The ABC Homeopathy Forum
need comparative data
Hello fellow LS victims, and I say that because I feel that the lack of research into LS is making us victims of the disease. I, like many others, have been through numerous gyn's, urologists, plastic surgeons, vulvular disease specialists, dermantologists, etc., all with either no knowledge, or just referring to their computers for what is already out there for treatment. I was told to use a steroid cream for two years before I learned it was doing more harm than good. By that time, the damage was done. I narrowly escaped having a radical surgery by a well-known gyn, who insisted he could make things right. Thankfully, a doctor at Cleveland Clinic straighted that out while I just happened to be on vacation in that area. He said surgery for LS is considered mutilation in most cases for LS. Still, even he had no more advice than continue with steroid creams, yada, yada, yada.And here we are folks, with growing numbers of cases, mostly women, no real information, no real causes, no real cures. I am searching for anyone with similar problems. In addition to the LS, I have and have had some gastrointestinal problems, not real serious, more of a nuisance. I became allergic to milk, at 49, mind you. I had a tetuns shot and lost large clumps of hair on my head. I became allergic to steroid injections. All this since LS. It does seem to break out in more places when I am more stressed, and has broken out in all the "hot" spots, such as under bra straps, along panty line, in vaginal area of course- that
is where it started, also some spots on neckline and breast. I've noticed no spots on areas that are touched by sunlight???. Anyone out there who'd like to compare, let's do it. Maybe we can come up with something the doctors can't. Please respond. Thanks.
mirrormirror on 2006-02-23
This is just a forum. Assume posts are not from medical professionals.
Stay away from any form of surgical intervention.
UV treatment MAY help.....
A randomized controlled study of low-dose UVA1, medium-dose UVA1, and narrowband UVB phototherapy in the treatment of localized scleroderma.
Kreuter A, Hyun J, Stucker M, Sommer A, Altmeyer P, Gambichler T.
Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany. a.kreuter at derma.de
BACKGROUND: In previous trials, UV therapy has been demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of localized scleroderma (LS). To date, a randomized comparison study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different, commonly used phototherapeutic modalities in LS is still outstanding. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of low-dose (LD) UVA1, medium-dose (MD) UVA1, and narrowband (NB) UVB phototherapy in the treatment of LS. METHODS: Sixty four patients with LS were consecutively included in a prospective, open, randomized controlled 3-arm study. Severity of LS was determined by means of a clinical score, and clinical improvement was also monitored by histopathologic analysis and 20-MHz ultrasound. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients were treated with LD UVA1 (20 J/cm2), 18 patients received MD UVA1 (50 J/cm2), and 19 patients were treated with NB UVB dependent on their skin type. Phototherapy was performed 5 times weekly for 8 weeks. Two of the 64 patients included in this trial discontinued therapy. Skin status significantly improved in all patients who finished the treatment protocol, resulting in a reduction of the clinical score in all groups (LD UVA1, 7.6-5.0 [P < .001, 95% confidence interval 1.6-3.4]; MD UVA1, 11.1-6.6 [P < .001, 95% confidence interval 2.5-6.2]; NB UVB, 7.3-4.9 [P < .001, 95% confidence interval 1.6-3.2]). The reduction of the score was accompanied by an improvement of the visual analog scale for itching and tightness, histologic score, and 20-MHz ultrasound. MD UVA1 was significantly more effective than NB UVB (P < .05). There were no significant differences between LD UVA1 and NB UVB and the former and MD UVA1 (P > .05). LIMITATIONS: We had a relatively small study sample and nonblinded assessment of primary outcome. CONCLUSION: Phototherapy, as previously reported in several noncontrolled trials, is an effective therapeutic option in LS, with a favorable risk/benefit ratio. UVA1 phototherapy should be considered among the first approaches in the management of LS.
One Homeopathic Prof of Homeopathy suggests diet..
Vegetables eggs cereals milk ..due to modern farming would suggest goat milk NOT cows.
Puls , Arnica,Sarsap, K Iod, Lyc and Merc may help, depènding on indications
UV treatment MAY help.....
A randomized controlled study of low-dose UVA1, medium-dose UVA1, and narrowband UVB phototherapy in the treatment of localized scleroderma.
Kreuter A, Hyun J, Stucker M, Sommer A, Altmeyer P, Gambichler T.
Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany. a.kreuter at derma.de
BACKGROUND: In previous trials, UV therapy has been demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of localized scleroderma (LS). To date, a randomized comparison study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different, commonly used phototherapeutic modalities in LS is still outstanding. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of low-dose (LD) UVA1, medium-dose (MD) UVA1, and narrowband (NB) UVB phototherapy in the treatment of LS. METHODS: Sixty four patients with LS were consecutively included in a prospective, open, randomized controlled 3-arm study. Severity of LS was determined by means of a clinical score, and clinical improvement was also monitored by histopathologic analysis and 20-MHz ultrasound. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients were treated with LD UVA1 (20 J/cm2), 18 patients received MD UVA1 (50 J/cm2), and 19 patients were treated with NB UVB dependent on their skin type. Phototherapy was performed 5 times weekly for 8 weeks. Two of the 64 patients included in this trial discontinued therapy. Skin status significantly improved in all patients who finished the treatment protocol, resulting in a reduction of the clinical score in all groups (LD UVA1, 7.6-5.0 [P < .001, 95% confidence interval 1.6-3.4]; MD UVA1, 11.1-6.6 [P < .001, 95% confidence interval 2.5-6.2]; NB UVB, 7.3-4.9 [P < .001, 95% confidence interval 1.6-3.2]). The reduction of the score was accompanied by an improvement of the visual analog scale for itching and tightness, histologic score, and 20-MHz ultrasound. MD UVA1 was significantly more effective than NB UVB (P < .05). There were no significant differences between LD UVA1 and NB UVB and the former and MD UVA1 (P > .05). LIMITATIONS: We had a relatively small study sample and nonblinded assessment of primary outcome. CONCLUSION: Phototherapy, as previously reported in several noncontrolled trials, is an effective therapeutic option in LS, with a favorable risk/benefit ratio. UVA1 phototherapy should be considered among the first approaches in the management of LS.
One Homeopathic Prof of Homeopathy suggests diet..
Vegetables eggs cereals milk ..due to modern farming would suggest goat milk NOT cows.
Puls , Arnica,Sarsap, K Iod, Lyc and Merc may help, depènding on indications
walkin last decade
To post a reply, you must first LOG ON or Register
Important
Information given in this forum is given by way of exchange of views only, and those views are not necessarily those of ABC Homeopathy. It is not to be treated as a medical diagnosis or prescription, and should not be used as a substitute for a consultation with a qualified homeopath or physician. It is possible that advice given here may be dangerous, and you should make your own checks that it is safe. If symptoms persist, seek professional medical attention. Bear in mind that even minor symptoms can be a sign of a more serious underlying condition, and a timely diagnosis by your doctor could save your life.