No, not really. The Framingham study, the one that the researcher I wrote to (and talked with) was involved in, dealt with a lot of different people.
They were able to show that the longer symptoms had persisted prior to treatment, the less "total" recovery there was. So they said that early diagnosis was the best.
But in all the subjects there was some recovery.
As far as I know, "docs" don't do that any more: give a shot or two to see if people need it.
But in any case, I didn't think that the course of B12 replacement therapy was ever "a shot or two."
In most B12 replacement therapy that I've seen described there's an initial period of more frequent shots, for instance a shot a day for several days. Then it drops to a shot a week, then a shot every two weeks, then the "maintenance" is set at a shot a month.
It was that kind of therapy that was prescribed and then if there were results the diagnosis was made of B12 deficiency. That's how I understand it.
What I want to bring forward is that I had the most recovery after the holistic M.D. prescribed a shot a day for a year... That is a LOT of B12, and it was only when I had that amount (and sometimes I doubled up) that my peripheral neuropathy that had been such a problem went away.
Happiness. It makes me smile to remember how that went.
It's not a matter of whether my experience is common or otherwise.
It's a matter of each person needing to know what their own experience is, and to record it so that they can refer to it.
I don't know what you mean when you write, "I don't know why you I don't believe people should try B12."
rose wrote -
Quote:
Originally Posted by rose
The research you are referring to has been done assuming that people are being diagnosed early. People who are diagnosed and treated early (those lucky enough to have obvious megaloblastic/macrocytic anemia) usually respond quickly and recover very quickly. Those are not the people I am addressing.
The fact that some docs will give a shot or two to see if a person needs B12 is better than nothing. But many people were missed because they did not have the response thought by ignorant medical people to be the norm.
I have been suggesting for many years that people keep notes. It is important for them to understand that not responding immediately and obviously does not mean they don't need the vitamin. The trial and the notes need to be kept up much longer to cover that possibility.
Most people do show some response within days to weeks. Some take longer, and after the initial response it is common for a person with significant damage to have strange symptoms as their body periodically adjusts to interpreting different signals as the nerves repair.
I have no problem with your description of your experience. It is important for people to know that your experience is not common. Theirs may be very different.
I don't know why you I don't believe people should try B12. I have been suggesting it and providing support for years. It is important for people to know that if they give it only a couple of months, that may not be enough to determine whether or not they need it.
The danger is in people assuming that if they do not have results that are quick and obvious that they do not need the vitamin. The body can do a lot of work before letting us know what it is doing.
I don't know what you're responding to. It certainly isn't to what I've been saying.
rose
|