Talk:Low dose naltrexone
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Autoimmunity
The use of "autoimmunity" as a term in this article is loose. For it to be used correctly would require immune attack against self tissues. (unknown user, Oct 20, 2006)
All references to "autoimmune disease" in the article do refer to diseases in which the body's immune system attacks itself. However, whereas previously it was thought that the mechanism for autoimmune disease is a hyperactive immune system, it is now believed that immunodeficiency may be a contributing factor or even a primary cause in some, most, or all of these diseases. Andew2 07:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
The article author's statement that Crohn's is a "classic autoimmune" disorder was not stated with references and further is contradicted by several studies including the ones referenced on this author's own article. Autoimmune and under active immune system are not the same or similar even. Therefore the statements of this author's article are logically inconsistent, and factually incorrect on at lest one point. Several studies show that Crohn's disease can be treated with better success than the rates quoted in the author's article by using anti-mycobacterial treatments. [1] [2] [3] Therefore, the statement that Crohn's is autoimmune is not just an understatement but is totally inconsistent with logical conclusions from more effective treatments than those of the typical American pharmaceutical model. I.e. if the most effective treatments assume that Crohn's disease is causes by a bacteria and aided by a weak immune system, then Crohn's disease is not autoimmune and is probably bacterial in origin. Several studies over several years support the notion that Crohn's disease is bacterial in origin and aided by a weak immune system, therefore, Crohn's disease is not autoimmune and is probably bacterial in origin. The use of the term "autoimmunity" in reference to Crohn's disease must be deleted or changed soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.249.30.239 (talk) 20:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I wish to change "The trial demonstrated the safety and efficacy of LDN in a group of patients with Crohn's disease, a classic autoimmune disorder. Dr. Jill Smith, Professor of Gastroenterology at Pennsylvania State University's College of Medicine, found that two-thirds of the patients in her pilot study went into remission and fully 89% of the group responded to treatment to some degree." to "The trial demonstrated the safety and efficacy of LDN in a group of patients with Crohn's disease, regarded by some Dr.s in many countries as an autoimmune disorder. Dr. Jill Smith, Professor of Gastroenterology at Pennsylvania State University's College of Medicine, found that two-thirds of the patients in her pilot study went into remission and fully 89% of the group responded to treatment to some degree." I would naturally provide sources to show that some Dr.s and researchers believe, regardless of the actual truth of the matter, that CD (Crohn's disease)is autoimmune. I then wold like to add a statement that this study and others call into question the unfounded assumption that CD is autoimmune. The links from my previous anonymous post just above should be helpful but I have more as well. I think I will edit this by Wed. unless I hear this is a bad idea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halej (talk • contribs) 03:12, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Use with ALS
The drug has been shown to reduce and stop the progression of the symptoms of the disease. This should D-E-F-I-N-I-T-E-L-Y be included in the article. I will add this after I find sources.Yamaka122 19:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] DATES need to be added to this section
The use of LDN for such diseases as cancer was discovered and developed by Ian Zagon, PhD in animal and in vitro research (WHEN?), and LDN's broader clinical effects in humans were discovered by Bernard Bihari, MD in the 1980s (DATE?). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.108.231.181 (talk) 07:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Warnings about bogus science.
That proponents are being attacked or ignored by the establishment is a claim that should raise eyebrows and a big smile in any skeptik, so maybe someone should back it up with overtures to the establishment. That it's a solution for some of the most prolific and intractable problems in category:medicine should open somebody's wallet for research. I want to know which problem is most likely.
Aha. I see it in the category.
MS: An acronym for Multiple Sclerosis.
M$: An acronym for Monopolistic $cuzzball.
BrewJay (talk) 20:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
