Slashdot Mirror

4 50mg vials is around $9k USD. Standard dosage for adults is 200mg every 3 weeks. That's about $156k per year. http://www.merck.com/product/u... https://www.goodrx.com/keytrud... In contrast, my Remicade for arthritis is about $40k / year, but my insurance brings it down to about a $300 / year co-pay. So you don't have to be rich. You just need a job with decent benefits.

Clarinex is a large and increasing source of revenue for Merck. They made $659M in 2010

I went and looked up the actual report on Gardasil's adverse reactions. Here's the straight dope:

Potential Autoimmune Disorder | Gardasil (11,813) | Placebo (9701)
Juvenile Arthritis | 1 | 0
Rheumatoid Arthritis | 2 | 0
Systemic lupus erythematosis | 0 | 1
Arthritis | 5 | 2
Reactive Arthritis | 1 | 0

So, at worst, the rate of such diseases was ~0.076% with Gardasil and ~0.031% without it. But these numbers are so low that the difference could easily be due to chance. There's no real evidence that Gardasil had anything to do with those cases. Saying otherwise is just scare tactics.

if you drink more 3 drinks a day, the overdose threshold can be as high as 6grams

since contrary to the popular belief, alcohol is actually protective in case of acetaminophen poisoning, since the P450 enzyme favour ethanol to acetaminophen so there is less N-acetyl-p-benzoquinone imine(the bad metabolite of Tylenol that fuck up your liver) produced, you can read more int he Merck manual

Just watch for Vitamin D toxicity. In general, overdosing on natural stuff like carrots and liver oil is quite possible, and with at least weird, and sometimes toxic side effects. As for effectiveness, I doubt that. Whole foods and Vitamin D won't solve things like Manic Depression.

Well, clinical trials of a Cox-2 are not going to be powered to show an increased risk of mortality, but the data certainly suggest Vioxx would "cause" death, in the sense that the hazard ratio would be above 1 if a trial were powered for it. But look at a typical composite endpoint of MI, stroke, or CV death. The best trial we have of this is APPROVe, since it was placeo controlled, look at Merck's own data, right here: https://merck.com/newsroom/vioxx/pdf/APPROVe_Extension_Statistical_Package.pdf

See page 62 of that pdf for the kaplan-meier curves of the composite endpoint discussed above.

My main message to everyone would be that you have to know what a trial is powered to detect before you claim what has or has not been shown!

No. You do not have an allergy to sunlight. You have non-allergic rhinitis. It is an exaggerated histamine response. Like getting a runny nose in the cold. http://allergies.about.com/od/fa1/f/nasoocularrefle.htm There is a condition commonly known as sun allergy, but it is not actually an allergy. Just an ultrasensitivity to UV radiation. http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec18/ch214/ch214c.html An allergy to sunlight is a myth.

Computers have been used for quite some time in medicine but mainly for data storage/retrieval. Their use in the diagnostic process is evolving. For example, computer aided reading of mammograms is a current area of R&D, although not to a point where it is automated. One cool application of 3D reconstruction currently in use is with bronchoscopies, where the software creates a 3D reconstruction of a bronchial tree from CT slices and then sets up breadcrumbs for a pulmonologist to a target site. During the bronchoscopy, the pulmonologist marks the crumbs as he goes to keep track of his progress. Virtual colonoscopies (with CT scans) are being looked at as an alternative for colonscopies (and some people do use them this way if there aren't other options, but it is not currently an accepted general screening method, at least according to the USPSTF). In pathology, research is ongoing on visualizing expression of multiple different types of proteins in tumor cells at the same which are then "read" by a computer with an eye to use data mining to determine sets of proteins as prognostic indicators. Also in pathology, scanning technology is progressing to the point where you can get high resolution scans of slides at different magnifications (up to 40x) fairly quickly that can be read remotely via viewing software. So in short - there are lots of interesting (dare I say exciting?) applications going on right now for using computers as an aid for the diagnostic process.

That being said, as always the right study depends on time, cost, and quality. For example, sticking somebody you think has an epidural hematoma in an MRI scanner for $1600 and 45 minutes instead of a CT for $500 and 5 minutes isn't that bright of an idea. But as the technology evolves, do does the applications for it. One issue with indiscriminate scanning (and testing in general) is that it can actually harm people. This is the debate over prostate cancer/detection. Namely - if you find something in your study, what is the harm done in addressing (e.g. surgical morbidity/mortality/side effects) vs. not doing anything (mortality from the finding). This is the debate over prostate cancer screening/treatment right now. And of course there is always the issue of pre-test probability and its effect on test results (Baye's theroem).

Willie! It has been a long time. I see you're still trolling on slashdot. Fantastic, your people need to show the world you are capable of using the Web as well as any regular person.

http://www.merck.com/about/executive_committee/home.html

Mr Clarke, is that you?

Its been a long time since we've talked Richard, hows life going? Still got the fat belly I hope.

http://www.merck.com/about/executive_committee/rtc.html

. This might be worth looking into.

I'm no expert, but I don't see how the mothers antibodies could be protecting the child after delivery[...]

From the Merck Manual Home Edition:

IgG, the most prevalent class of antibody[...] is the only class of antibody that crosses the placenta from mother to fetus. The mother's IgG protects the fetus and infant until the infant's immune system can produce its own antibodies.

IgA: These antibodies help defend against the invasion of microorganisms through body surfaces lined with a mucous membrane, including those of the nose, eyes, lungs, and digestive tract. IgA is present in the bloodstream, in secretions produced by mucous membranes, and in colostrum (the fluid produced by the breasts during the first few days after delivery, before breast milk is produced).

Obviously, this is anything but a comprehensive review of the relevant medical literature. I personally wonder how long actual antibodies last (as opposed to the immunity of which they are one facet). Hopefully, this has piqued your interest enough that you'll look deeper yourself.

But I could be wrong, maybe antibodies get through as well, it just doesn't seem likely.

How "likely" does it seem that you would have five classes of antibodies? I'm not going to beat you over the head about being wrong (which would make me, what, a bio-nazi?), but I will call you out for relying on supposition and gut feeling instead of doing even the most basic checking (not even "research") before spouting off.

If we collectively make fun of Ted Stevens for speaking "authoritatively" about things he does not understand in the least (series of tubes!), I would suggest that we are perfectly within our rights to call out each other for spouting equally ill-informed drivel about topics on which we have not bothered to read.

Chernobyl didn't have a containment dome. It suffered Xenon poisoning because of the low power levels the test demanded, the technicians turned all the safety measures off to run their test, they pulled the control rods out, and it had a positive void coefficient so that the process fed back on itself. See the Hyperphysics page here. To quote from that page: "It was like airplane pilots experimenting with the engines in flight" (Legasov).

Okay, so human error will always happen, right? That's why newer plants fail safe. All western plants have containment domes, and newer plant types (such as pebble bed reactors or Generation III reactors like the AP1000) are passively safe, which means that even if all the coolant is removed, nothing happens. Also, most plants automatically scram (insert control rods to maximum positions) on error.

Now let's look at Three Mile Island. A problem in an unrelated system caused the primary feedwater pump to fail. The reactor automatically went to scram as designed (thus showing what I said in the last paragraph). However, a valve that would vent steam caused by heating the water by decay heat (since radioactive decay still happens even when no fission is going on), failed to close, and the monitoring systems did not show clearly enough that it was indeed open long after it should be.
The result was that the reactor in question (TMI-2) was severely damaged and some radioactive Krypton was released. What danger did this entail? To quote the Merck manual, "the Three Mile Island accident did not result in major radiation exposure; in fact, anyone living within 1 mile of the plant received only about 0.08 mSv additional radiation". As a comparison, a chest x-ray is between 0.05 and 0.1 mSv.

Solar might be more safe, but it also occupies a great deal of space and is much more expensive. Fossil fuel plants pollute and for coal in particular, there are mining accidents; since a given amount of coal provides much less energy than a given amount of uranium, a lot more has to be mined for the same amount of energy. Chernobyl was the Bhopal of nuclear power, but we don't stop making pesticides just because of Bhopal, and so we shouldn't stop nuclear power just because of Chernobyl either, but instead take the proper precautions and engineer the systems to be safe.

65mg Tablets of Methylene Blue (Urolene Blue) {a round blue tablet} used to be commonly available and at a price of $19.99 for a bottle of 30 65mg tablets at www.drugstore.com. But for whatever reason these tablets seem to no longer be available in the U.S.

Here is an Info page from Merck which references that and much more about Methylene Blue (Tablets & Injection):

http://www.merck.com/mmpe/lexicomp/methylene%20blue.html

Administration: Oral

Administer after meals with a full glass of water. When given for the treatment of ifosfamide-induced encephalopathy, may be mixed with fruit juice to mask unpleasant taste.

Administration: I.V.

Administer undiluted by direct I.V. injection over several minutes. For the treatment of ifosfamide-induced encephalopathy, methylene blue may be administered either undiluted as a slow I.V. push over at least 5 minutes or diluted in 50 mL NS or D5W and infused over at least 5 minutes. Consider concomitant dextrose administration, especially in patients who are hypoglycemic, to ensure efficacy of methylene blue.

Dosage

Children: NADPH-methemoglobin reductase deficiency: Oral: 1-1.5 mg/kg/day (maximum: 300 mg/day) given with 5-8 mg/kg/day of ascorbic acid

Children and Adults: Methemoglobinemia: I.V.: 1-2 mg/kg or 25-50 mg/m2 over several minutes; may be repeated in 1 hour if necessary

Adults:

Genitourinary antiseptic: Oral: 65-130 mg 3 times/day with a full glass of water (maximum: 390 mg/day)

Ifosfamide-induced encephalopathy (unlabeled use): Oral, I.V.:

Prevention: 50 mg every 6-8 hours

Treatment: 50 mg as a single dose or every 4-8 hours until symptoms resolve

-
by the way: The (Ascorbic Acid) mentioned under dosage is (Vitamin C).
-

* Does anyone know where these tablets could be purchased now?

they have seriously jeopardized the incentive of pharmaceutical companies to produce useful drugs over the long term.

Yeah, because these sales would make or break the Merck company - NOT! You see, it is ALSO a drop in the bucket for Merck. They had sales of $22 billion in 2005, R&D was $3.85 billion out of $14.65 billion expenses (or 26%). Their drugs keep selling so I doubt they have been in the red since then.

The real issue here is whether a country has the right to define its own laws independent of pressure from corporations. And lo and behold, it has. It is also a question of market knowledge: Brazil are saying "you offered this lower price to Thailand, why not also to us? They have a higher GDP per capita and a lower percentage of people under the poverty line than us" and Merck didn't agree so Brazil shopped elsewhere. That's called free market.

On the contrary, the common misconception is that marijuana is physically addictive. Your psychologically-induced withdrawal symptoms notwithstanding, cannabis or marijuana is not physically addictive. (Although it is entirely possible you may have gotten yourself hooked on laced weed. As the saying goes, buyer beware -- especially on the black market.)

You can read the truth about marijuana known to all good doctors (but continuously misrepresented by the U.S. government):

Cannabis (Marijuana) Dependence

Chronic or periodic use of cannabis producing some psychologic dependence but no physical dependence. [emphasis added]

Any drug that causes euphoria and diminishes anxiety can cause dependence, and cannabis is no exception. However, heavy use and complaints of inability to stop are unusual. Cannabis can be used episodically without evidence of social or psychologic dysfunction. The term dependence probably is misapplied to many users. No withdrawal syndrome occurs when the drug is discontinued, but some heavy users report disrupted sleep and nervousness when they stop.

[...]

Critics of marijuana cite much scientific data regarding adverse effects, but most of the claims regarding severe biologic impact are unsubstantiated, even among relatively heavy users and in areas intensively investigated, such as immunologic and reproductive function. However, high-dose smokers of marijuana develop pulmonary symptoms (episodes of acute bronchitis, wheezing, coughing, and increased phlegm), and pulmonary function may be altered. This is manifested by large airway changes of unknown significance. Even daily smokers do not develop obstructive airway disease. Pulmonary carcinoma has not been reported in persons who smoke only marijuana, possibly because less smoke is inhaled than during cigarette smoking. However, biopsies of bronchial tissue sometimes show precancerous changes, so carcinoma may occur. In a few case-control studies, some tests detected diminished cognitive function in small samples of long-term high-dose users; this finding awaits confirmation. Studies in newborns have not found evidence of fetal harm due to maternal use of cannabis. Decreased fetal weight has been reported, but when all factors (eg, maternal alcohol and tobacco use) are accounted for, the effect on fetal weight disappears. -9-Tetrahydrocannabinol is secreted in breast milk. Although no harm to breastfed babies has been shown, breastfeeding mothers, like pregnant women, are advised to avoid using cannabis.

That last part is to help counter your D.A.R.E. education. You have been lied to. Please stop repeating those lies. It makes you look foolish.

Really, not very funny. The problem under investigation is "news" stories being produced by, for instance, the White House (using taxpayer money) and then aired by local and national television stations as though the station produced it, as though it were actual news, and as though the Bush administration did not ask them to run it while hiding the identity of those who produced it. This free advertising and mis-use by the government of what are supposed to be trusted sources has been very successful in its propaganda aims. For instance, look up how many Americans still harbor the delusion that Iraq had some involvement in 9/11. Bush, of course, did not invent this. Look up how many Americans believe marijuana produces harmful medical effects. (It does not.) There are actual Federal laws against the Federal government using taxpayer money to advocate for a particular political position in these propagandistic ways. However, when large amounts of money can be made by certain private industries by having the government support their positions (even surreptitiously), these laws are too often ignored. Witness the military-industrial-congressional complex and the war on some drugs as but two examples.

If drugs were legal and somebody sold you a bad batch, or didn't deliver, you could take them to court.

err, Yea, tell that to Merek.

Just a thought.. and feel free to make jokes in reference to The Simpsons or whatnot.
But, what about "treatments" that can suppress?

Although I have to admit, I see it as more likely a psychological problem than one that is caused physiologically. Perhaps, it would be worth investigating if there is a physiological root that can be cut?

http://www.ipce.info/library_3/files/cloud_ped_tim e.htm
"Half of child sexual abusers are the parents of the victims; other relatives commit 18% of the offenses."
"Although news reports focus on horrific serial offenders, experts say it's possible, with treatment, to prevent pedophiles from abusing kids. States have incarcerated many child sexual abusers, but most eventually get out (average sentence: 11 years). Active pedophiles who find their way into the few treatment programs around the country turn out to be less of a risk than those who are locked up for a while and released."

http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec07/ch104/ch104c.html
Pedophilia can be treated with psychotherapy and drugs that alter the sex drive, with varying results. Such treatment may be sought voluntarily or only after criminal apprehension and legal action. Incarceration, even long-term, does not change pedophilic desires or fantasies.

Actually, I heard it on the radio, but it's also present in page 5 of the financial section of Merck's Annual Report. My bad though, it was 50%, not 60%. Clearly, that means that I have a bias. Sorry to waste your time.

From the conclusion of your first article:

Current marijuana use had a negative effect on global IQ score only in subjects who smoked 5 or more joints per week. A negative effect was not observed among subjects who had previously been heavy users but were no longer using the substance. We conclude that marijuana does not have a long-term negative impact on global intelligence. [emphasis added]

As for the hyperbole of your other claims, let's dispose of them by referring to the most-widely used medical textbook in the world, The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy entry on marijuana:

Critics of marijuana cite much scientific data regarding adverse effects, but most of the claims regarding severe biologic impact are unsubstantiated, even among relatively heavy users and in areas intensively investigated, such as immunologic and reproductive function. However, high-dose smokers of marijuana develop pulmonary symptoms (episodes of acute bronchitis, wheezing, coughing, and increased phlegm), and pulmonary function may be altered. This is manifested by large airway changes of unknown significance. Even daily smokers do not develop obstructive airway disease. Pulmonary carcinoma has not been reported in persons who smoke only marijuana, possibly because less smoke is inhaled than during cigarette smoking. However, biopsies of bronchial tissue sometimes show precancerous changes, so carcinoma may occur. In a few case-control studies, some tests detected diminished cognitive function in small samples of long-term high-dose users; this finding awaits confirmation. Studies in newborns have not found evidence of fetal harm due to maternal use of cannabis. Decreased fetal weight has been reported, but when all factors (eg, maternal alcohol and tobacco use) are accounted for, the effect on fetal weight disappears. delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol is secreted in breast milk. Although no harm to breastfed babies has been shown, breastfeeding mothers, like pregnant women, are advised to avoid using cannabis. [emphasis added]

Btw, I am not sure why you have to call the poster you are responding to names. Seems like your arguments should be able to stand on their own.

On the contrary, the source of the Nixon Report is the Nixon Administration. It wanted to study the drug as extensively as it could at the time. It was specifically looking for negative qualities for political reasons (to support the 1970 OmniBus Drug Act, which is the basis for drugs being illegal today). Whether this study is reproduced at a pro- or anti- drug site does not diminish its impartiality (with respect to its ultimate findings) or change its source.

As for your hand-waving, unsupported claims about the dangers of marijuana, you have utterly failed to provide even one source to support your claim. I, on the other hand, can negate any source you might find by way of the latest edition of the most widely-used medical textbook in the world, The Merck Manual of Diagnostics and Therapeutics.

From the entry titled Cannabis (Marijuana) Dependence:

Chronic or periodic use of cannabis producing some psychologic dependence but no physical dependence.

Any drug that causes euphoria and diminishes anxiety can cause dependence, and cannabis is no exception. However, heavy use and complaints of inability to stop are unusual. Cannabis can be used episodically without evidence of social or psychologic dysfunction. The term dependence probably is misapplied to many users. No withdrawal syndrome occurs when the drug is discontinued, but some heavy users report disrupted sleep and nervousness when they stop.

This entry is, quite simply, the final word on cannabis. Only a study done in the past year could change this. And, even then, the study would, per the scientific method (the basis of medicine), await confirmation. I have seen no such study in the scientific literature. Have you?

And please don't provide a political article or anecdote to support your claim.

Fortunately, for him and the millions of Americans who smoke cannabis, decades of scientific testing have exonerated the plant as a health hazard, except the act of smoking. Here is the The Merck Manual of Diagnostics and Therapeutics, the world's most widely used medical textbook, entry on Cannabis (Marijuana). It supports that the plant is fine as a drug, just don't smoke it.

Some readers may here be moved to protest that the bizarre behavior of rats fed massive doses of caffeine is irrelevant to the problems of human coffee drinkers, who are not very likely to bite themselves to death. Let us promptly and wholeheartedly agree. There is a lesson to be learned, nevertheless, from these rat reports. If the drug producing this effect in rats were marijuana, or LSD, or amphetamine, the report would no doubt have made headlines thrown about the country. One of the distorting effects of categorizing drugs as "good," "bad," and "nondrugs" is to protect the "nondrugs" such as caffeine from warranted criticism while subjecting the illicit drugs to widely publicized attacks--- regardless of the relevance of the data to the human condition.

Thus we come to the coffee paradox--- the question of how a drug so fraught with potential hazard can be consumed in the United States at the rate of more than a hundred billion doses a year (see Chapter 61) without doing intolerable damage--- and without arousing the kind of hostility, legal repression, antisocial condemnation aroused by the illicit drugs.

The answer is quite simple. Coffee, tea, cocoa, and the cola drinks have been domesticated. Caffeine has been incorporated into our way of life in a manner that minimizes (though it does not altogether eliminate) the hazards inherent in caffeine use. Instead of its being classified as an illicit drug, thereby grossly amplifying caffeine's potential for harm, ways to make caffeine safer have been searched for and found.[...]

That other drugs now deemed illicit might be similarly domesticated, with a similar reduction in the damage they wreak on individuals and on society, is a possibility readers may wish to keep in mind as they read the chapters that follow.

I find this very hard to believe. Withdrawal from heroin is far more harrowing (and life-threatening) than withdrawal from nicotine.

Do not talk about things you do not know about. Heroin withdrawl is like a bad case of the flu and is non life threatening. It may be the straw that breaks the camels back if it's an addict weakend by AIDS he caught because he couldn't get clean needles. Or somebody poisoned by impurities caused by illicit synthesis. Both tragedies that would be avoided if clean measured doses of heroin were available.

If you want to learn something, check out the Merck Manual: Withdrawal: The withdrawal syndrome is self-limited and, although severely discomforting, is not life threatening.

In fact, you can go through the "Complications" sections and see how many items would disappear if clean cheap sterile measured doses were available.

Most of the ill effects of patents would go away if they reduced the patent protection to only 5 years, and allowed no extensions. These days 5 years is plenty for even a small company to get to market and make some money on their invention.

Oh yeah?

"HPV is actually just a predisposition to cervical cancer or prostate cancer and it hasn't been proven that it is actually an STD."

Unfortunately, this is blatantly wrong.

It's in the "sexually transmitted disease" chapter of the Merck Manual, and I challenge you to find a quorum of MDs who believe that it isn't or a well-respected paper supporting your position. ALL warts are caused by viruses, and are thus communicable!

I believe your post could be illustrating the problem the original submitter was referring to - you are probably the unfortunate victim of misinformation.

Not exactly as you described, but give The Merck Manual a try.

I'm sorry to hear that your son's development has been set back by something. However, I doubt it has anything to do with thimerosal, seeing that the MMR vaccine used in the US, MMR II from Merck, has never contained thimerosal. Thimerosal was used in DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis), hepatitis B, and influenza vaccines.

Now that was a non-sequitor. Tell me, where in my post did I ever take an explicit or implicit position that it was ethical "to dismember an innocent human being in one stage of development and not in another stage"?

My objection was to terminology: an abortion is the interruption of a pregnancy, and no pregnancy has occurred. Yes, the destruction of zygotes produced as part of IVF should be the moral equivalent of abortion, if moral attitudes were determined by logical argument, but "moral equivalent" and "are the same thing" are two different relations.

As for there being "no such thing" as a fertilized egg, many reputable sources disagree. I'll concede that another term for fertilized egg common in medical jargon is "zygote".

Erm. The same company that devloped Vioxx also devloped Ivermectin (Mectizan), a highly effective treatment plan (once every 12 months) for River blindness, a dehabilitating disease that affects people who can't afford modern medicine. Despite Merck dumping about $290 million into developing the treatment, they give it away for free.

Before you attack Merck with pitchforks and torches in hand, you ought to realise that this company has an unprecedented history of philanthropy, and it saddens me to know that somebody at that company with their eyes in profit instead of the Right Thing screwed up so royally with the debacle we know today as Vioxx.

Whatever happens with that company, I hope that at least some of their positive ideological foundations are continuted.

--sean

Plus, there's the collision factor: an elderly person who isn't too steady and who has slower reaction times than the norm is more likely to hit an obstacle

PLUS there's the eyesight factor. I think it's a brilliant idea for old people with failing eyesight to zip around at 18 mph. Riiiight....

Interesting fact: the lens in the eye never stops growing. So the older you are, the thicker and more opaque your lenses are. Plus your retinas are less sensitive. The result: a 60 year old's retina only picks up about 1/3 the light of a 20 year old's.

I think they are saying that it is the temperature at which certain biological process start to break down. For example, with a 106F fever you can go into convulsions and other nasty things. source

I think they may be saying that in their opinion, the film was so poor, it made them want to die, or some such. That what I remember reading about it.

Wikipedia, NIDA, the National Cancer Institute, American Society of Addiction Medicine, and the Merck Manual all seem to like my assessment of the term as deprecated.

Get over it, the term is obsolete.

You may understand why doctors may default to such harsh treatment when in doubt. It's a damned tough bug. It can infect nearly any system in the body (even the brain, in rare cases), though it's most commonly found in the lungs. It'll sit dormant for an entire lifetime, popping up when the immune system is weak and/or when damage to the infected system released the cysts, activating the infection.

There are 3 primary kinds of TB: Mycobacterium tuberculosis (the kind people mostly get), M. bovis (cattle variant), and M. avis (bird variant).

I've read up on TB a bit (I also own the Merck Vet. Manual), because we own a cow. Cattle, a common vector for TB, are simply culled when bovine TB is detected. I assume that if effective treatment were possible, it would be similar to the long, expensive kind used on people and it's simply not profitable to cure a cow.

What these sources really don't address (or address clearly to the layman) is whether or not the bovine and avian variants are a threat to people, and if they're treated the same way. Maybe an M.D. can clarify for me. :)

Before we go blaming the victim it would be much more helpful to listen rather than jumping to conclusions.

He claims two rare diseases and there's nothing odd about that. I have two rare medical problems. At age 6 I was diagnosed with NF1 (1 in 3000) and had a pheochromocytomoa (unknown incidence but possibly 1 in 5000) diagnosed at age 40. The latter would never have been detected had I not developed a case of pancreatitis that was NOT brought on by alcohol consumption. Lucky me, I got it twice. Thankfully, a CAT scan and chest X-rays helped locate the pheo. Who would ever tell their doctor they get headaches when defecating?

You want to talk about how the medical profession misses a lot of diseases and conditions because routine blood tests are not so routine anymore or that HMOs have reduced the blood panel 40 to a blood panel with fewer than 30 items

The medical world works miracles everyday and I am grateful to my doctors. Doctors are not infallible and miss things. Sometimes they make patients feel guilty for coming to the office too often. We often label these people hypochondriacs when some of us are responding as we were taught by all those 1960s health films we had to watch. The ones that insisted we get an annual physical and see the doctor immidiately for any small problem.

Before we go blaming the victim it would be much more helpful to listen rather than jumping to conclusions.

He claims two rare diseases and there's nothing odd about that. I have two rare medical problems. At age 6 I was diagnosed with NF1 (1 in 3000) and had a pheochromocytomoa (unknown incidence but possibly 1 in 5000) diagnosed at age 40. The latter would never have been detected had I not developed a case of pancreatitis that was NOT brought on by alcohol consumption. Lucky me, I got it twice. Thankfully, a CAT scan and chest X-rays helped locate the pheo. Who would ever tell their doctor they get headaches when defecating?

You want to talk about how the medical profession misses a lot of diseases and conditions because routine blood tests are not so routine anymore or that HMOs have reduced the blood panel 40 to a blood panel with fewer than 30 items

The medical world works miracles everyday and I am grateful to my doctors. Doctors are not infallible and miss things. Sometimes they make patients feel guilty for coming to the office too often. We often label these people hypochondriacs when some of us are responding as we were taught by all those 1960s health films we had to watch. The ones that insisted we get an annual physical and see the doctor immidiately for any small problem.

The recommended treatment for agoraphobia, like most phobias, is behavior therapy. This is a form of treatment pioneered by Skinner and Watson. You expose people to something they're afraid of, at first very briefly, but eventually for longer periods of time, and they gradually learn that there are no consequences. Eventually, their conditioned response (fear) extinguishes. Drugs are used occasionally in treating phobias, but not all that often.

"[schizophrenia's] poorer cousin, manic depression"

Richer cousin. Bipolar disorder correlates positively with income, social class, and creativity (although yes, it can derail your life too).

Found this and a line from the Merck manual as references. There are many more, but no time to look just now--I am at work.

It's hard to clasify this as outsourcing, when the largest pharmaceutical company in the word has been based in India for years: Merck. (Not sure on today's metrics of "largest", as Pfizer blew up [Viagra!] and merged with GlaxoSmithKline to become the world's largest "research-based" pharm.co. for a time.) This story is just a scare tactic. Not every industry is central to the US.

-bZj

The problem is in execution. There always seem to be those people out there who think that if they talk louder, their ideas gain more credibility.

I've always just viewed it as a similar to Munchausen Syndrome, in that it's a person who just wants attention, but there methods of going about it vary.

But in all, he seems right up there as the type of thing that Penn and Teller would make fun of on their show, but there's no full listing of what's going to be in season 2.

Btw, do these positive effects for a 50 or 60 year old include having a stroke?

Umm, they have had one for about 80 years.

Its called Amphetamine

Its perfectly safe, as long as you buy it at the drug store and not illictly. Generally the appetite suppressing effects only last about six months however. Unfortunately, the human body builds a tolerance to all drugs, especially to hormones and hormone-like substances. Amphetamine works because it is structurally similar to adrenalin. In fact, some of an older generation might remember the only asthma inhalers they had were Benzedrine inhalers, aka benzoamphetamine. It wasn't until the 1970's they were able to use adrenalin safely in inhalers like Primatine Mist.

Basically, you drink too much water (or don't pee enough) and you wind up diluting the electrolytes in your blood. This causes disruptions in the transmissions of nerve impulses, muscle contractions, etc. Like I said, very, very rare, and hard to get simply by drinking too much water. You'd have to drink insanely massive quantities in a very short period of time.

A lot of people have a /8 network. From what I remember from my networking class, there was a scheme for how the ips should be divided.

If the first digit is less than 128 (ok, in reality, it is 127), they get a /8. If it is less than 192 (I think this is about where it is) they buy in a /16. If it is over 192, they get a /24.

Of course these can be subdivided.

Other examples of people who have /8 networks

MIT 18.0.0.0/8
Merck & Co., Inc 54.0.0.0/8
General Electric 3.0.0.0/8
US Department of Defence 6.0.0.0/8, 7.0.0.0/8, and 11.0.0.0/8
Genuity 4.0.0.0/8 and 8.0.0.0/8
American Telephone and Telegraph (AT&T) 12.0.0.0/8.

And that is just barely touching the surface.

--CPM

This is not particularly surprising: viruses in that family cause a lot of "common colds" and other URIs (among them, parainfluenza is in that family). See here and here.

would have to assume you're joking. RNA virili and bacteria are far more prone to mutations in the genes. Why hasn't AIDS been cured? It's an RNA virus;

I am certainly not an expert in this field, but I notice that according to the linked page of photos of this class of virus, that it includes both measles and mumps. The body pretty much self-vaccinates against both of these diseases, in that normally, once you contract the disease once, you have a lasting immunity.

This seems to contradict the sweeping statement that because of the class of virus this thing is, it would mutate too often to make a "standard" vaccination work. Obviously, if it mutated so frequently, people would be succeptable to mutated strains of the diseases over and over again.

Oh, yeah, not to mention that there are effective vaccines for both measles and mumps.

Interestingly, though, RSV (respiratory syncytial virus), yet another illness in this same family, is not currently prevented with a vaccine, but rather with a monoclonal antibody injection, Synagis

Thanks for the spelling corrections, fuckwad. As is typical of those who have little to offer, bullshit is the method of choice for argument. Have you ever even read the book you ignorant tool? I didn't think so. You just think I am making up this bullshit about republicans? Why don't you don't you read the book.

Also, thanks for posting some rather pointless quotes, certaintly nothing from a respectable medical journal. For those who might read something from this twit, I will post a couple of journal citations from the National Library of Medicine University of Sunderland. You are a goddamn british fuck, and you are commenting to me about politics?

As a side note, wheat opioid peptides are called opioid peptides because they bind to the same opioid receptors in the brain as all naturally occuring opiates, such as morphine. Any simple medical guide, including a nurse's pharmaceutical reference will make it quite clear that opioids ultimately kill you by suppressing your respiratory system to the point of failure. Note, thats what happens when someone dies of asthma (duhhh!). If you read the Merck Manul, a common medical reference, you will find one of the chief side effects of long term narcotic pain management is respiratory suppression manifested as asthma. But seriously, how the fuck can you claim to know anything about this subject when you didn't even know this. Seriously, why the fuck do you think so many plants have opioid peptides in them, to get us high? They kill things, especially bugs. Hey, since your british, why don't you drink down a couple bottles of codeine cough syrup and tell me how you feel. I don't think you will be breathing too well.

(1) Fukudome, S. et al, Release of opioid peptides, gluten exorphins by the action of pancreatic elastase. FEBS Lett. 1997 / 412 (3) / 475-479.

(2) Fukudome, S. et al, Gluten exorphin C : a novel opioid peptide derived from wheat gluten. FEBS Lett. 1993 / 316 (1) / 17-19.

(3) Max ,B., This and that : an artefactual alkaloid and its peptide analogs. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 1992 / 13 (9) / 341-345.

(4) Fukodome, S. et al, Opioid peptides derived from wheat gluten : their isolation and characterization. FEBS lett. 1992 / 296 (1) / 107-111.

(5) Dohan, F.C. ,Genetics and idiopathic schizophrenia. Am. J. Psychiatry 1989 / 146 (11) / 1522-1523. , Dohan, F.C. ,Genetic hypothesis of idiopathic schizophrenia : its exorphin connection. Schizophr. Bull. 1988 / 14 (4) / 489-494. , Paroli, E. et al, Opioid peptides from food (the exorphins). World Rev. Nutr. Diet. 1988 / 55 / 58-97. , Morley, J.E., Food peptides. A new class of hormones ? J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1982 / 247 (17) / 2379-2380 , Ross-Smith, P. et al, Diet (gluten) and Schizophrenia. J. Hum. Nutr. 1980 / 34 (2) / 107-112.