The Fluoroquinolone Drugs are the most toxic and dangerous antibiotic in clinical practice today.

"davidtfull" wrote in message
...

If nothing else you are tenascious in your defense of this drug:

The one fixated on the drug is you. I acknowledge that it has numerous side
effects. What I have been saying and what you have been ignoring, several
times, is that if you look as closely at other antibiotics you will similar
and often worse problems.

Here are a few more studies regarding crystalluria. First reported in
1986, so for more than twenty years, just like the tendon issues,
nobody knows anything about it. Thorsteinsson et al clearly
established such an association in human patients twenty years ago.
Nakano et al established the relationship to bladder stones ten years
later. Both of which cite to urinary pH being a factor. Again I have
hundreds of such studies.

Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people have
crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to develop
kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the discussion. This
at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no importance.

Crystalluria and ciprofloxacin, influence of urinary pH and hydration.
Chemotherapy. 1986;32(5):408-17.
Thorsteinsson SB, Bergan T, Oddsdottir S, Rohwedder R, Holm R.
PMID: 3019613 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Fluoroquinolone associated bladder stone.
Nakano M, Ishihara S, Deguchi T, Kuriyama M, Kawada Y.
J Urol. 1997 Mar;157(3):946. No abstract available.
PMID: 9072608 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

cute - a reference you have only a title for with no abstract and no full
text.

So this article involved Tosufloxacin in a 64 yo woman with a h/o cervical
cancer a hysterectomy who had complete bladder function failure and required
self catheterization to get the urine out of her bladder. She had recurrent
Psuedomonal infections - very concerning - which had been susceptible to
this medication and was treated with it periodically for many years. She
was found to have bladder stones (VERY common in patients with bladder
failure and recurrent infections). Stone analysis revealed Calcium
Phosphate stones, consistent with her recurrent infections, which included
the medication Tosufloxacin. They don't comment on the percentages.

This is an example of your lack of knowledge and trying to form medical
opinions based on the titles of journal articles! Bladder stones do not
form because of metabolic abnormalties. They form because of incomplete
emptying - be it from a large prostate or, as in the case, probably a
bladder damaged from either her prior surgery or directly from her cancer.
The fact that her inevitable bladder stone incorporated some of the
medication that was being used to prevent her from dying from overwhelming
sepsis with a particularly virulent organism is neither surprising nor
problematic. Going back to my original point, cipro - or any other
quinolone - does not cause bladder stones and this article does not say
otherwise.

Hammann C, Guelpa G.[Drug-induced calculi]
Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax. 1993 Oct 12;82(41):1129-32. French.
PMID: 8210886 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

BILATERAL HYDRONEPHROSIS FROM CIPROFLOXACIN INDUCED CRYSTALLURIA AND
STONE FORMATION. The Journal of Urology, Volume 164, Issue 2, Pages
438-438 N. CHOPRA, P. FINE, B. PRICE, I. ATLAS

Ciprofloxacin crystalluria
Giovanni B. Fogazzi1,, Giuseppe Garigali1, Claudia Brambilla2 and
Michel Daudon3
Ciprofloxacin can cause crystalluria in alkaline urine (especially at
pH 7.3), both in experimental animals and in healthy human
volunteers after oral or intravenous administration [1-3B2B3].

Acute interstitial nephritis in a cardiac transplant recipient
receiving ciprofloxacin
Luis J. Rosado, MD, Mark S. Siskind MD, Jack G. Copeland, MD

I think this is the study you were referring to and it too is OLD
NEWS.

It was published on or around 2003, actually. But thanks for playing.

Remainder is repetitive an snipped.

"Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
importance." skeptic

The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.

The fact that my original kidney stone was induced by Cipro seems to
have escaped your notice. A re-challenge nine months later produce
yet another stone. Both containing Cipro. Since that time, with no
further exposure to the quinolones I have been "stone free" for over
eight years now. The same as I was prior to being given Cipro, where
I was stone free for forty five years. By any scientific standards
that is reasonable "cause and effect" as there were no "underlying"
medical conditions that would cause such stone formations.

In the above statement you reveal your total and complete ignorance
regarding this whole affair. You seem to believe that crystalluria is
of no importance.

"In clinical practice, a crystalluria due to ciprofloxacin has been
recorded in patients [1], as well as in a patient who developed
obstructive uropathy due to massive ciprofloxacin crystal
precipitation in the distal ureters and bladder, after a 24-day
treatment at a dose of 500 mg twice daily [2]. In addition, a new case
with acute renal failure and ciprofloxacin crystalluria has recently
been published [3]. "

Citing to:

Ciprofloxacin crystalluria
Giovanni B. Fogazzi1,, Giuseppe Garigali1, Claudia Brambilla2 and
Michel Daudon3
1Research laboratory on urine of Unità Operativa di Nefrologia,
Fondazione IRCCS, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Mangiagalli e Regina
Elena, 2Unità Operativa di Nefrologia Ospedale S. Paolo, Milano, Italy
and 3Service de Biochimie A, Hôpital Necker, Paris, France
http://ndt.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/co.../21/10/2982#B5

Yet you state that obstructive uropathy and renal failure due to cipro
induced crystalluria is of no "clinical significance" and "of no
importance." Neither is spontaneous tendon ruptures or peripheral
neuropathy I would then assume as well. I keep trying to end this
useless discussion and yet you keep on challenging and insulting me.
But I cannot allow you to post frivolous unsupported statements such
as that.

1. Boll P and Tillotson G. (1995) Tolerability of fluoroquinolone
antibiotics. Drug Safety 13:344-358.
2. Chopra N, Fine PL, Price B, et al. (2000) Bilateral hydronephrosis
from ciprofloxacin induced crystalluria and stone formation. J Urol
164:438.
3. Sedlacek M, Suriawinata AA, Schoolwert A, et al. (2006)
Ciprofloxacin crystal nephropathy - a 'new' cause of acute renal
failure [letter]. Nephrol Dial Transplant doi:10.1093/ndt/gfl160.

OK, let us talk about relativity, another attempt you made at changing
the course of the discussion:

oral cefixime or trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole / IV ceftazidime; IV
ceftazidime followed by oral cefixime; and sequential IV ceftazidime
to oral trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole
vs.
Cipro

Study 100169

Bottom line: Ciprofloxacin patients were more likely to report more
than one event and on more than one occasion compared to control
patients and arthropathy occurred more frequently in patients treated
with ciprofloxacin than control, regardless of whether they received
IV or oral drug.

Study 100169
This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled,
parallel group,
multinational, multicenter pediatric clinical trial. Patients from 1
year to 17 years diagnosed with complicated urinary tract infection
(cUTI) or pyelonephritis were enrolled. Patients were stratified prior
to randomization based on whether, in the opinion of the clinical
investigator; intravenous (IV) therapy was initially warranted.
Patients were then randomized to receive either ciprofloxacin or
comparator antibiotics. In the first stratum, ciprofloxacin oral
suspension was compared to the comparator regimens of oral cefixime or
trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX) [in Canada only]. In the
second stratum ciprofloxacin (IV or IV followed by oral suspension)
was compared to one of the following comparator regimens: IV
ceftazidime; IV ceftazidime followed by oral cefixime; and sequential
IV ceftazidime to oral TMP/SMX [in Canada only].

Arthropathy occurred more frequently in patients who received
ciprofloxacin than the
comparator and was defined as any condition affecting a joint or
periarticular tissue that may have been temporary or permanent
(including bursitis, inflammation of the muscular or tendinous
attachment to the bone, and tendonitis). The affected joints included:
knee, elbow, ankle, hip, wrist, and shoulder. Arthropathy, as shown in
Table 1, was seen in 9.3% (31/335) of ciprofloxacin patients versus 6%
(21/349) of comparator patients at 6 weeks

The rates were 13.7% and 9.5%, respectively, at 1 year. Arthropathy
occurred
more frequently in patients treated with ciprofloxacin than control,
regardless of whether
they received IV or oral drug. Ciprofloxacin patients were more likely
to report more than one event and on more than one occasion compared
to control patients (37% [17/46] versus 24% [8/33]).

Arthropathy occurred in all age groups and the rates in the
ciprofloxacin arm were
consistently higher than in the control arm,.

The arthropathy rates in patients treated with oral versus those
treated with IV (IV alone or sequential IV to oral therapy) at six
weeks were different. The arthropathy rates in the oral stratum were
9.1% (27/296) for ciprofloxacin and 6.9% (21/304) for the comparator
groups. The arthropathy rates in the IV stratum were 10.3% (4/39) for
ciprofloxacin and 0% (0/45) for the comparator groups.

The arthropathy rates were similar between males and females and
consistent between
treatment groups. The rates were 13.9% (38/273) and 10.6% (30/284) in
females compared to 12.9% (8/62) and 4.6% (3/65) in males for
ciprofloxacin and comparator, respectively.

Arthropathy rates in patients with cUTI were 12.2% (20/164) for
ciprofloxacin versus 9.6% (16/166) for comparator, and in patients
with pyelonephritis the rates were 6.4% (11/171) for ciprofloxacin
versus 2.7% (5/183) for the comparator.

There was a bigger difference between treatment group arthropathy
rates in the United States (21.0% [13/62] for ciprofloxacin versus
11.3% [8/71] for comparator) than in the overall rates.

The incidence of neurological events from initial dosing through 6
weeks up follow-up was 2.7% (9/335) in the ciprofloxacin group and
2.0% (7/349) in the comparator group.

The overall incidence of adverse events at six weeks was 41% (138/335)
in the ciprofloxacin arm compared to 31% (109/349) in the control
arm...Serious adverse events were seen in 7.5% (25/335) of
ciprofloxacin patients compared to 5.7% (20/349) of the control
patients and discontinuation of drug due to adverse events was seen in
3% (10/335) of ciprofloxacin patients and 1.4% (5/349) of control
patients.


Source:
Division of Special Pathogen and Immunologic Drug Products
Summary of Clinical Review of Studies Submitted in Response to a
Pediatric Written Request
Applications:
19-537/S-049, ciprofloxacin tablets
20-780/S-013, ciprofloxacin oral suspension
19-847/S-027, ciprofloxacin IV 10 mg/mL
19-857/S-031, ciprofloxacin IV 5% dextrose
Applicant: Bayer Corporation, Pharmaceutical Division 400 Morgan Lane
West Haven, Connecticut 06516
Drug Name Established: Ciprofloxacin
Proprietary: Cipro(R)
Route: Oral or IV

More adverse events were seen with Cipro and more patients
discontinued the drug due to these adverse reactions. As such Cipro
has a higher RISK factor than oral cefixime or trimethoprim/
sulfamethoxazole / IV ceftazidime; IV ceftazidime followed by oral
cefixime; and sequential IV ceftazidime to oral trimethoprim/
sulfamethoxazole in regards to manifesting adverse reactions. A 10%
higher risk factor in fact.

Now let's take a look at doxycycline.

Cipro vs. Doxycycline

60 Day Cipro Study

Bottom line: Doxycycline tends to have fewer side effects than Cipro.
(That is why the CDC recommended in November of 2001 that all those
needing antibiotics against anthrax--for treatment and prevention--be
given doxycycline, not Cipro.)

Adverse events at 30 days, by most recent antimicrobial agent, all
sites, 2001-2002
All Adverse events:

Day 30
Ciprofloxacin 77 out of 737 patients stated as 10.5%
Doxycycline 71 out of 2,050 patients stated at 3.4%

The overall rate of reported adverse events reported for Cipro was
16.5% vs. 3.4% for Doxycycline.

Once again more adrs with Cipro than Doxycycline. You will find this
with every other antibiotic currently in clinical use today.

So yes, the "game" is over and you lost. Cipro is NOT a safe
antibiotic. It is every bit as dangerous and at times more so than
any other antibiotic on the market today. 1 in 10 chance of having a
serious joint problem, as well as a 41% chance of having an adverse
reaction. Associated with obstructive uropathy and renal failure due
to cipro induced crystalluria, which you find to be of no importance.
But you are absolutely correct about one thing here in this entire
discussion. I have to be absolutely "loony" to think that you are
even listening to a single word I say.

You see I view you as nothing more than a glorified mechanic who is in
love with his tools. A fraud in white if you would. A true physician
would have shown an interest in the information I provided and
questioned the wisdom of their prescription practices. All you have
done is harass and insult me and side with the drug rep with the 40 DD
chest. You are simply not worth any more effort. Frankly "Doctor" I
don't give a damn whether you believe me or not. I could care less if
you think I am a nutcase.

As such, if you would be kind enough to stop responding with insults
and frivolous opinions we can end this. I'd much rather you remain
silent and thought a fool than to continue to speak up and remove all
doubt as you persist in doing. If you do not wish to listen with an
open mind why then do you continue to beg for a response? Is your ego
so huge you have to have the final word? OK. I'll grant you that
one. Let it be "thanks for playing", instead of another round of
patronization and insults delivered from your elevated pedestal.

I'm not the least bit interested in anything else you have to say, so
don't waste any more of your time or mine by continuing to bait me.
This isn't some kind of sick game where there are winners and losers.
The only ones losing here are your patients. And that quite frankly
is not my problem, but theirs anyhow. Go waste your time on them
instead of me.

You have yet to provide one shred of evidence that the quinolones are
safer than your other choices, which was the subject of this
discussion to begin with. Your opinions are not to be considered
evidence. So far you have proven nothing but the size of your ego as
well as your closed and narrow mindedness. Both of which are quite
admiral attributes to have in a physician I would imagine. Unless you
happen to be the patient.
.
Thanks for playing as well. Game over. Go ahead and think you "won"
if that makes you feel any better. Makes no difference to me one way
or the other. You were playing with yourself anyhow as I wasn't even
playing to begin with.

"davidtfull" wrote in message
...
"Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
importance." skeptic

The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.

--- REPLY: ---

If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. I will
post about the things that interest me. Stones interest me. Cipro does not
"cause kidney stones". That would be a very misleading statement. There is
one known case of cipro causing stones resulting in obstruction. The fact
that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is cute
but of no clinical consequence. I pointed that out to educate you since you
keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. It doesn't.
Bladder stones are a result of functional bladder issues such as neurogenic
bladder or outlet obstruction as well as infections. Cipro does not cause
bladder stones. That was just a silly comment. The pH issue is based on
either in vitro lab data or animal data and since we only have one published
case of renal stones resulting from cipro use we can't really say if acidity
of the urine played any role.

I am not saying cipro is the safest medication on the market. It is merely
not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. The fact that
you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a bad
personal experience with cipro.

On Mar 4, 6:17*pm, "Skeptic" wrote:
"davidtfull" wrote in message

...
"Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
importance." skeptic

The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. *Yet
you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
this. *Kidney stones and bladder stones. *Whether or not it caused
kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
did not. *It does. *You asked for a citation and I provided it.
Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. *Of course you just blew that
warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.

--- REPLY: ---

If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. *I will
post about the things that interest me. *Stones interest me. *Cipro does not
"cause kidney stones". *That would be a very misleading statement. *There is
one known case of cipro causing stones resulting in obstruction. *The fact
that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is cute
but of no clinical consequence. *I pointed that out to educate you since you
keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. *It doesn't.
Bladder stones are a result of functional bladder issues such as neurogenic
bladder or outlet obstruction as well as infections. *Cipro does not cause
bladder stones. *That was just a silly comment. *The pH issue is based on
either in vitro lab data or animal data and since we only have one published
case of renal stones resulting from cipro use we can't really say if acidity
of the urine played any role.

I am not saying cipro is the safest medication on the market. *It is merely
not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. *The fact that
you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a bad
personal experience with cipro.

Reply -

If you were to go to askapatient.com you will see that on a rating
basis of 1 to 5 with
5 being the best and 1 being the worst, Cipro came in at 1.9 with over
400 people
feeling the need to tell their horror stories about their experience
with cipro. Many
people stated that it ruined their lives. Many were left crippled even
after months and
years had gone by.

If you look at Doxycycline on the same site, you will see that only 25
people felt the
need to comment and that Doxy had given them mostly stomach upset and
nausea. I saw
nowhere in the comments where Doxy had ruined anyone's life or caused
severe
health problems that didn't resolve soon after discontinuing it. Most
people gave it
a rating of 3 or better.

I used to be a previously healthy male before I took Cipro for a
simple UTI over 19
months ago. Upon finishing my script (500mg x 2 day for 10 days) I
started to have
most of all the severe ADR's listed in the PDR. It's been a long 19
months and I am
not getting better, in fact, I'm getting worse than ever. ALL my
joints ache. ALL my
muscles are sore. I still have insomnia. I have severe nerve damage in
my feet (PN).
Basically, my life has been destroyed by this drug Cipro. My Dr.
refused to believe
that any of my symptoms were related to the Cipro. He also claimed it
was a very
safe drug. I'm not the only one that this has happened to. There are
thousands of
people that have been damaged permanently by Cipro or the other FQ's.
Dr's aren't
listening to their patients and learning from their experiences. You
Dr's think you know
it all. You have SO much to learn, if only you'd try....if only you'd
listen to your patients
and not the drug reps.

Now what do I do? I'm screwed and my Dr. that did this refuses to open
his eyes and
consider that there just might be a connection. Great health care we
have. I suggest
you do some research on these toxic FQ's before you prescribe anymore
of them.

No need to use a cannon to shoot a gopher when a pellet gun would work
just fine. TBY

I think you're either exaggerating your personal story or don't understand
your own condition.

As for cipro, I will say again, don't leave your analysis of how safe a
medication is to random web comments. That's just flat out stupid. Try
asking some people who see patients daily - they'll tell yout that cipro
doesn't nearly as many serious side effects as many other antibiotics. You
want to talk about renal damage? Look up gentamicin - something I use
commonly in my field. There are no doubt side effects to medications.
You're just on some personal vendetta against this particular one for no
particularly good reason.


"ciprocripple" wrote in message
...
On Mar 4, 6:17 pm, "Skeptic" wrote:
"davidtfull" wrote in message

...
"Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
importance." skeptic

The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.

--- REPLY: ---

If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. I will
post about the things that interest me. Stones interest me. Cipro does not
"cause kidney stones". That would be a very misleading statement. There is
one known case of cipro causing stones resulting in obstruction. The fact
that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is
cute
but of no clinical consequence. I pointed that out to educate you since
you
keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. It doesn't.
Bladder stones are a result of functional bladder issues such as
neurogenic
bladder or outlet obstruction as well as infections. Cipro does not cause
bladder stones. That was just a silly comment. The pH issue is based on
either in vitro lab data or animal data and since we only have one
published
case of renal stones resulting from cipro use we can't really say if
acidity
of the urine played any role.

I am not saying cipro is the safest medication on the market. It is merely
not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. The fact
that
you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a
bad
personal experience with cipro.

Reply -

If you were to go to askapatient.com you will see that on a rating
basis of 1 to 5 with
5 being the best and 1 being the worst, Cipro came in at 1.9 with over
400 people
feeling the need to tell their horror stories about their experience
with cipro. Many
people stated that it ruined their lives. Many were left crippled even
after months and
years had gone by.

If you look at Doxycycline on the same site, you will see that only 25
people felt the
need to comment and that Doxy had given them mostly stomach upset and
nausea. I saw
nowhere in the comments where Doxy had ruined anyone's life or caused
severe
health problems that didn't resolve soon after discontinuing it. Most
people gave it
a rating of 3 or better.

I used to be a previously healthy male before I took Cipro for a
simple UTI over 19
months ago. Upon finishing my script (500mg x 2 day for 10 days) I
started to have
most of all the severe ADR's listed in the PDR. It's been a long 19
months and I am
not getting better, in fact, I'm getting worse than ever. ALL my
joints ache. ALL my
muscles are sore. I still have insomnia. I have severe nerve damage in
my feet (PN).
Basically, my life has been destroyed by this drug Cipro. My Dr.
refused to believe
that any of my symptoms were related to the Cipro. He also claimed it
was a very
safe drug. I'm not the only one that this has happened to. There are
thousands of
people that have been damaged permanently by Cipro or the other FQ's.
Dr's aren't
listening to their patients and learning from their experiences. You
Dr's think you know
it all. You have SO much to learn, if only you'd try....if only you'd
listen to your patients
and not the drug reps.

Now what do I do? I'm screwed and my Dr. that did this refuses to open
his eyes and
consider that there just might be a connection. Great health care we
have. I suggest
you do some research on these toxic FQ's before you prescribe anymore
of them.

No need to use a cannon to shoot a gopher when a pellet gun would work
just fine. TBY

On Mar 4, 6:17 pm, "Skeptic" wrote:
"davidtfull" wrote in message

...
"Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
importance." skeptic

The original discussion involved whether or notciprowas safe. Yet
you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating thatcipro
did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.

--- REPLY: ---

If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. I will
post about the things that interest me. Stones interest me. Ciprodoes not
"cause kidney stones". That would be a very misleading statement. There is
one known case ofciprocausing stones resulting in obstruction. The fact
that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is cute
but of no clinical consequence. I pointed that out to educate you since you
keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. It doesn't.
Bladder stones are a result of functional bladder issues such as neurogenic
bladder or outlet obstruction as well as infections. Ciprodoes not cause
bladder stones. That was just a silly comment. The pH issue is based on
either in vitro lab data or animal data and since we only have one published
case of renal stones resulting fromciprouse we can't really say if acidity
of the urine played any role.

I am not sayingciprois the safest medication on the market. It is merely
not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. The fact that
you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a bad
personal experience withcipro.

I am not sayingciprois the safest medication on the market. It is merely
not the most dangerous and is in line with other antibiotics. The fact that
you refuse to acknowledge that other antibiotics are also loaded with
serious potential adverse outcomes just shows your bias as a result of a bad
personal experience withcipro.

When have I failed to acknowledge that the other antibiotics are also
loaded with serious potential adverse outcomes? Every comparitive
study I have posted so far clearly states the obivious. So the
question I would have is what do YOU consider to be the most dangerous
if not the quinolones? And my "bad experience" was not just with
Cipro, but also Floxin and Levaquin.

If you had bothered to even read my history you would have noted that
I was on all three to treat a kidney stone for two months. A kidney
stone caused by cipro to begin with. Up to a 1000 mg a day of levaquin
at the end. (so how can you say that this is impossible when I am
living proof to the contrary?) And this resulted in far more than a
"bad experience". It crippled me for life. I have been in constant
pain for well over eight years now and have undergone a number of
surgeries to repair this damage. I am legally blind and suffer from
never ending chronic tendonitis. I have to use "voice software" a lot
of times to even use the computer as my hands are so crippled up.
(tendons shrunk).

Didn't have any of these kinds of problems with penicillin. bactrim.
flagyl, or any other antibiotic I had been on over the past fifty
three years. Only the quinolone class. I thought it only fair to
admit to my personal experience before discussing such a hot issue
with another physician. Of course my perceptions are clouded by
this. Whose would not? But I did not write the evidence I present.
Others who are supposedly nuetral did.

This being said lets take a look at the latest AER (3rd quarter 2006)
concerning the major antibiotics:

Drug Reactions
LEVAQUIN 617 URTICARIA 7
CIPROFLOXACIN 433 URTICARIA 6
BACTRIM 322 URTICARIA 1
AVELOX 272 URTICARIA 16
AMOXICILLIN 254
ZITHROMAX 154
AZITHROMYCIN 142
FLAGYL 140
GENTAMICIN 112
DOXYCYCLINE 109
MAXIPIME 61
KEFLEX 57
AMPICILLIN 55
PENICILLIN 44
TEQUIN 42
FACTIVE 8
AUGMENTIN 5

Funny how the fluoroquinolones are at the top of the list. With
bactrim coming in a distant third. As well as 14 cases of URTICARIA
associated with the quinolones being the primary suspect. (six
involving cipro) Only one with bactrim however. I fully acknowledge
that ALL drugs have side effects. NO question there at all.
Antibiotics have serious side effects as well. Some of which prove to
be fatal.

Of course your counter argument will be since the quinolones are
"first line agents" more of them had been prescribed so of course you
are going to see more reactions.

But how many support forums do we see on the Internet involving these
other antibiotics? None that I am aware of. But we see dozens
involving the quinolones with tens of thousands of members from all
over the world. Including doctors, lawyers, professionals, people of
all walks of life. These aren't twelve year old kids screwing around
with their computers I assure you.

How many of these other drugs have been removed from clinical practice
due to severe toxicity issues? We see at least eight with the
quinolone class.

How many petitions have been filed with the FDA either seeking the
drugs removal or black box warnings for these other antibiotics? We
see at least five with the quinolone class (2 seeking removal and 3
seeking black box warnings)

How many of these other drugs have an affect on DNA? All of the
quinolones do.

How many of these other drugs are considered to be a cancer causing
agent? Nalidixic Acid, upon which all the quinolone drugs are based,
is.

How many of these alternatives are NOT to be used in the pediatric
population due to severe adverse reactions? Cipro is the ONLY
quinolone approved for pediatric use and only in EXTREME situations.
Yet we see them being prescribed for a common ear infection without a
second thought.

As we seen with a few studies I had submitted the quinolone class has
a higher adr rate, and more serious reactions, than the drugs it was
compared to.

When we look at the numbers posted by the FDA in regards to number of
reactions and associated fatalities over a ten year period, once
again, when compared to all the other antibiotics, the quinolones are
in the lead.

Taken as a whole one can argue, quite confidently, that compared to
the other drugs in your arsenal, the quinolones are more dangerous
than your other choices. All antibiotics are dangerous, but the
quinolones are more so.

Take a moment and read what David Flockhart, M.D. Ph.D., Indiana
University School of Medicine, Division of Clinical Pharmacology,
Wishard Memorial Hospital has to say on this subject. He is
considered by many to be the country's foremost expert in
fluoroquinolone-related side effects.

"...as many as a third of patients taking a fluoroquinolone will
experience
some sort of psychiatric side effect, such as anxiety, personality
change or confusion...The psychiatric effects of the fluoroquinolones
are underappreciated by the medical profession as well as by the
public," (2001)

"Cipro is basically a big gun whose benefits outweigh its risks in
certain circumstances," "But the bigger gun you use, the more damage
you can expect as collateral." For a variety of reasons Flockhart says
some physicians start with the "big gun" rather than the lower-level
antibiotics, such as penicillin, which can be just as effective, less
expensive and less risky. (2001)

Dr.Flockhart also states that "All antibiotics can cause seizures at
very high doses, but quinolones appear to be more neurotoxic than
other classes of anti-infectives even at standard doses."

Or Dr. Jay Cohen, a Medical Researcher and Associate Professor at the
University of California San Diego who states:

"Although it's not widely recognized, Cipro and other fluoroquinolones
are associated with serious, rapid side effects that can be
devastating and sometimes permanent,"
"many patients reported that their doctors either failed to recognize
the adverse events or dismissed their significance. They were told to
continue taking the drug, when it's imperative that someone with these
reactions discontinue use immediately unless medical circumstances
such as severe infection and no alternative treatment-warrant
otherwise."

He adds that drugs like Levaquin, Cipro, or Avelox "should not be used
as first line antibiotics. Other, safer drugs should be tried first.
The need for antibiotic therapy with fluoroquinolones should be gauged
carefully, and unnecessary use should be avoided."

Dr. Jay Cohen, published a paper on peripheral neuropathy caused by
fluoroquinolones in 2001 in the Annals of Pharmacotherapy. Since then,
he says, "I have received several thousand e-mails, most of which
relate terrible, often catastrophic reactions to Levaquin, and to
Cipro. These reactions are slow to pass, leaving some people disabled
for months or years. It is an awful problem."

Clinical trials and case studies published by doctors in leading
medical journals also make it clear that such problems exist and it is
unique to the quinolone class. We DO NOT see these types of long term
reactions with the other antibiotics.

(This is why I consider them to be more dangerous than the other
antibiotics. Long term effects that persist for a lifetime.)

In their practices, doctors often appear to blame other factors for
damage done by the drugs. Says Cohen, "Unfortunately, many doctors do
not know that fluoroquinolones can cause such severe, long-lasting
reactions. When a reaction occurs, some doctors deny that it could
have been caused by the drug. Doctors order a battery of tests to seek
other causes, but the tests usually show nothing."

In the early 1990s, award-winning journalist Stephen Fried launched
his own dogged investigation of fluoroquinolones after his wife Diane
suffered long-term damage from a single pill of a variant called
ofloxacin (Floxin) that was popular at the time. In his book, Bitter
Pills: Inside the Hazardous World of Legal Drugs (Bantam Books, 1999),
Fried describes a 1993 FDA advisory committee meeting he attended, in
which government and drug-company officials haggled over possible new
warnings to be put on fluoroquinolone labels and inserts. Fried helped
FDA researchers make their case, but, he wrote in the book, "The
doctors leading the [G.D.] Searle [and Company] delegation said
something that almost caused me to have a seizure." "As you know,"
that doctor told the group, "physicians will not even look at the
package insert. If they do, it's for seconds."

So as you can see it is not "people who believe in aliens" or who are
"loony" that are telling you that the quinolones are not a safe drug
in comparision to the alternatives, but some very highly respected
physicians and professors, Dr. David Flockhart, Dr. Jay S. Cohen, Dr.
Sidney Wolf at Public Citizen, as well as the medical staff of the
Attorney General of the State of Illinois and the award-winning
journalist Stephen Fried as well as I. Not to mention over 4000
medical journal entries, case reports, clinical studies, etc., that I
have accumulated over the past eight years and tens of thousands of
people from all over the world that support all that I have stated
thus far.

What I find so insulting is you telling me this is nothing more than
"dribble". Perhaps with the brain damage I had suffered from these
drugs I am not capable of being articulate enough to get this message
across to you. Perhaps Dr. Cohen's letter to the FDA will suffice,
presented during the hearing with Rush Holt to which I was also in
attendance:

January 21, 2004

The Honorable Rush Holt
Member, U.S. House of Representatives
1630 Longworth Building
Washington DC 20515

Dear Congressman Holt.

I would like this letter to be entered into the record in your
hearings on fluoroquinolone antibiotics (e.g. Levaquin, Cipro, Floxin,
Tequin). I am the author of a study about severe, long-term
fluoroquinolone reactions published in the December 2001 issue of the
Annals of Pharmacotherapy. Actually, the publisher and I pre-released
this article in October 2001, during the anthrax scare when Cipro was
being prescribed indiscriminately and without warnings to patients.
Within days of publication of my paper, the U.S. Centers for Disease
Control changed their guidelines, placing the antibiotics doxycycline
and penicillin above Cipro as the preferred treatments for anthrax
exposure. Doxycycline and penicillin have fewer severe side effects
than fluoroquinolones, and they are not associated with the
devastating, disabling, long-term reactions that my study identified.

These severe reactions are occurring in patients who are usually
healthy, active, and young. Most often, the antibiotics are prescribed
for mild infections such as sinusitis, urinary or prostate infections.
Most reactions occur very quickly, sometimes with just a few doses of
the fluoroquinolone antibiotic. Reactions are acute, severe,
frightening, and often disabling. In most cases, side effects are
multiple, involving many systems of the body. In my study, nervous
system symptoms occurred in 91% of patients, musculoskeletal 73%,
sensory system 42%, cardiovascular 36%. skin 29%, gastrointestinal
18%.

These numbers do not adequately capture the severity and permanence of
these reactions. Here are some examples:

Male, age 36, previously in good health, received Cipro for possible
urinary infection:
Chronic, debilitating multi-focal neuropathy, fibromyalgia, chronic
fatigue, gastrointestinal problems, heart arrhythmia requiring
pacemaker, carpal tunnel syndrome, chronic multiple joint pains,
chronic pain. Functional ability: disabled. Duration: 5 years (patient
now age 41).

Female, age 32, previously in good health, received Cipro for urinary
infection: After 5
days. developed pain in wrists, neck, back, knees, hips, elbows,
shoulders, and Achilles tendons. Having difficulty writing. Medical
workup normal. Functional ability: greatly limited.

Female: age 47, previously in good health. received Levaquin for
sinusitis: Within 2 days developed joint pain (severe in hands).
insomnia, severe agitation, weakness, dizziness. severe fatigue,
mental infusion, abnormal dreams, gastrointestinal symptoms. Duration:
Still severe after 7 months.

Female, age 49. previously in good health, received Floxin for a
pelvic infection: Burning pain. memory loss, joint pains.
palpitations. nerve pain, insomnia, abnormal sense of smell, tinnitus,
panic attacks. Duration: more than 3 years.

Male, age 34, previously in good health, received l.evaquin for
prostate infection: Muscle spasms and twitching. numbness, impaired
coordination, weakness, increased sensitivity to temperatures, ftigue,
multiple joint, muscle pain, palpitations, blurred vision. Duration:
more than 1 year.

Male, age 35. in good health, received Levaquin for prostate
infection: I dose led to a ranch, ringing in the ears, and peripheral
nerve symptoms lasting 2 weeks. Then tendinitis began in shoulders,
elbows. wrists, hands, and Achilles tendons, with burning pain and
tightness in calves. After 2 months. still unable to walk more than a
short distance. This man told me. 'Prior to taking the medication I
asked about side effects and was told there were none for adults
except an upset stomach. Afterwards I was told that what I was
experiencing could not be related to the drug. Obviously the doctor
had never read the documentation that states otherwise."

These are not isolated cases. Since the publication of my article with
its 45 cases two and a half years ago, I have received e-mails from
more than 1000 people seeking help for their reactions. In most eases,
their doctors have dismissed their complaints or outright deny that
the reactions could occur with fluoroquinolones. Yet extensive medical
workups do not find any other cause. Worse, there are no known
effective treatments. thus. these people suffer pain and disability
for weeks, months. years.

Overall, my sense is that these reactions are not rare. I have spoken
to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration about this. I am shocked that
the agency stilt hasn't acted. Other major reactions such as Stevens-
Johnson syndrome or Churg Strauss syndrome from medications are posted
prominently on drug labels. These reactions are much rarer than the
ones occurring with fluoroquinolone antibiotics.. .At the very
least,.black boxes should he placed in fluoroquinolone package inserts
about severe, multi- system reactions.

I readily agree that fluoroquinolone antibiotics play an important
role in treating infections diseases, but we must alert doctors and
patients about the potential devastating effects of these drugs. We
must educate them that if any signs of reactions occur, such signs
should be reported immediately and the drugs should be discontinued.
Most of all, we must educate doctors to avoid prescribing
fluoroquinoloncs for minor infections, instead saving them for serious
infections, just as we do with other groups of antibiotics with
serious toxicities.

I hope you will serious look at this problem and respond accordingly.
These people need your help. This is largely a preventable problem..
Thank you..

Jay S. Cohen, M.D.
Associate Professor (voluntary)
Departments of Famity and Preventive Medicine and of Psychiatry
University of California, San Diego

The quinolone class is not a safe alternative to the antibiotics
currenly on the market today. To state otherwise is frivolous and
foolish. The evidence does not support your contention that it is
just as safe as the alternatives. In fact the evidence does the exact
opposite.

Although we have come close to losing our tempers here, we have
refrained from doing so. What concerns me the most is not whether you
think I am a nutcase to be indulged, (I could care less what you think
of me anyhow), but imagining some poor slob sitting in your office,
suffering these horrendous reactions, and you, in your ignorance,
telling him that it is "dribble". That is what scares the hell out of
me more than anything. I lived that. And I will suffer all the abuse
you have to offer to prevent just ONE person from having to do the
same. So bring it on if you care to.

Or would you rather admit that you were rather hasty in suggesting
that the quinolones are great drugs, (which I would not hold against
you in the least) and see what you can learn to prevent you from
crippling a patient in the same manner that ignorant ass of an
urologist crippled me?

This is what interest me. Kidney and bladder stones appears to be
what interest you.
I'm willing to admit I was rather hasty to state that cipro causes
bladder stones. The potential is there due to the crystals and ph
levels and that was all that I was trying to communicate to you. But
as we have found, only one such case had been reported. But the
question that begs to be asked is how many cases were NOT reported? I
know for a fact that my urologist did not write any such paper, nor
did he bother to file a medwatch report. The same thing with the
kidney stones, as we see with the 2006 quarter any number of kidney
stones were associated with the quinolones. But how many papers do
you think will be written regarding that? NONE I'll bet.

So swallow your pride and listen to your patients. You will be a far
better physician for it. Or continue to blow me off and be a worse
one. Choice is yours my friend.

Makes no difference to me one way or the other. Nothing you do or do
not do will have any impact on my life at this point. But it will
have a helluva impact on your patients. Ultimately that is all I care
about anyhow.

Since stones interest you let's take a look at what I had based my
assertion on. When reviewing the following keep in mind that
enrofloxacin is the animal equivalent of ciprofloxacin:

"Not only does enrofloxacin cause crystals; entire bladder stones can
be formed out of enrofloxacin. Granted, a urinary stone composed of
enrofloxacin is somewhat unusual but it is important to realize that
enrofloxacin crystals might be found in a urine sample of a patient on
enrofloxacin and that these crystals should be recognized as such."
Iatrogenic Disorders of the Urinary Tract--Treating our Treatments.
ACVIM 1999, C.A. Osborne, D.J. Polzin, J. P. Lulich, S.J. Ross, F.
Jacob, A. C. O'Keefe.
Pharmacologic Treatment of Uroliths -- Cause or Cure.
ACVIM 1998, C. Osborne, J. Lulich, et. al.
Drug-Induced Urolithiasis
Osborne, C.A., Lulich, J.P., Bartges, J.W. et al.
Veterinary Clinics of North America Small Animal Practice 29[1]:
251-66, xiv 1999 Jan.

Since we use animal studies to predict a drugs adrs in humans there is
some basis for thinking that cipro can cause a bladder stone. These
stones are usually associated with urinary stasis, as you had noted,
but they can also form in healthy individuals without evidence of
anatomic defects, strictures, infections, or foreign bodies.

"A bladder stone can be caused by a fluoroquinolone antibiotic." UUTS
pg 137 written by Dr. R.A.S. Hemat
Dr. R.A.S Hemat is an experienced urologist, orthomolecularist and
refined medical educator with extensive international teaching
experience, both in traditional and integrated systems of medical
schools." I know nothing about Dr. Hemat and he could very well be a
quack for all I know. But this is what he stated in his urological
text book.

"Ciprofloxacin is a fluoroquinolone antibiotic used to treat
complicated and uncomplicated infections. It is nearly insoluble at
neutral or alkaline pH and crystallizes in excreted alkaline urine of
animal models. In humans, ciprofloxacin crystalluria may be induced
when urinary pH is greater than 7.3 and doses greater than 1000 mg are
administered. Chopra and colleagues(1) reported a patient with
bilateral ureteral obstruction due to calculi composed largely of
ciprofloxacin."

1. BILATERAL HYDRONEPHROSIS FROM CIPROFLOXACIN INDUCED CRYSTALLURIA
AND STONE FORMATION.
The Journal of Urology, Volume 164, Issue 2, Pages 438-438
N. CHOPRA, P. FINE, B. PRICE, I. ATLAS
(the reason I have not been providing abstracts for these citations is
the fact that almost all of the studies that are negative in nature
are "pay to view" costing a ton of money. I am not doing this to be
"cute". All those that "cheerleading" the use of the quinolones,
written by the drug company ghost writers, (like that numbnut Peter
Ball and his cohort Tillitson, who I think is still ****ed at me for
calling him a horse's ass to his face years ago) and other such
misleading propaganda are of course free)

So this was not being stated frivolously but with some basis in
research. So far we have been able to identify one patient with a
cipro bladder stone and another with a cipro kidney stone. As well as
the two cipro kidney stones I suffered from. As such one cannot
dismiss this out of hand as being "improbable". And I have no doubt
if I were to dig deep enough and spend a few hundred dollars on the
"pay to view" articles I would come up with quite a few more. But I
have no interest in pursuing this aspect. As I had said I was rather
hasty to state what I did, but I did not do so frivolously.

So shall we continue this discussion after you have read all of the
above or should I now just write you off as another lost cause? I'll
refrain from calling you a horse's ass like I did Tillitson as you
have yet to push me that far. Guess I have mellowed a bit over the
years after all. But ever since I was a kid I had no problem with
giving a bully the finger and then tangling with 'em. I for one
cannot be intimidated, by anyone, so don't waste your time pursuing
the approach. Won't work.

I've showed you a portion of mine so when are you going to show me
something of yours that proves me wrong? I'm still waiting...for
something written by someone other than yourself that is. (the drug
company propaganda is totally unacceptable, you have to come up with
something else other than their "cheat sheets" if you hope to impress
me with your superior intellect.)

If you still find this to be boring we can quit anytime you care to.
Like you I tend to post things that interest me as well. And I find
your denial concerning the safety profile of this class fascinating to
say the least.

Due to a dumb cut and paste typo that I missed I used URTICARIA when
I meant to use NEPHROLITHIASIS. Before you jump all over me I thought
I should correct this. As such it should read as follows:

This being said lets take a look at the latest AER (3rd quarter 2006)
concerning the major antibiotics:

Drug Reactions
LEVAQUIN 617 NEPHROLITHIASIS 7
CIPROFLOXACIN 433 NEPHROLITHIASIS 6
BACTRIM 322 NEPHROLITHIASIS 1
AVELOX 272 NEPHROLITHIASIS 16
AMOXICILLIN 254
ZITHROMAX 154
AZITHROMYCIN 142
FLAGYL 140
GENTAMICIN 112
DOXYCYCLINE 109
MAXIPIME 61
KEFLEX 57
AMPICILLIN 55
PENICILLIN 44
TEQUIN 42
FACTIVE 8
AUGMENTIN 5

Funny how the fluoroquinolones are at the top of the list. With
bactrim coming in a distant third. As well as 14 cases of
NEPHROLITHIASIS
associated with the quinolones being the primary suspect. (six
involving cipro) Only one with bactrim however. I fully acknowledge
that ALL drugs have side effects. NO question there at all.
Antibiotics have serious side effects as well. Some of which prove
to
be fatal.

"davidtfull" wrote in message
...
If you had bothered to even read my history you would have noted that
I was on all three to treat a kidney stone for two months.

Antibiotics are not used to treat kidney stones. Sorry.

Antibiotics are not used to treat kidney stones. *Sorry.

Apperently my urologist was unaware of that. Well since the only
thing wrong with me was a kidney stone and I did NOT have prostatitis
nor a urinary tract infection, or any bacterial infection whatsoever,
why the hell did the urologist keep me on them for two months then?
My initial exam showed EVERYTHING to be perfectly normal except for
blood in the urine and renal colic. I presented with gross hematuria
and severe renal colic on referral from my primary for a suspected
kidney stone. The IVP showed an occult stone at the fourth vertebrae
but the radiologist missed it, as well as the urologist who also
viewed these films.

Urinalysis was negative for a bacterial infection including the 24 and
48-hour studies. And throughout this who period all urine was free of
any bacteria but full of red blood cells. Prostrate was normal, it
was NOT boggy and of normal size. Cysto w/bladder wash was a negative
study as well. No infection, no cancer, nothing. There was no
frequency, no urgency, no testicular pain, no distension, normal bowel
sounds, no bruits, no hepatosplenomegaly, no ulcers or urethral
discharge, no evidence of hernia. No bladder infection and no kidney
infection. Only gross hematuria that persisted for two months as well
as severe renal colic as the stone shredded the lining of the ureter
as it made its way down to the bladder. Both ceased after I passed
the stone.

When I was in ER having seizures do to mixing Motrin and cipro (Motrin
prescribed by the urologist to treat the renal colic even though
NSAIDS are contra indicated due to increasing the risk of seizures
when you are on a quinolone drug) the ER doctor noted that I had
"Urinary obstruction versus continuing hematuria". The on call
urologist overruled this and stated that I had a severe bladder
infection and put me on levaquin, even though all test from ER were
negative for a bacterial infection.

So tell me doctor why was I even on this poison for so long then? I
know NOW that you do not treat kidney stones with an antibiotic. But
did not know that then. Never ever had a kidney stone before in my
life. First he told me I had a urinary tract infection, which was a
lie. Then he told me it was prostatitis, which was also a lie, then
in ER we were back to an urinary tract infection again. The whole
time it was a fricking kidney stone!!!!!! He simply did not know what
was wrong and just kept throwing antibiotics at it. That's why.
Gross medical malpractice I believe the term to be.

After I fired his incompetent ass the 2nd urologist found the stone on
the xray right away as well as recognized that I was having severe
adrs to the quinolone drugs. He stopped the drugs immedately,
prescribed demerol for the pain and scheduled surgery for the very
next morning to basket the stone and remove it. That evening I passed
it.
It looked like one of those "hitch hikers" that stick to your pant leg
with spikes sticking out all over the place. Damn near a 1/8" around
and a 1/4" long.

Too late. Crippled for life and you got the balls to call this whole
affair a "bad experience"? Then wonder why doctors get sued.
F.U.then. Sorry, but some doctors are incompetent as hell. Just my
luck to run into them all the time. This is why I have such a hard on
concerning scripting abuse and these drugs. This kinda crap goes on
every day of the week. Don't know whats wrong? Throw a quinolone at
it and see what happens. May not help but can't hurt, after all these
are "safe antibiotics with minimum side effects". Right? And when
the patient complains about adverse reactions, just tell him it can't
possibly be the drug. Then prescribe even more of it. This is what
my first urologist kept telling me anyhow.

"Antibiotics are not used to treat kidney stones. Sorry." Take your
"sympathy" do a prostate exam on yourself with it. I don't want or
need it.

Skeptic wrote:

"You're just on some personal vendetta against this particular one for
no
particularly good reason".
-------------------------

Why In the hell would i have a personal vendetta against one
particular drug for
no particular reason?? WTF is wrong with you? What an idiot! That
makes no sense,
and neither do your comments. Cipro injured me, or was it just some
strange coincidence
that my body fell apart within days of finishing my scrip?

askapatient,com isn't random comments made on the web. These are
observations
made by people that took this drug and had ADR's with it.

Your comments are flat out stupid and smack of a very small and closed
mind with
a huge ego. Typical of many Dr.s that 'practice' medicine today. Wake
Up!

People like you who pretend to be Dr's are a danger to our
society....period.


On Mar 4, 9:24*pm, "Skeptic" wrote:
I think you're either exaggerating your personal story or don't understand
your own condition.

As for cipro, I will say again, don't leave your analysis of how safe a
medication is to random web comments. *That's just flat out stupid. *Try
asking some people who see patients daily - they'll tell yout that cipro
doesn't nearly as many serious side effects as many other antibiotics. *You
want to talk about renal damage? *Look up gentamicin - something I use
commonly in my field. *There are no doubt side effects to medications.
You're just on some personal vendetta against this particular one for no
particularly good reason.

"ciprocripple" wrote in message

...
On Mar 4, 6:17 pm, "Skeptic" wrote:





"davidtfull" wrote in message

...
"Crystalluria is of no clinical significance. A huge number of people
have crystals in their urine for varying reasons who never go on to
develop kidney stones. You're trying to change the focus of the
discussion. This at no time involved "crystalluria" which is of no
importance." skeptic

The original discussion involved whether or not cipro was safe. Yet
you refuse to provide any citations regarding this original issue and
continue to harp on a secondary and rather unimportant aspect of
this. Kidney stones and bladder stones. Whether or not it caused
kidney stones was mentioned in passing due to you stating that cipro
did not. It does. You asked for a citation and I provided it.
Bladder stones was secondary to that discussion and was simply
mentioned in regards to the PH of urine. Of course you just blew that
warning off just like you have the rest of citations I provided you.

--- REPLY: ---

If you don't like the coversation you don't have to participate. I will
post about the things that interest me. Stones interest me. Cipro does not
"cause kidney stones". That would be a very misleading statement. There is
one known case of cipro causing stones resulting in obstruction. The fact
that there may or may not be crystalluria at an increased incidence is
cute
but of no clinical consequence. I pointed that out to educate you since
you
keep posting it like it actually has some clinical importance. It doesn't.