viagra
Steve Harris
<48ns7us7tprfb0q76...@4ax.com>...
><nlp-m...@bk.ru> wrote:
>
>>Hello.
>>My name is Jim.
>>The following is a true story:
>
>Hi, Jim. You're a spammer.
>
>My name is Carey. The following is also a true strory.
>
>A local gentleman here ordered viagra by mail in preparation for his
>"big date." Unfortunately, he died of sudden cardiac arrest... in
>bed... with his lover... before he was even able to get out of those
>elegant silk pajamas he'd purchased just for the occassion. I felt
>really bad about having to slice them open up the front with a pair of
>shears. They probably cost well over $100, but it didn't look like he
>was going to be needing them again.
>
>It was quite a scene... candle light, soft music, the half empty
>glasses of wine by the bed... his horrified, mortified lover in a
>sexy, sheer nightgown, crying and whimpering in the corner as a gaggle
>of paramedics feverishly tried to revive her lover. Meanwhile, the
>neighbors all peered from their windows, wondering why all those
>flashing lights and police cars were in front of her house at 2am....
>
>It seems the poor gentleman didn't know viagra is an extremely
>dangerous, potentially lethal drug when combined with the other, very
>common medication he was taking.
>
>Alas, another viagra success story.
COMMENT:
Yep, Viagra can really stiffen you out sometimes, all right-- to do any
better, you have to go on with cryonics.
I've recommended to the Viagra people that they develop seldenafil as a
cardiac stress-test drug, much as persantin is used for that now. It puts
your ticker under load, but there's a lab and a bunch of docs watching you,
so it's a much safer proposition. It should work fine for the purpose, and
would be the perfect screen for people who are going to start using it as a
sex drug.
And you'd catch a lot of early and undiagnosed heart disease that way, as
well. It really is a crying shame the way the stuff is being promoted. More
than half of men who have difficulty getting an errection have the problem
because they have beginning to develop atherosclerosis, and don't know it. I
know urologists convinced that this "sign" is a far more sensitive one and
more specific one than angina, and maybe as worrysome as a positive stress
test. New erectile dysfunction should trigger the full cardiac workup,
probably. Instead, it triggers some guy to go down to get a free sample of
something which his doc may not require him to get the screens for. Which he
generally uses for some strange and new woman that he's worried about
impressing (his wife already knows he sometimes can't perform), and the
combination of excitement and the new drug does him in.
Here we have the US surgeon general, whose job it is to tell the public such
important stuff. Like: "Hey, bub. If you think you might suddenly have the
need for Viagra, maybe it's time you got checked out for heart disease. See
your doctor." Instead, we have TV commercials fueled by ungodly amounts of
pharmaceutical profits in which we have some guy who looks about 35 except
for the touch of Grey, putting on his necktie for that hot date (with the
wife <g>), hawking a molecules which is ACTUALLY going to be used by 50
year-old obese diabetic businessmen at some hardware convention, a thousand
miles from home where the wife still is.
I've thought about putting together a $1000-callgirl scan as a similar
screen for such men, but suspect that society isn't ready for that. I think
you could save some lives that way rather pleasantly, but the insurers would
balk.
Say, have you heard there's another generic coming along in this same
family, called mycoxsadril?
SBH
--
I welcome email from any being clever enough to fix my address. It's open
book. A prize to the first spambot that passes my Turing test.
sle...@scummyisp.com
>Carey Gregory wrote in message
><48ns7us7tprfb0q76...@4ax.com>...
>><nlp-m...@bk.ru> wrote:
>>My name is Carey. The following is also a true strory.
>>A local gentleman here ordered viagra by mail in preparation for his
>>"big date." Unfortunately, he died of sudden cardiac arrest... in
>>bed... with his lover.
<snip>
>>It seems the poor gentleman didn't know viagra is an extremely
>>dangerous, potentially lethal drug when combined with the other, very
>>common medication he was taking.
You're very coy as to the name of this "other, very common
medication". Could I propose, nitroglycerin? If so, it's hardly likely
(referring to Dr. Harris's comments below) that the person was unaware
of his cardiovascular condition.
As to Dr. Harris, you shock me. I had you figured for one of the more
helpful MD's around here, someone with a somewhat skeptical (OK,
cynical) attitude towards the god-like affectations of the medical
industry and their pharmacological supporters. Viagra is hardly one of
the more obvious nor deserving targets.
<snip>
>And you'd catch a lot of early and undiagnosed heart disease that way, as
>well. It really is a crying shame the way the stuff is being promoted. More
>than half of men who have difficulty getting an errection have the problem
>because they have beginning to develop atherosclerosis, and don't know it. I
>know urologists convinced that this "sign" is a far more sensitive one and
>more specific one than angina, and maybe as worrysome as a positive stress
>test.
And you have some magic solution to atherosclerosis? Some other pill
that makes the plaque disappear and the arteries become flexible?
What's the point?
> New erectile dysfunction should trigger the full cardiac workup,
>probably. Instead, it triggers some guy to go down to get a free sample of
>something which his doc may not require him to get the screens for. Which he
>generally uses for some strange and new woman that he's worried about
>impressing (his wife already knows he sometimes can't perform), and the
>combination of excitement and the new drug does him in.
Now why on earth would you jump to that conclusion? Since most guys of
an age to need Viagra are hardly god's gift to women it's far more
likely that he's using it precisely to improve his performance with
his wife or maybe the widow and her five daughters. But even if he is
using it for the purpose of impressing some new little floozy, just
what business is that of the medical profession? What's next? The
optical guy denying me new glasses because I might use them to read a
porno magazine? Or maybe we should extend it a little further: no
replacement hip for you; you might just be going to use it for some
non-serious pleasure walking. Ridiculous, eh? Just like your judgement
about the use to which the patient is going to put his newly
strengthened erection.
>Here we have the US surgeon general, whose job it is to tell the public such
>important stuff. Like: "Hey, bub. If you think you might suddenly have the
>need for Viagra, maybe it's time you got checked out for heart disease. See
>your doctor." Instead, we have TV commercials fueled by ungodly amounts of
>pharmaceutical profits in which we have some guy who looks about 35 except
>for the touch of Grey, putting on his necktie for that hot date (with the
>wife <g>), hawking a molecules which is ACTUALLY going to be used by 50
>year-old obese diabetic businessmen at some hardware convention, a thousand
>miles from home where the wife still is.
I can only think that you have some personal axe to grind here, you're
so fascinated by these businessmen supposedly using Viagra for
hookers.
No doubt Pfizer is making a bundle off Viagra at a non-insurance-
reimbursed (mostly) $10 per 100mg but I say thank god for Pfizer and
for Bob Dole. They should get the nobel prize! Even apart from the
medical effects of Viagra, the wonder drug, they deserve credit for
taking impotence our of the shadowy world and establishing it as a
condition to be treated and researched just the same as--oh, let's
say--asthma, or at least acne. The eventual goal is to have sexual
function treated just as we do age- and disease-deterioration of
eyesight, i.e., maintenance of sexual abilities at an optimum level
throughout life. The risk of minor and/or rare side effects is
something that the patient alone (properly informed of course) should
deal with.
For anyone watching and not convinced by the scare story above, the
cheapest place to get Viagra in the US is currently Walmart (at $8.25
per 100mg) or better (but you take a risk) one of the web merchants
selling (and making almost as much as Pfizer) the Indian equivalent,
Androz or the little pink pill (diamond shaped also sildenafil citrate
also Indian) whose name escapes me at the moment. One such place is
webviagra. Price is around $5/100mg (delivered; plain envelope; US
mail) although I saw one at $2.50/100mg recently. Alternatively you
might consider potentiating the effect of Viagra with pharmaceutical
grade Yohimbine ($15 per 90 pills of 5.4mg ea). 25mg Androz + 1.2mg
Yohimbine has approximately the same effect as 50mg Androz/Viagra. For
more information check out alt.support.impotence.
No doubt Dr. Harris will go berserk at the above advice but he could
serve a useful service in informing us if the blood pressure lowering
effect of Viagra is negated by the blood pressure raising effect of
Yohimbine.
Spindoctor
<sle...@scummyISP.com> wrote in message
news:7ett7ukj0tflcsfiv...@4ax.com...
All I can say is thank God I live in the UK ............where thousands of
diabetics every day use Viagra which is prescribed on demand free of charge,
obviously your GP knows your state of health etc. but I told him that 50mg
was'nt quite doing it for me and he now prescribes 100mg as and when
required............no limits no questions as to my use, be it for the wife
or the fun
he is happy that i am looking after myself.
--
The Spindoctor
Essex/Thames Border
God must be a comedian, I asked to be surrounded by
beautiful women, He gave me Four daughters and a Wife!!
Carey Gregory
>You're very coy as to the name of this "other, very common
>medication". Could I propose, nitroglycerin? If so, it's hardly likely
>(referring to Dr. Harris's comments below) that the person was unaware
>of his cardiovascular condition.
Yes, good guess on the nitro, but I intentionally omitted the name
because it's not the only drug that can produce lethal interactions
with viagra.
Merely being aware that he had a cardiovascular condition doesn't mean
much. The real problem isn't cardiac stress, per se, but the blood
pressure lowering effects of the two drugs, especially in combination.
The combination can lead to profound, irreversible shock. It's
unlikely Joe Q. Public would be aware of that.
>The risk of minor and/or rare side effects is
>something that the patient alone (properly informed of course) should
>deal with.
Profound, irreversible shock is hardly a minor side-effect, and the
number of potential viagra users who are also taking nitrates is
large. No other drug has been hawked over the internet and by
mail-order like Viagra has. It completely bypasses the normal
screening of a physician, or even a pharmacist or nurse. No, this
isn't really Pfizer's fault, and I don't blame them for it. I replied
to this chunk of spam simply to educate the lurkers out there who
might be tempted to order viagra without knowing what they're doing.
>No doubt Dr. Harris will go berserk at the above advice but he could
>serve a useful service in informing us if the blood pressure lowering
>effect of Viagra is negated by the blood pressure raising effect of
>Yohimbine.
It seems even you don't fully understand that it's not the
side-effects of Viagra alone but the *combination* which can be so
deadly.
Steve Harris
<7ett7ukj0tflcsfiv...@4ax.com>...
>As to Dr. Harris, you shock me. I had you figured for one of the more
>helpful MD's around here, someone with a somewhat skeptical (OK,
>cynical) attitude towards the god-like affectations of the medical
>industry and their pharmacological supporters. Viagra is hardly one of
>the more obvious nor deserving targets.
Well, actually it is, but it's hard to know who to blame. We tolerate some
direct targeting of Rx drugs to consumers in the US, and the price we charge
for the information distortion this naturally causes, is to make the drug
companies do a bit of public service education at the same time. But it's
obvious that this kind of thing is not working as intended when our TV
commercials for birth control pills for women (for example) contain stuff
like "Birth control pills will not prevent HIV or sexually transmitted
diseases" (now there's a newsflash), as well as the heavier stuff like
"Women who smoke should not use the pill, or generally women over 40; and
possible side effects include clots in the lungs, stroke, heart attack
paralysis, death and have a nice day..." While at the SAME time commercials
for Viagra have next to no warnings at all. And certainly don't mention the
important point that most impotence in men is connected to atherosclerosis,
and ought to make any man who is using erectile aid drugs think about having
a complete cardiovascular workup, if he hasn't already. The FDA message
here is very clear: we don't see a woman who has a stroke while using an
oral contraceptive in the same political light as we see a man who has a
heart attack because he's in the wrong group to be using Viagra. We should,
however, because there is no difference. I am merely recommending the same
sauce for the gander as for the goose, as it were.
>And you have some magic solution to atherosclerosis? Some other pill
>that makes the plaque disappear and the arteries become flexible?
>What's the point?
The point is that we're quite close to having just such stuff. Dying of a
big sudden MI in middle age in an affluent western country is now more a
matter of incredibly bad luck, really really bad genes, or shear stupidity--
sort of like losing all of your teeth in this modern age of dentistry and
periodontics. Atherosclerosis is not like metastasized pancreatic cancer--
it's in general now a very treatable problem. With smoking cessation, proper
diet, and drug treatment most people can now put their coronary risk factors
exactly where you want them. You can also take aspirin and other
preventives, as well as get a stress test (and angiography and even surgery
if necessary) to give them some idea of how much time and room you have to
deal with the problem, and/or give them the time if they need it. Under such
conditions atherosclerotic lesions DO stop growing, and often actually
regress. Proper treatment makes a tremendous difference in risk of future
MI. There are no guarantees yet, and regression doesn't happen immediately,
of course. But it's quite common to see studies in which risk of future MI
in treatment groups is cut to a tiny fraction of placebo; and I've no doubt
the odds are higher yet for combinations of treatments with regard to no
treatment (which is what you get if you ignore warnings like impotence).
They don't do such studies because with what we know by now about treatment
of atherosclerosis, they'd be immoral. In any case, you see the point. This
is something you want to know about. As you pelvic arteries now, so go your
coronary arteries tomorrow.
>No doubt Pfizer is making a bundle off Viagra at a non-insurance-
>reimbursed (mostly) $10 per 100mg but I say thank god for Pfizer and
>for Bob Dole. They should get the nobel prize! Even apart from the
>medical effects of Viagra, the wonder drug, they deserve credit for
>taking impotence our of the shadowy world and establishing it as a
>condition to be treated and researched just the same as--oh, let's
>say--asthma, or at least acne.
The point is that Viagra doesn't treat the problem, which is (too often)
pelvic atherosclerosis. It treats the SYMPTOM. Sometimes the only symptom
some of these men will have for years-- until they get the big MI.
If somebody had just discovered nitroglycerin pills, and the company had Bob
Dole come on TV and say: "Say, men, do you get chest pain sometimes when
shoveling snow? Try a bottle of THESE. They work for me when MY chest
hurts during exercise." Then you'd get it. Wouldn't you?
This is not to say that nitroglycerin pills are not a good thing. They are.
When used by people who know what they're doing. But if some company should
really try to market nitrates that way to people with the "problem" of chest
pain, like the problem of impotence, the FDA would go bananas. They don't
think about Viagra the same way. They probably should.
Jerry Sturdivant
Steve Harris <sbha...@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote
> The point is that Viagra doesn't treat the problem, which is (too
> often) pelvic atherosclerosis. It treats the SYMPTOM. Sometimes
> the only symptom some of these men will have for years蓉ntil
> they get the big MI.
Doesn't this become a moral call? You take some old fellow that's lead a
sedimentary life style. Enjoyed all life's had to offer. Lived in the
buffet line. Smoked. Generally lived for quality of life, not quantity.
Give him the facts and the odds; tell him he needs a physical and let him
make the decision. If the blood-pressure lowering pills may conflict with
Viagra, offer the option of trimix penile injections. There's no law
against endangering your life in the seeking of pleasure.
Jerry of ASI (I post in alt.support.impotence)
Steve Harris
Jerry Sturdivant wrote in message <01c1c1fc$0d631080$LocalHost@jerrys>...
Of course I have no objection if it's done this way. But it's not. You see
the young guy on the Viagra ads, who can't be more than about 40 and isn't 5
lbs overweight, and you might get the idea that impotence is just something
that naturally happens to large fraction of men as a result of being over
35. No big deal. Nothing to get embarrassed or even worried about. Doesn't
mean you're sick. Just see your doctor and get the fix pill.
Well, it is something to worry about. And it may well mean that you're sick
as hell, and in fact you're (technically) dying. You're no younger than your
arteries, and some of your better arteries are complaining. And sure, you
can take the Viagra and ignore all this. Great. Just so you don't say we
didn't tell you.
Beachhouse
to patients via the mass media,
I think Steve overstates/exaggerates the Viagra story a bit....
Used appropriately (i.e., patients with diabetes, known, stable peripheral
vascular disease) Viagra can obviously improve an important "quality of
life."
What do you suggest for "pelvic atherosclerosis" anyway? There are few
effective treatments for peripheral vascular disease *other* than
symptom-relieving drugs! (Other than trying to control BP, glucose,
quitting smoking, and lowering cholesterol -- all measures that basically
serve to limit further damage).
Hopefully any new patient requesting "Viagra" will be counselled regarding
the potential cardiovascular risks.
And, hopefully, any new patient with significant risk factors for coronary
disease will undergo appropriate risk stratification *regardless* of whether
he has erectile dysfunction, wants Viagra, or is waiting to have his hip
replaced ;)
"Steve Harris" <sbha...@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in message
news:a5ro05$t99$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
>
> Jerry Sturdivant wrote in message <01c1c1fc$0d631080$LocalHost@jerrys>...
> >
> >Steve Harris <sbha...@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote
> >
> >> The point is that Viagra doesn't treat the problem, which is (too
> >> often) pelvic atherosclerosis. It treats the SYMPTOM. Sometimes
> >> the only symptom some of these men will have for years-until
Pierre
benefit from Viagra. Not much you can do directly about your arteries when
you're already on an artery-friendly low-everything renal diet and every BP
med known to mankind.
Pierre
"Beachhouse" <sendn...@please.com> wrote in message
news:a5sdb7$sj4$1...@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu...
Jerry Sturdivant
Steve Harris <sbha...@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote
>> Give him the facts and the odds; tell him he needs a
>> physical and let him make the decision
> Of course I have no objection if it's done this way. But it's not.
You're right, of course. Everybody wants the magic pill but few consider
the possibility of consequences.
> You see the young guy on the Viagra ads, who can't be more than
> about 40 and isn't 5 lbs overweight, and you might get the idea
> that impotence is just something that naturally happens to large
> fraction of men as a result of being over 35. No big deal.
Well, I wouldn't call Bob Dole 40. But advertising being what it is (I
watch little TV) I'll accept your description that they've starting using
younger models. But have you ever seen a fat slob advertising an exercising
machine?
Yet ED (Erectile Dysfunction) isn't limited to the young. In our newsgroup
(alt.support.impotence, your posts have cross posted to our group) we find
ED at all ages.
> Nothing to get embarrassed or even worried about. Doesn't
> mean you're sick. Just see your doctor and get the fix pill.
> Well, it is something to worry about.
Yes it is. But the embarrassment is there for many. We get lots of post
from men wanting a sample pill or Internet Rx without seeing their doctor.
The macho in men seem to prevent them from broaching the subject with their
doctor.
> And it may well mean that you're sick as hell,
> and in fact you're (technically) dying.
We're all dying, technically. In our group, the first thing we tell a
newcomer is to see a doctor for a physical, and to tell the doctor about
the ED. What we've run across is the lack of information about ED and what
the fixes are. And this is from doctors. Even urologists. It seems Viagra
has opened a new dialog and people are talking about it more. And many of
the doctor haven't kept up. Either through the doctor's embarrassment, lack
of furthering their education, or religious convictions. Many just don't do
the proper job.
We've have posters that have been issued Rx for Muse. That's the antique of
ED fixes. Other doctors will just toss some sample Viagra pills and no
instructions on how to take them. (Empty stomach, et cetera). And lately, a
doctor issued a trimix Rx, needles, and never made an exploratory injection
in the office or instruction on injecting. Much of the medical profession
is behind in the sexual revolution.
> You're no younger than your arteries, and some of your better
> arteries are complaining. And sure, you can take the Viagra and
> ignore all this. Great. Just so you don't say we didn't tell you.
Exactly. As you say, toss them the blue pill without giving them a blood
test or physical. Education is lacking because of the subject itself. So we
say get a physical, understand all the options, THEN go for it.
Jerry of ASI www.alt-support-impotence.org
Jerry Sturdivant
John 'the Man' <DeMan[19]@hotmail.com>
> Then, I would strongly suggest that you degenerate creeps
> who publicly access over their Dick, kindly out of the sci ngs.
Fuck off yourself, "creep." I was replying to a cross post to our group. If
you don't want responses from other groups, don't cross post to other
groups. (Like YOU did after I intentionally told you which group I was in).
Jerry of alt.support.impotence
Courageous
>Yet ED (Erectile Dysfunction) isn't limited to the young. In our newsgroup
>(alt.support.impotence, your posts have cross posted to our group) we find
>ED at all ages.
You meant to say "isn't limited to the old," and you're correct.
When someone is young and gets E.D., it's a particularly harsh blow.
And I object to the other poster's characterization of "most" E.D.
as having come from pelvic arterial insufficency. The etiological
evidence isn't nearly so clear. Performance anxiety, hormonal
insufficiency, depression, and venous leakage all play significant
roles, and there also quite possibly exists currently undiscovered
etiology as well. Note well.
>> Nothing to get embarrassed or...
>Yes it is. But the embarrassment is there for many. We get lots of post
>from men wanting a sample pill or Internet Rx without seeing their doctor.
>The macho in men seem to prevent them from broaching the subject with their
>doctor.
Some doctors can be pretty insensitive about it, too. When I first
went through my problem I got "you're too young for this." Fuck yeah,
humiliate me further.
>Exactly. As you say, toss them the blue pill without giving them a blood
>test or physical. Education is lacking because of the subject itself. So we
>say get a physical, understand all the options, THEN go for it.
It's the right approach.
C//