The question is.. does it work at that lower dose? And what does it do to your chances of being able to off of the drug after 6 months/1 year? Even if its cheaper, it won't end up being cheaper in the long run if its less effective than the original protocol.
Hemispherx protocol is exceptionally liberal. You may start at whatever dose you wish. Most docs. prefer you start and at least try protocol first (200 mg and then up to 400). Peterson starts patients at very low dose (usually below 100 mg). If you do not tolerate the higher doses you may reduce to whatever dose balances side effects and benefits. However, there is no way to save unused Ampligen so if you use less than 200 mg it gets thrown out. I am only on 100 mg, but that is the dose I tolerate. Hemispherx only makes 200 mg bottles so patients on 400 mg dose require 2 bottles.
@ Acer2000 - yes, the drug works. Same principle as lower dose on other medications - I don't take full doses of anything. I am too drug sensitive. I have spoken with several patients who took less than 400 mg for 18 months. Got 90% better. Stayed about 80% - 90% better for 11 years. Grape Funk - Peterson seems to guss fairly well who will respond. Peterson looks at NK cell, RNase-L, etc. The biggest tell is if you take Ampligen & you feel like crap, it will work for you. Not neccesarily huge results in every case, but almost everyone who feels something gets some improvement. Also a billing manager who knows gov. coding well can get medicare and / or medicaid to pay for office visits and infusions.
I am not on the forums often so it is better to contacct me by email.
i've just re-read the wikipedia pg on ampligen and it says it works by inducing interferon production. This begs the obvious question of why interferon inducers have not received more attention on here??? I have read many posts of heapsreal's on the subject but there doesn't seem that many other people here who've tried it at all. If anyone knows can they explain the difference btwn ampligen and a "regular" IFN inducer to me???
No one really knows exactly how/why Ampligen works for us. Administration of interferon is usually very proinflammatory. I asked Dr. Peterson why not just give straight interferon and he said it makes patients VERY sick.
I have no idea how Ampligen compares to something like cycloferon though.
If the BWG and the Lipkin studies establish XMRV/MULVs as circulating retroviruses and not lab contaminants, and Hemispherix can retroactively show that XMRV+ patients did well on ampligen, I wonder if that wld speed FDA approval?
Then it would be more likely to be covered by insurance..
Lots of ifs... and then how long would it take for all that stuff to happen?
Joey knows I've said this before, and I hate to be a downer here, but I really doubt that Ampligen will ever be approved, XMRV or no XMRV. They've been trying for 23-25 years to get the drug approved for a variety of conditions, to no avail.
Part of this may be due to what Joey said, that 'they don't really know how or why it works' (when it does), but keep in mind it was rejected for approval by the FDA just two years ago (after a 5 year process).
But for me, the main problem seems to be the poor management of the company...the half-truths, the outright lies (suggesting imminent approval in June 2009) to get the stock price up, and then the resulting crash in December 2009 when it was rejected. Others have blamed conspiracy theories, but the fact remains that management was caught in a series of lies/half-truths to investors during that period.
In June of '09 the stock price was at something like $4.60. Today it's at 27 cents.
Perhaps if they're able to bring in new management, the company can survive. But it just doesn't look good IMHO, especially considering it's 25 year history.
i dont think ampligen will be scrapped completely at any time..its too valuable. its wide spectrum and anti-smallpox, right? the govt is always trying to develop small pox drugs in case of bioterrorism. though i think cmx157 will be good for smallpox....not sure