An Idea Not Sure If It's Good or Bad-You Decide

You know what would be even better?

If the Doctors that gave their patients AV's, would attest that it helped their patient for Meniere's! And if a doubting Doctor is refusing to subscribe them, they can contact the prescribing Doctor about it. Once there is a size able list of Doctor names and numbers that have prescribed AV's, who they've seen has helped their patient, via their patient's feedback, then someone here can take that list in to show their Doctor of all the ones who are already prescribing it to the doubting Doctor.

The idea is that Doctors are more likely to believe other Doctors rather than individuals such as us, hence more success rate to get the prescription when they see so many other ones already doing it. It's a bit of a job for everyone who has had success with AV's on this board to go into their Doctors office and ask if they could be included in this list so that others suffering from Meniere's may benefit from AV's also via their doubting Doctors.

 

I think if both of our ideas are combined it will be foolproof but I do think that MD Doctors will more likely believe other MD Doctors than just testimonials having higher success rate. So it maybe worthwhile to put the effort into this channel.

 

Yes ideally one should get an HSV test IgG is the most accurate from what I heard they also have IgA which is not accurate if I remember correctly but that's for another topic.

The thing is in Dr. Gacek's paper he doesn't test anyone for HSV and sometimes it can't be detected if it's all the way up in the inner ear. It would be ideal if it got detected because everything would be easy from that point in terms of getting the AV's and knowing the cause of one's symptoms but it seems from what I read here not a lot of people seem to say that they got tested for HSV first before they got their script for AV's. I don't know maybe I'm wrong on this.

My doctor was willing to prescribe it after I showed him Dr. Gacek's paper and I even did the HSV test and it came out negative before I asked for the AV's.

 

Wonderful idea. Makes good sense. If reason prevails, this oughta work.

But in the case of many (not all) highly-trained physicians, good ideas, good sense, and good reason simply do not play important roles in what they prescribe. The most important thing is the un-assailed sovereignty of their superior knowledge. And these people already know with certainty that a) Meniere’s is idiopathic (of unknown and/or unknowable causes) and b) that consequently all of the (few) potential treatments are presently known by the medical profession. End of story. Next patient, please.

One would presume, reasonably (but inaccurately) that because Dr. Gacek and others have published profound treatment efficacies with antiherpetic drugs, in peer-reviewed medical journals, both general practitioners and otolaryngologists would joyfully embrace a new, effective treatment for Meniere’s. Fortunately, for many Meniere’s patients that have presented the clinical data to their physicians, this is exactly what has happened.

But for many others, they have been sneered at and deprecated. In those practices, patients have no right, privilege, responsibility, or utility in bringing to the physician’s attention anything new, different, or unique regarding Meniere’s treatment. It’s professional arrogance of a most putrid stench. It’s to be solely the doctor’s knowledge and medical art, pure and simple. Nothing can, should, or will be added; particularly by an ignorant walk-in patient. To these sorts of doctors, allowing a patient to offer treatment information, especially for a mystifying disease such as Meniere’s, is purely an insult. They are above such affronts to their superior skills and knowledge.

I speak with some related knowledge on the matter. My John of Ohio Meniere’s Treatment Regimen (http://www.zoominternet.net/~kcshop/JOH.pdf) has a personally-documented efficacy rate of 87% (statistically equivalent to Dr. Gacek’s antiherpetic treatment). I have over 260 user-accounts, telling their successes or failures with the regimen. Although admittedly this evidence is merely anecdotal (personal stories) it is therefore not highly regarded in medical practice. It’s certainly not in a peer-reviewed medical journal by any means.

Nonetheless, the accounts are honest and engaging, telling in many cases how years of conventional medical Meniere’s treatments simply failed to work ---- and that the regimen finally brought high or complete levels of symptomatic relief.

A new antiherpetic treatment approach requires the taking of prescription drugs; therefore, a physician has to write out a prescription. Not so with my regimen. All of the components of the regimen are unregulated over-the-counter vitamins and supplements. Just go buy or order the stuff (not from me; I sell nothing), and follow the precepts of the regimen.

A number of regimen users have emailed, telling that their physicians were, at the start, certain that the regimen couldn’t and wouldn’t work; but because all the stuff was over-the-counter, they were allowed to “give it a try.” Then, the good doctors were astonished to find that the regimen did work; that most or all of the Meniere’s symptoms declined or abated. It is reported that a number of physicians now quietly provide copies of the regimen to their Meniere’s patients, based upon its many successes and virtual absence of side effects.

In summary, prompting the medical profession to change its ways and perspectives has always been extremely difficult, even in the glaring bright light of profound efficacies. It took decades for medicine to finally accept (in the 19th century) the “germ theory.” The same glacial pace of change for Meniere’s is locked in. I fear that the only global, pan-medical hope for universal acceptance of antiherpetic Meniere’s therapy will be with an entirely new generation of practitioners; who have learned and embraced the treatment while at medical school. That means a new generation of med-school professors must be in place, teaching all of this to their intellectually superior doctors-to-be.

This could take several decades.

And as for my off-the-street approach, my regimen of over-the-counter components, it will never appear in the medical literature. It will always be relegated to medically-questionable on-line appearances such as this so-questionable website.

--John of Ohio

 

But what about negative HSV tests, whereafter antiherpetics actually bring relief?

The universal usefulness of herpes testing, so as to determine whether or not an antiherpetic should be prescribed, in my mind, is weak. Simply put, there simply are no definitive, universal tests for the presence of herpes viruses, dormant or active, in the inner ear or related nerves. To require a positive herpes test before administering any of the antiherpetics is going mean a good number of sufferers go un-treated, even when antiherpetic therapy would actually have worked.

And who should care if some serum test detects or fails to detect the presence of a herpes infection? The real goal is stop any herpes activity, thereby bringing symptomatic relief. The dectection, errant or positive, of the virus is not the issue. Symptomatic relief is. And for about 90% with Meniere's symptoms, relief is gained, regardless of the results of a herpes-presence test.

Of greater concern, I believe (although rather minor), is the very moderate possiblity of renal or hepatic dysfunctions --- side effects. There are common renal and hepatic function tests that detect such dysfunctions. These tests, I believe, would be far more useful and protective. And they would be administered during and after antiherpetic administration. "Here, take this anti-herpes drug, and we'll need to test your kidneys and liver from time to time to see they stay Ok."

But, frankly, the side effects of the antiherpetics, even at both high and enduring doses, are minimal if not essentially absent.

Once again, some of the doctors are at fault, complicating (well, preventing) effective, useful 21st-century Meniere's therapy.

(Mr. Doctor, read yourself, and then show your medical malpractice insurance agent Gacek's paper. Consider what a medical malpractice jury would find after a proper presentation of Gacek's findings in a courtroom. In the same vein, what would a jury of laymen decide in a case brought against you by a Meniere's patient for whom you refused antiherpetic treatment, whereupon that patient subsequently encountered an accident or physical or financial harm from his continuing Meniere's? Do you think the jury of laymen will be pursuaded by your opinion that you "just didn't think antiherpetics were safe or effective....?" In utter disregard to Gacek's information, in fact.)

Maybe that's how antiherpetic Meniere's treatments will come into profound, widespread, preferred usage. Court precidents and medical malpractice insurance agents can change medicine faster than any other agents.

--John of Ohio

 

I like Vicki's idea of putting together stories of mm improvement due to the use of antivirals. When I tried to tell my ENT that several others have had improvement he responded with "I doubt there were very many". I would love to be able to share actual stories with him.

I am very doubtful that my Dr would want his name shared. I get my script from my PCP and it made me very nervous when the ENT wanted to know WHO was prescribing them. I never had a HSV test and at this point don't want one in case I tested negative and my PCP stopped giving me scripts. I've even hesitated to change drug insurance plans for fear that the new company may question the diagnosis used for antivirals. At this point I still struggle some but I certainly would not want to face mm without antivirals.

 

I think it's good idea. It can't hurt to try. I will be happy to post about my improved hearing test results. I know that my ENT felt it was important to document that.

I also make a point every chance I get to mention this to anyone in the healthcare world. I just figure the more the word is out there the better.