The Medical Thread

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

However, many of these drugs used to treat depression (Major Clinical, and/or biopolar I or II, with psychotic episodes) according to the exact definitions of the DSM, MD Consult and Online consult schedules with full case conference review, are legit for the treatment of this illness... That is why psychiatrists are scheduled to prescribe these medications, rather than a GP or Family Doctor...

I know a Family Doc, Internal Med doc or a GP is not going to want the DEA asking questions as to why they prescribed one too many antidepressants without a mental eval referral...

Family Practice and Internal Medicine doctors are "scheduled" to prescribe these medications, and the DEA does not track how many prescriptions non- psychiatrists give for depression.
If only psychiatrists and psychologists (in states that give prescribing rights to pyschologists) were the only people able to treat mental illness, then there would be a lot of people with no access to mental health care. There are many areas with few psychiatrist. These practitioners stay full for appointments. Any physician who is willing to follow the outcome of a disease can appropriately prescribe these medications. The side effects are very rare for this class of medications, and I'm sure a board certified physician can assess for those effects as well as a psychiatrist. As for whether every person with depression should get "talk therapy," that's the ideal but not the practical solution to a very common disease.

[cheerfulgreek]

While we're on the subject of medication, How much is too much? In some cases is it even necessary? Like autism for example. I think some of the vaccines are the problem with this epidemic. I don't know much about it, but I do believe that deliberating symptoms of autism typically become apparent at a very early age, like age 2 or 3, not long after infants have received vaccinations for a host of diseases. Many parents claim that their children developed autism shortly after inoculations(tests) either following a vaccine series of mumps, or measles, or vaccines that contain mercury.

I'm not sure if anyone heard of this, but has anyone heard of the MMR vaccine? There's a disease called "rumbella" which is often referred to as the German Measles. MMR means mumps, measles, and rumbella. I remember reading about a study regarding this vaccine. The study showed that symptoms of autism emerged shortly after children received the MMR vaccine. How much research is being done with the medications that are being prescribed to patients? How much research is being done on some of the vaccines we're taking into our bodies? I know there's lot a lot of research being done, but how much is a lot?

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

While we're on the subject of medication, How much is too much? In some cases is it even necessary? Like autism for example. I think some of the vaccines are the problem with this epidemic. I don't know much about it, but I do believe that deliberating symptoms of autism typically become apparent at a very early age, like age 2 or 3, not long after infants have received vaccinations for a host of diseases. Many parents claim that their children developed autism shortly after inoculations(tests) either following a vaccine series of mumps, or measles, or vaccines that contain mercury.

I'm not sure if anyone heard of this, but has anyone heard of the MMR vaccine? There's a disease called "rumbella" which is often referred to as the German Measles. MMR means mumps, measles, and rumbella. I remember reading about a study regarding this vaccine. The study showed that symptoms of autism emerged shortly after children received the MMR vaccine. How much research is being done with the medications that are being prescribed to patients? How much research is being done on some of the vaccines we're taking into our bodies? I know there's lot a lot of research being done, but how much is a lot?

Sweetheart is RUBELLA!!! Like BigRed said... According to Robbins "Pathologic Basis of Disease" 5th Ed. rubella disease is not good because it causes so many birth defects... I think there are animal models that can get this...

Most vaccines nowadays are DNA vaccines. Very few are still heat-killed live virus to boost ones immunity.

What is vaccination biologically? Injection of nucleic acids into the body? By microbes and viruses alone do this. Does that change who we are? Depends. Humans generally care several different viruses that does not cause them to get sick, all the time. Adenovirus and AAV, cytomegalovirus (until one has HIV), etc.

Generally, there are standard curves with LC50 based on the nonhuman primate studies and/or cell biology studies. That is how they decide the concentrations for these things.

[cheerfulgreek]

Oh dear GOD!!!!! I am so embarrassed!! Rubella, Rubella, Rubella!! I seriously thought it was "rumbella". (giggling) Thanks? Well, you guys knew what I meant. Right?

o.k. you guys may be right, there is little evidence that vaccines cause autism, but it is possible that vaccines trigger autism in a small subset of children, but if so, that subset has yet to be identified. A study really was done in the 90s that investigated 12 children, and the study did reveal that symptoms of autism did emerge shortly after the MMR vaccine was given to them.

If it can't be proven that vaccines play a role in the increase of autism, can someone explain why the rates of autism continue to rise? Do you think genetic factors play a role? I honestly don't believe that genetic influences alone can account for such an astronomical rise in a disorder's prevalence over a matter of just a few years. Could environmental factors be a potential explanation? AKA_Monet mentioned something about environmental factors in an earlier post. We were discussing a different topic, but could this also fall under environmental factors?

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

If it can't be proven that vaccines play a role in the increase of autism, can someone explain why the rates of autism continue to rise? Do you think genetic factors play a role? I honestly don't believe that genetic influences alone can account for such an astronomical rise in a disorder's prevalence over a matter of just a few years. Could environmental factors be a potential explanation? AKA_Monet mentioned something about environmental factors in an earlier post. We were discussing a different topic, but could this also fall under environmental factors?

I do not think in an of itself, the actual "piece" or construct DNA that is truly the "vaccinating part" has ANYTHING to do with autism. But there IS precedence that an "outside" piece of the construct could cause a severely lethal allergic reaction. It has to do with the one of the first gene therapy using the Adenoviral construct to cure Cystic Fibrosis by Dr. James Wilson. He risked ALOT to do this therapy that goes against UN human clinical trials. And the 15 year old boy he did the gene therapy in died a horrid death. Fortunately, the boy's father was a lawyer...

Autism's symptoms has been shown to be EXACERBATED by environment. As far as what is causing it, it could be too much lead or other minute items that we regularly do now and consume -- hayle, it could be that we have too much tech chit abound that fries our brains and gets transmitted to a developing fetus... Who knows?

[AKA_Monet]

Cheerful-

Are you asking all these questions because you saw the Charlie Bartlett trailer?

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Cheerful-

Are you asking all these questions because you saw the Charlie Bartlett trailer?

lol lol lol lol

No, I just wanna read other opinions. I do wanna see that movie though. Does anyone know when it starts?

I just want to mention one more thing. Back to the DSM manual....o.k. I promise I won't bring up the the DSM anymore...lol.

I just wanted to mention something about the vaccines. There may be an overlooked alternative explanantion for this epidemic. Over time the the criteria for a diagnosis of autism have loosened, resulting in the labeling of substantially more mildly afflicted individuals as autistic. The 1980 version of the DSM required individuals to meet six of six criteria for an autism diagnosis, In contrast to that, the 1994 version, which is the version we're currently using requires individuals to meet any 8 of 16 criteria. The 1980 version contained only two diagnosis relevant to autism, DSM IV contains five including Asperger's syndrome which most researchers regard as a high functioning variant of autism.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

hayle, it could be that we have too much tech chit abound that fries our brains and gets transmitted to a developing fetus... Who knows?

lol lol

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Oh dear GOD!!!!! I am so embarrassed!! Rubella, Rubella, Rubella!! I seriously thought it was "rumbella". (giggling) Thanks? Well, you guys knew what I meant. Right?

o.k. you guys may be right, there is little evidence that vaccines cause autism, but it is possible that vaccines trigger autism in a small subset of children, but if so, that subset has yet to be identified. A study really was done in the 90s that investigated 12 children, and the study did reveal that symptoms of autism did emerge shortly after the MMR vaccine was given to them.

If it can't be proven that vaccines play a role in the increase of autism, can someone explain why the rates of autism continue to rise? Do you think genetic factors play a role? I honestly don't believe that genetic influences alone can account for such an astronomical rise in a disorder's prevalence over a matter of just a few years. Could environmental factors be a potential explanation? AKA_Monet mentioned something about environmental factors in an earlier post. We were discussing a different topic, but could this also fall under environmental factors?

You have to be very careful when evaluating research on this topic since the main proponent of this theory was revealed to have falsified his data. Re-evaluation revealed no causation.

[AKA_Monet]

This statement is from the National Institutes of Mental Health website:

Medications for bipolar disorder are prescribed by psychiatrists—medical doctors (M.D.) with expertise in the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders. While primary care physicians who do not specialize in psychiatry also may prescribe these medications, it is recommended that people with bipolar disorder see a psychiatrist for treatment.

Some mental illnesses are treated by primary care physicians - but they will give a referral for further evaluation by a mental health care provider.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

You have to be very careful when evaluating research on this topic since the main proponent of this theory was revealed to have falsified his data. Re-evaluation revealed no causation.

What data was falsified? He was sick, and needed help.

[cheerfulgreek]

Call me weird, but I just bought a tarantula a couple of days ago. I used to have one years ago and if they lose a leg, it usually, if not always grows back after molting. Infact, there's several species in the animal kingdom that can regenerate lost body parts, and when this happens (usually in lizards) the epidermal cells around the wound migrate in to close it without creating scar tissue. The different cell types revert to stem cells in order to form a blastema that will later turn into a new limb and so on. In humans, like the human heart, it forms a scar after a heart attack rather than new muscle, and every year people die from complications related to scarring. What about the human finger, when it's kept clean and unstitched? It can grow back. Do you think scientist can develop something to regenerate body parts? What about cloning body parts?

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Adenovirus and AAV, cytomegalovirus (until one has HIV), etc.

I want to elaborate on this too. Since we're on the subject of vaccines, is there one for AIDS? I remember when Bill Clinton set a national goal to develop an AIDS vaccine within a decade. Kennedy said he wanted to put a man on the moon to counter Russia's Sputnik launch from 1957. Kennedy's program worked, but we still have yet to see an AIDS vaccine.

Clinton did establish a research center at the National Institutes of Health, at the same time involving other nations in the effort.

There was an HIV vaccine back in the 80s, "VaxSyn" which is based on some kind of viral protein. I can't remember the name exactly, but I do know it was based on a viral protein. Anyway, it was unsuccessful, but then again, back in the 80s it was also thought that AIDS was gay related.

So what do you think? Do you think a successful vaccine can be created soon? Bill Clinton started this program some 10 years ago. Well, we're still waiting.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

I want to elaborate on this too. Since we're on the subject of vaccines, is there one for AIDS? I remember when Bill Clinton set a national goal to develop an AIDS vaccine within a decade. Kennedy said he wanted to put a man on the moon to counter Russia's Sputnik launch from 1957. Kennedy's program worked, but we still have yet to see an AIDS vaccine.

Clinton did establish a research center at the National Institutes of Health, at the same time involving other nations in the effort.

There was an HIV vaccine back in the 80s, "VaxSyn" which is based on some kind of viral protein. I can't remember the name exactly, but I do know it was based on a viral protein. Anyway, it was unsuccessful, but then again, back in the 80s it was also thought that AIDS was gay related.

So what do you think? Do you think a successful vaccine can be created soon? Bill Clinton started this program some 10 years ago. Well, we're still waiting.

One of the HIV vaccine centers was at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. It has just come out unfortunately that the HIV vaccine failed. It did not protect anyone from becoming infected with HIV...

There is the issue that MAYBE HSV-2 infection has some protection against HIV, BUT I just read in JAMA that may not be all the accurate...

I do not understand why a vaccine cannot be made against HIV... It does not make sense? And what bakes my noodle even more is how come folks with advance HIV disease do not get "polio" or "MMR"?

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

One of the HIV vaccine centers was at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. It has just come out unfortunately that the HIV vaccine failed. It did not protect anyone from becoming infected with HIV...

There is the issue that MAYBE HSV-2 infection has some protection against HIV, BUT I just read in JAMA that may not be all the accurate...

I do not understand why a vaccine cannot be made against HIV... It does not make sense? And what bakes my noodle even more is how come folks with advance HIV disease do not get "polio" or "MMR"?

Actually the number of people living with HIV/AIDS globally has dramatically dropped, and that's not because of an actual drop in the HIV burden, but because of better counting methods in India. UNAIDS (The Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS) and the World Health Organization announced some time last November that the disease's prevalence in India is around 2 million. That's still a lot when you look at the numbers alone, but if you think about it, that's down by more than half from a previous estimate of around 5 million.