![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 49 to 73 of 89. Go back in thread:
Posted by SLS on November 4, 2009, at 23:49:36
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 4, 2009, at 19:21:23
>
> >
> > Also:
> >
> > http://depression.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=depression&cdn=health&tm=25&f=00&su=p284.9.336.ip_p619.12.336.ip_&tt=2&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi%3Fdb%3Dpubmed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26dopt%3DAbstractPlus%26list_uids%3D12929754%26query_hl%3D1%26itool%3Dpubmed_docsum
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
>
> So according to that study, I should not apply an unspecified amount of hypericin directly to my lenses and then proceed to irradiate them with an unspecified amount of UVB light, for an unspecified amount of time. Is that about right?
Since there are multiple scientific investigations that come to the same conclusions (hypericin damages ocular lens proteins via its interaction with alpha-Crystallin and singlet oxygen), it might be prudent to investigate the potential for SJW to facilitate the development of cataracts seriously.
- Scott
Posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 7:52:05
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 4, 2009, at 19:32:28
>
> > > Grazing: St. Johnswort presents difficult problems for grazing, given its chemical constituents. It depresses the central nervous system and increases the animals' sensitivity to temperature change and handling. St. Johnswort also affects the liver, causing temporary sensitivity to sunlight. Livestock usually avoid it unless food is scarce. Excess consumption leads to blistering and itching on light-haired or unpigmented skin areas including the mouth, nose and ears. Dark skin is not affected. The animals may lose weight, become difficult to manage, and they may die of dehydration or starvation if there is swelling or soreness in the mouth. Cattle need to ingest only 1% of their body weight to be affected, whereas sheep can consume up to 4% of their weight. The wool and meat of affected animals is often of poor quality. Horses, rabbits and pigs are also affected by the herb, but I have not found any information reporting whether or not goats are affected. The dried plant as found in hay is much less potent than fresh, but may still cause problems.
>
> Sorry, I wasn't aware there were any cattle on this board taking SJW for mood disorders? What exactly is the point of this? If it makes you feel better I promise not let my cow or goat graze on SJW. Can we now drop this sillyness?
>
> > Also read the link in Scott's post. I posted for what I thought a genuine health risk. If you feel free to google this topic on cattle and sjw this apparently is quite common. I for one will not use the product but feel free to ingest large quantities of sjw since herbal means safe. I guess you're entitled to do what you wish with your eyes. I won't waste my time any more as this is becoming quite childish.
>
> Again with the cattle.
> Childish? What is childish, taking 1 or two potential side effects and blowing them way out of proportion to what the literature indicates and then using it as justification for hysteria.
>
> Furthermore, not one person in this thread has made any statement to the extant that SJW is completely safe and requires no caution or education before ingestion. Anything that you put into your body is potentially going to cause an adverse reaction. Heck, people even die from too much water! True story. Acetaminophen causes many deaths every year. If you eat too many calories you can develop metabolic syndrome and die. Etc. Etc. Etc.......
>
>There seem to be two sets of rules around here. The alt med people frequently use rat and other animal studies to further their views. I guess that doesn't apply to negative sides.
Posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 7:54:01
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort » TenMan, posted by SLS on November 4, 2009, at 23:49:36
> >
> > >
> > > Also:
> > >
> > > http://depression.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=depression&cdn=health&tm=25&f=00&su=p284.9.336.ip_p619.12.336.ip_&tt=2&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi%3Fdb%3Dpubmed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26dopt%3DAbstractPlus%26list_uids%3D12929754%26query_hl%3D1%26itool%3Dpubmed_docsum
> > >
> > >
> > > - Scott
> >
> >
> > So according to that study, I should not apply an unspecified amount of hypericin directly to my lenses and then proceed to irradiate them with an unspecified amount of UVB light, for an unspecified amount of time. Is that about right?
>
>
> Since there are multiple scientific investigations that come to the same conclusions (hypericin damages ocular lens proteins via its interaction with alpha-Crystallin and singlet oxygen), it might be prudent to investigate the potential for SJW to facilitate the development of cataracts seriously.
>
>
> - ScottThese people are in a state of denial.
Posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 8:00:36
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort » TenMan, posted by SLS on November 4, 2009, at 23:49:36
> >
> > >
> > > Also:
> > >
> > > http://depression.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=depression&cdn=health&tm=25&f=00&su=p284.9.336.ip_p619.12.336.ip_&tt=2&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi%3Fdb%3Dpubmed%26cmd%3DRetrieve%26dopt%3DAbstractPlus%26list_uids%3D12929754%26query_hl%3D1%26itool%3Dpubmed_docsum
> > >
> > >
> > > - Scott
> >
> >
> > So according to that study, I should not apply an unspecified amount of hypericin directly to my lenses and then proceed to irradiate them with an unspecified amount of UVB light, for an unspecified amount of time. Is that about right?
>
>
> Since there are multiple scientific investigations that come to the same conclusions (hypericin damages ocular lens proteins via its interaction with alpha-Crystallin and singlet oxygen), it might be prudent to investigate the potential for SJW to facilitate the development of cataracts seriously.
>
>
> - ScottI have been taking SJW for years. I am well aware of the published studies, good and bad, along with much of the anecdote, about the herb. Personally, I am especially concerned about the cataracts issue because my father had it in both eyes in his late 50's and I share his blue eyes, a trait which predisposes one to cataract formation to begin with. However, to this point, I have seen nothing that warrants major concern to the effect that taking the standard doses used for mood disorders orally will hasten the formation of cataracts, as for now it is all theoretical. Personally, I'm far more concerned with the potential unknown consequences of a lifetime of SSRI or Atypcial AP use than SJW. There is no question in my mind what the riskier option is.
Posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 8:03:08
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 7:52:05
> >
> > > > Grazing: St. Johnswort presents difficult problems for grazing, given its chemical constituents. It depresses the central nervous system and increases the animals' sensitivity to temperature change and handling. St. Johnswort also affects the liver, causing temporary sensitivity to sunlight. Livestock usually avoid it unless food is scarce. Excess consumption leads to blistering and itching on light-haired or unpigmented skin areas including the mouth, nose and ears. Dark skin is not affected. The animals may lose weight, become difficult to manage, and they may die of dehydration or starvation if there is swelling or soreness in the mouth. Cattle need to ingest only 1% of their body weight to be affected, whereas sheep can consume up to 4% of their weight. The wool and meat of affected animals is often of poor quality. Horses, rabbits and pigs are also affected by the herb, but I have not found any information reporting whether or not goats are affected. The dried plant as found in hay is much less potent than fresh, but may still cause problems.
> >
> > Sorry, I wasn't aware there were any cattle on this board taking SJW for mood disorders? What exactly is the point of this? If it makes you feel better I promise not let my cow or goat graze on SJW. Can we now drop this sillyness?
> >
> > > Also read the link in Scott's post. I posted for what I thought a genuine health risk. If you feel free to google this topic on cattle and sjw this apparently is quite common. I for one will not use the product but feel free to ingest large quantities of sjw since herbal means safe. I guess you're entitled to do what you wish with your eyes. I won't waste my time any more as this is becoming quite childish.
> >
> > Again with the cattle.
> > Childish? What is childish, taking 1 or two potential side effects and blowing them way out of proportion to what the literature indicates and then using it as justification for hysteria.
> >
> > Furthermore, not one person in this thread has made any statement to the extant that SJW is completely safe and requires no caution or education before ingestion. Anything that you put into your body is potentially going to cause an adverse reaction. Heck, people even die from too much water! True story. Acetaminophen causes many deaths every year. If you eat too many calories you can develop metabolic syndrome and die. Etc. Etc. Etc.......
> >
> >
>
> There seem to be two sets of rules around here. The alt med people frequently use rat and other animal studies to further their views. I guess that doesn't apply to negative sides.And yet, you haven't even managed to post a single rat study, much less a cow study. Your arguments are built on sand.
Posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 8:52:33
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 8:03:08
> > >
> > > > > Grazing: St. Johnswort presents difficult problems for grazing, given its chemical constituents. It depresses the central nervous system and increases the animals' sensitivity to temperature change and handling. St. Johnswort also affects the liver, causing temporary sensitivity to sunlight. Livestock usually avoid it unless food is scarce. Excess consumption leads to blistering and itching on light-haired or unpigmented skin areas including the mouth, nose and ears. Dark skin is not affected. The animals may lose weight, become difficult to manage, and they may die of dehydration or starvation if there is swelling or soreness in the mouth. Cattle need to ingest only 1% of their body weight to be affected, whereas sheep can consume up to 4% of their weight. The wool and meat of affected animals is often of poor quality. Horses, rabbits and pigs are also affected by the herb, but I have not found any information reporting whether or not goats are affected. The dried plant as found in hay is much less potent than fresh, but may still cause problems.
> > >
> > > Sorry, I wasn't aware there were any cattle on this board taking SJW for mood disorders? What exactly is the point of this? If it makes you feel better I promise not let my cow or goat graze on SJW. Can we now drop this sillyness?
> > >
> > > > Also read the link in Scott's post. I posted for what I thought a genuine health risk. If you feel free to google this topic on cattle and sjw this apparently is quite common. I for one will not use the product but feel free to ingest large quantities of sjw since herbal means safe. I guess you're entitled to do what you wish with your eyes. I won't waste my time any more as this is becoming quite childish.
> > >
> > > Again with the cattle.
> > > Childish? What is childish, taking 1 or two potential side effects and blowing them way out of proportion to what the literature indicates and then using it as justification for hysteria.
> > >
> > > Furthermore, not one person in this thread has made any statement to the extant that SJW is completely safe and requires no caution or education before ingestion. Anything that you put into your body is potentially going to cause an adverse reaction. Heck, people even die from too much water! True story. Acetaminophen causes many deaths every year. If you eat too many calories you can develop metabolic syndrome and die. Etc. Etc. Etc.......
> > >
> > >
> >
> > There seem to be two sets of rules around here. The alt med people frequently use rat and other animal studies to further their views. I guess that doesn't apply to negative sides.
>
> And yet, you haven't even managed to post a single rat study, much less a cow study. Your arguments are built on sand.
>There are probably other natural options that don't put your eyes at risk. My p-doc is actually in favor of anything natural or pharm that will help his patients. But in light of some of the new evidence coming out on sjw he is telling his patients to not take it.
I published a post which I saw in a forum. Just something for people to be aware of. There was no intent to make this an alt med versus the conventional med debate. I believe you were the one that turned the thread in that direction.
Posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 8:59:53
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by willyeee on November 4, 2009, at 21:35:19
> > > Youre right,actualy any substance capable of passing the blood brain barrier can be dangerous.
> > >
> > > On the flip side,i hear you keep mentioning that it was a prescription medication in germany,i dont believe that holds much value,lets look at what is or was also prescription,
> > >
> > >
> > > MDMA,ecstasy
> > > L-dopa a mere amino acid
> > > samE now otc and avaiable to everyone
> > > kava kava as the trade name KAVAIN
> > >
> > > Tryptohan
> > >
> >
> > They are prescription because they are studied, controlled, and each pill/batch is exactly the same as the next...unlike in USA where you never know what you are going to get from one brand to another, one bottle to another.
>
> WOW that is so untrue,are you not familiar with GMP,its a official qouality control assurance measure,google it and you can see.Brands that carry the stamp gmp have been through this process of quality meaaure,so you are not just getting x amount of whatever,you can be assured youre getting what the bottle states.GMP has been around for ages and is considered and extremly realiable assurance of quality.
> >
> > You mentioned "a mere amino acid". >
>
> Yess and your response oan only mean you misinterperted me.What my point was in the mention of that statement was even natural substances are prescription such as l dopa,and that the fact something is prescription doesent make it something grand.You took only part of my statement and then responded with a whole different scenerio.
>
>
> > Germany has more of an exact science in their plant pharmacology, with lots of research and study, which requires exact formulas, which requires prescription. My point however was that, given a choice between SJW or SSRI, they choose SJW 6 times more freqently. That would not be happening if it wasn't providing results.
>
> Well it isnt as if st johns wort is unobtianable here,i was only using my personal expericance,and even more so my ten years of deep research on tons of groups,and with this st johns wort is and never was considered a first line effective choice,in fact on a group i belonged to on google "smart drugs and nutrients" a popular natural treatment for depression was a amino acid stack of dl-phenlayine,tyorsine.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > > i can go on and on,im glad st johnns wort is helping u,but for the most part,using personal experiance,and tons and tons of readgings of message groups,st johns wort is not considered a very effective treatment for depression,in fact 5 htp is touted much more effective and im not saying that is highly mentioned either.
> > >
> > > Im disappointed to see your recent strong view on what seems to be natural over medication,i did the natural route,learned every herb/nutrient/amino acid there is for depression,and all i got was a lot of money wasted.
> >
> > That just tells me your depression is not due to low serotonin, norepinephrine, or dopamine. Something else. I am very sorry your efforts were fruitless. I think that can happen because people are not well schooled on which agents to choose, why to choose them, how to combine them, why to combine them, and how critical the brand choices and dosing strategies are. It's not as simple as just popping a few supplement pills for a few days to see what happens and then move on to a different one.
>
> That is quite a statement to claim the reason most people found natural remedies ineffective vs meds were due to not knowing enough.Perhaps it was merly due to the fact they simply dident work?
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > When u take a natural supplement at mega doses it no longer is natural.
> >
> > That is true. The thing is, of the people I have talked to who experience remission on natural agents, none of them take anything close to mega doses. One guy for example...130mg tyrosine divided up into 5 little doses throughout the day. I do not believe in megadoses of anything.
> >
> > >
> > > When u mess with balance of amino acids,that is not a safe practice either.
> >
> > But messing with all the unknowns of powerful artificial chemicals is? You do realize, for every bit of information that we know about a drug, there is 10X that much we don't know. Back to your original statement however, messing with amino acids I believe carries a far lower risk than anything else. You can even do that with food choices...heavy protein vs heavy carbs, etc.
>
> I never stated meds did not,however the imbalance of messing with supplemnting amino acids is real and can drive people up a wall.L phenlyaline can raise blood pressure and give you a heart attack,thats why even a pack of gum MUST state it contains it.My point is people should not think if they go natural that they have no serious risks.Self treatment of depression with say amino acids can worsen depression siginificantly which itself is a danger.
> >
> > >
> > > Herbs cross the blood brain barrier,making them no different the drugs,and that includes the risks also.
> >
> > True. I think I already said that. Anything that impacts the nervous system carries risk.
> >
> > >
> > > It saddens me cause i used to love and respect your views when reading ur posts.
> >
> > It saddens me you feel that way. What I see too often is what I also see in this post...someone who is struggling for an answer, a new avenue, an idea...and yet if it is anything outside of the psychiatric toolbox, forget it. Why someone would limit their potentials for life enhancement is beyond me. But that's ok, we all have our own lives to be responsible for. I personally prefer a large toolbox with lots of tricks in it, only some of which are from the psychiatric menu.
>
> Whoa again an assumption,as i said i visited a group and bought the book series SMART DRUGS AND NUTRIENTS,this groups premise is based on the combination of the use of both medication,nutrients,and herbs to treat depression.
>
> All are valued,studied and discussed along the group.I learned about everything from deprenyl,...to less known nutrients like picamilion which is a potent gaba nutrient,to l theanine which is also a common use natural nutrient.
>
> So sorry but i have and do think outside the box,and i respect the use of natural methos,and medication methods,and both.My point was it seems you are starting to dabble close to the line of anti med period.This is just my observation only.
> >
> > I have been 100% pro meds at times. That's when people at pbabble like my posts the most...because it fit the mindframe they were in...meds, meds, meds, and nothing but meds.
> >
> > I have also been 100% natural at times. But over time I have concluded that neither approach is perfect, both have flaws, both are purely experimental, and the best results are witnessed by combining strategies of both med and natural. (the word natural includes herbs, supplements, tailored exercise, tailored food choices, anti-microbial strategies, and anti-toxin strategies). We're not simply talking tryptophan or SJW. A sick mind/sick body needs a whole lot more than any single pharm drug or herb is going to provide. They are sick for a reason, and it probably aint as simple as a chemical imbalance. Several bases need to be covered simultaneously in concert and compliment with each other.
> >
> > For example, someone on a psych med with a specific diet and a specific exercise routine and a few specialty supplements and anti-microbial anti-toxin strategies is going to be in a whole lot better condition than someone on cocktail list of psych meds and nothing else.
> >
> > So when you see me talking natural stuff or defending natural stuff, please don't misunderstand me. I am pro-med and pro-natural and pro-healthy, all at the same time. Neither one of those by themselves is going to get anyone very far for very long, except a very few who happen to hit a jackpot for whatever unknown reason. That does happen, but very infrequently, yet most of us think we are in line to hit the next lucky jackpot. We aren't. We keep trying one drug after another as if we are sure the next one is the jackpot. Ten years goes by. Twenty years.
> >
> > It takes work to bring a sick mind/sick body back to health. I do not believe natural alone will do that. I do not believe pharm alone will do that.
> >
> > But overall I did want to defend SJW, and reiterate I think the profound reaction to SJW highlighted a serious hidden problem that SJW did not cause, but rather uncovered and exposed.
>
> Dont get me wrong,i speak from the heart when i say i could not be happier you have success on sjw,espcecialy after the horrid experiance of ect.
> >
> > That can be taken as a powerful glaring hint, or it can be outright ignored. We all have our own choices and prices.
> >
> >
>
> My concern,or i guess point is reading ur post of late is seems as i stated you are dabbling near being anti med,i know you say you arent,but im getting that impression from your posts,and i am a strong opposer to people who are anti natural and anti med.
>
> Downplaying one or the other to someone sick is to me a serious thing,a sick person new and unknowledgeable to meds or anything does not need anyone with a personal vandetta swaying them to one side,they need their treatment to be carefully selected,and if medication is what sounds best for them,contary to what you said,i believe opening the psychiatric door at that time is crucial opposed to spending time trying various over the counter supplements.Your experience sounds similar to mine. I started experiencing anxiety and depression around the age of 20. For the next 25 years I spent quite a bit of money on miracle supplements and alt med treatments. I didn't try an ad until I was 45. I guess it was with the advent of ssris. Well at least they worked. But I never spent more than a couple months on them due to sides. yes i did try sjw and it did not work for me.
At this point I would not categorize myself as pro med or anti med or pro alt med or anti alt med. I'm trying to patch together whatever works. I also tend to cycle through different treatments frquently.
Posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 9:00:24
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 8:52:33
> > > >
> > > > > > Grazing: St. Johnswort presents difficult problems for grazing, given its chemical constituents. It depresses the central nervous system and increases the animals' sensitivity to temperature change and handling. St. Johnswort also affects the liver, causing temporary sensitivity to sunlight. Livestock usually avoid it unless food is scarce. Excess consumption leads to blistering and itching on light-haired or unpigmented skin areas including the mouth, nose and ears. Dark skin is not affected. The animals may lose weight, become difficult to manage, and they may die of dehydration or starvation if there is swelling or soreness in the mouth. Cattle need to ingest only 1% of their body weight to be affected, whereas sheep can consume up to 4% of their weight. The wool and meat of affected animals is often of poor quality. Horses, rabbits and pigs are also affected by the herb, but I have not found any information reporting whether or not goats are affected. The dried plant as found in hay is much less potent than fresh, but may still cause problems.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, I wasn't aware there were any cattle on this board taking SJW for mood disorders? What exactly is the point of this? If it makes you feel better I promise not let my cow or goat graze on SJW. Can we now drop this sillyness?
> > > >
> > > > > Also read the link in Scott's post. I posted for what I thought a genuine health risk. If you feel free to google this topic on cattle and sjw this apparently is quite common. I for one will not use the product but feel free to ingest large quantities of sjw since herbal means safe. I guess you're entitled to do what you wish with your eyes. I won't waste my time any more as this is becoming quite childish.
> > > >
> > > > Again with the cattle.
> > > > Childish? What is childish, taking 1 or two potential side effects and blowing them way out of proportion to what the literature indicates and then using it as justification for hysteria.
> > > >
> > > > Furthermore, not one person in this thread has made any statement to the extant that SJW is completely safe and requires no caution or education before ingestion. Anything that you put into your body is potentially going to cause an adverse reaction. Heck, people even die from too much water! True story. Acetaminophen causes many deaths every year. If you eat too many calories you can develop metabolic syndrome and die. Etc. Etc. Etc.......
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > There seem to be two sets of rules around here. The alt med people frequently use rat and other animal studies to further their views. I guess that doesn't apply to negative sides.
> >
> > And yet, you haven't even managed to post a single rat study, much less a cow study. Your arguments are built on sand.
> >
>
> There are probably other natural options that don't put your eyes at risk. My p-doc is actually in favor of anything natural or pharm that will help his patients. But in light of some of the new evidence coming out on sjw he is telling his patients to not take it.
>
> I published a post which I saw in a forum. Just something for people to be aware of. There was no intent to make this an alt med versus the conventional med debate. I believe you were the one that turned the thread in that direction.Yes, a post with the header: DO NOT TAKE ST. JOHNS WORT IT IS DANGEROUS
You then proceeded to provided zero evidence to the claim beyond anecdote and observations that when cows ingest multiple pounds of the stuff while grazing they get sick.
And you wonder why there is a debate?
You are well intentioned but ignorant. That is a very dangerous combination.
Posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 9:41:32
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 9:00:24
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Grazing: St. Johnswort presents difficult problems for grazing, given its chemical constituents. It depresses the central nervous system and increases the animals' sensitivity to temperature change and handling. St. Johnswort also affects the liver, causing temporary sensitivity to sunlight. Livestock usually avoid it unless food is scarce. Excess consumption leads to blistering and itching on light-haired or unpigmented skin areas including the mouth, nose and ears. Dark skin is not affected. The animals may lose weight, become difficult to manage, and they may die of dehydration or starvation if there is swelling or soreness in the mouth. Cattle need to ingest only 1% of their body weight to be affected, whereas sheep can consume up to 4% of their weight. The wool and meat of affected animals is often of poor quality. Horses, rabbits and pigs are also affected by the herb, but I have not found any information reporting whether or not goats are affected. The dried plant as found in hay is much less potent than fresh, but may still cause problems.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, I wasn't aware there were any cattle on this board taking SJW for mood disorders? What exactly is the point of this? If it makes you feel better I promise not let my cow or goat graze on SJW. Can we now drop this sillyness?
> > > > >
> > > > > > Also read the link in Scott's post. I posted for what I thought a genuine health risk. If you feel free to google this topic on cattle and sjw this apparently is quite common. I for one will not use the product but feel free to ingest large quantities of sjw since herbal means safe. I guess you're entitled to do what you wish with your eyes. I won't waste my time any more as this is becoming quite childish.
> > > > >
> > > > > Again with the cattle.
> > > > > Childish? What is childish, taking 1 or two potential side effects and blowing them way out of proportion to what the literature indicates and then using it as justification for hysteria.
> > > > >
> > > > > Furthermore, not one person in this thread has made any statement to the extant that SJW is completely safe and requires no caution or education before ingestion. Anything that you put into your body is potentially going to cause an adverse reaction. Heck, people even die from too much water! True story. Acetaminophen causes many deaths every year. If you eat too many calories you can develop metabolic syndrome and die. Etc. Etc. Etc.......
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > There seem to be two sets of rules around here. The alt med people frequently use rat and other animal studies to further their views. I guess that doesn't apply to negative sides.
> > >
> > > And yet, you haven't even managed to post a single rat study, much less a cow study. Your arguments are built on sand.
> > >
> >
> > There are probably other natural options that don't put your eyes at risk. My p-doc is actually in favor of anything natural or pharm that will help his patients. But in light of some of the new evidence coming out on sjw he is telling his patients to not take it.
> >
> > I published a post which I saw in a forum. Just something for people to be aware of. There was no intent to make this an alt med versus the conventional med debate. I believe you were the one that turned the thread in that direction.
>
> Yes, a post with the header: DO NOT TAKE ST. JOHNS WORT IT IS DANGEROUS
>
> You then proceeded to provided zero evidence to the claim beyond anecdote and observations that when cows ingest multiple pounds of the stuff while grazing they get sick.
>
> And you wonder why there is a debate?
>
> You are well intentioned but ignorant. That is a very dangerous combination.
>
>At this point you are being uncivil.
This is the title of my post
You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort
That is far from what you said my post was titled.
The part underneath that said do not ever take sjw was part of the post of the person who had the bad reaction.
You are becoming shrill and hysterical. I published a legitimate post from a well known sjw forum and you seem to be having some type of psychotic breakdown. I published what appeared to be a genuine post and you can't deal with it. I'm sorry that a serious sjw reaction somehow is upsetting to your world. Maybe it is time to close this thread. This thread has gone far of course.
Posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 9:56:31
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 9:41:32
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Grazing: St. Johnswort presents difficult problems for grazing, given its chemical constituents. It depresses the central nervous system and increases the animals' sensitivity to temperature change and handling. St. Johnswort also affects the liver, causing temporary sensitivity to sunlight. Livestock usually avoid it unless food is scarce. Excess consumption leads to blistering and itching on light-haired or unpigmented skin areas including the mouth, nose and ears. Dark skin is not affected. The animals may lose weight, become difficult to manage, and they may die of dehydration or starvation if there is swelling or soreness in the mouth. Cattle need to ingest only 1% of their body weight to be affected, whereas sheep can consume up to 4% of their weight. The wool and meat of affected animals is often of poor quality. Horses, rabbits and pigs are also affected by the herb, but I have not found any information reporting whether or not goats are affected. The dried plant as found in hay is much less potent than fresh, but may still cause problems.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry, I wasn't aware there were any cattle on this board taking SJW for mood disorders? What exactly is the point of this? If it makes you feel better I promise not let my cow or goat graze on SJW. Can we now drop this sillyness?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Also read the link in Scott's post. I posted for what I thought a genuine health risk. If you feel free to google this topic on cattle and sjw this apparently is quite common. I for one will not use the product but feel free to ingest large quantities of sjw since herbal means safe. I guess you're entitled to do what you wish with your eyes. I won't waste my time any more as this is becoming quite childish.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Again with the cattle.
> > > > > > Childish? What is childish, taking 1 or two potential side effects and blowing them way out of proportion to what the literature indicates and then using it as justification for hysteria.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Furthermore, not one person in this thread has made any statement to the extant that SJW is completely safe and requires no caution or education before ingestion. Anything that you put into your body is potentially going to cause an adverse reaction. Heck, people even die from too much water! True story. Acetaminophen causes many deaths every year. If you eat too many calories you can develop metabolic syndrome and die. Etc. Etc. Etc.......
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > There seem to be two sets of rules around here. The alt med people frequently use rat and other animal studies to further their views. I guess that doesn't apply to negative sides.
> > > >
> > > > And yet, you haven't even managed to post a single rat study, much less a cow study. Your arguments are built on sand.
> > > >
> > >
> > > There are probably other natural options that don't put your eyes at risk. My p-doc is actually in favor of anything natural or pharm that will help his patients. But in light of some of the new evidence coming out on sjw he is telling his patients to not take it.
> > >
> > > I published a post which I saw in a forum. Just something for people to be aware of. There was no intent to make this an alt med versus the conventional med debate. I believe you were the one that turned the thread in that direction.
> >
> > Yes, a post with the header: DO NOT TAKE ST. JOHNS WORT IT IS DANGEROUS
> >
> > You then proceeded to provided zero evidence to the claim beyond anecdote and observations that when cows ingest multiple pounds of the stuff while grazing they get sick.
> >
> > And you wonder why there is a debate?
> >
> > You are well intentioned but ignorant. That is a very dangerous combination.
> >
> >
>
> At this point you are being uncivil.
>
> This is the title of my post
>
> You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort
>
> That is far from what you said my post was titled.
>
> The part underneath that said do not ever take sjw was part of the post of the person who had the bad reaction.
>
> You are becoming shrill and hysterical. I published a legitimate post from a well known sjw forum and you seem to be having some type of psychotic breakdown. I published what appeared to be a genuine post and you can't deal with it. I'm sorry that a serious sjw reaction somehow is upsetting to your world. Maybe it is time to close this thread. This thread has gone far of course.If you had even bothered to read the original post you put up you would see that I am correct about the header. So now you are putting up posts that you don't even read?
Posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 10:05:45
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 8:00:36
> I have been taking SJW for years. I am well aware of the published studies, good and bad,
Perhaps other people were not. Now, they are.
> However, to this point, I have seen nothing that warrants major concern to the effect that taking the standard doses used for mood disorders orally...
I guess the evaluation of the import of the studies I referenced is a personal matter, rather than a scientific one.
> will hasten the formation of cataracts, as for now it is all theoretical.
Why do you say this?
It is not theoretical that processes associated with cataract formation are seen in the most recent studies. They are an empirical observation.
> Personally, I'm far more concerned with the potential unknown consequences of a lifetime of SSRI or Atypcial AP use than SJW.
Talk about theoretical...
- Scott
Posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 10:08:52
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 8:03:08
Here is something you can stick in the sand:
- Scott"Therefore, in the presence of light, hypericin can induce changes in lens protein that could lead to the formation of cataracts. Appropriate precautions should be taken to protect the eye from intense sunlight while on this antidepressant medication."
Photochem Photobiol. 2000 Aug;72(2):200-3.
Photooxidation of lens alpha-crystallin by hypericin (active ingredient in St. John's Wort).Schey KL, Patat S, Chignell CF, Datillo M, Wang RH, Roberts JE.
Department of Cell and Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, USA.
Hypericin is the active ingredient in the over the counter antidepressant medication St. John's Wort. Hypericin produces singlet oxygen and other excited state intermediates that indicate it should be a very efficient phototoxic agent in the eye. Furthermore it absorbs in the UV and visible range, which means it can potentially damage both the lens and the retina. Lens alpha-crystallin, isolated from calf lenses, was irradiated in the presence of hypericin (5 x 10(-5) M, 10 mM ammonium bicarbonate, pH 7.0) and in the presence and absence of light (> 300 nm, 24 mW/cm2). Hypericin-induced photosensitized photopolymerization as assessed by sodium dodecylsulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Further analysis of the oxidative changes occurring in alpha-crystallin using mass spectrometry showed specific oxidation of methionine, tryptophan and histidine residues, which increased with irradiation time. Hypericin did not damage the lens protein in the dark. Damage to alpha-crystallin could undermine the integrity of the lens directly by protein denaturation and indirectly by disturbing chaperone function. Therefore, in the presence of light, hypericin can induce changes in lens protein that could lead to the formation of cataracts. Appropriate precautions should be taken to protect the eye from intense sunlight while on this antidepressant medication.
PMID: 10946573 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 10:10:15
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 9:00:24
> You are well intentioned but ignorant. That is a very dangerous combination.
Yup.
- Scott
Posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 10:13:06
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort » TenMan, posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 10:05:45
> > I have been taking SJW for years. I am well aware of the published studies, good and bad,
>
> Perhaps other people were not. Now, they are.
>
> > However, to this point, I have seen nothing that warrants major concern to the effect that taking the standard doses used for mood disorders orally...
>
> I guess the evaluation of the import of the studies I referenced is a personal matter, rather than a scientific one.
>
> > will hasten the formation of cataracts, as for now it is all theoretical.
>
> Why do you say this?
>
> It is not theoretical that processes associated with cataract formation are seen in the most recent studies. They are an empirical observation.
>
> > Personally, I'm far more concerned with the potential unknown consequences of a lifetime of SSRI or Atypcial AP use than SJW.
>
> Talk about theoretical...
>
>
> - ScottScott, until there is evidence that oral consumption leads to cataract formation it is theoretical. Plain and simple.
As to my statement about SSRI's and AP's; it is purely my opinion but one I made in response to the safety of SJW being unfairly attacked. I am making no statements to the extent that they should not be taken at all or that they are extremely dangerous, unlike others in this thread.....
Is the difference not obvious?
Posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 10:29:34
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 9:41:32
Bulldog:
For what it may be worth, I do not think that you are ignorant... at least no more so than me.
:-)
I find nothing wrong with ignorance. We don't exit the womb being omniscient. It is just the perpetuation of ignorance that I have a problem with (not that I am not guilty of this from time to time). If you hadn't brought up the issue of SJW and cataracts, I would never have investigated it.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 10:51:33
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 10:13:06
I have not come to any conclusions as to how high might be the risk of people developing cataracts as a result of SJW use. I performed a simple, cursory, literature search on Google and Medline to find out more about this issue once I saw it brought up in the thread. That you dismissed the study citations that I provided so quickly only provided me with more motivation to corroborate the results of the first study I found.
The information is there. What people do with it is a matter of personal choice.
Funny thing. Many of the studies involving the genesis of cataracts use bovine eyes. Cows.
- Scott
Posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 11:01:53
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort » TenMan, posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 10:51:33
> I have not come to any conclusions as to how high might be the risk of people developing cataracts as a result of SJW use. I performed a simple, cursory, literature search on Google and Medline to find out more about this issue once I saw it brought up in the thread. That you dismissed the study citations that I provided so quickly only provided me with more motivation to corroborate the results of the first study I found.
>
> The information is there. What people do with it is a matter of personal choice.
>
> Funny thing. Many of the studies involving the genesis of cataracts use bovine eyes. Cows.
>
>
> - ScottSott, where did I dismiss any of the studies?
There is nothing wrong with putting them into context. None of us here are putting hypericin directly onto our eyes, or eating 1-4% of our bodyweight of the herb. It is important to understand that in relation to how we use the herb, surely you don't disagree?
There is a wealth of long term literature on the use of St. Johns Wort. Cataract formation in humans from orally ingested standard doses for mood disorders has not been shown. Nothing about that statement is false or disingenuous.
If my debating with you is motivating you to further educate yourself on the subject then good! That is how good debate works!
Posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 11:04:38
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 10:13:06
> > > I have been taking SJW for years. I am well aware of the published studies, good and bad,
> >
> > Perhaps other people were not. Now, they are.
> >
> > > However, to this point, I have seen nothing that warrants major concern to the effect that taking the standard doses used for mood disorders orally...
> >
> > I guess the evaluation of the import of the studies I referenced is a personal matter, rather than a scientific one.
> >
> > > will hasten the formation of cataracts, as for now it is all theoretical.
> >
> > Why do you say this?
> >
> > It is not theoretical that processes associated with cataract formation are seen in the most recent studies. They are an empirical observation.
> >
> > > Personally, I'm far more concerned with the potential unknown consequences of a lifetime of SSRI or Atypcial AP use than SJW.
> >
> > Talk about theoretical...
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Scott, until there is evidence that oral consumption leads to cataract formation it is theoretical. Plain and simple.
>
> As to my statement about SSRI's and AP's; it is purely my opinion but one I made in response to the safety of SJW being unfairly attacked. I am making no statements to the extent that they should not be taken at all or that they are extremely dangerous, unlike others in this thread.....
>
> Is the difference not obvious?
>
>
>
>
>
>Yes I remember when there was a theory that a wonderful herb called tobacco caused lung cancer. By time the theory was proved millions had already died of lung cancer. So I guess by time you get the evidence you need you will be walking with a seeing eye dog.Obviously that is none of my concern.
It is intuitively obvious to the most casual of observers that this herb must be approached with the greatest concern. I understand that this herb has helped you. Well you say it has helped you and I can understand that you are upset that this formerly believed benign herb is far from benign. I would also be upset. The theoretical studies that show a strong connection between hypericin and cataracts is very powerful. Why else would there be companies trying to produce lowered hypericin products or eliminate it all together. Obviously there is a strong concern. I talked to new chapter on the phone and they wouldn't even committ to saying that their lowered hypericin product sc27 was not a hazzard to the eyes. Also I asked about prescription meds and the told me that it's the hyperforin that's implicated in altering blood levels of meds. For millions of us on blood pressure meds,cholesterol meds etc. that is also an unacceptable risk. So a potent sjw product with standardized levels of hypericin and hyperforin is basically a pharmacuetical med.
If you get pharmacuetical quality results from an herb than that powerful product is going to be accompanied with significant sides. Basically one goes with the other.
I have said that i believe this drug does have promise but with what is emerging it needs to be produced in a quality controlled way by a pharmaceutical company (s) so that a standardized product is produced. Than prescribed by a doctor who knows what meds you take and wether this can safely be taken with them. Possibly eliminate hypericin and eliminate cataracts.
Right now there might be dozens of products out there that vary widely in potency. If it acts like a med, smells like a med,etc than it is a med. Again intuitively obvious to the most casual of observers.
Posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 11:15:56
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort » TenMan, posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 11:04:38
> > > > I have been taking SJW for years. I am well aware of the published studies, good and bad,
> > >
> > > Perhaps other people were not. Now, they are.
> > >
> > > > However, to this point, I have seen nothing that warrants major concern to the effect that taking the standard doses used for mood disorders orally...
> > >
> > > I guess the evaluation of the import of the studies I referenced is a personal matter, rather than a scientific one.
> > >
> > > > will hasten the formation of cataracts, as for now it is all theoretical.
> > >
> > > Why do you say this?
> > >
> > > It is not theoretical that processes associated with cataract formation are seen in the most recent studies. They are an empirical observation.
> > >
> > > > Personally, I'm far more concerned with the potential unknown consequences of a lifetime of SSRI or Atypcial AP use than SJW.
> > >
> > > Talk about theoretical...
> > >
> > >
> > > - Scott
> >
> > Scott, until there is evidence that oral consumption leads to cataract formation it is theoretical. Plain and simple.
> >
> > As to my statement about SSRI's and AP's; it is purely my opinion but one I made in response to the safety of SJW being unfairly attacked. I am making no statements to the extent that they should not be taken at all or that they are extremely dangerous, unlike others in this thread.....
> >
> > Is the difference not obvious?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Yes I remember when there was a theory that a wonderful herb called tobacco caused lung cancer. By time the theory was proved millions had already died of lung cancer. So I guess by time you get the evidence you need you will be walking with a seeing eye dog.Obviously that is none of my concern.
>
> It is intuitively obvious to the most casual of observers that this herb must be approached with the greatest concern. I understand that this herb has helped you. Well you say it has helped you and I can understand that you are upset that this formerly believed benign herb is far from benign. I would also be upset. The theoretical studies that show a strong connection between hypericin and cataracts is very powerful. Why else would there be companies trying to produce lowered hypericin products or eliminate it all together. Obviously there is a strong concern. I talked to new chapter on the phone and they wouldn't even committ to saying that their lowered hypericin product sc27 was not a hazzard to the eyes. Also I asked about prescription meds and the told me that it's the hyperforin that's implicated in altering blood levels of meds. For millions of us on blood pressure meds,cholesterol meds etc. that is also an unacceptable risk. So a potent sjw product with standardized levels of hypericin and hyperforin is basically a pharmacuetical med.
> If you get pharmacuetical quality results from an herb than that powerful product is going to be accompanied with significant sides. Basically one goes with the other.
> I have said that i believe this drug does have promise but with what is emerging it needs to be produced in a quality controlled way by a pharmaceutical company (s) so that a standardized product is produced. Than prescribed by a doctor who knows what meds you take and wether this can safely be taken with them. Possibly eliminate hypericin and eliminate cataracts.
> Right now there might be dozens of products out there that vary widely in potency. If it acts like a med, smells like a med,etc than it is a med. Again intuitively obvious to the most casual of observers.
>
>
>
>
bulldog, why do you continually insist on putting words into my mouth? I have never said that SJW is benign. Not once. I have stated multiple times that it does involve risk and that there are legitimate concerns. I mean, what is so hard to understand about that? Until you actually bother to read my posts I'm going to have to put you on ignore.As for the rest of your statement-I agree with you. And I hope that I am not using a seeing eye dog one day. However for me the benefits of a life worth living far outweigh the theoretical risk of cataracts.
Posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 11:41:01
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 11:15:56
Thank God for that present
Posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 15:07:11
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 11:15:56
At the very least, one might consider not exposing their eyes to bright sunlight without wearing amber sunglasses.
- Scott
Posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 15:32:08
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 15:07:11
bulldog, I just want to apologize for calling you ignorant. I was out of line and hope you will forgive me.
I've said all I wanted to in this thread and will now bow out.
Take care all.
Posted by bulldog2 on November 5, 2009, at 15:52:33
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by TenMan on November 5, 2009, at 15:32:08
> bulldog, I just want to apologize for calling you ignorant. I was out of line and hope you will forgive me.
>
> I've said all I wanted to in this thread and will now bow out.
>
> Take care all.
>
>I'm fine...I think we just got to worked up...Good luck with the sjw...we're all just looking for something that works and doesn't harm us...you take care also
Posted by bleauberry on November 5, 2009, at 18:19:54
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort » TenMan, posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 10:08:52
This study is full of words like "could", "should", "potentiall", and theory.
No actual case reports of documented SJW-induced eye damage have been presented.
In general, isolated concentrated singular molecules, such as prescription meds, that have only a few years or a few decades of experience, probably in my opinion present much greater risks than plants that have been tested in realtime for centuries or thousands of years.
Whatever the case, the risks and actual events are extremely low.
This study, if anything, tells me that if I were to take a high dose of SJW for a prolonged period of time, it would be wise for me to have good sunglasses when outdoors. In essence, that was the stated conclusion at the end of the study in the last sentence.
Rather than guessing, maybe we can recruit the assistance of hundreds or thousands of longterm SJW users to see what their experiences have been. That can be found in the archives of sjwinfo.org. Plan on spending a few days there because it is huge. I spent an entire weekend there once trying to make a list of all reported side effects, an estimate of improvement vs remission vs failure, results with diffferent brands (trying to choose my own brand), bizarre outcomes, and such. Finding out what happened with real people like you and me trounces anything a theorist can dream up.
Not prescribed 6 times more often than SSRIs, but rather, 6 times more often than Prozac. I don't think even Lexapro or Effexor or Zoloft are prescribed 6 times more often than Prozac. So no matter, the point remains the same. It is prescribed a lot, and that would not be happening if it was not providing safe repeatable results statistically equivalent to or better than other medical options.
> Here is something you can stick in the sand:
>
>
> - Scott
>
> "Therefore, in the presence of light, hypericin can induce changes in lens protein that could lead to the formation of cataracts. Appropriate precautions should be taken to protect the eye from intense sunlight while on this antidepressant medication."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Photochem Photobiol. 2000 Aug;72(2):200-3.
> Photooxidation of lens alpha-crystallin by hypericin (active ingredient in St. John's Wort).
>
> Schey KL, Patat S, Chignell CF, Datillo M, Wang RH, Roberts JE.
>
> Department of Cell and Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, USA.
>
> Hypericin is the active ingredient in the over the counter antidepressant medication St. John's Wort. Hypericin produces singlet oxygen and other excited state intermediates that indicate it should be a very efficient phototoxic agent in the eye. Furthermore it absorbs in the UV and visible range, which means it can potentially damage both the lens and the retina. Lens alpha-crystallin, isolated from calf lenses, was irradiated in the presence of hypericin (5 x 10(-5) M, 10 mM ammonium bicarbonate, pH 7.0) and in the presence and absence of light (> 300 nm, 24 mW/cm2). Hypericin-induced photosensitized photopolymerization as assessed by sodium dodecylsulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Further analysis of the oxidative changes occurring in alpha-crystallin using mass spectrometry showed specific oxidation of methionine, tryptophan and histidine residues, which increased with irradiation time. Hypericin did not damage the lens protein in the dark. Damage to alpha-crystallin could undermine the integrity of the lens directly by protein denaturation and indirectly by disturbing chaperone function. Therefore, in the presence of light, hypericin can induce changes in lens protein that could lead to the formation of cataracts. Appropriate precautions should be taken to protect the eye from intense sunlight while on this antidepressant medication.
>
> PMID: 10946573 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Posted by bleauberry on November 5, 2009, at 18:44:45
In reply to You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort, posted by bulldog2 on November 2, 2009, at 18:55:47
I favor prescription meds.
I favor natural plant medicines.
Both have their place.
The prescriptions I view as single molecule strongarm nuclear bombs to accomplish a narrow defined desired mechanism. Appropriate for acute and dire needs. But often problematic or toxic with longterm use.
The plants offer an array of dozens or hundreds of molecules that provide a wide spectrum synergistic mechanism, generally more suitable for longer term use with slower onset of action. These mechanisms have been discovered and passed on through generations over hundreds and thousands of years from all around the planet. Even tribes who had not the slightest sense of science could depend on XYZ herb to cure diarhea or XYZ herb to cure leprosy or syphillis, or XYZ herb to lift the spirits, or induce sleep, or dispel worms, or heal burns without scarring, or whatever. The plants still do it today. Many of them have documented scientifically studied extremely low toxicity levels and are suitable for longterm use.
So I favor both sides. Even better is when the benefits of both can be combined in logarithmic synergy. Someone adding a bit of tyrosine to an SSRI, someone adding a few immmune herbs or antispirochetal herbs to their antibiotic, anti-inflammatory herbs with just about anything, etc.
However, when I see anyone attacking one or the other (prescription or plant), I feel compelled to offer some counterbalance in defense of the attacked.
Here it is.
The following are side effects that did and do occur with one of the most common meds mentioned on pbabble, with a high enough significance to be reported by the manufacturer and the FDA.
Shakiness (tremor)
Anemia
Nose bleed
Weight loss
Hemorrhoids
Muscle pain or bone pain
Liver problems
Mania or hypomania
Decreases in blood sodium levels (hyponatremia)
Asthma
Acne
High blood sugar (hyperglycemia)
Hair loss
Confusion or other mental changes
A rapid heart rate
Nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea
Hallucinations
Blood pressure changes
An irregular heart rhythm
Overactive reflexes
Fever, sweating, or shivering
Shakiness
Agitation
Seizures
Coma
Chest palpitationsThis thread just needs a little balance. We are all worked up over possible eye problems with SJW that no one yet has verified, but the above documented side effects are ok?
ps..the drug is Lexapro.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.