Date:   1/12/2008 1:06:52 AM ( 16 y ago)
Hits:   3,872
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1083963

1 readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

Its always great to see the warm thoughts and good intentions directed toward others on this forum. While I do agree with the sentiment I do take exception. Fasinex is identical to triclabendazole, the human brand that is manufactured by Novartis and is currently the drug of choice for F. hepatica. It is a common misnomer that "animal" drugs are different than human drugs when in fact they are indeed the same, such as in this case. Another example is ivermectin, which is commonly given to livestock as well as domestic animals, such as dogs. Where it gets dicey is in the dosage, which has to be calculated by weight and often with confusing unit conversions best left to pharmacists. Even so, most of these meds do happen to have a very high safety index and have been studied extensively in animals. The greater issue is, taking meds for undiagnosed conditions. These meds can have horrific die off reactions, stir up latent infections or trigger secondary infections, any of which may be fatal. For each of these reasons this post is correct in advising against unsupervised use of pharm drugs. Assuming you do have a reaction, how would anyone know what you took, much less why? How would you show up at an ER to explain that you took unprescribed meds for an undiagnosed condition; not to mention, most (99.99%) of ER docs are ill prepared to properly address these types of cases, much less the side effects of an unfamiliar medication.

I must agree with other posters on the futility of "lab testing". I can't speak for eauropean labs, but in the U.S. "lab testing" involves, first of all, procedures which can destroy many specimens and then relies on poorly trained and educated lab techs (couple months of formal training) to catch and identify an infection from a specimen which is several drops of a diluted sample of one "scoop" from a tiny portion of your stool. The odds against them finding anything are STAGGERING, even if they know what they are looking for, much less, what they are looking at. Literature suggests an accuracy rate of a mere 10-20 percent, while I maintain that it is actually much smaller. At best, this would mean that, out of any 10 true positive cases only 1 to 2 would be detected. Even with a high index of suspicion, many infections are quite difficult to detect and occasionally impossible, as some parasites don't secrete eggs but actual larvae. This brings us full circle to the double jeopardy that exists with pharm drugs. How do we get prescribed the meds if they can't even properly diagnose us? Therein lies the Real question. But the dilemma doesn't stop there, because sadly enough, most docs are painfully unaware of these meds, proper indications or dosages not to mention the efficacy of the drug. I could go on and on but I hate to unduly further depress anyone. Bottom line, taking unprescribed meds unsupervised is not a good idea and can actually make your condition worse, not to mention possibly have fatal consequences.
 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.02 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=1083963