ikulo wrote:Didn't Putnam already try blood thinners 80 years ago with no success? I couldn't find the actual studies, but that has been noted on this board a few times.
dania wrote:Aspirin helps in preventing blood from clotting. Just like Plavix and Coumadin. All 3 make the blood less sticky.
Martin Cane, M.D:
Both warfarin (Brand name - Coumadin) and Plavix (generic - clopidogrel bisulfate) are considered blood thinners. But they are very different drugs with different actions:
Warfarin works by counteracting Vitamin K in the plasma of the blood. Vitamin K is key in the coagulation pathways responsible for the clotting of blood, and with less activity of Vitamin K blood takes longer to clot. Too little, as well as too much warfarin can be dangerous. If taking a dose that is ineffective, clot formation is not adequately prevented and the problem you are trying to treat or prevent may very well occur. Taking too much warfarin raises the risk of bleeding, especially in the gastrointestinal tract and, in the elderly, the brain. People taking this drug must have their blood monitored to measure the time it takes to clot, which can result in frequent adjustments of their dose. The use of warfarin is considered "full anticoagulation" and is felt to be more effective (a higher level) than other oral blood thinners.
Plavix is a drug known as an anti-platelet drug. This drug works on the platelets in the blood stream by causing them to be less "sticky". When clots form, platelets stick to each other as part of the clotting process. Other medications in this class of drug are aspirin, persantine and aggrenox. Unlike warfarin, monitoring blood levels or activity is not necessary.
MarkW wrote:How would a blood thinning agent have any impact against a sceptum or web ? (documented by Sclafani) or a complete restriction ?
Maybe yes, maybe no. Maybe, maybe, I don't know?Shueywho wrote:Maybe it was a question out of curiosity....just maybe?
Z. Böszörményi (Neuropsychiatric-university-clinic, Budapest, 1950): New therapeutic trials of disseminated sclerosis. From among 36 patients suffering from disseminated sclerosis after dicumarin-treatment the condition of 10 patiens has shown moderate improvement, in 7 cases the improvement was doubtful, 14 remained unchanged and 5 showed marked deterioration. The validity of these results is made uncertain by the short duration of treatment (3–12 weeks) the drugs having been given in too small doses in some cases, while in others dicumarin was given together with other therapy. In one of the deteriorated cases, which nearly ended lethally, the danger of administering dicumarin in the presence of pontobulbar foci was shown. 10–10 patients have been given myanesin resp. relaxil, with an only temporary effect on the neurological picture and with an also transitory euphoria, but the findings seem to prove that the main point of effect is localised to the cerebrum. Parpanit has been given to 5 patients for 2–6 months, with but a little diminution of spasticity, and in 2 cases of the intentional tremor; of greatest value was the euphorizing effect of the drug which might have been due to the presence of subclinical frontomesencephalic foci. While dicumarin cannot be recommended as a therapy for disseminated sclerosis the other 2 drugs may be applied owing to their possible symptomatic ameliorating effects.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users