 |
|
|
|
|
| |
RHODIOLA
ROSEA (dry roots) |
|
|
Preparation of tea: cut fine 5g of
Rhodiola Rosea roots. 1 cup of boiling water pour
in roots and leave for (brew) at least 4 hours. Than
filter. Daily dosage: 1/5 cup - 3-5 times per day.
For better taste dilute Rhodiola Rosea tea with juice,
tonic or other herbal tea.
Preparation of tincture
for personal usage: Mill 30 g of Rhodiola
Rose roots in a coffee-grinder no less than 5-10 mm,
add 150 ml of light spirits (30-40%), agitate and
steep 3-5 days at room temperature. Separate and filter
the extract. Dosage: ? tsp. x 3 times per day.
|
|
| |
RHODIOLA
ROSEA (dry extract tablets, total rosavins 40%) |
|
|
Preparation of tea: cut fine 5g of
Rhodiola Rosea roots. 1 cup of boiling water pour
in roots and leave for (brew) at least 4 hours. Than
filter. Daily dosage: 1/5 cup - 3-5 times per day.
For better taste dilute Rhodiola Rosea tea with juice,
tonic or other herbal tea.
Preparation of tincture
for personal usage: Mill 30 g of Rhodiola
Rose roots in a coffee-grinder no less than 5-10 mm,
add 150 ml of light spirits (30-40%), agitate and
steep 3-5 days at room temperature. Separate and filter
the extract. Dosage: ? tsp. x 3 times per day.
|
|
|
Xenical blocks absorption of dietary fat into the
bloodstream, thereby reducing the number of calories
you get from a meal. At the usual dosage level, it
cuts fat absorption by almost one-third. Combined
with a low-calorie diet, it is used to promote weight
loss and discourage the return of unwanted pounds.
The drug is prescribed for
the frankly obese and for merely overweight people
who have other health problems such as high blood
pressure, diabetes, or high cholesterol levels. Your
weight status is determined by your body mass index
(BMI), a comparison of height to weight.
|
|
|
University of Missouri-Kansas
City and Mid America Heart Institute, St Luke's Hospital,
Kansas City, Missouri 64110, USA.
AIM: This article provides the first
comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized clinical
trials of medications for obesity. METHOD: Based on
stringent inclusionary criteria, a total of 108 studies
were included in the final database. Outcomes are
presented for comparisons of single and combination
drugs to placebo and for comparisons of medications
to one another. RESULT: Overall, the medications studied
produced medium effect sizes. Four drugs produced
large effect sizes (ie d>0.80; amphetamine, benzphetamine,
fenfluramine and sibutramine). The placebo-subtracted
weight losses for single drugs vs placebo included
in the meta-analysis never exceeded 4.0 kg. No drug,
or class of drugs, demonstrated clear superiority
as an obesity medication. Effects of methodological
factors are also presented along with suggestions
for future research.
|
|
|
Servicio de Farmacologia
Clinica, Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona,
Espana.
INTRODUCTION. In recent years new
anti Parkinson drugs have been marketed and there
has been controversy over the safety of some drugs.
OBJECTIVE. To analyze the evolution of the consumption
of anti Parkinson drugs and the effect of the newer
drugs. PATIENTS AND METHODS. A study of the consumption
of anti Parkinson drugs (1989 1998). Data were obtained
from the ECOM database of the Ministry of Health and
TEMPUS of the National Statistics Institute. The drugs
were classified using the Anatomo Therapeutic Clinical
Classification (ATC). Consumption was expressed in
defined daily dosage (DDD) and the costs in euros.
The drugs marketed since 1990 were classified as new
drugs and the others as classical drugs. RESULTS.
The total consumption of drugs increased from 1.92
DDD/1,000 inhabitants/day in 1989 to 3.64 DDD/1,000
inhabitants/day in 1998. The drugs showing the greatest
increase were selegiline, pergolide and levodopa.
The total pharmaceutical expenses tripled. There was
a smaller increase in the consumption of new drugs
(1.2% of the total in 1991 and 6.6% in 1998) than
in their costs (6.7% of the total in 1991 and 38.8%
in 1998). The cost per DDD of the new drugs increased
five times (1989: 2.55 euros and 1998: 13.59 euros)
and that of the classical drugs was similar (1989:
0.54 euros and 1998: 0.62 euros). CONCLUSIONS. The
total consumption of anti Parkinson drugs has progressively
increased. The consumption of selegiline has also
increased in spite of controversy over its safety.
The new drugs have a major economic effect.
|
|
|
Laboratoire Chropi, Paris.
The data obtained during the past
decade in experimental and clinical pharmacology show
that the GABAergic drugs, with central activity, do
not ameliorate the symptoms of the Parkinson's disease
(PD), but would worsen the akineto-rigid syndrome,
the dyskinesias and the deteriorating mental status
in the later stages of the PD. On the other hand,
recent data of experimental pharmacology suggest the
possibility that glycinergic or glutamatergic derivatives,
with central activity, would have a beneficial effect
on the syndromes of the later stages of PD (declining
efficacy of L-DOPA, dyskinesias, deteriorating mental
status), which constitute, with the fluctuation of
the response to L-DOPA, ("on-off" effects),
the major problems of the PD's treatment. Some theoretical
and experimental data also suggest the possibility
of a beneficial effect of the glutamatergic drugs
in the treatment of the "on-off" effects.
|
|
|
In normal elderly humans there is
progressive motor dysfunction and loss of nigrostriatal
neurons and brain dopamine similar to, although of
a milder degree than, that seen in Parkinson's disease.
Ten healthy elderly volunteers were given Carbidopa/levodopa
or placebo in a double-blind crossover study. We measured
movement velocity, reaction time, tremor, visual evoked
response (VER), and electroretinography (ERG). Significant
changes were seen only in ERG. Motor functions and
VER were unchanged. Although there appeared to be
pharmacologic activity (ie, changes in ERG), levodopa,
in adequate antiparkinson dosage, had no impact on
the mild extrapyramidal impairment of normal elderly
subjects.
|
|
|
CONTEXT: Pramipexole and levodopa
both ameliorate the motor symptoms of early Parkinson
disease (PD), but no controlled studies have compared
long-term outcomes after initiating dopaminergic therapy
with pramipexole vs levodopa. OBJECTIVE: To compare
the development of dopaminergic motor complications
after initial treatment of early PD with pramipexole
vs levodopa. DESIGN: Multicenter, parallel-group,
double-blind, randomized controlled trial. SETTING:
Academic movement disorders clinics at 22 sites in
the United States and Canada. PATIENTS: Three hundred
one patients with early PD who required dopaminergic
therapy to treat emerging disability, enrolled between
October 1996 and August 1997. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects
were randomly assigned to receive pramipexole, 0.5
mg 3 times per day, with levodopa placebo (n = 151);
or Carbidopa/levodopa, 25/100 mg 3 times per day,
with pramipexole placebo (n = 150). For patients with
residual disability, the dosage was escalated during
the first 10 weeks. From week 11 to month 23.5, investigators
were permitted to add open-label levodopa to treat
continuing or emerging disability. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Time to the first occurrence of any of 3 dopaminergic
complications: wearing off, dyskinesias, or on-off
motor fluctuations; changes in scores on the Unified
Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), assessed
at baseline and follow-up evaluations; and, in a subgroup
of 82 subjects evaluated at baseline and 23.5 months,
ratio of specific to nondisplaceable striatal iodine
123 2-beta-carboxymethoxy-3-beta-(4-iodophenyl)tropane
(beta-CIT) uptake on single photon emission computed
tomography imaging of the dopamine transporter. RESULTS:
Initial pramipexole treatment resulted in significantly
less development of wearing off, dyskinesias, or on-off
motor fluctuations (28%) compared with levodopa (51%)
(hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI],
0. 30-0.66; P<.001). The mean improvement in total
UPDRS score from baseline to 23.5 months was greater
in the levodopa group than in the pramipexole group
(9.2 vs 4.5 points; P<.001). Somnolence was more
common in pramipexole-treated patients than in levodopa-treated
patients (32.4% vs 17.3%; P =.003), and the difference
was seen during the escalation phase of treatment.
In the subgroup study, patients treated initially
with pramipexole (n = 39) showed a mean (SD) decline
of 20.0% (14.2%) in striatal beta-CIT uptake compared
with a 24.8% (14.4%) decline in subjects treated initially
with levodopa (n = 39; P =.15). CONCLUSIONS: Fewer
patients receiving initial treatment for PD with pramipexole
developed dopaminergic motor complications than with
levodopa therapy. Despite supplementation with open-label
levodopa in both groups, the levodopa-treated group
had a greater improvement in total UPDRS compared
with the pramipexole group.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
