For - Re: Minocycline

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

Thanks for taking such care and time to reply to my searching questions. Like

many of us here, I'm just someone who questions by nature, feeling that

knowledge empowers. I am also still processing the early anger stage of being

recently diagnosed...angry at this ugly disease and angry that so many are

suffering and can't seem to find solutions without equally upsetting

side-effects. I read all the posts about problems experienced with all the drugs

and my heart just breaks.

>>>The use of minocycline to treat RA is not a secret which rheumatologists keep

from their patients.<<<

Perhaps I should clarify...when I used the term " a well-kept secret " , I was

really referring to the email I had previously sent asking how many people had

tried antibiotic therapy. Only a very few responded that they had and were

having great success. The scarcity of numbers on this therapy in the group

really came as a surprise, considering how often other DMARDS are mentioned. One

person responded that she'd asked and been told it wasn't worth trying, as there

had been little success with it in her practice. So, I've been trying to figure

out what criteria doctors of this opinion were judging its lack of efficacy. The

people who do try it seem to swear by it, helped by this fairly innocuous drug

when they'd had no success with others, and it didn't ring true to me to

classify the response of all patients to antibiotic therapy in the same way.

>>>Rheumatologists offer the agents they believe are the most appropriate and

will likely be most effective for the patient's particular situation. There is

no evidence to suggest that minocycline should be used alone as a first choice

for aggressive disease. Under the right circumstances, it is a good choice for

mild to moderate RA or in combination with another DMARD for more serious

disease.<<<

I'm very interested in this subject and wonder if you would share what you have

learned about how rheumatologists determine the right circumstances for deciding

whether a patient might benefit from minocycline...either alone or in combo with

another DMARD? It does sound like some doctors dismiss minocycline altogether,

so I have to wonder if it is more to do with each rheumy's personal belief

system about what they feel works over what a patient may feel more comfortable

trying. Rheumatologists, though doing the best with the tools they have, are

still just as human as the rest of us, with their own opinions and biases. So,

it's not a bad thing to be one's own advocate and to question professional

opinions and seek out second and third opinions, too.

>>>As a specialty, rheumatology is relatively new. I'm not sure it's been

around long enough (since 1972) to be able to justify referring to

rheumatologists and their methods as " archaic. " And today in 2007,

rheumatologists are using revolutionary strategies and cutting edge

treatments to help patients with rheumatic diseases - six biologic

therapies, stem cell transplantation, and induction therapy, for example.<<<

To be fair to my doctor and to what he was inferring when he commented on the

field of rheumatology being " archaic " ....we were discussing the fact that some

of the drugs used as " gold standards " , like methotrexate, are aimed towards

suppressing symptoms rather than targeting the actual cause of hyper-immune

response. Though specific genes, environmental factors, etc, are known to be

implicated, not much is known about just what goes wrong and how to target these

causes and, for this reason alone, it seems like we're stuck in the dark ages.

Of course, like the recent breakthrough made up in Canada for Type 1 diabetes, a

cure may be found in the twinkling of an eye. But, for now, we must continue to

just treat symptoms, monitor toxicity in the body to these drugs, and deal with

possible side-effects. I do understand that many have success with these

treatments, too, but many don't. What about them?

Biologics, as you mentioned, may be taking us one step further in targeting

causes, but it can feel a bit like " choosing your poison " . Choose not to take

them and suffer the inevitable consequences or take them and hopefully get a

remission, but at the risk of some potentially serious complications. Also,

maybe I'm jaded, but the fact that they are impossibly expensive for some people

makes me distrustful of big pharmaceuticals and their intentions. Is it really

in their best interests to research a cure when these other drugs are proving so

lucrative?

Maybe stem cell research is our greatest hope, but in the current political

climate, who knows if its promise will ever become a reality? I pray so....

Incidentally, I was just reading an article today about western doctors going to

India to study ancient Ayrvedic medicine, which has had quite some success in

treating RA, too. I don't know much about it, though, and it may be they don't

have the answers either...just relieving symptoms in an " archaic " kinda way

(LOL), but maybe with fewer side-effects?

, you offer an uplifting perspective in your email to me and I am grateful

for this, but I hope you and the group will have patience with the very human

side of me that is still working on adjusting to this diagnosis and researching

all the alternatives to make the most informed choices possible, as time goes

by. I feel sure that by reading all the posts and research articles here that

this will help in a big way.

Thanks!

Peace, n