Blood Thinners and Phos

[Sheri Nakken]

another page somewhere had said at greater risk for stroke when coming off
Sheri

At 03:23 PM 11/12/2016, you wrote:
Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://homeopathycures.wordpress.com/ & http://vaccinationdangers.wordpress.com/
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases

[Bob Needham]

Hi Leilanae - I have always used that protocol and seen good results and I believe it is best to stay with that approach. and ... Sheri I will be also passing on you thoughts too during the appointment on Monday.

Much appreciated

Bob

[Tanya Marquette]

that I believe is based on the belief that once off the blood thinner, a clot will form and cause a stroke.

thus the statement that when coming off one of these drugs as for surgery, and substitute would probably
be given. it is all part of the same thinking and not much data from what the articles promote. in other

words there is a lot of bias built into the reporting. what else is new
t

[Leilanae]

Hi Bob,

It is good to know that, in your experience, Phos, given before surgery, does not have an affect on anesthesia. My only experience has been Phos after surgery.

Thanks for the info.

Atb,

Leilanae

[Shannon Nelson]

Wow, interesting...

My Dad has atrial fib plus pacemaker, and was put on Xanax. After some months he suddenly developed a urinary bleed -- apparently was not dangerous (we were told), but very dramatic and upsetting! (And messy and inconvenient.)

With the agreement of the ER doc he stopped the Xanax, with no problem. A few months later he was convinced to begin it again, at a reduced dosage, so far also with no problem. So I wonder if the caution against stopping it might have to do with risks of the circumstances rather than risks of the drug?
Shannon

[Maria Bohle]

Ramakrishnan used to say give a dose of Phos 200c three days prior to surgery. But never. CLoser than that to prevent hemorrhage

[Sheri Nakken]

hard to say - but we are talking about anti-coagulants
Sheri

:
Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://homeopathycures.wordpress.com/ & http://vaccinationdangers.wordpress.com/
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases

[Tanya Marquette]

My experience is that doctors are trained to promote 'caution' which means taking whatever drug is currently being pushed.
Caution rarely means do nothing and wait and watch to see what, if any symptoms return or develop.

I just cannot not be highly suspicious of the medical industry.

t

[Bob Needham]

Hi Leilanae

Somehow I've been misunderstood. My question was prompted by the fact that I always used Phos after an operation not before. There are homeopaths who do recommend prior but I have also seen other literature advising against such. Thus, to error on the side of caution I will maintain the post-operative approach.

Bob

[Dale Moss]

Several points I'd like to make regarding this thread:

1) The newer blood thinners are to be avoided, shunned, deep-sixed. Costly, no advantages except that they free one from periodic testing (meaning this is a matter of convenience, not of health), and, as has been pointed out, they cannot be antidoted, unlike coumadin. Having once tried to stop bleeding from an accident in a friend taking coumadin -- no Vit. K on hand -- I can only imagine how horrendously difficult this would be in someone on Eliquis!

2) There seems to be a lot of a-fib out there... What's going on? Any theories as to the seemingly increased prevalence? It was suggested to my husband that people who exerted themselves strongly in their teens (he was a paratrooper at a very early age) are at risk of developing a-fib later in life. Makes me wonder about all these little athletes.

3) The other night I was called out on an emergency for an acquaintance who hasn't been able to eat for three weeks. She's elderly and was getting very weak and panicky. Turns out this started after she'd been given an A/B for a dental abscess (azithromycin). Of course, she'd been to her doc and the hospital, neither of which could find anything "wrong" with her. So... they gave her an antidepressant, which made things even worse. Why the hell would they treat an acute problem with a chronic med and why couldn't they see the causation? (A few doses of Carbo-v. set her right.) This isn't mere caution; this is incompetence. And in the case of Eliquis I'd call it criminal negligence: how can you give a potentially life-threatening drug when you lack the ability to counter its effects?

Dale
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Tab® S