Letters from the SCD support group:
Drugs or no drugs

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 16:23:18 -0400
From: "Paula Sirois" <psirois@hunterdon.csnet.net>
To: <SCD-list@longisland.com>
Subject: No drugs

I really agree that if it can be done without drugs, that is the way to go.
My son had a relapse at three months, about two-and-a-half weeks ago. We
are being more careful with the diet. He is eating yogurt, ripe bananas,
chicken, eggs, zucchini, carrots, cooked apples and peaches with a bit of
honey, and I am certain he is sneaking in some SCD-allowed fruit leather.
That is about it. I am noticing that he is a bit better today. It can be
scary when the relapse hits hard, but I think that prednisone is
horrendous, and the doctors act irresponsibly when they dish it out while
glossing over the side effects. We also began acupuncture this week.

My son is not really good about exercising when he feels like he needs the
bathroom a lot, but I will pass on the advice. He is taking

L-glutamine, Seasilver (contains vitamin C, Aloe vera, colloidal silver,
lots of minerals), Digestzyme, Seacure (an amino acid supplement with omega
3 fatty acids from white fish), Zinaxin (a form of ginger without the
irritants), and Fisol (a source of delayed-release fish oil). He was taking
Prime Defense, an HSO (homeostatic soil organisms) probiotic formula, but
he felt that it was making him worse, so he stopped for the time being.
That is frustrating because the product is known to make an individual
worse as part of the healing process, but try telling THAT to a fifteen
year old who is about to start school again.

We are ordering a specific type of bentonite clay that seems to be very
helpful for individuals with these diseases. I will keep everyone posted on
the effects.

Thanks to all for corresponding with me on this subject.



Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 11:36:00 -0700
From: David Hyde <dhyde@ccsf.cc.ca.us>
To: SCD-list@longisland.com
Subject: Re: No drugs

> ...the SCD can be a great help, but I still maintain that a moderately or
> heavily symptomatic UC patient with daily bleeding and the rest will not
> go into remission by diet alone.
> My question to the group:
> Is this the general consensus?
> My feeling is that the SCD, combined with the right combination of
> specific supplements ( eg, vitamins/nutrients/probiotics/herbs/bentonite
> clay) and WILL/DETERMINATION, may well be enough. Am I delusional? (I
> think not.) It is my understanding that there have been many cases where
> individuals go into remission without resorting to prednisone or any
> other drugs."

I'm doing great after 4 months on the scd with no drugs (ever) some
exercise and vitamins. I have pretty severe Crohn's (well it seemed bad
to me). While I don't claim 100% relief (still have occassional D and
bloating) I can manage fine now, and at least don't appear to be
deteriorating. If I woul;d just exercise regularly, I'm fairly certain
I'd be just fine. Drugs cause resistance. Drugs damage good cells too.
Steriods fry your immune system. If you want long term health, I'd
really try and keep their use to a minimum.


Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:52:37 -0500
From: Nancy Emerson <nemerson@newfound.k12.nh.us>
To: SCD-list@longisland.com
Subject: meds vs SCD - was GI appt and complex carbs


Here are my 2 cents worth on drugs vs. SCD.

I went through a period this fall when I was so frustrated I might have considered taking the recommended medications. However, I had spent the past year being determined to believe there had to be a better way. In two months on SCD there is no doubt in my mind that my doctor's version of "the wrong approach" (SCD) is for me very much the right approach. And I am so glad I am not putting more chemicals in my body. Five years of being on and off prednisone was enough.

I would say that unless you try SCD and it doesn't work for you I wouldn't play with the drugs.

I say "play" for a reason. No one really knows what the long range effects of these medications will be. They have frequently done tests on the medications only for limited trials, and then rushed them to approval so that people can "benefit" from them more immediately. I heard of one medication (from my pharmaceutical company friend) which was tested through one round of treatments and approved. Once patients reached the second round of treatment there were no tests to look to for information, and patients started exhibiting many unexpected side effects. Essentially, the patients were the trial run and the results were far worse than anticipated in the way of side effects.

So in essence, my attitude is, since no one really knows what the long range effect will be of these medications, I don't want the experiment done on my body. I don't want to hear when I'm 50 "Oh, sorry, those meds that allowed you to live your life for the past 30 years? Well they did a great job for 30 years, but the longterm side effects mean you probably won't live past 55." Maybe I wouldn't hear that, but I don't want to take the chance.

Beyond that we all have to make our own decisions about what efforts we are willing to make and what risks we are willing to take.

Sorry this is so long. I would just consider food for thought.

Good luck with the dilemna - it is not an easy choice given the difficulties involved.


To SCD Web Library start page