DMSO - Have you tried it?

[Angela]

DMSO Comments

I hear this is some pretty scary stuff to mess with...

Angela

[Angela]

Anybody?

[Jason]

I use this product with great success. It's not a scam. Any sign of an outbreak I apply 99.9% pure DMSO and it's gone before I know it. I've only had one real break out (blisters to scab) and I attribute that fact to my use of DMSO at the first hint of and outbreak.

Whether that changes anyones mind or not I can't do anything about. Many people here seem to already have made up their minds on it.

[Angela]

Well, I for one am glad that you didn't post your comments in order to try and change anyone's mind.

[Ewizardtucson]

Speaking from experience:

This is very dangerous stuff !!!

It's used primarily as a penetrant. It is used to assist in getting medicine applied topically to animals joints into their body. Notice that phrase, and take it literally.

It's nasty to the taste, and really doesn't help get O3 from the surface of your body, into your nervous system. If you have a peticide on your body, and apply DMSO on top of it...............just gives me shivers thinking about the result.

The bottle I had, had a warning on it about using it for treatment of any kind on humans

Only put things that are approved by the FDA on or in your body as treatment for anything. They spend years and millions of dollars making sure things are safe for us to consume.

fred

[Jason]

No offense Fred but the stuff works I've been using it for years. Used it on a sore knee yesterday and it worked great. Of course you must be careful to get a quality product and use it after showering and such. Common sense.

FDA approved pharmaceuticals cause more deaths per year than anything else. You need to read up on the dark side of pharmaceutical industry to fully understand.

The drug companies can't patent this stuff that's the only reason they don't speak of it. No money in it.

Death by Medicine
By Gary Null, PhD; Carolyn Dean MD, ND; Martin Feldman, MD; Debora Rasio, MD; and Dorothy Smith, PhD
Something is wrong when regulatory agencies pretend that vitamins are dangerous, yet ignore published statistics showing that government-sanctioned medicine is the real hazard.

Until now, Life Extension could cite only isolated statistics to make its case about the dangers of conventional medicine. No one had ever analyzed and combined ALL of the published literature dealing with injuries and deaths caused by government-protected medicine. That has now changed.

A group of researchers meticulously reviewed the statistical evidence and their findings are absolutely shocking.4 These researchers have authored a paper titled “Death by Medicine” that presents compelling evidence that today’s system frequently causes more harm than good.

This fully referenced report shows the number of people having in-hospital, adverse reactions to prescribed drugs to be 2.2 million per year. The number of unnecessary antibiotics prescribed annually for viral infections is 20 million per year. The number of unnecessary medical and surgical procedures performed annually is 7.5 million per year. The number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalization annually is 8.9 million per year.

The most stunning statistic, however, is that the total number of deaths caused by conventional medicine is an astounding 783,936 per year. It is now evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the US. (By contrast, the number of deaths attributable to heart disease in 2001 was 699,697, while the number of deaths attributable to cancer was 553,251.5)

We placed this article on our website to memorialize the failure of the American medical system. By exposing these gruesome statistics in painstaking detail, we provide a basis for competent and compassionate medical professionals to recognize the inadequacies of today’s system and at least attempt to institute meaningful reforms.

[Jason]

Just google "DMSO safe?" for more on this. The big pharma doesn't want you using ANYTHING they can't make a dollar on. Most of the people in the FDA were former big Pharma researchers etc. See the problem? Approve your own research.

DMSO-The King Antioxidant

Categories
Control tactics
Environmental poisoning
Practical Health
..."DMSO has a myriad of applications in medicine. Some are so dramatically effective that the concept of such therapy just boggles the mind!"...

This cost effective king of antioxidants has so many non toxic applications that it boggles the mind. With a few exceptions, such as a solution for organ preservation, the FDA has continued to block it's full potential to protect it's pharma cronies.

DMSO not only treats but in many cases cures.

Naturally, this product is banned from health food stores even though it is essentially non toxic - certainly far far less than aspirin and many food products including salt. Try swallowing a tablespoon of salt some time! A method once used to kill by the Chinese I belive...

However, 70% DMSO is available from veterinary supply sources where it is used extensively.

Cost effective vitamin and mineral supplementation is used extensively on animals as it is recognized to be essential since, at least, the early 1900s. Suspect no one will pay mega bucks to treat animals with mostly contrived and toxic patented substances that us humans are, conned into, and so eager to pay in the name of never ending mostly sham research...

Chris Gupta

DMSO Therapy

Introduction

This is a chemical product—called dimethyl sulfoxide—that has been around a long time but is totally strange to the orthodox medical community. It has been used for years by athletes to help them with painful muscles and joints.

DMSO works in a number of ways, but these are entirely new to therapeutic principles. This is not a drug in the usual sense, since a drug treats disease symptoms. DMSO treats altered cellular function or damaged cells. The cells become healed and restored by changing and stabilizing the “water structure” within the cell. It exerts its effects on biological systems by changing the liquid structure of water. Therefore, changes occur in protein and other molecules. These changes are physical-chemical in nature and difficult to understand without a degree in physics.

The fact remains that these products work to restore function in illnesses like arthritis and immune system disease, and they are very helpful in acute inflammatory pain syndromes.

What It Does

DMSO tends to build up white blood cells and increase immune production of MIF (migration inhibitory factors) of macrophages. Thus, the immune system is made more effective by allowing macrophages to move more quickly. Thus DMSO modulates lymphocytes, and it therefore reactivates the production of MIF. It also diminishes allergic reactions by unfolding the cell membrane and making more cell receptor sites available to attachment by specific antigens.

The modulating effect of DMSO on lymphocytes also tends to increase the production of lymphokines (chemical immune cell mediators) such as interferon. It potentiates cell mediated immunity and can be effective in multiple sclerosis, systemic lupus, erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, thyroiditis, ulcerative colitis, cancer, etc.

What Are Its Major Therapeutic Properties?

* It blocks pain by interrupting conduction in the small c-fibers, the non-myelinating nerve fibers.
* It is anti-inflammatory.
* It is anti bacterial, fungal and viral.
* It transports all molecules (drugs, etc.) across cell membranes.
* It reduces the incidence of platelet thrombi (clots in vessels).
* It effects cardiac contractility by inhibiting calcium to reduce the workload of the heart.
* It is a vasodilator, probably related to histamine release in the cells and to prostaglandin inhibition.
* It softens collagen.
* It is a scavenger of the hydroxyl free radical.
* It stimulates the immune system.
* It is a potent diuretic.
* It increases interferon formation.
* It stimulates wound healing.

Summary

DMSO has certain unique physiological characteristics which stem from its molecular makeup:

* It is a simple small molecule with unusual properties.
* An exothermic reaction occurs when DMSO is diluted with water (heat is generated).
* Hydroxyl radicals (OH), which are free radicals (oxidants), are ubiquitous and highly injurious to cells—and thus health. DMSO neutralizes (quenches) these free radicals. It is a free radical scavenger!
* DMSO substitutes for water in the living cell—it can destroy intracellular free radicals. No other antioxidant can do that.
* DMSO increases the permeability of cell membranes yielding a flushing effect of toxins from intracellular location to extracellular.
* It is an antidote to allergic reactions.
* It can penetrate any cell wall; thus it can get where most chemicals can’t.
* It has a very low index of any toxicity.
* Allergic reactions to DMSO can occur but they are uncommon.
* DMSO has a myriad of applications in medicine. Some are so dramatically effective that the concept of such therapy just boggles the mind!

References

Szmant, H. Harry. Physical properties of dimethyl sulfoxide and its function in biological systems, Biological Actions of Dimethyl Sulfoxide ed. by Stanley W. Jacob and Robert Herschler. (New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 1975), pp. 20-23.

Barfeld, H., and T. Atoynatan. N-acetylcysteine inactivates migration inhibitory factor and delayed hypersensitivity reactions. Nature new Bio., 231:157-159, 1971.

Barfeld, H., and T. Atoynatan, Cytophilic nature of migration inhibitory factor associated with delayed hypersensitivity, Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med., 139:497-501, 1969.

Tschope, M., cited in Raettig, H. “The potential of DMSO in experimental immunology,” Dimethylsulfoxyl, Internationales Symposium in Wien. G. Laudahn and K. Getrich, eds.; 54. Saladruck, Berlin, Germany, 1966.

Engel, M.F. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 141:638, 1967.

[Hugo]

I'm sure there are some valuable medical attributes, but like you hear on TV, "Don't try this at home." The only medical use for DMSO that is approved as safe and effective is for a bladder condition.

Here's some additional information: http://www.racoon.com/herpes/main/dmso.htm

[ama]

I didn't vote because I don't think this stuff is a scam neccessarily, I just have a lot of doubts about it's safety, and although I do use proven antivirals, I am also posting here for other reasons.

Firstly, I wanted to say that although I do have HSV, I also have an autoimmune rheumatic disease that affects my joints VERY VERY badly.

I have NEVER had anyone suggest that I use this stuff, whether a doctor or other medical professional, a book I read, another sufferer of the same or similar condition, or anyone else whom I went to for advice. There are a great many dangerous drugs that I take on a regular basis that are FDA approved that I know for a fact can cause serious liver damage just for starters. It gives me the chills to think what a non-approved drug might do to my body. And that doesn't even begin to touch on the subject of drug interaction.
So I am a little curious as to where you got the information that this is a common cure for my sort of disease, because it's news to me.

I would just encourage anyone to use a lot of caution about what they put onto or into their bodies. After all, AHEM, isn't that what got us Herpes in the first place??

[Jason]

Okay well, all I'd like to say is it's not "some pretty scary stuff" - as stated in the first post - and also that the FDA and big pharmaceutical industry are not looking out for our best interests. They are looking out for the interests of their share holders first and foremost.

It's been great for me.

[ama]

I am not one to generally ruffle feathers, but if the major pharmaceutical companies and the FDA DON'T look out for our interests, then their shareholders interests doon't really get looked out for either. Why back useless, harmful, totally toxic drugs? Yes, there are a lot of drugs with negative side effects that are out there, but they are pretty clearly labeled, and since most of the really nasty ones, like the chemotherapy drugs or immunosuppressive drugs are the only things capable of doing what they do, there is a huge demand for them from the buyer/user/patient.

I think the major point most of us are trying to get across here is that anyone taking any sort of medication, prescription or otherwise to treat HSV, should take the time to educate themselves to their satisfaction and for their safety and peace of mind.

[newly diagnosed]

I've never heard of using DMSO for herpes before. When I worked in the labs doing anti-herpesviral research then I can remember my colleagues using it as part of the experiments (note that this was just a biochemical ingredient and not being tested as an antiviral). All I remember is that the stuff stinks and that people were very careful when handling it.

So - no thanks!!

[Jason]

Lets take Ritalin for example. Do you think the drug companies have our best interests in mind by putting all of our male children on this drug?

They account for acceptable losses. How hard is it to go up against the pharmaceutical industry and prove an adverse reaction or death caused by a particular drug?

Don't get me wrong there are many beneficial drugs but many are created to make money. How about the seasonal flu shot? When that first came out it was only for the elderly now it's pushed for everybody.

How about the obscene amount of drugs they give livestock before feeding them to us. That's causing all kinds of problems.

Look into the swine flu fiasco of the seventies. Dollar bills first and foremost.

Go to Amazon.com and search "pharmaceutical industry" look through the myriad of books there. Get one about the relationship between the FDA and the drug companies. When you find out what's really going on that's what is "some scary stuff".

Use just as much caution when being prescribed these drugs. Demand to know what the side effects are. All of them.

That being said I am considering going on an anti-viral because I'm too afraid to be intimate with anyone without being on one. So what do we recommend? What are the known side effects?

I contracted HSV 10 months ago from someone I had a very in-depth conversation with about her possible HSV-1 infection. She had at one time told me she had hsv-1 then a few years later we started dating. I asked her about it and she assured me it was a mistake before.

Two weeks later... Happiness at my house!

Evidently she likes to live in denial. She got mad at me for suggesting I got it from her. "What she had was on the inside of her thigh." "She's a different person now" "Her doctor says she's just got a yeast infection"

I am really not having much issue with this disease but it's hard to tell.
If I do feel as though I am getting an outbreak I smother it with DMSO and it's gone in no time. Sometimes in as little as thirty minutes.

[Jason]

I would agree with all the possible side effects listed in the link above but I'm not suggesting anyone take this stuff internally and that appears to be how many of them happen.

Just apply a little bit to the outbreak area before it really blisters. Have clean hands! Have clean body! Use quality DMSO! The 70% with aloe is fine. The 99/9 percent stuff stings. Your outbreak will stop dead in it's tracks. Spray some colloidal silver on there as well if you have it.

Women I can't really advise on using it. If the outbreak is inside I would not suggest it.

[Ewizardtucson]

Sorry - - - didn't mean to stir things up there !

I think the FDA really errs on the side of safety, and wants to be absolutely positive that anything, and everything they approve will not be bad for us. Also, make sure that it is useful to us.

Jason....I'm glad it works for you. That's the important thing. Just, please be careful with it.

The next time I'm down near Sierra Vista, I'll stop by a hay and feed store that carries it for the horses, and copy down what the label says and post it here.

Fred

[Timf]

Just google "DMSO safe?" for more on this. The big pharma doesn't want you using ANYTHING they can't make a dollar on. Most of the people in the FDA were former big Pharma researchers etc. See the problem?

The problem with this reasoning is that it is flawed in this case. DMSO is prepped for pharmaceutical use as a solvent, for human and animal clinical use by who - pharmaceutical companies - so they can or rather they do already happily make a lot of bucks on it. A bottle of 500ml of the stuff that meets USP regs costs 82 GBP without sales taxes/VAT (about 160USD) from one major lab chemical supplier here in the UK. Plenty of profit in there because they are already making it - any scaling up improves the profit.

Moving onto the two main aspects people are asking here - 1) safety and 2) efficacy vs Herpes - with respect to herpes Ive used it as a carrier for drugs in antiviral experiments on HSV1 and 2, EHV, and BHV. I never saw any knockdown from experiments using the carrier (ie DMSO) alone - that was one of the reasons we used it. It has been clinically used in the UK as a carrier for an anti-herpetic drug (idoxuridine) for zoster and if it had had a big effect alone it would have been picked up there as there is a large body of work done on it. DMSO alone generally comes up negative overall from al the data Ive seen. You can certainly find it helping other drugs, Berman and Hamuy see it help interferon studies for instance.

The stuff is used a HUGE amount in biomed research as well as its use in clinical practise. There was a LOT of work done on DMSO and its safety and most of it comes from the 60s, 70s and the 80s and you can find a HUGE amount of papers using it in Pubmed - including a lot on the worries people had about it and how much of those worries are justified (Jacob is one of the big authors in the field in the 60s and 70s). There is simply too much work with the compound to go through what effects it has been seen to have and have not been seen. Last time I went through this I spent 2 weeks scanning the data and you can find all sorts of commentary positive and negative. Despite the time since the work was done the two review papers that most work keeps coming back to are;

Brobyn (1975) Ann N Y Aca Sci, vol243 pp497-506 for toxicity and
Swanson (1985) Rev Clin Basic Pharm vol 5 p1-33 for medical use of the stuff.
I did have self contained document on the stuff as well but I appear to have misplaced it.

The compound has some issues - so do many - but it is used, the more you use and more internal the use gets the more careful you have to be and there have been some reports of significant side effects in humans - but it is used clinically. Its not a dripping deadly poison, but its not innocuous and has some serious issues to really think about before touching it (hence why its use tends to come under the supervision of a professional).

We handle it very carefully in the lab for 2 main reasons - 1) at a cosmetic level it stinks to high heaven and you end up tasting it and 2) anything it comes into contact with tends to get picked up and carried elsewhere where you don't want it. The single biggest worry is what else other than itself it take over the skin barrier and what someone else has managed to contaminate your bottle with.

So, no I dont handle it like its hydrogen cyanide, however nor do I throw it around like its sodium chloride. However, I treat it with care and awareness of both its own properties and how it affects and is affected by other things for a reason. Its not always simply an issue of what the DMSO is doing, but what it may allow to have an effect - and thats a BIG problem potentially so it is something to think about.

[on-the-journey24-7]

Gee, guess I'm outta the loop. Haven't even heard of this stuff yet. I'm going to have to come back to read the posts & check it out more; just so I'm in the know!

Tamara

[maxmoreno]

Hello,

I have reviewed the information for DMSO on http://www.dmso-use.com
and I was wondering if somebody has experienced this
medicine. Can we consider this as a common way of healing?

Thank you.[/url]

[Jason]

Just google "DMSO safe?" for more on this. The big pharma doesn't want you using ANYTHING they can't make a dollar on. Most of the people in the FDA were former big Pharma researchers etc. See the problem?

The problem with this reasoning is that it is flawed in this case. DMSO is prepped for pharmaceutical use as a solvent, for human and animal clinical use by who - pharmaceutical companies - so they can or rather they do already happily make a lot of bucks on it. A bottle of 500ml of the stuff that meets USP regs costs 82 GBP without sales taxes/VAT (about 160USD) from one major lab chemical supplier here in the UK. Plenty of profit in there because they are already making it - any scaling up improves the profit.

Moving onto the two main aspects people are asking here - 1) safety and 2) efficacy vs Herpes - with respect to herpes Ive used it as a carrier for drugs in antiviral experiments on HSV1 and 2, EHV, and BHV. I never saw any knockdown from experiments using the carrier (ie DMSO) alone - that was one of the reasons we used it. It has been clinically used in the UK as a carrier for an anti-herpetic drug (idoxuridine) for zoster and if it had had a big effect alone it would have been picked up there as there is a large body of work done on it. DMSO alone generally comes up negative overall from al the data Ive seen. You can certainly find it helping other drugs, Berman and Hamuy see it help interferon studies for instance.

The stuff is used a HUGE amount in biomed research as well as its use in clinical practise. There was a LOT of work done on DMSO and its safety and most of it comes from the 60s, 70s and the 80s and you can find a HUGE amount of papers using it in Pubmed - including a lot on the worries people had about it and how much of those worries are justified (Jacob is one of the big authors in the field in the 60s and 70s). There is simply too much work with the compound to go through what effects it has been seen to have and have not been seen. Last time I went through this I spent 2 weeks scanning the data and you can find all sorts of commentary positive and negative. Despite the time since the work was done the two review papers that most work keeps coming back to are;

Brobyn (1975) Ann N Y Aca Sci, vol243 pp497-506 for toxicity and
Swanson (1985) Rev Clin Basic Pharm vol 5 p1-33 for medical use of the stuff.
I did have self contained document on the stuff as well but I appear to have misplaced it.

The compound has some issues - so do many - but it is used, the more you use and more internal the use gets the more careful you have to be and there have been some reports of significant side effects in humans - but it is used clinically. Its not a dripping deadly poison, but its not innocuous and has some serious issues to really think about before touching it (hence why its use tends to come under the supervision of a professional).

We handle it very carefully in the lab for 2 main reasons - 1) at a cosmetic level it stinks to high heaven and you end up tasting it and 2) anything it comes into contact with tends to get picked up and carried elsewhere where you don't want it. The single biggest worry is what else other than itself it take over the skin barrier and what someone else has managed to contaminate your bottle with.

So, no I dont handle it like its hydrogen cyanide, however nor do I throw it around like its sodium chloride. However, I treat it with care and awareness of both its own properties and how it affects and is affected by other things for a reason. Its not always simply an issue of what the DMSO is doing, but what it may allow to have an effect - and thats a BIG problem potentially so it is something to think about.

This is some excellent information Tim thank you.

I am trying to find out who may own the patent on DMSO if there is one. It was discovered so long ago there may not be one right?
I'm coming up with this.

Dimethyl Sulfoxide (DMSO) - Highly Polar, Aprotic Solvent
CH3–S–CH3
||
O

Arkema manufactures DMSO in Lacq, France and supplies it worldwide. DMSO is available in drums, totes, isotanks, tank trucks and railcars.

First discovered in 1867, dimethyl sulfoxide is still the most effective aprotic solvent and has many advantages over dimethylformamide and n-methy-2-pyrrolidone. Some of DMSO's characteristics include:

High polarity and dieletric constant
Excellent thermal stability - when heated to 150°C for 24 hours, less than 0.1% assay loss
Safety - low vapor tension and high flash point
Toxicity - virtually non-toxic
Recyclable - DMSO can usually be recovered and regenerated efficiently and economically
Compared to similar solvents, DMSO leads to an increase in reaction rates, higher selectivity and yields, and ability to work at lower temperatures
Applications

Solvent - paint stripping, cleaning, and extraction
Reaction medium - fine chemical organic synthesis
Electronics - stripping or cleaning solvent, rinsing agent for semiconductor and LCD's
Polymers - synthesis of polymers such as Polyacrylonitrile, Polyvinylacetate, and others
New Developmental Polar Solvents

Arkema is developing new solvents that can provide the properties you need. For additional information on these products, please contact us.
http://www.arkema-inc.com/index.cfm?pag=121

I still have to state with the utmost confidence that applying a relatively small amount of DMSO to an outbreak - as it's starting - will stop it dead in it's tracks. There is nothing that will change my opinion on this. I discovered this in 2000 by out of desperation applying some liquid DMSO to a cold sore.

When I contracted genital herpes last year and went searching for answers I was surprised to find that others were using this product.

[Jason]

Hello,

I have reviewed the information for DMSO on http://www.dmso-use.com
and I was wondering if somebody has experienced this
medicine. Can we consider this as a common way of healing?

Thank you.[/url]

Have you read any of the above posts yet?

[Timf]

This is some excellent information Tim thank you.

I am trying to find out who may own the patent on DMSO if there is one. It was discovered so long ago there may not be one right?

There will be no patent on DMSO as a compound. There may be protected formulations and some processes involving it but that will be it.

I still have to state with the utmost confidence that applying a relatively small amount of DMSO to an outbreak - as it's starting - will stop it dead in it's tracks. There is nothing that will change my opinion on this.

Dangerous statement to make. I can think of two relevant issues off the top of my head that alter perspectives without needing to alter your personal observations.

I can quote similar 'evidence of activity' occuring in people who entered a Valtrex trial and got regular abortion of lesions despite being in the placebo arm (Spruance's large once day/two day treatment regime when he presented it at meetings to be precise)...the benefit for valtrex was that number of abortive lesions went up. Just doing something may help some people - placebo effects are significant in some diseases - its why a placebo control is vital. Thats why single person evidence won't convince scientists outright of a specific activity of something, when the people affected will be rock solid on their statement that something works.

Also more dangerously you are measuring the visible lesion as evidence of lack of an outbreak, not virus activity. There are two sections to a herpetic lesion - the virus actually replicating and the inflammatory lesion. They are separate objects that make a whole and getting holistic on this is why there are combination drugs in trial - with antivirals for the virus and anti-inflammatories for the lesions. The worry with DMSO improving the appearance of the skin is that the compound is washing the cytokines away (it certainly can carry them as the interferon studies show) limiting the local responses and leaving the virus replicating - effectively turing a lesion into a shedding episode. Thats personal relief, but its not necessarily a reliable antiviral treatment. That concept feeds back into language differences in what people will accept as 'treatment' for themselves and what wider issues have to be considered for a commercialised compound. The range of responses to steroid-only treatment of lesions is another beautiful example of this.

In the face of the existence of such alternative explanations and phenomena, the fact that I have sat and watched DMSO have no effect on virus weighs rather heavily on my limited opinion of specific antiviral effects of DMSO and makes me look at alternative explanations as to why someone says they feel better. That has obvious knockons to the cost-benefit analysis of any treatment which ultimately is the final arbiter.

[Jason]

I won't dispute any of that. All good information. Thank you.

So I've read that the DMSO is super oxygenating the area it's applied to and that the virus can't survive in an oxygen rich environment. I've also read that it causes an immune response of sorts an increase in the white blood cells to the area. That's what I assume is taking place with me when I observe the apparent success I'm having with it.

Still intend on using it. Don't like painful, scabby lesions on my body if I can prevent them.

Is there any thing else safer that may work as I'm describing?

[Jason]

Prescription For Disaster (Gary Null)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... &plindex=0
Prescription for Disaster is an in-depth investigation into the symbiotic relationships between the pharmaceutical industry, the FDA, lobbyists, lawmakers, medical schools, and researchers, and the impact this has on consumers and their health care. During this thorough investigation, we take a close look at patented drugs, why they are so readily prescribed by doctors, the role insurance companies and HMO's play in promoting compliance, and the problem of rising health care costs. We examine the marketing and public relations efforts on behalf of the pharmaceutical companies, including sales reps, medical journals and conferences. Further, we look at alternatives to traditional pharmacology and drug therapy, such as vitamins and nutritional supplements, and why they are often perceived as a competitive threat to the drug manufacturers. Alternative therapies also include diet, exercise and a healthy lifestyle.

Prescription for Disaster takes you on a journey through the tangled web of big business, the way disease is treated today, and the consequences we suffer as a society. «

[Angela]

Jason -

The discussion of prescription vs. homeopathy is just like some of the heated discussions you might find in politics or religion.

The thing is to present something and base it on fact and to present it in such a way that you are not deemed biased to the discussion.

Nobody here has ever said that "natural" treatments did not work for herpes. It's those that try to make prescription meds that have been clinically proven out to always be the bad guy are the ones I frown on.

I just wish people would present information in an unbiased way. And just because Valtrex has worked for me doesn't make me biased and always for the drug companies.

That's why it's so important for people to do their homework!

Angela

[Jason]

I'm not opposed to prescription medications just opposed to putting blind faith into the FDA. They do not always have our best interests at heart.

So is Avacor better than Valtrex? I need to get on one of these I feel. No outbreaks but I don't feel comfortable having sex with someone with out being on one of these.

[Angela]

I'm not opposed to prescription medications just opposed to putting blind faith into the FDA. They do not always have our best interests at heart.

I don't put blind faith into anybody or anything without doing my homework first. That goes for everything in life. The only thing I have blind faith in is the belief in Jesus Christ the son of God, my Lord and Savior.

So is Avacor better than Valtrex?

I've never heard of Avacor to treat Herpes. I have heard of Valtrex to treat herpes. I do know that Valtrex reduces asymptomatic shedding by about 95% and that it gets the outbreaks under control. I also know that Valtrex reduces transmission by about 50% according to studies.

I need to get on one of these I feel. No outbreaks but I don't feel comfortable having sex with someone with out being on one of these.

I know what you mean... if it were me I would want to be on something that I knew was going to help in keeping my partner from contracting it. Whatever you decide just make sure you use condoms too, k?

Angela

[Angela]

Here's what Rajah of HHP had to say

[Jason]

Thanks Angela. What is the name of that other anti-viral aclivore or something? Are you familiar with that one?

I was reading some of the comments linked in what you posted. It's interesting, it seems to me that the people that have actually tried DMSO feel that it works, but those that have not think it's a dangerous scam.

I use it and feel it's safe and extremely effective. I've used it for sprains too. Equally impressed. I skateboard almost everyday (at forty) and three weeks ago I twisted my knee and ankle pretty good. I limped around for a day or two with out any improvement and was a little worried. I applied some dmso before bed one night and was skateboarding again the next day.

All I can say is that it works for me, and of course I'm very cautious when using it. I don't go spraying my weeds, cleaning my oven, or changing my oil then apply the stuff.

Reading through the forum it sounds like a lot of people are struggling with the pain of the outbreak sores. H balm and the like sound only mildly effective in easing the pain. DMSO extremely effective for me in this department because no sores actually develop. On my second potential outbreak (February) I applied dmso and sprayed some colloidal silver on the area and watched a cluster of four pink bumps disappear in a matter of an hour or so. Maybe less, all I know is they disappeared quick. Since that observation I always have dmso with me and if I notice anything going on - tingling, whatever - I apply dmso and the result is... I'm not even sure I was having an outbreak because nothing even develops.

What do you think of the theory that with each out break that is suppressed your immune system may get a better hold of this thing? I wonder if with each full blown outbreak the virus gains a foothold again?

I know people are going to disagree with me again, but the thread was asking for comment on this stuff. I say A++ over here.

[Angela]

Acyclovir - I believe that is what you are asking about.

The thing about what you are doing is it's not been clinically proven to reduce outbreaks, to suppress outbreaks, or to reduce transmission. You don't have anything to go on really unless you are part of some sort of experimentation. You're just guessing that what you are doing with the DMSO is working. In the meantime you have no idea what kind of poison you are putting into your body.

The herpes virus doesn't have a hold of anything. The herpes virus is nothing. The body does a great job of handling itself and figuring out what to do with the virus the long you have it whether you choose to treat your outbreaks or not. In fact, you really don't have to treat your outbreaks if you don't want to and as far as suppressive therapy goes (the clinically proven kind) everybody has their own reasons for being on it.

Contrary to what some homeopaths believe.. just because you are taking something doesn't mean that you have to take it forever and certainly not in the case of herpes.

[arrquie]

DMSO products in the high priced places are not necessary. If you choose you can try at your own discretion dmso from your local farm supply. There is one very important thing to consider, SAFETY. Pure DMSO can severely dehydrate skin. DMSO can transmit anything on the skin into the skin. Using DMSO with pharmaceutical grade Hydrogen Peroxide can move the chemicals used to stabilize the hydrogen peroxide into the body. Use food grade hydrogen peroxide but be sure to dilute it because it can severely burn the skin. It can also carry chemicals from inappropriate containers into the skin. Dilute with distilled water. Use for anything other than external should be administered by an medical practitioner. Use with care and know the FDA does not approve it for human use. However, you should also consider that the FDA gets most of its money from drug companies who have to pay huge fees for review of their products. The FDA and the big pharma have common interest in blocking cheap, unpatentable products.