fallen, i suggest you read the doctoral dissertation
BEANS, ROOT AND LEAVES
A HISTORY OF THE CHEMICAL THERAPY OF PARKINSONISM
google brings up the .pdf but i don't know how to get the link, just google BEANS, ROOTS AND LEAVES PARKINSON'S and it should come up in the first page of the search.

i think after reading it you might come to the conclusion that hundreds if not more substances were tested on pd and l-dopa with carbidopa just works better by far than anything else. if mucana worked that great and could compete in the marketplace against ridiculously cheap carbidopa/levodopa it would have supplanted C/L by now in the western world.

what people lose sight of is it that it seems pharma was ready to give up on l-dopa because of the high cost of the grams of l-dopa one had to take before carbidopa was developed and the extreme side affects of that l-dopa, i assume it was darn hard to find doctors wanting to do trials and subject patients to that much misery. if it weren't for some very dedicated researchers maybe we'd be taking mucana now instead of C/L. Sure money was the motivation for pd drug deveopment, but i'm sure glad i have C/L, I couldn't imagine what life for advanced pd'er was like before it, must have been a living hell and i'm sure pd'ers didn't live as long. i'm willing to pay PHARMA something for those extra useful years. as for today, we have no cure which is unacceptable but i understand how hard it is to recruit patients into trials where they undergo brain surgery when C/L works so well and reversible DBS is an option and the disease has no accepted biomarkers yet.


i'll never understand why people show up here and bash C/L when on the other hand it seems most HINZ protocol posters never last for more on the protocol, high cost being a factor since you have to buy everything from your health care practitioner and the difficulty of consuming grams of mucana, and bottom line, nothing about their personal experience can be verified.