Tag: FDA

Suffer from Arthritis?

Suffer from Arthritis?
Ronald H. Pope

Arthritis pain relief, naturally
without prescription drugs.

The prescription drug of choice is, unfortunately, still Celebrex. Like its now market removed cousin, Vioxx, this blockbuster painkiller has been the subject of repeated FDA warnings that patient use can cause bleeding ulcers and heighten the risk of heart attacks – See article by Rita Rubin USA TODAY A better Life April 15, 2002.

Arthritis sufferers should be made aware that there are alternatives to the high cost of prescription drugs being prescribed by medical doctors. One such alternative is a natural remedy medically tested by a doctor, a remedy that does not cause the user to suffer from any side effects such as bleeding ulcer, or an increased risk of heart attack by elevated blood pressure such as the dangerous drugs being prescribed. The formula is especially effective for osteoarthritis of the knees.

One of the things that the doctor discovered in his case studies was that pain from arthritis decreased, and mobility of the joints involved improved, sometimes greatly, starting two to six weeks after the patient began to take the formula. Generally, the improvement continues until the formula is stopped. Then the whole problem starts to return, generally, in the same two to six weeks. In summary, the treatment is an effective control, not a cure. There is no cure known for arthritis at this juncture.

If you are interested in learning more about this exciting new ‘old’ remedy resurrected from the research papers in the Library of Congress or any another natural over the counter remedies for arthritis pain relief that actually do work, please email [email protected]

About the author:

Ronald H. Pope is President of Pope Estates Arizona Inc. Business Brokers & Commercial Realtors in Scottsdale, Arizona http://www.popemakesdeals.com

Statistics for Lasik Surgery Patients

The Lasik operation can be a wonderful, life-changing option for many people whose vision is less than perfect. There are several different types of Lasik operations now available, from the original and well documented procedure to Lasik procedures done with three dimensional wavefronts, or done entirely with lasers. Each of these variations of the Lasik procedure should be discussed with the physician that is to perform the operation.
Like any surgery, Lasik does have the potential for side effects.

Sometimes reading the horror stories of the outcomes of a Lasik procedure can deter people from seriously considering such a choice. It is also true that the vast numbers of people who have a successful, trouble-free Lasik surgery tend not to report a long and detailed story of their experience, unlike those that have experienced trouble afterward.

However, it is good to know what the possible side effects of the Lasik procedure are, and also the likelihood that one of these side effects will occur for a particular patient. Just like any medicine we take, each has a possible number of side effects, but we generally assume that the likelihood of a serious side effect is small, and we take the medicine anyway. This article will hopefully put concerns of the prospective Lasik patient into perspective so that they can calmly and thoughtfully ponder having a Lasik procedure done in the future.

More than one million Lasik procedures are done in the US every year, according to the FDA. This arm of the national government has accumulated the following statistics for the most common side effects of the Lasik procedure. These statistics will also vary by the physician performing the surgery, so make sure to get as much information on the prospective Lasik physician as possible.

After Lasik surgery, 1.7 percent of patients experience some glare or sensitivity to light after the operation. This varies by patient, but this sensitivity is especially noticeable when looking at a bright light, such as a streetlight when walking at night, or other strong light and dark contrast. Another light related side effect is a halo around a light, and this occurs in 3.5 percent of Lasik patients.

The new, corrected vision can be noticed quickly by some Lasik patients, in as little as a few hours after surgery. Most patients that have undergone the Lasik procedure find the change is permanent within a few days. In 2.6 percent of clients that have had a Lasik procedure done, there is persistent visual fluctuation within at least a part of their sphere of vision.

Finally, some patients do not get a fully corrected sphere of vision after their Lasik procedure. This happens with a small number of clients, and the FDA statistics are that only 3 percent of patients have this effect. In all or nearly all cases, the physician in charge will perform an additional Lasik procedure to improve this.

This detailing of the major permanent side effects of the Lasik procedure should put any personal horror stories into perspective. Notice that none of the percentages are above 3 percent, and this should bring comfort to most prospective Lasik clients. However, it should also motivate them to look carefully at the Lasik physician’s personal record.

Should I have Lasik or ICL?

A number of people who are considering the Lasik procedure to correct their nearsightedness or farsightedness have of some potential problems of Lasik, and are wondering if there are other options. Though more than 95 percent of the Lasik patients have a very successful procedure without any major side effects, there are choices for people who wish to improve their vision. Let’s compare two, and discuss these choices with a reputable ophthalmologist.

Traditional Lasik surgery uses a scalpel to create a small flap in the eye, and then a laser reshapes the eye in order to focus accurately. There are two more recent forms of Lasik, one that entirely uses a laser and does away with the scalpel. Another variation uses a three dimension waveform for people with unusual eye shapes, and both of these are worth discussing with your ophthalmologist.

Those people with very thin corneas or other issues that make Lasik not a good candidate for their particular case can consider implantable contact lens surgery. This is known as ICL in the eye surgeon’s lingo, and is a good alternative to Lasik to permanently correct vision. These lenses function in exactly the same way as removable lenses, except that they remain permanently in the eye. Like Lasik, they reshape the eye in order for it to focus accurately. The patient will not feel the lens once the operation has been performed.

Lasik and ICL are similar in several ways. Lasik can improve vision affected by nearsightedness and astigmatism, and ICL can improve these vision deficiencies also. Both Lasik and ICL also have some of the same risks, one of these being that the correction is not accurate after the first operation is done. Lasik is a much more frequently performed procedure, and less than 3 percent (according to the FDA) of these patients need to undergo additional surgery to further correct vision after the first Lasik procedure is done.

Like any operation, there is a chance of infection in either a Lasik procedure or an ICL operation. Good post-operative care by the patient will minimize this and regular checkups at the Lasik or eye care center will nearly always clear this up without further complication. In a small percentage of the cases, either Lasik or ICL patients may not achieve perfect vision and may need to continue to wear corrective eyewear, though usually not at the same strength as the original eyewear.

One advantage of ICL over Lasik is that ICL is a reversible procedure, where the implanted lens can be removed later if that becomes necessary. Lasik involves the reshaping of the cornea to bring objects accurately into focus, and is permanent. However, for a typical, healthy patient either Lasik or ICL will generally bring about the desired improvement in vision.

Lasik is generally a less invasive procedure, and this is reflected in the current cost of the operation. The current price for a Lasik procedure is between $500 and $2500 per eye, depending on the type of procedure and the presiding physician. A typical price for ICL is between $1500 and $3000 per eye. Do some investigation into the options offered, and select the eye procedure that is best for your personal case.

My Rude Introduction to Arthritis and how I am Coping

My Rude Introduction to Arthritis and how I am Coping with It
Jimmie Newell

Let me begin by stating upfront that I realize that a great many people suffer from much more serious arthritic conditions than I. This article is not to trivialize their conditions in any way. My intent is to explain how this disease manifested itself in me and the treatment that I have undertaken.Being an avid golfer, I like many other men can hardly wait for spring to arrive. In 2004 spring came early. My first round I walked 18 holes with a push cart as I usually do. I did not feel any abnormal pain at this point. The next day I went to the driving range to work some of the kinks out of my swing, and hit a large bucket of balls. Later that evening my left knee was in so much pain that I could not stand with any pressure on it, walking was very painful. This persisted for 2-3 weeks, it did finally start to get better, but only marginally, golf had been degraded to using a power cart, there was just no way I could walk 9 holes, let alone 18. Making any full swing was painful from the pressure put on my left knee.I finally went to an Orthopedist, and after x-rays of both knees and a range of motion exam, was told that I had Osteoarthritis. The doctor showed me the small space left between the bones of my left knee, and told me that the meniscus (a pad of cartilage that cushions the joint and prevents bone to bone contact) was thinning and was in all likelihood torn. He told me that a few years ago, the standard treatment was to surgically repair the meniscus . however this type of repair was only effective at relieving pain about 50% of the time.The more accepted treatment now, was to prescribe a series of exercises designed to strengthen the muscles around the knee joint, and a pain reliever to control the pain, so that I could exercise. He also suggested that I investigate and take glucosamine which is a natural healing product not regulated by the FDA. He stated that recent large scale studies had shown that glucosamine was effective in slowing down the loss of cartilage and may even contribute to regeneration of damaged cartilage.Because I had previously had problems using Ibuprofen, he prescribed “Bextra” (a cox 2 inhibitor drug) that seemed very effective. Of course 2 weeks later came the scare about “Vioxx” also a cox 2 inhibitor drug, and I stopped taking “Bextra”, which is now not prescribed by many doctors. I started taking Ibuprofen again, however only in great moderation, I have had no ill effects. I continued with the exercises, some gradual improvement was noticed. I also continued taking glucosamine.All of these measures have contributed to effective pain relief, however even more relief was noticed after losing about 10 lbs. This reinforces the notion that excess weight plays a large role in knee pain.As of now (going into spring of 2005) the pain seems to be under control, my activity with the possible exception of running, is not restricted in any way. And my golf swing, once again needs work!Resources for more information:Arthritis and Glucosamine Information Center – http://www.glucosamine-arthritis.org/Flexicose HomepageArthritis FoundationNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesJohns Hopkins Arthritis Center Arthritis National Research FoundationCenters for Disease Control and Prevention Arthritis InsightTo Your Health,Jim Newell About the Author
Jimmie Newell is the webmaster for http://www.ToYourHealth101.com, a health & wellness website, featuring editorials, tips, information and links addressing many of the health issues of today.