During my years at the University of Michigan Medical School, 1965-1969, we heard scarcely a word about nutrition, vitamins, and disease treatment. And even though Dr. William Kaufman was a 1938 graduate of that same medical school, we heard nothing about his landmark work on niacinamide and arthritis.

But since learning about it, I’ve followed his lead with niacinamide therapy for over 30 years at the Tahoma Clinic. In that time, my colleagues and I have seen very significant improvements in individuals with joint pain and decreased joint mobility secondary to osteoarthritis. So much so that-thanks to a research grant from the Knowledge Medical Foundation-we’re conducting a study to investigate once again niacinamide’s ability to relieve pain and improve joint mobility.

I’ll tell you more about the study-and how you can be a part of it in just a moment. But first, let me fill you in a bit more on the man who developed this promising therapy, and how he discovered it.

Why niacin “enriched” bread isn’t good enough

Dr. Kaufman pioneered the use of niacinamide for osteoarthritis in the 1940s and reported on his results in the groundbreaking 1949 book, The Common Form of Joint Dysfunction: Its Incidence and Treatment.

Years ago, I had the chance to talk with Dr. Kaufman about his niacinamide work. One of the first things I asked him was why he thought his own alma mater (and mine as well) didn’t offer its medical students any information about his breakthrough research.

As Dr. Kaufman put it, “in my medical school years, we were drilled in great detail about vitamin deficiency disorders during our lectures in internal medicine, pediatrics, public health, neurology, psychiatry, and pathology. But after synthetic vitamins became available to treat florid deficiency diseases, not teaching about nutrition and vitamins became a national trend.”

Dr. Kaufman’s first observations were made in the days before bread and other white flour products were “enriched” with niacin, but the “enrichment” used only a few B-vitamins, and not B6 or folic acid or chromium or many of the other things milled out of flour. So, as he explained, he “really got a chance to observe the difference that niacinamide could make, starting from a position of real deficiency or semi-deficiency.”

He started with niacin. He had read an article in the AMA Journal which said that niacin was safe, so he told me that he took some-and “got very sick.” “After that,” Dr. Kaufman told me, “I decided to concentrate on niacinamide, and looked around without success for a local supply. I couldn’t find any at first, but ultimately, I was shipped two boxes containing 100,000 tablets of niacinamide, 50 milligrams each, so I had plenty of material.”

Dr. Kaufman noticed early on that joints were one of the most frequently improved areas among patients with a niacin-deficiency syndrome he discovered and called aniacinamidosis. When compulsory “enrichment” of flour occurred in 1943, many of the more obvious symptoms of aniacinamidosis disappeared from the general population, but the same joint problems persisted. So, looking for objective data, he designed a way to measure and evaluate 20 joints or joint groups in as little as 5 minutes.

He performed these measurements on all new patients instead of just those with obvious arthritis, and it quickly became apparent that limitation of joint movement was exceedingly common-even in people without joint complaints or obvious arthritis. And the vast majority of them responded to treatment with niacinamide.

With that sort of remarkable success, you might think that Dr. Kaufman’s therapy would have become common practice, but as I mentioned earlier, we never heard so much as a peep about it in medical school. But, as Dr. Kaufman remarked to me during our conversation, “I’m not surprised they didn’t refer to my books. The reviews of my 1943 book were dismissive, because the ‘experts’ couldn’t believe that the larger amounts of niacinamide I used in therapy improved joint mobility, muscle strength, maximal muscle working capacity, and mental functioning.”

But as dismissive as the mainstream may have been, the effects of Dr. Kaufman’s therapy are hard to deny-at least for the people experiencing them…

Relief in as little as 2 ½ minutes

During our talk, Dr. Kaufman told me that within just 2 ½ to 5 minutes, intensely deficient individuals (a situation that hasn’t occurred since 1943) taking niacinamide begin showing signs of physical and mental relaxation-previously tense muscles become more relaxed, drawn facial expressions turn calm, and some patients even smile with relief. Without being asked, patients often start to sit, walk, and stand up straighter.

Dr. Kaufman also noted that many times with the first 10 minutes, an intensely niacinamide-deficient person’s hands and feet changed from a sallow yellow complexion to a healthy pink color and actually felt warmer, both to the person him or herself and to the examining clinician.

Dr. Kaufman detailed his observations of niacinamide therapy in individuals with both osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. He found that most experienced significant improvement, and, as he told me, “as long as niacinamide is continued, the improvement ‘holds’…Of course, joint mobility wasn’t the only improvement, just the one we could precisely measure. Nearly everyone got at least some pain relief and reduction of swelling. It takes 1 to 3 months for maximum effect, but nearly everyone needed less pain medication, and a significant number needed none.”

By now, you’re probably wondering how niacinamide works to help joints. When I asked him that same question, Dr. Kaufman explained that “niacinamide has the special capacity of “wringing out” excess fluid from cartilage and connective tissue. [It] is also anti-inflammatory.”

Dr. Kaufman’s treatment calls for relatively large doses of niacinamide. But as he explained to me, “timing is just as important: 250 milligrams of niacinamide taken every three hours for six doses is about twice as effective as 500 milligrams taken three times daily.”

Following Dr. Kaufman’s protocol, my Tahoma Clinic colleagues and I have found that while some joints respond better than others, Dr. Kaufman’s observation is true: “They all respond to a degree. The best are knees, shoulders, and the neck and then wrists and fingers.”

Since Dr. Kaufman’s 1940s publication, there’s been only one published study about the effects of niacinamide on osteoarthritis. It was conducted by Dr. Wayne Jonas, who in the past has also has been Director of the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. His team reported a significant improvement in joint mobility and significant lessening in pain in individuals with osteoarthritis who took niacinamide as compared with those who took placebo.1

And that brings us to the research we’re conducting at the Tahoma Clinic.

A new study on an old standby

The study is being conducted by Dr. John Sherman, who has been practicing medicine for 30 years, along with Dr. David Zeoli, who has been in practice for over a decade. I will be consulting and supervising the research, which will be investigating the effects of 3,000 milligrams of niacinamide per day (divided into three 1,000 mg doses).

Now-back to how you can help. If you have osteoarthritis, live in the Pacific Northwest, and are able to visit the Tahoma Clinic four times in six months, you may be eligible to participate in this study at no cost to you. To volunteer or for more information, please go to www.tahomaclinic.com or call (425)264-0059.

Thinning hair may not seem like something many women need to worry about, but it’s much more common than you might think. I’m not writing about the relatively rare condition known as alopecia, where a woman loses large patches-or in some cases ALL-of her hair. I’m referring to the much-less-technical “too much hair in the bathtub drain” syndrome. Most women who encounter this problem realize it when they pull their hair back into a ponytail-and notice that the ponytail keeps getting skinnier and skinnier.

One of the other, even more common complaints I hear from women is that their fingernails just aren’t strong and healthy. No matter what they do-gelatin, calcium, etc.-their nails continue to chip, peel, break, crack, or layer back.  While both of these conditions seem cosmetic, the truth is that they both signal another issue going on inside the body-one that can “snowball” into many more serious problems if it’s left untended.

Before I tell you about that underlying cause and how to correct it naturally, there is one other interesting sidenote you should know.

Surprisingly, even though both of the problems I described above have the same underlying cause, I’ve very rarely heard-in 37 years of natural medicine practice-from one woman who has both problems at the same time. It’s either hair loss or poor nail quality, but a woman almost never has both problems simultaneously. As one woman said to me years ago: “It’s just as well! Who needs badly thinning hair and lousy fingernails both at once?”

But back to what’s causing these all-too-common problems for so many pre-menopausal women…

Recent research-on the right track, but not quite there

Recent research has established a link between low levels of iron and female scalp hair loss. That’s pro­gress, but low levels of iron actually tend to have the same underlying cause as do the hair loss and poor quality nails. For pre-menopausal women (and many women after menopause, too) that cause is “gastric hypochlorhydria,” or, in plain English, low stomach acid.

If stomach acid is low, protein isn’t efficiently digested into its component amino acids and peptides (two or more “linked” amino acids), and then blood levels of one (or usually more) essential amino acids become low. But our bodies use amino acids to build every bodily protein we have, and hair and nails are mostly protein-a very specialized protein, but protein all the same. However, our bodies know that we can live without hair or nail proteins, but we can’t live without heart muscle proteins or other important body proteins. So if there aren’t enough amino acids available to build and repair all body proteins, the hair or nails are the “first to go.”

Also if stomach acid is low, most minerals (including iron) aren’t adequately “separated out” from the foods in which they’re present. In some cases-including iron-the “electrical state” (for the technically inclined, the “valance state”) of the mineral needs to be changed by stomach acid for the mineral to be optimally absorbed. Which explains why low iron levels are “linked” with female hair loss. But your hair, nails, and iron levels aren’t the only things that suffer when your body isn’t producing enough stomach acid…

When stomach acid is low, folate is also poorly absorbed, and the factor which aids in vitamin B12 absorption is often inadequately produced as well.

Putting it all together, low stomach acid results in a variable combination of inadequate levels of any one or more of the eight essential amino acids, over a dozen potential minerals, as well as folate and vitamin B12. No wonder a woman’s hair falls out, or her nails just aren’t strong and healthy!

But you can correct the problem, keep your hair firmly on your head where it belongs, and have nails that are a manicurist’s dream (not to mention protect your body from the myriad problems associated with nutrient deficiencies). There are just a few specific-but simple-steps you’ll need to follow.

The high-tech test

Low stomach acid production is one of the very first things we check for at the Tahoma Clinic, and your to-do-list should certainly start there.

The test for stomach function is definitely high-tech. It’s sometimes called “gastric analysis by radiotelemetry,” but the more common name is the “Heidelberg capsule test” since the test capsules were originally manufactured by a company in Heidelberg, Germany.

Each capsule is approximately the size of a large multiple vitamin-mineral capsule and is rounded so that it sort of resembles a supplement capsule. But it’s made of non-digestible plastic and contains a miniature radio transmitter and pH sensor. The capsule is ordinarily attached to a very thin string to keep it in the stomach during the test, but just as importantly for individuals with ulcerative colitis, Crohns disease, diverticulosis, or other intestinal disease, the string is attached to keep the capsule from getting stuck further down the intestinal tract. (The string attached to the capsule does hang out of the person’s mouth throughout the test, but it’s not overly uncomfortable: Most people say it feels like having a hair in their mouth.)

Although the test is always taken on an empty stomach, you do swallow the capsule with a little bit of water-just enough to get it down. Once it gets into the stomach, the local fluids are released, which activate the capsule: The pH sensor measures any acidity present, and the tiny radio transmitter sends a signal to a receiver, which in turn sends it to a computer for graphic display.

Unfortunately, I hear about a lot of instances where doctors or technicians stop the test at this point, with no challenge. But doing the test like that is like doing a resting electrocardiogram with no treadmill exercise to measure the before-and-after difference in heart rate. An accurate test must determine how much acid the stomach can make, and how rapidly, in response to a digestive challenge.

Since food allergies and sensitivities are so common and since most people don’t realize that they even are sensitive to some foods, it’s not really possible to have the person being tested eat something to test how his or her stomach produces acid in response. Some people make more acid when presented with a food to which they’re allergic, and some people make less. So there’s no way to pick a food that we can be sure will produce a standardized result, and standardization is necessary for accurate test interpretation.

Fortunately, a group of Canadian researchers came up with an answer back in the 1970s. They used bicarbonate, which is not only very alkaline, but also a natural substance found in everyone’s bodies, which means it’s extremely unlikely to trigger an allergic response that would affect acid production. So after the patient swallows the Heidelberg capsule and the technician takes the initial measurements, the person being tested is given a carefully measured amount of bicarbonate. Of course, the pH goes way up (usually to pH 7 or 8). A normal stomach rapidly makes acid to overcome the alkalinity, and the pH returns to normal (pH 1.8-2.3). A normal stomach can overcome a bicarbonate challenge in 20 minutes or less, five times in a row. But an underfunctioning stomach takes much longer, or, in more serious cases, never returns to normal.

Most stomach function tests take around 100 minutes or a little longer: The patient undergoes five different 20-minute challenges. At the end of the test, youre given the option to have the capsule removed by pulling the string out, or letting it pass through your system naturally.

Unfortunately, the Heidelberg test is only available in a minority of these United States. But you can get a list of the doctors in those states who perform it from the company that manufactures the testing equipment, Electro-medical Devices of Atlanta, Georgia (706-745-9698, www.phcapsule.com). If you decide to have the test done, make absolutely sure that the doctor is going to follow the bicarbonate challenge procedure described above BEFORE you swallow the capsule. Otherwise, you may not have get an accurate test result for your time, money, and (slight) discomfort.

The simple solution

If testing shows that your stomach acid is low, taking hydrochloric acid in conjunction with pepsin usually gives the best results in treating the condition.

The amount of hydrochloric acid that’s usually effective for adults is at least 40 to 70 grains of betaine hydrochloride (or glutamic-acid hydrochloride) with pepsin per meal. That’s about four to seven 10-grain capsules per meal.

To minimize even minor side effects, I always start with just one capsule (5, 7.5, or 10 grains) taken just before meals. After two or three days, if there are no problems, I suggest increasing the dosage to two capsules before meals for another two or three days and then to three capsules. The dose is gradually increased in this fashion until the recommended amount is reached.

Keep in mind, though, that while side effects are rare, they are possible. Hydrochloric acid should never be used at the same time as aspirin, Butazolidin, Inodicin, Motrin, or any other anti-inflammatory medications. These medications themselves can cause stomach bleeding and ulcers, so using hydrochloric acid with them increases the risk.

With all of this in mind, it’s important to work closely with a physician skilled in natural medicine whenever you’re supplementing with hydrochloric acid and pepsin. To locate such a physician in your area, contact the American College for Advancement in Medicine.

For a brief review of low stomach acid and related problems, you might want to refer to my recently published (and relatively short) book Stomach (Praktikos Books, Mt. Vernon, Virginia, 2009) or the older, more comprehensive book Why Stomach Acid is Good for You (M. Evans & Company, New York, 2001) written by Lane Lenard, Ph.D., and me. Both books are available from the Tahoma Clinic Dispensary. JVW

Two more factors to consider for women 60 and older

You may have noticed earlier that I referred to these problems in pre-menopausal women. All of this frequently applies to post-menopausal women too, but there are often additional factors to consider in these instances. One of them is DHEA, an “adrenal androgen” that reaches its highest levels at age 30, and naturally declines after that. Many women in their late 60s and older who aren’t using bio-identical hormones (BHRT) have extremely low levels of DHEA, and find that restoring more youthful levels in their bodies using BHRT can slow hair loss-and even promote a little hair growth.

Similarly, weak thyroid can contribute to hair loss. And while it’s true that weak thyroid function can affect women at any age (especially those whose iodine and iodide intake is low, and have a long history of drinking chlorinated and/or fluoridated water), it’s more common in older age groups.

JVW

One of the most abundant minerals on earth, strontium is present in the soil, air, water, fish, and most plant foods, especially cabbage, beets and Brazil nuts. Worldwide, humans’ estimated daily intake of strontium is 1-5 milligrams per day. Chemically similar to calcium, strontium is absorbed in comparable amounts.

Once in bone, strontium beneficially affects both aspects of the bone remodeling process: It not only slows down the development of osteoclasts (the cells that take away bone) thus lessening bone removal activity, but also enhances the development of osteoblasts (the bone cells which build bone), thus increasing bone forming activity.

Amazingly, these effects were discovered a full century ago. In 1909 and 1910, a German researcher reported his conclusion that strontium appeared to be uniquely effective in stimulating rapid formation of bone.1 Ten years later, another German researcher concluded that strontium plus calcium were superior to calcium alone in mineralizing bone.2 Following these publications, conflicting reports were made about the effects of strontium, until a 1952 Cornell University research report concluded, “…the deposition of calcium plus strontium [in bone] is greater than the total calcium storage which can be achieved by calcium alone, regardless of calcium intake.”3

In 1959, Mayo Clinic researchers reported significant improvement in severe osteoporosis,4 and in 1986, a pioneer in late-20th century strontium research published microscopic observations about how strontium works to improve bone building and bone density.5 After 1986, very little research on strontium was done or reported until just a few years ago. Since then, there’s been a research explosion.

I reported to you on the early stages of that explosion in the February 2003 issue of Nutrition & Healing, and recommended that anyone with osteoporosis add this mineral to his or her anti-osteoporosis supplementation program.6 In just the last five years, more than 400 articles have been published in peer-reviewed medical literature on the bone-building effects of strontium.

Why go natural?

Pure strontium is chemically unstable, but it is found in Nature with natural chemicals that help stabilize it into forms such as strontium citrate, strontium chloride, strontium carbonate, strontium gluconate, or strontium lactate.

Strontium ranelate (a recently created, never-before-found-in-nature, and therefore able to be patented strontium combination) has been the subject of a number of large, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (further discussed below), which have confirmed strontium’s effectiveness in halting and reversing osteoporosis.

Strontium ranelate combines strontium with a synthetic compound called ranelic acid, which is supposed to be very poorly absorbed. This patentable form of strontium (tradename Protelos®) is currently being marketed in Europe for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis.

Post-menopausal? This is your must-have mineral

Strontium’s ability to prevent early postmenopausal bone loss was evaluated in a 24-month double-blind placebo-controlled study of 160 postmenopausal women. All the women were given calcium (500 milligrams per day). Those who also received stronium ranelate (1 gram per day) increased their lumbar bone mineral density (BMD) by an average of 5.53 percent, a significantly greater percentage density increase than the women who were given a placebo.

After two years, bone mineral density in the femoral neck (the neck-shaped area near the top of the femur) had increased 2.46 percent, and BMD in the hip had increased 3.21 percent in women given strontium ranelate, again a significantly greater improvement than that seen in those given placebo. Plus, strontium was as well tolerated as placebo.7

Strontium was also shown to greatly benefit postmenopausal women who had already had a vertebral osteoporotic fracture. In a two-year double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 353 Caucasian women, study participants were given either strontium ranelate (0.5, 1, or 2 grams per day) or placebo. All the women also received a daily 500-milligram supplement of calcium along with an 800 IU vitamin D3 supplement. At the end of the study, the yearly increase in lumbar BMD in the women given 2 grams of strontium ranelate was +7.3 percent.

(A word of warning: Despite what these researchers recommended, never, ever take more supplemental strontium than calcium! Animals given more strontium than calcium in long term studies have developed bone deformities.)

During the second year of treatment, the 2-gram dose was associated with a 44-percent reduction in the number of patients who experienced a new vertebral fracture. Treating postmenopausal women who already had osteoporosis with strontium ranelate (2 grams daily for two years) resulted in an increase in these women’s lumbar BMD of about 3 percent each year.8

A serious reduction in non-spinal fracture risk

The largest, most significant study of strontium to date is a five-year study that began in 1996 and included two clinical trials evaluating strontium ranelate’s effects on women with osteoporosis: (1) the spinal osteoporosis therapeutic intervention (SOTI) study, which had a study population of 1,649 patients (with an average age of 70 years) and looked at strontium’s effects on the women’s risk of vertebral fractures, and (2) the treatment of peripheral osteoporosis (TROPOS) trial, which included 5,091 patients (with an average age of 77 years) and looked at strontium’s effects on non-spinal fractures.

Both studies were multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that included two parallel groups: women with osteoporosis who were given strontium ranelate (2 grams per day-please remember the above precaution regarding calcium) compared to a second comparable group of women with osteoporosis receiving a placebo.

After three years of follow-up, the SOTI study revealed that strontium caused a 41-percent reduction in the women’s risk of experiencing a vertebral fracture compared to placebo. Even in the first year, the women’s risk of a new vertebral fracture was reduced 49 percent in the strontium group compared to placebo. Lumbar BMD increased 11.4 percent in the strontium group, but decreased 1.3 percent in the placebo group.

Making good news even better, strontium caused no adverse side effects.9-11

Fracture risk dramatically reduced

The TROPOS study, which looked at the effect of strontium on non-vertebral fractures, showed a reduction in risk of 16 percent in all vertebral fractures and a 19-percent reduction in risk of major non-vertebral osteoporotic fractures. In a subgroup of women at high risk of fracture-women 74 years of age or older with low femoral neck bone mineral density scores-treatment with strontium was associated with a 36-percent reduction in risk of hip fracture.12

Strontium was also studied in 1,431 postmenopausal women with osteopenia (accelerated bone loss, an early warning signal for developing osteoporosis). In women with lumbar spine osteopenia, strontium ranelate decreased the risk of vertebral fracture by an average of 41 percent (by 59 percent in women who had not yet experienced a fracture, and by 38 percent in women who had already had a fracture). In women with osteopenia at both the lumbar spine and the neck of the femur, strontium reduced fracture risk by 52 percent.13

Another recent review found strontium able to reduce vertebral fracture risk in patients with osteopenia, and to reduce vertebral, non-vertebral, and hip fractures in patients with osteoporosis aged 74 years and older.14

A study involving 325 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Malaysia, also confirmed strontium’s benefits. After one year of taking either 2 grams of strontium or placebo daily, bone mineral density in the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and hip in the women receiving strontium increased by 3 to 5 percent compared to those given placebo.15

Sorting the best strontium

Most recently, an international, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared strontium malonate (a totally natural strontium combination) to strontium ranelate. In this study 289 postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density who were at least 50 years old were divided into five groups. Three of the groups were given strontium malonate in daily doses of 0.75 grams, 1 gram, or 2 grams. The fourth group received 2 grams of strontium ranelate daily, while the fifth group was given a placebo.

After 12 weeks, levels of CTX-1 (C-terminal telopeptide of type 1 collagen, a biomarker that measures bone resorption activity) were much lower in all three groups given strontium malonate than in the women given either strontium ranelate or placebo.16

Of course, the patent medicine companies will tell you their concoctions are the best for battling osteoporosis. Sadly, bisphosphonate patent medicines (the most commonly prescribed “anti-osteoporosis medicines”) suppress the ability of strontium to help re-build bone: When a woman stops taking these patent medicines, bone remodeling remains suppressed for at least six months, which blunts their ability to benefit from all forms of strontium, as shown by a study published in the March 2010 issue of the Journal of Bone Mineral Research.

The research was done in the United Kingdom with 120 women with osteoporosis, 60 of whom had taken bisphosphonates, and 60 of whom had not. All 120 women received strontium, calcium and vitamin D. After one year, bone mineral density went up 5.6 percent at the spine, 3.4 percent at the hip, and 4.0 percent at the heel in the women who had not taken a bisphosphonate.

In contrast, the women who had been on a bisphosphonate had only an average 2.1-percent increase at the spine and no increase in BMD at the hip or heel. Researchers do not know how long it will take for normal remodeling to begin again in the bones of the women who had used a bisphosphonate.17

How much and which formula?

If you want to put strontium to use for yourself, how much should you use? Based on the current research, it appears that between 340 and 680 milligrams of daily elemental strontium works best. The smaller quantities will help prevent bone loss from occurring, while the larger doses can help treat osteoporosis.

In these United States and Canada, natural strontium is available as an individual supplement, but you can also gain the benefits of strontium combined with other bone-building nutrients. After writing that February 2003 newsletter, I worked with Progressive Laboratories (800-527-9512, www.progressivelabs.com), to develop a formula called Osteo-Mins. It combines strontium with other proven bone-building nutrients including calcium, magnesium, vitamin D, vitamins K1 and K2, zinc, copper, boron, silicon, manganese, selenium, and molybdenum. Osteo-Mins is available through natural food stores, compounding pharmacies, and the Tahoma Clinic Dispensary.

Safely taking strontium

Strontium improves bone mineral density and strengthens bone in a normal, healthy way. This mineral is so safe that it wa­s the key ingredient in toothpastes for sensitive teeth, such as Sensodyne, which in the past included 10 percent total strontium chloride hexahydrate by weight, until the manufacturer made a very foolish decision to remove it in favor of a more toxic ingredient. Strontium reduces tooth sensitivity by forming a barrier over microscopic tubules in tooth dentin in which nerve endings have become exposed by gum recession.18

However, since the quantities of strontium used in the studies are larger than those we might normally consume in our food each day, researchers wanted to check to be sure long-term use of strontium would not cause any alterations in the newly formed bone crystals or any other negative side effects. A number of studies have now addressed these concerns.

Strontium has been shown to improve vertebral bone density and strength in rats without altering bone stiffness, indicating that the improvement occurred without causing abnormal bone crystals. In monkeys, strontium both decreased bone resorption (loss) and increased bone synthesis. In cell cultures, strontium not only increased the reproduction of bone-forming osteoblast cells, but also enhanced and increased the synthesis of collagen (the major protein in the bone matrix).19-23

In patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis, data from two large double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trials of five years’ duration, strontium greatly reduced the risk of fractures without causing any adverse side effects other than a very occasional case of nausea or diarrhea. Data on patients who continued to receive strontium during an additional three-year extension of these trials indicates that strontium continued to provide protection against new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures for the eight years of therapy, improving bone mineral density at numerous sites, and increasing markers of bone formation while decreasing markers of bone resorption.24

The main precaution is to make sure you’re taking more calcium than strontium! (Yes, this is repetition, but important repetition.) Early 20th century research in animals shows that if strontium intake exceeds calcium intake over a long period of time, the animals develop bone deformities. Also, you will surely be at less risk for potential side effects if you take a natural form of strontium (such as strontium citrate or strontium lactate, as used by the Mayo Clinic researchers in 1959), rather than the patent medicine form strontium ranelate.

Potential problems with strontium ranelate

When researchers looked at the combined data from both the SOTI and TROPOS trials, they found strontium ranelate increased the yearly incidence of venous thromboembolism (blood clots) by 7 percent. They also found a few cases of DRESS syndrome (Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms syndrome), which they discounted as being too few to be a “real” problem. However, since death is a possible side effect of DRESS syndrome, for those affected, it is a very real, very serious side effect!

DRESS syndrome (also termed drug hypersensitivity syndrome) includes a widespread drug-induced rash, fever, and involvement of one or more internal organs. Symptoms of DRESS syndrome usually begin one to eight weeks after exposure to the offending drug.

Approximately 50 percent of patients will have hepatitis (liver inflammation), 30 percent will have eosinophilia (a high concentration of a type of white blood cell that reacts to allergy and parasites), 10 percent will have nephritis (kidney inflammation), and 10 percent will have pneumonitis (lung inflammation).

DRESS syndrome is often severe and can result in death if not diagnosed early. In a manner reminiscent of the initial trickle that gradually turned into a flood of reports linking bisphosphonates with osteonecrosis of the jaw and increased risk of femur fracture, reports of strontium-ranelate-associated DRESS syndrome and acute renal failure are starting to appear.25-29

The “risk” could be more than worth it

Strontium is a trace element naturally present in the human body, so these potential side effects are very likely due to its combination with ranelic acid, which is supposedly “poorly absorbed.” If you decide to take strontium ranelate, immediately stop taking this patent medicine if any suspicious skin disorders occur within two months of starting treatment.

Why take this risk in the first place? Why use a “space alien” (never before found on planet Earth) patent medication-strontium ranelate-rather than one of the naturally occurring (but unpatentable) salt forms of strontium? The natural combination forms of strontium consist of a single strontium atom plus one or two molecules of citrate, lactate, gluconate, or carbonate.

Each molecule of strontium ranelate, however, contains two atoms of strontium plus one molecule of the “space alien” molecule, ranelic acid. Since strontium is the active agent in building bone, why expose yourself to any risk of adverse events or pay the increased expense of a patented drug when natural forms of strontium are readily available?

And please remember: If you decide to take strontium as an individual supplement, always take more calcium than strontium. JVW

References

Reverse osteoporosis by actually rebuilding bone

1 Lehnerdt F. Zur Frage der Substitution des Calcium im Knochensystem durch Strontium, Beitr Path Anat 1909;46:468-585; Beitr Path Anat 1910;47:215-247
2 Alwens. Ueber die Beziehungen der Unterernahrung zur Osteoporose und Osteomalazie, Munchen med. Wehnschr 1919;1071-1075
3 Shorr E, Carter AC. The usefulness of strontium as an adjuvant to calcium in the re-mineralization of the skeleton in man. Bull. Hosp. Joint Dis. 1952;13(1):59-66
4 Waugh JM et al., The Effect of Strontium Lactate in the Treatment of Osteoporosis, Staff Meetings of the Mayo Clinic 1959;34(13):329-334
5 Marie PJ et al. Histomorphology of bone changes in stable strontium therapy. Trace Substances in Environmental Health (Proceedings of the University of Missouri’s 19th Annual Conference on Trace Substances in Environmental Health ) 1985;XIX:193-208
6 Wright, JV. Fight-even prevent-osteoporosis with the hidden secrets of this bone-building mineral. Nutrition & Healing 2003 (February) 10;2:1-4
7 Reginster JY, Deroisy R, Dougados M, et al. Prevention of early postmenopausal bone loss by strontium ranelate: the randomized, two-year, double-masked, dose-ranging, placebo-controlled PREVOS trial. Osteoporos Int. 2002 Dec;13(12):925-31. PMID: 12459934
8 Seeman E, Devogelaer J, Lorenc R, et al., Strontium ranelate reduces the risk of vertebral fractures in patients with osteopenia. J Bone Miner Res. 2008 Mar;23(3):433-8. PMID: 17997711
9 Meunier P, Roux C, Ortolani S, et al., Effects of long-term strontium ranelate treatment on vertebral fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2009 Oct;20(10):1663-73. PMID: 19153678
10 Meunier P, Roux C, Seeman E, et al., The effects of strontium ranelate on the risk of vertebral fracture in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. N Engl J Med. 2004 Jan 29;350(5):459-68. PMID: 14749454
11 Reginster J, Seeman E, De Vernejoul MC, et al., Strontium ranelate reduces the risk of nonvertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: Treatment of Peripheral Osteoporosis (TROPOS) study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005 May;90(5):2816-22. Epub 2005 Feb 22. PMID: 15728210
12 Arlot ME, Jiang Y, Genant HK, et al., Histomorphometric and microCT analysis of bone biopsies from postmenopausal osteoporotic women treated with strontium ranelate. J Bone Miner Res. 2008 Feb;23(2):215-22. PMID: 17922612
13 Seeman E, Devogelaer J, Lorenc R, et al., Strontium ranelate reduces the risk of vertebral fractures in patients with osteopenia. J Bone Miner Res. 2008 Mar;23(3):433-8.
14 Neuprez A, Reginster JY. Bone-forming agents in the management of osteoporosis. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Oct;22(5):869-83. PMID: 19028361
15 Liu JM, Wai-Chee Kung A, et al. Efficacy and safety of 2 g/day of strontium ranelate in Asian women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Bone. 2009 Sep;45(3):460-5. Epub 2009 May 21. PMID: 19464401
16 Accessed at http://www.mskreport.com/articles.cfm?articleID=3014, June 3, 2010
17 Middleton ET, Steel SA, Aye M, et al. The effect of prior bisphosphonate therapy on the subsequent BMD and bone turnover response to strontium ranelate. J Bone Miner Res. 2010 Mar;25(3):455-62. PMID: 20201000
18 Pradyot Patnaik. Handbook of Inorganic Chemicals. McGraw-Hill, 2002, ISBN 007049439
19 Marie PJ. Strontium ranelate: a dual mode of action rebalancing bone turnover in favour of bone formation. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2006 Jun;18 Suppl 1:S11-5. PMID: 16735840
20 Marie PJ. Strontium ranelate: a physiological approach for optimizing bone formation and resorption. Bone. 2006 Feb;38(2 Suppl 1):S10-4. Epub 2006 Jan 24. PMID: 16439191
21 Boivin G, Meunier PJ. The mineralization of bone tissue: a forgotten dimension in osteoporosis research. Osteoporos Int. 2003;14 Suppl 3:S19-24. Epub 2003 Mar 18. Review. PMID: 12730799
22 Boivin G, Farlay D, Khebbab MT, et al. In osteoporotic women treated with strontium ranelate, strontium is located in bone formed during treatment with a maintained degree of mineralization. Osteoporos Int. 2010 Apr;21(4):667-77. Epub 2009 Jul 14. PMID: 19597910
23 Uebelhart D, Frey D, Frey-Rindova P, et al. [Therapy of osteoporosis: bisphosphonates, SERM's, teriparatide and strontium] Z Rheumatol. 2003 Dec;62(6):512-7. PMID: 14685711
24 Deeks ED, Dhillon S. Strontium ranelate: a review of its use in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Drugs. 2010 Apr 16;70(6):733-59. PMID: 20394457
25 Musette P, Brandi ML, Cacoub P, et al. Treatment of osteoporosis: recognizing and managing cutaneous adverse reactions and drug-induced hypersensitivity. Osteoporos Int. 2010 May;21(5):723-32. Epub 2009 Nov 17. PMID: 19921087
26 Pernicova I, Middleton ET, Aye M. Rash, strontium ranelate and DRESS syndrome put into perspective. European Medicine Agency on the alert. Osteoporos Int. 2008 Dec;19(12):1811-2. Epub 2008 Sep 20. PMID: 18807101
27 Kramkimel N, Sibon C, Le Beller C, et al. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2009 Oct;34(7):e349-50. Epub 2009 May 16. PMID: 19456761
28 Jonville-Béra AP, Crickx B, Aaron L, et al. Strontium ranelate-induced DRESS syndrome: first two case reports. Allergy. 2009 Apr;64(4):658-9. Epub 2009 Feb 7. PMID: 19210353
29 Iyer D, Buggy Y, O’Reilly K, et al. Strontium ranelate as a cause of acute renal failure and dress syndrome. Nephrology (Carlton). 2009 Sep;14(6):624. PMID: 19712264

Last month, I showed you one of the most amazing breakthroughs in medicine I’ve seen in years.  If you suffer from any disease that threatens your life or your ability to live life to the fullest, then you have to read the rest of the story.

The breakthrough is the controversial Stem Cell Therapy.  But this Stem Cell Therapy is unlike any you’ve ever heard of.  The therapies you’ve heard about on the nightly news get the stem cells from two main sources: fetal cells and umbilical cord blood.As a baby develops in the womb, it’s loaded with primitive stem cells.  And the blood in the umbilical cord also is loaded.  The advantage of the former (the baby itself) is that stem cells can be “harvested” from target organs.  But there are major ethical problems - use of an aborted human baby.  This is illegal in the U.S., but many offshore clinics have been using fetal cells from eastern European aborted pregnancies.  But to get this therapy, you’ll have to travel to an unregulated clinic in a foreign country and then pay $25,000 or more for these cells.

Umbilical cord blood stem cells don’t carry any moral or ethical problems.  It’s an easy routine procedure to collect cord blood from the cut cord.  Once harvested, the placenta and umbilical cord cells are taken to a lab.  There, lab technicians grow the cells in culture,  and then doctors can administer them to patients. 

Both of these procedures have some limitations.  If there’s not a good tissue-type match (like blood typing), the cells won’t last as long as a perfect match.  The cells will survive long enough to impart their growth factors into your diseased organs.  But your body will eventually reject the cells after six to nine months.  Nevertheless, true healing can occur with both types of stem cells and for those that can afford them, they can be lifesaving.

While the cost of umbilical cord cells is much less expensive than the fetal cell, it’s still pricey, ranging from $4,000 to $25,000 as well.  These costs vary from one offshore clinic to another depending on a great number of factors.

And that is where this new breakthrough stem cell treatment comes in.  Not only does it cost much less than the other treatments, it never has any refection issues. That’s because this therapy doesn’t use the stem cells of an aborted baby or the blood from a newborn’s umbilical cord.  This therapy uses your own stem cells.

That’s right!  You still have stem cells in your body.  No, you are not a newborn, nor a fetus.  However, your bone marrow is simply loaded with at least two lines of stem cells - mesenchymal and hematopoietic.  The latter make your blood and immune cells.  The mesenchymal stem cells support the hematopoietic cells but can, themselves, differentiate into many different specialized organ and tissue cells. 

However, up until recently, no one knew how to extract these stem cells and use them properly.  But David Steenblock, DO of Mission Viejo, California, changed all that.  He perfected a rather inexpensive method of harvesting and delivering your own stem cells.

And Dr, Steenblock has used the therapy on hundreds of people with incredible success.  Take La Rue for example.  This beautiful 63-year-old woman suffered from fibromyalgia, diabetes, degenerating joints, multiple allergies, fibromyalgia-like symptoms, multiple sclerosis, and asthma.

La Rue’s MS was rather mild, causing balance and urinary infection and retention problems.  Her energy was poor, and she needed to rest after any activity.  Her blood glucose was erratic, from 50-189.  She needed an albuterol inhaler for asthma and Singulair for allergies,  She suffered from asthma attacks two to three times weekly needing inhalers, and a round of dangerous steroids up to three times per month.

She suffered from significant osteoarthritis (degeneration) in her knees, left ankle, shoulder and elbow, both hydrocondone most of the time.

So La Rue went to see Dr. Steenblock twice in July 2009.  He extracted her stem cells and used them to treat all of her problems.  Shortly after the treatment, most if not all her joint pain cleared.  She stopped taking the narcotics.  All of her asthma symptoms vanished.  Her muscle pains cleared.  Her urinary problems went away, her balance improved, and her energy took a leap up.

Dr. Steenblock admits that there are disadvantages with his method as well.  The biggest problem is that your own stem cells come tagged with your chronological age.  So they may not pack the regenerative power of umbilical cord cells, which have gone through fewer cell divisions.

Stem cells are like a cat with “9 lives”.  By age 70 or so,  they may not have too man divisions left in their fixed allotment.  That means this therapy may not work as quickly for those up in age.  It might take more injections of the stem cells to see real results.  But many people see results within a couple of days.  And others see significant improvement within a month or two.

However, there are some real advantages.  Since these cells are pulled from your own bone marrow, you won’t have any rejection problems.  The organs they differentiate into will be with you for your natural life.  In contrast, your immune system will pick off any fetal or umbilical cells after a few months.

But the biggest advantage is that this procedure is not subject to any type of FDA scrutiny.  It is perfectly legal, and the feds won’t bust down your doctor’s doors for performing it.  It uses normal medical techniques that any trained doctor can do in his own clinic.  There’s no need to have a hospital or operating room.

What’s more, the procedure is simple.  Terri and I both Had it done.  You simply lie on your back while the top of your hip bone (iliac crest) is fully anesthetized.  The whole area is cleansed and draped to ensure sterility.  The nurse will give you a small amount of heparin IV to reduce the risk of clotting of the sampled bone marrow blood.  The doctor then takes a highly specialized needle down to the bone and penetrates into the marrow either manually or with a low speed drilling device attached to the needle.  He withdraws about 400cc of bone marrow blood into syringes prepared with citrate ( to prevent coagulation).  The blood is then added to a saline solution and immediately reinfused through an IV.  The whole procedure takes about two hours.

Sounds painful, doesn’t it?  They warned Terri and me that it could be.  But we barely felt some strange slight pressure during parts of the procedure.  However, others are definitely sensitive to the procedure and may require light IV sedation or a narcotic.

But it’s all very worth it.  Just ask Barbara.  She is 60 years old and has severe COPD (emphysema).  Her lung function was 39% of normal.  When she saw Dr. Steenblock, he told her that he had not yet treated COPD.  But Barbara was rapidly deteriorating, losing 5% lung function per year.  She was getting every cold, flu, pneumonia, and virus that came around and was repeatedly very ill.  So Dr. Steenblock gave it a try.  He gave her two stem cell sessions.  The deterioration stopped immediately.

Today, one year since her last treatment, she has not been sick once.

Whether you have severe and deteriorating COPD, Parkinson’s , Alzheimer’s, diabetes, macular degeneration, hear failure, or any other chronic, debilitating, and potentially life-threatening illness,  this stem cell treatment is worth a try,  The first macular degeneration case Dr. Steenblock treated said he had, “significant and immediate improvement.”  And within two months, his eyes showed clear clinical improvement.

While the treatment is considerably less than those offered overseas, it’s still expensive.  And insurance probably won’t cover it.  But, again, it’s worth it.  In Mexico, some physicians charge a whopping $12,000 for this same type of bone marrow stem cell treatment.

So how much does Dr. Steenblock charge?  Less than $5000 for autologous bone marrow stem cells and other factors that are useful at directing the stem cells.  The bare-bones stem cell treatments just $2,500.  This is a reasonable cost considering the materials, time, and effort aside from the incredible promise of stem cells.

Dr. Steenblock’s patients were all very eager to tell me their story.  All had received autologous cells and all graciously permitted use of their real name.

I’ll close with the story of Silas.  Silas is now 64.  His doctor diagnosed him with Parkinson’s three years ago.  His doctors first started him on Marpex, which helped some.  Then he added Sinemet, which did not help al all.  He was gradually going downhill with increasing rigidity, left-sided tremor, fatigue, and was unable to work.

Silas saw Dr. Steenblock one year ago and had 5-6 autologous stem cell infusions.  His functional ability jumped from 3 to 8 (on a scale of 10).  Rigidity dropped from 10 to 3.  Tremor, which was worsening continuously, had stabilized and has not worsened since.  He is absolutely happy with stem cells.  “I have not gotten any worse.  Most people do (get worse), and I am better!  I still take the drugs.  I am scared to stop them.  I am now back to work in the trucking business!  I can now take care of myself.”

There are some risks with bone marrow stem cells that you should know.  These include penetration through your hip into the abdominal cavity or even your hip joint, the inability to get the needle out of the bone, and the inability to get the bone marrow blood back into you.  In the latter case, shock could develop from blood loss.  Additionally, if you are obese, the excess fat could make it difficult to do the procedure.  Finally, there are the complications of bleeding, infection, nausea and vomiting (from drugs, if needed).  So please get your bone marrow stem cells from an experienced physician.

It’s also imperative that you doctor test to be sure you are not suffering from heavy metal poisoning, chronic infections, or hormone imbalances.  Many of these are subtle and require a very good evaluation by a competent integrative doctor.

If you’d like to read more testimonials from actual patients go to www.youtube.com and type “Steenblock” into the search field.  You can also get more information from Dr. Steenblock’s book on Umbilical Cord Stem Cell Therapy, which is available from Amazon or his office.

If you are interested in speaking with Dr. Steenblock’s office, please call 800-300-1063.  His website is www.stemcell.md.

From SECOND OPINION newsletter, February 2010, by Dr. Robert Jay Rowen

The FDA plans to examine the connection, but they’re not too enthusiastic about it. They said the findings of a few studies are not clear — and that Parkinson’s patients have heart problems anyway. And of course they had to be sure to throw in their assurance that Stalevo is an effective treatment for Parkinson’s. Wow — they’re really setting the stage for an impartial judgment, aren’t they?

Still, they’ve agreed to look into the connection between Stalevo and increased risk of serious heart problems. In the meantime, they’re urging patients not to stop taking the drug without consulting a doctor.

If you know someone taking Stalevo, why not arm him for that consultation? Simply search “Parkinson’s” in the archive at www.wrightnewsletter.com and you’ll find plenty of free advice on how to combat the disease. Nutrition & Healing subscribers have access to even more.

Yours in good health,

Christine O’Brien

Dr. Wright: Since the adrenal glands are the primary stress-response glands in the body, severe exhaustion can be the result if they do not operate properly. Yet effective treatment can help those with the problem feel better in a short time.

Therapy consists ofDHEA, cortisol, and the use of extra table salt when seasoning food. This will help rest and repair the glands. In addition, good, basic nutrition remains important, so a diet of whole, unprocessed foods and limiting sugar and junk food is required. A quality multiple vitamin, 1 gram of pantothenic acid twice daily and additional vitamin C in the form of 1 gram three times a day of sodium ascorbate, and six or more pieces of licorice daily (without sugar or other additives) will help speed the recovery of your adrenals.

Finally, consider taking one capsule three times daily of both an adrenal glandular (composed of whole dehydrated animal adrenal cortex), and a combination of botanicals called Adren-Plus, will give you all the nutrients you need to improve your adrenal health. You can order both from the Tahoma Clinic Dispensary at (888)893-6878 or online at www.tahoma-clinic.com.

(NaturalNews) Shortly after Australia banned flu vaccines in children due to an alarming increase in vomiting, fevers and seizures caused by the vaccines (http://www.naturalnews.com/029586_A…), Finland has now suspended H1N1 vaccines due to increased reports of narcolepsy in children and teens. Narcolepsy is a nervous system disorder characterized by extreme fatigue and daytime sleepiness. It indicates a serious malfunction of the brain and nervous system.
Finland is now reporting that narcolepsy is appearing in children immediately following vaccination with H1N1 vaccines. So far, six children are confirmed of suffering the neurological side effect and nine more are in the process of being confirmed, reports The Epoch Times (http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/con…).

The Finland National Institute for Health (THL) said in a press release that the cause of the narcolepsy may be the vaccine, and they are investigating further.

Sweden’s Medical Products Agency, meanwhile, launched a similar investigation on August 19 to try to determine the cause of post-vaccination narcolepsy also found in children there. The vaccines appear to be causing a pattern of neurological disorders affecting children and teens across the planet.

The harm caused by flu vaccines

H1N1 swine flu vaccines and seasonal flu vaccines have been linked to seizures and other neurological disorders, and they have resulted in some children and teens being paralyzed or even killed. At the same time, there is no scientific evidence whatsoever that seasonal flu vaccines are even safe or effective — they’ve never been subjected to double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, which are considered the “gold standard” of scientific investigation.

There’s no real evidence that seasonal flu vaccines work at all, in fact. Most of the people who get sick every winter, it turns out, are the very people who got vaccinated. That’s because vaccines actually weaken the immune system and cause increased risk of future infections. A study published in the journal PLoS revealed that seasonal flu vaccination actually increases the risk of H1N1 swine flu infections (”Does Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Increase the Risk of Illness with the 2009 A/H1N1 Pandemic Virus?” Viboud C, Simonsen L (2010) PLoS Med 7(4): e1000259).

Also see: http://www.naturalnews.com/028538_s…

Rather than protecting the public, seasonal flu vaccines and H1N1 swine flu vaccines actually leave them more vulnerable to future infections. That simple fact, combined with the increasing reports of neurological side effects being linked to vaccines, should raise serious questions about the reasoning behind any mass-vaccination program.

When it comes to vaccines, children seem to suffer more than adults. It is the children who are winding up in hospitals, convulsing with seizures or suffering narcolepsy. The saddest part of this is that these children could be very effectively protected from seasonal flu with vitamin D, but the medical industry isn’t recommending vitamin D for children.

Vaccines remain the prescription for everyone; even as children around the world are suffering the consequences.

Additional sources for this story include:
The Epoch Times:
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/con…

PrisonPlanet.com:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/finland…

(NaturalNews) Some vegetarians will avoid becoming vegan because of one simple myth they’ve heard again and again: they’ve heard that vegans can suffer from vitamin B12 deficiency based on their diet. Lots of vegetarians decide, based on this faulty information, that they need to continue eating animal protein. However, nothing could be further from the truth.That’s not to say that there is no such thing as vitamin B12 deficiency, because it does exist. People who are deficient of the vitamin experience many symptoms, such as fatigue, weight loss, gastrointestinal issues (such as upset stomach, diarrhea, or constipation), numbness, confusion, and memory loss, to name a few. It does exist, but it’s not caused by veganism.

The truth is vegans don’t need to worry. They don’t need to start taking special supplements or eating nutritional yeast. The biggest untruth feeding this myth is that people have been told the only source of vitamin B12 is through animal-based foods (meat, dairy products, etc.). However, lack of vitamin B12 needn’t be a concern, even if a person only eats plant foods. According to Dr. Vivian V. Vetrano, vitamin B12 actually comes from coenzymes, which are already present in bacteria found on the human body (in and around the mouth, for example).

In fact, vitamin B12 deficiency is often, according to Dr. Vetrano, a symptom of a larger problem; that is, it’s not caused from a poor diet but rather from deficiency diseases that usually can’t be treated simply by having the patient ingest additional vitamin B12. It is often caused by a digestive problem; Dr. Vetrano states that in the case of deficiency the body has a problem absorbing nutrients from food. Vitamin B12 deficiency, rather than being caused by diet, is often caused by Crohn’s disease, celiac disease, and other digestive disorders.

Vegetarians who have heard that they don’t get enough protein in their diets and know this myth is untrue can rest assured that vitamin B12 deficiency is a myth as well. Instead, vegans need to concentrate on eating plenty of healthy raw foods, nuts, seeds, grains, vegetables and fruits. The truth is people don’t have to eat meat or other animal products to survive and thrive. Vitamin B12 deficiency due to a vegan diet is simply a lie that finally needs to be put to rest.

Sources for this story:

http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/…
http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/v/vit…
http://www.roylretreat.com/articles…

About the author

Cindy Jones-Shoeman is the author of Last Sunset and a Feature Writer for Academic Writing at Suite101.
Some of Cindy’s interests include environmental issues, vegetarian and sustainable lifestyles, music, and reading.

See Video at> http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/08/16/rheumatoid-arthritis-protocol.aspx

By Dr. Mercola

Rheumatoid arthritis affects about 1 percent of our population and at least two million Americans have definite or classical rheumatoid arthritis. This number has increased in recent years, as in 2010 about 2.5 percent of white women developed RA.  It is a much more devastating illness than previously appreciated. Most patients with rheumatoid arthritis have a progressive disability.The natural course of rheumatoid arthritis is quite remarkable in that less than 1 percent of people with the disease have a spontaneous remission. Some disability occurs in 50-70 percent of people within five years after onset of the disease, and half will stop working within 10 years. The annual cost of this disease in the U.S. is estimated to be over $1 billion.

This devastating prognosis is what makes this novel form of treatment so exciting, as it has a far higher likelihood of succeeding than the conventional approach.

Over the years I have treated over 3,000 patients with rheumatic illnesses, including SLE, scleroderma, polymyositis and dermatomyositis.

Approximately 15 percent of these patients were lost to follow-up for whatever reason and have not continued with treatment. The remaining patients seem to have a 60-90 percent likelihood of improvement on this treatment regimen.

This level of improvement is quite a stark contrast to the typical numbers quoted above that are experienced with conventional approaches, and certainly a strong motivation to try the protocol I discuss below.

RA Can Be More Deadly than Heart Disease

There is also an increased mortality rate with this disease. The five-year survival rate of patients with more than thirty joints involved is approximately 50 percent. This is similar to severe coronary artery disease or stage IV Hodgkin’s disease.

Thirty years ago, one researcher concluded that there was an average loss of 18 years of life in patients who developed rheumatoid arthritis before the age of 50.

Most authorities believe that remissions rarely occur. Some experts feel that the term “remission-inducing” should not be used to describe ANY current rheumatoid arthritis treatment, and a review of contemporary treatment methods shows that medical science has not been able to significantly improve the long-term outcome of this disease.

Dr. Brown Pioneered a Novel Approach to Treat RA

I first became aware of Doctor Brown’s protocol in 1989 when I saw him on 20/20 on ABC. This was shortly after the introduction of his first edition of his book, The Road Back. Unfortunately, Dr. Brown died from prostate cancer shortly after the 20/20 program so I never had a chance to meet him.

My application of Dr. Brown’s protocol has changed significantly since I first started implementing it. Initially, I rigidly followed Dr. Brown’s work with minimal modifications to his protocol. About the only change I made was changing Tetracycline to Minocin. I believe I was one of the first physicians who recommended the shift to Minocin and most people who use his protocol now use Minocin.

In 1939, Dr. Sabin, the discoverer of the polio vaccine, first reported chronic arthritis in mice caused by a mycoplasma. He suggested this agent might cause human rheumatoid arthritis. Dr. Brown worked with Dr. Sabin at the Rockefeller Institute.

Dr. Brown was a board certified rheumatologist who graduated from Johns Hopkins medical school. He was a professor of medicine at George Washington University until 1970 where he served as chairman of the Arthritis Institute in Arlington, Virginia. He published over 100 papers in peer reviewed scientific literature.

He was able to help over 10,000 patients when he used this program, from the 1950s until his death in 1989, and clearly far more than that have been helped by other physicians using this protocol.

He found that significant benefits from the treatment require, on average, about one to two years.

I have treated nearly 3000 patients and find that the dietary modification I advocate, which I started to integrate in the early 1990’s, accelerates the response rate to several months. I cannot emphasize strongly enough the importance of this aspect of the program.

Still, the length of therapy can vary widely.

In severe cases, it may take up to 30 months for patients to gain sustained improvement. One requires patience because remissions may take up to 3 to 5 years. Dr. Brown’s pioneering approach represents a safer, less toxic alternative to many conventional regimens and results of the NIH trial have finally scientifically validated this treatment.

The dietary changes are absolutely an essential component of my protocol. Dr. Brown’s original protocol was notorious for inducing a Herxheimer, or worsening of symptoms, before improvement was noted. This could last two to six months. Implementing my nutrition plan resulted in a lessening of that reaction in most cases.

When I first started using his protocol for patients in the late ’80s, the common retort from other physicians was that there was “no scientific proof” that this treatment worked. Well, that is certainly not true today. A review of the bibliography will provide over 200 references in the peer-reviewed medical literature that supports the application of Minocin in the use of rheumatic illnesses.

In my experience, nearly 80 percent of people do remarkably better with this program. However, approximately 5 percent continue to worsen and require conventional agents, like methotrexate, to relieve their symptoms.

Scientific Proof for this Approach

The definitive scientific support for minocycline in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis came with the MIRA trial in the United States. This was a double blind randomized placebo controlled trial done at six university centers involving 200 patients for nearly one year. The dosage they used (100 mg twice daily) was much higher and likely less effective than what most clinicians currently use.

They also did not employ any additional antibiotics or nutritional regimens, yet 55 percent of patients improved. This study finally provided the “proof” that many traditional clinicians demanded before seriously considering this treatment as an alternative regimen for rheumatoid arthritis.

Dr. Thomas Brown’s effort to treat the chronic mycoplasma infections believed to cause rheumatoid arthritis is the basis for this therapy. Dr. Brown believed that most rheumatic illnesses respond to this treatment. He and others used this therapy for SLE, ankylosing spondylitis, scleroderma, dermatomyositis and polymyositis.

Dr. Osler was one of the most well respected and prominent physicians of his time (1849- 1919), and many regard him as the consummate physician of modern times. An excerpt from a commentary on Dr. William Osler provides a useful perspective on application of alternative medical paradigms:

Osler would caution us against the arrogance of believing that only our current medical practices can benefit the patient. He would realize that new scientific insights might emerge from as yet unproved beliefs. Although he would fight vigorously to protect the public against frauds and charlatans, he would encourage critical study of whatever therapeutic approaches were reliably reported to be beneficial to patients.

Factors Associated with Your Success on this Program

There are many variables associated with an increased chance of remission or improvement.

• The younger you are, the greater your chance for improvement
• The more closely you follow the nutrition plan, the more likely you are to improve and the less likely you are to have a severe flare-up. I now offer the Nutritional Typing Test for free, so please do not skip this essential step.
• Smoking seems to be negatively associated with improvement
• The longer you have had the illness and the more severe the illness, the more difficult it seems to treat

Revised Antibiotic-Free Approach

Although I used a revision of his antibiotic approach for nearly ten years, my particular prejudice is to focus on natural therapies. The program that follows is my revision of this protocol that allows for a completely drug-free treatment of RA, which is based on my experience of treating over 3000 patients with rheumatic illnesses in my Chicago clinic.

If you are interested in reviewing or considering Dr. Brown’s antibiotic approach, I have included a summary of his work and the evidence for it in the appendix.

Crucial Lifestyle Changes

Improving your diet using a combination of my nutritional guidelines, nutritional typing is crucial for your success. In addition, there are some general principles that seem to hold true for all nutritional types and these include:

• Eliminating sugar, especially fructose, and most grains. For most people it would be best to limit fruit to small quantities
• Eating unprocessed, high-quality foods, organic and locally grown if possible
• Eating your food as close to raw as possible
• Getting plenty high-quality animal-based omega-3 fats. Krill oil seems to be particularly helpful here as it appears to be a more effective anti inflammatory preparation. It is particularly effective if taken concurrently with 4 mg of Astaxanthin, which is a potent antioxidant bioflavanoid derived from algae
• Astaxanthin at 4 mg per day is particularly important for anyone placed on prednisone as Astaxanthin offers potent protection against cataracts and age related macular degeneration
• Incorporating regular exercise into your daily schedule

Early Emotional Traumas are Pervasive in Those with RA

With the vast majority of the patients I treated, some type of emotional trauma occurred early in their life, before the age their conscious mind was formed, which is typically around the age of 5 or 6. However, a trauma can occur at any age, and has a profoundly negative impact.

If that specific emotional insult is not addressed with an effective treatment modality then the underlying emotional trigger will continue to fester, allowing the destructive process to proceed, which can predispose you to severe autoimmune diseases like RA later in life.

In some cases, RA appears to be caused by an infection, and it is my experience that this infection is usually acquired when you have a stressful event that causes a disruption in your bioelectrical circuits, which then impairs your immune system.

This early emotional trauma predisposes you to developing the initial infection, and also contributes to your relative inability to effectively defeat the infection.

Therefore, it’s very important to have an effective tool to address these underlying emotional traumas. In my practice, the most common form of treatment used is called the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT).

Although EFT is something that you can learn to do yourself in the comfort of your own home, it is important to consult a well-trained professional to obtain the skills necessary to promote proper healing using this amazing tool.

Vitamin D Deficiency Rampant in Those with RA

The early part of the 21^st century brought enormous attention to the importance and value of vitamin D, particularly in the treatment of autoimmune diseases like RA.

From my perspective, it is now virtually criminal negligent malpractice to treat a person with RA and not aggressively monitor their vitamin D levels to confirm that they are in a therapeutic range of 65-80 ng/ml.

This is so important that blood tests need to be done every two weeks, so the dose can be adjusted to get into that range. Most normal-weight adults should start at 10,000 units of vitamin D per day.

If you are in the US, then Lab Corp is the lab of choice as Quest labs provide results that are falsely elevated. If you choose to use Quest you need to multiply your result by 0.70 to obtain the right number.

For more detailed information on vitamin D you can review my vitamin D resource page.

Low Dose Naltrexone

One new addition to the protocol is low-dose Naltrexone, which I would encourage anyone with RA to try. It is inexpensive and non-toxic and I have a number of physician reports documenting incredible efficacy in getting people off of all their dangerous arthritis meds.

Although this is a drug, and strictly speaking not a natural therapy, it has provided important relief and is FAR safer than the toxic drugs that are typically used by nearly all rheumatologists.

Nutritional Considerations

Limiting sugar is a critical element of the treatment program. Sugar has multiple significant negative influences on your biochemistry. First and foremost, it increases your insulin levels, which is the root cause of nearly all chronic disease. It can also impair your gut bacteria.

In my experience if you are unable to decrease your sugar intake, you are far less likely to improve. Please understand that the number one source of calories in the US is high fructose corn syrup from drinking soda. One of the first steps you can take is to phase out all soda, and replace it with pure, clean water.

Exercise for Rheumatoid Arthritis

It is very important to exercise and increase muscle tone of your non-weight bearing joints. Experts tell us that disuse results in muscle atrophy and weakness. Additionally, immobility may result in joint contractures and loss of range of motion (ROM). Active ROM exercises are preferred to passive.

There is some evidence that passive ROM exercises increase the number of white blood cells (WBCs) in your joints.

If your joints are stiff, you should stretch and apply heat before exercising. If your joints are swollen, application of ten minutes of ice before exercise would be helpful.

The inflamed joint is very vulnerable to damage from improper exercise, so you must be cautious. People with arthritis must strike a delicate balance between rest and activity, and must avoid activities that aggravate joint pain. You should avoid any exercise that strains a significantly unstable joint.

A good rule of thumb is that if the pain lasts longer than one hour after stopping exercise, you should slow down or choose another form of exercise. Assistive devices are also helpful to decrease the pressure on affected joints. Many patients need to be urged to take advantage of these. The Arthritis Foundation has a book, Guide to Independent Living, which instructs patients about how to obtain them.

Of course, it is important to maintain good cardiovascular fitness as well. Walking with appropriate supportive shoes is another important consideration.

If your condition allows, it would be wise to move towards a Peak Fitness program that is designed for reaching optimal health.

It’s Important to Control Your Pain

One of the primary problems with RA is controlling pain. The conventional treatment typically includes using very dangerous drugs like prednisone, methotrexate, and drugs that interfere with tumor necrosis factor, like Enbrel.

The goal is to implement the lifestyle changes discussed above as quickly as possible, so you can start to reduce these toxic and dangerous drugs, which do absolutely nothing to treat the cause of the disease.

However pain relief is obviously very important, and if this is not achieved, you can go into a depressive cycle that can clearly worsen your immune system and cause the RA to flare.

So the goal is to be as comfortable and pain free as possible with the least amount of drugs. The Mayo Clinic offers several common sense guidelines for avoiding pain by paying heed to how you move, so as to not injure your joints.

Safest Anti-Inflammatories to Use for Pain

Clearly the safest prescription drugs to use for pain are the non-acetylated salicylates such as:

• Salsalate
• Sodium salicylate
• Magnesium salicylate (i.e., Salflex, Disalcid, or Trilisate).

They are the drugs of choice if there is renal insufficiency as they minimally interfere with anticyclooxygenase and other prostaglandins.

Additionally, they will not impair platelet inhibition in those patients who are on an every-other-day aspirin regimen to decrease their risk for stroke or heart disease.

Unlike aspirin, they do not increase the formation of products of lipoxygenase-mediated metabolism of arachidonic acid. For this reason, they may be less likely to cause hypersensitivity reactions. These drugs have been safely used in patients with reversible obstructive airway disease and a history of aspirin sensitivity.

They are also much gentler on your stomach than the other NSAIDs and are the drug of choice if you have problems with peptic ulcer disease. Unfortunately, all these benefits are balanced by the fact they may not be as effective as the other agents and are less convenient to take. You need to take 1.5-2 grams twice a day, and tinnitus, or ringing in your ear, is a frequent side effect.

You need to be aware of this complication and know that if tinnitus does develop, you need to stop the drugs for a day and restart with a dose that is half a pill per day lower. You can repeat this until you find a dose that relieves your pain and doesn’t cause any ringing in your ears.

If the Safer Anti-Inflammatories aren’t Helping, Try This Next…

If the non-acetylated salicylates aren’t helping there are many different NSAIDs to try. Relafen, Daypro, Voltaren, Motrin, Naprosyn. Meclomen, Indocin, Orudis, and Tolectin are among the most toxic or likely to cause complications. You can experiment with them, and see which one works best for you.

If cost is a concern, generic ibuprofen can be used at up to 800 mg per dose. Unfortunately, recent studies suggest this drug is more damaging to your kidneys.

If you use any of the above drugs, though, it is really important to make sure you take them with your largest meal as this will somewhat moderate their GI toxicity and the likelihood of causing an ulcer.

Please beware that they are much more dangerous than the antibiotics or non-acetylated salicylates.

You should have an SMA blood test performed at least once a year if you are on these medications. In addition, you must monitor your serum potassium levels if you are on an ACE inhibitor as these medications can cause high potassium levels. You should also monitor your kidney function. The SMA will show any liver impairment the drugs might be causing.

These medications can also impair prostaglandin metabolism and cause papillary necrosis and chronic interstitial nephritis. Your kidney needs vasodilatory prostaglandins (PGE2 and prostacycline) to counterbalance the effects of potent vasoconstrictor hormones such as angiotensin II and catecholamines. NSAIDs decrease prostaglandin synthesis by inhibiting cyclooxygenase, leading to unopposed constriction of the renal arterioles supplying your kidney.

Warning: These Drugs Massively Increase Your Risk for Ulcers

The first non-aspirin NSAID, indomethacin, was introduced in 1963. Now more than 30 are available. Relafen is one of the better alternatives as it seems to cause less of an intestinal dysbiosis. You must be especially careful to monitor renal function periodically. It is important to understand and accept the risks associated with these more toxic drugs.

Every year, they do enough damage to the GI tract to kill 2,000 to 4,000 people with rheumatoid arthritis alone. That is ten people EVERY DAY. At any given time, 10 to 20 percent of all those receiving NSAID therapy have gastric ulcers.

If you are taking an NSAID, you are at approximately three times greater risk for developing serious gastrointestinal side effects than those who don’t.

Approximately 1.2 percent of patients taking NSAIDs are hospitalized for upper GI problems, per year of exposure. One study of patients taking NSAIDs showed that a life-threatening complication was the first sign of ulcer in more than half of the subjects.

Researchers found that the drugs suppress production of prostacyclin, which is needed to dilate blood vessels and inhibit clotting. Earlier studies had found that mice genetically engineered to be unable to use prostacyclin properly were prone to clotting disorders.

Anyone who is at increased risk of cardiovascular disease should steer clear of these medications. Ulcer complications are certainly potentially life-threatening, but, heart attacks are a much more common and likely risk, especially in older individuals.

How You Can Tell if You are at Risk for NSAID Side Effects

Risk factor analysis can help determine if you will face an increased danger of developing these complications. If you have any of the following, you will likely to have a higher risk of side effects from these drugs:

• 1. Old age
• 2. Peptic ulcer history
• 3. Alcohol dependency
• 4. Cigarette smoking
• 5. Concurrent prednisone or corticosteroid use
• 6. Disability
• 7. Taking a high dose of the NSAID
• 8. Using an NSAID known to be more toxic

Prednisone

The above drug class are called non steroidal anti inflammatories (NSAIDs). If they are unable to control the pain, then prednisone is nearly universally used. This is a steroid drug that is loaded with side effects.

If you are on large doses of prednisone for extended periods of time, you can be virtually assured that you will develop the following problems:

• Osteoporosis
• Cataracts
• Diabetes
• Ulcers
• Herpes reactivation
• Insomnia
• Hypertension
• Kidney stones

You can be virtually assured that every time you take a dose of prednisone your bones are becoming weaker. The higher the dose and the longer you are on prednisone, the more likely you are to develop the problems.

However, if you are able to keep your dose to 5 mg or below, this is not typically a major issue.

Typically this is one of the first medicines you should try to stop as soon as your symptoms permit.

Beware that blood levels of cortisol peak between 3 and 9am. It would, therefore, be safest to administer the prednisone in the morning. This will minimize the suppression on your hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.

You also need to be concerned about the increased risk of peptic ulcer disease when using this medicine with conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatories. If you are taking both of these medicines, you have a 15 times greater risk of developing an ulcer!

If you are already on prednisone, it is helpful to get a prescription for 1 mg tablets so you can wean yourself off the prednisone as soon as possible. Usually you can lower your dose by about 1 mg per week. If a relapse of your symptoms occurs, then further reduction of the prednisone is not indicated.

How Do You Know When to Stop the Drugs?

Unlike conventional approaches to RA, my protocol is designed to treat the underlying cause of the problem. So eventually the drugs that you are going to use during the program will be weaned off.

The following criteria can help determine when you are in remission and can consider weaning off your medications: *

• A decrease in duration of morning stiffness to no more than 15 minutes
• No pain at rest
• Little or no pain or tenderness on motion
• Absence of joint swelling
• A normal energy level
• A decrease in your ESR to no more than 30
• A normalization of your CBC. Generally your HGB, HCT, & MCV will increase to normal and your “pseudo”-iron deficiency will disappear
• ANA, RF, & ASO titers returning to normal

If you discontinue your medications before all of the above criteria are met, there is a greater risk that the disease will recur.

If you meet the above criteria, you can try to wean off your anti-inflammatory medication and monitor for flare-ups. If no flare-ups occur for six months, then discontinue the clindamycin.

If the improvements are maintained for the next six months, you can then discontinue your Minocin and monitor for recurrences. If symptoms should recur, it would be wise to restart the previous antibiotic regimen.

Evaluation to Determine and Follow RA

If you have received evaluations and treatment by one or more board certified rheumatologists, you can be very confident that the appropriate evaluation was done. Although conventional treatments fail miserably in the long run, the conventional diagnostic approach is typically excellent, and you can start the treatment program discussed above.

If you have not been evaluated by a specialist then it will be important to be properly evaluated to determine if indeed you have rheumatoid arthritis.

Please be sure and carefully review Appendix Two, as you will want to confirm that fibromyalgia is not present.

Beware that arthritic pain can be an early manifestation of 20-30 different clinical problems.

These include not only rheumatic disease, but also metabolic, infectious and malignant disorders. Rheumatoid arthritis is a clinical diagnosis for which there is not a single test or group of laboratory tests which can be considered confirmatory.

Criteria for Classification of Rheumatoid Arthritis

• Morning Stiffness - Morning stiffness in and around joints lasting at least one hour before maximal improvement is noted.
• Arthritis of three or more joint areas - At least three joint areas have simultaneously had soft-tissue swelling or fluid (not bony overgrowth) observed by a physician. There are 14 possible joints: right or left PIP, MCP, wrist, elbow, knee, ankle, and MTP joints.
• Arthritis of hand joints - At least one joint area swollen as above in a wrist, MCP, or PIP joint.
• Symmetric arthritis - Simultaneous involvement of the same joint areas (as in criterion 2) on both sides of your body (bilateral involvement of PIPs, MCPs, or MTPs) is acceptable without absolute symmetry. Lack of symmetry is not sufficient to rule out the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis.
• Rheumatoid Nodules - Subcutaneous nodules over bony prominences, or extensor surfaces, or in juxta-articular regions, observed by a physician. Only about 25 percent of patients with rheumatoid arthritis develop nodules, and usually as a later manifestation.
• Serum Rheumatoid Factor - Demonstration of abnormal amounts of serum rheumatoid factor by any method that has been positive in less than 5 percent of normal control subjects. This test is positive only 30-40 percent of the time in the early months of rheumatoid arthritis.

You must also make certain that the first four symptoms listed in the table above are present for six or more weeks. These criteria have a 91-94 percent sensitivity and 89 percent specificity for the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis.

However, these criteria were designed for classification and not for diagnosis. The diagnosis must be made on clinical grounds. It is important to note that many patients with negative serologic tests can have a strong clinical picture for rheumatoid arthritis.

Your Hands are the KEY to the Diagnosis of RA

In a way, the hands are the calling card of rheumatoid arthritis. If you completely lack hand and wrist involvement, even by history, the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis is doubtful. Rheumatoid arthritis rarely affects your hips and ankles early in its course.

The metacarpophalangeal joints, proximal interphalangeal and wrist joints are the first joints to become symptomatic. Osteoarthritis typically affects the joints that are closest to your fingertips (DIP joints) while RA typically affects the joints closest to your wrist (PIP), like your knuckles.

Fatigue may be present before your joint symptoms begin, and morning stiffness is a sensitive indicator of rheumatoid arthritis. An increase in fluid in and around your joint probably causes the stiffness. Your joints are warm, but your skin is rarely red.

When your joints develop effusions, hold them flexed at 5 to 20 degrees as it is likely going to be too painful to extend them fully.

Radiological Changes

Radiological changes typical of rheumatoid arthritis on PA hand and wrist X-rays, which must include erosions or unequivocal bony decalcification localized to, or most marked, adjacent to the involved joints (osteoarthritic changes alone do not count).

Note: You must satisfy at least four of the seven criteria listed. Any of criteria 1-4 must have been present for at least 6 weeks. Patients with two clinical diagnoses are not excluded. Designations as classic, definite, or probable rheumatoid arthritis, are not to be made.

Laboratory Evaluation

The general initial laboratory evaluation should include a baseline ESR, CBC, SMA, U/A, 25 hydroxy D level and an ASO titer. You can also draw RF and ANA titers to further objectively document improvement with the therapy. However, they seldom add much to the assessment.

Follow-up visits can be every two to four months depending on the extent of the disease and ease of testing.

The exception here would be vitamin D testing which should be done every two weeks until your 25 hydroxy D level is between 65 and 80 ng/ml.

Many patients with rheumatoid arthritis have a hypochromic, microcytic CBC that appears very similar to iron deficiency, but it is not at all related. This is probably due to the inflammation in the rheumatoid arthritis impairing optimal bone marrow utilization of iron.

It is important to note that this type of anemia does NOT respond to iron and if you are put on iron you will get worse, as the iron is a very potent oxidative stress. Ferritin levels are generally the most reliable indicator of total iron body stores. Unfortunately it is also an acute phase reactant protein and will be elevated anytime the ESR is elevated. This makes ferritin an unreliable test in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

APPENDIX ONE: The Infectious Cause of Rheumatoid Arthritis

It is quite clear that autoimmunity plays a major role in the progression of rheumatoid arthritis. Most rheumatology investigators believe that an infectious agent causes rheumatoid arthritis. There is little agreement as to the involved organism, however.

Investigators have proposed the following infectious agents:

• Human T-cell lymphotropic virus Type I
• Rubella virus
• Cytomegalovirus
• Herpesvirus
• Mycoplasma

This review will focus on the evidence supporting the hypothesis that mycoplasma is a common etiologic agent of rheumatoid arthritis.

Mycoplasmas are the smallest self-replicating prokaryotes. They differ from classical bacteria by lacking rigid cell wall structures and are the smallest known organisms capable of extracellular existence. They are considered to be parasites of humans, animals, and plants.

Culturing Mycoplasmas from Joints

Mycoplasmas have limited biosynthetic capabilities and are very difficult to culture and grow from synovial tissues. They require complex growth media or a close parasitic relation with animal cells. This contributed to many investigators failure to isolate them from arthritic tissue.

In reactive arthritis, immune complexes rather than viable organisms localize in your joints. The infectious agent is actually present at another site. Some investigators believe that the organism binding in the immune complex contributes to the difficulty in obtaining positive mycoplasma cultures.

Despite this difficulty, some researchers have successfully isolated mycoplasma from synovial tissues of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. A British group used a leucocyte-migration inhibition test and found two-thirds of their rheumatoid arthritis patients to be infected with Mycoplasma fermentens. These results are impressive since they did not include more prevalent Mycoplasma strains like M salivarium, M ovale, M hominis, and M pneumonia.

One Finnish investigator reported a 100 percent incidence of isolation of mycoplasma from 27 rheumatoid synovia using a modified culture technique. None of the non- rheumatoid tissue yielded any mycoplasmas.

The same investigator used an indirect hemagglutination technique and reported mycoplasma antibodies in 53 percent of patients with definite rheumatoid arthritis. Using similar techniques other investigators have cultured mycoplasma in 80-100 percent of their rheumatoid arthritis test population.

Rheumatoid arthritis can also follow some mycoplasma respiratory infections.

One study of over 1000 patients was able to identify arthritis in nearly 1 percent of the patients. These infections can be associated with a positive rheumatoid factor. This provides additional support for mycoplasma as an etiologic agent for rheumatoid arthritis. Human genital mycoplasma infections have also caused septic arthritis.

Harvard investigators were able to culture mycoplasma or a similar organism, ureaplasma urealyticum, from 63 percent of female patients with SLE and only 4 percent of patients with CFS. The researchers chose CFS, as these patients shared similar symptoms as those with SLE, such as fatigue, arthralgias, and myalgias.

Animal Evidence for the Protocol

The full spectrum of human rheumatoid arthritis immune responses (lymphokine production, altered lymphocyte reactivity, immune complex deposition, cell-mediated immunity and development of autoimmune reactions) occurs in mycoplasma induced animal arthritis.

Investigators have implicated at least 31 different mycoplasma species.

Mycoplasma can produce experimental arthritis in animals from three days to months later. The time seems to depend on the dose given, and the virulence of the organism.

There is a close degree of similarity between these infections and those of human rheumatoid arthritis.

Mycoplasmas cause arthritis in animals by several mechanisms. They either directly multiply within the joint or initiate an intense local immune response.

Arthritogenic mycoplasmas also cause joint inflammation in animals by several mechanisms. They induce nonspecific lymphocyte cytotoxicity and antilymphocyte antibodies as well as rheumatoid factor.

Mycoplasma clearly causes chronic arthritis in mice, rats, fowl, swine, sheep, goats, cattle and rabbits. The arthritis appears to be the direct result of joint infection with culturable mycoplasma organisms.

Gorillas have tissue reactions closer to man than any other animal, and investigators have shown that mycoplasma can precipitate a rheumatic illness in gorillas. One study demonstrated that mycoplasma antigens do occur in immune complexes in great apes.

The human and gorilla IgG are very similar and express nearly identical rheumatoid factors (IgM anti-IgG antibodies). The study showed that when mycoplasma binds to IgG it can cause a conformational change. This conformational change results in an anti-IgG antibody, which can then stimulate an autoimmune response.

The Science of Why Minocycline is Used

If mycoplasma were a causative factor in rheumatoid arthritis, one would expect tetracycline type drugs to provide some sort of improvement in the disease. Collagenase activity increases in rheumatoid arthritis and probably has a role in its cause.

Investigators have demonstrated that tetracycline and minocycline inhibit leukocyte, macrophage, and synovial collagenase.

There are several other aspects of tetracyclines that may play a role in rheumatoid arthritis. Investigators have shown minocycline and tetracycline to retard excessive connective tissue breakdown and bone resorption, while doxycycline inhibits digestion of human cartilage.

It is also possible that tetracycline treatment improves rheumatic illness by reducing delayed-type hypersensitivity response. Minocycline and doxycycline both inhibit phosolipases which are considered proinflammatory and capable of inducing synovitis.

Minocycline is a more potent antibiotic than tetracycline and penetrates tissues better.

These characteristics shifted the treatment of rheumatic illness away from tetracycline to minocycline. Minocycline may benefit rheumatoid arthritis patients through its immunomodulating and immunosuppressive properties. In vitro studies have demonstrated a decreased neutrophil production of reactive oxygen intermediates along with diminished neutrophil chemotaxis and phagocytosis.

Minocycline has also been shown to reduce the incidence and severity of synovitis in animal models of arthritis. The improvement was independent of minocycline’s effect on collagenase. Minocycline has also been shown to increase intracellular calcium concentrations that inhibit T-cells.

Individuals with the Class II major histocompatibility complex (MHC) DR4 allele seem to be predisposed to developing rheumatoid arthritis.

The infectious agent probably interacts with this specific antigen in some way to precipitate rheumatoid arthritis. There is strong support for the role of T cells in this interaction.

So minocycline may suppress rheumatoid arthritis by altering T cell calcium flux and the expression of T cell derived from collagen binding protein. Minocycline produced a suppression of the delayed hypersensitivity in patients with Reiter’s syndrome, and investigators also successfully used minocycline to treat the arthritis and early morning stiffness of Reiter’s syndrome.

Clinical Studies

In 1970, investigators at Boston University conducted a small, randomized placebo-controlled trial to determine if tetracycline would treat rheumatoid arthritis. They used 250 mg of tetracycline a day.

Their study showed no improvement after one year of tetracycline treatment. Several factors could explain their inability to demonstrate any benefits.

Their study used only 27 patients for a one-year trial, and only 12 received tetracycline, so noncompliance may have been a factor. Additionally, none of the patients had severe arthritis. Patients were excluded from the trial if they were on any anti-remittive therapy.

Finnish investigators used lymecycline to treat the reactive arthritis in Chlamydia trachomatous infections. Their study compared the effect of the medication in patients with two other reactive arthritis infections: Yersinia and Campylobacter.

Lymecyline produced a shorter course of illness in the Chlamydia induced arthritis patients, but did not affect the other enteric infections-associated reactive arthritis. The investigators later published findings that suggested lymecycline achieved its effect through non-antimicrobial actions. They speculated it worked by preventing the oxidative activation of collagenase.

The first trial of minocycline for the treatment of animal and human rheumatoid arthritis was published by Breedveld. In the first published human trial, Breedveld treated ten patients in an open study for 16 weeks. He used a very high dose of 400 mg per day. Most patients had vestibular side effects resulting from this dose.

However, all patients showed benefit from the treatment, and all variables of efficacy were significantly improved at the end of the trial.

Breedveld expanded on his initial study and later observed similar impressive results. This was a 26-week double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial with minocycline for 80 patients. They were given 200 mg twice a day.

The Ritchie articular index and the number of swollen joints significantly improved (p < 0.05) more in the minocyline group than in the placebo group.

Investigators in Israel studied 18 patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis for 48 weeks.

These patients had failed two other DMARD. They were taken off all DMARD agents and given minocycline 100 mg twice a day. Six patients did not complete the study — three withdrew because of lack of improvement, and three had side effects of vertigo or leukopenia.

All patients completing the study improved. Three had complete remission, three had substantial improvement of greater than 50 percent, and six had moderate improvement of 25 percent in the number of active joints and morning stiffness.

APPENDIX TWO: Make Certain You are Assessed for Fibromyalgia

You need to be very sensitive to this condition when you have rheumatoid arthritis as it is frequently a complicating condition. Many times, the pain will be confused with a flare-up of the RA.

You need to aggressively treat this problem. If it is ignored, the likelihood of successfully treating the arthritis is significantly diminished.

Fibromyalgia is a very common problem. Some experts believe that 5 percent of people are affected with it. Over 12 percent of the patients at the Mayo Clinic’s Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation have this problem, and it is the third most common diagnosis by rheumatologists in the outpatient setting. Fibromyalgia affects women five times as frequently as men.

Signs and Symptoms of Fibromyalgia

One of the main features of fibromyalgia is morning stiffness, fatigue, and multiple areas of tenderness in typical locations. Most people with fibromyalgia complain of pain over many areas of their body, with an average of six to nine locations. Although the pain is frequently described as being “all over,” it is most prominent in the neck, shoulders, elbows, hips, knees, and back.

Tender points are generally symmetrical and on both sides of the body. The areas of tenderness are usually small (less than an inch in diameter) and deep within the muscle. They are often located in sites that are slightly tender in normal people.

People with fibromyalgia, however, differ in having increased tenderness at these sites than the average person. Firm palpation with the thumb (just past the point where the nail turns white) over the outside elbow will typically cause a vague sensation of discomfort. Patients with fibromyalgia will experience much more pain and will often withdraw the arm involuntarily.

More than 70 percent of patients describe their pain as profound aching and stiffness of muscles. Often it is relatively constant from moment to moment, but certain positions or movements may momentarily worsen the pain. Other terms used to describe the pain are “dull” and “numb.”

Sharp or intermittent pain is relatively uncommon.

Patients with fibromyalgia also often complain that sudden loud noises worsen their pain.

The generalized stiffness of fibromyalgia does not diminish with activity, unlike the stiffness of rheumatoid arthritis, which lessens as the day progresses. Despite the lack of abnormal lab tests, patients can suffer considerable discomfort.

The fatigue is often severe enough to impair activities of work and recreation. Patients commonly experience fatigue on arising and complain of being more fatigued when they wake up than when they went to bed.

Over 90 percent of patients believe the pain, stiffness, and fatigue are made worse by cold, damp weather. Overexertion, anxiety and stress are also factors.

Many find that localized heat, such as hot baths, showers, or heating pads, give them some relief. There is also a tendency for pain to improve in the summer with mild activity, or with rest.

Some patients will date the onset of their symptoms to some initiating event. This is often an injury, such as a fall, a motor vehicle accident, or a vocational or sports injury. Others find that their symptoms began with a stressful or emotional event, such as a death in the family, a divorce, a job loss, or similar occurrence.

Pain Location

Patients with fibromyalgia have pain in at least 11 of the following 18 tender point sites (one on each side of the body):

• 1. Base of the skull where the suboccipital muscle inserts.
• 2. Back of the low neck (anterior intertransverse spaces of C5-C7).
• 3. Midpoint of the upper shoulders (trapezius).
• 4. On the back in the middle of the scapula.
• 5. On the chest where the second rib attaches to the breastbone (sternum).
• 6. One inch below the outside of each elbow (lateral epicondyle).
• 7. Upper outer quadrant of buttocks.
• 8. Just behind the swelling on the upper leg bone below the hip (trochanteric prominence).
• 9. The inside of both knees (medial fat pads proximal to the joint line).

Treatment of Fibromyalgia

There is a persuasive body of emerging evidence that indicates that patients with fibromyalgia are physically unfit in terms of sustained endurance. Some studies show that exercise can decrease fibromyalgia pain by 75 percent.

Sleep is also critical to improvement, and many times, improved fitness will also correct the sleep disturbance.

Normalizing vitamin D levels has also been shown to be helpful to decrease pain as has topical magnesium oil supplementation.

Allergies, especially to mold, seem to be another common cause of fibromyalgia. There are some simple interventions using techniques called Total Body Modification (TBM) 800-243-4826.

APPENDIX THREE: Antibiotic Therapy with Minocin

There are three different tetracyclines available: simple tetracycline, doxycycline, or Minocin (minocycline).

Minocin has a distinct and clear advantage over tetracycline and doxycycline in three important areas:

• 1. Extended spectrum of activity
• 2. Greater tissue penetrability
• 3. Higher and more sustained serum levels

Bacterial cell membranes contain a lipid layer. One mechanism of building up a resistance to an antibiotic is to produce a thicker lipid layer. This layer makes it difficult for an antibiotic to penetrate. Minocin’s chemical structure makes it the most lipid soluble of all the tetracyclines.

This difference can clearly be demonstrated when you compare the drugs in the treatment of two common clinical conditions.

Minocin gives consistently superior clinical results in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. In other studies, Minocin was used to improve between 75-85 percent of patients whose acne had become resistant to tetracycline. Strep is also believed to be a contributing cause to many patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Minocin has shown significant activity against treatment of this organism.

Important Factors to Consider When Using Minocin

Unlike the other tetracyclines, Minocin tends not to cause yeast infections. Some infectious disease experts even believe that it has a mild anti-yeast activity. Women can be on this medication for several years and not have any vaginal yeast infections. Nevertheless, it would be prudent to take prophylactic oral lactobacillus acidophilus and bifidus preparations.

This will help to replace the normal intestinal flora that is killed with the Minocin.

Another advantage of Minocin is that it tends not to sensitize you to the sun. This minimizes your risk of sunburn and increased risk of skin cancer.

However, you must incorporate several precautions with the use of Minocin.

Like other tetracyclines, food impairs its absorption. However, the absorption is much less impaired than with other tetracyclines. This is fortunate because some people cannot tolerate Minocin on an empty stomach and have to take it with a meal to avoid GI side effects.

If you need to take it with a meal, you will still absorb 85 percent of the medication, whereas tetracycline is only 50 percent absorbed. In June of 1990, a pelletized version of Minocin also became available, which improved absorption when taken with meals.

This form is only available in the non-generic Lederle brand, and is a more than reasonable justification to not substitute for the generic version.

Clinical experience has shown that many patients will relapse when they switch from the brand name to the generic. In February, 2006 Wyeth sold manufacturing rights of Minocin to Triax Pharmaceuticals (866-488-7429).

Clinically, it has been documented that it is important to take Lederle brand Minocin as most all generic minocycline are clearly less effective.

A large percentage of patients will not respond at all, or not do as well with generic non-Lederle minocycline.

Traditionally it was recommended to only receive the brand name Lederle Minocin. However, there is one generic brand that is acceptable, and that is the brand made by Lederle. The only difference between Lederle generic Minocin and brand name Minocin is the label and the price.

The problem is finding the Lederle brand generic. Some of my patients have been able to find it at Wal Mart. Since Wal Mart is one of the largest drug chains in the US, this should make the treatment more widely available for a reduced charge.

Many patients are on NSAID’s that contribute to microulcerations of the stomach, which cause chronic blood loss. It is certainly possible to develop a peptic ulcer contributing to this blood loss. In either event, patients are frequently receiving iron supplements to correct their blood counts.

IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT MINOCIN NOT BE GIVEN WITH IRON!

Over 85 percent of the dose will bind to the iron and pass through your colon unabsorbed.

If iron is taken, it should be at least one hour before Minocin, or two hours after.

A recent, uncommon, complication of Minocin is a cell-mediated hypersensitivity pneumonitis.

Most patients can start on 100 mg of Minocin every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday evening. Doxycycline can be substituted for patients who cannot afford the more expensive Minocin.

It is important to not give either medication daily, as this does not seem to provide as great a clinical benefit.

WARNING: Tetracycline type drugs can cause a permanent yellow- grayish brown discoloration of your teeth.

This can occur in the last half of pregnancy, and in children up to eight years old. You should not routinely use tetracycline in children.

If you have severe disease, you can consider increasing the dose to as high as 200 mg three times a week. Aside from the cost of this approach, several problems may result from the higher doses.

Minocin can cause quite severe nausea and vertigo, but taking the dose at night tends to decrease this problem considerably.

However, if you take the dose at bedtime, you must swallow the medication with TWO glasses of water. This is to insure that the capsule doesn’t get stuck in your throat. If that occurs, a severe chemical esophagitis can result, which can send you to the emergency room.

For those physicians who elect to use tetracycline or doxycycline for cost or sensitivity reasons, several methods may help lessen the inevitable secondary yeast overgrowth. Lactobacillus acidophilus will help maintain normal bowel flora and decrease the risk of fungal overgrowth.

Aggressive avoidance of all sugars, especially those found in non-diet sodas will also decrease the substrate for the yeast’s growth. Macrolide antibiotics like Biaxin or Zithromax may be used if tetracyclines are contraindicated.

They would also be used in the three pills a week regimen.

Clindamycin

The other drug used to treat rheumatoid arthritis is clindamycin. Dr. Brown’s book discusses the uses of intravenous clindamycin, and it is important to use the IV form of treatment if the disease is severe.

In my experience nearly all scleroderma patients require a more aggressive stance and use IV treatment. Scleroderma is a particularly dangerous form of rheumatic illness that should receive aggressive intervention.

A major problem with the IV form is the cost. The price ranges from $100 to $300 per dose if administered by a home health care agency. However, if purchased directly from Upjohn, significant savings can be had.

If you have a milder illness, the oral form of clindamycin is preferable.

With a mild rheumatic illness (the minority of cases), it is even possible to exclude this from your regimen. Initial starting doses for an adult would be a 1200 mg dose once a week.

Please note that many people do not seem to tolerate this medication as well as Minocin. The major complaint seems to be a bitter metallic type taste, which lasts about 24 hours after the dose. Taking the dose after dinner does seem to help modify this complaint somewhat. If this is a problem, you can lower the dose and gradually increase the dose over a few weeks.

Concern about the development of C. difficile pseudomembranous enterocolitis as a result of the clindamycin is appropriate. This complication is quite rare at this dosage regimen, but it certainly can occur.

It is also important to be aware of the possibility of developing a severe and uncontrollable bout of diarrhea. Administration of acidophilus seems to limit this complication by promoting the growth of the healthy gut flora.

If you have a resistant form of rheumatic illness, intravenous administration should be considered. Generally, weekly doses of 900 mg are administered until clinical improvement is observed. This generally occurs within the first 10 doses.

At that time, the regimen can be decreased to every two weeks with the oral form substituted on the weeks where the IV is not taken.

What to Do if You Fail to Respond

The most frequent reason for failure to respond to the protocol is lack of adherence to the dietary guidelines.

Most people eat too many grains and sugars, which disturbs insulin physiology. It is important that you adhere as strictly as possible to the guidelines.

A small minority, generally under 15 percent of patients will fail to respond to the protocol described above, despite rigid adherence to the diet. These individuals should already be on the IV clindamycin.

It appears that hyaluronic acid, which is a potentiating agent commonly used in the treatment of cancer, may be quite useful in these cases. It seems that hyaluronic acid has very little to no direct toxicity but works in a highly synergistic fashion when administered directly in the IV bag with the clindamycin.

Hyaluronic acid is also used in orthopedic procedures. The dose is generally from 2 to 10 cc into the IV bag. Hyaluronic acid is not inexpensive, however, as the cost may range up to $10 per cc. You also need to use some caution, as it may precipitate a significant Herxheimer flare reaction.

Bibliography

• 1. Pincus T, Wolfe F: Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Challenges to Traditional Paradigms. AnnInternMed 115:825-6, Nov 15 1991.
• 2. Pincus T: Rheumatoid arthritis: disappointing long-term outcomes despite successful short-term clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol 41:1037-41, 1988.
• 3. Brooks PM: Clinical management of rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet 341 :286-90, 1993.
• 4. Pincus T, Callahan LF: Remodeling the pyramid or remodeling the paradigms concerning rheumatoid arthritis - lessons learned from Hodgkin’s Disease and coronary artery disease. JRheumatol 17:1582-5, 1990.
• 5. Reah TG: The prognosis of rheumatoid arthritis. Proc R Soc Med 56:813-17, 1963.
• 6. Wolfe F, Hawley DJ: Remission in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 12:245-9, 1985.
• 7. Kushner I, Dawson NV: Changing perspectives in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. JRheumatol 19:1831-34, 1992.
• 8. Pinals RS: Drug therapy in rheumatoid arthritis a perspective. Br J Rheumatol 28:93-5, 1989.
• 9. Klippel JH: Winning the battle, losing the war? Another editorial about rheumatoid arthritis. JRheumatol 17:1118-22. 1990.
• 10. Healey LA, Wilske KR: Evaluating combination drug therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 18:641-2, 1991.
• 11. Wolfe F: 50 Years of antirheumatic therapy: the prognosis of rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 17:24-32, 1990.
• 12. Gabriel SE, Luthra HS: Rheumatoid arthritis: Can the long term be altered? Mayo Clin Proc 63:58-68, 1988.
• 13. Harris ED: Rheumatoid arthritis: Pathophysiology and implications for therapy. NEngl JMed 322:1277-1289, May 3, 1990.
• 14. Schwartz BD: Infectious agents, immunity and rheumatic diseases. Arthr Rheum 33 :457-465, April 1990.
• 15. Tan PLJ, Skinner MA: The microbial cause of rheumatoid arthritis: time to dump Koch’s postulates. J Rheumatol 19:1170-71. 1992.
• 16. Ford DK: The microbiological causes of rheumatoid arthritis. JRheumatol 18:1441-2, 1991.
• 17. Burmester GR: Hit and run or permanent hit? Is there evidence for a microbiological cause of rheumatoid arthritis? J Rheumatol 18:1443-7, 1991.
• 18. Phillips PE: Evidence implications infectious agents in rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. Clin EXD Rheumatol 1988 6:87-94.
• 19. Sabin AB: Experimental proliferative arthritis in mice produced by filtrable pleuropneumonia-like microorganisms. Science 89:228-29, 1939.
• 20. Swift HF, Brown TMcP: Pathogenic pleuropneumonia-like organisms from acute rheumatic exudates and tissues. Science 89:271-272. 1939.
• 21. Clark HW, Bailey JS, Brown TMcP: Determination of mycoplasma antibodies in humans. Bacteriol Proc 64:59, 1964.
• 22. Brown Tmcp, Wichelausen RH, Robinson LB, et al: The in vivo action of aureomycin on pleuropneumonia-like organisms associated with various rheumatic diseases. J Lab Clin Med 34: 1404-1410. 1949.
• 23. Brown TMcP, Wichelhausen RH: A study of the antigen-antibody mechanism in rheumatic diseases. Amer JMed Sci 221:618, 1951.
• 24. Brown TMcP: The rheumatic crossroads. Postgrad Med 19:399-402, 1956.
• 25. Brown TMcP, Clark HW, Bailey JS, et al: Relationship between mycoplasma antibodies and rheumatoid factors. ArthrRheum 13:309-310, 1970.
• 26. Clark HW, Brown TMcP: Another look at mycoplasma. Arthr Rheum 19:649-50, 1976.
• 27. Hakkarainen K, et al: Mycoplasmas and arthritis. Ann Rheumat Dis 51: S70-72; l992.
• 28. Rook, GAW, et al: A reppraisal of the evidence that rheumatoid arthritis and several other idiopathic diseases are slow bacterial infections. Ann Rheum Dis 52:S30-S38; 1993.
• 29. Clark HW, Coker-Vann MR, Bailey JS, et al: Detection of mycoplasma antigens in immune complexes from rheumatoid arthritis synovial fluids. Ann Allergy 60:394-98, May 1988.
• 30. Wilder RL: Etiologic considerations in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Intern Med 101 :820-21, 1984.
• 31. Bartholomew LE: Isolations and characterization of mycoplasmas (PPLO) from patients with rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus and Reiter’s syndrome. Arthr Rheum 8:376-388. 1965.
• 32. Brown TMcP, et al: Mycoplasma antibodies in synovia. Arthritis Rheum 9:495, 1966.
• 33. Hernandez LA, Urquhart GED, *** WC: Mycoplasma pneumonia infection and arthritis in man. Br Med J 2: 14- 16. 1977.
• 34. McDonald MI, Moore JO, Harrelson JM, et al: Septic arthritis due to Mycoplasma hominis. Arth Rheum 26: 1044-47, 1983.
• 35. Williams MH, Brostoff J, Roitt IM: Possible role of Mycoplasma fermenters in pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet 2:277-280 1970
• 36. Jansson E, Makisara P, Vainio K, et al: An 8-year study on mycoplasma in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 30:506-508, 1971.
• 37. Jansson E, Makisara P, Tuuri S: Mycoplasma antibodies in rheumatoid arthritis. Scan J Rheumatol 4: 165-68, 1975.
• 38. Markham JG, Myers DB: Preliminary observations on an isolate from synovial fluid of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis, S 1-7 1976.
• 39. Tully JG, et al: Pathogenic mycoplasmas: cultivation and vertebrate pathogenicity of a new spiroplasma. Science 195:892-4, 1977.
• 40. Fahlberg WJ, et al: Isolation of mycoplasma from human synovial fluids and tissues. Bacteria Proceedings 66:48-9, 1966.
• 41. Ponka A: The occurrence and clinical picture of serologically verified Mycoplasma pneumonia infections with emphasis on central nervous system, cardiac and joint manifestations. Ann Clin Res II (suppl) 24, 1979.
• 42. Hernandez LA, Urquhart GED, *** WC: Mycoplasma pneumonia infections and arthritis in man. Br Med J2:14-16, 1977.
• 43. Ponka A: Arthritis associated with Mycoplasma pneumonia infection. Scand J Rheumatol 8:27-32, 1979.
• 44. Stuckey M, Quinn PA, Gelfand EW: Identification of T-Strain mycoplasma in a patient with polyarthritis. Lancet 2:917-920. 1978.
• 45. Webster ADB, Taylor-Robinson D, Furr PM, et al: Mycoplasmal septic arthritis in hypogammaglobuinemia. Br Med J 1 :478-79, 1978.
• 46. Ginsburg KS, Kundsin RB, Walter CW, et al: Ureaplasma urealyticum and Mycoplasma hominis in women with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatism 35 429-33, 1992.
• 47. Cole BC, Cassel GH: Mycoplasma infections as models of chronic joint inflammation. Arthr Rheum 22:1375-1381, Dec 1979.
• 48. Cassell GH, Cole BC: Mycoplasmas as agents of human disease. N Engl J Med 304: 80-89, Jan 8, 1981.
• 49. Jansson E, et al: Mycoplasmas and arthritis. Rheumatol 42:315-9, 1983.
• 50. Camon GW, Cole BCC, Ward JR, et al: Arthritogenic effects of Mycoplasma arthritides T cell mitogen in rats. JRheumatol 15:735-41, 1988.
• 51. Cedillo L, Gil C, Mayagoita G, et al: Experimental arthritis induced by Mycoplasma pneumonia in rabbits. JRheumatol 19:344-7, 1992.
• 52. Baccala R, Smith LR, Vestberg M, et al: Mycoplasma arthritidis mitogen. Arthritis Rheumatism 35:43442, 1992.
• 53. Brown McP, Clark HW, Bailey JS: Rheumatoid arthritis in the gorilla: a study of mycoplasma-host interaction in pathogenesis and treatment. In Comparative Pathology of Zoo Animals, RJ Montali, Gigaki (ed), Smithsonian Institution Press. 1980. 259-266.
• 54. Clark HW: The potential role of mycoplasmas as autoantigens and immune complexes in chronic vascular pathogenesis. Am J Primatol 24:235-243, 1991.
• 55. Greenwald, rheumatoid arthritis, Goulb LM, Lavietes B, et al: Tetracyclines imibit human synovial collagenase in vivo and in vitro. RhPn fol 14:28-32. 1987.
• 56. Goulb LM, Lee HM, Lehrer G, et al: Minocycline reduces gingival collagenolytic activity during diabetes. JPeridontRes 18:516-26, 1983.
• 57. Goulb LM, et al: Tetracyclines imibit comective tissue breakdown: new therapeutic implications for an old family of drugs. Crit Rev Oral Med Pathol 2:297-322, 1991.
• 58. Ingman T, Sorsa T, Suomalainen K, et al: Tetracycline inhibition and the cellular source of collagenase in gingival revicular fluid in different periodontal diseases. A review article. J Periodontol 64(2):82-8, 1993.
• 59. Greenwald rheumatoid arthritis, Moak SA, et al: Tetracyclines suppress metalloproteinase activity in adjuvant arthritis and, in combination with flurbiprofen, ameliorate bone damage. J Rheumatol 19:927-38, 1992.
• 60. Gomes BC, Golub LM, Ramammurthy NS: Tetracyclines inhibit parathyroid hormone induced bone resorption in organ culture. Experientia 40:1273-5, 1985.
• 61. Yu LP Jr, SMith GN, Hasty KA, et al: Doxycycline inhibits Type XI collagenolytic activity of extracts from human osteoarthritic cartilage and of gelantinase. JRheumatol 18:1450-2, 1991.
• 62. Thong YH, Ferrante A: Effect of tetracycline treatment of immunological responses in mice. Clin Exp Immunol 39:728-32, 1980.
• 63. Pruzanski W, Vadas P: Should tetracyclines be used in arthritis? J Rheumatol 19: 1495-6, 1992.
• 64. Editorial: Antibiotics as biological response modifiers. Lancet 337:400-1, 1991.
• 65. Van Barr HMJ, et al: Tetracyclines are potent scavengers of the superoxide radical. Br J Dermatol 117:131-4, 1987.
• 66. Wasil M, Halliwell B, Moorhouse CP: Scavenging of hypochlorous acid by tetracycline, rifampicin and some other antibiotics: a possible antioxidant action of rifampicin and tetracycline? Biochem Pharmacol 37:775-8, 1988.
• 67. Breedveld FC, Trentham DE: Suppression of collagen and adjuvant arthritis by a tetracycline. Arthritis Rheum 31(1 Supplement)R3, 1988.
• 68. Trentham, DE; Dynesium-Trentham rheumatoid arthritis: Antibiotic Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis: Scientific and Anecdotal Appraisals. Rheum Clin NA 21: 817-834, 1995.
• 69. Panayi GS, et al: The importance of the T cell in initiating and maintaining the chronic synovitis of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 35:729-35, 1992.
• 70. Sewell KL, Trentham DE: Pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet 341 :283-86, 1993.
• 71. Sewell KE, Furrie E, Trentham DE: The therapeutic effect of minocycline in experimental arthritis. Mechanism of action. JRheumatol 33(suppl):S106, 1991.
• 72. Panayi GS, Clark B: Minocycline in the treatment of patients with Reiter’s syndrome. Clin Erp Immunol 7: 100-1, 1989.
• 73. Pott H-G, Wittenborg A, Junge-Hulsing G: Long-term antibiotic treatment in reactive arthritis. Lancet i:245-6, Jan 30, 1988.
• 74. Skinner M, Cathcart ES, Mills JA, et al: Tetracycline in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism 14:727-732, 1971.
• 75. Lauhio A, Leirisalo-Repo M, Lahdevirta J, et al: Double-blind placebo-controlled study of three-month treatment with Iymecycline in reactive arthritis, with special reference to Chlamydia arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatism 34:6-14, 1991.
• 76. Lauhio A, Sorsa T, Lindy O, et al: The anticollagenolytic potential of Iymecycline in the long-term treatment of reactive arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatism 35: 195-198, 1992.
• 77. Breedveld FC, Dijkmans BCA, Mattie H: Minocycline treatment for rheumatoid arthritis: an open dose finding study. JRheumatol 17:43-46, 1990.
• 78. Kloppenburg M, Breedveld FC, Miltenburg AMM, et al: Antibiotics as disease modifiers in arthritis. Clin Exper Rheumatol l l(suppl 8):S113-S115, 1993.
• 79. Langevitz P, et al: Treatment of resistant rheumatoid arthritis with minocycline: An open study. J Rheumatol 19: 1502-04, 1992.
• 80. Tilley, B, et al: Minocycline in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A 48 week double-blind placebo controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 122:81, 1995.
• 81. Mills, JA: Do Bacteria Cause Chronic Polyarthritis? N Enel J Med 320:245-246. January 26, 1989.
• 82. Rothschild BM, et al: Symmetrical Erosive Peripheral Polyarthritis in the Late Archaic Period of Alabama. Science 241:1498-1502, Sept 16, 1988.
• 83. Clark, HW, et al: Detection of Mycoplasma Antigens in Immune Complexes From Rheumatoid Arthritis Synovial Fluids. Ann Allergy 60:394-398, May 1988.
• 84. Res PCM, et al: Synovial Fluid T Cell Reactivity Against 65kD Heat Shock Protein of Mycobacteria in Early Chronic Arthritis. Lancet ii:478-480, Aug 27, 1988.
• 85. Cassell GH, et al: Mycoplasmas as Agents of Human Disease. N Engl J Med 304:80-89, Jan 8, 1981.
• 86. Breedveld FC, et al: Minocycline Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis: An Open Dose Finding Study. J Rheumatol 17:43-46, January 1990.
• 87. Phillips PE: Evidence implicating infectious agents in rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 6:87-94. 1988.
• 88. Harris ED: Rheumatoid Arthritis, Pathophysiology and Implications for Therapy. N Engl J Med 322:1277-1289, May 3, 1990.
• 89. Clark HW: The Potential Role of Mycoplasmas as Autoantigens and Immune Complexes in Chronic Vascular Pathogenesis. Am Jof Primatology 24:235-243. 1991.
• 90. Silman AJ: Is Rheumatoid Arthritis an Infectious Disease? Br Med J 303:200 July 27, 1991.
• 91. Clark HW: The Potential Role of Mycoplasmas as Autoantigens and Immune Complexes in Chronic Vascular Pathogenesis. Am J Primatol 24:235-243, 1991.
• 92. Wheeler HB: Shattuck Lecture Healing and Heroism. NEngl JMed 322:1540-1548, May 24, 1990.
• 93. Arnett FC: Revised Criteria for the Classification of Rheumatoid Arthritis. Bun Rheum Dis 38:1-6, 1989.
• 94. Braanan W: Treatment of Chronic Prostatitis. Comparison of Minocycline and Doxycycline. Urology 5:631-636, 1975.
• 95. Becker FT: Treatment of Tetracycline-Resistant Acne Vulgaris. Cutis 14:610-613. 1974.
• 96. Cullen, SI: Low-Dose Minocycline Therapy in Tetracycline-Recalcitrant Acne Vulgaris. Cutis 21:101-105, 1978.
• 97. Mattuccik, et al: Acute Bacterial Sinusitis. Minocycline vs.Amoxicillin. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surgery 112:73-76, 1986.
• 98. Guillon JM, et al: Minocylcine-induced Cell-mediated Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis. Ann Intern Med 117:476-481, 1992.
• 99. Gabriel SE, et al: Rifampin therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 17: 163-6, 1990.
• 100. Caperton EM, et al: Cefiriaxone therapy of chronic inflammatory arthritis. Arch Intern Med 150:1677-1682, 1990.
• 101. Ann Intern Med 117:273-280, 1992.
• 102. Clive DM, et al: Renal Syndromes Associated with Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory drugs. NEngl JMed 310:563-572. March 1 l994.
• 103. Piper, et al: Corticosteroid Use and Peptic Ulcer Disease: Role of Non-Steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs. Ann Intern Med 114:735-740, May 1, 1991.
• 104. Allison MC, et al: Gastrointestinal Damage Associated with the Use of Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs. N Engl J Med 327:749-54, 1992.
• 105. Fries JF:Postmarketing Drug Surveillance: Are Our Priorities Right? JRheumatol 15:389-390, 1988.
• 106. Brooks PM, et al: Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs Differences and Similarities. NEngl JMed 324:1716-1724, June 13, 1991.
• 107. Agrawal N: Risk Factors for Gastrointestinal Ulcers Caused by Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs). J Fam Prac 32:619-624, June 1991.
• 108. Silverstein, F: Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Peptic Ulcer Disease. Postgrad Med 89:33-30, May 15, 1991.
• 109. Gabriel SE, et al: Risk for Serious Gastrointestinal Complications Related to Use of NSAIDs. Ann Intern Med 115:787-796 1991.
• 110. Fries JF, et al: Toward an Epidemiology of Gastropathy Associated With NSAID Use. Gastroent 96:647-55, 1989.
• 111. Armstrong CP, et al: NSAIDs and Life Threatening Complications of Peptic Ulceration. Gut 28:527-32, 1987.
• 112. Murray MD, et al: Adverse Effects of Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs on Renal Function. AnnInternMed 112:559, April 15, 1990.
• 113. Cook DM: Safe Use of Glucocorticoids: How to Monitor Patients Taking These Potent Agents. Postgrad Med 91:145-154, Feb. 1992.
• 114. Piper JM, et al: Corticosteroid Use and Peptic Ulcer Disease: Role of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs. Ann Intern Med 114:735-740, May 1, 1991.
• 115. Thompson JM: Tension Myalgia as a Diagnosis at the Mayo Clinic and Its Relationship to Fibrositis, Fibromyalgia, and Myofascial Pain Syndrome. Mayo Clin Proc 65:1237-1248, September 1990.
• 116. Semble EL, et al: Therapeutic Exercise for Rheumatoid Arthritis and Osteoarthritis. Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism 20:32-40, August 1990.
• 117. O’Dell, J, Haire, C, Palmer, W, Drymalski, W, Wees, S, Blakely, K, Churchill, M, Eckhoff, J, Weaver, A, Doud, D, Erickson, N, Dietz, F, Olson, R, Maloney, P, Klassen, L, Moore, G, Treatment of Early Rheumatoid Arthritis with Minocycline or Placebo: Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1997, 40:5, 842-848.
• 118. Tilley, BC, Alarcón, GS, Heyse, SP, Trentham, DE, Neuner, R, Kaplan, DA, Clegg, DO, Leisen, JCC, Buckley, L, Cooper, SM, Duncan, H, Pillemer, SR, Tuttleman, M, Fowler, SE, Minocycline in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A 48-Week, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial, Annals of Internal Medicine, 1995, 122:2, 81-89.
• 119. Bluhm, GB, Sharp, JT, Tilley, BC, Alarcon, GS, Cooper, SM, Pillemer, SR, Clegg, DO, Heyse, SP, Trentham, DE, Neuner, R, Kaplan, DA, Leisen, JC, Buckley, L, Duncan, H, Tuttleman, M, Shuhui, L, Fowler, SE, Radiographic Results from the Minocycline in Rheumatoid Arthritis (MIRA) Trial, Journal of Rheumatology, 1997, 24:7, 1295-1302.
• 120. Breedveld, FC, Editorial: Minocycline in Rheumatoid Arthritis, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1997, 40:5, 794-796.
• 121. Breedveld, FC, Letters: Reply to Minocycline-Induced Autoimmune Disease, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1998, 41:3, 563-564.
• 122. Fox, R, Sharp, D, Editorial: Antibiotics as Biological Response Modifiers, The Lancet, 1991, 337:8738, 400-401.
• 123. Greenwald, rheumatoid arthritis, Golub, LM, Lavietes, B, Ramamurthy, NS, Gruber, B, Laskin, RS, McNamara, TF, Tetracyclines Inhibit Human Synovial Collagenase In Vivo and In Vitro, Journal of Rheumatology, 1987, 14:1, 28-32.
• 124. Griffiths, B, Gough, A, Emery, P, Letters: Minocycline-Induced Autoimmune Disease: Comment on the Editorial by Breedveld, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1998, 41:3, 563.
• 125. Kloppenburg, M, Breedveld, FC, Miltenburg, AMM, Dijkmans, BAC, Antibiotics as Disease Modifiers in Arthritis, Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 1993, 11: Suppl. 8, S113-S115.
• 126. Kloppenburg, M, Breedveld, FC, Terwiel, JPh, Mallee, C, Dijkmans, BAC, Minocycline in Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1994, 37:5, 629-636.
• 127. Kloppenburg, M, Mattie, H, Douwes, N, Dijkmans, BAC, Breedveld, FC, Minocycline in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Relationship of Serum Concentrations to Efficacy, Journal of Rheumatology, 1995, 22:4, 611-616.
• 128. Lauhio, A, Leirisalo-Repo, M, Lähdevirta, J, Saikku, P, Repo, H, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Three-Month Treatment with Lymecycline in Reactive Arthritis, with Special Reference to Chlamydia Arthritis, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1991, 34:1, 6-14.
• 129. Lauhio, A, Sorsa, T, Lindy, O, Suomalainen, K, Saari, H, Golub, LM, Konttinen, YT, The Anticollagenolytic Potential of Lymecycline in the Long-Term Treatment of Reactive Arthritis, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1992, 35:2, 195-198.
• 130. Paulus, HE, Editorial: Minocycline Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis, Annals of Internal Medicine, 1995, 122:2, 147-148.
• 131. Pruzanski, W, Vadas, P, Editorial: Should Tetracyclines be Used in Arthritis?, Journal of Rheumatology, 1992, 19:10, 1495-1497.
• 132. Sieper, J, Braun, J, Editorial: Treatment of Reactive Arthritis with Antibiotics, British Journal of Rheumatology, July 1998.
• 133. Baseman, JB, Tully, JG, Mycoplasmas: Sophisticated, Reemerging, and Burdened by Their Notoriety, CDC’s Emerging Infectious Diseases, 1997, 3:1, 21-32.
• 134. Franz, A, Webster, ADB, Furr, PM, Taylor-Robinson, D, Mycoplasmal Arthritis in Patients with Primary Immunoglobulin Deficiency: Clinical Features and Outcome in 18 Patients, British Journal of Rheumatology, 1997, 36:6, 661-668.
• 135. Hakkarainen K, Turunen, H, Miettinen, A, Karppelin, M, Kaitila, K, Jansson, E, Mycoplasmas and Arthritis, Annals of Rheumatic Diseases, 1992, 51, 1170-1172.
• 136. Hoffman, RH, Wise, KS, Letters: Reply to Mycoplasmas in the Joints of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Other Inflammatory Rheumatic Disorders, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1998, 41:4, 756-757.
• 137. Schaeverbeke, T, Bébéar, C, Lequen, L, Dehais, J, Bébéar, C, Letters: Mycoplasmas in the Joints of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Other Inflammatory Rheumatic Disorders: Comment on the Article by Hoffman et al., Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1998, 41:4, 754-756.
• 138. Schaeverbeke, T, Gilroy, CB, Bébéar, C, Dehais, J, Taylor-Robinson, D, Mycoplasma fermentans, But Not M penetrans, Detected by PCR Assays in Synovium from Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Other Rheumatic Disorders, Journal of Clinical Pathology, 1996, 49, 824-828.
• 139. Aoki, S, Yoshikawa, K, Yokoyama, T, Nonogaki, T, Iwasaki, S, Mitsui, T, Niwa, S, Role of Enteric Bacteria in the Pathogenesis of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Evidence for Antibodies to Enterobacterial Common Antigens in Rheumatoid Sera and Synovial Fluids, Annals of Rheumatic Diseases, 1996, 55:6, 363-369.
• 140. Blankenberg-Sprenkels, SHD, Fielder, M, Feltkamp, TEW, Tiwana, H, Wilson, C, Ebringer, A, Antibodies to Klebsiella pneumoniae in Dutch Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis and Acute Anterior Uveitis and to Proteus mirabilis in Rheumatoid Arthritis, Journal of Rheumatology, 1998, 25:4, 743-747.
• 141. Ebringer, A, Ankylosing Spondylitis is Caused by Klebsiella: Evidence from Immunogenetic, Microbiologic, and Serologic Studies, Rheumatic Disease Clinics of North America, 1992, 18:1, 105-121.
• 142. Erlacher, L, Wintersberger, W, Menschik, M, Benke-Studnicka, A, Machold, K, Stanek, G, Söltz-Szöts, J, Smolen, J, Graninger, W, Reactive Arthritis: Urogenital Swab Culture is the Only Useful Diagnostic Method for the Detection of the Arthritogenic Infection in Extra-Articularly Asymptomatic Patients with Undifferentiated Oligoarthritis, British Journal of Rheumatology, 1995, 34:9, 838-842.
• 143. Gaston, JSH, Deane, KHO, Jecock, RM, Pearce, JH, Identification of 2 Chlamydia trachomatis Antigens Recognized by Synovial Fluid T Cells from Patients with Chlamydia Induced Reactive Arthritis, Journal of Rheumatology, 1996, 23:1, 130-136.
• 144. Gerard, HC, Branigan, PJ, Schumacher Jr, HR, Hudson, AP, Synovial Chlamydia trachomatis in Patients with Reactive Arthritis/ Reiter’s Syndrome Are Viable But Show Aberrant Gene Expression, Journal of Rheumatology, 1998, 25:4, 734-742.
• 145. Granfors, K, Do Bacterial Antigens Cause Reactive Arthritis?, Rheumatic Disease Clinics of North America, 1992, 18:1, 37-48.
• 146. Granfors, K, Merilahti-Palo, R, Luukkainen, R, Möttönen, T, Lahesmaa, R, Probst, P, Märker-Hermann, E, Toivanen, P, Persistence of Yersinia Antigens in Peripheral Blood Cells from Patients with Yersinia Enterocolitica 0:3 Infection with or without Reactive Arthritis, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1998, 41:5, 855-862.
• 147. Inman, RD, The Role of Infection in Chronic Arthritis, Journal of Rheumatology, 1992, 19, Supplement 33, 98-104.
• 148. Layton, MA, Dziedzic, K, Dawes, PT, Letters to the Editor: Sacroiliitis in an HLA B27-negative Patient Following Giardiasis, British Journal of Rheumatology, 1998, 37:5, 581-583.
• 149. Mäki-Ikola, O, Lehtinen, K, Granfors, K, Similarly Increased Serum IgA1 and IgA2 Subclass Antibody Levels against Klebsiella pneumoniæ Bacteria in Ankylosing Spondylitis Patients With/Without Extra-Articular Features, British Journal of Rheumatology, 1996, 35:2, 125-128.
• 150. Morrison, RP, Editorial: Persistent Chlamydia trachomatis Infection: In Vitro Phenomenon or in Vivo Trigger of Reactive Arthritis?, Journal of Rheumatology, 1998, 25:4, 610-612.
• 151. Mousavi-Jazi, M, Boström, L, Lövmark, C, Linde, A, Brytting, M, Sundqvist, V-A, Infrequent Detection of Cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr Virus DNA in Synovial Membrane of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis, Journal of Rheumatology, 1998, 25:4, 623-628.
• 152. Nissilä, M, Lahesmaa, R, Leirisalo-Repo, M, Lehtinen, K, Toivanen, P, Granfors, K, Antibodies to Klebsiella pneumoniæ, Escherichia coli, and Proteus mirabilis in Ankylosing Spondylitis: Effect of Sulfasalazine Treatment, Journal of Rheumatology, 1994, 21:11, 2082-2087.
• 153. Svenungsson, B, Editorial Review: Reactive Arthritis, International Journal of STD & AIDS, 1995, 6:3, 156-160.
• 154. Tani, Y, Tiwana, H, Hukuda, S, Nishioka, J, Fielder, M, Wilson, C, Bansal, S, Ebringer, A, Antibodies to Klebsiella, Proteus, and HLA-B27 Peptides in Japanese Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis and Rheumatoid Arthritis, Journal of Rheumatology, 1997, 24:1, 109-114.
• 155. Tiwana, H, Walmsley, RS, Wilson, C, Yiannakou, JY, Ciclitira, PJ, Wakefield, AJ, Ebringer, A, Characterization of the Humoral Immune Response to Klebsiella Species in Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Ankylosing Spondylitis, British Journal of Rheumatology, 1998, 37:5, 525-531.
• 156. Wilkinson, NZ, Kingsley, GH, Sieper, J, Braun, J, Ward, ME, Lack of Correlation Between the Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis DNA in Synovial Fluid from Patients with a Range of Rheumatic Diseases and the Presence of an Antichlamydial Immune Response, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1998, 41:5, 845-854.
• 157. Wollenhaupt, J, Kolbus, F, Weißbrodt, H, Schneider, C, Krech, T, Zeidler, H, Manifestations of Chlamydia Induced Arthritis in Patients with Silent Versus Symptomatic Urogenital Chlamydial Infection, Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 1995, 13:4, 453-458.
• 158. Alarcon, GS, Tilley, B, Cooper, S, Clegg, DO, Trentham, DE, Pillemer, SR, Neuner, R, Fowler, S, Letter: Another look at minocycline, Bulletin on the Rheumatic Diseases, 1996, 45(8), 6-7.
• 159. Amin, AR, Attur, MG, Thakker, GD, Patel, PD, Vyas, PR, Patel, RN, Patel, IR, Abramson, SB, A novel mechanism of action of tetracyclines: effects on nitric oxide synthases, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1996, 93(24), 14014-14019.
• 160. Ayuzawa, S, Yano, H, Enomoto, T, Kobayashi, H, Nose, T, The Bi-Digital O-Ring Test used in the successful diagnosis & treatment (with antibiotic, anti-viral agents & oriental herbal medicine) of a patient suffering from pain & weakness of an upper extremity & Barre-Lieou syndrome appearing after whiplash injury: A case report, Acupuncture & Electro-Therapeutics Research, 1997, 22(3-4), 167-174.
• 161. Bitar, CN, Steele, RW, Use of prophylactic antibiotics in children, Advances in Pediatric Infectious Diseases, 1995, 10, 227-262.
• 162. Bluhm, GB, Sharp, JT, Tilley, BC, Alarcon, GS, Cooper, SM, Pillemer, SR, Clegg, DO, Heyse, SP, Trentham, DE, Neuner, R, Kaplan, DA, Leisen, JC, Buckley, L, Duncan, H, Tuttleman, M, Li, S, Fowler, SE, Radiographic Results from the Minocycline in Rheumatoid Arthritis (MIRA) Trial, Journal of Rheumatology, 1997, 24(7), 1295-1302.
• 163. Brandt, KD, Modification by oral doxycycline administration of articular cartilage breakdown in osteoarthritis, Journal of Rheumatology, 1995, Supplement 43, 149-151.
• 164. Breedveld, FC, Editorial: Minocycline in Rheumatoid Arthritis, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1997, 40(5), 794-796.
• 165. Breedveld, FC, Letters: Reply to Minocycline- Induced Autoimmune Disease, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1998, 41(3), 563-564.
• 166. Bullingham, R, Shah, J, Goldblum, R, Schiff, M, Effects of food and antacid on the pharmacokinetics of single doses of mycophenolate mofetil in rheumatoid arthritis patients, British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 1996, 41(6), 513-516.
• 167. Burton, IE, Moussa, KM, Sanders, PA, Agranulocytosis in rheumatoid arthritis associated with long-term flucloxacillin for staphylococcal osteomyelitis, Acta Haematologica, 1995, 94(4), 196-198.
• 168. Canvin, JM, Madhok, R, Letter: Minocycline in rheumatoid arthritis, Annals of Internal Medicine, 1995, 123(5), 392.
• 169. Caruso, I, Twenty years of experience with intra-articular rifamycin for chronic arthritides, Journal of International Medical Research, 1997, 25(6), 307-317.
• 170. Currie, BJ, Are the currently recommended doses of benzathine penicillin G adequate for secondary prophylaxis of rheumatic fever?, Pediatrics, 1996, 97(6, Page 2), 989-991.
• 171. Ebell, MH, Minocycline for rheumatoid arthritis, Journal of Family Practice, 1995, 40(5), 497-498.
• 172. Elkayam, O, Yaron, M, Zhukovsky, G, Segal, R, Caspi, D, Toxicity profile of dual methotrexate combinations with gold, hydroxychloroquine, sulphasalazine and minocycline in rheumatoid arthritis patients, Rheumatology International, 1997, 17(2), 49-53.
• 173. Evdoridou, J, Roilides, E, Bibashi, E, Kremenopoulos, G, Multifocal osteoarthritis due to Candida albicans in a neonate: serum level monitoring of liposomal amphotericin B and literature review, Infection, 1997, 25(2), 112-116.
• 174. Galland, L, Letter: Minocycline and rheumatoid arthritis revisited, Annals of Internal Medicine, 1995, 123(5), 392-393.
• 175. Griffiths, B, Gough, A, Emery, P, Letters: Minocycline- Induced Autoimmune Disease: Comment on the Editorial by Breedveld, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1998, 41(3), 563.
• 176. Hanemaaijer, R, Sorsa, T, Konttinen, YT, Ding, Y, Sutinen, M, Visser, H, van Hinsbergh, VW, Helaakoski, T, Kainulainen, T, Ronka, H, Tschesche, H, Salo, T, Matrix metalloproteinase-8 is expressed in rheumatoid synovial fibroblasts and endothelial cells: Regulation by tumor necrosis factor-alpha and doxycycline, Journal of Biological Chemistry, 1997, 272(50), 31504-31509.
• 177. Herdy, GV, Editorial: The challenge of secondary prophylaxis in rheumatic fever [Portuguese, Original Title: Desafio da profilaxia secundaria na febre reumatica, Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, 1996, 67(5), 317.
• 178. Herdy, GV, Souza, DC, Barros, PB, Pinto, CA, Secondary prophylaxis in rheumatic fever: Oral antibiotic therapy versus benzathine penicillin [Portuguese, Original Title: Profilaxia secundaria na febre reumatica: Antibioticoterapia oral versus penicilina benzatina], Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, 1996, 67(5), 331-333.
• 179. Herrick, AL, Grennan, DM, Griffen, K, Aarons, L, Gifford, LA, Lack of interaction between flucloxacillin and methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 1996, 41(3), 223-227.
• 180. Houck, HE, Kauffman, CL, Casey, DL, Minocycline treatment for leukocytoclastic vasculitis associated with rheumatoid arthritis, Archives of Dermatology, 1997, 133(1), 15-16.
• 181. Iwata, M, Ida, M, Oda, S, Takeuchi, E, Nakamura, Y, Horiguchi, T, Sato, A, Bronchiolitis obliterans preceding rheumatoid arthritis: effect of clarithromycin [Japanese], Nippon Kyobu Shikkan Gakkai Zasshi ^Ö Japanese Journal of Thoracic Diseases, 1996, 34(11), 1271-1276.
• 182. Kassem, AS, Zaher, SR, Abou Shleib, H, el-Kholy, AG, Madkour, AA, Kaplan, EL, Rheumatic fever prophylaxis using benzathine penicillin G (BPG): two- week versus four-week regimens: comparison of two brands of BPG, Pediatrics, 1996, 97(6, Page 2), 992-995.
• 183. Kim, NM, Freeman, CD, Minocycline for rheumatoid arthritis, Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 1995, 29(2), 186-187.
• 184. Kloppenburg, M, Dijkmans, BA, Breedveld, FC, Antimicrobial therapy for rheumatoid arthritis, Baillieres Clinical Rheumatology, 1995, 9(4), 759-769.
• 185. Kloppenburg, M, Dijkmans, BA, Verweij, CL, Breedveld, FC, Inflammatory and immunological parameters of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with minocycline, Immunopharmacology, 1996, 31(2-3), 163-169.
• 186. Kloppenburg, M, Mattie, H, Douwes, N, Dijkmans, BA, Breedveld, FC, Minocycline in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: relationship of serum concentrations to efficacy, Journal of Rheumatology, 1995, 22(4), 611-616.
• 187. Kuznetsova, SM, Petrova, NK, Lecture: Antibiotics in the prevention of rheumatic fever [Russian, Original Title: Antibiotiki v profilaktike revmatizma (lektsiia)], Antibiotiki i Khimioterapiia, 1996, 41(2), 43-51.
• 188. Lai, NS, Lan, JL, Treatment of DMARDs-resistant rheumatoid arthritis with minocycline: a local experience among the Chinese, Rheumatology International, 1998, 17(6), 245-247.
• 189. Langevitz, P, Livneh, A, Bank, I, Pras, M, Minocycline in rheumatoid arthritis, Israel Journal of Medical Sciences, 1996, 32(5), 327-330.
• 190. Lauhio, A, Salo, T, Tjaderhane, L, Lahdevirta, J, Golub, LM, Sorsa, T, Letter: Tetracyclines in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, The Lancet, 1995, 346(8975), 645-646.
• 191. McKendry, RJ, Is rheumatoid arthritis caused by an infection?, The Lancet, 1995, 345(8961), 1319-1320.
• 192. Meehan, R, Letter: Minocycline in rheumatoid arthritis, Annals of Internal Medicine, 1995, 123(5), 391-392.
• 193. Nordstrom, D, Lindy, O, Lauhio, A, Sorsa, T, Santavirta, S, Konttinen, YT, Anti-collagenolytic mechanism of action of doxycycline treatment in rheumatoid arthritis, Rheumatology International, 1998, 17(5), 175-180.
• 194. O’Dell, JR, Haire, CE, Palmer, W, Drymalski, W, Wees, S, Blakely, K, Churchill, M, Eckhoff, PJ, Weaver, A, Doud, D, Erikson, N, Dietz, F, Olson, R, Maloley, P, Klassen, LW, Moore, GF, Treatment of Early Rheumatoid Arthritis with Minocycline or Placebo: Results of a Randomized, Double- Blind, Placebo- Controlled Trial, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1997, 40(5), 842-848.
• 195. Panush, RS, Thoburn, R, Should minocycline be used to treat rheumatoid arthritis?, Bulletin on the Rheumatic Diseases, 1996, 45(2), 2-5.
• 196. Patmas, MA, Letter: Minocycline in rheumatoid arthritis, Annals of Internal Medicine, 1995, 123(5), 391-392.
• 197. Paulus, HE, Editorial: Minocycline treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, Annals of Internal Medicine, 1995, 122(2), 147-148.
• 198. Pillemer, SR, Fowler, SE, Tilley, BC, Alarcon, GS, Heyse, SP, Trentham, DE, Neuner, R, Clegg, DO, Leisen, JC, Cooper, SM, Duncan, H, Tuttleman, M, Meaningful improvement criteria sets in a rheumatoid arthritis clinical trial: MIRA Trial Group, Minocycline in Rheumatoid Arthritis, Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1997, 40(3), 419-425.
• 199. Ryan, ME, Greenwald, rheumatoid arthritis, Golub, LM, Potential of tetracyclines to modify cartilage breakdown in osteoarthritis, Current Opinion in Rheumatology, 1996, 8(3), 238-247.
• 200. Sieper, J, Braun, J, Editorial: Treatment of Reactive Arthritis with Antibiotics, British Journal of Rheumatology, 1998, 37(7), 717-720.
• 201. Smith, GN Jr, Yu, LP Jr, Brandt, KD, Capello, WN, Oral administration of doxycycline reduces collagenase and gelatinase activities in extracts of human osteoarthritic cartilage, Journal of Rheumatology, 1998, 25(3), 532-535.
• 202. Tilley, BC, Alarcon, GS, Heyse, SP, Trentham, DE, Neuner, R, Kaplan, DA, Clegg, DO, Leisen, JC, Buckley, L, Cooper, SM, Duncan, H, Pillemer, SR, Tuttleman, M, Fowler, SE, Minocycline in rheumatoid arthritis: A 48-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, MIRA Trial Group, Annals of Internal Medicine, 1995, 122(2), 81-89.
• 203. Trentham, DE, Dynesius-Trentham, rheumatoid arthritis, Antibiotic therapy for rheumatoid arthritis: Scientific and anecdotal appraisals, Rheumatic Diseases Clinics of North America, 1995, 21(3), 817-834.
• 204. Wilson, C, Senior, BW, Tiwana, H, Caparros-Wanderley, W, Ebringer, A, Antibiotic sensitivity and proticine typing of Proteus mirabilis strains associated with rheumatoid arthritis, Rheumatology International, 1998, 17(5), 203-205.
• 205. Yu, LP Jr, Burr, DB, Brandt, KD, O’Connor, BL, Rubinow, A, Albrecht, M, Effects of oral doxycycline administration on histomorphometry and dynamics of subchondral bone in a canine model of osteoarthritis, Journal of Rheumatology, 1996, 23(1), 137-142.
• 206. Ted R. Mikuls, Rheumatoid arthritis incidence: What goes down must go up? Arthritis and Rheumatism, 2010, 62(6), 1565 - 1567,

Sources:

  Video Transcript (PDF)

Leah Siegel fought hard against cancer, enduring blood transfusions and chemical burns and painful sores. She was haunted by the idea that her children would grow up without any memory of her.

From the moment doctors told her she had stage four breast cancer in 2008, she worried most about leaving her children. “I just need 10 years,” she told her oncologist. But the cancer had already had spread to her liver and bones. Doctors gave her two to three years.

According to this story in the Dallas News:

“Leah told doctors she would try any treatment, no matter the side effects … doctors seemed to be jumping from drug to drug. ‘There wasn’t a real plan anymore,’ said Leah’s husband, Eric … Leah agreed to try a powerful drug cocktail that caused the most painful side effects yet. Flaming blisters appeared on her hands and … The drugs burned sores in her mouth and throat. For weeks, she couldn’t eat. She began to worry that she would starve to death.”

Sources:

  Dallas News August 3, 2010

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

If you haven’t read the reference link above in the Dallas News I would STRONGLY encourage you to do so. It is an amazingly powerful story that helps bring home a real life illustration of what is going on with cancer in this country.

It is just beyond tragic that this is allowed to occur anywhere, let alone in the U.S.

No one should have to go through this type of pain and sorrow and leave young children behind when their mother dies decades prematurely because of a fatally flawed medical system.

Unfortunately, cancer rates are on the rise and the disease is expected to kill more than 13 million people a year by 2030, almost double the number who died from the disease in 2008.

Even with the latest technology and “advances” in medicine, cancer continues to devastate families and kill people far before their time. And through it all the current medical paradigm has remained essentially clueless about the underlying causes of cancer, along with how to effectively treat them.

Most conventional cancer treatments actually add insult to injury by doing more harm than good — a fact that has been largely swept under the rug by the medical industry.

Are Toxic Drugs Really Helping Cancer Patients?

Drugs, surgery and radiation are typically the only solutions offered by conventional physicians to treat cancer, and upon receiving a cancer diagnosis most people are willing to do just about anything to get better. This includes taking outrageously expensive and dangerous medications that offer little, if any, benefit.

Take Avastin, the best-selling cancer drug in the world, which is used to treat advanced breast cancer in the United States. This drug, which brings in $855 million in revenues each year, costs $8,000 a month even though it has not been proven to improve quality of life or help patients live longer.

Further, the side effects of the drug can in and of themselves be deadly. Potentially fatal risks of the drug include gastrointestinal perforation, hemorrhage, slow wound healing, stroke, severe hypertension, severe kidney malfunction, and the list goes on. Now the FDA is even considering revoking its approval for this toxic drug, citing new studies that show the benefits just do not outweigh the risks.

Unfortunately, this is often the way it works with cancer drugs. The benefits are sparse while the side effects can often kill.

Cancer Drugs Can Actually Cause Cancer, Illness, Death

The drugs conventional physicians use to treat cancer can actually cause cancer in healthy people who are only exposed to small amounts of them, as is often the case among the health care workers who make their livings making, mixing and administering these toxic agents.

Even when used correctly these toxic drugs may end up killing you prematurely or cause other cancers down the line, as they impair your immune system and are capable of causing genetic damage.

The biggest drawback to chemotherapy is the fact that it destroys healthy cells throughout your body right along with cancer cells. So a typical, and potentially deadly, side effect of chemo is the destruction of the rapidly multiplying and dividing cells found in your:

• Bone marrow, which produces blood
• Digestive system
• Reproductive system
• Hair follicles

Despite its reputation as the gold-standard cancer treatment, chemotherapy has an average 5-year survival success rate of just over 2 percent for all cancers, according to a study published in the journal Clinical Oncology in December 2004.

Another study, The National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (NCEPOD), found that more than four in 10 patients who received chemotherapy toward the end of life experienced potentially fatal effects.

And after reviewing data from over 600 cancer patients who died within 30 days of receiving treatment, it was found that chemotherapy hastened or caused death in 27 percent of cases.

Chemotherapy drugs are, by their very nature, extremely toxic and typically do not work with your body to modulate and normalize its response to allow the cancer to resolve normally. Natural approaches simply do not have the types of fatal side effects common with cancer drugs because they work by optimizing your body’s own natural healing capacities.

Tips for Fighting, and Preventing, Cancer

If you are facing cancer, I strongly recommend you seek the help of a knowledgeable natural health care practitioner experienced in cancer care who can help you use nutrition, emotional healing, and other alternative treatments to help you get well.

This should include a reliable screening of your vitamin D levels.

Calcitriol, the most potent steroid hormone in your body, is produced in large amounts in your tissues when you have sufficient amounts of vitamin D. However, most cancer patients are vitamin D deficient.

Calcitrol — the activated form of vitamin D — has been shown to protect against cancer by inducing cell differentiation and controlling cell proliferation. People with a low vitamin D level are less able to make activated vitamin D in an amount sufficient to exert the controls over cell proliferation that are needed to reduce cancer.

Optimized vitamin D levels will work synergistically with virtually every other cancer treatment. There are over 830 peer-reviewed scientific studies showing its effectiveness in the treatment of cancer!

You’ll want to elevate your levels of vitamin D to about 80-90 ng/ml, and continue to have them monitored throughout your treatment.

However, even better than a safe treatment is preventing cancer in the first place, and I believe you can virtually eliminate your cancer risk if you follow risk reduction strategies that have not been formally “proven” yet by conservative researchers.

You can help save yourself and your family from a cancer diagnosis by following the lifestyle changes below.

Many of the preventive strategies I’m about to share with you are not only important to prevent cancer, they’re also incredibly important to use as part of your cancer treatment strategy if you already have the illness.

11 Top Strategies for Preventing and Fighting Cancer Naturally

• 1. Optimize your vitamin D levels. It’s virtually impossible to discuss cancer prevention and treatment today without discussing vitamin D, as the scientific evidence of its anti-cancerous benefits is truly impressive.

Theories linking vitamin D to certain cancers have been tested and confirmed in more than 200 epidemiological studies, and understanding of its physiological basis stems from more than 2,500 laboratory studies, according to epidemiologist Cedric Garland, DrPH, professor of family and preventive medicine at the UC San Diego School of Medicine.

Dr. Garland is widely regarded as the leading epidemiologist on vitamin D and its relation to health. He led one of the latest studies on vitamin D for cancer prevention and proposed a new model of cancer development — dubbed DINOMIT– that is centered on a loss of cancer cells’ ability to stick together.

The model is a departure from the older model of cancer development, which centers on genetic mutations as the earliest driving forces behind cancer.

To find out the appropriate levels of vitamin D for cancer prevention and treatment, please watch my free one-hour vitamin D lecture.

• 2. Control your insulin levels by limiting your intake of processed foods and sugars as much as possible.
• 3. Get appropriate amounts of animal-based omega-3 fats, especially those from krill oil.
• 4. Exercise. One of the primary reasons exercise works is that it drives your insulin levels down. Controlling insulin levels is one of the most powerful ways to reduce your cancer risks.

Exercise is also an important part of cancer treatment, as Harvard Medical School researchers found patients who exercise moderately — 3-5 hours a week — reduce their odds of dying from breast cancer by about half as compared to sedentary women.

In fact, any amount of weekly exercise increased a patient’s odds of surviving breast cancer. This benefit also remained constant regardless of whether women were diagnosed early on or after their cancer had spread.

• 5. Have a tool to permanently erase the neurological short-circuiting that can activate cancer genes. Even the CDC states that 85 percent of disease is caused by emotions. It is likely that this factor may be more important than all the other physical ones listed here, so make sure this is addressed. My particular favorite tool for this purpose, as you may know, is the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT).
• 6. Only about 24 percent of people eat enough vegetables, so by all means eat as many vegetables as you are comfortable with. Ideally, they should be fresh and organic. However, please understand that, frequently, fresh conventionally grown vegetables are healthier than organic ones that are older and wilted in the grocery store. They are certainly better than no vegetables at all, so don’t use that as an excuse. If you are a carb nutritional type you may need up to 300 percent more vegetables than a protein nutritional type.
• 7. Eating according to your nutritional type has potent anti-cancer effects. When we treat cancer patients in our clinic, this is in fact one of the most powerful anti-cancer strategies we have.
• 8. Maintain an ideal body weight.
• 9. Get enough high-quality sleep.
• 10. Reduce your exposure to environmental toxins like pesticides, household chemical cleaners, synthetic air fresheners and air pollution.
• 11. Boil, poach or steam your foods, rather than frying or charbroiling them. Better yet eat as many of your foods raw as you can.

The sooner you implement these natural strategies, the better, as they will provide your body with the basic foundational elements necessary for health, healing and wellness.

Related Links:

  Why Do Doctors Prescribe Drugs that Kill the Nurses Administering Them?

  Does Chemo for Breast Cancer Cause More Harm Than Good?

  This is Now Considered a Critical Piece of Cancer Treatment…