond, but it will not harm people. We just need to work out when to start giving it to people, and the screening of endorphin levels is the obvious place to start here.
Endorphins are simply vital to health. It is well known that older people have less endorphin receptors and lower endorphin levels than youngsters, and now we are discovering that our plethora of age related diseases and endorphin depletion are connected strongly. This does not account for all disease, but it does account for most cases of a very large number of immune system diseases.
So, our motto is also “First Do No Harm” and this is why we confidently tell everyone to use LDN if they need it. Our beloved MS society may only work with drugs that can earn enough revenue to get their research paid for, but that just means that they will never notice a drug like LDN and will even resist supporting it at all. I can't really blame them for having to take that stance. But there is nowt so powerful as an idea whose time has come, and “First Do No Harm” needs to come again.
We have all been out on the street lately talking to the public about LDN, and the word is spreading fast now. Hopefully soon, every GP will have been asked for LDN, several times, and every MP will know about this idea too. We, the patients, want LDN. Who really has the right to deny us?
Please support us by signing our petition to the Government by going to www.ldnnow.com and click on the petition link. Thank you
The only thing needed to make this therapy approach reliable is a bit of research to work out how to use it properly and how to spot when it doesn’t work well. It would be intelligent to do some large scale trial type research, and double blinded randomised crossover trials, to answer the many questions surrounding dosing, retention of metabolites and malabsorption issues.
But my point in this blog is to make it clear that there is no barrier to prescription of this therapy except the paranoia of GP’s who think they might get sued if it doesn’t live up to the hype.
Well, the answer to that is simple, tell the patient that it might work, it is not a cure and if you are early in your disease, you might not notice it working because nothing will be happening – including the progression of your disease.
LDN is completely safe to use and also we know it is safe to use long term. There are going to be people who don’t respond, but it will not harm people. We just need to work out when to start giving it to people, and the screening of endorphin levels is the obvious place to start here.
Endorphins are simply vital to health. It is well known that older people have less endorphin receptors and lower endorphin levels than youngsters, and now we are discovering that our plethora of age related diseases and endorphin depletion are connected strongly. This does not account for all disease, but it does account for most cases of a very large number of immune system diseases.
So, our motto is also “First Do No Harm” and this is why we confidently tell everyone to use LDN if they need it. Our beloved MS society may only work with drugs that can earn enough revenue to get their research paid for, but that just means that they will never notice a drug like LDN and will even resist supporting it at all. I can't really blame them for having to take that stance. But there is nowt so powerful as an idea whose time has come, and “First Do No Harm” needs to come again.
We have all been out on the street lately talking to the public about LDN, and the word is spreading fast now. Hopefully soon, every GP will have been asked for LDN, several times, and every MP will know about this idea too. We, the patients, want LDN. Who really has the right to deny us?
Please support us by signing our petition to the Government by going to www.ldnnow.com and click on the petition link. Thank you
LDNNow on LDN Politically
LDN can be prescribed off-label to treat anything. The NHS does not prevent this. The reason your doctor will refuse you LDN is that he is not covered by his insurance to prescribe a therapy which is not sanctioned by NICE. For NICE to sanction LDN, they require a trial. They will argue that the use of LDN to treat autoimmune disease opposes the current beliefs about what causes auto-immune diseases so trials are necessary.
However, the use of LDN to treat cancers does not conflict with current accepted knowledge, so the use of LDN to treat cancer is not even controversial. Trials and research costs money, and we need much research and trials to satisfy NICE. Now, if we cannot fund the trials and research in 30 years of trying, then we can see that they are never going to happen unless someone wins the lottery and funds the right people to do the right trials. Which means it will never happen, for LDN or any other generic drug.
The political part of the problem is this. We need to overcome the shortcoming of the system which means that effective generic drugs cannot be made available for new uses.Politicians can change the system so that NICE can accept clinical evidence from doctors who use a generic drug. They can then make an assessment, combined with knowledge from previously existing trials with the drug, and sanction generic drugs which will make them fall under the insurance for doctors and doctors will feel happy to prescribe it.
LDN is the sharp point of this spear, because it is so widely important clinically. It makes the generic drugs issue urgent because until it is resolved, people will die and, like myself, suffer avoidable disability leading to me being a drain on the economy rather than a professional contributor.This issue is as full of politics as a dead rat is full of maggots. So why do politicians talk about the medical issues and claim “not my bag” when we try to get them to talk about the politic? Are they blind? Do we want politicians who don’t see politics when it smacks them in the face? Rhetorical naturally.
Please sign the petition to help make LDN available as front line treatment by going to www.ldnnow.com. Thank you!
However, the use of LDN to treat cancers does not conflict with current accepted knowledge, so the use of LDN to treat cancer is not even controversial. Trials and research costs money, and we need much research and trials to satisfy NICE. Now, if we cannot fund the trials and research in 30 years of trying, then we can see that they are never going to happen unless someone wins the lottery and funds the right people to do the right trials. Which means it will never happen, for LDN or any other generic drug.
The political part of the problem is this. We need to overcome the shortcoming of the system which means that effective generic drugs cannot be made available for new uses.Politicians can change the system so that NICE can accept clinical evidence from doctors who use a generic drug. They can then make an assessment, combined with knowledge from previously existing trials with the drug, and sanction generic drugs which will make them fall under the insurance for doctors and doctors will feel happy to prescribe it.
LDN is the sharp point of this spear, because it is so widely important clinically. It makes the generic drugs issue urgent because until it is resolved, people will die and, like myself, suffer avoidable disability leading to me being a drain on the economy rather than a professional contributor.This issue is as full of politics as a dead rat is full of maggots. So why do politicians talk about the medical issues and claim “not my bag” when we try to get them to talk about the politic? Are they blind? Do we want politicians who don’t see politics when it smacks them in the face? Rhetorical naturally.
Please sign the petition to help make LDN available as front line treatment by going to www.ldnnow.com. Thank you!
LDN, Healthcare, Human Rights and the Market
First, healthcare as the day to day best practice medicine as applied by doctors and nurses at ground level. There is an unwritten understanding and expectation that doctors put patients best interests first. This is what actually happens, but it also leads to a litigation-fear driven approach to treatment choices rather than one based entirely on medical knowhow, and makes a fool of progress with generic drugs.
Second, the market forces have become enslaved to a process of high technology seeking consequential high returns and ignoring low cost , low unit profit opportunities. With LDN, the market demands LDN, so it is economically bizarre that no-one is profiting from this demand.
But, there is a reason, and it is because of the licences. Drug licences are so expensive that generic drugs cannot earn enough to pay for them.This is a system fault, and because it affects health care, it becomes our moral obligation to do some joined up thinking and make sure public money gets used whenever this system fault occurs, but only when there is lots of evidence from doctors that the generic drug has found a new and promising use. This approach will save billions of pounds sterling in drug costs too.
For LDN, the evidence from hundreds of doctors is already available and now growing very fast and LDN can be used to manage so many terrible conditions, as observed in tens of thousands of ‘anecdotal’ reports and observations. The eye witness evidence exists in great measure.
I therefore have to contend that it is actually a moral obligation for government to act on this, and by implication, to state that failure to act is a crime against human rights. I say that because LDN promises quality of life to many who are disabled and life itself to many who would otherwise be dead now, if the eye witness evidence is to be believed.
The moral situation question research to prove or disprove these claims regarding LDN. The politics of the market forces requires state intervention on human rights grounds. Two years ago, it was maybe not yet time for this, but now, in 2009, small trials are occurring and the evidence is growing but this is all the work of individuals. Full, conclusive trials are beyond the resources of individuals. The evidence and demands of the users in the world plus these pilot trials have now shown us that LDN must be researched for licence now.
I demand to be offered LDN by my doctor, or at least to be able to choose to use it through the NHS because I know it works for me. We know too much about LDN now to put it back in the bottle, the time has come and from now on, this apathy can only be judged as a crime, a scandal, and an inaction that contravenes human rights to life.
Please go to www.ldnnow.com and sign the petition to the Govt so Low Dose Naltrexone can be offered as front line treatment. Thank you.
Second, the market forces have become enslaved to a process of high technology seeking consequential high returns and ignoring low cost , low unit profit opportunities. With LDN, the market demands LDN, so it is economically bizarre that no-one is profiting from this demand.
But, there is a reason, and it is because of the licences. Drug licences are so expensive that generic drugs cannot earn enough to pay for them.This is a system fault, and because it affects health care, it becomes our moral obligation to do some joined up thinking and make sure public money gets used whenever this system fault occurs, but only when there is lots of evidence from doctors that the generic drug has found a new and promising use. This approach will save billions of pounds sterling in drug costs too.
For LDN, the evidence from hundreds of doctors is already available and now growing very fast and LDN can be used to manage so many terrible conditions, as observed in tens of thousands of ‘anecdotal’ reports and observations. The eye witness evidence exists in great measure.
I therefore have to contend that it is actually a moral obligation for government to act on this, and by implication, to state that failure to act is a crime against human rights. I say that because LDN promises quality of life to many who are disabled and life itself to many who would otherwise be dead now, if the eye witness evidence is to be believed.
The moral situation question research to prove or disprove these claims regarding LDN. The politics of the market forces requires state intervention on human rights grounds. Two years ago, it was maybe not yet time for this, but now, in 2009, small trials are occurring and the evidence is growing but this is all the work of individuals. Full, conclusive trials are beyond the resources of individuals. The evidence and demands of the users in the world plus these pilot trials have now shown us that LDN must be researched for licence now.
I demand to be offered LDN by my doctor, or at least to be able to choose to use it through the NHS because I know it works for me. We know too much about LDN now to put it back in the bottle, the time has come and from now on, this apathy can only be judged as a crime, a scandal, and an inaction that contravenes human rights to life.
Please go to www.ldnnow.com and sign the petition to the Govt so Low Dose Naltrexone can be offered as front line treatment. Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)