This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Knowledge & Support Community

Hi All,

I found this interview with Dr Bihari that gives the full history of LDN and how it came about, and what it is being used for now.
It is sad to see that we have made little progress since 2003, but it's a "must read" for all those taking or interested in Low Dose Naltrexone.
Cheers, Ian
http://www.buylowdosenaltrexone.com/art ... f-ldn.html

And let us not forget that Dr Bihari took out patents on the application of Naltrexone in low dosages.
That these patents were bought by one of the major pharmaceutical manufacturers (TNI Biotec).
TNI are building a plant in Central America to produce Naltrexone in a small dose form.
TNI are also supposed to be setting up a Phase III trial - but not for MS treatment. Reputedly they are focusing on Crohn's disease.

I would ask: Why bring up an 11-year old interview right now?

Geoff

DrGeoff wrote:And let us not forget that Dr Bihari took out patents on the application of Naltrexone in low dosages.
That these patents were bought by one of the major pharmaceutical manufacturers (TNI Biotec).
TNI are building a plant in Central America to produce Naltrexone in a small dose form.
TNI are also supposed to be setting up a Phase III trial - but not for MS treatment. Reputedly they are focusing on Crohn's disease.

I would ask: Why bring up an 11-year old interview right now?

Geoff

Would imagine that Bihari would have only been able to get utility patents for using low dose LDN on MS patients since Naltrexone itself was way beyond any patent protection.

Do you think that the trials are being done for Crohn's as opposed to MS due to the better possibility of a positive outcome?

Yes, Harry, as I understand it the patents were for the application in low dosage strengths rather than Naltrexone itself.

And, yes, I am certain that Crohn's was selected as being easier to get a good outcome from a trial. I am sure that most people here can work out the problems with trying to get a favorable outcome from a group of MS sufferers. One would have to be very selective of the trial subjects, and that would make a nonsense of the usual "random assignment to experimental or control groups" thing. Of course, once there is one favorable trial, then someone, somewhere in the world, will approve it for prescription. Then Europe will approve it, then the UK, then finally the US. Then the insurance companies will maybe start shelling out for it.

Properly trialed, I guess that there could be quite a market for a capsule or tablet with 1.5mg of Naltrexone. Going by that which the happy users report - that would make it easy to get to the 3mg or 4.5mg which most of them use.

Geoff

There have been a couple trials of LDN for MS, I found a some links below... Primary benefits were reduction of spasms, brain fog and energy levels.

I take 4.5mg of LDN nightly and my insurance company pays for it. Its $70 for a 2 month supply. I live in Canada and the Government pays for all my meds after I hit $5000, which is only a few months of Copaxone, and puts my insurance company Great West Life off the hook. The $5,000 is based on household income. The gov't DO NOT pay for LDN though... which I thought was odd as my Neurologist prescribed it.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18728058
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20695007
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15694688

Kronk wrote:There have been a couple trials of LDN for MS, I found a some links below... Primary benefits were reduction of spasms, brain fog and energy levels.

I take 4.5mg of LDN nightly and my insurance company pays for it. Its $70 for a 2 month supply. I live in Canada and the Government pays for all my meds after I hit $5000, which is only a few months of Copaxone, and puts my insurance company Great West Life off the hook. The $5,000 is based on household income. The gov't DO NOT pay for LDN though... which I thought was odd as my Neurologist prescribed it.

I'm guessing the gov't here probably doesn't pay for LDN because it isn't "approved" for MS use but if they cover other rx drugs for you then I wonder why they wouldn't cover the LDN. Have you ever called them and asked why not? First check if the rx bottle has a DIN number on it...that's usually the criteria and if LDN is considered a "compounded drug" then that might be the reason. Let me know what you find. Thanks.

It is a compound drug and that is why it isnt covered. But my insurance pays so I am not impacted. Even so the price of LDN is a heck of a lot cheaper than the myriad of other supplements I am taking.

Kronk wrote:It is a compound drug and that is why it isnt covered. But my insurance pays so I am not impacted. Even so the price of LDN is a heck of a lot cheaper than the myriad of other supplements I am taking.

OK. When my wife used LDN for a year or so, (didn't effect her one way or the other) I had to fight with the insurance company because although we had compounded drug coverage, they said it wasn't covered because there was no DIN number. I had to tell them that it was illegal to place a DIN number on a compounded rx. Nothing like telling people how they should do their job!!