Manila Cures - here they are..
Dr. A. N. Feliciano
Dear friends,
Please be informed that these patients who wrote about their experience
below, consulted and were treated by AEF, and NOT BY ANF.
This is precisely why I am in the Internet, to clarify this issue, once and
for all, because Dr. Anonymous/MAN has consistently associated me with
AEF to deliberately fool and confuse patients which a normal person do not
usually do, unless he is crack pot belonging to a weird cult, because he
has no reason to attack me personally and consistently.
I have suggest my own protocol which most of you have already benefited
from without going to Manila. This method I have developed after more
than 30 years of research is not the same as offered by AEF. His method has
COMPROMISED the results of mine developed by a neophyte and one who
claimed falsely a research plagiarized from mine when he claimed that he
did this research since 1983 during his speech to the PF, who appeared to
have swollowed it hook, line and sinker. This false claim is still
published in the Prostatitis Foundation web site advertising a 100% cure
within 16 days.
How could anyone claim a research he did not do in 1983 and was not
authorized to do so, for the simple fact that AEF did not obtained a
license to practice medicine until only in 1991, after 3 unsuccessful
attempts to pass the medical board exam. This can easily be verified by
writing to the
Chairman
Board of Medical Examiners
Professional Regulation Commission
Manila, Philippines.
To reveal this fraudulent misinformation is a "moral obligation" of any
one including the Prostatitis Foundation, because it has resulted in harm
to many patients.
Where is your sense of morality and decency Mr. Ken Smith, by stating that
this is a "personal feud"? In America as Jim wrote, this will be a ground
for massive investigation by medical groups. It is forth coming in the
Philippines.
For once this anonymous/meaker has done a public service.
Antonio Novak Feliciano, M.D., F.P.C.S.
http://webcom.net/~ino/
http://www.qinet.net/user/dr.anf/chronic.htm
----------
> From: Anonymous <nob...@REPLAY.COM>
> To:
> Subject: Manila Cures - here they are..
> Date: Friday, December 26, 1997 1:50 PM
>
> Anyone can use an anonymous e-mailer, Dr Anonymous! You asked for Manila
> cures - here are some courtesy Ken Smith's site:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> A Critical Essay on the importance of the Manila treatment
> From two people who have been there
>
> From: Petr Vanysek
>
> After spending five to seven weeks in Manila and being able to observe
the
> "Feliciano" drainage treatment as well as gather evidence about the
> success of the treatment, we have compiled here what we believe to be
> important information for future approaches to the treatment of
> prostatitis. Most information we reviewed prior to going to Manila
> appeared to indicate that treatment in Manila was nearly always
> successful. On the basis of this information, a number of patients have
> travelled to Manila for treatment and a number of others have attempted
to
> follow the Feliciano procedure through other physicians or even
self-help.
>
> For the purpose of this note, we define prostatitis as a set of physical
> complaints that patients have learned to label, either through diagnosis
> by a physician or by other means, as prostatitis. We also define cure as
a
> situation in which the patient is declared cured by the doctor, symptoms
> have significantly abated, and the patient is satisfied with the results
> of the cure. This definition describes well an average internet
> sci.med.prostate.prostatitis participant, who thinks he has prostatitis
> and expects that the cure will free him of his symptoms. Dr. Feliciano
> himself has defined cure as negative tests for micro-organisms and
> resolution of symptoms.
>
> The information of the success of the Feliciano treatment still relies
> almost entirely on the original report and testimonial by Dave Trissel
and
> Aaron R. They describe themselves as cured and therefore in this
> environment of lack of adequate medical help, their reports have
> apparently been uncritically accepted.
>
> Much less known are the results of the next five patients who went to
> Manila following the first two patients. From a letter from one of these
> following patients, we learned that only one of these five considered
> himself cured upon his departure. Ironically, shortly after this
patient's
> return, new bacteria appeared and he reportedly continues treatment in
New
> York. Another patient, Larry Boehm, returned from Manila before
completing
> the entire course of treatment required by Dr. Feliciano, and reports
that
> he was treated by an urologist numerous times following his return to the
> U.S., and he continues on antibiotics. Two other patients remain by their
> choice anonymous. The first, we learned, spent a total of three and half
> months in Manila due to various complications. He has apparently chronic
> chlamydia and there are conflicting reports whether he has prostatitis.
> The other, who apparently suffered complications from a biopsy prior to
> the Manila trip is still recovering, reporting that he is "feeling now
> much better." The last of these five reports worrisome events that
> occurred during the course of treatment, although not necessarily the
> result of the treatment, i.e., that he was hospitalized for intestinal
> bleeding, and acquired a severe GI infection, ostensibly from drinking
tap
> water.
>
> Between July 4th and 6th, six new patients arrived to Manila, including
> the two of us, about whom we have acquired detailed information. One
> patient arrived and departed pain free. However, his chief complaint was
> recurrent bladder infection, and only time will show whether this has
> disappeared. He departed following four weeks of treatment, apparently
> infected by some organism not detected by his initial culture. The second
> of these patients arrived with excruciating testicular pain and departed
> still in pain, and like the first of these six patients, was apparently
> infected by some organism not detected by his initial culture. The third
> patient departed observing that his symptoms are now significantly worse
> than before treatment. The fourth patient remains in Manila, at last
> report, with symptoms unresolved. Jeff Parker left Manila following
> negative cultures for organism, but no improvement in his groin pain.
Petr
> Vanysek has returned with exactly the same symptom, urethral burning, as
> if the treatment never took place.
>
> It is uncertain who has actually been cured; the only firm testimonial
> seems to be that 2 of the 13 North American patients were cured, with one
> patient looking forward to completing 9 weeks of treatment, and one other
> patient waiting to see if his bladder infection recurs.
>
> After we arrived in Manila, we were advised for the first time of the
> "four months rule," i.e., after clinical signs are negative, four months
> may be required for symptoms to diminish. Although we remain hopeful,
> quite frankly, we are not holding our breath, and seriously question the
> casual relation between treatment and changed symptoms after a
substantial
> period of time following treatment.
>
> Although the foregoing may appear to be the result of simple
> disappointment and frustration at not being cured, it is intended, in
> keeping with the purpose of the news group, to be a disclosure of all
> information of which we are aware; we can both see now that we travelled
> to Manila out of desperation and optimism based on inadequate information
> as to the effectiveness of the drainage method. This post is also
intended
> to keep the search for a "cure," by patients, doctors, and the
Prostatitis
> Foundation, alive, since the drainage method, based upon the foregoing,
> appears to be merely helpful for some patients.
>
> We anticipate a future post concerning our non-medical
thoughts/criticisms
> of the drainage treatment we received in Manila.
>
> Jeff Parker and Petr Vanysek
>
CGaydos109
I was very disappointed to hear your experience. I was anticipating to my
urologist with Dr. Feliciano's treatment protocol and seeing if he is willing
to try it. I suppose that there is still hope since it the method seemed to
work for some patients. I must say that I am disappointed and confused after
reading this posting.
Sincerely,
Jim
theurgy
In sci.med.prostate.prostatitis you write:
As one of the group of Americans who visited Dr. AE Feliciano, the son of
the prolific Dr. AN Feliciano who posts so much, I must tell you that none
of that group consider themselves cured. As far as I know, only two people
that have posted to this group in the last 2 years claim to have been
cured in Manila, and it was their posts that caused several of us to give
it a try. The story and claims sound plausible, but the cure rate is low.
I still do some self massage and multiple antibiotics when I have a
flareup, but mostly because I see no alternatives. Massage does sometime
reduce my symptoms, but at other times it seems to make them worse.
From what I know of the two Felicianos there is no significant difference
in their treatment approach, and I would not expect much difference in
their success rates. One uses more cultures to try and identify bugs, the
other other more simultaneous antibiotics in hope of killing bugs. I have
also seen Dr. Shoskes at UCLA, who is a proponent of quercetin. It does
not appear to have made much difference in my case. Indidentally, his lab
showed no bacteria in my case, but as Dr. AN Feliciano points out, it is
easy to miss something during culturing. It is also clear that the set of
symptoms we ususally call prostatitis can be caused by several different
things, and a chronic bacterial infection is only one possibility. For
what it's worth, Dr. Shoskes thinks it may be partly autoimmune in nature,
triggered perhaps by infections but persisting long after they have gone.
Regards,
Heiner Biesel
Don
> As one of the group of Americans who visited Dr. AE Feliciano, the son of
> the prolific Dr. AN Feliciano who posts so much, I must tell you that
none
> of that group consider themselves cured. As far as I know, only two
people
> that have posted to this group in the last 2 years claim to have been
> cured in Manila, and it was their posts that caused several of us to give
> it a try. The story and claims sound plausible, but the cure rate is low.
I knew this was true just from reading the posts for the last year and a
half.
I don't think anyone can prove otherwise. The cures DO NOT EXIST!
<dba...@gate.net>
Dr. A. N. Feliciano
> From: theurgy <trx...@XMISSION.COM>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Manila Cures - here they are..
> Date: Monday, January 12, 1998 9:52 AM
>
> In sci.med.prostate.prostatitis you write:
>
> >I was very disappointed to hear your experience. I was anticipating to
my
> >urologist with Dr. Feliciano's treatment protocol and seeing if he is
willing
> >to try it. I suppose that there is still hope since it the method
seemed to
> >work for some patients. I must say that I am disappointed and confused
after
> >reading this posting.
> >Sincerely,
> >Jim
>
> the prolific Dr. AN Feliciano who posts so much, I must tell you that
none
> of that group consider themselves cured. As far as I know, only two
people
> that have posted to this group in the last 2 years claim to have been
> cured in Manila, and it was their posts that caused several of us to give
> it a try. The story and claims sound plausible, but the cure rate is low.
> flareup, but mostly because I see no alternatives. Massage does sometime
> reduce my symptoms, but at other times it seems to make them worse.
>
> From what I know of the two Felicianos there is no significant difference
> in their treatment approach, and I would not expect much difference in
> their success rates. One uses more cultures to try and identify bugs, the
> other other more simultaneous antibiotics in hope of killing bugs. I have
> also seen Dr. Shoskes at UCLA, who is a proponent of quercetin. It does
> not appear to have made much difference in my case. Indidentally, his lab
> showed no bacteria in my case, but as Dr. AN Feliciano points out, it is
> easy to miss something during culturing. It is also clear that the set of
> symptoms we ususally call prostatitis can be caused by several different
> things, and a chronic bacterial infection is only one possibility. For
> what it's worth, Dr. Shoskes thinks it may be partly autoimmune in
nature,
> triggered perhaps by infections but persisting long after they have gone.
>
> Regards,
> Heiner Biesel
In other words, quoting Jim or was it Jon who wrote;
"We are all doomed".
Heiner's analysis is quite accurate but not complete and the reason that I
have become "prolific" and "post so much" is to convince patients and
doctors of the method of frequent prostatic massages and multiple
antibiotics which he himself has adapted during his flare-ups and he sees
no alternative. No other doctor has experience in this type of treatment.
I suppose Heiner is complementing me by referring to me as "prolific"
defined in the dictionary as "highly productive", and not complaining when
he also said "who post so much", referring to my postings. I don't thinki
he is biting the hand that is feeding him.
Heiner's message is that very few of those that came to Manila, including
himself were cured by AEF and therefore patients should no longer consider
traveling half-way around the world to consult this doctor. I have also
written that I would rather not treat any one from this forum and have
discouraged any patient who because of reading the Digest would want to
consult me.
No matter what my purpose was, I feel that I have now accomplished my
mission which is to discourage any one from coming to the Philippines to
consult any doctor including myself. I hope that the Prostatitis Foundation
will now realize their error and remove any trace of any doctor from the
Philippines, especially the one who has deceived them.
Maybe I can now be less "prolific" and withdraw from this forum.
I am glad that Heiner finds relief by doing " self massage and multiple
antibiotics when I (he) have a flare-up, but mostly because I (he) see no
alternatives".
Just from whom did Heiner get this method and unless I was "prolific"?
The doctor I have exposed did not refute the charge of fraud and
plagiarism, an admission of truth.
I consider the matter closed. This is my main purpose. Nothing personal.
Henceforth, I will only answer questions directly address to me but the
authors of future E mail should bear in mind that my purpose is only to try
to enlighten them and not to convince them to consult me.
Finally Heiner wrote:
< It is also clear that the set of symptoms we usually call prostatitis
can
be caused by several different things, and a chronic bacterial infection
is only one possibility. For what it's worth, Dr. Shoskes thinks it may be
partly autoimmune in
nature. >
Dr. Krieger reported that 87% of diagnosed non-bacterial prostatitis is
actually bacterial. Do you not believe your own doctor?
Petr Vanysek
Don wrote:
I knew this was true just from reading the posts for the last year and
a half. I don't think anyone can prove otherwise. The cures DO NOT
EXIST!
dba...@gate.net>
----------
Don,
I am afraid you are correct. You have to make your conclusions from
the past posts, though. The trouble with this group is that it does not
like to read negative reports.
Petr Vanysek
(one who made the trip to Manila)
John Garst
In article <B0000...@mail.qinet.net>, Prostatitis Discussion
<PROST...@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU> wrote:
...
> Dr. Krieger reported that 87% of diagnosed non-bacterial prostatitis is
> actually bacterial. Do you not believe your own doctor?
....
This is not what Krieger reported. He reported that 87% were positive for
genetic indices of bacteria and that this correlated with WBC count in the
EPS. Except for this correlation, there is no indication that the
bacteria detected are related to prostatitis. Kreiger et al. did no
control experiments (i.e., no studies of "normal" men).
John Garst ga...@sunchem.chem.uga.edu