RE: Funding a Study for LDN and MS

[Guest guest]

I was equally surprised that not only our government, the insurance

companies, and the MS Society would not see the eventual cost benefits to

funding a study on LDN, but what about the countries with Socialized

medicine? Dave answered my question last year stating that their

government (Brittan) has its own system to get through and there is a

similar strong hold with the pharmacy companies.

Very sad, but the silver lining is that many of us have found each other and

created a wonderful support group. In fact if the drug were readily

available prior to putting this together most people would not have the

great advise from one another as to what helps and what does not with

dosages, fillers etc. The major problems still being that more people are

not finding out about it and a lot of people really struggle to get it

prescribed. So of course it is still greatly important to try and a study

going.

[low dose naltrexone] Funding a Study for LDN and MS

> In my opinion, the two most logical places to campaign for funding for

> studies to gain approval for LDN in the treatment of MS are with the

> non-profit MS organizations who should have ALREADY funded the studies

> on their own, and with the health insurance companies, most notably

> Blue Cross. With profits as a detracting feature for pharmaceutical

> companies, it would seem that MILLIONS could be saved by insurance

> companies if LDN proved to be a worthy substitute for the ABCRs. It

> certainly has replaced them for me, and the total cost of LDN is lower

> than the co-pay for the ABCRs.

> The problem here, however, lies in being able to actually talk to a

> human being at the insurance company. I think it's easier to find a

> four-leaf clover in a lawn of zoysia than talking to a person at Blue

> Cross. Thanks, BMR

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

The MS non-profit organizations are sponsored by the drug companies who make

the traditional drugs for MS.

[low dose naltrexone] Funding a Study for LDN and MS

In my opinion, the two most logical places to campaign for funding for

studies to gain approval for LDN in the treatment of MS are with the

non-profit MS organizations who should have ALREADY funded the studies

on their own, and with the health insurance companies, most notably

Blue Cross. With profits as a detracting feature for pharmaceutical

companies, it would seem that MILLIONS could be saved by insurance

companies if LDN proved to be a worthy substitute for the ABCRs. It

certainly has replaced them for me, and the total cost of LDN is lower

than the co-pay for the ABCRs.

The problem here, however, lies in being able to actually talk to a

human being at the insurance company. I think it's easier to find a

four-leaf clover in a lawn of zoysia than talking to a person at Blue

Cross. Thanks, BMR

[Guest guest]

That is true, but there is also a great deal of money going to these

non-profits as individual donations, based on the premise that

their " Mission " is to fund research for ALL potentially beneficial

medications and to eradicate MS. Eradication, of course is only a

dream, but, to my knowledge, LDN is the ONLY medication that is most

often providing improvement rather than merely slowing the disease

process. If these organizations are going to profess this goal in

attempting to raise funds, then I personally think they should be

held accountable for funding studies to attain approval for MS.

There are studies ongoing for treatment of Crohn's and Child Autism;

there should also be studies ongoing for treatment of MS. Thanks for

your input. Sincerely, Bill

>

> The MS non-profit organizations are sponsored by the drug

companies who make

> the traditional drugs for MS.

>

> [low dose naltrexone] Funding a Study for LDN and MS

>

> In my opinion, the two most logical places to campaign for funding

for

> studies to gain approval for LDN in the treatment of MS are with

the

> non-profit MS organizations who should have ALREADY funded the

studies

> on their own, and with the health insurance companies, most

notably

> Blue Cross. With profits as a detracting feature for

pharmaceutical

> companies, it would seem that MILLIONS could be saved by insurance

> companies if LDN proved to be a worthy substitute for the ABCRs.

It

> certainly has replaced them for me, and the total cost of LDN is

lower

> than the co-pay for the ABCRs.

> The problem here, however, lies in being able to actually talk to

a

> human being at the insurance company. I think it's easier to find

a

> four-leaf clover in a lawn of zoysia than talking to a person at

Blue

> Cross. Thanks, BMR

>

>

>

>

>

>

>