Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue



David Wright wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, Jon Quixote
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>"Marciosos6 Probertiosos6" <[email protected]> wrote
>>>
>>>>I am making the following assumptions, which, are reasonable to rational people: ...
>>>
>>>You are also assuming that the subjects were not addicted. Maybe they were and maybe they
>>>weren't. The study only says that they all failed to get off the drugs when given the
>>>opportunity.
>>
>>No, the study says that they continued to avail themselves of the drugs when given the option.
>>
>>"After 7 days they had the option of stopping the medication or continuing for 3 more weeks. All
>>the patients reported that the drug helped and all chose to continue taking it."
>
>
> Can you even get addicted to a substance in 7 days? I recall reading that even heroin takes a
> couple of weeks.

Perhaps to tobacco.

TOBACCO ADDICTION FOUND TO BE NEARLY IMMEDIATE: http://www.umassmed.edu/pap/news/2002/08_29_02.cfm

Nancy Unique, like everyone else
 
"Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"CBI" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> "SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:<hbnEb.4656$Fg.4562@lakeread01>...
>> > "Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]...
>> > > "Marciosos6 Probertiosos6" <[email protected]> wrote
>> > > > I am making the following assumptions, which, are reasonable to
>rational
>> > > > people: ...
>> > >
>> > > You are also assuming that the subjects were not addicted. Maybe they were and maybe they
>> > > weren't. The study only says that they all failed to get off the drugs when given the
>> > > opportunity.
>> >
>> >
>> > Is that your definition of "addictive"? Does that mean that, oh, women
>on
>> > birth control pills are addicted to them because they refuse to stop
>taking
>> > them "when given the opportunity"? That those on antihistimines are addicted? (These are two
>> > examples that came to mind--there are many
>more, I
>> > am sure).
>>
>> By his definition you are addicted to any medication - in deed any substance - that you choose to
>> ingest.
>>
>> --
>> CBI, MD
>
>
>Any suggestions for my detoxing off losartan potassium?
>
>;o) Rich
>

After seven days, my wife didn't want to stop taking warfarin. I had better book her into rehab.

--
Peter Bowditch
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight
and The New Improved Quintessence of the Loon with added Vitamins and C-Q10 http://www.ratbags.com/loon
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
 
"nknisley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Marciosos6 Probertiosos6 wrote:
>
> > "JG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:kiRDb.1624$%[email protected]...
> >
> >>"Marciosos6 Probertiosos6" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >>>(Please repost for jan to read. She MUST know this!)
> >>
> >>>Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue Mon Dec 15, 7:00 PM ET
> >>
> >
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1434&ncid=1434&e=2&u=/acs/20031216/hl_acs/ritalin_h-
elps_beat_cancer_fatigue
> >
> >>...Imagine that, a stimulant helping beat fatigue! What'll they think of next?!? <g> When are
> >>they gonna test meth, or crack?
> >
> >
> > They are addictive at just about any doseage, so MPH is far preferable, since it is not
> > addictive at the doseages that werre administered.
> >
>
> WRT your statement that methamphetamine is addictive at just about any dosage: Are you talking
> about street meth or pharmaceutical methamphetamine (Desoxyn)?
>
> Are there studies that you know of showing Desoxyn is addictive when taken as prescribed (for ADHD
> or narcolepsy) and not abused by taking more than the prescribed amount or by injecting or
> snorting it?

Street useage.
 
"Marciosos7 Probertiosos7" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "nknisley" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Marciosos6 Probertiosos6 wrote:
> >
> > > "JG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:kiRDb.1624$%[email protected]...
> > >
> > >>"Marciosos6 Probertiosos6" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > >>news:[email protected]...
> > >>
> > >>>(Please repost for jan to read. She MUST know this!)
> > >>
> > >>>Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue Mon Dec 15, 7:00 PM ET
> > >>
> > >
>
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1434&ncid=1434&e=2&u=/acs/20031216/hl_acs/ritalin_h-
elps_beat_cancer_fatigue
> > >
> > >>...Imagine that, a stimulant helping beat fatigue! What'll they think of next?!? <g> When are
> > >>they gonna test meth, or crack?
> > >
> > >
> > > They are addictive at just about any doseage, so MPH is far
preferable,
> > > since it is not addictive at the doseages that werre administered.
> > >
> >
> > WRT your statement that methamphetamine is addictive at just about any dosage: Are you talking
> > about street meth or pharmaceutical methamphetamine (Desoxyn)?
> >
> > Are there studies that you know of showing Desoxyn is addictive when taken as prescribed (for
> > ADHD or narcolepsy) and not abused by taking more than the prescribed amount or by injecting or
> > snorting it?
>
> Street useage.

What about the street usage of caffeine?

Buny
 
"Marciosos7 Probertiosos7" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> He just does not want to get it.
^^^^^^^^^^

For those who harp "the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have one," they seem to have
a big problem following their own words, no?

Happy Holidays, Buny
 
"SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:2jFEb.5292$Fg.5235@lakeread01...
>
> "Marciosos7 Probertiosos7" <[email protected]> wrote in
message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "nknisley" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > > Marciosos6 Probertiosos6 wrote:
> > >
> > > > "JG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:kiRDb.1624$%[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > >>"Marciosos6 Probertiosos6" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > >>news:[email protected]...
> > > >>
> > > >>>(Please repost for jan to read. She MUST know this!)
> > > >>
> > > >>>Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue Mon Dec 15, 7:00 PM ET
> > > >>
> > > >
> >
>
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1434&ncid=1434&e=2&u=/acs/20031216/hl_acs/ritalin_h-
elps_beat_cancer_fatigue
> > > >
> > > >>...Imagine that, a stimulant helping beat fatigue! What'll they
think
> > > >>of next?!? <g> When are they gonna test meth, or crack?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > They are addictive at just about any doseage, so MPH is far
> preferable,
> > > > since it is not addictive at the doseages that werre administered.
> > > >
> > >
> > > WRT your statement that methamphetamine is addictive at just about any dosage: Are you talking
> > > about street meth or pharmaceutical methamphetamine (Desoxyn)?
> > >
> > > Are there studies that you know of showing Desoxyn is addictive when taken as prescribed (for
> > > ADHD or narcolepsy) and not abused by taking more than the prescribed amount or by injecting
> > > or snorting it?
> >
> > Street useage.
>
> What about the street usage of caffeine?

Higly addictive. One of the women who works for our office tenant is pregnant.She is drinking at
least 8 cups of coffee a day, and is now late for delivery. If the kid cannot fall asleep....
 
"Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Marciosos7 Probertiosos7" <[email protected]> wrote
> > Research studies show that the oral use of the medication does not have
> the
> > same physiology response as when it is snorted, or injected. The physiological response in those
> > circumstances is the same for cocaine
and
> > heroin. Roger refuses to recognize this, and ...
>
> I am happy to recognize the research. Yes, the physiological response when ritalin or cocaine is
> snorted or injected is much faster. It can
reach
> the brain within 5 minutes or so that way. Pills act much more slowly. No question about it.

You are 1/3 way there....

Now youhave to recognize that the rapid uptake of injected or snorted ritalin, met, etc. is what
makes it addictive, and that oral use at the prescribed doses does not make it addictive.
 
"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:07:57 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos7"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:hbnEb.4656$Fg.4562@lakeread01...
> >>
> >> "Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> > "Marciosos6 Probertiosos6" <[email protected]> wrote
> >> > > I am making the following assumptions, which, are reasonable to
> >rational
> >> > > people: ...
> >> >
> >> > You are also assuming that the subjects were not addicted. Maybe they were and maybe they
> >> > weren't. The study only says that they all failed to get off the drugs when given the
> >> > opportunity.
> >>
> >>
> >> Is that your definition of "addictive"? Does that mean that, oh, women
on
> >> birth control pills are addicted to them because they refuse to stop
> >taking
> >> them "when given the opportunity"? That those on antihistimines are addicted? (These are two
> >> examples that came to mind--there are many
more,
> >I
> >> am sure).
> >
> >How about that diabetic who is addicted to insulin, by Roger's standard?
>
> --
> "Let me clear this up right now. ADHD is not like diabetes and [the
stimulant used for it] is not
> like insulin. Diabetes is a real medical condition that can be
objectively diagnosed. ADHD is an
> invented label with no objective, valid means of identification. Insulin
is a natural hormone
> produced by the body and it is essential for life. [This stimulant] is a
chemically derived
> amphetamine-like drug that is not necessary for life. Diabetes is an
insulin deficiency. Attention
> and behavioral problems are not a [stimulant] deficiency."
>
>
> Dr. Mary Ann Block

Jakey...I was referring to Roger's standards, which have nothing to do with the real world.
 
"Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote
> > > You are also assuming that the subjects were not addicted. Maybe they were and maybe they
> > > weren't. The study only says that they all failed to get off the drugs when given the
> > > opportunity.
> > Is that your definition of "addictive"? ...
>
> No, but it is a good clue when we are discussing mind-altering drugs.

Then why cut out the rest of my post...these drugs also have effects on the brain....birth control
pills, antihistimines, asthma meds, insulin...all impact the brain as well...are you suggesting that
those who use these are addicted because they fail to get off of them when "given the opportunity"?

Buny
 
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:06:00 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos8"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:07:57 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos7"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:hbnEb.4656$Fg.4562@lakeread01...
>> >>
>> >> "Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> news:[email protected]...
>> >> > "Marciosos6 Probertiosos6" <[email protected]> wrote
>> >> > > I am making the following assumptions, which, are reasonable to
>> >rational
>> >> > > people: ...
>> >> >
>> >> > You are also assuming that the subjects were not addicted. Maybe they were and maybe they
>> >> > weren't. The study only says that they all failed to get off the drugs when given the
>> >> > opportunity.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Is that your definition of "addictive"? Does that mean that, oh, women
>on
>> >> birth control pills are addicted to them because they refuse to stop
>> >taking
>> >> them "when given the opportunity"? That those on antihistimines are addicted? (These are two
>> >> examples that came to mind--there are many
>more,
>> >I
>> >> am sure).
>> >
>> >How about that diabetic who is addicted to insulin, by Roger's standard?
>>
>> --
>> "Let me clear this up right now. ADHD is not like diabetes and [the
>stimulant used for it] is not
>> like insulin. Diabetes is a real medical condition that can be
>objectively diagnosed. ADHD is an
>> invented label with no objective, valid means of identification. Insulin
>is a natural hormone
>> produced by the body and it is essential for life. [This stimulant] is a
>chemically derived
>> amphetamine-like drug that is not necessary for life. Diabetes is an
>insulin deficiency. Attention
>> and behavioral problems are not a [stimulant] deficiency."
>>
>>
>> Dr. Mary Ann Block
>
>Jakey...I was referring to Roger's standards, which have nothing to do with the real world.
>
>

pet peeve..

the insulin /diabetes analogy is hackneyed ..inappropriate and worked to death..

as to the topic... with advanced cancer whatever gets you through the night is OK in my book..
 
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:03:28 -0600, "SumBuny"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:06:00 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos8"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> >> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:07:57 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos7" <[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> >news:hbnEb.4656$Fg.4562@lakeread01...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:[email protected]...
>> >> >> > "Marciosos6 Probertiosos6" <[email protected]> wrote
>> >> >> > > I am making the following assumptions, which, are reasonable to
>> >> >rational
>> >> >> > > people: ...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > You are also assuming that the subjects were not addicted. Maybe they were and maybe they
>> >> >> > weren't. The study only says that they all failed to get off the drugs when given the
>> >> >> > opportunity.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Is that your definition of "addictive"? Does that mean that, oh,
>women
>> >on
>> >> >> birth control pills are addicted to them because they refuse to stop
>> >> >taking
>> >> >> them "when given the opportunity"? That those on antihistimines are addicted? (These are
>> >> >> two examples that came to mind--there are many
>> >more,
>> >> >I
>> >> >> am sure).
>> >> >
>> >> >How about that diabetic who is addicted to insulin, by Roger's
>standard?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> "Let me clear this up right now. ADHD is not like diabetes and [the
>> >stimulant used for it] is not
>> >> like insulin. Diabetes is a real medical condition that can be
>> >objectively diagnosed. ADHD is an
>> >> invented label with no objective, valid means of identification.
>Insulin
>> >is a natural hormone
>> >> produced by the body and it is essential for life. [This stimulant] is
>a
>> >chemically derived
>> >> amphetamine-like drug that is not necessary for life. Diabetes is an
>> >insulin deficiency. Attention
>> >> and behavioral problems are not a [stimulant] deficiency."
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Dr. Mary Ann Block
>> >
>> >Jakey...I was referring to Roger's standards, which have nothing to do
>with
>> >the real world.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> pet peeve..
>>
>> the insulin /diabetes analogy is hackneyed ..inappropriate and worked to death..
>
>Perhaps...but Roger stated something about drugs that affect the brain, and insulin *does*
>that...he also defined "addiction" as a drug that someone could not stop taking "when given the
>opportunity"...insulin also fits that. It was used to point out that his "logic/definition" is
>specious at best...

a lot of this is word games..

addicted/dependent/withdrawal sydromes/discontinuity syndrome "addicted" has negative
connotations..summoning up pictures of addicts shooting up in alleys...

If after becoming habituated people find they can no longer function without a continuous input of a
drug..thats addiction as far as most people are concerned..

I suspect most diabetics have come to terms with the fact they are dependent on insulin..

>
>
>>
>> as to the topic... with advanced cancer whatever gets you through the night is OK in my book..
>
>
>Totally agree...

Yep...serious stuff..

"There's a greater and greater attempt by the pharmaceutical companies to define normal behaviours
as signs of illness and therefore as something that can be treated by their products,"

Professor Allan Horwitz
 
"SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<shFEb.5287$Fg.4086@lakeread01>...
> "Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote
> > > > You are also assuming that the subjects were not addicted. Maybe they were and maybe they
> > > > weren't. The study only says that they all failed to get off the drugs when given the
> > > > opportunity.
> > > Is that your definition of "addictive"? ...
> >
> > No, but it is a good clue when we are discussing mind-altering drugs.
>
>
> Then why cut out the rest of my post...these drugs also have effects on the brain....birth control
> pills, antihistimines, asthma meds, insulin...all impact the brain as well...are you suggesting
> that those who use these are addicted because they fail to get off of them when "given the
> opportunity"?

You'll have to excuse Roger. You see - every time he reads and responds to a Usenet post it is an
opportunity to stop using logical falacies. Alas, he decides not to. He must be addicted to them.

--
CBI, MD
 
"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:06:00 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos8"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:07:57 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos7" <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >news:hbnEb.4656$Fg.4562@lakeread01...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> >> > "Marciosos6 Probertiosos6" <[email protected]> wrote
> >> >> > > I am making the following assumptions, which, are reasonable to
> >> >rational
> >> >> > > people: ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You are also assuming that the subjects were not addicted. Maybe they were and maybe they
> >> >> > weren't. The study only says that they all failed to get off the drugs when given the
> >> >> > opportunity.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Is that your definition of "addictive"? Does that mean that, oh,
women
> >on
> >> >> birth control pills are addicted to them because they refuse to stop
> >> >taking
> >> >> them "when given the opportunity"? That those on antihistimines are addicted? (These are two
> >> >> examples that came to mind--there are many
> >more,
> >> >I
> >> >> am sure).
> >> >
> >> >How about that diabetic who is addicted to insulin, by Roger's
standard?
> >>
> >> --
> >> "Let me clear this up right now. ADHD is not like diabetes and [the
> >stimulant used for it] is not
> >> like insulin. Diabetes is a real medical condition that can be
> >objectively diagnosed. ADHD is an
> >> invented label with no objective, valid means of identification.
Insulin
> >is a natural hormone
> >> produced by the body and it is essential for life. [This stimulant] is
a
> >chemically derived
> >> amphetamine-like drug that is not necessary for life. Diabetes is an
> >insulin deficiency. Attention
> >> and behavioral problems are not a [stimulant] deficiency."
> >>
> >>
> >> Dr. Mary Ann Block
> >
> >Jakey...I was referring to Roger's standards, which have nothing to do
with
> >the real world.
> >
> >
>
> pet peeve..
>
> the insulin /diabetes analogy is hackneyed ..inappropriate and worked to death..
>
> as to the topic... with advanced cancer whatever gets you through the night is OK in my book..

Send Roger a copy.
 
"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:06:00 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos8"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:07:57 GMT, "Marciosos7 Probertiosos7" <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >news:hbnEb.4656$Fg.4562@lakeread01...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> >> > "Marciosos6 Probertiosos6" <[email protected]> wrote
> >> >> > > I am making the following assumptions, which, are reasonable to
> >> >rational
> >> >> > > people: ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You are also assuming that the subjects were not addicted. Maybe they were and maybe they
> >> >> > weren't. The study only says that they all failed to get off the drugs when given the
> >> >> > opportunity.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Is that your definition of "addictive"? Does that mean that, oh,
women
> >on
> >> >> birth control pills are addicted to them because they refuse to stop
> >> >taking
> >> >> them "when given the opportunity"? That those on antihistimines are addicted? (These are two
> >> >> examples that came to mind--there are many
> >more,
> >> >I
> >> >> am sure).
> >> >
> >> >How about that diabetic who is addicted to insulin, by Roger's
standard?
> >>
> >> --
> >> "Let me clear this up right now. ADHD is not like diabetes and [the
> >stimulant used for it] is not
> >> like insulin. Diabetes is a real medical condition that can be
> >objectively diagnosed. ADHD is an
> >> invented label with no objective, valid means of identification.
Insulin
> >is a natural hormone
> >> produced by the body and it is essential for life. [This stimulant] is
a
> >chemically derived
> >> amphetamine-like drug that is not necessary for life. Diabetes is an
> >insulin deficiency. Attention
> >> and behavioral problems are not a [stimulant] deficiency."
> >>
> >>
> >> Dr. Mary Ann Block
> >
> >Jakey...I was referring to Roger's standards, which have nothing to do
with
> >the real world.
> >
> >
>
> pet peeve..
>
> the insulin /diabetes analogy is hackneyed ..inappropriate and worked to death..

Perhaps...but Roger stated something about drugs that affect the brain, and insulin *does* that...he
also defined "addiction" as a drug that someone could not stop taking "when given the
opportunity"...insulin also fits that. It was used to point out that his "logic/definition" is
specious at best...

>
> as to the topic... with advanced cancer whatever gets you through the night is OK in my book..

Totally agree...
 
"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:03:28 -0600, "SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >>
> >> pet peeve..
> >>
> >> the insulin /diabetes analogy is hackneyed ..inappropriate and worked to death..
> >
> >Perhaps...but Roger stated something about drugs that affect the brain,
and
> >insulin *does* that...he also defined "addiction" as a drug that someone could not stop taking
> >"when given the opportunity"...insulin also fits
that.
> >It was used to point out that his "logic/definition" is specious at
best...
>
> a lot of this is word games..
>
> addicted/dependent/withdrawal sydromes/discontinuity syndrome "addicted" has negative
> connotations..summoning up pictures of addicts shooting up in alleys...
>
> If after becoming habituated people find they can no longer function without a continuous input of
> a drug..thats addiction as far as most people are concerned..
>
> I suspect most diabetics have come to terms with the fact they are dependent on insulin..

It may seem semantics to you, but I find it rather insulting/annoying/hate-filled for many who post
here insinuating the negative that I am addicted to antihistimines/asthma meds/ADHDmeds/birth
control pills/whatever...insinuating that I am the same as those who abuse illegal drugs on the
street...and then, when I call them on it, *I* am the one who is "not playing fair".....this gets
old rather quickly....

The "either/or" attitude is what truly sucks...you either take no medications, or you are addicted
to drugs....what happened to the most typical patient, the one in the middle area?

Buny
 
In article <shFEb.5287$Fg.4086@lakeread01>,
SumBuny <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Roger Schlafly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> "SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote
>> > > You are also assuming that the subjects were not addicted. Maybe they were and maybe they
>> > > weren't. The study only says that they all failed to get off the drugs when given the
>> > > opportunity.
>> > Is that your definition of "addictive"? ...
>>
>> No, but it is a good clue when we are discussing mind-altering drugs.
>
>
>Then why cut out the rest of my post...these drugs also have effects on the brain....birth control
>pills, antihistimines, asthma meds, insulin...all impact the brain as well...are you suggesting
>that those who use these are addicted because they fail to get off of them when "given the
>opportunity"?

In Schlafly-land, things mean whatever he defines them to mean. Reality is irrelevant.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
 
"Marciosos7 Probertiosos8" <[email protected]> wrote
> > I am happy to recognize the research. Yes, the physiological response when ritalin or cocaine is
> > snorted or injected is much faster. It can
> Now youhave to recognize that the rapid uptake of injected or snorted ritalin, met, etc. is what
> makes it addictive, and that oral use at the prescribed doses does not make it addictive.

Just show me the published scientific paper.

Rush Limbaugh claims that he got addicted to prescribed pills. Are you saying that is impossible?

If it has been shown to be impossible, then there must be a recognized paper saying so.
 
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 13:11:48 -0600, "SumBuny"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:03:28 -0600, "SumBuny" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> pet peeve..
>> >>
>> >> the insulin /diabetes analogy is hackneyed ..inappropriate and worked to death..
>> >
>> >Perhaps...but Roger stated something about drugs that affect the brain,
>and
>> >insulin *does* that...he also defined "addiction" as a drug that someone could not stop taking
>> >"when given the opportunity"...insulin also fits
>that.
>> >It was used to point out that his "logic/definition" is specious at
>best...
>>
>> a lot of this is word games..
>>
>> addicted/dependent/withdrawal sydromes/discontinuity syndrome "addicted" has negative
>> connotations..summoning up pictures of addicts shooting up in alleys...
>>
>> If after becoming habituated people find they can no longer function without a continuous input
>> of a drug..thats addiction as far as most people are concerned..
>>
>> I suspect most diabetics have come to terms with the fact they are dependent on insulin..
>
>
>It may seem semantics to you, but I find it rather insulting/annoying/hate-filled for many who
>post here insinuating the negative that I am addicted to antihistimines/asthma
>meds/ADHDmeds/birth control pills/whatever...insinuating that I am the same as those who abuse
>illegal drugs on the street..

yeah,..thats what I meant by negative connotations and conjuring up up images of junkies shooting
up in alleys

>.and then, when I call them on it, *I* am the one who is "not playing fair".....this gets old
>rather quickly....
>
>The "either/or" attitude is what truly sucks...you either take no medications, or you are addicted
>to drugs....what happened to the most typical patient, the one in the middle area?

well..whilst there certainly are individual differences and personality factors involved..the
addiction is a function of the drug..hence the precieved need to control them..

obviously its an even more sensitive area where children are concerned..

__

"When society turns a blind eye to the dangers of drugs and rushes to embrace a pharmaceutical cure
for nearly every condition, there is almost no end to the harm that may result".

Thomas.J.Moore
 
"jake" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:03:28 -0600, "SumBuny"

> >> >> >How about that diabetic who is addicted to insulin, by Roger's
> >standard?
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> "Let me clear this up right now. ADHD is not like diabetes and [the
> >> >stimulant used for it] is not
> >> >> like insulin. Diabetes is a real medical condition that can be
> >> >objectively diagnosed. ADHD is an
> >> >> invented label with no objective, valid means of identification.
> >Insulin
> >> >is a natural hormone
> >> >> produced by the body and it is essential for life. [This stimulant]
is
> >a
> >> >chemically derived
> >> >> amphetamine-like drug that is not necessary for life. Diabetes is
an
> >> >insulin deficiency. Attention
> >> >> and behavioral problems are not a [stimulant] deficiency."
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Dr. Mary Ann Block
> >> >
> >> >Jakey...I was referring to Roger's standards, which have nothing to do
> >with
> >> >the real world.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> pet peeve..
> >>
> >> the insulin /diabetes analogy is hackneyed ..inappropriate and worked to death..
> >
> >Perhaps...but Roger stated something about drugs that affect the brain,
and
> >insulin *does* that...he also defined "addiction" as a drug that someone could not stop taking
> >"when given the opportunity"...insulin also fits
that.
> >It was used to point out that his "logic/definition" is specious at
best...
>
> a lot of this is word games..

Agreed. That is Roger's specialty.

>
> addicted/dependent/withdrawal sydromes/discontinuity syndrome "addicted" has negative
> connotations..summoning up pictures of addicts shooting up in alleys...
>
> If after becoming habituated people find they can no longer function without a continuous input of
> a drug..thats addiction as far as most people are concerned..
>
> I suspect most diabetics have come to terms with the fact they are dependent on insulin..

Diabetes is classified, in one system, as insulin dependent or non-insulin dependent. thus, your
point is well taken.
 
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:59:51 GMT, "Marciosos6 Probertiosos6"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>(Please repost for jan to read. She MUST know this!)
>
>Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue Mon Dec 15, 7:00 PM ET
>
>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1434&ncid=1434&e=2&u=/acs/20031216/hl_acs/ritalin_-
>helps_beat_cancer_fatigue
>
>The drug methylphenidate -- more commonly known as Ritalin (news - web sites), Concerta, Metadate,
>or Methylin -- can help cancer patients fight off fatigue, according to researchers from M.D.
>Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. The best effect comes from taking small doses throughout the
>day, they report in the Journal of Clinical Oncology (Vol. 21, No. 23: 4439-4443).
>
>Most patients with advanced cancer will experience fatigue, a symptom that can destroy quality of
>life. Although the fatigue sometimes stems from anemia and improves with increases in blood counts,
>most often there is no specific cause and no ready treatment.
>
>Methylphenidate is typically prescribed for ADHD, or attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, but
>it has been used, with some success, to treat cancer fatigue. In this study, the researchers wanted
>to better document this success by measuring symptom improvement through the use of specially
>designed questionnaires.
>
>Patients Felt Better Physically and Emotionally
>
>The researchers enrolled 30 patients with advanced cancer and fatigue; the participants were given
>a one-week supply of 5-mg methylphenidate tablets and told to take them as needed for fatigue.
>After 7 days they had the option of stopping the medication or continuing for 3 more weeks. All the
>patients reported that the drug helped and all chose to continue taking it.
>
>
>The researchers also found other evidence that the drug was helping. At the beginning of the study,
>the patients rated their fatigue on a 0-10 scale, with 10 being the worst. The average was 7.2.
>After 28 days of methylphenidate, their fatigue level had dropped to 4.4.
>
>
>The patients also reported less depression and greater physical and emotional well-being. When the
>researchers measured patient fatigue during the day, they noted a drop from morning to evening as
>the effects of that day's treatment took hold.
>
>Side Effects Minor
>
>Side effects weren't a big problem. Two patients reported restlessness. Two others reported a loss
>of appetite, although most actually found their appetites improved.
>
>
>The authors acknowledge that bigger studies are needed to understand why methylphenidate works, how
>long it remains effective, and how long it can safely be taken. But they were encouraged by the clear-
>cut benefit of the drug in improving both the fatigue and the quality of life of these patients.
>

Repost.

Regards,

Aribert Deckers
--
World Conference "Health Care Systems: Public and Private Management"

http://www.ariplex.com/ama/ama_p0.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back