Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: cem_devecioglu on 15 November 2012, 17:58:03
-
while reading through many documents, I have seen an interesting subject..
apoptosis: meaning cell suicide wave that many cells start to kill themselves.. ??? by mitochondria..
how this happen ? after a heart attack when cells are left without oxygene.. its an aftermath starting the whole atomic chain reaction by giving oxygene to the patient.. and interestingly not only heart is effected .. all organs.. ??? :-\
"The mitochondrion, powerhouse of the cell, is the central player in defining the outcome of heart attacks. Mitochondria contain cellular poisons that are normally sequestered in inactive form, but when unleashed and activated they enforce cell suicide. These suicide regulators are released from mitochondria through mitochondrial death channels. Understanding how the death channels work may hold the key to new treatments that could dramatically reduce myocardial injury and improve the outcome for patients who experience acute myocardial infarction.
A heart attack can affect 50 percent or more of the myocardial left ventricle (which takes in freshly oxygenated blood), causing massive tissue loss and scarring, which is known as infarction. Heart attacks begin with thrombosis; a blood clot wedged in a coronary artery causes reduced blood flow to downstream tissue (ischemia). The cardiac muscle becomes hypoxic (short of oxygen) and acidotic, and the energy level falls because the lack of oxygen interrupts mitochondrial metabolism. Cadiac tissue severely affected by ischemia may cease to contract. Ischemia must be relieved in a timely manner or all of the tissue downstream of the blood clot will die. Relief occurs when the flow of oxygenated blood to the tissue recommences, a process known as reperfusion. The amount of tissue salvaged by reperfusion is determined by the amount of time between the onset of ischemia and removal of the clot.
When reperfusion delivers oxygen back to the tissue, mitochondria become reenergized and contractions resume. If the ischemic period is short, damage to the heart may be minimal at the onset of reperfusion. However, lethal injury spreads insidiously across the formerly ischemic region over the hours, days and sometimes weeks after reperfusion. This damage, known as reperfusion injury, was first described about 20 years ago. For many heart attack victims, it is the greatest threat to survival.
As reperfusion injury develops, heart cells are forced into a wave of suicide known as apoptosis, or programmed cell death. The stimuli for this are a combination of the reoxygenation component of reperfusion and an imbalance of calcium ions and protons that develops during ischemia and which is exacerbated by reperfusion. The targets for both of these stimuli are the mitochondria. Reperfusion injury begins when mitochondrial death channels open and release the suicide activators. We are only now beginning to fully understand what causes the death channels to open and how the suicide process works.."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3163465/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3163465/)
-
Fascinating Cem :y :y :y
Just proves, something will always get us when our number is up! ::) ::) ;)
-
Fascinating Cem :y :y :y
Just proves, something will always get us when our number is up! ::) ::) ;)
;D interestingly if those kind of deadly mechanisms dont exist probably we could grow up in size and never die forever.. ???
-
Very interesting.
I know in the UK in the last 2 years a drug has been introduced that reduces the amount of dead heart tissue following a heart attack and that time is of the essence for administration of this drug. Whether it is linked to this I don't know?
-
and a warning , if you read the whole document you will see calcium and sodium ions are very important for heart and many other biological mechanisms.. if a doctor prescribes you lasix which is a diuretic , slam the door from outside and run away.. I wont tell you why but if you stay you will understand that I was right when you are in the sky with some wings :'(
-
Very interesting.
I know in the UK in the last 2 years a drug has been introduced that reduces the amount of dead heart tissue following a heart attack and that time is of the essence for administration of this drug. Whether it is linked to this I don't know?
highly probable..
-
and a warning , if you read the whole document you will see calcium and sodium ions are very important for heart and many other biological mechanisms.. if a doctor prescribes you lasix which is a diuretic , slam the door from outside and run away.. I wont tell you why but if you stay you will understand that I was right when you are in the sky with some wings :'(
Quite a careless piece of advice there. It is statements like that which cause more harm that good. Do you think doctors prescribe Lasix/Frusemide/Furosemide because they want to poison you?
-
and a warning , if you read the whole document you will see calcium and sodium ions are very important for heart and many other biological mechanisms.. if a doctor prescribes you lasix which is a diuretic , slam the door from outside and run away.. I wont tell you why but if you stay you will understand that I was right when you are in the sky with some wings :'(
Quite a careless piece of advice there. It is statements like that which cause more harm that good. Do you think doctors prescribe Lasix/Frusemide/Furosemide because they want to poison you?
Lasix caused many deaths whole out the world which even the producer firm also accepts.. its a very dangerous drug and have a very complicated dosage calculation which many doctors are unaware .. and remember every human body give different response to those drugs.. it plays with the blood osmotic pressure and when the dangerous point is passed you loose the patient very quickly.. I can continue whole night about this drug but not necessary at the moment.. sometimes the drug firms play with your health.. human history is full of those stories.. which most of them kept secret by the hospitals..
it also killed my mother >:( >:( now are you sure its careless advice ?
-
and a warning , if you read the whole document you will see calcium and sodium ions are very important for heart and many other biological mechanisms.. if a doctor prescribes you lasix which is a diuretic , slam the door from outside and run away.. I wont tell you why but if you stay you will understand that I was right when you are in the sky with some wings :'(
Quite a careless piece of advice there. It is statements like that which cause more harm that good. Do you think doctors prescribe Lasix/Frusemide/Furosemide because they want to poison you?
Lasix caused many deaths whole out the world which even the producer firm also accepts.. its a very dangerous drug and have a very complicated dosage calculation which many doctors are unaware .. and remember every human body give different response to those drugs.. it plays with the blood osmotic pressure and when the dangerous point is passed you loose the patient very quickly.. I can continue whole night about this drug but not necessary at the moment.. sometimes the drug firms play with your health.. human history is full of those stories.. which most of them kept secret by the hospitals..
it also killed my mother >:( >:( now are you sure its careless advice ?
I think one more explanation about this necessary ..
when the bloods osmotic pressure changes it doesnt effect the kidneys work alone.. it also effects how the oxygen is dissolved in your blood.. your blood cant carry enough oxygen to your body forcing heart to work more.. plus those ions which is necessary for the heart electrical impulses are no more existent in your body and you suddenly face a heart attack.. persons with insufficient or slow kidney responses and insufficient liver function can easly pass the dangerous point.. even when you were monitored 7/24 :(
plus those drugs are especially used on patients with heart and liver problems because all of them accumulate acidosis in their peritonial area..
-
Thanks for the lesson in physiology cem. Which by the way makes no sense to me at all. I suppose 17 years of training and a PhD wont give me the knowledge that you can.
And I am sorry for your loss.
-
;D ;D :D Hope its not catching...... ;D ;D ;D
-
Thanks for the lesson in physiology cem. Which by the way makes no sense to me at all. I suppose 17 years of training and a PhD wont give me the knowledge that you can.
And I am sorry for your loss.
please dont take it personal , but there are lots of PhD owners who prescribes wrong doses.. lots of PhD owners who didnt care to make extra tests which is required for the patient to see whats actually happening inside.. responsibility and knowledge is something personal..
a degree doesnt guarantee anything
and please feel free to correct me if there is any mistakes
-
besides, talking specifically about this drug, I read many documents about it and blockage of kidneys never mentioned anywhere else.. and some other side effects.. like many other drugs.. the producer company just sells it.. its effectively a 0 outcome drug may be minus because it leaves the human body completely unstable and worse than before its applied... >:( >:(
just an example how many drugs yearly seen to be harmful and later pulled out of market after we are used as test rabbits ?
-
Again cem you are going off on a tangent.
Blockage of kidneys? How? Care to elaborate?
0 outcome drug? What is that? So you are telling me that the FDA in the US and NICE in UK have licensed its use with absolutely no evidence at all? Sounds ludicrous to me.
Leaving the body unstable and worse? Again it sounds like BS to me. The physiology you have stated makes no logical sense!
A lot of my patients would really struggle with their breathing if I were to take them off their frusemide/Lasix today. And it is not a complicated drug to use or monitor at all. Like every other drug in the world it has side effects and a safety profile. Personally I would have more faith in Lasix than Ibuprofen/Neurofen that people seem to be popping all the time for pain relief.
What bothers me is that you are spouting statements that you make sound like hard facts with absolutely nothing to back them up. You are entitled to your opinion but don't force it on others particularly if you have no scientific evidence to back it up and just use hear say and something you may have read as evidence. I appreciate you may have had a bad experience with a particular drug, but it is scare mongering like yours that cause people to do silly things like not give their children MMR. Guess what, now when people are getting Measles they cant seem to find anyone else to blame but themselves and their scaremongering friends/family. Hence my initial comment on careless advice.
-
besides, talking specifically about this drug, I read many documents about it and blockage of kidneys never mentioned anywhere else.. and some other side effects.. like many other drugs.. the producer company just sells it.. its effectively a 0 outcome drug may be minus because it leaves the human body completely unstable and worse than before its applied... >:( >:(
just an example how many drugs yearly seen to be harmful and later pulled out of market after we are used as test rabbits ?
That statement just goes on to show your complete lack of understanding of drug research and how extensive safety testing is done prior to human use. I think it is useless to try and take this any further with that sort of an attitude.
-
Again cem you are going off on a tangent.
Blockage of kidneys? How? happened , and proven .. I have spend 6 months on that subject..
0 outcome drug? What is that? So you are telling me that the FDA in the US and NICE in UK have licensed its use with absolutely no evidence at all? Sounds ludicrous to me. if you dont believe me just look at the statistics how many drugs FDA have licensed and then pulled back.. all diuretics are dangerous .. thats a known fact.. but furosemide is the worst may be..
Leaving the body unstable and worse? Again it sounds like BS to me. The physiology you have stated makes no logical sense! than explain why makes no sense
A lot of my patients would really struggle with their breathing if I were to take them off their frusemide/Lasix today. And it is not a complicated drug to use or monitor at all. please write the formula and what parameters are required .. and how you can obtain those parameters ?
Like every other drug in the world it has side effects and a safety profile. Personally I would have more faith in Lasix than Ibuprofen/Neurofen that people seem to be popping all the time for pain relief. so you accept that it has side effects.. but problem is , it can become deadly on old patients.. and doctors who used them dont warn their patients before use.. but even they accepted after a debate..
What bothers me is that you are spouting statements that you make sound like hard facts with absolutely nothing to back them up.
I dont need , just do a google search and you will face them.. problem is I learned through a very event.. I hope you wont
You are entitled to your opinion but don't force it on others particularly if you have no scientific evidence to back it up and just use hear say and something you may have read as evidence. I appreciate you may have had a bad experience with a particular drug,
for your information when I query my friends and doctor friends , 1 of them loose his mother from the same drug application, another was hardly saved ..
but it is scare mongering like yours that cause people to do silly things like not give their children MMR. Guess what, now when people are getting Measles they cant seem to find anyone else to blame but themselves and their scaremongering friends/family. Hence my initial comment on careless advice.
-
besides, talking specifically about this drug, I read many documents about it and blockage of kidneys never mentioned anywhere else.. and some other side effects.. like many other drugs.. the producer company just sells it.. its effectively a 0 outcome drug may be minus because it leaves the human body completely unstable and worse than before its applied... >:( >:(
just an example how many drugs yearly seen to be harmful and later pulled out of market after we are used as test rabbits ?
That statement just goes on to show your complete lack of understanding of drug research and how extensive safety testing is done prior to human use. I think it is useless to try and take this any further with that sort of an attitude.
really ? I think the attitude of trusting those drugs and believing the research alone is not enough for a health professional.. and something may be you know better than me, how many doctors apply dosing based on producers tested facts !!!
-
After reading the various observations about doctors and prescribing drugs it reminds me once that giving medicine containing lead and arsenic was thought very beneficial.
Oh, and even smoking was considered good for you as well!! ;D ;D
I am sure others with medical training and an understanding history in that subject will tell us more :D :D ;)
-
and the last fact , please explain how good is this diuretic to people, who have lost their lifes because of it.. >:(
-
After reading the various observations about doctors and prescribing drugs it reminds me once that giving medicine containing lead and arsenic was thought very beneficial.
I am sure others with medical training and an understanding history in that subject will tell us more :D :D ;)
;D :y
-
"As with many diuretics, it can cause dehydration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehydration) and electrolyte imbalance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolyte_imbalance), including loss of potassium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium), calcium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calcium), sodium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium), and magnesium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnesium). Excessive use of furosemide will most likely lead to a metabolic alkalosis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metabolic_alkalosis) due to hypochloremia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypochloremia) and hypokalemia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypokalemia). The drug should, therefore, not be used in horses that are dehydrated or experiencing kidney failure. It should be used with caution in horses with liver problems or electrolyte abnormalities. Overdose may lead to dehydration, change in drinking patterns and urination, seizures, gastrointestinal problems, kidney damage, lethargy, collapse, and coma."
"
- ringing in your ears, hearing loss;
- feeling very thirsty or hot, being unable to urinate, heavy sweating, or hot and dry skin;
- painful or difficult urination;
- pale skin, unusual bleeding (nose, mouth, vagina, or rectum), purple or red pinpoint spots under your skin;
- feeling light-headed or short of breath, rapid heart rate, trouble concentrating;
- nausea, upper stomach pain, itching, loss of appetite, dark urine, clay-colored stools, jaundice (yellowing of the skin or eyes);
- sudden numbness or weakness, especially on one side of the body;
- skin rash, bruising, severe tingling, pain, muscle weakness;
- dry mouth, increased thirst, drowsiness, restless feeling, confusion, nausea, vomiting, increased urination, muscle pain or weakness, uneven heart rate, fainting, or seizure (convulsions);
- numbness or tingly feeling around your mouth, muscle tightness or contraction, overactive reflexes;
- headache, trouble concentrating, weakness, loss of appetite, feeling unsteady, shallow breathing or breathing that stops
- severe skin reaction -- fever, sore throat, swelling in your face or tongue, burning in your eyes, skin pain, followed by a red or purple skin rash that spreads (especially in the face or upper body) and causes blistering and peeling."
-
withdrawn drugs by fda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs)
http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/ (http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/)
-
Kidney damage is not the same as kidney blockage. Those are 2 completely different things and I am not being pedantic, just telling you the facts that the 2 are caused differently and have radically different treatments. Like I said before, Neurofen has a greater propensity to cause kidney damage than frusemide/Lasix. Yet you seem to think Lasix is the worst drug in the world, which is not true. It is one of the safest and easiest to use diuretics' provided you know what you are doing. I know medicine in Turkey is ok, but from your accounts it would seem the doctors there do not even know how to use a basic drug that has been around for many many years.
You list the side effects; so what? Look at most other drugs and you will se a list of side effects that are just as long or mostly even longer. No doctor prescribes drugs unless necessary, so why would you tell someone to run away if they were being prescribed a basic drug in the community? That is my POINT! Which you don't seem to get!
The rest of your argument is again baseless:
For eg :
"happened , and proven .. I have spend 6 months on that subject.." - that tells me nothing! Its a statement of belief, where is the factual information?
"if you dont believe me just look at the statistics how many drugs FDA have licensed and then pulled back.. all diuretics are dangerous .. thats a known fact.. but furosemide is the worst may be.." - And when was Frusemide withdrawn? What does that statement have to do with Frusemide? Where does your link say that Frusemide is the worst drug? I can think of other diuretics that are more difficult to use. Again a pointless statement form you.
"so you accept that it has side effects.. but problem is , it can become deadly on old patients.. and doctors who used them dont warn their patients before use.. but even they accepted after a debate.. " - Who accepted? Perhaps your local doctor? That simply proves that your local medical service is poor. Nothing to do with Frusemide or the international medical community? Again a nonsensical statement that proves nothing.
"I dont need , just do a google search and you will face them.. problem is I learned through a very event.. I hope you wont" - Again, if you are using google as a basis for medical information then you are barking up the wrong tree. People are very happy to blame certain drugs for all their problems and this is not limited to Lasix. Search for any drug, any! And I can assure you that you will find someone saying something about it. Once again it doesn't prove your statement that diuretics are the most dangerous drugs on the planet! You are extrapolating information to make a wrong assumption.
"for your information when I query my friends and doctor friends , 1 of them loose his mother from the same drug application, another was hardly saved .." - Again hearsay. How can you be guaranteed it was the Lasix that caused issues. This is like saying " Someone I know who knows someone said that it was ok to leave the power sounder attached to the car". Will you believe that? No! Because you have experience. In the same way as I have tens of thousands of patients on Lasix. Rather then your version of someone I know who knows someone else.
"really ? I think the attitude of trusting those drugs and believing the research alone is not enough for a health professional.. and something may be you know better than me, how many doctors apply dosing based on producers tested facts !!!" - I dont know how to answer that question. What else do you suggest we do? Test it on ourselves first? Our pets maybe? We have to accept that the drug has passed a large safety trial and review the data presented. I am not sure how else to answer your question. I dont have my own laboratory to test new medicines.
-
withdrawn drugs by fda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs)
http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/ (http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/)
The second link is a blog from a medico legal firm employee. You think that person has an unbiased view? Really? You don't think they are just touting for business?
-
I'm with D on this one. Google and Youtube can't possibly be a substitute for proper medical training. And Frusemide contributed to helping my daughter survive 3 heart operations over the course of 7 years.
As D says, no powerful drug is without its side effects, and that's why we train people for years to be able to use them properly
-
I'm with D on this one. Google and Youtube can't possibly be a substitute for proper medical training. And Frusemide contributed to helping my daughter survive 3 heart operations over the course of 7 years.
As D says, no powerful drug is without its side effects, and that's why we train people for years to be able to use them properly
Glad your daughter is ok now Jonny :y but please keep in mind she is very young, and the very same drug creates more problems than it solves on elder people.. because their kidneys, liver dont work properly.. this increases the drugs life time in body causing more damage and easily leading to overdose..
ad as for internet education :) if you can understand what you read and listen, the same applies to the school, because we humans learn by seeing and hearing.. you see the side effects.. very obvious , these all happen on my mother because of the same drug.. what would I do, try not to see it ? >:(
-
withdrawn drugs by fda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs)
http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/ (http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/)
The second link is a blog from a medico legal firm employee. You think that person has an unbiased view? Really? You don't think they are just touting for business?
what ? people died because they had biased views.. how you can ignore them ???
-
Kidney damage is not the same as kidney blockage. Those are 2 completely different things and I am not being pedantic, just telling you the facts that the 2 are caused differently and have radically different treatments.
;D
seriously, the body salts/minerals whatever rushing to the kidney filters block them.. so the patients stop urinating for a time.. please search more.. this happened and I dont owe any lie to anyone..
-
http://www.naturalnews.com/035378_hospitals_elderly_death_rates.html (http://www.naturalnews.com/035378_hospitals_elderly_death_rates.html)
-
withdrawn drugs by fda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs)
http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/ (http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/)
The second link is a blog from a medico legal firm employee. You think that person has an unbiased view? Really? You don't think they are just touting for business?
what ? people died because they had biased views.. how you can ignore them ???
cem I know English isn't your native language but surely you understand what I mean. You provide a link to say how someone thinks risky drugs are brought onto the market. This someone works for a firm that specialises in medicolegal law. Do you not think they have a vested interest? Its like me linking to an article by Kwik fit saying how unsafe tyres are below 4mm as per their research. Then saying that any tyre shop that doesn't agree with you is wrong and therefore run a mile.
-
withdrawn drugs by fda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs)
http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/ (http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/)
The second link is a blog from a medico legal firm employee. You think that person has an unbiased view? Really? You don't think they are just touting for business?
what ? people died because they had biased views.. how you can ignore them ???
cem I know English isn't your native language but surely you understand what I mean. You provide a link to say how someone thinks risky drugs are brought onto the market. This someone works for a firm that specialises in medicolegal law. Do you not think they have a vested interest? Its like me linking to an article by Kwik fit saying how unsafe tyres are below 4mm as per their research. Then saying that any tyre shop that doesn't agree with you is wrong and therefore run a mile.
unfortunately its not the only paper about that subject.. besides even if nothing exists on that subject, I live and experienced the truth .. thats enough for me..
-
Kidney damage is not the same as kidney blockage. Those are 2 completely different things and I am not being pedantic, just telling you the facts that the 2 are caused differently and have radically different treatments.
;D
seriously, the body salts/minerals whatever rushing to the kidney filters block them.. so the patients stop urinating for a time.. please search more.. this happened and I dont owe any lie to anyone..
Let me try to be specific:
Renal failure/damage/injury is when the kidneys stop working as a waste clearance tool. There are various types of renal failure. In terms of urine output it can be classified into three types. 1.Oliguric i.e. when the urine volume drops below normal. 2. Normal i.e. the urine output is normal but the kidney are not going about their waste clearing function. 3. Polyuric i.e. kidneys produce lots more urine than normal but still aren't functioning as they should. The three have different causes and need differing forms of treatment.
Kidney obstruction is very different: It is a mechanical blockage to the flow of urine out of the body. Causes include stones, cancers, trauma etc. The treatment is usually dramatically different from the above paragraph.
There is no way frusemide can cause kidney blockage by salts or minerals rushing to the kidneys as you state.
I hope that makes it clearer as to why I objected to your earlier statements.
-
http://www.naturalnews.com/035378_hospitals_elderly_death_rates.html (http://www.naturalnews.com/035378_hospitals_elderly_death_rates.html)
No mention of Frusemide or Lasix or diuretics that I can find in that article either? Whats the point? If poor care of the elderly is your point then I agree with you. It is a global issue. But that was not what we were disagreeing about.
Again you are quoting an unrelated article - you are not making any sense now?
-
withdrawn drugs by fda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs)
http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/ (http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/)
The second link is a blog from a medico legal firm employee. You think that person has an unbiased view? Really? You don't think they are just touting for business?
what ? people died because they had biased views.. how you can ignore them ???
cem I know English isn't your native language but surely you understand what I mean. You provide a link to say how someone thinks risky drugs are brought onto the market. This someone works for a firm that specialises in medicolegal law. Do you not think they have a vested interest? Its like me linking to an article by Kwik fit saying how unsafe tyres are below 4mm as per their research. Then saying that any tyre shop that doesn't agree with you is wrong and therefore run a mile.
unfortunately its not the only paper about that subject.. besides even if nothing exists on that subject, I live and experienced the truth .. thats enough for me..
What is there about Frusemide again? Nothing that I can see. They mention a cancer drug, one for MS and an anticoagulant. Which of these were Lasix again? Where does it mention diuretics as one of the most dangerous drugs in the world (as you put it)?
-
Kidney damage is not the same as kidney blockage. Those are 2 completely different things and I am not being pedantic, just telling you the facts that the 2 are caused differently and have radically different treatments.
;D
seriously, the body salts/minerals whatever rushing to the kidney filters block them.. so the patients stop urinating for a time.. please search more.. this happened and I dont owe any lie to anyone..
Let me try to be specific:
Renal failure/damage/injury is when the kidneys stop working as a waste clearance tool. There are various types of renal failure. In terms of urine output it can be classified into three types. 1.Oliguric i.e. when the urine volume drops below normal. 2. Normal i.e. the urine output is normal but the kidney are not going about their waste clearing function. 3. Polyuric i.e. kidneys produce lots more urine than normal but still aren't functioning as they should. The three have different causes and need differing forms of treatment.
Kidney obstruction is very different: It is a mechanical blockage to the flow of urine out of the body. Causes include stones, cancers, trauma etc. The treatment is usually dramatically different from the above paragraph.
There is no way frusemide can cause kidney blockage by salts or minerals rushing to the kidneys as you state.
I hope that makes it clearer as to why I objected to your earlier statements.
ok after 1 week of low dose treatment the doctors decide to increase the dosage and I warned them.. because it caused vomitting .. but still they insisted and increased the dosage.. and urination completely stopped for 3-4 days.. While searching for related papers I have seen that one paper mentioned about this blockage.. I'm not a doctor and I cant imagine something like this myself..
anyway either it blocks or not, it damages many functions in the body .. And I concluded that correct dosage on old people with cirrhosis or kidney problems is next to impossible as it accumulates in their body.. :-\ plus the original culculaton formula had some parameters some of which are taken from blood tests may be not that hard to obtain but there were others thats not easy.. and I dont see any doctor working on it ???
-
withdrawn drugs by fda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_withdrawn_drugs)
http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/ (http://www.searcymasstort.com/blog/2012/09/09/risky-drugs-and-how-they-get-on-the-market/)
The second link is a blog from a medico legal firm employee. You think that person has an unbiased view? Really? You don't think they are just touting for business?
what ? people died because they had biased views.. how you can ignore them ???
cem I know English isn't your native language but surely you understand what I mean. You provide a link to say how someone thinks risky drugs are brought onto the market. This someone works for a firm that specialises in medicolegal law. Do you not think they have a vested interest? Its like me linking to an article by Kwik fit saying how unsafe tyres are below 4mm as per their research. Then saying that any tyre shop that doesn't agree with you is wrong and therefore run a mile.
unfortunately its not the only paper about that subject.. besides even if nothing exists on that subject, I live and experienced the truth .. thats enough for me..
What is there about Frusemide again? Nothing that I can see. They mention a cancer drug, one for MS and an anticoagulant. Which of these were Lasix again? Where does it mention diuretics as one of the most dangerous drugs in the world (as you put it)?
D, it was just an example to show you that a licensed drug may not be as safe as you think.. please check the side effects again.. these are lasix explanation pages taken from the net.. and you can find them easily..
here is a related page
http://www.rxlist.com/lasix-drug/patient-images-side-effects.htm (http://www.rxlist.com/lasix-drug/patient-images-side-effects.htm)
-
Cem; I believe you know that I like you and respect you (and your intelligence). So I hope you won't mind if I say that in the circumstances of your loss, there's no way you could have a balanced rational view of this drug that is being discussed. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that your view is inevitably changed by these tragic circumstances.
D; what sort of role do you have in medicine?
I'm really surprised that a medic would argue about a drug with a non-medic who has recently(?) been bereaved, on a car forum. ???
I'm not saying you're wrong, just surprised that you think this 'quarrel' is better than simply letting cem's original statement 'go'. After all, Andrew Wakefield's notorious MMR vaccine misdirection was only possible because he was medically qualified, surely. Had he been making his claims on a car forum, methinks history may have taken a different course.
-
Cem; I believe you know that I like you and respect you (and your intelligence). So I hope you won't mind if I say that in the circumstances of your loss, there's no way you could have a balanced rational view of this drug that is being discussed. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that your view is inevitably changed by these tragic circumstances.
D; what sort of role do you have in medicine?
I'm really surprised that a medic would argue about a drug with a non-medic who has recently(?) been bereaved, on a car forum. ???
I'm not saying you're wrong, just surprised that you think this 'quarrel' is better than simply letting cem's original statement 'go'. After all, Andrew Wakefield's notorious MMR vaccine misdirection was only possible because he was medically qualified, surely. Had he been making his claims on a car forum, methinks history may have taken a different course.
Hiya Abiton :y
My friends and my family know that in every subject I try to be objective as much as possible , even if it kills me.. ;D
but during this hospital period, I have double checked every drug and intravenous solution including their dosage and last usage date..
(because my grandfather was almost dying because of a mistake)
my aunt is/was a doctor and I have spend long time with her.. besides I have 3 doctor friends (classmates) working as a professor in USA..
and many friends here.. I have consulted with them several times.. I brought my mother walking to the hospital and the rest you know..
I was about to open a case/jury against the doctors but before that I collected and read as much info as possible.. At the end of decision period I concluded that doctors biggest mistake was ignoring some tests on a person who have coronary heart disease and ignoring cirrhose probability for more than 10 long years >:( plus one young doctor looking more than 40 serious patients and olders visiting daily and giving advice.. of course there were many things to criticise(and big mistakes) (including intense care unit ) but decision on the high dose were surprisingly taken by the young doctor and a duty surgeon near me on a sunday afternoon where olders have no control.. everything turned upside down afterwards.. And I warned them but who listen!! My mistake was that I thought they knew better than me.. :( >:( anyway after reading lots of pages and talking with doctor friends I decided that even if I nail those young doctors I cant bring my mother back.. And at least they tried to cure her :-\ actually in intense care unit the doctors tried the anti drugs and solutions which was correct but didnt help because my mother had a 2 heart attack afterwrds .. her tension and many other things prooved that she was really poisoned.. which also my friends approve after I tell them my notes..
as for the lasix, there are lighter diuretics which are not that lethal but lasix is a loop diuretic and is very aggressive.. even young people at age of 35-40 died from high dosage.. if anyone neglects the side effects I listed , I highly recommend checking them twice..
So , I accept it as a duty to warn people in that subject..
-
I am so sorry for your recent loss Cem. :( :(
Didn't know until I read an entry in this thread. :-[
-
Thank you for not being cross with me cem. :y
I am very willing to believe that in your mother's case this drug was a contributory factor in her death, and so I fully understand your disappointment with her doctors.
That doesn't mean that it is never a good drug to use though, which I think was what D is concerned that you are/were saying in your original post on the subject.
Thanks to you, I for one will certainly be asking my doctors all about it if I am ever prescribed it. And if they are good doctors, they won't mind, IMHO.
-
I am so sorry for your recent loss Cem. :( :(
Didn't know until I read an entry in this thread. :-[
its not important Lizzie :y
-
Thank you for not being cross with me cem. :y
I am very willing to believe that in your mother's case this drug was a contributory factor in her death, and so I fully understand your disappointment with her doctors.
That doesn't mean that it is never a good drug to use though, which I think was what D is concerned that you are/were saying in your original post on the subject.
Thanks to you, I for one will certainly be asking my doctors all about it if I am ever prescribed it. And if they are good doctors, they won't mind, IMHO.
Abiton, trust me the best doctor for yourself is you.. because before any test you will feel something wrong inside you.. Listen your body..
and if you start any drug and see side effects dont neglect it , stop it and ask to more than one source :y
-
Cem; I believe you know that I like you and respect you (and your intelligence). So I hope you won't mind if I say that in the circumstances of your loss, there's no way you could have a balanced rational view of this drug that is being discussed. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that your view is inevitably changed by these tragic circumstances.
D; what sort of role do you have in medicine?
I'm really surprised that a medic would argue about a drug with a non-medic who has recently(?) been bereaved, on a car forum. ???
I'm not saying you're wrong, just surprised that you think this 'quarrel' is better than simply letting cem's original statement 'go'. After all, Andrew Wakefield's notorious MMR vaccine misdirection was only possible because he was medically qualified, surely. Had he been making his claims on a car forum, methinks history may have taken a different course.
I suspect I indeed have been carried away. Like you said Wakefields claim is a prime example of misdirection and something that still irritates me. One which I alluded to in one of my posts and which I felt was strongly reminiscent in cem's blanket op. Hence my initial statement and then I suspect I have been carried away by the argument. I wasn't quarrelling as you state, just trying to put the facts straight. I have spent years trying to get people to see sense about MMR, but the misdirection was so good that people refused to see through it, despite the evidence.As a closing statement I will allude to cem's last post where he states there are lighter/weaker/less lethal diuretics than Lasix. This isn't true, I know it isn't and really struggle to keep quiet when I see rubbish like this being posted. I am open to logical arguments but not stuff that has no scientific basis. I think I will stop there and pull out of this "quarrel".
-
Cem; I believe you know that I like you and respect you (and your intelligence). So I hope you won't mind if I say that in the circumstances of your loss, there's no way you could have a balanced rational view of this drug that is being discussed. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that your view is inevitably changed by these tragic circumstances.
D; what sort of role do you have in medicine?
I'm really surprised that a medic would argue about a drug with a non-medic who has recently(?) been bereaved, on a car forum. ???
I'm not saying you're wrong, just surprised that you think this 'quarrel' is better than simply letting cem's original statement 'go'. After all, Andrew Wakefield's notorious MMR vaccine misdirection was only possible because he was medically qualified, surely. Had he been making his claims on a car forum, methinks history may have taken a different course.
I suspect I indeed have been carried away. Like you said Wakefields claim is a prime example of misdirection and something that still irritates me. One which I alluded to in one of my posts and which I felt was strongly reminiscent in cem's blanket op. Hence my initial statement and then I suspect I have been carried away by the argument. I wasn't quarrelling as you state, just trying to put the facts straight. I have spent years trying to get people to see sense about MMR, but the misdirection was so good that people refused to see through it, despite the evidence.As a closing statement I will allude to cem's last post where he states there are lighter/weaker/less lethal diuretics than Lasix. This isn't true, I know it isn't and really struggle to keep quiet when I see rubbish like this being posted. I am open to logical arguments but not stuff that has no scientific basis. I think I will stop there and pull out of this "quarrel".
To me this has been a healthy fascinating debate of opinions. :y :y :y
I won't profess to understand it all, but it has interested me greatly and made me think 8) 8)
Thanks to both of you
-
Cem; I believe you know that I like you and respect you (and your intelligence). So I hope you won't mind if I say that in the circumstances of your loss, there's no way you could have a balanced rational view of this drug that is being discussed. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that your view is inevitably changed by these tragic circumstances.
D; what sort of role do you have in medicine?
I'm really surprised that a medic would argue about a drug with a non-medic who has recently(?) been bereaved, on a car forum. ???
I'm not saying you're wrong, just surprised that you think this 'quarrel' is better than simply letting cem's original statement 'go'. After all, Andrew Wakefield's notorious MMR vaccine misdirection was only possible because he was medically qualified, surely. Had he been making his claims on a car forum, methinks history may have taken a different course.
I suspect I indeed have been carried away. Like you said Wakefields claim is a prime example of misdirection and something that still irritates me. One which I alluded to in one of my posts and which I felt was strongly reminiscent in cem's blanket op. Hence my initial statement and then I suspect I have been carried away by the argument. I wasn't quarrelling as you state, just trying to put the facts straight. I have spent years trying to get people to see sense about MMR, but the misdirection was so good that people refused to see through it, despite the evidence.As a closing statement I will allude to cem's last post where he states there are lighter/weaker/less lethal diuretics than Lasix. This isn't true, I know it isn't and really struggle to keep quiet when I see rubbish like this being posted. I am open to logical arguments but not stuff that has no scientific basis. I think I will stop there and pull out of this "quarrel".
D, you may choose to pull out.. but I still cant understand how a professional can ignore those listed lethal side effects.. where many options are available on the market.. besides this diuretic(s) makes you more thirsty than ever and you cant stop drinking water .. and next time they give you a higher dose ..even I cant understand this logic ;D ;D I think the doctors needs some mathematics ;D :D
-
We do not ignore them cem, we just make sure that we monitor patients adequately to ensure they are safe. All drugs have side effects. Name one without and I will be your slave for life.
The diuretic doesn't make you thirsty. It doesn't work like that. The reason its used is due to an increase in fluid retention and this causing symptoms. The way it works is by dilating the venous compartment of the body so as to relieve the pre-load pressure on the right side of the heart. This helps improve breathlessness. Then it makes you loose fluid hence reducing the volume within the blood vessels. But in the patient population that we us it in, they have fluid retention in the space between the cells(lungs, gut, ankles, face etc). This volume loss then draws fluid out from this space under oncotic pressure to refill the volume within the blood vessels. Hence getting rid of unnecessary fluid that is in fact causing damage and symptoms like breathlessness. In addition to this patients often have to be restricted to a certain amount of fluid intake per day depending on the severity of water retention. So it is not as simple as prescribe a dose and forget it. It is more a clinical decision based on a patients clinical status. In addition, in England, most patients on diuretics will receive education as to how to monitor this fluid loss at home and what to do if it is too much or too little. Plus blood tests on a routine basis. The other diuretics available in this country are often stronger and have more side effects than frusemide. There really isn't an other weaker but better diuretic option. Feel free to name an alternative that you may think works better. Hope that helps.
-
We do not ignore them cem, we just make sure that we monitor patients adequately to ensure they are safe. All drugs have side effects. Name one without and I will be your slave for life.
The 1.diuretic doesn't make you thirsty. It doesn't work like that. The reason its used is due to an increase in fluid retention and this causing symptoms. The way it works is by dilating the venous compartment of the body so as to relieve the pre-load pressure on the right side of the heart. This helps improve breathlessness. Then it makes you loose fluid hence reducing the volume within the blood vessels. But in the patient population that we us it in, they have fluid retention in the space between the cells(lungs, gut, ankles, face etc). This volume loss then draws fluid out from this space under oncotic pressure to refill the volume within the blood vessels. Hence getting rid of unnecessary fluid that is in fact causing damage and symptoms like breathlessness. In addition to 1.this patients often have to be restricted to a certain amount of fluid intake per day depending on the severity of water retention. 3.So it is not as simple as prescribe a dose and forget it. It is more a clinical decision based on a patients clinical status. In addition, in England, most patients on diuretics will receive education as to how to monitor this fluid loss at home and what to do if it is too much or too little. Plus 2.blood tests on a routine basis. The other diuretics available in this country are often stronger and have more side effects than frusemide. There really isn't an other weaker but better diuretic option. 4.Feel free to name an alternative that you may think works better. Hope that helps.
1. ::) :-X
2.Without any doubt and suspicion I can say if those blood tests show every detail , many patients would be still alive!
3. thats generally the case with millions of patients and few doctors even in europe
4.thats your homework not mine ;D