Re: Testimony from a nurse to the Senate who became ill from Lupron.......
From: andrea (anonymous@obgyn.net)
Wed Oct 17 00:01:10 2007
Michelle,
I'm so sorry for all you are going through, I can't imagine how hard it
must be. When I first joined this site, I thought my problems were bad,
but to see so many women on here sick from Lupron makes my cramps seem
minor. I've had tons of doctors pressure me to take it, but I've always
refused. I really do want to fight for all of you with Lupron
illnesses, I just hope I can. Please e-mail me, so we can keep in touch
& I can keep you updated on things.
Take care of yourself,
Andrea
At Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Michelle wrote:
>
>Hmmm...very interesting. I developed my pituitary microadenoma in the
>years after taking Lupron in 1997. The idea that Lupron could lead to
>pituitary disease sounds very plausible to me because the drug so
>artificially and abnormally hyperstimulates the pituitary gland to
>produce FSH that I'm sure damage could easily occur to this tiny gland.
>Further, I have been told I have a "nonfunctional" pituitary adenoma
>which tumors typically arise from abnormal cells of the gonadotroph
>variety. The tumor has grown 4mm in size and is almost a macroadenoma
>now, growing at a rate of 1mm+ per year. I will probably have to have
>pituitary surgery some year soon. Also, I have adrenal insufficiency
>that I believe is due in part to this pituitary tumor, which has almost
>killed me three times now with adrenal crises. With a nonfunctional
>adenoma, you can end up with adrenal problems, thryoid problems,
>gynecologic problems, etc., such as mine because the abnormal tissue in
>the pituitary continues to grow over time, displacing the normal
>pituitary tissue and that is how you end up with a virtual
>hypophysectomy because the normal pituitary cells are destroyed and
>replaced by the abnormal ones and the pituitary therefore loses the
>ability to produce the pituitary stimulating hormones such as ACTH, FHS,
>TSH, GH, and so one, that stimulate the adrenals, thyroid, etc.
>
>I truly believe that the link between Lupron and pituitary problems
>should be studied further. Also, I think that researchers and doctors
>should be much more attentive to the side effects of long-term use of
>estrogen/progestin pills for endometriosis. I believe that I have
>suffered a lot of damage from these pills. For years, they caused
>numbness in my arms, sharp head pains, and other such symptoms. I have
>evidence of small infarcts, liver damage, and pulmonary hypertension
>now. I believe the pills played some role in much of this, based on my
>symptoms. Doctors should not dismiss offhand, as mine did, the
>complaints of a patient with regard to such symptoms as I now know they
>are quite serious. Focal nodular hyperplasia in the liver, sharp head
>pain and evidence of microvascular disease in the brain, Raynauds, heart
>strain, nonspecific ischemia, shortness of breath, and so on, should all
>be taken seriously and not dismissed. Instead, doctors are waiting for
>a major stroke or heart attack to occur before they take any complaints
>seriously. By then, it's too late.
>
>Stay vigilent everyone. And thanks for the post. Interesting.
>
>At Tue, 16 Oct 2007, andrea wrote:
>>
>>These quotes are from the PDF that Maggie found of testimony of a nurse,
>>Lynne Millican, to the Senate, who became ill from Lupron 10 years ago.
>>
>>I also spoke with Emily Page, the woman who started the Lupron petition,
>>and she also believes there is a cover-up going on when it comes to
>>Lupron. She sued TAP, but was given very little money, because her
>>doctor denied her problems were caused by the Lupron. She is still very
>>sick today.
>>
>>Please read these outtakes, and see what you think....falsifying 80% of
>>info in 4 Lupron studies? That sounds like a cover-up to me....
>>
>>pg 54: TAP has been declared a criminal enterprise based upon its scheme
>>with physicians and billing fraud and kickbacks and they just paid the
>>largest fine in history at the time, $875 million.
>>
>>pg 58: The internet posts of women identify the badgering, and coercion,
>>and manipulation, and threats used to convince women into taking Lupron
>>for a variety of indications—many refer to their doctor as trying to
>>‘‘shove it down [their] throat’’.
>>
>>pg 58: I would later learn that the director of this IVF clinic, Dr.
>>Andrew Friedman, had been a lead Lupron investigator, had received
>>numerous grants and funds from Lupron’s manufacturer, Takeda Abbott
>>Pharmaceuticals (TAP), and had published extensively on Lupron. Dr.
>>Friedman was ultimately found guilty of falsifying and fabricating
>>approximately 80 percent of the data in four Lupron studies, two of
>>which had been published and were subsequently retracted. Friedman had
>>‘‘altered and fabricated information in patient medical records,
>>falsified research notes by changing dates and changing and adding
>>text’’, and fabricated notes and fabricated patients for clinical visits
>>that had not taken place.
>>
>>pg 61: The profoundly significant and despicable thefts (‘‘conversion’’,
>>‘‘sharing’’) of women’s ova and embryos by Drs. Ricardo Asch, Sergio
>>Stone and Jose Balmaceda at the University of California at Irvine
>>(Regents; Press; 1995) should be a serious reminder to the utter (and
>>anesthetized) ease with which such menacing maneuvers can be executed.
>>(And Dr. Asch had co-authored studies of Lupron, ‘‘which was kindly
>>provided by Abbott’’ [Guerrero, 1993]). The contemptible violations of
>>stealing women’s eggs and embryos should highlight the profitability of
>>schemes to procure women’s eggs and embryos for use in research and/or
>>covert ‘re-sale’. Dr. Asch reportedly ‘left his office daily with
>>briefcase stuffed with thousands of dollars’. And attention should be
>>directed to the drug protocol(s) used—medications administered
>>‘‘deliberately’’ ‘‘so there would be a surplus of eggs’’ (Challender,
>>1995). Who is exerting any oversight over the field of reproductivity?
>>Who would exert oversight over therapeutic cloning—this same industry?
>>
>>pg 63: Women are told that Lupron will ‘‘shut down their system’’,
>>allowing ‘‘control’’ over their system, and that the side effects are
>>related to menopausal symptoms. But in fact, it was known prior to my
>>‘treatment’ with Lupron (but not disclosed to me) that Lupron causes a
>>‘‘hypophysectomy’’ (Holmes, 1988)—which, by definition, is ‘‘destruction
>>or removal of the pituitary’’; and it was known (but not disclosed to
>>me) that ‘‘sustained treatment with GnRH agonists most likely abolishes
>>pituitary function’’ (Bischof, 1988). I would also later learn that in
>>the original rat studies submitted to the FDA for Lupron’s initial
>>approval of palliative prostate cancer, all rats at all doses developed
>>pituitary adenomas (tumors)—and it was stated that ‘‘there is no obvious
>>reason to suggest that the same process could not occur
>>in humans’’ (NDA 19–010).
>>
>>pg 65: Published medical reports have noted the occurrence of abnormal
>>human pregnancy outcomes associated with the use of Lupron—43.5 percent
>>in one 1996 study (Karande, 1996). Another report, using the ‘long
>>Lupron protocol’, showed a 38 percent abortion rate (Shanis, 1995), and
>>a study of ‘low responders’ using Lupron showed a 66.6 percent
>>spontaneous first trimester abortion rate (Droesch, 1989). In ‘healthy
>>women undergoing ovarian stimulation’ using Lupron in another study, an-
>>other 66.6 percent abortion rate was noted (Minaretzis, 1995). Another
>>study’s title states ‘‘Exposure to [Lupron] in Early Pregnancy is
>>Associated With High Pregnancy Wastage That Could be Related to the
>>Length of Exposure’’ (Sasy, 1997).
>>
>>pg 69: The U.S. investigation of TAP’s billing practices revealed that
>>a computer program given by TAP to many doctors in the country (some
>>10,000 urologists received gifts from TAP), which computated the amount
>>of money per Lupron prescription the doctor could earn, also harbored a
>>‘secret key’—and in the event the secret computer program was in danger
>>of discovery, a secret key was struck and !presto! all incriminating
>>information disappeared.
>>
>>The first long-term follow-up of children who were accidentally exposed
>>to GnRHa's was published in 1999, and revealed that 4 out of the 6
>>children studied had severe neurodevelopmental abnormalities (including
>>seizure disorder). If that figure holds up in larger subsequent
>>follow-up of children ... I would ask - do you think there is a problem
>>here ... and what is the solution?' Archives of Ophthalmology, 2001,
>>carried an article with a telling title:Ocular Anomalies Seen in
>>Children Born After IVF'. On March 7, 2002 a new study was released
>>indicating that the former 2-3% rate of major birth defects from IVF - a
>>percentage always classified as consistent with the general population -
>>was, in fact, in error. This study now found a 9% rate of major birth
>>defects among IVF offspring. Will the percentage of birth defects from
>>IVF continue to climb?
>>
>>http://www.stemcellresearch.org/testimony/complete_hearing-2006-03.pdf
![[ endo@obgyn.net ]](../../images/endo_at_obgyn.gif)