• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

modafinil


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 sprinkles

  • Guest
  • 27 posts
  • 0

Posted 18 September 2006 - 07:59 PM


http://www.dfwcfids....rt04.part2b.htm


Avoid Provigil: It Stimulates Nitric Oxide

"Provigil does the opposite. Provigil does several things, but is mostly an NMDA-activator —it's a stimulant similar to cocaine—it will actually stimulate nitric oxide production. It may also stimulate ATP generation, which is the benefit perhaps that one sees. With more nitric oxide, you can think better, your memory improves, you can focus better, and you have more energy. But what you're doing is generating more peroxynitrite and this may not be felt for a while, but ultimately it's probably felt—in the brain at least—as Alzheimer's or Parkinson's Disease or worse, ten years from now."

#2 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 19 September 2006 - 12:25 AM

If you review the most recent data published about Modafinil you will find that it appears to be neuroprotective and is implicated in the PREVENTION of PD.

Stimulating Nitric Oxide -- if, in fact, that is what modafinil (Provigil) does, that would seem to suggest it to be even more of a wonder drug than it already appears to be. Nitric Oxide production is one of the primary reasons I currently take an Arginine supplement before I go to the gym; and is principally implicated in viagra's function.

The need for peer review is highlighted by the information overload you find on the Internet. Anyone can post a webpage within a few minutes and post totally usless and incorrect information. This highlights the need for a proper review of the data to assess if the evidence supports a given theory.

Run the name of the "MD" through Pubmed and you'll see he hasn't done any research of his own -- which can speak volumes about his credibility in the field. The site that this dude's work is supposedly posted at might not even be a quote directly attributed to him, is by Carol Sieverling -- and if it is, it looks about as quacked out as can be. In the future, do yourself a favor and put some quality time in checking the references of folks you want to cite as authorities.

[quote name='http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/health/sexshow_2001/marsden.html']CBC MARKETPLACE: HEALTH » SEX
The ins and outs of Nitric Oxide
Broadcast: November 28, 2001

Dr. Philip Marsden explains Nitric Oxide and the topical application of arginine to skin.

Q: What is Nitric Oxide?

A: In 1998, the Nobel Prize was awarded to a group of researchers who found that Nitric Oxide has been produced within the blood vessels of humans. This was a surprising discovery but realized that Nitric Oxide played a role in various areas.

That lead to research to try to understand how Nitric Oxide played a role in the reproductive tract. And the surprising finding when researchers were working on the development of the cardiovascular system to treat heart disease was that a drug, Viagra had a very potent effect on male reproductive function, even thought it was developed to treat cardiovascular disease.

That sort of lead to the idea that maybe Nitric Oxide is also important to the biology of how endocrine glands work, such as the gonads, ovaries and testes.

That it was important in the sexual act itself, for instance, in the male achieving an erection. As well, the biology of how babies are conceived and grow in the uterus. And that area the contribution of Nitric Oxide in those particular aspects of biology said maybe a contribution of too much or too little Nitric Oxide when diseases develop.

The discovery that Nitric Oxide was important in the health and well-being of patients is a fundamental one. My research lab has a great interest in that area and many other labs do to.

At a recent meeting of the American Heart Association two weeks ago, Nitric Oxide was a big area for study. It's important in heart disease, we now know it's got an important contribution in terms of stroke, brain injury and it's probably important in understanding diseases of the skin, diseases of the immune system.

It's especially important in terms of how we understand the importance of the biology of reproduction. Viagra is probably the best example that we have a lot to learn about Nitric Oxide and human response.

Both researchers and lay individuals have an evolving interest in the complex human behaviour. We have memory, sleep, sexual function. And those areas I think are going to be the areas that catch an increasing amount of interest.

In terms of understanding the full processes, that we now have a foothold on some aspects of female and male reproduction as it relates to Nitric Oxide, it's good news for patients. It's playing a role in health and it may be playing a role in disease.


Q: Give us an understanding of arginine's relationship to Nitric Oxide.

A: My research lab and many others tried to determine how Nitric Oxide was made in the cardiovascular system and other cells. And the finding that was made was that there's an enzyme, a protein in cells that produced Nitric Oxide. So where did it come from?

The surprise is that it was an element that's in our daily diets on a daily basis — an essential amino acid — arginine. The arginine produces Nitric Oxide because one of the nitrogen atoms develops it. So if you don't have arginine, you don't make Nitric Oxide and if you don't have the enzyme, you don't make it.

So the idea was in human disease, and therefore male and female reproductive function was whether or not arginine availability was also caused part of the problem. Too much arginine or too little arginine.

When arginine is given to animals or patients, it has surprising effects whether it be in the diet or intravenously injected. It changes how the pancreas works in forming insulin. It effects how our pituitaries work.

It's not a well understood pathway in the reproductive system, whether arginine therapy given systemically (in the vein) or given orally or rubbed topically has an effect on Nitric Oxide system producing testosterone, male erectile response or the climactic response. Those are not well understood areas.

Q: So the application of a cream with arginine is applied to the genital area — would you say it would have an effect?

A: So if arginine is important in Nitric Oxide the question becomes whether topical therapy has an effect on this Nitric Oxide pathway. I think the answer is not known.

The claims that topically applying arginine changes the availability of Nitric Oxide, in most reasonable approaches would suggest that you have to develop proper experiments and talk with patients about whether the cream with arginine or whether the cream without arginine has the effects you're trying to measure.

I am not aware that a large number of studies have been done on arginine biology in the external reproductive tract. It does have application in burn therapy and that maybe it helps skin lesions heal — that area is a more rapidly emerging one. And there still is a lot to learn. I would like to argue that the proof as to whether arginine is important in the female climatic response is not there.

The concerning issue for patients is whether or not the arginine will have the effect that they're hoping and there are many reasons as to why the female climatic response may be normal or abnormal. The link between arginine and that response has not been established.

Q: What do you think of Viacrème?

A: It's a product. It is, as consumers who want to look on the Internet will find, a product that makes no claims with respect to its health benefits, yet one's left with the impression that Viacrème and Viagra have something in common.

Clearly, Nitric Oxide is important in the female and male sexual function and we still have a lot to learn. That's good news for patients. It's good news for people who want to develop further insight into the product. Whether this product Viacrème is the answer to that in terms of changing the female sexual response remains to be determined.

The product is a lubricant and contains arginine and menthol. It's called l-arginine on the product. That's just a nuance of amino acid biology and it's not "larginine." It's L-arginine. It's the same product you find over the counter as an oral drug in the vitamin section of the drug store. Menthol is clearly labelled. They do state that "Viacrème is not intended to cure, treat or prevent any disease or medical condition, yet the term clearly implies a relatedness to Viagra."
[/quote]

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 sprinkles

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 27 posts
  • 0

Posted 19 September 2006 - 02:00 AM

I'm just saying that it's something to consider. Adam, when shit does not agree with your current supplement regime you seem to discredit it as pseudoscience. Are you saying that it can't be neuroprotective within certain biochemical systems and neurotoxic within others?

You seem to make a lot of assumptions, perhaps for the sake of sanity.

#4 kylyssa

  • Guest
  • 340 posts
  • 0

Posted 19 September 2006 - 05:57 AM

I've got to agree with Adam on this one. A lot of what is said in the article scans as strange and unsupported reasoning. I have never seen his take on Nitric Oxide before in any other literature.

The fellow also goes on to suggest the use of calcium channel blockers!!! Have you any idea how foolish it is to mess around with calcium channel blockers other than in controlled, supervised situations for the reduction of high blood pressure? Even still, they are not necessarily great for long term blood pressure maintainance. They can actually weaken the heart muscles and increase the incidence of cardiac arrest - even when put to their proper and approved use.

#5 kylyssa

  • Guest
  • 340 posts
  • 0

Posted 19 September 2006 - 06:03 AM

His statements about eating raw meat and better yet, eating raw eggs because they are young and the recipe for a "homebrew" remedy throw this paper into a whole different category far away from biochemistry.

#6 sprinkles

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 27 posts
  • 0

Posted 19 September 2006 - 02:58 PM

Can anyone else weigh in on the legitimacy of his claim. Sorry, kylyssa, your opinion does not seem very objective or scientific.

He might very well be wrong - i'm not saying he's not, it's just something to consider given that he is a medical doctor and probably understands the body better than most of us here.

Edited by sprinkles, 19 September 2006 - 06:10 PM.


#7 ikaros

  • Guest
  • 334 posts
  • 5
  • Location:EU

Posted 19 September 2006 - 03:59 PM

I have no knowledge whether his claims are really true or not, but it's clear that he's speculating, so if it was a proven truth I think the drug should have been already withdrawn from the pharmaceutical market. Nitric oxide is quite widespreadly used by the body to perform biological functions, excess may be a problem. But IMO it's just common sense not to use stimulants when you really don't need them, i.e. in normal healthy indiviudals, even modafinil, the mind just doesn't seem to like overburning.

#8 mrak1979

  • Guest
  • 232 posts
  • 5

Posted 19 September 2006 - 11:02 PM

If a nootropic agent is proven to increase nitric oxide production, is this a bad thing? I read in another post that pramiracetam also increases nitric oxide production and that it should be used with caution. Sorry I can't post an actual article, because it was awhile ago so I don't have it. Any thoughts?

#9 kylyssa

  • Guest
  • 340 posts
  • 0

Posted 19 September 2006 - 11:10 PM

Can anyone else weigh in on the legitimacy of his claim.  Sorry, kylyssa, your opinion does not seem very objective or scientific.

He might very well be wrong - i'm not saying he's not, it's just something to consider given that he is a medical doctor and probably understands the body better than most of us here.


Goodness gracious, I'm just a Florist but I learned in chemistry for the health sciences that calcium channel blockers lower blood pressure. Do I need to cite a paper if I say the sky is blue? Anyone with a few years of college biochemistry can see his reasoning is weird.

This article is neither objective nor scientific - it's written by someone other than who you are claiming as per the byline at the top, a Carol Sieverling with no MD after his or her name. He or she cites no references and puts forth a personal theory which is obviously questionable even to a Florist.

3) Magnesium Sulfate Injections

Magnesium blocks the production of nitric oxide by calcium channel blockade. [Many patients benefit from magnesium injections, which are virtually painless with the addition of taurine. The Magnesium used by most is Magnesium Sulfate—standard 50% solution—1/2 cc drawn into the syringe first, followed by 1 1/2 cc's of Taurine. The Taurine is compounded at 50 mg/cc. The taurine makes the injection virtually painless and the ratio eliminates the hard knots many are familiar with. The injection is intramuscular, given in upper, outer quadrant of either buttock. Both require scripts from a doctor.]


He or she is recommending medication which could result in blood pressure drops (calcium channel blockade) to people of a subset (CFIDS) who already usually suffer from low blood pressure.


He or she then goes on to state

Preload: Cortisol as Licorice Root

For those with low blood pressure—most CFIDS patients have low blood pressure—cortisol could also be useful and can be improved adaptogenically using Licorice Root Extract at 1 to 2 tsp every other day. [Adaptogenic substances respond to what your body needs. I take licorice root capsules. Only the type with glycyrrhizin works for this purpose.]


This is herbalism, not standardized pharmacology.

Precious few MD's will recommend eating raw meat, either

"Yes, raw meat. Raw meat of any kind is better than cooked meat." [Assuming it's safe and not contaminated.] Cooking destroys the RNA and DNA, depending on how much you cook it. If you overcook it, you definitely destroy it. But the most efficient way to destroy RNA and DNA is by microwaving.

Eggs & Raw Milk (Cheese): Secondly, young food is better than old because it has a higher RNA and DNA content. How young can you go on the meat side before you can't go any younger? The egg. Eggs are very rich in RNA and DNA. And milk, if it's not pasteurized. It has to be raw milk. Raw milk has a high content of RNA and DNA. It also, interestingly, has a very high proportion of whey protein.

Moreover, if it's undenatured there's likely to be RNA and DNA embedded in that. So I have a sneaky feeling that part of the power of undenatured whey protein may in fact be its RNA and DNA. And if you could raise your uric acid level, you would allow yourself to make more energy, which will allow you to raise your Glutathione. That could well be the mechanism [of the effectiveness of undenatured whey protein].

Of course, raw milk is hard to deal in. There are laws against it. So how can you fix raw milk and make it legal? Make cheese out of it. Cheese made from raw milk and stored in caves—which is the traditional European methodology—actually saves raw milk in a form that can be stored for long periods of time, and has rich RNA and DNA content. You can go to most health food stores and ask for cheeses that are made from raw milk—that's what you want—and ask for the butter that is imported from France or Europe, which is also made from raw milk and is far better for you and is less processed.


I challenge you to find a scholarly paper written by a medical doctor that supports this. This is just somebody's dietary/supplemental theory of how to treat CFIDS. There are absolutely no papers cited in this article. It possibly is Dr Paul Cheney's theory of dietary alternative medicine - because that is who Dr Paul Cheney is, a doctor of alternative Medicine. This is why Adam couldn't find much about him - his papers deal with alternative medicine.

Cheney, Paul M.D.
The Cheney Clinic
1 Vanderbilt Park Dr
Suite 230
Asheville, NC 28803
828-274-6665
Clinic is temporary closed.
www.fnmedcenter.com/ccis/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Board certified in internal medicine. Dr. Cheney reported the 1984 outbreak in Incline Village, NV. He has been treating CFIDS ever since. He moved his practice to North Carolina years later. Uses a treatment pyramid where layers of treatment increase based on the individual patient's symptoms. Traditional medicine complemented with alternative strategies. Active in all areas: research, medical publications etc.



To me, alternative medicine clinics are just a scam intended to separate sick, suffering people from their money by offering herbs, strange diets, kooky supplements, and empty promises.

#10 sprinkles

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 27 posts
  • 0

Posted 20 September 2006 - 12:30 AM

Kylyssa: Did you notice that your post has not a single thing to do regarding his claim about Provigil?

Edited by sprinkles, 20 September 2006 - 01:02 AM.


#11 kylyssa

  • Guest
  • 340 posts
  • 0

Posted 20 September 2006 - 01:57 AM

His claim regarding Provigil is in the same article - if the rest of his reasoning is hazy why would the Provigil part be different? It's like finding a semi-coherent portion of an article on a Raëlian website and expecting the context to be irrelevant. I was merely pointing out the highly kooky parts of the article - the kooky parts destroy the credibility of the whole article. His credibility is squashed by the "Alternative medicine" in the rest of the article.

There's no point in proving that a generally established medical practice is ok if the one article contradicting it cites no sources, has an unclear byline, references a doctor of "Alternative medicine," suggests unsafe practices, pushes a wellness solution specific to an Alternative Clinic in North Carolina, is littered with incorrectly used scientific terminology, and uses a narrative tone.

Let's put it this way - if a random website says something contradictory to a hundred doctors, do we have to prove the doctors right or the website?

Credibility of your source is important.

#12 sprinkles

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 27 posts
  • 0

Posted 20 September 2006 - 03:32 AM

Can you show me the hundreds of doctors that have addressed the issue of Progivil and Nitric Oxide?

And no, even if the rest of the page is totally bogus, which has hardly been proven, it does not, in any way, discredit his opinion on Provigil. You, really, should know this. Stop drawing terrible inferences using logical fallacies.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#13 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 23 September 2006 - 08:49 PM

Let's put it this way - if a random website says something contradictory to a hundred doctors, do we have to prove the doctors right or the website?

Credibility of your source is important.


This is a good point, kylyssa.

To determine if a research publishing is of any significance: the first thing to do (besides obviously checking what research institution that conducted the study), if you do see the name of an "MD" conducting a study (or one that conducted one) -- run their name through their state board. That way, you can see if they have ever been convicted of any wrongdoing..if an MD isn't in their state boards, then I'm afraid it isn't possible for him or her to conduct research *on patients* (legally at least)...one time I checked out one of my doctors and he was fined by the state board of California for questionable billing practices...If it's an MD/PhD or PhD conducting research, then find out what other research they have conducted and see which #'d author they are. If you look at any credible research, you'll see that in most cases it's a group of researchers conducting a study; not just one individual. If a researcher publishes a study as first author and he or she has never done ANY research before...then the credibility of that study is likely going to be considered close to zero.

You have to earn credibility in the medical field; publishing research does not automatically make the results of any importance...that's why we have conventions such as peer review set up. :) Usually, a researcher will have to be seventh author first, then sixth, then fifth, then maybe jump to second or third...finally, after he or she demonstrates skill, the author can be first author...

Edited by nootropikamil, 23 September 2006 - 09:18 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users