Butterfly Cauldron
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
This is fricking awesome
Having survived life-long depression and suicidal episodes, I'm always looking out for new therapies and treatments that may be of use to me. I'm on a good drug right now (Cymbalta, yay!) but this sounds awesome.
People with treatment-resistant depression experienced relief in as little as two hours after a single shot of a drug typically used in higher doses as an anesthetic, according to a study published Monday.
The experimental treatment could open the way for drastic changes in the way mental-health professionals treat clinical depression, a debilitating illness that affects nearly 15 million people each year in this country.
It's a small study, and the drug -- ketamine -- isn't right for longterm use, but it's suggestive of a new line of research for new drugs. Effects in two fucking hours? Damn. Just...damn. That's bloody amazing. Even more amazing, the study found that one shot can work for up to a week. Almost no build up time and long-term action. That's just incredible. Plus? It works for almost everyone.
The patients in the study were randomly assigned to either get one active dose of ketamine or a placebo. Depression improved within one day in 71 percent of the patients who got the active drug, and 29 percent became nearly symptom-free within that first day. More than a third of the ketamine patients still showed improvement a week after they got the shot.
Seventy-one percent. That's just....depression drugs don't have those kind of numbers. Most anti-depressants take weeks to build up to effectiveness and most patients have to play around with dosage and drugs to find a good one. I went through three to find this one and I generally respond really well to medication. The potential good this research can do is just astounding.
So many people suffer from depression. So many people. If we could find a way to fix that...can you imagine the kind of change those people could make in the world?
People with treatment-resistant depression experienced relief in as little as two hours after a single shot of a drug typically used in higher doses as an anesthetic, according to a study published Monday.
The experimental treatment could open the way for drastic changes in the way mental-health professionals treat clinical depression, a debilitating illness that affects nearly 15 million people each year in this country.
It's a small study, and the drug -- ketamine -- isn't right for longterm use, but it's suggestive of a new line of research for new drugs. Effects in two fucking hours? Damn. Just...damn. That's bloody amazing. Even more amazing, the study found that one shot can work for up to a week. Almost no build up time and long-term action. That's just incredible. Plus? It works for almost everyone.
The patients in the study were randomly assigned to either get one active dose of ketamine or a placebo. Depression improved within one day in 71 percent of the patients who got the active drug, and 29 percent became nearly symptom-free within that first day. More than a third of the ketamine patients still showed improvement a week after they got the shot.
Seventy-one percent. That's just....depression drugs don't have those kind of numbers. Most anti-depressants take weeks to build up to effectiveness and most patients have to play around with dosage and drugs to find a good one. I went through three to find this one and I generally respond really well to medication. The potential good this research can do is just astounding.
So many people suffer from depression. So many people. If we could find a way to fix that...can you imagine the kind of change those people could make in the world?
Labels: depression, medication
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
But what does this mean?
There's an interesting article on the wire today about chronic pain.
Researchers believe proteins hold clues to chronic pain
By ROBERT PREIDT
HealthDay
Low blood levels of two anti-inflammatory proteins could be key to chronic pain, researchers report.
Low concentrations of two cytokines, IL-4 and IL-10, were found in patients with chronic widespread pain, according to a German study published in the August issue of Arthritis & Rheumatism.
Cytokines are proteins that act as messengers between cells.
The study included 40 patients who’d received intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) as a novel treatment for pain that hadn’t responded to standard therapy and another 15 patients who did not receive IVIG. The study also included a control group of 40 healthy people.
Blood samples were collected from all the study volunteers, and the pain patients were asked to rate their pain, fatigue, mood and cognitive function.
Okay, so it's good news that they think they're figuring out what causes chronic pain. Yay! However...what does this mean? I mean, I'm happy to know there's a protein in my body that's not doing it's thing. Cool. So, tell me how to fix it. Seriously, what do I do to up those proteins? What do I do to make that happen, because living in chronic pain is a bad, bad, bad thing.
The deal with chronic pain is that you get used to it. You get used to feeling draggy and tired and achy. It becomes normal, so you don't really notice it. Which is dangerous, because pain is your body's way of saying there's something wrong. So you run the risk of ignoring a serious warning sign, because you're so very used to being in pain.
That's why it took me years to find out I had an inflammed gallbladder. It hurt, yes. But everything hurts on me, so when one spot starts hurting more than others? Eh. It doesn't really register with me. I had gallbladder pain off and on for six damned years before we found out what it was. And the only reason I found out is that it started hurting daily, instead of once or twice a month. My surgeon said my gallbladder was getting to the dangerous stage and if I hadn't gotten it taken out when I did, it could have ruptured and then I'd have been in serious trouble.
It feels strange, being a chronic pain patient, because you go to the doctor so often. (BTW, I just got my latest round of tests back and I'm prefectly healthy. Well, you know, aside from the previously dxed conditions.) I worry sometimes that people think I'm a hypocondriac. I know I'm not, but it seems strange to be my age and be on so much medication/go to the doctor so very often. On one hand, I don't care what people think. But on the other...I'm only 31. This cannot be my life, ya know? Not for the next sixty or seventy years. (And I plan on living to be an old, old woman with many many cats and lots of books. I will have myself a little cabin on a mountain somewhere where it gets cool in the summer and cold in the winter. I will grow a flower garden filled with my favorite flowers, even if they don't match together. My garden will have no symblance of order, but everyone who sees it will know it's mine. I'll make pots of tea and sit on my front porch, reading. I'll give cookies to all the children in the neighborhood and everyone will know me as That Nice Old Lady With All the Cats. I will paint as much as I like, write as much as I like and generally do whatever the hell I want to do. And when I die, people will miss me and plant roses at my grave.)
So, anyway. I'm glad they're making progress, I just wanna know how that translates into the real world!
Researchers believe proteins hold clues to chronic pain
By ROBERT PREIDT
HealthDay
Low blood levels of two anti-inflammatory proteins could be key to chronic pain, researchers report.
Low concentrations of two cytokines, IL-4 and IL-10, were found in patients with chronic widespread pain, according to a German study published in the August issue of Arthritis & Rheumatism.
Cytokines are proteins that act as messengers between cells.
The study included 40 patients who’d received intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) as a novel treatment for pain that hadn’t responded to standard therapy and another 15 patients who did not receive IVIG. The study also included a control group of 40 healthy people.
Blood samples were collected from all the study volunteers, and the pain patients were asked to rate their pain, fatigue, mood and cognitive function.
Okay, so it's good news that they think they're figuring out what causes chronic pain. Yay! However...what does this mean? I mean, I'm happy to know there's a protein in my body that's not doing it's thing. Cool. So, tell me how to fix it. Seriously, what do I do to up those proteins? What do I do to make that happen, because living in chronic pain is a bad, bad, bad thing.
The deal with chronic pain is that you get used to it. You get used to feeling draggy and tired and achy. It becomes normal, so you don't really notice it. Which is dangerous, because pain is your body's way of saying there's something wrong. So you run the risk of ignoring a serious warning sign, because you're so very used to being in pain.
That's why it took me years to find out I had an inflammed gallbladder. It hurt, yes. But everything hurts on me, so when one spot starts hurting more than others? Eh. It doesn't really register with me. I had gallbladder pain off and on for six damned years before we found out what it was. And the only reason I found out is that it started hurting daily, instead of once or twice a month. My surgeon said my gallbladder was getting to the dangerous stage and if I hadn't gotten it taken out when I did, it could have ruptured and then I'd have been in serious trouble.
It feels strange, being a chronic pain patient, because you go to the doctor so often. (BTW, I just got my latest round of tests back and I'm prefectly healthy. Well, you know, aside from the previously dxed conditions.) I worry sometimes that people think I'm a hypocondriac. I know I'm not, but it seems strange to be my age and be on so much medication/go to the doctor so very often. On one hand, I don't care what people think. But on the other...I'm only 31. This cannot be my life, ya know? Not for the next sixty or seventy years. (And I plan on living to be an old, old woman with many many cats and lots of books. I will have myself a little cabin on a mountain somewhere where it gets cool in the summer and cold in the winter. I will grow a flower garden filled with my favorite flowers, even if they don't match together. My garden will have no symblance of order, but everyone who sees it will know it's mine. I'll make pots of tea and sit on my front porch, reading. I'll give cookies to all the children in the neighborhood and everyone will know me as That Nice Old Lady With All the Cats. I will paint as much as I like, write as much as I like and generally do whatever the hell I want to do. And when I die, people will miss me and plant roses at my grave.)
So, anyway. I'm glad they're making progress, I just wanna know how that translates into the real world!
Labels: disease, medication
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Let the Fundy screamfest begin!
Advisory committee recommends routine vaccination of 11- and 12-year-old girls against cervical cancer
By MIKE STOBBE
Associated Press Writer
ATLANTA (AP) -- Taking up a potentially explosive issue among religious conservatives, an influential government advisory panel Thursday recommended that 11- and 12-year-old girls be routinely vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer.
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices also said the shots can be started for girls as young as 9, at the discretion of their doctors.
The committee's recommendations usually are accepted by federal health officials, and influence insurance coverage for vaccinations.
Gardasil, made by Merck & Co., is the first vaccine specifically designed to prevent cancer. Approved earlier this month by the Food and Drug Administration for females ages 9 to 26, it protects against strains of the human papilloma virus, or HPV, which causes cervical, vulvar and vaginal cancers and genital warts.
Some health officials had girded themselves for arguments from religious conservatives and others that vaccinating youngsters against the sexually transmitted virus might make them more likely to have sex. But the controversy never materialized in the panel's public meetings.
Earlier this year, the Family Research Council, a conservative group, did not speak out against giving the HPV shot to young girls. The organization mainly opposes making it one of the vaccines required before youngsters can enroll in school, said the group's policy analyst, Moira Gaul.
Health officials estimate that more than 50 percent of sexually active women and men will be infected with one or more types of HPV in their lifetimes. Vaccine proponents say it could dramatically reduce the nearly 4,000 cervical cancer deaths that occur each year in the United States.
The vaccine comes as a $360 series of three shots, and in tests has been highly effective against HPV. The vaccine is formulated to address the subtypes of HPV responsible for 70 percent of cervical cancer cases and 90 percent of genital warts.
Scientists say the vaccine is most effective when given to girls before they become sexually active, and some girls become active before their teens. About 7 percent of children have had sexual intercourse before age 13, and about a quarter of boys and girls have had sex by age 15, according to government surveys.
In a public comment session at Thursday's meeting, all nine speakers supported recommending the vaccine to females 9 to 26, the broadest possible group under FDA license. The speakers included a state senator from Maryland and the chief medical officer of AmeriChoice, a UnitedHealth Group company that manages state Medicaid programs.
The panel focused on 11- to 12-year-olds in part because children that age already routinely get two other shots.
Several speakers also called for the immunization of boys, as soon as studies are completed on the vaccine's safety and effectiveness for males. HPV has been linked to penile, anal, and head and neck cancers and a tumor-like condition of the respiratory tract.
Merck officials said clinical effectiveness studies in males should be completed by 2008.
Merck officials also said they can provide the more than 19 million doses that health officials expect would be used in the next year.
---------------
Certain Fundy groups have already voice opposition to mandating this vaccine. I'm sure they'll be making their voices heard soon, and I'll happily post about 'em. 'Cause I'd love to see the Fundy church, in all it's horrid forms, crumble and be swallowed by the earth. 'cept that would give the earth heartburn and I don't want that. Anyway, I think this is awesome and I'd get the bloody vaccine myself if my doctor would let me. Also, if I ever have a daughter? She's totally getting this. Provided it proves safe, of course. But I'm believe they've already proved that, so....why would anyone not want their daughters to be protected against cervical cancer? I just can't understand that...because trust me, you're not thinking about cancer when you're having sex.
By MIKE STOBBE
Associated Press Writer
ATLANTA (AP) -- Taking up a potentially explosive issue among religious conservatives, an influential government advisory panel Thursday recommended that 11- and 12-year-old girls be routinely vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer.
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices also said the shots can be started for girls as young as 9, at the discretion of their doctors.
The committee's recommendations usually are accepted by federal health officials, and influence insurance coverage for vaccinations.
Gardasil, made by Merck & Co., is the first vaccine specifically designed to prevent cancer. Approved earlier this month by the Food and Drug Administration for females ages 9 to 26, it protects against strains of the human papilloma virus, or HPV, which causes cervical, vulvar and vaginal cancers and genital warts.
Some health officials had girded themselves for arguments from religious conservatives and others that vaccinating youngsters against the sexually transmitted virus might make them more likely to have sex. But the controversy never materialized in the panel's public meetings.
Earlier this year, the Family Research Council, a conservative group, did not speak out against giving the HPV shot to young girls. The organization mainly opposes making it one of the vaccines required before youngsters can enroll in school, said the group's policy analyst, Moira Gaul.
Health officials estimate that more than 50 percent of sexually active women and men will be infected with one or more types of HPV in their lifetimes. Vaccine proponents say it could dramatically reduce the nearly 4,000 cervical cancer deaths that occur each year in the United States.
The vaccine comes as a $360 series of three shots, and in tests has been highly effective against HPV. The vaccine is formulated to address the subtypes of HPV responsible for 70 percent of cervical cancer cases and 90 percent of genital warts.
Scientists say the vaccine is most effective when given to girls before they become sexually active, and some girls become active before their teens. About 7 percent of children have had sexual intercourse before age 13, and about a quarter of boys and girls have had sex by age 15, according to government surveys.
In a public comment session at Thursday's meeting, all nine speakers supported recommending the vaccine to females 9 to 26, the broadest possible group under FDA license. The speakers included a state senator from Maryland and the chief medical officer of AmeriChoice, a UnitedHealth Group company that manages state Medicaid programs.
The panel focused on 11- to 12-year-olds in part because children that age already routinely get two other shots.
Several speakers also called for the immunization of boys, as soon as studies are completed on the vaccine's safety and effectiveness for males. HPV has been linked to penile, anal, and head and neck cancers and a tumor-like condition of the respiratory tract.
Merck officials said clinical effectiveness studies in males should be completed by 2008.
Merck officials also said they can provide the more than 19 million doses that health officials expect would be used in the next year.
---------------
Certain Fundy groups have already voice opposition to mandating this vaccine. I'm sure they'll be making their voices heard soon, and I'll happily post about 'em. 'Cause I'd love to see the Fundy church, in all it's horrid forms, crumble and be swallowed by the earth. 'cept that would give the earth heartburn and I don't want that. Anyway, I think this is awesome and I'd get the bloody vaccine myself if my doctor would let me. Also, if I ever have a daughter? She's totally getting this. Provided it proves safe, of course. But I'm believe they've already proved that, so....why would anyone not want their daughters to be protected against cervical cancer? I just can't understand that...because trust me, you're not thinking about cancer when you're having sex.
Labels: feminism, fundies, medication
