Most recent analysis of LDN survey reveals relapse rate of 0.226 for 267 MS patients, or 1 relapse every 5 years. Same as Copaxone!
http://home.earthlink.net/~dflomer/LDN/
The other questions on symptoms are subjective of course, but are informative for LDN users, who want to compare their results to a block of users, broken down by MS type.
I hope these reports help convince anyone you are talking to about LDN, either for prescriptions or research.
I think I have done everything I can to wring useful data out of the survey. I hope this homemade research is useful to everyone in their pitch to researchers, as a valid clue that needs to be followed up. Now it is time for trails!
My deepest gratitude to all of you for your feedback and hard work on the LDN trials campaign!
Samantha/Redtruck99@yahoo.com
LDN Survey: Relapse rate on LDN same as Copaxone
-
willysnout1
- Family Elder
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 2:00 pm
LSN research is progressing
Willy,
Of course it means nothing scientifically, I plaster that disclaimer all over the survey page. Anecdotes are not a bad thing, they are step 1 in the logical progression of research, followed by case studies, hypothesis, animal trials, then human trials. LDN has already been through human safety trials at much higher doses, so it can move more quickly.
My intent was to call attention to this growing body of anecdotal evidence which deserves the next investigative step. And it worked! My neurologist (at a large academic research hospital with an MS center) is writing an LDN clinical trial proposal for their review board right now. Another researcher has shown the survey to an Italian MS research group that is also considering a trial. So progress is happening, and in a year or two we should have the beginning of some definitve LDN-MS evidence.
Meanwhile, I am happy to keep taking this cheap harmless pill, that has made my cane obsolete, and kept me out of the wheelchair I was approved for. Yes, just one more useless anecdote, but hang in there, the answers will come...
SammyJo
Of course it means nothing scientifically, I plaster that disclaimer all over the survey page. Anecdotes are not a bad thing, they are step 1 in the logical progression of research, followed by case studies, hypothesis, animal trials, then human trials. LDN has already been through human safety trials at much higher doses, so it can move more quickly.
My intent was to call attention to this growing body of anecdotal evidence which deserves the next investigative step. And it worked! My neurologist (at a large academic research hospital with an MS center) is writing an LDN clinical trial proposal for their review board right now. Another researcher has shown the survey to an Italian MS research group that is also considering a trial. So progress is happening, and in a year or two we should have the beginning of some definitve LDN-MS evidence.
Meanwhile, I am happy to keep taking this cheap harmless pill, that has made my cane obsolete, and kept me out of the wheelchair I was approved for. Yes, just one more useless anecdote, but hang in there, the answers will come...
SammyJo
-
willysnout1
- Family Elder
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 2:00 pm
I think LDN deserves a real trial, by the way, and I've been saying that for quite a while.-
msmaybe
ldn
There is some very interesting data in the medical literature (PubMed) about neuroprotection in animals by naloxone (similar to naltrexone). The researchers showed neuroptrotection by naloxone. But it was not by the mechanism everyone claims--stimulation of opoid receptors. They showed that the isomer of naloxone (chemicals often have more than one isomer) that cannot affect opoid receptors has equal neuroprotection to the one that stimulates the opoid receptors. They postulated a yet undiscovered mechanism of action for this drug. These studies were done before the current internet excitement over LDN, but no one seems to quote them.
-
msmaybe
LDN
Here is one of the citations.
Methods Mol Med. 2003;79:43-54.
Neuroprotective effect of naloxone in inflammation-mediated dopaminergic neurodegeneration. Dissociation from the involvement of opioid receptors.
Liu B, Hong JS.
Neuropharmacology Section, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Methods Mol Med. 2003;79:43-54.
Neuroprotective effect of naloxone in inflammation-mediated dopaminergic neurodegeneration. Dissociation from the involvement of opioid receptors.
Liu B, Hong JS.
Neuropharmacology Section, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
-
msmaybe
LDN
Here is one of the citations.
Methods Mol Med. 2003;79:43-54.
Neuroprotective effect of naloxone in inflammation-mediated dopaminergic neurodegeneration. Dissociation from the involvement of opioid receptors.
Liu B, Hong JS.
Neuropharmacology Section, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Methods Mol Med. 2003;79:43-54.
Neuroprotective effect of naloxone in inflammation-mediated dopaminergic neurodegeneration. Dissociation from the involvement of opioid receptors.
Liu B, Hong JS.
Neuropharmacology Section, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Bravo msmaybe! Sounds like we are getting a double bargain from naltrexone. Here is the second part of the research by this team at NIH.
Inhibition by naloxone stereoisomers of beta-amyloid peptide (1-42)-induced superoxide production in microglia and degeneration of cortical and mesencephalic neurons.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/quer ... t=Abstract
SammyJo
http://LDNers.org
Inhibition by naloxone stereoisomers of beta-amyloid peptide (1-42)-induced superoxide production in microglia and degeneration of cortical and mesencephalic neurons.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/quer ... t=Abstract
SammyJo
http://LDNers.org