I had my visit with new neurologist that specializes in Parkinson's, i asked him what he thought about Buntanetap, he had no idea what that was, makes me a little worried that they are not very concerned about the well being of the patients and dont feel need to stay up to date on Parkinsons developments or recent research, maybe they are only paid to refill our meds? your opinion?
Parkinsons specialist unaware of Buntanetap - Cure Parkinson's
Parkinsons specialist unaware of Buntanetap
Written by
robinson621
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
29 Replies
•
Noticed the same. Doctors seem to ignore it. But investors are paying attention to the tiny company behind it. Annovis Bio.
I understand what your saying, i am not trying to promote Buntanetap, the point im trying to make is that they at least should be aware of Buntanetap by now, it makes me wonder what else they are missing or unaware of.
Totally agree with you! Many doctors lack curiosity and just want to push cl and then dbs.
He is not in a position to do anything with it until it gets approved. What matters is how good he is with treating patients with medications that are available to him.
When my husband got an appointment with the neurologist who gave him the diagnosis this doctor did not know about research being done at the institution where he worked. It was a clinical trial for exenatide. This doctor is no longer there and not sure where he went. I believe he was an intern because he had a supervising doctor so I am thinking they were there to observe his evaluations of the patient and provide helpful pointers. This turned out fine for us and we went back to him for one visit then we found another doctor and she is very helpful. I don't mind being the one to tell a doctor about research that is being done but I wish that if it was specific to their field that they would at least have some interest in reading about research but then I guess we have access to most of what is being done by reading posts here and on a few other valuable sites.
Interns get about an hour of sleep every other day and are busy learning the basics of the practice specialty, If they even are headed into a specialty during internship, which is not generally the case...all the while having their time ground into sub minimum wage ratios considering what their paid versus how much they are putting in as working hours...and even at that, assuming they're specialized to begin with, interns aren't generally specialized yet, so one has to know whether this intern is doing a year specialized position or is just generally rotating through, which rotation is typical of their first year post graduation. They're lucky through all their training rotations if they get 90 days in any particular services specialty...all while trying to respect the differential priority of certain outcomes, the most important of which is to try not to kill the patient.
yes I am aware of their difficult lot in life because my niece's husband and my friend's daughter have been interns recently so I am not being dismissive I just wished that the intern would have considered what I had to say and now we have a doctor who is like that and I appreciate her very much
This is a genuine concern and that's why I don't like the movement disorder specialists and neurologists. The doctor I consulted last week was also unaware of it
My dad’s specialist is very excited by all the new research. He made a point of telling us all about it on our last visit. As well as being dads neurologist he also has Parkinson’s which makes him very caring and passionate about maintaining independence and good quality of life.
My neurologist was also dismissive when I mentioned the company (Annovis). He didn't show any curiosity nor interest. The only thing he said was we'll see if something comes in the market. He is very pushy about starting on current drugs. Reading your post and from others gives the impression it's more widespread. Don't they have access to current trials specially the one's that have already gone through Phase 3 trials and show some promise.
Our experience was similar in that the doctor wanted my husband to start Sinemet immediately.
Sometimes I wonder about their commitment towards their patient. They must get commission recommending/ prescribing a drug, I hope that's not the only reason.
Another comment that is more ignorance for the most part, convenience of not having to know what you don't know or be responsible for patients care and well-being. Most medical practitioners know, and respect, that it is ordering on the insane or turning their patients into unvalidated guinea pigs to jump before an accumulation of science has occurred covering all aspects of the proposed drug, and in addition before the professional association has on its wisdom. I know it's hard to wait, but you don't know what you don't know... Where else is specialist pretty much does, plus his health responsible for knowing what one doesn't know. I am off for criticizing positions as people who read my accumulated comments no, but not the unfair ignorant speculative type of comments that are really kind of irresponsible and convenient.
I was not doubting their credibility but as shared by other patients, the reluctance to share some info that at least assures the patients their neurologist is up to date as they have so many resources.I don't think that's unfair to expect.
Well as a group in my experience neurologists do seem pretty consistently cranky. Wonder why now that you mention it. In my case I think I know why, I tend to talk back to them and ask them things like "how do you know," and "You're telling me the scan is somewhat abnormal and your effort to get me to do this or that and buy what you're selling. So can you tell me just exactly how it is abnormal and whether that results in actual abnormal behavior of some kind?" And then when he sort of gruffly says "well no, but I'm your doctor" when he really wasn't, the staff just asked him in because they weren't getting anywhere with my case either, and I sort of snickered and my wife was sitting there too. Then he said "look, on the depression side and how the same meds interact, I have no training in psychiatry, I'm a researcher" and I said "God that's evident, but if that is the case then what are you doing here in clinic with a patient? Didn't you just get done telling me I should listen to you because 'I'm your doctor,' and now you're telling me your not trained about something you're trying to get me to do?" I know it pissed him off, but he was selling some BS and he knew I knew, I think that ticked him off a little too. I won't embarass him by stating his name, but up to them I'd had a pretty typical view of the vaunted Mayo clinic... But in my defense, the conversation had gone from how do you know what you're saying is the right thing to do, to actually explicitly no I don't know but I'm your doctor... and he wasn't that either. But really, he knew I used to be a psychologist and he knew that he had seen me about 8 years before...Maybe researchers are a little more insular. Now I wonder if some of their specialties are better than others. But maybe in general it's because as a group it's kind of frustrating, I would think so, neurology isn't all that successful a science yet and I'm sure they know it. Maybe they just don't like other people knowing it.
They may think they are trying to be helpful but I wish they would at least have some awareness of what is going on in research because this is their specialty and if I can find out what is going on in research it does not seem like it would be too hard for the neurologists to try to be aware of the new ideas. I admit though that after years of very little innovative research the recent increase in new ideas and trials is encouraging.
My answer here is the same as to cinnamon, because tracks are remarkably similar. About cranky neurologists. .
Well as a group in my experience neurologists do seem pretty consistently cranky. Wonder why now that you mention it. My case I think I know why, I tend to talk back to them and ask them things like "how do you know," and "You're telling me the scan is somewhat abnormal and your effort to get me to do this or that and buy what you're selling. So can you tell me just exactly how it is abnormal and whether that results in actual abnormal behavior of some kind?" And then when he sort of gruffly says "well no, but I'm your doctor" when he really wasn't even that, the staff just asked him in because they weren't getting anywhere with my case either, and I sort of snickered and my wife was sitting there too. Then he said "look, on the depression side and how the same meds interact, I have no training in psychiatry, I'm a researcher" and I said "God that's evident, but if that is the case then what are you doing here in clinic with a patient? Didn't you just get done telling me I should listen to you because 'I'm your doctor,' and now you're telling me your not trained about something you're trying to get me to do?" I know it pissed him off, but he was selling some BS and he knew I knew, I think that ticked him off a little too. I won't embarass him by stating his name, but up to them I'd had a pretty typical view of the vaunted Mayo clinic... But in my defense, the conversation had gone from how do you know what you're saying is the right thing to do, to actually explicitly no I don't know but I'm your doctor... and he wasn't that either. But really, he knew I used to be a psychologist and he knew that he had seen me about 8 years before...Maybe researchers are a little more insular. Now I wonder if some of their specialties are better than others. But maybe in general it's because as a group it's kind of frustrating, I would think so, neurology isn't all that successful a science yet and I'm sure they know it. Maybe they just don't like other people knowing it.
I share his thoughtful skeptical view on Annovis myself, after listening to and viewing the last presentation. The head researcher essentially said: "Well, the 6 months data didn't give us what we were hoping for, so we'll go back to FDA and ask them to let us stretch it into an 18-month study and then see what we get when that's accomplished." What's the phrase? "Not quite ready for prime time."
>"He is very pushy about starting on current drugs. "
I'm not going to pretend to know motivation, but some doctors are very pushy about over prescribing medicine and it is not in the patient's best interest.
My report on cinnamon 
IMHO doctors don't spend a lot of time reading their medical journals.
When dealing with such diseases and seeing their patients,one would expect they have at least some updated info about any news on current progress,so at least sometime is given to discussion on that aspect as well. It's good for the patient to know the doc cares enough.
Actually if they keep up on all the research, even some of it, before it has actually concluded, they wouldn't have time for their work. There's just too much being done to follow unless you are a researcher in the first place... And as a practitioner you can't do anything that hasn't been approved by the FDA anyway, it's all preliminary until the drug is approved and then sometimes it's only approved for certain conditions. And the idea how many drugs are being studied versus how many that actually make it through to availability? Profitable (i.e., valuable) use of a doctor's expensive (somebody had to pay, and then society to sufficiently recoup, the roughly $500,000 to $750,000 for the training) time until then? That's why there are professional associations and boards they are required to be part of, which observes and participates, and even creates and does some of the research, including doing peer review of related research, then creates consensus from debating the pros and cons and against the current portfolio of treatments and solutions, and issue the commentary and formal positions to their members and cement them down with CEUs and conventions, including sales efforts by the pharmaceuticals the conventions and in their offices, including incentives and kickbacks are fees, a part of the same reality that creates the medications in the first place, so it makes blessings obviously and conflicts of interest are everywhere in this entire world for that matter. After that it comes down to the ethics of the individual doctor.
.
It's all really pretty normal and understandable once you have some understanding of the real landscape. Like with the car you own or used to maybe...next time you meet an automotive engineer, or go ask Reddit maybe, ask him how much of a whole vehicle he had anything to do with, and then ask him why he didn't have more, and to give a rough guess on how many engineers I'm specialized types of engineers it actually took. Betting you would be quite surprised at the answer, I know I was.
.
I think they actually do care, but being your personal supportive-style psychotherapist is not what they are the best at, nor would you hire them for that either. Now if you don't trust him, That's different. But if he is trustworthy and competent, but personally an a**hole, that's plenty OK with me.
Actually if they keep up on all the research, even some of it, before it has actually concluded, they wouldn't have time for their work. There's just too much being done to follow unless you are a researcher in the first place... And as a practitioner you can't do anything that hasn't been approved by the FDA anyway, it's all preliminary until the drug is approved and then sometimes it's only approved for certain conditions. And the idea how many drugs are being studied versus how many that actually make it through to availability? Profitable (i.e., valuable) use of a doctor's expensive (somebody had to pay, and then society to sufficiently recoup, the roughly $500,000 to $750,000 for the training) time until then? That's why there are professional associations and boards they are required to be part of, which observes and participates, and even creates and does some of the research, including doing peer review of related research, then creates consensus from debating the pros and cons and against the current portfolio of treatments and solutions, and issue the commentary and formal positions to their members and cement them down with CEUs and conventions, including sales efforts by the pharmaceuticals the conventions and in their offices, including incentives and kickbacks and fees, a part of the same reality that creates the medications in the first place, so it makes mixed blessings obviously and conflicts of interest are everywhere in this entire world for that matter. After that it comes down to the ethics of the individual doctor.
.
It's all really pretty normal and understandable once you have some understanding of the real landscape. Like with the car you own or used to maybe...next time you meet an automotive engineer, or go ask Reddit maybe, ask him how much of a whole vehicle he had anything to do with, and then ask him why he didn't have more, and to give a rough guess on how many engineers I'm specialized types of engineers it actually took. Betting you would be quite surprised at the answer, I know I was.
.
I think they actually do care, but being your personal supportive-style psychotherapist is not what they are the best at, nor would you hire them for that either. Now if you don't trust him, That's different. But if he is trustworthy and competent, but personally an a**hole, that's plenty OK with me.
The truth will come out in due course if it is any good, meanwhile the share price isn't reacting to the ramping.
I have had PD since 1992 and, since 1996, I have been PD symptom-free, due to having walked, as fast as I could, for one hour, every second day.
At the beginning, I could not walk very fast but, gradually, I walked faster and faster until I was walking at 7 Ks per hour.
I am now almost 90 years old and I am still walking, but not as fast.
I still have no PD symptoms but, I am getting slower.
The beauty of this walking is, IT COSTS NOTHING!
Not what you're looking for?
You may also like...
Parkinsons and constipation
Didn't know until today that constipation is another side effect of parkinsons. My partner has had...
Cannabis for Parkinsons and Dystonia
I had a long chat today with a dispensary employee. He gave me interesting information I wanted to...
Buntanetap
First phase 3 Buntanetap trials are coming to an end soon. What do the participants think - does...
Annovis Bio Buntanetap
With the Buntanetap phase III trial dosing ending soon, I noticed that Annovis Bio stock is...
WIM HOF help with Parkinsons
Google Wim Hof if you don’t know who he is. He has helped me more with Parkinsons than any drug...
Boxing for Parkinsons
Parkinsons Awareness
Dating & parkinsons
Parkinsons & Amino Acids
Management of Parkinsons Disease
