Can’t imagine the side effects, but if it works, might be worth it to some.
The authors found a significant reduction in mean ED visits (1.8) and hospital admissions (0.9) in the 2 years post-combination. There was a trend for reduction in alcohol and drug use, though only 3 participants of the study had a diagnosis of comorbid substance use disorder, and a non-significant reduction in the mean number of inpatient mental health days pre- versus post-combination (77 versus 33).
My last hospitalization was 2008, I’ve never gone inpatient since and I’m treatment resistant. I also don’t end up in ER because we’ve got it setup here that John has FMLA days and my pdoc answers Tuesday-Friday even if I have a crisis I can’t have most meds either due to allergic reaction or they work backwards (best way to describe it, got 5 stupid gene mutations, I don’t process and metabolize things right and can go toxic or get nothing absorbed). That’s also injections too, same thing, backwards or allergic.
It’s interesting but I guess I’m stuck still, but it’s been since March 2019 off APs. Guess I’ll keep the headphones on and watching my go to for movies and TV.
What is the difference between experimental treatments that take place on a certain knowledge of what is changing and what causes the change,and other that take place without this prior knowledge ?
On the principle,why are there experimental treatments and comparisons of their results ?
Because,the drug designer do not know the nature of the change’s nature that has occurred in the basic nature of the person diagnosed with sz,which should be treated (corrected / modified or restrained temporary / permanently )
Meaning that,the change ( disorder // suffering ) that sz induces in the nature of the person,the cause and mechanisms of change are all unknown factors to the drug designer,
and under the public pressure to find any quick treatment ,the designer resorts to experimental treatments and compares its results ,hopping that they may lead to knowing what the change is
Why the drug designer do not asking the persons with sz directly to know their suffering nature ?
Those who betray scientific objectivity are those who interpret the sz according to demand.
They fabricate irrelevant nomenclature,definitions,concepts and designing tests that are consistent only with the data of their theoretical models about the human nature (P /B ),and ignoring the nature of sz’s nature which is supposed to extract its actual facts
They invent alternative causes (instead of actual cause) be taken to explain the symptoms of sz
This theoretical models,words written in linguistic expressive methods in order to sound with the test of scientific facts in the eye of the educated reader -while it not true
If things don’t improve or get worse on Vraylar, I could try Clozaril again. I had a bad experience because of a horrible hospital/doctor who gave me like 3 APs at once and high doses not including other meds and I developed NMS and could have died. It’s not fun pissing ones pants. I never lasted more than 2 weeks on Clozaril. Doctors are hesitant given my background. It would be nice to have no delusions, but even my parents are against Clozaril. Vraylar works well for me. If I didn’t drink energy drinks and read certain things, I might be doing better, but I feel knowledge is power. I rather be educated than be in the dark and not know what hits me. I learned that from experience.
Is it possible to give us the medical name of the condition that you have experienced and consider the delusions as the main symptom of it and the cause of your personal suffering which disappears with medication ?