 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostatitis / October 2003Cured of prostatitis by the Stanford Protocol
Several years ago I came down with a very severe case of prostatitis that left me in terrifying pain almost always. Like many of you, I tried a great many treatments without success. Eventually I tried therapy for pelvic muscle dysfunction, and within 3 weeks of initiating that therapy, my pain improved dramatically. After that, my symptoms continued to improve, albeit very gradually, until they went away completely. Thus, I've been completely cured of a severe, debilitating, long-lasting case of prostatitis, by using therapy for pelvic muscle dysfunction. I'm not the only person who has benefitted from this therapy. Most people who try the therapy get much better, at least among those I've spoken to. Therefore, if you have Prostatitis or CPPS, I strongly recommend you look into therapy for pelvic muscle dysfunction, like the Stanford Protocol. You may find a way out of your pain, just as I have. (p.s. Sorry about the re-post, but I feel compelled to post this every 6 months or so. Perhaps I can spare some people the needless suffering that I regrettably underwent.) (disclaimer: I'm not a doc and am not offering medical advice. I'm relating a personal experience. Talk to your uro before doing anything.) > Several years ago I came down with a very severe case of prostatitis > that left me in terrifying pain almost always. Like many of you, I [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > relating a personal experience. Talk to your uro before doing > anything.) Just wondering if you could provide a link to more specific information about the Stanford Protocol? Thanks. >Several years ago I came down with a very severe case of prostatitis >that left me in terrifying pain almost always. Like many of you, I [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >relating a personal experience. Talk to your uro before doing >anything.) How long have you been completely without *any* symptoms? >Several years ago I came down with a very severe case of prostatitis >that left me in terrifying pain almost always. Like many of you, I [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >relating a personal experience. Talk to your uro before doing >anything.) I would advise readers of this newsgroup to ignore this irresponsible post and future posts from this individual_until_he gives us HIS DEFINITION of the word "cure" to newbies. >Several years ago I came down with a very severe case of prostatitis >that left me in terrifying pain almost always. Like many of you, I [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >relating a personal experience. Talk to your uro before doing >anything.) I would advise readers of this newsgroup to ignore this irresponsible post and future posts from this individual_until_he gives us HIS DEFINITION of the word "cure." > I would advise readers of this newsgroup to ignore this irresponsible post and > future posts from this individual_until_he gives us HIS DEFINITION of the word > "cure." I don't normaly respond to posts such as this, but in this case I'll make an exception, lest new sufferers actually beleive that there is no hope of recovery and give up persuing treatment. I think what Tom means when he states that he has been cured, is that he suffers no pain and no urinary dysfunction at any time, EVER. Posting which implies there is little chance of recovery is, in fact, irresponsible. You should educate yourself and check out the 'Success Stories' section of http://chronicpelvicpain.us/. There you will see many similar case histories similar to Tom's, and also see other reports of patients who have made significant or complete recoveries, including a post by Dr Shoskes who reports that 2 long term patients who are now completely symptom free after APPROPRIATE TREATMENT (Incidentally, for those cynics out there, neither of them were cured due to ProstaQ). And that is the key - Appropriate Treatment. This disease was thought of as incurable in the past, because treatment has traditionally been extremely poor. The new round of NIH funding should hopefully answer a few important questions, but it is already well established in the scientific literature that most CPPS patients have no actual Urological pathologies. However, 90% DO however have muscle spasm and myofascial pain - Why then, should it be so surprising then that someone who has received physical therapy and biofeedback to treat this spasm and myofascial pain has nade a complete recovery, and is now Cured? "Al" wrote.. > The new round of NIH funding should hopefully answer a few important > questions, but it is already well established in the scientific [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > received physical therapy and biofeedback to treat this spasm and > myofascial pain has nade a complete recovery, and is now Cured? Great post, Al! Very inspirational, thanks. I agree with everything you say about the cynic's who say there is no way to improve or be cured from this condition. Posting which implies there is little chance of recovery is in fact, simply wrong and irresponsible, as you put it. The key as you mention is receiving the right treatment, and physician to work with, ( not easy to find, but the truth ). You point out that physical therapy and biofeedback are certainly credible alternatives for treatment, and indeed there are some nice men who post here and at C.P.Com who can vouge this therapy has been effective for them. Fortunately, they have been kind enough to post their progress back for the others. Personally, I'm optimistic physical therapy and biofeedback can really be of some help for a subset of sufferer's, and as this particular treatment steadily improves, I foresee this treatment option as being a first line strategy for CPPS pts. in the near future. It's exciting to see the development. Of course this is a discussion group and having agreed with virtually everything you kindly offered, I do not agree that it is well established in the scientific literature that most CPPS patients have no actual Urological pathologies. Unfortunately, there is a medical group who are determined to push this line of thinking ahead with skewed and prejudice studies, instead of allowing all the research to let itself surface on it's own. Maybe I've misread, but if you are referring to bacterial etiology, there is in fact a plethora of literature that supports it. It simply can't be ignored, and it's no secret a significant subset of men harbour pathogens in their EPS and/or semen when the PROPER DIAGNOSTICS are used to screen. There are many unanswered questions that need addressing, yet many are turning a blind eye. The question is to what extent do these entities contribute to the inflammatory process, and what is to be done when antibiotics are not effective? What is to be done when antibiotic's relieve a sufferer's symptoms until they are stopped? In conclusion, for all you freaks out there jumping out of your seats, this isn't to say that ALL men suffer from pelvic muscle dysfunction, ( although most probably do have pelvic and/or perennial spasm ), or that ALL men have pathogen's, ( although some do ), it is to say that you researchers have to work together synergistically and put your ego's away. Consider each other's finding's for the sole purpose of providing the proper treatment for each of own individual, yet similar condition's. You researcher's have your work cut out for you....hehehe ;-) ( I don't want to debate this, thankyou ) Have a great day, fella's! Of course this is a discussion group and having agreed with > virtually everything you kindly offered, I do not agree that it is well > established in the scientific literature that most CPPS patients have no [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > There are many unanswered questions that need addressing, yet many are > turning a blind eye. -----I'm certainly not disputing that bacterial prostatitis does not exist, but bacterial prostatitis IS NOT CPPS, although bacterial prostatitis is only one of many possible INITIATING FACTORS for CPPS. Let me explain: Bacterial prostatitis is, by definition, and inflamed prostate gland caused by an infection, and is usually very treatble by oral ABX, aspecially if cultures and sensitivity test are performed. Pelvic pain relates to pain in various locations which may or may not be accompanied by urinary disfunction IN THE ABSENCE of prostate infection and inflammation. The vast majority who visit this board are here because they have failed ABX and do not have bacterial prostatitis, but do have CPPS. However, in some cases prostatitis may be one of many possible causes of CPPS. My own case may help illustrate the point I am trying to make.I fisrtly developed an intensly inflamed prostate (red hot coal in rectum sensation) and slowly developed the symptoms of CPPS during this time (perineal pain etc). The red hot coal sensation was cleared up 2 months later when I was eventually switched to course of doxycycline. I was left with chronic pelvic pain (in the absence of an inflamed prostate), (perineal pain; anal pain; pubic pain; urinary frequency & hesitancy etc.) which was related to chronic pelvic floor muscle spasm. From what I know, this is originaly a protective 'splinting' response to the inflamed prostate, but can then become the source of chronic pelvic pain, even after the original cause (i.e. prostatitis) has been treated. I've improved by around 80% as a result of an ongoing course of myofascial release/pelvic physiotherapy - ABX, although they cleared up the prostatitis, have absolutely no effect on my CPPS symptoms. This is an excellent article which discusses how damage to pelvic organs can cause nerve damage resulting in a vicous cycle of increased pain perception and muscle spasm. http://www.jmweissmd.com/article.htm The key point I am trying to make is that bacterial prostatitis is one of many possible causes of CPPS, and that once people have had it ruled out (most people) or treated, they need to have a complete assessment of their pelvic floor muscles. Those researchers who are still looking at a bacterial eitiology for CPPS itself are flogging a dead horse. Well Put Al. My thoughts almost exactly to a T!!! >Of course this is a discussion group and having agreed with >> virtually everything you kindly offered, I do not agree that it is well [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] >Those researchers who are still looking at a bacterial eitiology for >CPPS itself are flogging a dead horse. "Al" wrote.. Thanks for your comments, Al. > Let me explain: Bacterial prostatitis is, by definition, and inflamed > prostate gland caused by an infection, and is usually very treatble by > oral ABX, aspecially if cultures and sensitivity test are performed. Sure. > Pelvic pain relates to pain in various locations which may or may not > be accompanied by urinary disfunction IN THE ABSENCE of prostate > infection and inflammation. If I'm not mistaken, inflammation can accompany CPPS. > I've improved by around 80% as a result of an ongoing course of > myofascial release/pelvic physiotherapy - ABX, although they cleared > up the prostatitis, have absolutely no effect on my CPPS symptoms. Good news regarding the improvement. Hope the lingering symptoms eventually subside as well. > The key point I am trying to make is that bacterial prostatitis is one > of many possible causes of CPPS, and that once people have had it > ruled out (most people) or treated, they need to have a complete > assessment of their pelvic floor muscles. Sure. I agree with this for sure. I really do. > Those researchers who are still looking at a bacterial eitiology for > CPPS itself are flogging a dead horse. I don't agree with you on this. The whole key to determining when and when not to decide which therapy to follow, whether it be bacterial directed, pelvic floor dysfunction based, or whatever, is improving, and elevating the quality of screening from the onset for sufferer's of CPPS. A good start here would be to incorporate PCR in all men who present symptoms. Thanks for your feedback YTTM. > If I'm not mistaken, inflammation can accompany CPPS. -----It depends on how inflammation is being measured. According to True et al (1999) of a total of 368 bilateral prostate biopsies from CPPS patients, 33% of men had inflammation, and only 4% of these were categorised as moderate or severe (J Urol, 1999; 162;2014-8). It appears that when traditional markers of inflammation are used, very few CPPS patients actually have significant inflammation of their prostates in the absence of infection. "Al" wrote. > Thanks for your feedback YTTM. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > few CPPS patients actually have significant inflammation of their > prostates in the absence of infection. Interesting post, Al. Thanks. But, I'm not sure anyone, ( physician or sufferer ), can trust the conclusions presented in this study regarding infection and it's relationship to inflammation. One reason we should be skeptical is that we shouldn't generally trust "traditional" means of detection used by the medical community as a whole, ( recall my PCR comment? ). For example, I know someone who has CPPS with a significant, ( the same word the above study uses ), inflammatory condition, ( very high poly's in EPS ). Actually, it would be better described as a rampant inflammatory condition. He was screened by using modus operandi, ( "traditional" ), means and markers of inflammation, yet apparently his regular beat doctor determined it was not bacterial based because he couldn't find anything using his methods. Although I haven't read the full text, from what your telling me this study above suggests that significant inflammation in CPPS sufferer's is probably infection based. So which one is it? Is that study correct, and does my friend have an infection based on his significant inflammation, or were the results from his general doctor's work-up right and his rampant prostatic inflammation is not bacterial based? As a side note; I'd like to know how many men who post here have actually had tests to measure the inflammation in their EPS? How it was done? And what were the conclusion's? Specifically to our needs, when we go to the uro logist's office for a checkup, most of the doctor's we see do not have the tools in their office to look for inflammation. I'm always impressed if they do have some sort of microscopy available. It's not that common. One would probably have more luck determining their inflammatory response and why they have an inflammatory response at an infectious disease specialist's office. By the way, if you need to make an appointment with someone, it's probably best to call the potential doctor's office beforehand and ask what methods they use to determine what is happening in your EPS, ( expressed prostatic fluid ). Ideally, you want a physician who is hands on, or at least is affiliated with a credible lab. If you can find someone with a good setup like the above mentioned, it may be a sign of an educated physician, and your treatment option's may improve. > "Al" wrote. > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > like the above mentioned, it may be a sign of an educated physician, and > your treatment option's may improve. Bullshit. Tell me how having a good credible lab helped anybody out in treatment. As far as educated physicians go, the US doesn't have any so the treatment failures are high? Only the educated doctors have good success rates, bullshit again. Come up with a list of treatment options and you can stop your a.s kissing of educated doctors and labs. They haven't come up with any so get the sh.t off your face. "Robert" wrote.. > Bullshit. Tell me how having a good credible lab helped anybody out in > treatment. Hey goof! The fact that you would even pick an argument with me about the option's of having your EPS fluid samples screened by a good lab as opposed to a poor lab, show's that your a complete bean-brain. And, by the way, I COULD give you examples of how a good lab helped sufferer's, but this is personal information. > As far as educated physicians go, the US doesn't have any so > the treatment failures are high? For the most part I would have to agree here. The treatment option's in North America are dismal, but don't forget you moron, there are men who HAVE improved with the aid of an educated physician, and they do live in N.A. Arguing again about the importance of finding a good doctor to work with? What's your problem? > Only the educated doctors have good > success rates, bullshit again. Putting words in my mouth? Show me where I am quoted as saying this? Or, are you just adding imaginary quotes as you go along? > Come up with a list of treatment options and you can stop your a.s kissing > of educated doctors and labs. They haven't come up with any so get the sh.t > off your face. Why should I waste my time copying and pasting treatment option's for an idiot like you? Huh? If you don't have anything intelligent to say, then get lost. I'm already wasting my time aknowledging you. Listen carefully to me. Put your burrito down and wipe the milk dripping off your chin. I never said that improved treatment meant getting cured. What I have said is that it is important to find an interested doctor who can provide current treatment options thus improving chances of alleviating symptoms. What's wrong with that? If you knew anything about the CUrrent and VArious treatment option's an educated CPPS physician is aware of, and COMPARE those option's with those of an UN-educated physician, ( who more times than not, brushes sufferer's out the door with nothing more than a prescription for antidepressant's in their hand ), then it would be very clear to you the importance of finding a good doctor to work with. Go back to kicking your dog. > "Robert" wrote.. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > COULD give you examples of how a good lab helped sufferer's, but this is > personal information. Oh, you sweet talked me into believing that the US is full of bad labs so I believe you now. Conclussion- don't rely on EPS testing. > > As far as educated physicians go, the US doesn't have any so > > the treatment failures are high? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Arguing again about the importance of finding a good doctor to work with? > What's your problem? Very few you say? See most educated doctors who have success do not write or do studies about their success. Other doctors noting their success don't bother reading or care to treat patients to get them off their back. What kind of a moron are you? A good treatment would spread like wildfire which leads one to believe that most of these guys claiming good success are bullshiting all over you. Don't believe me? Show me one doctor who will claims relieve or cure for your condition and who actively encourage you travel to him? Stop spreading that crap. > If you knew anything about the CUrrent and VArious treatment option's > an educated CPPS physician is aware of, and COMPARE those option's with > those of an UN-educated physician, ( who more times than not, brushes > sufferer's out the door with nothing more than a prescription for > antidepressant's in their hand ), then it would be very clear to you the > importance of finding a good doctor to work with. UN-educated physician treating patients? They are ALL FUCKIN UNEDUCATED moron. There are no answers to this condition. You try anything and hope for the best. Incredible bullshit. Does it help you with your depression in believing you are going to an educated one. Lots of f.cking laugh. Does he show you all his diplomas or workshops he goes to? Placebo, you moron or maybe he is gay when he holds your hand and explains everything to you followed by you giving him a rim job (ie put your tongue on his educated butt-hole). As far as my dog, I have him well trained as he gives me a rim job on command. >As far as my dog, I have him well trained as he gives me a rim job on >command. Way to go, Robert. You always manage to bring a conversation down to a level you feel comfortable with. > >As far as my dog, I have him well trained as he gives me a rim job on > >command. > > Way to go, Robert. > > You always manage to bring a conversation down to a level you feel comfortable with. I got him from a third world country and he is almost as well trained as your wife. I am working on training him to change the car oil and lube. Have you got her to do that yet? "Robert" wrote.. > Oh, you sweet talked me into believing that the US is full of bad labs so I > believe you now. Conclussion- don't rely on EPS testing. Don't rely on EPS testing? Are you suggesting everyone with symptoms bypass a check for infection? This is not good advice. I agree if you mean men in THIS group should not rely on regular culture methods, because they are indeed USELESS for a variety of reasons. Standard cultures use the bare minimum as their standard, and antibiotics more times than not, are not effective for hard to treat cases such as found in the men who post here. Why this occurs is for a different discusion however. I suggest you don't completely rely on the information you are reading from this newsgroup as being relevant to all men who have had CPPS symptoms in the past. Do you think the men that post here are the only men in the world who have had to deal with prostatitis? The men that post here are hard to treat conditions. Even though cultures are virtually useless for men in this group, consider that there that there have been thousands of men in the past who have had EPS/semen/urine testing done, taken their antibiotics, have been healed, and have then gone on with there lives. They have no clue as to what a sci.med.prostate.prostititis group is. Why? Because they responded to treatment based on EPS testing. They have no need to post, or even seek specialist's care. We never hear about this information because those men never post to this group. It is easy to see how our views would be skewed regarding initial culturing if we solely rely on the information from this group. > Very few you say? See most educated doctors who have success do not write > or do studies about their success. Other doctors noting their success don't [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > your condition and who actively encourage you travel to him? > Stop spreading that crap. What is the point your trying to make? Your all over the place. You first attack me because I suggest it is essential to find a good doctor to work with, and now your lecturing me regarding why educated doctors do not cite studies proclaiming their successes? It seems to me that you are either a sufferer like many of us who have gone through the system with dismal results and your just as frustrated as we all are, or your someone with a personal vendetta against me. In any event, I don't dispute what your saying about the quality of care available for us. Quite frankly, I agree with you. There are many con artist out there. Some have posted here in the past. Nonetheless, you have made my very point for me. As you have acknowledged, there are some educated doctors out there, ( very, very, few ), and if any of us want to improve our chances of knocking down our symptoms, it's important we find a physician who will work with us and show an interest in our condition. It could be a family doctor, a specialist in your own hometown. It doesn't matter! I don't see why you are so against this idea? Does everyone have to be so antagonistic and kick their dog like you all day? > UN-educated physician treating patients? They are ALL FUCKIN UNEDUCATED > moron. There are no answers to this condition. You try anything and hope > for the best. Incredible bullshit. Does it help you with your depression > in believing you are going to an educated one. Man...hehe....is that seatbelt fastened on your chair? Chill out, buddy! Tell me where I said that finding an educated doctor will provide an instant cure? In your last post you LIED and misquoted me as well. Listen bonehead, I can't say this anymore plainly. An educated, interested, doctor, means that he should take you seriously, and listen to your complaints, ( it's apparent, you have quite a few ), and will discuss which course of action to take. For example, you both could decide to investigate the bacterial etiology and do various testing in that regard. OR you could decide to treat symptoms with pain management. OR you could decide to go the physiotherapy route and investigate pelvic floor dysfunction. How about back problems that may be associated with pelvic pain? Are you really that stupid you can't comprehend this? Oh, and don't preach to me about the quality of care out there and the difficulty in improving you asswipe! I know about this all to well. I know enough about that to suggest to you, and other's, how important it is to find a physician who will show an interest in helping and treating CPPS. > Lots of f.cking laugh. Your making a fool of yourself with your derailed rants. If you have symptoms, I actually sympathise with you. > Placebo, you moron or maybe he is gay when he holds your hand and > explains everything to you followed by you giving him a rim job (ie put your > tongue on his educated butt-hole). Angry man......are you always this stupid or are you just making an extra effort today? > As far as my dog, I have him well trained as he gives me a rim job on > command. Not surprising. I gather you get hot flashes at the cattle auction as well......oy! > But, I'm not sure anyone, ( physician or sufferer ), can trust the > conclusions presented in this study regarding infection and it's > relationship to inflammation. ---This study did not investigate infection - It simply looked at how many men with CPPS actully have inflammation of the prostate gland. as the results show, prostatitc inflammation in CPPS (i.e. abacterial prostatitis) is rare. One reason we should be skeptical is that we > shouldn't generally trust "traditional" means of detection used by the > medical community as a whole, ( recall my PCR comment? ). For example, I [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > results from his general doctor's work-up right and his rampant prostatic > inflammation is not bacterial based? -----I actually agree with you on the need for PCR screeining in certain cases, such as this where significant inflammation is present but traditional Urologocal workups fail to ID pathogens. I don't disagree with much of what you say, but the key point I am trying to make is that in CPPS patients: bacterial prostatitis itself is not common; significant inflammation is very rare; and finaly, that for most of us (around 90% according to Zermen et. al (1999))with 'abacterial prostatits' our main problem lies outwith the prostate gland itself; i.e. the the pelvic floor muscles and associated nerves. "Al" wrote.. > -----I actually agree with you on the need for PCR screeining in > certain cases, such as this where significant inflammation is present > but traditional Urologocal workups fail to ID pathogens. I'm glad you see the need for this as well. Speaking for myself, I'd like to see PCR done at the onset of symptoms. Have all the information recorded and treatment based on those PCR results put forth in studies. I don't think a few studies would suffice, but rather an accumulation of information over about 5-7 years or so, in order to get an accurate representation of any trend. The single MOST important factor involving all this, is the expertise of the individual doing the PCR. > I don't disagree with much of what you say, but the key point I am > trying to make is that in CPPS patients: bacterial prostatitis itself > is not common; Sure. Based on the current detection/culture methods used in all of those studies, no one can really dispute what you are saying about those conclusions. In the last few years there is a certain medical group who are pushing these findings hard. I don't really care unless they bully their way through and deny other research to come forth as well. My concern is that I just think that the whole traditional understanding about bacteria and the role they play in disease/inflammation is not sufficient anymore, and pathogens are not the same as say 30-40 years ago.With the rampant use of antibiotics, a more open society, the drug companies direct influence on our medical system and their need to make $ to the exclusion of all else, we are not keeping up. If what was considered and infection several decades ago does not respond to antibiotics today, then it must not be an infection, right? I don't see anyone informing us what changes happen to the human body/urogenital area when pathogenic bacteria inhabit the human body for several years. > significant inflammation is very rare; My friend must be one of the very few then. > and finaly, that > for most of us (around 90% according to Zermen et. al (1999))with > 'abacterial prostatits' our main problem lies outwith the prostate > gland itself; i.e. the the pelvic floor muscles and associated nerves. I really do agree with this. Pelvic floor muscles and associated nerves are surely being irritated, and it seems very realistic that at least 90% of men have some sort of muscular/spasmic reaction to whatever it is that is causing the discomfort. I think we've gone about as far as we can on this topic for now, Al. Thanks for your interesting comments :-) "Al" wrote.. > Thanks for your feedback YTTM. LOL! I missed this little jab ;-) Ya....I could be guilty of this simply because I prefer not to have my remarks interpreted in the wrong way. (-_-) ho ho ho >I think what Tom means when he states that he has been cured, is that >he suffers no pain and no urinary dysfunction at any time, EVER. Please let Tom speak for himself. You are just speculating about his case. Besides, I would also like to know how long he has been without symptoms. Some men have experienced long-term remissions, only to have their symptoms return months or even years later. >Posting which implies there is little chance of recovery is, in fact, >irresponsible. You need to work on your reading comprehension. I never posted anything suggesting that there is little chance of recovery. Obviously, numerous CPPS sufferers have beaten this thing down to a point where they are currently asymptomatic or almost asymptomatic, and leading normal or almost normal lives. There *is* hope for CPPS patients. I simply asked Tom for his definition of the word cure. Cure is a problematic term. It has a long, ugly history in this newsgroup. I really don't feel like explaining all this to you. Goodbye. mastcells@aol.com (Mast Cells) wrote in message > > I simply asked Tom for his definition of the word cure. ------No, you also stated that his post was irresponsible, and advised everyone to ignore it. mastcells@aol.com (Mast Cells) wrote in message Cure is a problematic > term. It has a long, ugly history in this newsgroup. ---I understand where you are coming from here, but I still felt it was a bit unfair to accuse someone of being irresponsible, just because he chose the word cur as opposed to another term such as 'complete recovery'. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.