Check out nutritionworld.com for info on Oregano oil. Here is the address: http://www.nutritionworld.com/droregano
Is this effective for combating sinusitus/inhalant allergies? Benefits? Side Effects?
I have been suffering from various inhalant allergies since the age of 12 - over 19 years. My condition continues throughout the year due to allergies from mold, dust and through to hayfever as well as all dander from animals. If Oil of Oregano is not an effective treatment, what do you suggest. I am tired of taking antihistamines and dosages of 2000 mg of Vitamin C don't seem to make any difference.
In Reply to: Oil of Oregano posted by Teresa Westhead on April 23, 1998 at 22:27:26:
I've been having good luck with quercetin and nettle--don't know which is helping, so I keep taking both. Mary J.
In Reply to: Oil of Oregano posted by Teresa Westhead on April 23, 1998 at 22:27:26:
Dear Theresa,
You need a copy of my book. Nothing but your learning WHY you have this, and doing something about THAT, will ever permanently resolve this.
Once you have this information under your belt, if you still have questions, write again. As you get well, please share your experiences with the BB so others might benefit from your experience.
Walt
do you think a 7year old should take oil of oregano for allergies and if so how much do i give her and can she stop her other med that do not seem to be working.
thanks sam
In Reply to: Re: candidias: oil of oregano posted by sam keys on April 26, 1998 at 16:57:53:
Dear Sam,
I am not a good enough herbologist to advise you about your question. However, this site is linked to a good herbologist & you could ask her.
What I DO know about, though, is the antihistaminic effect of esterified vitramin C. If she were mine, I would get her to take about 3 grams of esterified virtamin C twice a day & see how she is in a few days.
Let us know what you learn about oregano oil.
Walt
Dear Dr. Stoll,
I have been reading a lot of research info lately about the healing properties in Aloe Vera and an antioxidant called Pynogenol (spelled right?). I've read that these supplements can stimulate a person's immune system to fight off major health problems like cancer, heart disease, arthritis and many many other ailments.
Do you have any knowledge or experience with either of these products?
Thanks,
Cathy
In Reply to: "Can Aloe Vera really heal??" posted by Cathy Hill on April 01, 1998 at 08:17:43:
I have an aloe plant in my kitchen, and whenever I or my daughter get a cut or a graze we snap off a piece of the plant and squeeze the gel on to the wound.
I find benefits from a) less discomfort in the wound and b) the healing process is MUCH quicker.
The next time I have 2 similar abrasions I'll treat one and not the other and report back.
Tot siens
Deryk
In Reply to: "Can Aloe Vera really heal??" posted by Cathy Hill on April 01, 1998 at 08:17:43:
Cathy, here's more "anecdotal" evidence that aloe vera does indeed have healing properties. I, too, always keep an aloe vera plant around for treating minor cuts and burns. And I have in fact done a comparison "with" and "without". Hot grease spattered on my arm, and, when applying the aloe vera to the burned spots, I inadventently overlooked a couple. Within a couple of days, it was very obvious which ones I had overlooked. The areas to which I had applied the aloe vera were all healed, whereas the areas that had not been treated took another 7-10 days to completely heal. It truly does relieve pain and promote healing of minor injuries of this sort. What it might do for more serious conditions I don't know.
(When I had major surgery a year or so ago, I removed my bandage when I got home and applied aloe vera gel to the incision. Without having a "control" as a basis for comparison, however, I can't say whether it healed any faster than it would have otherwise.)
In Reply to: "Can Aloe Vera really heal??" posted by Cathy Hill on April 01, 1998 at 08:17:43:
Dear Cathy,
I just read and appreciated Vicki and Deryk's cogent remarks about aloe vera. Now, to throw a spanner in the works. I'm one of those allegedly statistically few folks who's allergic to aloe vera. The two times I've tried it topically I've broken out in a rash and had the affected skin turn beet red within minutes. Given these experiences, I wouldn't want to ingest aloe liquid, although I DO know an HIV-positive fellow who's been swilling aloe juice for over a dozen years along with following a whole-foods diet, and who's not developed active AIDS. So, i guess I've got to tout aloe's benefits too, along with the caution that one person's panacea may be another person's poison.
Kyra
In Reply to: Re: "Can Aloe Vera really heal??" posted by Deryk Bramwell on April 01, 1998 at 08:50:56:
I have developed a sensitivity to Aloe Vera as well. It could be the chemicals added to it, I'm not certain. I get big red splotches (contact dermititis?) when applied to the skin. I used Aloe successfully before developing a reaction.
Ron
In Reply to: "Can Aloe Vera really heal??" posted by Cathy Hill on April 01, 1998 at 08:17:43:
Dear Cathy,
We are just begining to scratch the surface about the potential of these substances. I am not a good enough herbologist to answer you well so I would recommend that you use our links page to contact the Herbologist.
Let us know what you learn.
Walt
There are an infinite number of responses that have been here regarding these natural remedies. I am afraid you have not looked hard enough and have surely not read Dr. Stolls book.
One of the reasons you don't see some natural remedy in every post is that Dr. Stoll has realized that healing is an above-down, inside-out process. Most problems don't require outside-in solutions. Whether you are using manufactured medicine or natural medicines you are still trying to trick your body into doing something that it is not wanting to do. Instead, if you learn what is holding your body back, and by that I mean different stressors, you can unleash your bodies own innate ability to heal itself. Suscptibility of the host determines who gets sick, not just what bugs are floating around. If you learn what keeps your immune system functioning at it's optimum level then you can fight off most anything. There ARE times when outside medicines are needed and natural ones are a better idea than manufactured ones, sometimes manufactured ones are needed and in some cases surgery is even needed. BUT if you learn to eat right, remove emotional and psychological stress, rest, keep active, etc.. you can avoid many pitfalls. When you do end up in these pitfalls then massage, extra relaxtion techniques, enhancing nutrition, chiropractic for your nervous system, etc.. is in order. Only when these things prove to not be enough is it time to start "tinkering" with what is going on. Too many times "remedies" take care of symptoms only or the cause for only a short period of time. Therefore it is better to work from the beginning than to start in the middle.
One other note. Many of the "remedies" you mention are just nutritional sources that a person may be lacking. These are things that should not be classified as the same thing as substances like certain herbs and teas which are not nutritional but are medicinal. Making sure someone is getting enough vitamin C is hardly the same as drinking Pau d'Arco tea.
You should consider ordering Dr. Stoll's book as there are some "remedies" such as Ginger root juice for hiatal hernia that you would probably find interesting. I think if you dig around a bit on this site and BB you will see what I am talking about regarding above-down, inside-out and how true healing comes from within and not without.
Be Well
In Reply to: Re: Natural Cures posted by David Ferguson, D.C. on April 05, 1998 at 22:28:03:
Dave
I think this post sums up the philosophy of the BB better than any I've read! I'm printing it out and if I can figure out how to do it, I'm going to "save" it on my computer, too!
I'm walking 3-4 hours per week now and down to 1Xwk. with Dr. Savoy. My colon is better, most of the time. The IT band is way better!
Nancy
Debbie, just in case these answers to your post sounded a little harsh, I just wanted you to know that Dr. Stoll and most of the regulars are very kind, caring and informative and I know you grow and learn from this BB. Don't know what happened here!
GRACE AND MERCY GUYS!!
In Reply to: Re: Natural Cures posted by David Ferguson, D.C. on April 05, 1998 at 22:28:03:
Dear David Ferguson,
That was an excellent explanation. That truly benefitted me reading it. I have read Dr. Stoll's book and many of the posts the last few days and was getting closer to an understanding but you really helped clarify that for me.
I suppose most of us have been taught all our lives that when we are ill to look outside for a cure and not to look at our own ability to heal within. I think there are times when there is an inbalance in nutrients in our bodies and we need to help find balance again but listening to our bodies helps us become aware to guide us toward methods of healing and balance. It has been very enlightening reading Dr. Stoll's posts and in his book about how each of us is different and that there is no 'one size fits all' remedy for illness. I appreciate his sense of respect for the individual to find their healing through education and self awareness. It becomes a jouney of personal growth and knowledge.
This is indeed a shift in thinking and responding to health and healing. It is more active and less passive.
Thanks Debbie for asking this question. The answer was very helpful to me. I truly appreciate it!
Thank you David and again to Dr. Stoll.
Sincerely,
pamela
Debbie,
I was very enlightened to read your comments about natural medicines. Recently I have become very interested in this topic and have been doing quite a bit of research. I think it is definitely a good positive move and it can never hurt or hinder one to be more intune with your mind and body and how better to do it than put inside only natural substances (things God intended for us since the beginning of time). Please don't be discouraged by the negative ramblings of others. Stick to what your mind and body is telling you and i'm sure you'll enjoy may years of good health...mentally and physically.
Good luck and God bless,
Cathy
In Reply to: Re: Natural Cures posted by David Ferguson, D.C. on April 05, 1998 at 22:28:03:
Dear Doc Dave,
I could not have said it better! Thanks for your intelligent, knowledgable and caring contributions to this 'site!
Namaste` Walt
In Reply to: Re: Natural Cures - Excellent Explanation posted by Pamela on April 06, 1998 at 01:51:18:
Dear Pam,
THANKS! I needed that!
It is by input as you have given that this 'site is enriched far beyond what I can do.
Namaste` Walt
In Reply to: Re: Natural Cures posted by Nancy on April 05, 1998 at 23:07:01:
Thanks, Nancy.
Congratulations on getting moving on your journey towards wellness. I hope you will continue to update us on your progress. This will be an exciting & fulfilling time for you!
If you have not looked at Jim's notes about experiencing the "process" you would be enlightened and entertained by reading them. They are so special that we have created an archive just for them.
There is a lot more to getting well than eating the right diet for the individual, or exercising, or even practicing skilled relaxation. There is that indefinable something (spirit?) that fills in the gaps & holds everything else together. The reason I focus on the simple things is that most people are so sick that they cannot do anything except baby steps in the right direction. Each step makes the spirit stronger to the place where wellness becomes automatic.
It is the notes by Doc Dave, You, Linda, Jim., etc., that the spiritual part of this is brought to the consciousness of the BB participants. Thanks for helping others!
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Natural Cures posted by bob b - Debbie! Maybe you should take reading lessons from a psychiatrist. on April 05, 1998 at 18:12:08:
Dear Bob B.,
I must have missed something here. I thought Debbie's note was a good one. I certainly didn't think she was off base--other than she didn't understand my feelings for the place for "natural substances". Doc Dave explains what I have been offering, here on the BB, and states it beautifully in his note of 4/6/98. I cannot say it better so I will not even try.
I appreciate your support. I would suggest that you give all participants of the BB the benefit of the doubt and consider that we are all seekers after information. The most charitable explanation for anything is usually closer to the truth than the worst possible interpretation.
When the rare person comes along for whom the worst possible interpretation of his/her notes is valid, that will become apparent to everyone soon enough. I have found that destructive people soon enough expose themselves more than they will ever know.
I hope Debbie has not been discouraged to continue participating in our mutual journey toward enlightenment.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: To Dr. Stoll posted by pea brain on April 06, 1998 at 19:56:00:
Dear Debbie,
I'm sure your post was not meant to bring up these unbelievable
responses. Most people who frequent these boards are looking
for knowledge, and support. We all have to do what is best for
our own bodies. The more knowledge we gather the better we will
feel. The more I learn the more I know that I know nothing. Ther
is so much out there to educate us and we need to be constantly
learning and fitting that knowledge in with what we already
know. Natural cures are good and they are just one part of the
many things available to help you. You need to explore as many
things as you can get your hands on. Read Dr. Stoll's book
and read many other books too. Explore things like acupuncture,
relaxation therapy, meditation, reflexology, exercise etc. and
see what these things do for your body. What works for one
person may or may not work for everyone. Remember you and you
alone should be responsible for your own health. Debbie I hope
these posts do not turn you off from this site. There is nothing
wrong with your question. You just want to learn more about
natural cures. Just keep your mind open to all new ideas and
learn from them.
Geri
In Reply to: Re: Natural Cures posted by Walt Stoll on April 07, 1998 at 08:01:25:
Dr Walt
I appreciate, as always, your words of encouragement. Those baby steps do add up, don't they! I still feel that I have a tremendous amount to learn and much healing, particularly of the LGS, but I've learned and healed alot, too.
I look forward to reading this BB every day. It's a continuous source of knowledge. And yes, I agree that Jim's posts are remarkable. I read everything he writes and have copied several of them.
I'm really beginning to understand that these pesky ailments of mine are cries for help from my body and that because of them and my changing of lifestyle, eating habits, etc, I may be preventing far more serious diseases in my future. I guess you could call them blessings in disguise, then.
Thanks again!
Nancy
Hello Dr. Stoll,
I have started taking Co-Enzyme Q10 to help supplement my diet. What is the average amount one should take in a day? Also, at what dosage amount is it consider toxic?
Thanks in advance for any reply,
Michael J. McG.
In Reply to: Co-Enzyme Q10 posted by Michael J. McG. on April 18, 1998 at 17:58:28:
Dear Michael,
In MY experience, CoQ10 is much too expensive for a general supplement. There are better things that will serve that purpose. NOW, if you have a specific condition, I can tell you the dosage for that.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Co-Enzyme Q10 posted by Walt Stoll on April 20, 1998 at 16:00:19:
Walt,
I take CoQ10 but would be hard pressed to say specifically for what. Would you be good enough to share with us the conditions which, in your opinion, would warrant a person's taking CoQ10? (It IS expensive.)
Vicki
In Reply to: Re: Co-Enzyme Q10 posted by Vicki on April 22, 1998 at 12:54:32:
Dear Vicki,
CoEnzyme Q10 concentrates in brain, eye & heart tissue.
SO, if I had serious problems with any of those organs, I would be taking at least 100 milligrams daily till the causes could be dealt with for a few months at least & the signs of problems were gone.
It is especially valuable for those things for which conventional medicine has no answers. It is a shame that the conventional medical monopoly ignores it just because it has few side-effects & can be obtained without a prescription (no cut for the doc).
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Co-Enzyme Q10 posted by Walt Stoll on April 24, 1998 at 09:52:05:
Dear Vicki,
When I lived at high altitude in New Mexico (7500 ft) I learned from an alternative doc/homeopath in Los Alamos that CoQ rapidly helps people from the "flatlands" (particularly the elderly population) adjust to high-altitude life. She said that it particularly benefits people with heart conditions who must live in the mountains. For myself, I've found that when I travel to 9,000-12,00 ft. to go skiing I can completely avoid altitude sickness/feeling of not enough air now that I'm a flatlander again simply by swallowing 3 to 5 100 mg CoQs at a time daily the entire time I'm up high. It's an incredible treat to be able to ski at 12,000 ft. with no noticeable altitude adjustment pangs. Yet another thing that the Gods of Medical Attitude are for the most part abysmally unaware of, and would scoff if they heard about.
Kyra
In Reply to: Re: Co-Enzyme Q10 posted by Kyra on April 26, 1998 at 01:42:37:
Kyra,
I saw your message about CoQ:
Do/did you experience any side effects from taking "3 to 5 100 mg CoQs at a time daily." I have been taking three 30 mg CoQs a day for about two weeks, and I have not really noticed any noticeable changes. I am thinking about increasing the dosage. Should I be concerned about this? And what type of side effects are associated with taking CoQ?
Much appreciative for any reply,
Michael J. McGartland
In Reply to: Re: Co-Enzyme Q10 posted by Michael on April 27, 1998 at 22:08:40:
Dear Michael,
I just checked my personal email and answered the identical message you'd sent there by responding to your email address, but in case you check the BB first, I'll paraphrase the message I sent you. First, I'm not an M.D., so I can't prescribe or diagnose anything. I'm willing to share my personal experiences with CoQ with you. At "3 to 5 100 mg CoQs daily". I didn't experience any side effects whatsoever, except that I didn't feel any altitude-related oxygen debt upon physical exertion, which I previously experienced to an empirically significant degree. I took this amount of CoQ at the suggestion of a friend I was skiing with. According to "Prescription for Nutritional Healing" by James F. Balch M.D. and Phyllis A. Balch C.N.C. under "Warnings" (page 10) in ragards to CoQ, "No side effects have been documented to date." The authors do not state at what dosage no side effects have been documented, nor do they reccommend a dosage. In the same book (page 11), the authors state that the Recommended Daily Allowance for Coenzyme Q as given by the FDA is 30 mg daily. If I were you, I'd consult a qualified health care professsional (perhaps a naturopath?) before increasing your dosage. What is apparently harmless to me might be toxic to you. The next I didn't mention in my email to you at your personal address. Another source of information on CoQ, if you have access to it, might be Medline database through the Internet.
All the best again!
Kyra
I went to the store to find Esterfied C. I found lots of Ester C. The sales person said its the same. Is it? I bought the powder because pills just sit in my stomah so far. Its brown and taste brown. Some had Bioflavanoids and I did not know if that was important. Also, I began to realize A Few years ago how tense I was holding my body and I began then to conciously relax my shoulders. Over the years my conciousness of the tension in my body has come to me section by section. I am now to the point where I can feel the tension in my stomach(no wonder the blood cant get there!). And most recently I can actually feel tension in my kidneys, liver and gall bladder. It astounds me how this has come to me and how I could not feel it before. What a process. I started talking to my organs while practicing relaxation and they all spoke of fear to me. Each organ expressed fear of different types. It was wild. I would just put my hand over the organ area and ask what it was feeling and if it had anything it wanted to say, acknowledging that I knew that we were one. I felt my best while I was doing that. I am very interested in Biofeedback and I was wondering how to pick a place to go to. Also, Walt, thanks for the help with the infection. So far so good, still dont know what bacteria. Thanks so much everyone for your help.
In Reply to: Ester C, Biofeedback and more... posted by B 12 Terri on April 28, 1998 at 01:07:30:
Dear Terri,
Ester C is all I could find, too. I don't know if it's the same as esterified c (I asked the same question) but I started taking it like crazy when I caught a cold/fever on Sunday and the stuff works! Just like the book says.
I think its great that the skilled relaxation is helping..I'm still working on that part.
Good luck and take care,
Terrie
I missed the annoucement about the recent vit. C research and would like someone to clue me in as to what was said or the original reference. I would like to be able to point out weaknesses in the research to people who tell me about it. I don't even know what adverse effects were found. Thanks. Martha
In Reply to: Vit. C controversy posted by Martha on April 14, 1998 at 11:10:08:
Go to Lycos search engine www.lycos.com and click on health and then select health news of April 8.
I copied the address:
http://news.lycos.com/stories/Health/19980408RTHEALTH-TOO9.asp
I also put it at the Link URL below but I have never use that before. If it works you may be able to click in the link and go to the news page.
Good luck
Antonio
In Reply to: Vit. C controversy posted by Martha on April 14, 1998 at 11:10:08:
Martha:
The Lycos link I gave you last night expired today, and I could not find it again in Lycos. However I did find it both the original anouncement and a rebutal at Infoseek.
If you want the originals they may still be there. (www.infoseek.com and ask for a Vitamin C search of NEWS not web). Just in case this one also dissappears I did a double cut and paste of both news. After you have a chance to look them over please let us know your thoughts. Take care.
Here it is (it does not look too good here, I hope the columns get straight in the final posting)
Antonio
High doses of vitamin C can be
harmful - study
02:01 p.m Apr 08, 1998 Eastern
By Patricia Reaney
LONDON, April 8 (Reuters) - Vitamin C can be
bad for your health, British doctors said on
Wednesday.
The dietary supplement that is marketed for its
cancer-preventive or antioxidant properties is
effective if taken in the recommended daily
allowance of 60 milligrams per day, but in larger
doses it may cause genetic damage that could lead
to diseases such as cancer or rheumatoid arthritis.
``At the dose of 500 milligrams per day, which is
a typical dose used for supplementation, we have
shown that as well a having an antioxidant, or
protective effect, it appears to have a dual activity
in that it can also cause damage,'' Professor
Joseph Lunec told Reuters in an interview.
``It's been shown in the test tube that vitamin C
can cause damage to DNA. We've shown it is
(true in) human subjects.''
Lunec and a team of researchers at the University
of Leicester in central England studied 30 healthy
people who were given 500 milligrams of vitamin
C, or ascorbic acid, each day for six weeks.
After testing blood samples of each volunteer they
found that in the higher dose vitamin C's
anti-cancer properties can be counteracted,
although the damage it produces seems to be
much less important than the damage it is
preventing.
``A fine balance exists that may be disrupted in
favour of oxidants (oxidative stress), giving rise to
an accumulation of bimolecular damage, which in
turn may play a role in major diseases such as
cancer, rheumatoid arthritis and atherosclerosis
(hardening of the arteries),'' he said in a report
published in the scientific journal Nature.
Vitamin C works as an antioxidant by attacking
certain oxygen atoms called free radicals, which
are produced by the body and stimulate cancer
growth.
But Lunec said his study showed that at higher
doses vitamin C can produce free radicals by
reacting with metal in DNA, the fundamental
genetic material of all cells.
Vitamin C, which is found in fresh fruits such as
oranges and grapefruits and in green vegetables,
milk and meat, has been shown to boost the
immune system and to help ward off colds and flu.
A deficiency of the vitamin can cause scurvy, a
disease that was once very common among
sailors, as well as muscle weakness, swelling and
inflammation of the gums and loss of teeth.
More recently cancer patients have been taking
much larger doses of the vitamin, up to six grams a
day, for its antioxidant qualities. But Lunec said
there is no scientific evidence to support the use of
such high doses.
``There seems to me to be no point in taking more
than you need to, especially if it has a potentially
harmful effect.''
Lunec and his team are currently conducting
similar studies using lower doses of vitamin C to
establish the best overall protective dose of the
vitamin. ^REUTERS@
Copyright 1998 Reuters Limited. All rights
reserved. Republication and redistribution of
Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the
prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not
be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or
for any acti
In Reply to: Vit. C controversy posted by Martha on April 14, 1998 at 11:10:08:
Antonio: thanks a million for the prompt and complete info.
It will take a while for me to digest it but "preliminary
and inconclusive" seems like a good assessment. This BB is
wonderful--where else could I get this info so easily.
Martha
In Reply to: Vit. C controversy posted by Martha on April 14, 1998 at 11:10:08:
Martha, I pass the following quote on for your information. I'm sure Dr Kennedy wouldn't mind my sharing it with the board.
"Vitamin C
"Special Flash from CNN, today (4/8/98): some fool states that it may be that vitamin C in large doses (defined as over 500 mg.) may be injurious to your health. This is surely part of the on-going war waged by the pharmaceutical companies against nutritional therapies. You can be certain money exchanged hands for this opinion to be expressed.
"All mammals make ascorbate (vit. C) in their bodies with the exceptions of only four species: gorillas, guinea pigs, fruit bats and man. These three other species consume a high ascorbate diet. Only man consumes a low ascorbate diet and does not manufactor his own ascorbate.
"Four enzymes are required to manufacture ascorbate from glucose and man is missing only the fourth one in the chain. Somewhere is our history we developed a genetic disease which we all share which could be called hypoascorbemia.
"Animals, such as rabbits, daily make the weight adjusted (to 150
pounds)equivalent of 5000 mg. and under stress or illness this can be quadrupled.
"I suggest that nature knows what it is doing and that high levels of ascorbate are very useful for long-term health. This may explain why animals in the wild never have vascular disease and why man almost always does.
"Apparently, plaque formation begins with micro-tears in the artery wall which should be rapidly repaired with the same material which was torn: collagen. However, because ascorbate is in short supply (which is required for collagen repair - thus scurvy occurs in ascorbate deficiency) the body has a back-up mechanism to repair micro-tears: plug it with lipids. The process begins with lipoprotein(a), the stickiest substance in the body and this substance attracts other lipid molecules. This is the beginning of plaque formation.
"Because vascular disease kills over 1/2 the population, it seems wise to take plenty of ascorbate. My daily dose is 3 grams and I consider that a minimum.
"More later,
Ron Kennedy, M.D."
In Reply to: Vit. C controversy posted by Martha on April 14, 1998 at 11:10:08:
Dear Martha,
I don't even read this kind of stuff anymore. The main thing is that the AMA will see that any negative findings (for anything non-prescription) will get universal exposure and any positive findings will be suppressed as much as possible.
I predict that this stupid study will go the way of the "research" by the tobacco companies substantiating the safety & non-addictive nature of smoking.
Linus Pauling (the person who knew more about vitamin C than anyone else in the world) took at least 15 grams of vitamin C daily for the last 20 years of his life. He finally died at about the age of 95 with no indication of ANY damage from the vitamin C. He, so far, is the only person in the world who earned 2 (unshared) Nobel Prizes. The AMA ostracized him as a quack & prevented him from getting any public funds for research for more than 20 years. Whoever listens to these guys must still believe in the tooth fairy.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Vit. C controversy posted by Martha on April 15, 1998 at 14:45:44:
I'm a 68 year old chronic hep C patient with very high viral load (1.25 million). Have never taken interferon. Waiting for a higher percentage treatment. Have been trying to get into a SUNY Hospital program where they are using interferon and ribaviron (??) but diabetes and heart bypass surgery three years ago may kill my chances. Any comments?
In Reply to: Re: Vit. C controversy posted by Chuck Richardson on April 21, 1998 at 21:21:15:
Dear Chuck,
BY FAR the most efficient, safest and least expensive way to produce interferon in the body (lots more than you can take) is by getting your vitamin C high enough that it turns on the body's interferon factories. This requires at least 50-100 grams a day for 5-10 days. The only way to get this level is by IV administration. One can get the equivalent of about 50 grams by using about 12 grams of oral ESTERIFIED vitamin C per day.
Call Robert Cathcart, MD, at (415) 949-2822 to find out more. Perhaps, if you do not live in his neighborhood, he can tell you who in your part of the country would know enough to offer you this.
Finally, you would be wise to become an expert in serious wellness. You can find that protocol on the homepage of this 'site (link on this page) and in my book. Also, you would greatly benefit by having your library find you a copy of "Psychoimmunity & the Healing Process". This book was edited by Jason Serinus & published first in 1986 by Celestial Arts.
As you get well, & back in control of your life, please share your experiences with us here on the BB. Others deserve to know that they are not bding offered all of their options by the conventional medical monopoly.
Walt
In Reply to: Vit. C controversy posted by Martha on April 14, 1998 at 11:10:08:
Here's Dr Weil's comments on the Vit C flap, from his website:
"Since this study hit the news I've been flooded with e-mail on the question. The British study..., published in the April 9 issue of Nature, claims that vitamin C is an effective antioxidant, but only if taken in low doses -- 60 mg per day. Larger doses -- 500 mg or more daily -- these researchers say, may cause cell damage. The study conducted by Dr. Ian D. Podmore and colleagues from the University of Leicester, U.K., consisted of 30 healthy volunteers taking 500 mg of vitamin C a day for six weeks. Before and during the intake of the vitamin, researchers watched two indicators of oxidation damage in DNA from the volunteers' white blood cells. While taking the supplements, one indicator showed less oxidation in the volunteers, and the other indicator showed more oxidation than before they began taking the supplementation. If you think it sounds confusing and contradictory, and raises a lot of questions, you're not alone.
For clarification I went to Professor Balz Frei, who directs the Linus Pauling Institute at Oregon State University. Professor Frei says the new finding is contrary to many others, directly contradicts at least one other recent study, and focuses too narrowly on a single biological marker that has yet to be proven as a good indicator of oxidative stress and cell damage. He adds, "The value of vitamin C in lowering the risk of cancer, heart disease and other serious health problems must be considered in its totality, not just in a focus on one single aspect of its biological effect."
Always keep in mind that, unwittingly, press coverage tends to distort the importance of these less-than-impressive studies, and may present factual information in a misleading manner. Director of the Life Sciences Division of Natural and Medicinal Products Research Alex G. Schauss, Ph.D., said, "The story that ran in the New York Times did not reveal that the investigators made no claim that vitamin C caused any clinical evidence of harm. In fact, the original Reuters release quoted the authors as stating that 'vitamin C works as an antioxidant by attacking certain oxygen atoms called free radicals, which are produced by the body and stimulate cancer growth.' These researchers further commented that the use of vitamin C could be justified."
Until there's new information that offers substantial and conclusive evidence that refutes the scientific findings to date, I'm going to continue taking 2,000 mg of vitamin C divided into smaller doses throughout the day. "
In Reply to: Re: Vit. C controversy posted by Vicki on April 27, 1998 at 14:54:15:
Thanks, Vicki,
Why have not all these other favorable studies been "hyped" like this negative one?
I am presently taking 2000 milligrams of esterified vitamin C twice a day (and have done so for a number of years). No dumb study like this one will convince me to stop that.
Thanks to Andy Weil for making this commentary available to the internet.
Walt
Take echinacea 3 times a day. It is a herbal remedy designed to boost your immune system by opening up your blood vessels and allowing your lymphatic system to be cleaned. Also take acidophillos for 6 wks. This will replace any friendly bacteria that may have been killed off by overuse of antibiotics. the friendly bacteria being the important bacteria that lives in our bowel to prevent yeast intection like candida. This was what I was told to take when my immune system was lowered by overuse of antibotics and infection. Garlic and vitamin C was also extra supplements that were advised to be taken daily aswell. Hope this helps you some
In Reply to: Re: ECHINACEA posted by Steph on April 20, 1998 at 16:04:56:
Dear Laura,
Echinacea is a very good immune system builder, however, what
most people don't know is that you should probably not take
it any longer than 14 days as it then loses it's effectiveness.
You may want to alternate it with astralagus which is also a
good immune system builder. Take one for about ten days and
then switch over to the other. Over use of antibiotics will
do terrible damage to your system. If you go to a doctor or
dentist that wants you to take more antibiotics than you think
you need remember that you are responsible for your own health
and you can say no. You know what is best for your own body.
As you have recently had quite a lot of antibiotics you might
want to be very careful about taking any more in the near
future.
Geri