Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today.
The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today.
The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in
clinical practice today.
* w w w .fqresearch.org/
The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in
clinical practice today.
* w w w .fqresearch.org/
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
"JOHN" <john@nospam . com > wrote in message
news:oZidnTzuarn57yTanZ2dnUVZ8sylnZ2d@bt . com ...
> The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in
> clinical practice today.
They're actually one of the safe, more effective antibiotics available
today.
"JOHN" <john@nospam . com > wrote in message
news:oZidnTzuarn57yTanZ2dnUVZ8sylnZ2d@bt . com ...
> The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in
> clinical practice today.
They're actually one of the safe, more effective antibiotics available
today.
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
In message <Ixhuj.39273$yE1.5879@attbi_s21>, Skeptic wrote:
> "JOHN" <john@nospam . com > wrote in message
> news:oZidnTzuarn57yTanZ2dnUVZ8sylnZ2d@bt . com ...
>> The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in
>> clinical practice today.
>
> They're actually one of the safe, more effective antibiotics available
> today.
In Scudamore's world there is no such thing. Remember,
bacteria don't cause disease so they can't do any good,
but they do cause antibiotic-resistant bacteria that
will depopulate the world. (Both positions cited by
Scudamore on his site and linked from Usenet posts.)
--
| The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" |
| The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" |
+---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel . com > ----------+
In message <Ixhuj.39273$yE1.5879@attbi_s21>, Skeptic wrote:
> "JOHN" <john@nospam . com > wrote in message
> news:oZidnTzuarn57yTanZ2dnUVZ8sylnZ2d@bt . com ...
>> The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in
>> clinical practice today.
>
> They're actually one of the safe, more effective antibiotics available
> today.
In Scudamore's world there is no such thing. Remember,
bacteria don't cause disease so they can't do any good,
but they do cause antibiotic-resistant bacteria that
will depopulate the world. (Both positions cited by
Scudamore on his site and linked from Usenet posts.)
--
| The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" |
| The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" |
+---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel . com > ----------+
Reply from: -- messaggio eliminato --
Date: 26 Feb 2008, 05:39
-- deleted messages --
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
"davidtfull" <davidtfull@aol . com > wrote in message
news:632dad91-222f-4509-86c9-b5030f4e6f29@q78g2000hsh.googlegroups . com ...
On Feb 18, 7:31 am, "Skeptic" <bcs0...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> "JOHN" <j...@nospam . com > wrote in message
>
> news:oZidnTzuarn57yTanZ2dnUVZ8sylnZ2d@bt . com ...
>
> > The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in
> > clinical practice today.
>
> They're actually one of the safe, more effective antibiotics available
> today.
I know you sick of hearing this but thought you would be interested in
the latest from the FDA's AER database concerning how "safe" cipro
is.
REPLY:
What you're not understanding is that all antibiotics have side effects.
All medications have rare side effects. All can cause serious problems.
I reviewed that case report of bilateral ureteral obstruction from cipro.
Seems like it was a real phenomenon in this elderly woman on 24 days of
cipro. Of course, it didn't cause permanent damage and the patient did fine
with no long term renal damage. But in pointing that out, that case report
referenced several other articles. Since you have the original reference
you can also look up the works they referenced. Specifically, there have
been studies done looking at thousands of patients looking for crystalluria
and stones and none were found.
So while the very very occasional odd side effect is possible, it by no
means should be considered a standard side effect - especially that is the
only ever reported event of that phenomenon.
"davidtfull" <davidtfull@aol . com > wrote in message
news:632dad91-222f-4509-86c9-b5030f4e6f29@q78g2000hsh.googlegroups . com ...
On Feb 18, 7:31 am, "Skeptic" <bcs0...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> "JOHN" <j...@nospam . com > wrote in message
>
> news:oZidnTzuarn57yTanZ2dnUVZ8sylnZ2d@bt . com ...
>
> > The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in
> > clinical practice today.
>
> They're actually one of the safe, more effective antibiotics available
> today.
I know you sick of hearing this but thought you would be interested in
the latest from the FDA's AER database concerning how "safe" cipro
is.
REPLY:
What you're not understanding is that all antibiotics have side effects.
All medications have rare side effects. All can cause serious problems.
I reviewed that case report of bilateral ureteral obstruction from cipro.
Seems like it was a real phenomenon in this elderly woman on 24 days of
cipro. Of course, it didn't cause permanent damage and the patient did fine
with no long term renal damage. But in pointing that out, that case report
referenced several other articles. Since you have the original reference
you can also look up the works they referenced. Specifically, there have
been studies done looking at thousands of patients looking for crystalluria
and stones and none were found.
So while the very very occasional odd side effect is possible, it by no
means should be considered a standard side effect - especially that is the
only ever reported event of that phenomenon.
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
> So while the very very occasional odd side effect is possible, it by no
> means should be considered a standard side effect - especially that is the
> only ever reported event of that phenomenon.
The medwatch database contains numerous reports of such kidney stones
caused by the quinolone drugs. Be that as it may. But this is not at
all what I was talking about. You did read the three hundred
citations concering spontaneous tendon ruptures and irreversible
peripheral nueropathy that I posted did you not? If not why not?
This is what I have such an issue with: blown tendons and fried
nerves. Permanent disability. Not a fricking cipro kidney stone.
How many antibiotics do you use that are capable of such life long
damage to a patient with as little as one pill? Not to mention SJS,
TENs, Kidney and Liver failure and disfiguring "rashes" as we find
with Factive? Fatal hypoglycemia as we see with Tequin? Fatal liver
damage as we seen with Trovan? Fatal cadio events as we seen with
Raxar and soon with Avelox? How many antibiotics can cause severe CNS
and PNS reactions that last a lifetime? Things like toxic psychosis.
This is what I am bitching about. Not stuff that is minor and goes
away when the script is stopped.
With the quinolones this is NOT the case. Such damage continues LONG
after therapy has been discontinued. In a number of documented cases
well over a decade. It has a profound affect on a DNA level. It is
not an adverse reaction to the drug. It is what the drug DID while it
was in the patient's system that is at issue here.
This is what I think YOU are failing to understand. Most drug
reactions abate when you take away the offending agent (the drug) The
quinolones are unique as the adrs are NOT to the drug itself. As the
drug has a direct toxic affect on the organs and trashes them. This
damage is what you see, not a side effect. And such damage creates a
dominoe effect that involves the entire human body. End result is
mutiple organ failure in some cases.
Like Elvis the drug has "left the building" but the damage it caused
while there, continues for years. This is what makes them so damn
dangerous in the hands of ignorant physicians who do not have a clue
regarding this very real risk. (ignorant refering to a lack of
specific knowledge, not meant as an insult) They have never seen such
a drug before that destroys bacteria by altering it's DNA. When there
is no bacteria present then the DNA of healthy tissue is altered
instead.
So what treatment can you offer to offset alteration of a patient's
DNA caused by the quinolone class? None. How do you reverse such
damage? You cannot. Tell the patient to stop the drug? Sorry, far
too late for that. (Other than prevent additional damage). But the
damage has already been done. Stopping the drug will not reverse it.
Stopping the drug will not "unblow' a tendon or "unfry" a nerve
ending.
Now do you understand?
> So while the very very occasional odd side effect is possible, it by no
> means should be considered a standard side effect - especially that is the
> only ever reported event of that phenomenon.
The medwatch database contains numerous reports of such kidney stones
caused by the quinolone drugs. Be that as it may. But this is not at
all what I was talking about. You did read the three hundred
citations concering spontaneous tendon ruptures and irreversible
peripheral nueropathy that I posted did you not? If not why not?
This is what I have such an issue with: blown tendons and fried
nerves. Permanent disability. Not a fricking cipro kidney stone.
How many antibiotics do you use that are capable of such life long
damage to a patient with as little as one pill? Not to mention SJS,
TENs, Kidney and Liver failure and disfiguring "rashes" as we find
with Factive? Fatal hypoglycemia as we see with Tequin? Fatal liver
damage as we seen with Trovan? Fatal cadio events as we seen with
Raxar and soon with Avelox? How many antibiotics can cause severe CNS
and PNS reactions that last a lifetime? Things like toxic psychosis.
This is what I am bitching about. Not stuff that is minor and goes
away when the script is stopped.
With the quinolones this is NOT the case. Such damage continues LONG
after therapy has been discontinued. In a number of documented cases
well over a decade. It has a profound affect on a DNA level. It is
not an adverse reaction to the drug. It is what the drug DID while it
was in the patient's system that is at issue here.
This is what I think YOU are failing to understand. Most drug
reactions abate when you take away the offending agent (the drug) The
quinolones are unique as the adrs are NOT to the drug itself. As the
drug has a direct toxic affect on the organs and trashes them. This
damage is what you see, not a side effect. And such damage creates a
dominoe effect that involves the entire human body. End result is
mutiple organ failure in some cases.
Like Elvis the drug has "left the building" but the damage it caused
while there, continues for years. This is what makes them so damn
dangerous in the hands of ignorant physicians who do not have a clue
regarding this very real risk. (ignorant refering to a lack of
specific knowledge, not meant as an insult) They have never seen such
a drug before that destroys bacteria by altering it's DNA. When there
is no bacteria present then the DNA of healthy tissue is altered
instead.
So what treatment can you offer to offset alteration of a patient's
DNA caused by the quinolone class? None. How do you reverse such
damage? You cannot. Tell the patient to stop the drug? Sorry, far
too late for that. (Other than prevent additional damage). But the
damage has already been done. Stopping the drug will not reverse it.
Stopping the drug will not "unblow' a tendon or "unfry" a nerve
ending.
Now do you understand?
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
"davidtfull" <davidtfull@aol . com > wrote in message
news:1934c005-9a48-4afa-a982-92992e428479@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups . com ...
>> So while the very very occasional odd side effect is possible, it by no
>> means should be considered a standard side effect - especially that is
>> the
>> only ever reported event of that phenomenon.
>
> The medwatch database contains numerous reports of such kidney stones
> caused by the quinolone drugs.
Define numerous and were they proven by stone analysis to be stones made of
cipro? Having a kidney stone while taking cipro doesn't qualify.
> Be that as it may. But this is not at
> all what I was talking about. You did read the three hundred
> citations concering spontaneous tendon ruptures and irreversible
> peripheral nueropathy that I posted did you not? If not why not?
The risk of tendon rupture is well known and has no novelty for me. This
issue of ureteral stones I found interesting. It's in my line of work.
> This is what I have such an issue with: blown tendons and fried
> nerves. Permanent disability. Not a fricking cipro kidney stone.
I have issues with anaphylaxis which can lead to death. Much more likely to
see that with, oh, let's say amoxicillin. Or are tendons more important to
you than life?
> How many antibiotics do you use that are capable of such life long
> damage to a patient with as little as one pill? Not to mention SJS,
> TENs, Kidney and Liver failure and disfiguring "rashes" as we find
> with Factive? Fatal hypoglycemia as we see with Tequin? Fatal liver
> damage as we seen with Trovan? Fatal cadio events as we seen with
> Raxar and soon with Avelox? How many antibiotics can cause severe CNS
> and PNS reactions that last a lifetime? Things like toxic psychosis.
> This is what I am bitching about. Not stuff that is minor and goes
> away when the script is stopped.
>
> With the quinolones this is NOT the case. Such damage continues LONG
> after therapy has been discontinued. In a number of documented cases
> well over a decade. It has a profound affect on a DNA level. It is
> not an adverse reaction to the drug. It is what the drug DID while it
> was in the patient's system that is at issue here.
>
> This is what I think YOU are failing to understand. Most drug
> reactions abate when you take away the offending agent (the drug) The
> quinolones are unique as the adrs are NOT to the drug itself. As the
> drug has a direct toxic affect on the organs and trashes them. This
> damage is what you see, not a side effect. And such damage creates a
> dominoe effect that involves the entire human body. End result is
> mutiple organ failure in some cases.
>
> Like Elvis the drug has "left the building" but the damage it caused
> while there, continues for years. This is what makes them so damn
> dangerous in the hands of ignorant physicians who do not have a clue
> regarding this very real risk. (ignorant refering to a lack of
> specific knowledge, not meant as an insult) They have never seen such
> a drug before that destroys bacteria by altering it's DNA. When there
> is no bacteria present then the DNA of healthy tissue is altered
> instead.
>
> So what treatment can you offer to offset alteration of a patient's
> DNA caused by the quinolone class? None. How do you reverse such
> damage? You cannot. Tell the patient to stop the drug? Sorry, far
> too late for that. (Other than prevent additional damage). But the
> damage has already been done. Stopping the drug will not reverse it.
> Stopping the drug will not "unblow' a tendon or "unfry" a nerve
> ending.
>
> Now do you understand?
See my other post. You have becomely ridiculously / absurdly /
inappropriately fixated on the side effect profile of one medication. You
likely had some personal experience with this particular medication. All
antibiotics have a laundry list of possible harmful outcomes. Sorry, cipro
isn't special there.
"davidtfull" <davidtfull@aol . com > wrote in message
news:1934c005-9a48-4afa-a982-92992e428479@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups . com ...
>> So while the very very occasional odd side effect is possible, it by no
>> means should be considered a standard side effect - especially that is
>> the
>> only ever reported event of that phenomenon.
>
> The medwatch database contains numerous reports of such kidney stones
> caused by the quinolone drugs.
Define numerous and were they proven by stone analysis to be stones made of
cipro? Having a kidney stone while taking cipro doesn't qualify.
> Be that as it may. But this is not at
> all what I was talking about. You did read the three hundred
> citations concering spontaneous tendon ruptures and irreversible
> peripheral nueropathy that I posted did you not? If not why not?
The risk of tendon rupture is well known and has no novelty for me. This
issue of ureteral stones I found interesting. It's in my line of work.
> This is what I have such an issue with: blown tendons and fried
> nerves. Permanent disability. Not a fricking cipro kidney stone.
I have issues with anaphylaxis which can lead to death. Much more likely to
see that with, oh, let's say amoxicillin. Or are tendons more important to
you than life?
> How many antibiotics do you use that are capable of such life long
> damage to a patient with as little as one pill? Not to mention SJS,
> TENs, Kidney and Liver failure and disfiguring "rashes" as we find
> with Factive? Fatal hypoglycemia as we see with Tequin? Fatal liver
> damage as we seen with Trovan? Fatal cadio events as we seen with
> Raxar and soon with Avelox? How many antibiotics can cause severe CNS
> and PNS reactions that last a lifetime? Things like toxic psychosis.
> This is what I am bitching about. Not stuff that is minor and goes
> away when the script is stopped.
>
> With the quinolones this is NOT the case. Such damage continues LONG
> after therapy has been discontinued. In a number of documented cases
> well over a decade. It has a profound affect on a DNA level. It is
> not an adverse reaction to the drug. It is what the drug DID while it
> was in the patient's system that is at issue here.
>
> This is what I think YOU are failing to understand. Most drug
> reactions abate when you take away the offending agent (the drug) The
> quinolones are unique as the adrs are NOT to the drug itself. As the
> drug has a direct toxic affect on the organs and trashes them. This
> damage is what you see, not a side effect. And such damage creates a
> dominoe effect that involves the entire human body. End result is
> mutiple organ failure in some cases.
>
> Like Elvis the drug has "left the building" but the damage it caused
> while there, continues for years. This is what makes them so damn
> dangerous in the hands of ignorant physicians who do not have a clue
> regarding this very real risk. (ignorant refering to a lack of
> specific knowledge, not meant as an insult) They have never seen such
> a drug before that destroys bacteria by altering it's DNA. When there
> is no bacteria present then the DNA of healthy tissue is altered
> instead.
>
> So what treatment can you offer to offset alteration of a patient's
> DNA caused by the quinolone class? None. How do you reverse such
> damage? You cannot. Tell the patient to stop the drug? Sorry, far
> too late for that. (Other than prevent additional damage). But the
> damage has already been done. Stopping the drug will not reverse it.
> Stopping the drug will not "unblow' a tendon or "unfry" a nerve
> ending.
>
> Now do you understand?
See my other post. You have becomely ridiculously / absurdly /
inappropriately fixated on the side effect profile of one medication. You
likely had some personal experience with this particular medication. All
antibiotics have a laundry list of possible harmful outcomes. Sorry, cipro
isn't special there.
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
On Feb 27, 9:32 pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0...@yahoo . com > wrote:
. You have becomely ridiculously / absurdly /
> inappropriately fixated on the side effect profile of one medication. Y=
ou likely had some personal experience with this particular medication.
Being blinded and crippled for eight years from cipro, floxin and
levaquin tends to do that to a person, especially when the doctors
responsible tell you it could not POSSIBLY be the drug while the other
dozen or so who are trying to fix this mess (he caused) years later
state the exact opposite.
>All > antibiotics have a laundry list of possible harmful outcomes. Sorr=
y, cipro
> isn't special there.-
Would of been rather helpful if the urologist had taken the time to
share a few items on that laundry list with me don't you think?
Rather than telling me the adrs I was suffering, which were on that
list, were NOT related to the quinolones I was on?
And I would have to counter that you have becomely "ridiculously /
absurdly / inappropriately fixated" on defending a toxic drug you
consider to be safe, when in fact it is a dangerous drug that has been
crippling patients for years. So probably best that we end this
discussion on friendly terms and just agree to disagree.
It's appears I will never change your mind and surely you will never
be able to change mine. My life as I knew it to be prior to these
drugs is over. There is no fixing this. Permanently disabled.
Funny you should state that tendon rupture is old news. I have a
patient survey form on the research site that visitors fill out and
out of well over 400 responses to date less than 1% indicated that
their treating physician had any knowledge concerning these reactions
and the overwhelming majority of these treating physicians claimed
that such a reaction was NOT even remotely possible with the quinolone
class. Comforting to know that your peers are so well informed. At
least you are part of that rare 1% who at least has a clue.
I wish you well and hope you might have learned something here. Take
care.
btw: Bladder stones usually occur with cipro when the PH is out of
whack. Something to keep in mind for your patients. Glad to know
that you are warning them about blowing a tendon and peripheral
nueropathy. 99% of your peers are not. I know for a fact that the
urologist who ruined my life had no such prior knowledge. If he had I
would not be such a cripple today. But then again this partially my
fault for trusting him to be informed to begin with.
A crucial mistake I will never repeat again.
Good luck to you (as well as your patients) and may God bless.
On Feb 27, 9:32 pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0...@yahoo . com > wrote:
. You have becomely ridiculously / absurdly /
> inappropriately fixated on the side effect profile of one medication. Y=
ou likely had some personal experience with this particular medication.
Being blinded and crippled for eight years from cipro, floxin and
levaquin tends to do that to a person, especially when the doctors
responsible tell you it could not POSSIBLY be the drug while the other
dozen or so who are trying to fix this mess (he caused) years later
state the exact opposite.
>All > antibiotics have a laundry list of possible harmful outcomes. Sorr=
y, cipro
> isn't special there.-
Would of been rather helpful if the urologist had taken the time to
share a few items on that laundry list with me don't you think?
Rather than telling me the adrs I was suffering, which were on that
list, were NOT related to the quinolones I was on?
And I would have to counter that you have becomely "ridiculously /
absurdly / inappropriately fixated" on defending a toxic drug you
consider to be safe, when in fact it is a dangerous drug that has been
crippling patients for years. So probably best that we end this
discussion on friendly terms and just agree to disagree.
It's appears I will never change your mind and surely you will never
be able to change mine. My life as I knew it to be prior to these
drugs is over. There is no fixing this. Permanently disabled.
Funny you should state that tendon rupture is old news. I have a
patient survey form on the research site that visitors fill out and
out of well over 400 responses to date less than 1% indicated that
their treating physician had any knowledge concerning these reactions
and the overwhelming majority of these treating physicians claimed
that such a reaction was NOT even remotely possible with the quinolone
class. Comforting to know that your peers are so well informed. At
least you are part of that rare 1% who at least has a clue.
I wish you well and hope you might have learned something here. Take
care.
btw: Bladder stones usually occur with cipro when the PH is out of
whack. Something to keep in mind for your patients. Glad to know
that you are warning them about blowing a tendon and peripheral
nueropathy. 99% of your peers are not. I know for a fact that the
urologist who ruined my life had no such prior knowledge. If he had I
would not be such a cripple today. But then again this partially my
fault for trusting him to be informed to begin with.
A crucial mistake I will never repeat again.
Good luck to you (as well as your patients) and may God bless.
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
"davidtfull" <davidtfull@aol . com > wrote in message
news:ca6e5dc2-44a8-4552-890d-92b23cf954b2@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
On Feb 27, 9:32 pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0...@yahoo . com > wrote:
. You have becomely ridiculously / absurdly /
> inappropriately fixated on the side effect profile of one medication. You
> likely had some personal experience with this particular medication.
Being blinded and crippled for eight years from cipro, floxin and
levaquin tends to do that to a person, especially when the doctors
responsible tell you it could not POSSIBLY be the drug while the other
dozen or so who are trying to fix this mess (he caused) years later
state the exact opposite.
>All > antibiotics have a laundry list of possible harmful outcomes. Sorry,
>cipro
> isn't special there.-
Would of been rather helpful if the urologist had taken the time to
share a few items on that laundry list with me don't you think?
Rather than telling me the adrs I was suffering, which were on that
list, were NOT related to the quinolones I was on?
And I would have to counter that you have becomely "ridiculously /
absurdly / inappropriately fixated" on defending a toxic drug you
consider to be safe, when in fact it is a dangerous drug that has been
crippling patients for years. So probably best that we end this
discussion on friendly terms and just agree to disagree.
It's appears I will never change your mind and surely you will never
be able to change mine. My life as I knew it to be prior to these
drugs is over. There is no fixing this. Permanently disabled.
Funny you should state that tendon rupture is old news. I have a
patient survey form on the research site that visitors fill out and
out of well over 400 responses to date less than 1% indicated that
their treating physician had any knowledge concerning these reactions
and the overwhelming majority of these treating physicians claimed
that such a reaction was NOT even remotely possible with the quinolone
class. Comforting to know that your peers are so well informed. At
least you are part of that rare 1% who at least has a clue.
I wish you well and hope you might have learned something here. Take
care.
btw: Bladder stones usually occur with cipro when the PH is out of
whack. Something to keep in mind for your patients. Glad to know
that you are warning them about blowing a tendon and peripheral
nueropathy. 99% of your peers are not. I know for a fact that the
urologist who ruined my life had no such prior knowledge. If he had I
would not be such a cripple today. But then again this partially my
fault for trusting him to be informed to begin with.
A crucial mistake I will never repeat again.
Good luck to you (as well as your patients) and may God bless.
***REPLY***
Sorry, I don't know you personally - that said, you could be frankly lying
about your claimed condition. Or, you could be misinformed. Or, you could
just be confused. I don' t know and won't pretend to, but I keep my
opinions of things like safety of a medication to medical fact, not internet
rumor.
That said, just wanted to point out, you commented "bladder stones" above.
Cipro has no association with bladder stones. There is one known case of
ureteral stones that you pointed out. Not bladder stones. Since there is
only one known case, the association to pH you comment on is based on in
vitro data which has not proven to have any correlation in humans.
You stated above,
" I have a
patient survey form on the research site that visitors fill out and
out of well over 400 responses to date less than 1% indicated that
their treating physician had any knowledge concerning these reactions
and the overwhelming majority of these treating physicians claimed
that such a reaction was NOT even remotely possible with the quinolone
class."
Here's a thought - if you want to find out what a doctor knows about a
medication, send the doctor the survey, not ask his patients. How is a
patient supposed to know if his doctor is aware of a certain factoid?
Regarding tendon rupture and my comment that it is "old news" - norfloxacin
was reported (if I recall correctly) to cause this or something close to it
in the early 1980's. I'd say 20 years would qualify as "old news". The
actual risk, as measured in a large study in the UK is 0.32 per 100 patient
years. And that is tendonopathy... less than 1/3 of those patients had a
rupture. So, if I give a 10 day course of cipro, that would be an estimated
risk of less than 0.0001% to have some degree of tendinopathy.
Oh, if only medications were perfect...
"davidtfull" <davidtfull@aol . com > wrote in message
news:ca6e5dc2-44a8-4552-890d-92b23cf954b2@s19g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
On Feb 27, 9:32 pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0...@yahoo . com > wrote:
. You have becomely ridiculously / absurdly /
> inappropriately fixated on the side effect profile of one medication. You
> likely had some personal experience with this particular medication.
Being blinded and crippled for eight years from cipro, floxin and
levaquin tends to do that to a person, especially when the doctors
responsible tell you it could not POSSIBLY be the drug while the other
dozen or so who are trying to fix this mess (he caused) years later
state the exact opposite.
>All > antibiotics have a laundry list of possible harmful outcomes. Sorry,
>cipro
> isn't special there.-
Would of been rather helpful if the urologist had taken the time to
share a few items on that laundry list with me don't you think?
Rather than telling me the adrs I was suffering, which were on that
list, were NOT related to the quinolones I was on?
And I would have to counter that you have becomely "ridiculously /
absurdly / inappropriately fixated" on defending a toxic drug you
consider to be safe, when in fact it is a dangerous drug that has been
crippling patients for years. So probably best that we end this
discussion on friendly terms and just agree to disagree.
It's appears I will never change your mind and surely you will never
be able to change mine. My life as I knew it to be prior to these
drugs is over. There is no fixing this. Permanently disabled.
Funny you should state that tendon rupture is old news. I have a
patient survey form on the research site that visitors fill out and
out of well over 400 responses to date less than 1% indicated that
their treating physician had any knowledge concerning these reactions
and the overwhelming majority of these treating physicians claimed
that such a reaction was NOT even remotely possible with the quinolone
class. Comforting to know that your peers are so well informed. At
least you are part of that rare 1% who at least has a clue.
I wish you well and hope you might have learned something here. Take
care.
btw: Bladder stones usually occur with cipro when the PH is out of
whack. Something to keep in mind for your patients. Glad to know
that you are warning them about blowing a tendon and peripheral
nueropathy. 99% of your peers are not. I know for a fact that the
urologist who ruined my life had no such prior knowledge. If he had I
would not be such a cripple today. But then again this partially my
fault for trusting him to be informed to begin with.
A crucial mistake I will never repeat again.
Good luck to you (as well as your patients) and may God bless.
***REPLY***
Sorry, I don't know you personally - that said, you could be frankly lying
about your claimed condition. Or, you could be misinformed. Or, you could
just be confused. I don' t know and won't pretend to, but I keep my
opinions of things like safety of a medication to medical fact, not internet
rumor.
That said, just wanted to point out, you commented "bladder stones" above.
Cipro has no association with bladder stones. There is one known case of
ureteral stones that you pointed out. Not bladder stones. Since there is
only one known case, the association to pH you comment on is based on in
vitro data which has not proven to have any correlation in humans.
You stated above,
" I have a
patient survey form on the research site that visitors fill out and
out of well over 400 responses to date less than 1% indicated that
their treating physician had any knowledge concerning these reactions
and the overwhelming majority of these treating physicians claimed
that such a reaction was NOT even remotely possible with the quinolone
class."
Here's a thought - if you want to find out what a doctor knows about a
medication, send the doctor the survey, not ask his patients. How is a
patient supposed to know if his doctor is aware of a certain factoid?
Regarding tendon rupture and my comment that it is "old news" - norfloxacin
was reported (if I recall correctly) to cause this or something close to it
in the early 1980's. I'd say 20 years would qualify as "old news". The
actual risk, as measured in a large study in the UK is 0.32 per 100 patient
years. And that is tendonopathy... less than 1/3 of those patients had a
rupture. So, if I give a 10 day course of cipro, that would be an estimated
risk of less than 0.0001% to have some degree of tendinopathy.
Oh, if only medications were perfect...
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
If nothing else you are tenascious in your defense of this drug:
Here are a few more studies regarding crystalluria. First reported in
1986, so for more than twenty years, just like the tendon issues,
nobody knows anything about it. Thorsteinsson et al clearly
established such an association in human patients twenty years ago.
Nakano et al established the relationship to bladder stones ten years
later. Both of which cite to urinary pH being a factor. Again I have
hundreds of such studies.
Crystalluria and ciprofloxacin, influence of urinary pH and hydration.
Chemotherapy. 1986;32(5):408-17.
Thorsteinsson SB, Bergan T, Oddsdottir S, Rohwedder R, Holm R.
PMID: 3019613 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Fluoroquinolone associated bladder stone.
Nakano M, Ishihara S, Deguchi T, Kuriyama M, Kawada Y.
J Urol. 1997 Mar;157(3):946. No abstract available.
PMID: 9072608 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Hammann C, Guelpa G.[Drug-induced calculi]
Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax. 1993 Oct 12;82(41):1129-32. French.
PMID: 8210886 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
BILATERAL HYDRONEPHROSIS FROM CIPROFLOXACIN INDUCED CRYSTALLURIA AND
STONE FORMATION. The Journal of Urology, Volume 164, Issue 2, Pages
438-438 N. CHOPRA, P. FINE, B. PRICE, I. ATLAS
Ciprofloxacin crystalluria
Giovanni B. Fogazzi1,, Giuseppe Garigali1, Claudia Brambilla2 and
Michel Daudon3
Ciprofloxacin can cause crystalluria in alkaline urine (especially at
pH > 7.3), both in experimental animals and in healthy human
volunteers after oral or intravenous administration [1-3B2B3].
Acute interstitial nephritis in a cardiac transplant recipient
receiving ciprofloxacin
Luis J. Rosado, MD, Mark S. Siskind MD, Jack G. Copeland, MD
I think this is the study you were referring to and it too is OLD
NEWS. The rates have been shown to be much higher than that since
this six year old study.
Fluoroquinolones and Risk of Achilles Tendon Disorders: Case-Control
Study [van der Linden PD et al. BMJ 2002;324:1306]:. The authors
conclude that this adverse effect shows up in 3.2 cases per 1,000
patient.
"So, if I give a 10 day course of cipro, that would be an estimated
risk of less than 0.0001% to have some degree of tendinopathy."
Really?
Then how do we account for this:
"Arthropathy occurred more frequently in patients who received
ciprofloxacin than the
comparator and was defined as any condition affecting a joint or
periarticular tissue that may
have been temporary or permanent (including bursitis, inflammation of
the muscular or
tendinous attachment to the bone, and tendonitis). The affected joints
included: knee,
elbow, ankle, hip, wrist, and shoulder. Arthropathy, as shown in Table
1, was seen in 9.3%
(31/335) of ciprofloxacin patients at 6 weeks. The rates were 13.7%
and 9.5%, respectively, at 1 year. Arthropathy occurred more
frequently in patients treated with ciprofloxacin than control,
regardless of whether they received IV or oral drug".
Source: FDA Summary of Clinical Review of Studies Submitted in
Response to a
Pediatric Written Request 2004
And these studies were conducted by the manufacturers.
13.7% does not compare to the .32% you are citing.
As such the risk would be about 1 in 10.
"Arthropathy occurred more frequently in patients treated with
ciprofloxacin...The affected joints included: knee,
elbow, ankle, hip, wrist, and shoulder. Arthropathy was seen in
9.3%..."
Yep sure sounds like a safe drug.
Not confused in the least. My diagnosis was confirmed by at least
half a dozen physicians. Rheumatologist, hematologist, gastrologist,
and my orthopedic surgeon. Not to mention my opthanuerologist and
nuerologist.
Permanent diplopia, chornic tendonitis, rupture of the achilles
tendon, destruction of the knee cartilage, reuptured abdominal
muscles, irreversible peripherial nueropathy, liver and kidney cystic
formations, atrophic heart valve, the list is endless. And my medical
bills are rapidly approaching a half a million dollars so far. Have
not been able to fix anything. I am far from being an isolated case
either, my name is "Legions".
Are we not done yet? You are starting to annoy me.
If nothing else you are tenascious in your defense of this drug:
Here are a few more studies regarding crystalluria. First reported in
1986, so for more than twenty years, just like the tendon issues,
nobody knows anything about it. Thorsteinsson et al clearly
established such an association in human patients twenty years ago.
Nakano et al established the relationship to bladder stones ten years
later. Both of which cite to urinary pH being a factor. Again I have
hundreds of such studies.
Crystalluria and ciprofloxacin, influence of urinary pH and hydration.
Chemotherapy. 1986;32(5):408-17.
Thorsteinsson SB, Bergan T, Oddsdottir S, Rohwedder R, Holm R.
PMID: 3019613 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Fluoroquinolone associated bladder stone.
Nakano M, Ishihara S, Deguchi T, Kuriyama M, Kawada Y.
J Urol. 1997 Mar;157(3):946. No abstract available.
PMID: 9072608 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Hammann C, Guelpa G.[Drug-induced calculi]
Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax. 1993 Oct 12;82(41):1129-32. French.
PMID: 8210886 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
BILATERAL HYDRONEPHROSIS FROM CIPROFLOXACIN INDUCED CRYSTALLURIA AND
STONE FORMATION. The Journal of Urology, Volume 164, Issue 2, Pages
438-438 N. CHOPRA, P. FINE, B. PRICE, I. ATLAS
Ciprofloxacin crystalluria
Giovanni B. Fogazzi1,, Giuseppe Garigali1, Claudia Brambilla2 and
Michel Daudon3
Ciprofloxacin can cause crystalluria in alkaline urine (especially at
pH > 7.3), both in experimental animals and in healthy human
volunteers after oral or intravenous administration [1-3B2B3].
Acute interstitial nephritis in a cardiac transplant recipient
receiving ciprofloxacin
Luis J. Rosado, MD, Mark S. Siskind MD, Jack G. Copeland, MD
I think this is the study you were referring to and it too is OLD
NEWS. The rates have been shown to be much higher than that since
this six year old study.
Fluoroquinolones and Risk of Achilles Tendon Disorders: Case-Control
Study [van der Linden PD et al. BMJ 2002;324:1306]:. The authors
conclude that this adverse effect shows up in 3.2 cases per 1,000
patient.
"So, if I give a 10 day course of cipro, that would be an estimated
risk of less than 0.0001% to have some degree of tendinopathy."
Really?
Then how do we account for this:
"Arthropathy occurred more frequently in patients who received
ciprofloxacin than the
comparator and was defined as any condition affecting a joint or
periarticular tissue that may
have been temporary or permanent (including bursitis, inflammation of
the muscular or
tendinous attachment to the bone, and tendonitis). The affected joints
included: knee,
elbow, ankle, hip, wrist, and shoulder. Arthropathy, as shown in Table
1, was seen in 9.3%
(31/335) of ciprofloxacin patients at 6 weeks. The rates were 13.7%
and 9.5%, respectively, at 1 year. Arthropathy occurred more
frequently in patients treated with ciprofloxacin than control,
regardless of whether they received IV or oral drug".
Source: FDA Summary of Clinical Review of Studies Submitted in
Response to a
Pediatric Written Request 2004
And these studies were conducted by the manufacturers.
13.7% does not compare to the .32% you are citing.
As such the risk would be about 1 in 10.
"Arthropathy occurred more frequently in patients treated with
ciprofloxacin...The affected joints included: knee,
elbow, ankle, hip, wrist, and shoulder. Arthropathy was seen in
9.3%..."
Yep sure sounds like a safe drug.
Not confused in the least. My diagnosis was confirmed by at least
half a dozen physicians. Rheumatologist, hematologist, gastrologist,
and my orthopedic surgeon. Not to mention my opthanuerologist and
nuerologist.
Permanent diplopia, chornic tendonitis, rupture of the achilles
tendon, destruction of the knee cartilage, reuptured abdominal
muscles, irreversible peripherial nueropathy, liver and kidney cystic
formations, atrophic heart valve, the list is endless. And my medical
bills are rapidly approaching a half a million dollars so far. Have
not been able to fix anything. I am far from being an isolated case
either, my name is "Legions".
Are we not done yet? You are starting to annoy me.
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
"davidtfull" <davidtfull@aol . com > wrote in message
news:bc0dbaa1-3aed-433b-af95-af8ad26d450d@s8g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>
> If nothing else you are tenascious in your defense of this drug:
The one fixated on the drug is you. I acknowledge that it has numerous side
effects. What I have been saying and what you have been ignoring, several
times, is that if you look as closely at other antibiotics you will similar
and often worse problems.
> Here are a few more studies regarding crystalluria. First reported in
> 1986, so for more than twenty years, just like the tendon issues,
> nobody knows anything about it. Thorsteinsson et al clearly
> established such an association in human patients twenty years ago.
> Nakano et al established the relationship to bladder stones ten years
> later. Both of which cite to urinary pH being a factor. Again I have
> hundreds of such studies.
Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people have
crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to develop
kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the discussion. This
at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no importance.
> Crystalluria and ciprofloxacin, influence of urinary pH and hydration.
> Chemotherapy. 1986;32(5):408-17.
> Thorsteinsson SB, Bergan T, Oddsdottir S, Rohwedder R, Holm R.
> PMID: 3019613 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
>
> Fluoroquinolone associated bladder stone.
> Nakano M, Ishihara S, Deguchi T, Kuriyama M, Kawada Y.
> J Urol. 1997 Mar;157(3):946. No abstract available.
> PMID: 9072608 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
cute - a reference you have only a title for with no abstract and no full
text.
So this article involved Tosufloxacin in a 64 yo woman with a h/o cervical
cancer a hysterectomy who had complete bladder function failure and required
self catheterization to get the urine out of her bladder. She had recurrent
Psuedomonal infections - very concerning - which had been susceptible to
this medication and was treated with it periodically for many years. She
was found to have bladder stones (VERY common in patients with bladder
failure and recurrent infections). Stone analysis revealed Calcium
Phosphate stones, consistent with her recurrent infections, which included
the medication Tosufloxacin. They don't comment on the percentages.
This is an example of your lack of knowledge and trying to form medical
opinions based on the titles of journal articles! Bladder stones do not
form because of metabolic abnormalties. They form because of incomplete
emptying - be it from a large prostate or, as in the case, probably a
bladder damaged from either her prior surgery or directly from her cancer.
The fact that her inevitable bladder stone incorporated some of the
medication that was being used to prevent her from dying from overwhelming
sepsis with a particularly virulent organism is neither surprising nor
problematic. Going back to my original point, cipro - or any other
quinolone - does not cause bladder stones and this article does not say
otherwise.
> Hammann C, Guelpa G.[Drug-induced calculi]
> Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax. 1993 Oct 12;82(41):1129-32. French.
> PMID: 8210886 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
>
> BILATERAL HYDRONEPHROSIS FROM CIPROFLOXACIN INDUCED CRYSTALLURIA AND
> STONE FORMATION. The Journal of Urology, Volume 164, Issue 2, Pages
> 438-438 N. CHOPRA, P. FINE, B. PRICE, I. ATLAS
>
> Ciprofloxacin crystalluria
> Giovanni B. Fogazzi1,, Giuseppe Garigali1, Claudia Brambilla2 and
> Michel Daudon3
> Ciprofloxacin can cause crystalluria in alkaline urine (especially at
> pH > 7.3), both in experimental animals and in healthy human
> volunteers after oral or intravenous administration [1-3B2B3].
>
> Acute interstitial nephritis in a cardiac transplant recipient
> receiving ciprofloxacin
> Luis J. Rosado, MD, Mark S. Siskind MD, Jack G. Copeland, MD
>
> I think this is the study you were referring to and it too is OLD
> NEWS.
It was published on or around 2003, actually. But thanks for playing.
Remainder is repetitive an snipped.
"davidtfull" <davidtfull@aol . com > wrote in message
news:bc0dbaa1-3aed-433b-af95-af8ad26d450d@s8g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
>
> If nothing else you are tenascious in your defense of this drug:
The one fixated on the drug is you. I acknowledge that it has numerous side
effects. What I have been saying and what you have been ignoring, several
times, is that if you look as closely at other antibiotics you will similar
and often worse problems.
> Here are a few more studies regarding crystalluria. First reported in
> 1986, so for more than twenty years, just like the tendon issues,
> nobody knows anything about it. Thorsteinsson et al clearly
> established such an association in human patients twenty years ago.
> Nakano et al established the relationship to bladder stones ten years
> later. Both of which cite to urinary pH being a factor. Again I have
> hundreds of such studies.
Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people have
crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to develop
kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the discussion. This
at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no importance.
> Crystalluria and ciprofloxacin, influence of urinary pH and hydration.
> Chemotherapy. 1986;32(5):408-17.
> Thorsteinsson SB, Bergan T, Oddsdottir S, Rohwedder R, Holm R.
> PMID: 3019613 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
>
> Fluoroquinolone associated bladder stone.
> Nakano M, Ishihara S, Deguchi T, Kuriyama M, Kawada Y.
> J Urol. 1997 Mar;157(3):946. No abstract available.
> PMID: 9072608 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
cute - a reference you have only a title for with no abstract and no full
text.
So this article involved Tosufloxacin in a 64 yo woman with a h/o cervical
cancer a hysterectomy who had complete bladder function failure and required
self catheterization to get the urine out of her bladder. She had recurrent
Psuedomonal infections - very concerning - which had been susceptible to
this medication and was treated with it periodically for many years. She
was found to have bladder stones (VERY common in patients with bladder
failure and recurrent infections). Stone analysis revealed Calcium
Phosphate stones, consistent with her recurrent infections, which included
the medication Tosufloxacin. They don't comment on the percentages.
This is an example of your lack of knowledge and trying to form medical
opinions based on the titles of journal articles! Bladder stones do not
form because of metabolic abnormalties. They form because of incomplete
emptying - be it from a large prostate or, as in the case, probably a
bladder damaged from either her prior surgery or directly from her cancer.
The fact that her inevitable bladder stone incorporated some of the
medication that was being used to prevent her from dying from overwhelming
sepsis with a particularly virulent organism is neither surprising nor
problematic. Going back to my original point, cipro - or any other
quinolone - does not cause bladder stones and this article does not say
otherwise.
> Hammann C, Guelpa G.[Drug-induced calculi]
> Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax. 1993 Oct 12;82(41):1129-32. French.
> PMID: 8210886 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
>
> BILATERAL HYDRONEPHROSIS FROM CIPROFLOXACIN INDUCED CRYSTALLURIA AND
> STONE FORMATION. The Journal of Urology, Volume 164, Issue 2, Pages
> 438-438 N. CHOPRA, P. FINE, B. PRICE, I. ATLAS
>
> Ciprofloxacin crystalluria
> Giovanni B. Fogazzi1,, Giuseppe Garigali1, Claudia Brambilla2 and
> Michel Daudon3
> Ciprofloxacin can cause crystalluria in alkaline urine (especially at
> pH > 7.3), both in experimental animals and in healthy human
> volunteers after oral or intravenous administration [1-3B2B3].
>
> Acute interstitial nephritis in a cardiac transplant recipient
> receiving ciprofloxacin
> Luis J. Rosado, MD, Mark S. Siskind MD, Jack G. Copeland, MD
>
> I think this is the study you were referring to and it too is OLD
> NEWS.
It was published on or around 2003, actually. But thanks for playing.
Remainder is repetitive an snipped.
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
"Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
importance." skeptic
The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.
The fact that my original kidney stone was induced by Cipro seems to
have escaped your notice. A re-challenge nine months later produce
yet another stone. Both containing Cipro. Since that time, with no
further exposure to the quinolones I have been "stone free" for over
eight years now. The same as I was prior to being given Cipro, where
I was stone free for forty five years. By any scientific standards
that is reasonable "cause and effect" as there were no "underlying"
medical conditions that would cause such stone formations.
In the above statement you reveal your total and complete ignorance
regarding this whole affair. You seem to believe that crystalluria is
of no importance.
"In clinical practice, a crystalluria due to ciprofloxacin has been
recorded in patients [1], as well as in a patient who developed
obstructive uropathy due to massive ciprofloxacin crystal
precipitation in the distal ureters and bladder, after a 24-day
treatment at a dose of 500 mg twice daily [2]. In addition, a new case
with acute renal failure and ciprofloxacin crystalluria has recently
been published [3]. "
Citing to:
Ciprofloxacin crystalluria
Giovanni B. Fogazzi1,, Giuseppe Garigali1, Claudia Brambilla2 and
Michel Daudon3
1Research laboratory on urine of Unità Operativa di Nefrologia,
Fondazione IRCCS, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Mangiagalli e Regina
Elena, 2Unità Operativa di Nefrologia Ospedale S. Paolo, Milano, Italy
and 3Service de Biochimie A, Hôpital Necker, Paris, France
* ndt.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/21/10/2982#B5
Yet you state that obstructive uropathy and renal failure due to cipro
induced crystalluria is of no "clinical significance" and "of no
importance." Neither is spontaneous tendon ruptures or peripheral
neuropathy I would then assume as well. I keep trying to end this
useless discussion and yet you keep on challenging and insulting me.
But I cannot allow you to post frivolous unsupported statements such
as that.
1. Boll P and Tillotson G. (1995) Tolerability of fluoroquinolone
antibiotics. Drug Safety 13:344-358.
2. Chopra N, Fine PL, Price B, et al. (2000) Bilateral hydronephrosis
from ciprofloxacin induced crystalluria and stone formation. J Urol
164:438.
3. Sedlacek M, Suriawinata AA, Schoolwert A, et al. (2006)
Ciprofloxacin crystal nephropathy - a 'new' cause of acute renal
failure [letter]. Nephrol Dial Transplant doi:10.1093/ndt/gfl160.
OK, let us talk about relativity, another attempt you made at changing
the course of the discussion:
oral cefixime or trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole / IV ceftazidime; IV
ceftazidime followed by oral cefixime; and sequential IV ceftazidime
to oral trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole
vs.
Cipro
Study 100169
Bottom line: Ciprofloxacin patients were more likely to report more
than one event and on more than one occasion compared to control
patients and arthropathy occurred more frequently in patients treated
with ciprofloxacin than control, regardless of whether they received
IV or oral drug.
Study 100169
This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled,
parallel group,
multinational, multicenter pediatric clinical trial. Patients from 1
year to < 17 years diagnosed with complicated urinary tract infection
(cUTI) or pyelonephritis were enrolled. Patients were stratified prior
to randomization based on whether, in the opinion of the clinical
investigator; intravenous (IV) therapy was initially warranted.
Patients were then randomized to receive either ciprofloxacin or
comparator antibiotics. In the first stratum, ciprofloxacin oral
suspension was compared to the comparator regimens of oral cefixime or
trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX) [in Canada only]. In the
second stratum ciprofloxacin (IV or IV followed by oral suspension)
was compared to one of the following comparator regimens: IV
ceftazidime; IV ceftazidime followed by oral cefixime; and sequential
IV ceftazidime to oral TMP/SMX [in Canada only].
Arthropathy occurred more frequently in patients who received
ciprofloxacin than the
comparator and was defined as any condition affecting a joint or
periarticular tissue that may have been temporary or permanent
(including bursitis, inflammation of the muscular or tendinous
attachment to the bone, and tendonitis). The affected joints included:
knee, elbow, ankle, hip, wrist, and shoulder. Arthropathy, as shown in
Table 1, was seen in 9.3% (31/335) of ciprofloxacin patients versus 6%
(21/349) of comparator patients at 6 weeks
The rates were 13.7% and 9.5%, respectively, at 1 year. Arthropathy
occurred
more frequently in patients treated with ciprofloxacin than control,
regardless of whether
they received IV or oral drug. Ciprofloxacin patients were more likely
to report more than one event and on more than one occasion compared
to control patients (37% [17/46] versus 24% [8/33]).
Arthropathy occurred in all age groups and the rates in the
ciprofloxacin arm were
consistently higher than in the control arm,.
The arthropathy rates in patients treated with oral versus those
treated with IV (IV alone or sequential IV to oral therapy) at six
weeks were different. The arthropathy rates in the oral stratum were
9.1% (27/296) for ciprofloxacin and 6.9% (21/304) for the comparator
groups. The arthropathy rates in the IV stratum were 10.3% (4/39) for
ciprofloxacin and 0% (0/45) for the comparator groups.
The arthropathy rates were similar between males and females and
consistent between
treatment groups. The rates were 13.9% (38/273) and 10.6% (30/284) in
females compared to 12.9% (8/62) and 4.6% (3/65) in males for
ciprofloxacin and comparator, respectively.
Arthropathy rates in patients with cUTI were 12.2% (20/164) for
ciprofloxacin versus 9.6% (16/166) for comparator, and in patients
with pyelonephritis the rates were 6.4% (11/171) for ciprofloxacin
versus 2.7% (5/183) for the comparator.
There was a bigger difference between treatment group arthropathy
rates in the United States (21.0% [13/62] for ciprofloxacin versus
11.3% [8/71] for comparator) than in the overall rates.
The incidence of neurological events from initial dosing through 6
weeks up follow-up was 2.7% (9/335) in the ciprofloxacin group and
2.0% (7/349) in the comparator group.
The overall incidence of adverse events at six weeks was 41% (138/335)
in the ciprofloxacin arm compared to 31% (109/349) in the control
arm...Serious adverse events were seen in 7.5% (25/335) of
ciprofloxacin patients compared to 5.7% (20/349) of the control
patients and discontinuation of drug due to adverse events was seen in
3% (10/335) of ciprofloxacin patients and 1.4% (5/349) of control
patients.
Source:
Division of Special Pathogen and Immunologic Drug Products
Summary of Clinical Review of Studies Submitted in Response to a
Pediatric Written Request
Applications:
19-537/S-049, ciprofloxacin tablets
20-780/S-013, ciprofloxacin oral suspension
19-847/S-027, ciprofloxacin IV 10 mg/mL
19-857/S-031, ciprofloxacin IV 5% dextrose
Applicant: Bayer Corporation, Pharmaceutical Division 400 Morgan Lane
West Haven, Connecticut 06516
Drug Name Established: Ciprofloxacin
Proprietary: Cipro(R)
Route: Oral or IV
More adverse events were seen with Cipro and more patients
discontinued the drug due to these adverse reactions. As such Cipro
has a higher RISK factor than oral cefixime or trimethoprim/
sulfamethoxazole / IV ceftazidime; IV ceftazidime followed by oral
cefixime; and sequential IV ceftazidime to oral trimethoprim/
sulfamethoxazole in regards to manifesting adverse reactions. A 10%
higher risk factor in fact.
Now let's take a look at doxycycline.
Cipro vs. Doxycycline
60 Day Cipro Study
Bottom line: Doxycycline tends to have fewer side effects than Cipro.
(That is why the CDC recommended in November of 2001 that all those
needing antibiotics against anthrax--for treatment and prevention--be
given doxycycline, not Cipro.)
Adverse events at 30 days, by most recent antimicrobial agent, all
sites, 2001-2002
All Adverse events:
Day 30
Ciprofloxacin 77 out of 737 patients stated as 10.5%
Doxycycline 71 out of 2,050 patients stated at 3.4%
The overall rate of reported adverse events reported for Cipro was
16.5% vs. 3.4% for Doxycycline.
Once again more adrs with Cipro than Doxycycline. You will find this
with every other antibiotic currently in clinical use today.
So yes, the "game" is over and you lost. Cipro is NOT a safe
antibiotic. It is every bit as dangerous and at times more so than
any other antibiotic on the market today. 1 in 10 chance of having a
serious joint problem, as well as a 41% chance of having an adverse
reaction. Associated with obstructive uropathy and renal failure due
to cipro induced crystalluria, which you find to be of no importance.
But you are absolutely correct about one thing here in this entire
discussion. I have to be absolutely "loony" to think that you are
even listening to a single word I say.
You see I view you as nothing more than a glorified mechanic who is in
love with his tools. A fraud in white if you would. A true physician
would have shown an interest in the information I provided and
questioned the wisdom of their prescription practices. All you have
done is harass and insult me and side with the drug rep with the 40 DD
chest. You are simply not worth any more effort. Frankly "Doctor" I
don't give a damn whether you believe me or not. I could care less if
you think I am a nutcase.
As such, if you would be kind enough to stop responding with insults
and frivolous opinions we can end this. I'd much rather you remain
silent and thought a fool than to continue to speak up and remove all
doubt as you persist in doing. If you do not wish to listen with an
open mind why then do you continue to beg for a response? Is your ego
so huge you have to have the final word? OK. I'll grant you that
one. Let it be "thanks for playing", instead of another round of
patronization and insults delivered from your elevated pedestal.
I'm not the least bit interested in anything else you have to say, so
don't waste any more of your time or mine by continuing to bait me.
This isn't some kind of sick game where there are winners and losers.
The only ones losing here are your patients. And that quite frankly
is not my problem, but theirs anyhow. Go waste your time on them
instead of me.
You have yet to provide one shred of evidence that the quinolones are
safer than your other choices, which was the subject of this
discussion to begin with. Your opinions are not to be considered
evidence. So far you have proven nothing but the size of your ego as
well as your closed and narrow mindedness. Both of which are quite
admiral attributes to have in a physician I would imagine. Unless you
happen to be the patient.
.
Thanks for playing as well. Game over. Go ahead and think you "won"
if that makes you feel any better. Makes no difference to me one way
or the other. You were playing with yourself anyhow as I wasn't even
playing to begin with.
"Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
importance." skeptic
The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.
The fact that my original kidney stone was induced by Cipro seems to
have escaped your notice. A re-challenge nine months later produce
yet another stone. Both containing Cipro. Since that time, with no
further exposure to the quinolones I have been "stone free" for over
eight years now. The same as I was prior to being given Cipro, where
I was stone free for forty five years. By any scientific standards
that is reasonable "cause and effect" as there were no "underlying"
medical conditions that would cause such stone formations.
In the above statement you reveal your total and complete ignorance
regarding this whole affair. You seem to believe that crystalluria is
of no importance.
"In clinical practice, a crystalluria due to ciprofloxacin has been
recorded in patients [1], as well as in a patient who developed
obstructive uropathy due to massive ciprofloxacin crystal
precipitation in the distal ureters and bladder, after a 24-day
treatment at a dose of 500 mg twice daily [2]. In addition, a new case
with acute renal failure and ciprofloxacin crystalluria has recently
been published [3]. "
Citing to:
Ciprofloxacin crystalluria
Giovanni B. Fogazzi1,, Giuseppe Garigali1, Claudia Brambilla2 and
Michel Daudon3
1Research laboratory on urine of Unità Operativa di Nefrologia,
Fondazione IRCCS, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Mangiagalli e Regina
Elena, 2Unità Operativa di Nefrologia Ospedale S. Paolo, Milano, Italy
and 3Service de Biochimie A, Hôpital Necker, Paris, France
* ndt.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/21/10/2982#B5
Yet you state that obstructive uropathy and renal failure due to cipro
induced crystalluria is of no "clinical significance" and "of no
importance." Neither is spontaneous tendon ruptures or peripheral
neuropathy I would then assume as well. I keep trying to end this
useless discussion and yet you keep on challenging and insulting me.
But I cannot allow you to post frivolous unsupported statements such
as that.
1. Boll P and Tillotson G. (1995) Tolerability of fluoroquinolone
antibiotics. Drug Safety 13:344-358.
2. Chopra N, Fine PL, Price B, et al. (2000) Bilateral hydronephrosis
from ciprofloxacin induced crystalluria and stone formation. J Urol
164:438.
3. Sedlacek M, Suriawinata AA, Schoolwert A, et al. (2006)
Ciprofloxacin crystal nephropathy - a 'new' cause of acute renal
failure [letter]. Nephrol Dial Transplant doi:10.1093/ndt/gfl160.
OK, let us talk about relativity, another attempt you made at changing
the course of the discussion:
oral cefixime or trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole / IV ceftazidime; IV
ceftazidime followed by oral cefixime; and sequential IV ceftazidime
to oral trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole
vs.
Cipro
Study 100169
Bottom line: Ciprofloxacin patients were more likely to report more
than one event and on more than one occasion compared to control
patients and arthropathy occurred more frequently in patients treated
with ciprofloxacin than control, regardless of whether they received
IV or oral drug.
Study 100169
This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled,
parallel group,
multinational, multicenter pediatric clinical trial. Patients from 1
year to < 17 years diagnosed with complicated urinary tract infection
(cUTI) or pyelonephritis were enrolled. Patients were stratified prior
to randomization based on whether, in the opinion of the clinical
investigator; intravenous (IV) therapy was initially warranted.
Patients were then randomized to receive either ciprofloxacin or
comparator antibiotics. In the first stratum, ciprofloxacin oral
suspension was compared to the comparator regimens of oral cefixime or
trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX) [in Canada only]. In the
second stratum ciprofloxacin (IV or IV followed by oral suspension)
was compared to one of the following comparator regimens: IV
ceftazidime; IV ceftazidime followed by oral cefixime; and sequential
IV ceftazidime to oral TMP/SMX [in Canada only].
Arthropathy occurred more frequently in patients who received
ciprofloxacin than the
comparator and was defined as any condition affecting a joint or
periarticular tissue that may have been temporary or permanent
(including bursitis, inflammation of the muscular or tendinous
attachment to the bone, and tendonitis). The affected joints included:
knee, elbow, ankle, hip, wrist, and shoulder. Arthropathy, as shown in
Table 1, was seen in 9.3% (31/335) of ciprofloxacin patients versus 6%
(21/349) of comparator patients at 6 weeks
The rates were 13.7% and 9.5%, respectively, at 1 year. Arthropathy
occurred
more frequently in patients treated with ciprofloxacin than control,
regardless of whether
they received IV or oral drug. Ciprofloxacin patients were more likely
to report more than one event and on more than one occasion compared
to control patients (37% [17/46] versus 24% [8/33]).
Arthropathy occurred in all age groups and the rates in the
ciprofloxacin arm were
consistently higher than in the control arm,.
The arthropathy rates in patients treated with oral versus those
treated with IV (IV alone or sequential IV to oral therapy) at six
weeks were different. The arthropathy rates in the oral stratum were
9.1% (27/296) for ciprofloxacin and 6.9% (21/304) for the comparator
groups. The arthropathy rates in the IV stratum were 10.3% (4/39) for
ciprofloxacin and 0% (0/45) for the comparator groups.
The arthropathy rates were similar between males and females and
consistent between
treatment groups. The rates were 13.9% (38/273) and 10.6% (30/284) in
females compared to 12.9% (8/62) and 4.6% (3/65) in males for
ciprofloxacin and comparator, respectively.
Arthropathy rates in patients with cUTI were 12.2% (20/164) for
ciprofloxacin versus 9.6% (16/166) for comparator, and in patients
with pyelonephritis the rates were 6.4% (11/171) for ciprofloxacin
versus 2.7% (5/183) for the comparator.
There was a bigger difference between treatment group arthropathy
rates in the United States (21.0% [13/62] for ciprofloxacin versus
11.3% [8/71] for comparator) than in the overall rates.
The incidence of neurological events from initial dosing through 6
weeks up follow-up was 2.7% (9/335) in the ciprofloxacin group and
2.0% (7/349) in the comparator group.
The overall incidence of adverse events at six weeks was 41% (138/335)
in the ciprofloxacin arm compared to 31% (109/349) in the control
arm...Serious adverse events were seen in 7.5% (25/335) of
ciprofloxacin patients compared to 5.7% (20/349) of the control
patients and discontinuation of drug due to adverse events was seen in
3% (10/335) of ciprofloxacin patients and 1.4% (5/349) of control
patients.
Source:
Division of Special Pathogen and Immunologic Drug Products
Summary of Clinical Review of Studies Submitted in Response to a
Pediatric Written Request
Applications:
19-537/S-049, ciprofloxacin tablets
20-780/S-013, ciprofloxacin oral suspension
19-847/S-027, ciprofloxacin IV 10 mg/mL
19-857/S-031, ciprofloxacin IV 5% dextrose
Applicant: Bayer Corporation, Pharmaceutical Division 400 Morgan Lane
West Haven, Connecticut 06516
Drug Name Established: Ciprofloxacin
Proprietary: Cipro(R)
Route: Oral or IV
More adverse events were seen with Cipro and more patients
discontinued the drug due to these adverse reactions. As such Cipro
has a higher RISK factor than oral cefixime or trimethoprim/
sulfamethoxazole / IV ceftazidime; IV ceftazidime followed by oral
cefixime; and sequential IV ceftazidime to oral trimethoprim/
sulfamethoxazole in regards to manifesting adverse reactions. A 10%
higher risk factor in fact.
Now let's take a look at doxycycline.
Cipro vs. Doxycycline
60 Day Cipro Study
Bottom line: Doxycycline tends to have fewer side effects than Cipro.
(That is why the CDC recommended in November of 2001 that all those
needing antibiotics against anthrax--for treatment and prevention--be
given doxycycline, not Cipro.)
Adverse events at 30 days, by most recent antimicrobial agent, all
sites, 2001-2002
All Adverse events:
Day 30
Ciprofloxacin 77 out of 737 patients stated as 10.5%
Doxycycline 71 out of 2,050 patients stated at 3.4%
The overall rate of reported adverse events reported for Cipro was
16.5% vs. 3.4% for Doxycycline.
Once again more adrs with Cipro than Doxycycline. You will find this
with every other antibiotic currently in clinical use today.
So yes, the "game" is over and you lost. Cipro is NOT a safe
antibiotic. It is every bit as dangerous and at times more so than
any other antibiotic on the market today. 1 in 10 chance of having a
serious joint problem, as well as a 41% chance of having an adverse
reaction. Associated with obstructive uropathy and renal failure due
to cipro induced crystalluria, which you find to be of no importance.
But you are absolutely correct about one thing here in this entire
discussion. I have to be absolutely "loony" to think that you are
even listening to a single word I say.
You see I view you as nothing more than a glorified mechanic who is in
love with his tools. A fraud in white if you would. A true physician
would have shown an interest in the information I provided and
questioned the wisdom of their prescription practices. All you have
done is harass and insult me and side with the drug rep with the 40 DD
chest. You are simply not worth any more effort. Frankly "Doctor" I
don't give a damn whether you believe me or not. I could care less if
you think I am a nutcase.
As such, if you would be kind enough to stop responding with insults
and frivolous opinions we can end this. I'd much rather you remain
silent and thought a fool than to continue to speak up and remove all
doubt as you persist in doing. If you do not wish to listen with an
open mind why then do you continue to beg for a response? Is your ego
so huge you have to have the final word? OK. I'll grant you that
one. Let it be "thanks for playing", instead of another round of
patronization and insults delivered from your elevated pedestal.
I'm not the least bit interested in anything else you have to say, so
don't waste any more of your time or mine by continuing to bait me.
This isn't some kind of sick game where there are winners and losers.
The only ones losing here are your patients. And that quite frankly
is not my problem, but theirs anyhow. Go waste your time on them
instead of me.
You have yet to provide one shred of evidence that the quinolones are
safer than your other choices, which was the subject of this
discussion to begin with. Your opinions are not to be considered
evidence. So far you have proven nothing but the size of your ego as
well as your closed and narrow mindedness. Both of which are quite
admiral attributes to have in a physician I would imagine. Unless you
happen to be the patient.
.
Thanks for playing as well. Game over. Go ahead and think you "won"
if that makes you feel any better. Makes no difference to me one way
or the other. You were playing with yourself anyhow as I wasn't even
playing to begin with.
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
"davidtfull" <davidtfull@aol . com > wrote in message
news:584fd10d-214e-4d4b-aff8-06d1786b62bb@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups . com ...
"Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
importance." skeptic
The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.
--- REPLY: ---
If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. I will
post about the things that interest me. Stones interest me. Cipro does not
"cause kidney stones". That would be a very misleading statement. There is
one known case of cipro causing stones resulting in obstruction. The fact
that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is cute
but of no clinical consequence. I pointed that out to educate you since you
keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. It doesn't.
Bladder stones are a result of functional bladder issues such as neurogenic
bladder or outlet obstruction as well as infections. Cipro does not cause
bladder stones. That was just a silly comment. The pH issue is based on
either in vitro lab data or animal data and since we only have one published
case of renal stones resulting from cipro use we can't really say if acidity
of the urine played any role.
I am not saying cipro is the safest medication on the market. It is merely
not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. The fact that
you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a bad
personal experience with cipro.
"davidtfull" <davidtfull@aol . com > wrote in message
news:584fd10d-214e-4d4b-aff8-06d1786b62bb@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups . com ...
"Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
importance." skeptic
The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.
--- REPLY: ---
If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. I will
post about the things that interest me. Stones interest me. Cipro does not
"cause kidney stones". That would be a very misleading statement. There is
one known case of cipro causing stones resulting in obstruction. The fact
that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is cute
but of no clinical consequence. I pointed that out to educate you since you
keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. It doesn't.
Bladder stones are a result of functional bladder issues such as neurogenic
bladder or outlet obstruction as well as infections. Cipro does not cause
bladder stones. That was just a silly comment. The pH issue is based on
either in vitro lab data or animal data and since we only have one published
case of renal stones resulting from cipro use we can't really say if acidity
of the urine played any role.
I am not saying cipro is the safest medication on the market. It is merely
not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. The fact that
you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a bad
personal experience with cipro.
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
On Mar 4, 6:17 pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> "davidtfull" <davidtf...@aol . com > wrote in message
>
> news:584fd10d-214e-4d4b-aff8-06d1786b62bb@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups . com ...
> "Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
> have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
> develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
> discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
> importance." skeptic
>
> The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
> you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
> continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
> this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
> kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
> did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
> Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
> mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
> warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.
>
> --- REPLY: ---
>
> If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. I will=
> post about the things that interest me. Stones interest me. Cipro do=
es not
> "cause kidney stones". That would be a very misleading statement. Th=
ere is
> one known case of cipro causing stones resulting in obstruction. The fa=
ct
> that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is cut=
e
> but of no clinical consequence. I pointed that out to educate you since=
you
> keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. It doesn=
't.
> Bladder stones are a result of functional bladder issues such as neurogeni=
c
> bladder or outlet obstruction as well as infections. Cipro does not cau=
se
> bladder stones. That was just a silly comment. The pH issue is based=
on
> either in vitro lab data or animal data and since we only have one publish=
ed
> case of renal stones resulting from cipro use we can't really say if acidi=
ty
> of the urine played any role.
>
> I am not saying cipro is the safest medication on the market. It is mer=
ely
> not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. The fact =
that
> you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
> serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a b=
ad
> personal experience with cipro.
Reply -
If you were to go to askapatient . com you will see that on a rating
basis of 1 to 5 with
5 being the best and 1 being the worst, Cipro came in at 1.9 with over
400 people
feeling the need to tell their horror stories about their experience
with cipro. Many
people stated that it ruined their lives. Many were left crippled even
after months and
years had gone by.
If you look at Doxycycline on the same site, you will see that only 25
people felt the
need to comment and that Doxy had given them mostly stomach upset and
nausea. I saw
nowhere in the comments where Doxy had ruined anyone's life or caused
severe
health problems that didn't resolve soon after discontinuing it. Most
people gave it
a rating of 3 or better.
I used to be a previously healthy male before I took Cipro for a
simple UTI over 19
months ago. Upon finishing my script (500mg x 2 day for 10 days) I
started to have
most of all the severe ADR's listed in the PDR. It's been a long 19
months and I am
not getting better, in fact, I'm getting worse than ever. ALL my
joints ache. ALL my
muscles are sore. I still have insomnia. I have severe nerve damage in
my feet (PN).
Basically, my life has been destroyed by this drug Cipro. My Dr.
refused to believe
that any of my symptoms were related to the Cipro. He also claimed it
was a very
safe drug. I'm not the only one that this has happened to. There are
thousands of
people that have been damaged permanently by Cipro or the other FQ's.
Dr's aren't
listening to their patients and learning from their experiences. You
Dr's think you know
it all. You have SO much to learn, if only you'd try....if only you'd
listen to your patients
and not the drug reps.
Now what do I do? I'm screwed and my Dr. that did this refuses to open
his eyes and
consider that there just might be a connection. Great health care we
have. I suggest
you do some research on these toxic FQ's before you prescribe anymore
of them.
No need to use a cannon to shoot a gopher when a pellet gun would work
just fine. TBY
On Mar 4, 6:17 pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> "davidtfull" <davidtf...@aol . com > wrote in message
>
> news:584fd10d-214e-4d4b-aff8-06d1786b62bb@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups . com ...
> "Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
> have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
> develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
> discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
> importance." skeptic
>
> The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
> you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
> continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
> this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
> kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
> did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
> Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
> mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
> warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.
>
> --- REPLY: ---
>
> If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. I will=
> post about the things that interest me. Stones interest me. Cipro do=
es not
> "cause kidney stones". That would be a very misleading statement. Th=
ere is
> one known case of cipro causing stones resulting in obstruction. The fa=
ct
> that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is cut=
e
> but of no clinical consequence. I pointed that out to educate you since=
you
> keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. It doesn=
't.
> Bladder stones are a result of functional bladder issues such as neurogeni=
c
> bladder or outlet obstruction as well as infections. Cipro does not cau=
se
> bladder stones. That was just a silly comment. The pH issue is based=
on
> either in vitro lab data or animal data and since we only have one publish=
ed
> case of renal stones resulting from cipro use we can't really say if acidi=
ty
> of the urine played any role.
>
> I am not saying cipro is the safest medication on the market. It is mer=
ely
> not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. The fact =
that
> you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
> serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a b=
ad
> personal experience with cipro.
Reply -
If you were to go to askapatient . com you will see that on a rating
basis of 1 to 5 with
5 being the best and 1 being the worst, Cipro came in at 1.9 with over
400 people
feeling the need to tell their horror stories about their experience
with cipro. Many
people stated that it ruined their lives. Many were left crippled even
after months and
years had gone by.
If you look at Doxycycline on the same site, you will see that only 25
people felt the
need to comment and that Doxy had given them mostly stomach upset and
nausea. I saw
nowhere in the comments where Doxy had ruined anyone's life or caused
severe
health problems that didn't resolve soon after discontinuing it. Most
people gave it
a rating of 3 or better.
I used to be a previously healthy male before I took Cipro for a
simple UTI over 19
months ago. Upon finishing my script (500mg x 2 day for 10 days) I
started to have
most of all the severe ADR's listed in the PDR. It's been a long 19
months and I am
not getting better, in fact, I'm getting worse than ever. ALL my
joints ache. ALL my
muscles are sore. I still have insomnia. I have severe nerve damage in
my feet (PN).
Basically, my life has been destroyed by this drug Cipro. My Dr.
refused to believe
that any of my symptoms were related to the Cipro. He also claimed it
was a very
safe drug. I'm not the only one that this has happened to. There are
thousands of
people that have been damaged permanently by Cipro or the other FQ's.
Dr's aren't
listening to their patients and learning from their experiences. You
Dr's think you know
it all. You have SO much to learn, if only you'd try....if only you'd
listen to your patients
and not the drug reps.
Now what do I do? I'm screwed and my Dr. that did this refuses to open
his eyes and
consider that there just might be a connection. Great health care we
have. I suggest
you do some research on these toxic FQ's before you prescribe anymore
of them.
No need to use a cannon to shoot a gopher when a pellet gun would work
just fine. TBY
Re: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today
I think you're either exaggerating your personal story or don't understand
your own condition.
As for cipro, I will say again, don't leave your analysis of how safe a
medication is to random web comments. That's just flat out stupid. Try
asking some people who see patients daily - they'll tell yout that cipro
doesn't nearly as many serious side effects as many other antibiotics. You
want to talk about renal damage? Look up gentamicin - something I use
commonly in my field. There are no doubt side effects to medications.
You're just on some personal vendetta against this particular one for no
particularly good reason.
"ciprocripple" <endofcherrylane@earthlink . net > wrote in message
news:108c93ae-e536-4eb6-adc4-4246e7257e7a@s37g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
On Mar 4, 6:17 pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> "davidtfull" <davidtf...@aol . com > wrote in message
>
> news:584fd10d-214e-4d4b-aff8-06d1786b62bb@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups . com ...
> "Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
> have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
> develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
> discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
> importance." skeptic
>
> The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
> you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
> continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
> this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
> kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
> did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
> Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
> mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
> warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.
>
> --- REPLY: ---
>
> If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. I will
> post about the things that interest me. Stones interest me. Cipro does not
> "cause kidney stones". That would be a very misleading statement. There is
> one known case of cipro causing stones resulting in obstruction. The fact
> that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is
> cute
> but of no clinical consequence. I pointed that out to educate you since
> you
> keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. It doesn't.
> Bladder stones are a result of functional bladder issues such as
> neurogenic
> bladder or outlet obstruction as well as infections. Cipro does not cause
> bladder stones. That was just a silly comment. The pH issue is based on
> either in vitro lab data or animal data and since we only have one
> published
> case of renal stones resulting from cipro use we can't really say if
> acidity
> of the urine played any role.
>
> I am not saying cipro is the safest medication on the market. It is merely
> not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. The fact
> that
> you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
> serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a
> bad
> personal experience with cipro.
Reply -
If you were to go to askapatient . com you will see that on a rating
basis of 1 to 5 with
5 being the best and 1 being the worst, Cipro came in at 1.9 with over
400 people
feeling the need to tell their horror stories about their experience
with cipro. Many
people stated that it ruined their lives. Many were left crippled even
after months and
years had gone by.
If you look at Doxycycline on the same site, you will see that only 25
people felt the
need to comment and that Doxy had given them mostly stomach upset and
nausea. I saw
nowhere in the comments where Doxy had ruined anyone's life or caused
severe
health problems that didn't resolve soon after discontinuing it. Most
people gave it
a rating of 3 or better.
I used to be a previously healthy male before I took Cipro for a
simple UTI over 19
months ago. Upon finishing my script (500mg x 2 day for 10 days) I
started to have
most of all the severe ADR's listed in the PDR. It's been a long 19
months and I am
not getting better, in fact, I'm getting worse than ever. ALL my
joints ache. ALL my
muscles are sore. I still have insomnia. I have severe nerve damage in
my feet (PN).
Basically, my life has been destroyed by this drug Cipro. My Dr.
refused to believe
that any of my symptoms were related to the Cipro. He also claimed it
was a very
safe drug. I'm not the only one that this has happened to. There are
thousands of
people that have been damaged permanently by Cipro or the other FQ's.
Dr's aren't
listening to their patients and learning from their experiences. You
Dr's think you know
it all. You have SO much to learn, if only you'd try....if only you'd
listen to your patients
and not the drug reps.
Now what do I do? I'm screwed and my Dr. that did this refuses to open
his eyes and
consider that there just might be a connection. Great health care we
have. I suggest
you do some research on these toxic FQ's before you prescribe anymore
of them.
No need to use a cannon to shoot a gopher when a pellet gun would work
just fine. TBY
I think you're either exaggerating your personal story or don't understand
your own condition.
As for cipro, I will say again, don't leave your analysis of how safe a
medication is to random web comments. That's just flat out stupid. Try
asking some people who see patients daily - they'll tell yout that cipro
doesn't nearly as many serious side effects as many other antibiotics. You
want to talk about renal damage? Look up gentamicin - something I use
commonly in my field. There are no doubt side effects to medications.
You're just on some personal vendetta against this particular one for no
particularly good reason.
"ciprocripple" <endofcherrylane@earthlink . net > wrote in message
news:108c93ae-e536-4eb6-adc4-4246e7257e7a@s37g2000prg.googlegroups . com ...
On Mar 4, 6:17 pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> "davidtfull" <davidtf...@aol . com > wrote in message
>
> news:584fd10d-214e-4d4b-aff8-06d1786b62bb@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups . com ...
> "Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
> have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
> develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
> discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
> importance." skeptic
>
> The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
> you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
> continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
> this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
> kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
> did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
> Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
> mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
> warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.
>
> --- REPLY: ---
>
> If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. I will
> post about the things that interest me. Stones interest me. Cipro does not
> "cause kidney stones". That would be a very misleading statement. There is
> one known case of cipro causing stones resulting in obstruction. The fact
> that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is
> cute
> but of no clinical consequence. I pointed that out to educate you since
> you
> keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. It doesn't.
> Bladder stones are a result of functional bladder issues such as
> neurogenic
> bladder or outlet obstruction as well as infections. Cipro does not cause
> bladder stones. That was just a silly comment. The pH issue is based on
> either in vitro lab data or animal data and since we only have one
> published
> case of renal stones resulting from cipro use we can't really say if
> acidity
> of the urine played any role.
>
> I am not saying cipro is the safest medication on the market. It is merely
> not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. The fact
> that
> you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
> serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a
> bad
> personal experience with cipro.
Reply -
If you were to go to askapatient . com you will see that on a rating
basis of 1 to 5 with
5 being the best and 1 being the worst, Cipro came in at 1.9 with over
400 people
feeling the need to tell their horror stories about their experience
with cipro. Many
people stated that it ruined their lives. Many were left crippled even
after months and
years had gone by.
If you look at Doxycycline on the same site, you will see that only 25
people felt the
need to comment and that Doxy had given them mostly stomach upset and
nausea. I saw
nowhere in the comments where Doxy had ruined anyone's life or caused
severe
health problems that didn't resolve soon after discontinuing it. Most
people gave it
a rating of 3 or better.
I used to be a previously healthy male before I took Cipro for a
simple UTI over 19
months ago. Upon finishing my script (500mg x 2 day for 10 days) I
started to have
most of all the severe ADR's listed in the PDR. It's been a long 19
months and I am
not getting better, in fact, I'm getting worse than ever. ALL my
joints ache. ALL my
muscles are sore. I still have insomnia. I have severe nerve damage in
my feet (PN).
Basically, my life has been destroyed by this drug Cipro. My Dr.
refused to believe
that any of my symptoms were related to the Cipro. He also claimed it
was a very
safe drug. I'm not the only one that this has happened to. There are
thousands of
people that have been damaged permanently by Cipro or the other FQ's.
Dr's aren't
listening to their patients and learning from their experiences. You
Dr's think you know
it all. You have SO much to learn, if only you'd try....if only you'd
listen to your patients
and not the drug reps.
Now what do I do? I'm screwed and my Dr. that did this refuses to open
his eyes and
consider that there just might be a connection. Great health care we
have. I suggest
you do some research on these toxic FQ's before you prescribe anymore
of them.
No need to use a cannon to shoot a gopher when a pellet gun would work
just fine. TBY
Next: The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical...
Previous: VitaPro Vitamin Database
