Send a Message
to PromZA

Comments

18

Joined

Nov 1, 2011

PromZA's Favorites

PromZA Profile

Recent Posts

Accutane's mechanism of action explained

continued  (Jul 27, 2012 | post #467)

Accutane's mechanism of action explained

Found this http://www.medicin abiomolecular.com. br/biblioteca/pdfs /Nutrigenomica/nut rig-0043.pdf  (Jul 27, 2012 | post #466)

Accutane's mechanism of action explained

Anybody had dental disease? My teeth break off. No pain or anything they just seem to die including the nerve. After my previous post I now see that wikipedia does mention epigenetic changes. Possibly Isotretinoin changes specific gene methylation so certain cells stop proliferating. Would like to get my hands on NCC's research.  (Jul 25, 2012 | post #465)

Accutane's mechanism of action explained

@NCC: Maybe it's also worthwhile to research the epigenome. Our genome contains all the instructions to make our cells but the epigenome determines where and how these instructions are used. So far it's the only explanation of where our body plan is located. Based on the birth defects caused by isotretinoin it really sounds to me like it messes with the epigenome and more importantly a very specific part of it that ends up forming the head and nervous system. This part may then have a different function in adults with isotretinoin again messing with it.  (Jun 12, 2012 | post #459)

Accutane's mechanism of action explained

As for the science bit. Somebody put forth a hypothesis. They did not claim to know for sure. That's how science works. Results don't magically appear. Somebody comes up with an idea and then it gets tested and results either confirm it or not. Unfortunately before something can be considered it needs support and before it gets support it needs to be considered so it's a catch 22. For this reason different studies and research is combined to draw conclusions more often than not in order to secure research grants. Something also doesn't become science once proven and non-science until proven. Both the successes and failures are science! I'm glad somebody is taking interest in this so we can hopefully someday know the truth. Age related damage won't necessarily lead to a shorter life. There's damage that occurs to our cells and damage that occurs to the structures they make up. Cellular damage leads to less efficient structural repair over time known as aging. If this causes damage to cells the structures will still appear young and aging may progress normally but the cells themselves work less effectively, divide less frequently and create more problems. My trials have found magnesium glycinate and B12 helpful but I noticed the biggest effect of "life force" returning with a B-complex. Vitamin D also seems to be helping to keep me more regular and comfortable. I've noticed a loss of magnesium and calcium lately and apparently this can be caused by mineral deficiencies so my next route will be a multi-mineral chelate. I'm convinced that this causes gradual deterioration of the digestive system explaining my later onset of a host of different seemingly unrelated symptoms. First one vitamin or mineral deficiency occurs and leads to problems then others follow. Enzymatic rates drop including that of brain hormones. Worst of all the tests except for a few come back normal because these are subclinical deficiencies but they have a great effect because they've been there for so long. It amazes me that in this day and age where vitamin and mineral deficiencies are the biggest cause of disease that there's still not a standard blood panel for these as the first course of investigation. The only reason I suspect I didn't develop the osteomalacia is because I've always been a high testosterone guy but this has now probably changed as well. So after reading that a specific mineral deficiency causes herniation I started wondering if that could also be the cause of my hiatus hernia. Guess what my digging found: http://www.fda-rep orts.com/accutane/ reaction/hiatus_he rnia/page1.html and this one http://www.fda-rep orts.com/isotretin oin/reaction/hiatu s_hernia/page1.htm l but wait it gets even more interesting: http://www.fda-rep orts.com/accutane/ reaction/depressio n/page1.html http://www.fda-rep orts.com/isotretin oin/reaction/depre ssion/page1.html The problems with isotretinoin are there but seem less, or are they? One explanation is that cheap generics sometimes use lower quality ingredients or lower quantities. Lower dosages is exactly the recommendation now as opposed to the higher dosages when I was using it. Another one is that the generics just haven't been on the market long enough or people just haven't made the connection between them and their illness like with Accutane. There's no doubt Roche knows exactly how it works after 30 years. Another problem they probably know about is vitamin D production. Studies done so far have pointed to the sebaceous glands as the source of cholesterol secreted for vitamin D production. Kill off these cells and you stop vitamin D production. What do we see in people with a D deficiency? Yup you guessed it; osteomalacia, depression and autoimmune diseases such as IBS, MS, hypothyroidism and pernicious anemia to name just a few. Vitamin D is needed for uptake and retention of calcium and magnesium but also has an effect on uptake of other minerals and some vitamins.  (Jun 12, 2012 | post #458)

Accutane's mechanism of action explained

Amazing how ignorant and unsympathetic people can be. One thing I've learned so far is that symptoms can start anywhere from immediately to 20 years (or possibly more) down the line. So if it's done nothing to you, trust me, it's not been long enough! One thing a lot of people have in common here is that it took 10-15 years and with long high and often repeated dosages. The people coming here saying that "a few" illnesses aren't caused by this drug are doing exactly what they are accusing others of doing. If diseases in a few people can't automatically point to a causal agent then so too can't a few [still] healthy people rule it out. BUT this is more than just a few people. The link between this pathogen and IBS, depression, mental impairment, skeletal abnormalities and dry skin is undeniable or the litigation so far wouldn't have succeeded. If you used this and have any of these symptoms or related ones your troubles are as a result until proven otherwise. You may not even notice the symptoms. You start forgetting and become disinterested in stuff you used to love but put it down to old age. Worst the depression makes you notice the good times in your life less and you start forgetting how you used to feel. It's not until one day it hits you like a brick, you feel strange emotions that were never a part of you and realise people older than you still feel good and you don't. You have depression. You've had it for years and possibly even a decade without knowing it. And yes I did know there were side effects but nobody warned me it could be permanent or show up years later. I also had no reason to believe they were so bad as my dermatologist made it seem like a safe drug not even doing liver tests before or after. He even let me follow my own regimen for the occasional outbreaks without supervision. I mean how can a drug then be seen as dangerous right? It's not until recently I learned it permanently reduces sebum production and until then thought my teenage acne went away on its own. The worst symptoms I got while taking it were dry lips. I even got a lot of sun without ill effect so ignored that advice, until I spent a whole day in the sun that would have been too much even for a normal person. I wasn't warned of permanent IBS, depression and unstoppable nosebleeds over a decade later. The high triglycerides and LDL cholesterol and low HDL cholesterol was supposed to be temporary but I still have these. It's an informed decision for anybody doing their research today but it wasn't for me and I don't believe it is for anybody that only reads the pamphlet.  (Jun 12, 2012 | post #457)

South Africa

Scientists who said climate change sceptics had been prov...

Oh my, only saw this one now. HE SUBVERTED THE PEER-REVIEW PROCESS!!! Do you even know what peer-review is and how it works? Here is a basic rundown: 1. Data gets collected and/or a conclusion or theory gets drawn up by someone on something. 2. This gets sent to selected "peer-reviewe rs" that examines the data to see if it followed the correct data collection methodology and if the conclusion or theory can be logically be drawn. 3. Any errors like incomplete/inaccur ate data or the wrong methodology and logical errors in the conclusion or theory gets sent back with the reviewer either accepting the work or rejecting it. An editor then publishes it or not based on these reviews or publishes it with corrections by the author. Publishing it does not mean it's correct and unbiased journals will publish regardless of the correctness unless something is really flawed. Only then will the broader public get to see it and get a chance to comment themselves. Nothing in this process prevents honesty and full disclosure after its completion. By subverting it it means automatic rejection by some journals and some reviewers are not allowed to comment. So yes, as I say a very honest man indeed that subverts a process that could have shown his conclusion as incorrect based on the data. If the results proved something the other way and Curry leaked it to the media YOU would be singing the same tune as me. Your bias just keeps you from admitting he subverted it.  (Nov 7, 2011 | post #61)

South Africa

Scientists who said climate change sceptics had been prov...

Result being the data, not the opinion of one "scientistYea h whatever. Keep looking at the data with blinders on. Science has to accept whatever maths proves. What I understand is maths and in maths if your results lie mostly below your line you're overestimating. Go back and look at that graph YOU posted after you remove those blinders. And your insults don't phase meI am thanks. So far it looks like it will prove the global warming moaners wrongAnd subverted proper peer-review. Well done for that "reporting to the worldAnd your point? You're only strengthening mine.  (Nov 7, 2011 | post #60)

South Africa

Scientists who said climate change sceptics had been prov...

Right... I see nothing on my point of the graph being skewed in order to show any warming. The earth has gone through cycles of warming and cooling for millions of years. The GW advocates are claiming that we are causing the earth temperature to rise. They show us a graph with this massive incline but it's deliberately stretched across only one or two degrees. On a grand scale this 'mountain' hardly shows up as a molehill. Then where it actually shows warming may be coming to a standstill, pseudo-sceptics like Muller claim it's worse than ever. It's simply not worse and that despite carbon emissions being on the increasing. Something else may be happening here. To convince us they are right they use icebergs melting in the Atlantic as evidence. The last I heard these break off from the polar ice caps and then drift off. Unless they are undergoing spot heating it's absurd to blame GW. Some other mechanism is causing them to break apart. Notice as their predictions don't come true they are now shifting the focus from global warming to climate change because as we all know the climate will change. Not the original goal post, charlatans.  (Nov 6, 2011 | post #51)

South Africa

Scientists who said climate change sceptics had been prov...

10 years is anything but a short time periodTake a closer look at that graph. There's some strange below average spikes earlier on and towards the end most of it seems to fall below the supposed warming incline. I'm afraid I am not the one that needs glasses my friendThe foolishness is saying nothing we are doing is helping to stop "global warming" when the results of the last decade does not show any statistically significant increase or decrease. Indeed if we can't stop it the question should be if we are indeed causing it. That has never been answered satisfactorily while the earth has undergone global warming and cooling cycles for millions of years.  (Nov 6, 2011 | post #38)

South Africa

Scientists who said climate change sceptics had been prov...

Are YOU? Actually nobody needs to be as the data is freely availableHe's NOT right. His only defense when confronted with the contradiction from his conclusion with the results was that his claim isn't misleading because the data was made available. Yes an honest man indeed... (_) Your claim that it's accelerating does not correlate with the data, just like Muller's claimA slave to him? OMW. He is NOT strengthening it. He has subverted it but keep on hoping. End. Of. Story.  (Nov 5, 2011 | post #36)

South Africa

Scientists who said climate change sceptics had been prov...

He found no such thing. FACT: The data does NOT show the global warming proponents to be right. His conclusion is opposite to the data. Is that how you define an honest man? Omw. (_) Do I need to remind you that the graph showing a standstill was published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation? The only politics Curry is playing here are the ones she was dragged into by Muller. He subverted the peer review process. As for the insult against real sceptics, just proves you have no logical argument against the facts as presented.  (Nov 5, 2011 | post #32)

South Africa

South African uniformed officers having sex while on duty

Well when the president thinks a shower is better than a condom what do we expect from lowly police officers?  (Nov 5, 2011 | post #24)

South Africa

Scientists who said climate change sceptics had been prov...

Real sceptics are the ones like Curry who did the study probably expecting to find a warming trend but then report the real facts. Muller is nothing but a bogus sceptic. Finally there was a real study showing the opposite of what all the global warming proponents have been spreading despite them not being able to prove it. Not just that but it was considered the most comprehensive study yet even before its inception so would have carried great weight any way it pointed to. Muller sabotaged the whole peer review process when he leaked the results. Now we are back to square one. It also just proves again that peer review is useless when it comes to truthShe has? When? Where? Her own words: "There is no scientific basis for saying that warming hasn't stopped," That sounds a lot different from saying it has stopped. The charlatans are the ones like Muller that misrepresents the data. Curry is a distinguished scientists and reporting the truth of the data will not change that fact. On the basis of this study other scientists that rejected sceptic claims are now actually starting to address them. That should tell you something or are you going to remain a closed minded bogus sceptic forever?  (Nov 5, 2011 | post #29)

South Africa

How many are in Malema's corner?

^^^ A racist with a poor education that can't even spell. Yes we are all taking YOU very seriously (_)  (Nov 3, 2011 | post #4)

Q & A with PromZA

Hometown:

South Africa

On My Mind:

Mould

Blog / Website / Homepage:

http://bblounge.co.za

I Believe In:

God