An email to me from Dr. Rauch (the man) !!

Is it not curious that no course of antiherpetic drugs fits anywhere in this treatment scenario --- as though antiherpetics had no place in Meniere's treatments?

Of course, Dr. Gacek in Boston documents the matter quite differently.

Cogent info here:
http://menieres.org/talk/index.php?topic=1300.0

Treatment with antiherpetics requires the physician to merely write a prescription and get paid only for an office visit. Most of Dr. Rauch's procedures yield for him substantial fees (not that would have anything to do with his neglect, dismissal, or rejection of Gacek's published findings, of course).

--John of Ohio

 

I think success percentages should be posted for each regimen.

 

No, my regimen does not yield a “90% cure.”

There is no authentic cure for Meniere’s; merely some methods to chronically suppress the symptoms of the disease. The herpes virus, which causes the vast majority of Meniere’s cases (but not all of them) continues to reside in inner ear tissues, albeit in a dormant state. At some time in the future, when a treatment is neglected or stopped, or extraneous factors re-activate the virus, symptoms will return.

Presently, I have 265 specific, written accounts from regimen users, telling if the regimen was useful or ineffective. 233 regimen users reported that it significantly or completely suppressed Meniere’s symptoms. 32 regimen users report that it failed to provide any useful levels of symptomatic relief — it failed for them. This is an 87.9% success rate.

But as many have learned, going off the regimen most frequently allows the symptoms to return. At least maintenance-level doses of the regimen components must be continued after symptoms are controlled.

A real cure would not require continued treatment and dosings.

For those interested, scrutinize regimen information here:
http://www.zoominternet.net/~kcshop/JOH.pdf

–John of Ohio

 

I also have to wonder why "the man" won't even try antivirals, given their documented success rates with Gacek and other hearing centers. A laby is an expensive, destructive alternative that should only be considered after ALL else has failed.

 

Bulldogs,

I have not assessed regimen success when combined with a prescription antiherpetic (acyclovir, et al.). But I’m certain that concurrent use of antiherpetics and the regimen is not harmful, and that almost surely the chances of symptomatic relief are greater when used concurrently. The lysine of my regimen and the prescribed antiherpetic drugs both suppress herpes virus replication, but by different, non-competitive mechanisms.

But I have had no way to assess the successes of regimen users who have also taken the antiherpetics, inasmuch as those prescription drugs are often not mentioned in emails or postings from regimen users; merely whether or not the regimen brought relief. But there is every reason to believe that concurrent treatment with the regimen and a prescription antiherpetic drug increases chances of symptomatic relief. There is no biochemical or physiological reasons not to use both at the same time.

I’m not familiar with any Meniere’s symposia. As a retired biology teacher and with extensive experience in another biological (non-medical) field, I’ve presented any number of papers and presentations at scientific meetings and symposia. I’m familiar and experienced with the format, and would be delighted to lay out the theories, evidence, and efficacy data for my Meniere’s treatment regimen.

But most symposia on medical subjects are (understandably) limited to presentations by medical practitioners and researchers. Common blokes off the street with no strings of letters after their names, with no cogent peer-reviewed publications, are not invited or allowed to appear.

The real validity problem with my Meniere’s treatment regimen has several facets. First, it was contrived by a medically unqualified common citizen, not a medical professional or researcher at any legitimate medical institution or company.

Secondly, the components of the regimen are all over-the-counter, rather common products that anyone, without a prescription or medical advice can buy and use. How could any of this be effective against a disease like Meniere’s, which has been essentially un-treatable from the start (“I’m sorry, ma’am, you have Meniere’s; we don’t know what causes it, and you will have to learn to live with it. Next patient, please.”)? Meniere’s, in conventional medical thought, must require some new, very expensive, unique drug. Nothing else has ever really worked.

Third, my presentation of regimen efficacy, on the face of it, will be utterly dismissed by the proper medical community. It’s all from individual case accounts — anecdotes, user statements. Those simply are not considered accurate or useful in new drug or treatment protocols. Properly, my regimen should be first tested clinically with a double-blind trial; where neither the patients nor the administering physicians know if the patients are getting the real regimen components, or sugar-pill type substitutes. Hundreds of Meniere’s patients would have to participate in such a study, over many months or a year or more. At the end, metrification of symptoms of both the experimental group (those who unknowingly took the real regimen components), compared against the control group (those who thought they were taking the “real thing” but only with inactive ingredients), would be compared.

Conducting such a proper clinical trial would take months, and hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars. Ain’t gonna happen, even if (as I’m certain it would) the clinical trial proved the regimen to be highly efficacious. No one is going to fork over the required funds to conduct the trial because no matter how it turns out, no one can recover any funds. No new, patented Meniere’s drug would result; merely a document that says that John of Ohio’s claims of efficacy were accurate.

Therefore, nothing will change. A few, who discover the regimen on the Internet, who boldly take it to their doctor for review (as I advise, for the obvious reasons), will have (at the present) an 87% chance of gaining symptomatic relief. The vast majority of Meniere’s sufferers will continue with unabated symptoms, forking out big sums for delicate inner ear injections and surgeries. A few of us, however, will regard the anxieties, pains, and life-style obstructions of Meniere’s as things now in the past. Very few physicians will be saying to their Meniere’s patients, “Hey, here’s this John of Ohio Meniere’s Treatment Regimen. Let’s give it a six-month trial. I’ll first give you an MRI to rule out an acoustic neuroma. If that’s negative, let’s try this.”

I doubt that my regimen will ever gain any widespread legitimacy or usage in the otolaryingological world. Medical practice and protocols work against it in every way.

I continue to take regimen user accounts, recording all cogent data (but not names or contact information). I’d be willing to submit a PDF document of these to any medical professional who might request it.

But those are mere patient anecdotes — stories, with little medical practice legitimacy.

–John of Ohio