Dr Nase,



How has a few questions asking about demodex "taken over this board"?



Although I've chosen a non-prescription route to treatment, I'm open to laser

and medication treatments which ARE the majority of topics on this board. I'm

just not open (is that gullible?) to the side effects of laser and medication.

It's enough having rosacea. It's quite a another thing to end up with very bad

effects from treatments.



Rachael





----- Original Message -----

From: "drnase2000" <drnase1000@...>

To: <rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 1:02 AM

Subject: [rosacea] Re: Demodex Solutions and Dr. Nase





Now I

> start to see demodex take over this board and that is unacceptable.

> Be open to treatments, but not gullible.

I for one have suffered permanent skin damage from laser, BUT I do

not trash or put down anyone who DOES find positive results in the

treatment of their rosacea thru the use of laser treatments.



I don't use demodex either, BUT again, that is my choice. Dr. Nase,

your comments are often welcome, but sometimes you go to far, allow

US to decide what is best for the treatment of OUR skin. Knowledge

is power. Allow us the opportunity to discover knowledge.



Ami







--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "Rachael M" <rachael@n...>

wrote:

> Dr Nase,

>

> How has a few questions asking about demodex "taken over this

board"?

>

> Although I've chosen a non-prescription route to treatment, I'm

open to laser and medication treatments which ARE the majority of

topics on this board. I'm just not open (is that gullible?) to the

side effects of laser and medication. It's enough having rosacea.

It's quite a another thing to end up with very bad effects from

treatments.

>

> Rachael

>

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "drnase2000" <drnase1000@h...>

> To: <rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com>

> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 1:02 AM

> Subject: [rosacea] Re: Demodex Solutions and Dr. Nase

>

>

> Now I

> > start to see demodex take over this board and that is

unacceptable.

> > Be open to treatments, but not gullible.

I understand and sympathize with both sides of the

view on this, but I'm going to have to agree with Dr.

Nase in this respect. There's way too much discussion

over Demodex involvement with Acne/Rosacea on the

internet in general.



I remember a little over a year ago after finding out

about Rosacea and doing internet searches, the first

pages that were brought up were Demodex Solutions and

Rosacea LTD. Plus, there's alot of talk on this board

about mite involvement when there's a very simple/easy

way to see if it plays any role in your

Rosacea/Acne/Whatever. Why not just go to a physician,

get a quick prescription for Stromectol, and give it a

whirl? Hell - Dr. Nase even posted a few studies

awhile back ago about just this.



If anything, a prescription of Stromectol appears to

be one of the safest and most effective medications

for ruling out mite involvement.



I'd much rather concentrate on getting to the very

scientific heart of the disorder. That's the only way

there'll ever be a "cure".



Ian



--- joy4ami <joy4ami@...> wrote:

> I for one have suffered permanent skin damage from

> laser, BUT I do

> not trash or put down anyone who DOES find positive

> results in the

> treatment of their rosacea thru the use of laser

> treatments.

>

> I don't use demodex either, BUT again, that is my

> choice. Dr. Nase,

> your comments are often welcome, but sometimes you

> go to far, allow

> US to decide what is best for the treatment of OUR

> skin. Knowledge

> is power. Allow us the opportunity to discover

> knowledge.

>

> Ami

--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, ian <csciian@y...> wrote:

>

> I understand and sympathize with both sides of the

> view on this, but I'm going to have to agree with Dr.

> Nase in this respect. There's way too much discussion

> over Demodex involvement with Acne/Rosacea on the

> internet in general.

>

> I remember a little over a year ago after finding out

> about Rosacea and doing internet searches, the first

> pages that were brought up were Demodex Solutions and

> Rosacea LTD. Plus, there's alot of talk on this board

> about mite involvement when there's a very simple/easy

> way to see if it plays any role in your

> Rosacea/Acne/Whatever. Why not just go to a physician,

> get a quick prescription for Stromectol, and give it a

> whirl? Hell - Dr. Nase even posted a few studies

> awhile back ago about just this.

>

> If anything, a prescription of Stromectol appears to

> be one of the safest and most effective medications

> for ruling out mite involvement.

>

> I'd much rather concentrate on getting to the very

> scientific heart of the disorder. That's the only way

> there'll ever be a "cure".

>

> Ian







Well said Ian.  That is exactly what I am getting at.  The two

ladies who thought I was too firm on my stance have to understand

that there is no one else to put things in perspective.  No one. I

absolutely understand you can make you own choices.  But, I have

seen demodex jump up every couple months and it just takes over an

entire board.  It swamps my emails and it replicates just like those

critters.  Brady Barrows has a great site for Demodex -- there is a

lot of good information and patient experiences.  There is no need

to bring that frenzy into a board that looks at all the possible

avenues.  I would hate to see two sites focused on demodex.  Where

would that get us?  I just think that we should continue going over

the underlying pathophysiology of rosacea.



The poster that was a little miffed with my stance should also re-

read my post, I am not telling anyone not to buy demodex products at

all.  If you want to try it go ahead.  I am CLEARLY critiquing the

claims that are made on the website --  these claims are wrong.

This is not "going too far" at all.  If its a fish, call it a fish.

The Internet advertising world has now taken over what people know

about rosacea and on most search engines one of the first things

that every newbie sees is that demodex cause rosacea and that these

products cause a "near 100% cure".  So, they start off trying the

creams and lotions for 6 to 9 months and just cant understand why

they dont respond because this treatment cures all rosaceans.



In every demodex post I have used the term perspective.  Keep it in

perspective.  A small percentage will be helped and the rest will

not.  So, I would hate to see our board read like this:



Z-cream post

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream

Re: Z-Cream





Regards,



Geoffrey

______________________________



Dr. Geoffrey Nase

Ph.D. Neurovascular Physiologist

http://www.drnase.com

______________________________















>

> --- joy4ami <joy4ami@y...> wrote:

> > I for one have suffered permanent skin damage from

> > laser, BUT I do

> > not trash or put down anyone who DOES find positive

> > results in the

> > treatment of their rosacea thru the use of laser

> > treatments.

> >

> > I don't use demodex either, BUT again, that is my

> > choice. Dr. Nase,

> > your comments are often welcome, but sometimes you

> > go to far, allow

> > US to decide what is best for the treatment of OUR

> > skin. Knowledge

> > is power. Allow us the opportunity to discover

> > knowledge.

> >

> > Ami

Without taking any sides here, the role (or non-role) of demodex

mites in rosacea symptoms and Demodex Solutions is something that

will continue to come up on this forum. Newbies will always ask

questions and any new study connecting demodex mites to rosacea or

rosacea-like symptoms will reignite the topic, just like with any

other treatmet (e.g., IPL, Accutane). In particular, since some

people DO experience improvement after eliminating demodex mites or

after using Demodex Solutions products, it will continue to be a

source of curiosity. So, I know it's frustrating to keep going over

this, particularly if you think the role of demodex in rosacea is

exaggerated, but it's not so much because people are doubting the

claims made as people are either gathering rosacea info for the

first time (i.e., they are newbies) or are trying to fit some new

piece of info into their current conceptualization of this disorder.



Also, given that we've well established that everyone is unique and

everyone responds differently to treatments, I think it is best, on

any topic, that the posts try to be along one of these lines: 1)

Seeking information/have question, 2) Posting about what has or has

not worked for you personally (or stating that such and such seems

to have worked for lots of board members), and 3) Posting about new

studies. While it's justified to say that Demodex Solutions or any

other company is making claims beyond the scope of its product,

there also needs to be some recognition that the products have

worked for some people (even if what about it specifically is

working for the person is unknown).



Personally, I'm sick of all the IPL questions just because they

don't apply to me currently, but obviously these are important to

those asking them. I either just don't read them or skim them.



-Kat

Hello Kat,



....I really like what you wrote below.  It is constructive,

intuitive and makes sense.  I think I can add some more points that

I think are germane to these various subjects that you brought up.





<katwalker@j...> wrote:

> Without taking any sides here, the role (or non-role) of demodex

> mites in rosacea symptoms and Demodex Solutions is something that

> will continue to come up on this forum.









....Absolutely.  It will come up on any rosacea forum or support

group.  I have never tried to stop them from coming up, but to put

some type of framework on it because it can easily take over a board

and bury rosacea.  Sincerely, I would really like Demodex Solutions

to perform clinical studies in which they use the base cream and the

cream with the anti-demodex ingredients.  I say this because the

base cream is probably as effective just by itself -- sublimed

sulfur and zinc oxide have been used for four decades to treat

rosacea.  So, this confuses people.  Rosacea needs less confusion

and more focus.  Otherwise we are stuck in quicksand for another

decade.  From what I have read on their site and brief notes from

studies, there is no way that they can tell whether the benefits are

from getting rid of the mites or just the sulfur/zinc oxide actions

on the skin.







Newbies will always ask questions and any new study connecting

demodex mites to rosacea or rosacea-like symptoms will reignite the

topic, just like with any other treatmet (e.g., IPL, Accutane). In

particular, since some people DO experience improvement after

eliminating demodex mites or after using Demodex Solutions products,

it will continue to be a source of curiosity.









....I agree.  If it works and it does not increase flushing then

please use the product.  I have been very open with that statement.

But, do not associate that with demodex removal.  First, because one

cannot due to the lack of solid studies.  Second, because that takes

research dollars away from studying the heart of rosacea.  It has

already removed approximately $77,000 from the NRS studies.  Boy,

this money could have been spent getting down to the molecular

level.  The genetic disorder.  The real beast.  Not a critter that

may cause secondary symptoms in some people because of the increased

facial heat.  Go after the primary causes....go after the heat

production dysfunction and there lies the answer.









So, I know it's frustrating to keep going over this, particularly if

you think the role of demodex in rosacea is exaggerated, but it's

not so much because people are doubting the claims made as people

are either gathering rosacea info for the first time (i.e., they are

newbies) or are trying to fit some new piece of info into their

current conceptualization of this disorder.

>

> Also, given that we've well established that everyone is unique

and everyone responds differently to treatments, I think it is best,

on any topic, that the posts try to be along one of these lines: 1)

> Seeking information/have question, 2) Posting about what has or

has

> not worked for you personally (or stating that such and such seems

> to have worked for lots of board members),







....I agree with you up to this point.  There is no way for me to

explain this easily, so I will try to be constructive and

considerate.  I think the worst thing this group can do is list

every single thing that has worked for them or heard works for

others.  That sounds like a dictatorship.....right?  No, it goes

straight to the heart of the matter, utter confusion.  We had people

posting that topical hydrogen peroxide helped their rosacea,

glycolic acid peels, apple vinegar, DMSO + Fluconazole, CO2

dermabrasion, 20% salicylic acid treatments, sun tanning, nose

strips, suction pore removers, malic acid treatments, citric acid

topicals, benzoyl peroxide, cryosurgery (freezing of the skin),

topical nizoral shampoo on the face, cauterizing blood vessels with

an old fashion needle cauterizer that is more apt to cause scarring

then remove vessels, weekly pore removal with home made instruments,

OTC mite cream and crabs lotion, herpes cream, and the list goes on

and on.  None of the above are acceptable treatments by the current

medical standards primarily for safety and avoidance of skin

damage.  So, somehow (and I dont have the answer), we must allow

subjects to get posted and then constructively put a yield sign up

or allow for short debates.  I try to do everything constructively

and I do put up yield signs.



Andrew had an excellent Rosacea Knowledge Support Board going for

quite a while until I stepped aside due to one member and there was

then a lack of focus and forward movement.  Everyone was throwing

out everything in the kitchen sink including toothpaste on their

face and it slowly came to a halt several months after focus was

gone and common sense left the building.













and 3) Posting about new studies. While it's justified to say that

Demodex Solutions or any other company is making claims beyond the

scope of its product,





....If one were to make these same claims in the science or medical

field, they would be literally thrown out the door.  None of their

material would ever get published.  When you start talking about

near cure rates, common sense has to step in.  Many of the people

that post within the first week that this cream is helping are

emailing me in two months to inquire why it is now hurting their

faces or not helping any more.........there are a lot of premature

reports.  With rosacea and its tendency to wax and wane independent

of intervention, one should really wait at least 6 to 9 months to

report on a product.  Delayed irritant dermatitis, rosacea

dermatitis and reactive flushing can start to take place after 60 to

90 days of a wonderful treatment because the product has been

peeling away their skin and now they are supersensitive to all

environmental triggers.





++++++++++++ You know, I feel a little bit responsible for those

three young ladies who have corneal scarring from Dave Flemmings

DMSO + Fluconazole cure.  I was just diagnosed with cancer at the

time and did not have the energy to debate with Dave and his 17 page

demeaning retorts.  I should have stepped in sooner.  I should have

put up a strong yield sign and just sat back and taken the shelling

by Dave.  But, I did nothing.  2 ladies have lost over 50% of their

vision and the other is undergoing surgery soon because the DMSO

burned right through her corneas.  Shouldn't someone raise their

hands and say "Hey wait a minute, lets think about this", or "Hey,

the first thing anyone sees on the search engines is a cure for acne

rosacea (wrong term by the way) by getting rid of demodex".  Rosacea

has lacked guidance by the medical community, has severely lacked

nonprofit organizations for 25 years, has no doctor forum for input,

and has been stamped a cute cosmetic disorder.  Where are we going?

What are we doing?  Is anybody doing anything?  Shouldn't someone be

the voice of reason?  Shouldn't someone publish in dermatology

articles and give them the same constructive criticism at his own

expense?







there also needs to be some recognition that the products have

worked for some people (even if what about it specifically is

working for the person is unknown).

>

> Personally, I'm sick of all the IPL questions just because they

> don't apply to me currently, but obviously these are important to

> those asking them. I either just don't read them or skim them.

>

> -Kat

Dr. Nase,

You are certainly passionate about how you feel this support group

should operate. It is admirable. However, I am afraid this board

will never be completely the way you would like it to be. As it has

been pointed out, there are always new people asking the same

questions, and people posting about products that have helped them,

even if you think the products or the way they are promoted are

discreditable. I don't know if there is any way to really control

the whole thing. I am afraid that it is just not completely crystal

clear what causes rosacea, and people respond to different products

and/or treatments in unpredictable ways. Therefore there will always

be a certain amount of confusion in discussions about rosacea,

despite your best efforts to control that.



If you really want a certain focus on the topic of rosacea, I don't

know if there is another way for you to get it than to start your

own board. I know you are very busy, but obviously this is something

you care about a lot. Just a thought.









--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "Dr. Geoffrey Nase, PhD"

<drnase1000@h...> wrote:

> Hello Kat,

>

> ....I really like what you wrote below.  It is constructive,

> intuitive and makes sense.  I think I can add some more points

that

> I think are germane to these various subjects that you brought up.

>

>

> <katwalker@j...> wrote:

> > Without taking any sides here, the role (or non-role) of demodex

> > mites in rosacea symptoms and Demodex Solutions is something

that

> > will continue to come up on this forum.

>

>

>

>

> ....Absolutely.  It will come up on any rosacea forum or support

> group.  I have never tried to stop them from coming up, but to put

> some type of framework on it because it can easily take over a

board

> and bury rosacea.  Sincerely, I would really like Demodex

Solutions

> to perform clinical studies in which they use the base cream and

the

> cream with the anti-demodex ingredients.  I say this because the

> base cream is probably as effective just by itself -- sublimed

> sulfur and zinc oxide have been used for four decades to treat

> rosacea.  So, this confuses people.  Rosacea needs less confusion

> and more focus.  Otherwise we are stuck in quicksand for another

> decade.  From what I have read on their site and brief notes from

> studies, there is no way that they can tell whether the benefits

are

> from getting rid of the mites or just the sulfur/zinc oxide

actions

> on the skin.

>

>

>

> Newbies will always ask questions and any new study connecting

> demodex mites to rosacea or rosacea-like symptoms will reignite

the

> topic, just like with any other treatmet (e.g., IPL, Accutane). In

> particular, since some people DO experience improvement after

> eliminating demodex mites or after using Demodex Solutions

products,

> it will continue to be a source of curiosity.

>

>

>

>

> ....I agree.  If it works and it does not increase flushing then

> please use the product.  I have been very open with that

statement.

> But, do not associate that with demodex removal.  First, because

one

> cannot due to the lack of solid studies.  Second, because that

takes

> research dollars away from studying the heart of rosacea.  It has

> already removed approximately $77,000 from the NRS studies.  Boy,

> this money could have been spent getting down to the molecular

> level.  The genetic disorder.  The real beast.  Not a critter that

> may cause secondary symptoms in some people because of the

increased

> facial heat.  Go after the primary causes....go after the heat

> production dysfunction and there lies the answer.

>

>

>

>

> So, I know it's frustrating to keep going over this, particularly

if

> you think the role of demodex in rosacea is exaggerated, but it's

> not so much because people are doubting the claims made as people

> are either gathering rosacea info for the first time (i.e., they

are

> newbies) or are trying to fit some new piece of info into their

> current conceptualization of this disorder.

> >

> > Also, given that we've well established that everyone is unique

> and everyone responds differently to treatments, I think it is

best,

> on any topic, that the posts try to be along one of these lines:

1)

> > Seeking information/have question, 2) Posting about what has or

> has

> > not worked for you personally (or stating that such and such

seems

> > to have worked for lots of board members),

>

>

>

> ....I agree with you up to this point.  There is no way for me to

> explain this easily, so I will try to be constructive and

> considerate.  I think the worst thing this group can do is list

> every single thing that has worked for them or heard works for

> others.  That sounds like a dictatorship.....right?  No, it goes

> straight to the heart of the matter, utter confusion.  We had

people

> posting that topical hydrogen peroxide helped their rosacea,

> glycolic acid peels, apple vinegar, DMSO + Fluconazole, CO2

> dermabrasion, 20% salicylic acid treatments, sun tanning, nose

> strips, suction pore removers, malic acid treatments, citric acid

> topicals, benzoyl peroxide, cryosurgery (freezing of the skin),

> topical nizoral shampoo on the face, cauterizing blood vessels

with

> an old fashion needle cauterizer that is more apt to cause

scarring

> then remove vessels, weekly pore removal with home made

instruments,

> OTC mite cream and crabs lotion, herpes cream, and the list goes

on

> and on.  None of the above are acceptable treatments by the

current

> medical standards primarily for safety and avoidance of skin

> damage.  So, somehow (and I dont have the answer), we must allow

> subjects to get posted and then constructively put a yield sign up

> or allow for short debates.  I try to do everything constructively

> and I do put up yield signs.

>

> Andrew had an excellent Rosacea Knowledge Support Board going for

> quite a while until I stepped aside due to one member and there

was

> then a lack of focus and forward movement.  Everyone was throwing

> out everything in the kitchen sink including toothpaste on their

> face and it slowly came to a halt several months after focus was

> gone and common sense left the building.

>

>

>

>

>

>

> and 3) Posting about new studies. While it's justified to say that

> Demodex Solutions or any other company is making claims beyond the

> scope of its product,

>

>

> ....If one were to make these same claims in the science or

medical

> field, they would be literally thrown out the door.  None of their

> material would ever get published.  When you start talking about

> near cure rates, common sense has to step in.  Many of the people

> that post within the first week that this cream is helping are

> emailing me in two months to inquire why it is now hurting their

> faces or not helping any more.........there are a lot of premature

> reports.  With rosacea and its tendency to wax and wane

independent

> of intervention, one should really wait at least 6 to 9 months to

> report on a product.  Delayed irritant dermatitis, rosacea

> dermatitis and reactive flushing can start to take place after 60

to

> 90 days of a wonderful treatment because the product has been

> peeling away their skin and now they are supersensitive to all

> environmental triggers.

>

>

> ++++++++++++ You know, I feel a little bit responsible for those

> three young ladies who have corneal scarring from Dave Flemmings

> DMSO + Fluconazole cure.  I was just diagnosed with cancer at the

> time and did not have the energy to debate with Dave and his 17

page

> demeaning retorts.  I should have stepped in sooner.  I should

have

> put up a strong yield sign and just sat back and taken the

shelling

> by Dave.  But, I did nothing.  2 ladies have lost over 50% of

their

> vision and the other is undergoing surgery soon because the DMSO

> burned right through her corneas.  Shouldn't someone raise their

> hands and say "Hey wait a minute, lets think about this", or "Hey,

> the first thing anyone sees on the search engines is a cure for

acne

> rosacea (wrong term by the way) by getting rid of demodex".

Rosacea

> has lacked guidance by the medical community, has severely lacked

> nonprofit organizations for 25 years, has no doctor forum for

input,

> and has been stamped a cute cosmetic disorder.  Where are we

going?

> What are we doing?  Is anybody doing anything?  Shouldn't someone

be

> the voice of reason?  Shouldn't someone publish in dermatology

> articles and give them the same constructive criticism at his own

> expense?

>

>

>

> there also needs to be some recognition that the products have

> worked for some people (even if what about it specifically is

> working for the person is unknown).

> >

> > Personally, I'm sick of all the IPL questions just because they

> > don't apply to me currently, but obviously these are important

to

> > those asking them. I either just don't read them or skim them.

> >

> > -Kat

Deal PaulandSilus,





Your name appears to be new in the group and perhaps this explains your

post.  This group has evolved through discussion, differing opinion and

dissemination of knowledge. This group is the way many people want it to be.

Having many different opinions and theories is what makes it dynamic,

versatile and creative. We are extremely fortuitous in have someone of Dr

Nase's expertise and knowledge contribute to this group.   Any comments made

by Dr Nase are thought through and he will often use empirical evidence and

anecdotal evidence to back his points up.  Furthermore, Dr Nase is able to

offer sound clinical advice and will quickly highlight a post recommending a

product which maybe harmful or misleading in the Rosacea area.  Without

someone like this, who is truly on our side, I can't help but feel that this

group could be the target of unscrupulous marketing, by companies or fly by

nights trying to make a quick buck.



Upon reading the post by Dr Nase you draw upon for your comments, I see an

open and informative at times critical discussion of the points made.  This

type of dialogue is essential if we are to progress the cause of rosaceans.

In the same light, spirit of debate and dynamism, I welcome your post.



However, I would ask that you consider your future responses and

suggestions, giving some credit and respect to the fact that Dr Nase is most

probably the foremost source of expertise available in the Rosacea field,

and that he continues to be there for us, over and above the call of duty.



Finally, I am certain any poll taken of this group would highlight 99.999%

gratitude and support for Dr Nase's previous and future posts.



So lets hope he doesn't start up his own board...but knowing how may hours

Dr Nase seems to squeeze out of a day it wouldn't surprise me!





Sincerely,







Paul Smith



PS



As I am writing this the thought just crossed my mind, "where would I be had

Dr Nase not undertaken all his work and research", the answer is I would

never have stumbled on his site, or bought his book.  Consequently, I would

most likely be continuing to waste money, buying ineffective products from

websites that made unrealistic claims about their products, as I did for

many years!!  So giving Rosacea Research a much needed kick up the ass...

THANK YOU DR NASE!!

























-----Original Message-----

From: rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com

[mailto:rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of paulandsilus

Sent: 12 May 2005 15:05

To: rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [rosacea] Dr. Nase rosacea support



Dr. Nase,

You are certainly passionate about how you feel this support group

should operate. It is admirable. However, I am afraid this board

will never be completely the way you would like it to be. As it has

been pointed out, there are always new people asking the same

questions, and people posting about products that have helped them,

even if you think the products or the way they are promoted are

discreditable. I don't know if there is any way to really control

the whole thing. I am afraid that it is just not completely crystal

clear what causes rosacea, and people respond to different products

and/or treatments in unpredictable ways. Therefore there will always

be a certain amount of confusion in discussions about rosacea,

despite your best efforts to control that.



If you really want a certain focus on the topic of rosacea, I don't

know if there is another way for you to get it than to start your

own board. I know you are very busy, but obviously this is something

you care about a lot. Just a thought.









--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "Dr. Geoffrey Nase, PhD"

<drnase1000@h...> wrote:

> Hello Kat,

>

> ....I really like what you wrote below.  It is constructive,

> intuitive and makes sense.  I think I can add some more points

that

> I think are germane to these various subjects that you brought up.

>

>

> <katwalker@j...> wrote:

> > Without taking any sides here, the role (or non-role) of demodex

> > mites in rosacea symptoms and Demodex Solutions is something

that

> > will continue to come up on this forum.

>

>

>

>

> ....Absolutely.  It will come up on any rosacea forum or support

> group.  I have never tried to stop them from coming up, but to put

> some type of framework on it because it can easily take over a

board

> and bury rosacea.  Sincerely, I would really like Demodex

Solutions

> to perform clinical studies in which they use the base cream and

the

> cream with the anti-demodex ingredients.  I say this because the

> base cream is probably as effective just by itself -- sublimed

> sulfur and zinc oxide have been used for four decades to treat

> rosacea.  So, this confuses people.  Rosacea needs less confusion

> and more focus.  Otherwise we are stuck in quicksand for another

> decade.  From what I have read on their site and brief notes from

> studies, there is no way that they can tell whether the benefits

are

> from getting rid of the mites or just the sulfur/zinc oxide

actions

> on the skin.

>

>

>

> Newbies will always ask questions and any new study connecting

> demodex mites to rosacea or rosacea-like symptoms will reignite

the

> topic, just like with any other treatmet (e.g., IPL, Accutane). In

> particular, since some people DO experience improvement after

> eliminating demodex mites or after using Demodex Solutions

products,

> it will continue to be a source of curiosity.

>

>

>

>

> ....I agree.  If it works and it does not increase flushing then

> please use the product.  I have been very open with that

statement.

> But, do not associate that with demodex removal.  First, because

one

> cannot due to the lack of solid studies.  Second, because that

takes

> research dollars away from studying the heart of rosacea.  It has

> already removed approximately $77,000 from the NRS studies.  Boy,

> this money could have been spent getting down to the molecular

> level.  The genetic disorder.  The real beast.  Not a critter that

> may cause secondary symptoms in some people because of the

increased

> facial heat.  Go after the primary causes....go after the heat

> production dysfunction and there lies the answer.

>

>

>

>

> So, I know it's frustrating to keep going over this, particularly

if

> you think the role of demodex in rosacea is exaggerated, but it's

> not so much because people are doubting the claims made as people

> are either gathering rosacea info for the first time (i.e., they

are

> newbies) or are trying to fit some new piece of info into their

> current conceptualization of this disorder.

> >

> > Also, given that we've well established that everyone is unique

> and everyone responds differently to treatments, I think it is

best,

> on any topic, that the posts try to be along one of these lines:

1)

> > Seeking information/have question, 2) Posting about what has or

> has

> > not worked for you personally (or stating that such and such

seems

> > to have worked for lots of board members),

>

>

>

> ....I agree with you up to this point.  There is no way for me to

> explain this easily, so I will try to be constructive and

> considerate.  I think the worst thing this group can do is list

> every single thing that has worked for them or heard works for

> others.  That sounds like a dictatorship.....right?  No, it goes

> straight to the heart of the matter, utter confusion.  We had

people

> posting that topical hydrogen peroxide helped their rosacea,

> glycolic acid peels, apple vinegar, DMSO + Fluconazole, CO2

> dermabrasion, 20% salicylic acid treatments, sun tanning, nose

> strips, suction pore removers, malic acid treatments, citric acid

> topicals, benzoyl peroxide, cryosurgery (freezing of the skin),

> topical nizoral shampoo on the face, cauterizing blood vessels

with

> an old fashion needle cauterizer that is more apt to cause

scarring

> then remove vessels, weekly pore removal with home made

instruments,

> OTC mite cream and crabs lotion, herpes cream, and the list goes

on

> and on.  None of the above are acceptable treatments by the

current

> medical standards primarily for safety and avoidance of skin

> damage.  So, somehow (and I dont have the answer), we must allow

> subjects to get posted and then constructively put a yield sign up

> or allow for short debates.  I try to do everything constructively

> and I do put up yield signs.

>

> Andrew had an excellent Rosacea Knowledge Support Board going for

> quite a while until I stepped aside due to one member and there

was

> then a lack of focus and forward movement.  Everyone was throwing

> out everything in the kitchen sink including toothpaste on their

> face and it slowly came to a halt several months after focus was

> gone and common sense left the building.

>

>

>

>

>

>

> and 3) Posting about new studies. While it's justified to say that

> Demodex Solutions or any other company is making claims beyond the

> scope of its product,

>

>

> ....If one were to make these same claims in the science or

medical

> field, they would be literally thrown out the door.  None of their

> material would ever get published.  When you start talking about

> near cure rates, common sense has to step in.  Many of the people

> that post within the first week that this cream is helping are

> emailing me in two months to inquire why it is now hurting their

> faces or not helping any more.........there are a lot of premature

> reports.  With rosacea and its tendency to wax and wane

independent

> of intervention, one should really wait at least 6 to 9 months to

> report on a product.  Delayed irritant dermatitis, rosacea

> dermatitis and reactive flushing can start to take place after 60

to

> 90 days of a wonderful treatment because the product has been

> peeling away their skin and now they are supersensitive to all

> environmental triggers.

>

>

> ++++++++++++ You know, I feel a little bit responsible for those

> three young ladies who have corneal scarring from Dave Flemmings

> DMSO + Fluconazole cure.  I was just diagnosed with cancer at the

> time and did not have the energy to debate with Dave and his 17

page

> demeaning retorts.  I should have stepped in sooner.  I should

have

> put up a strong yield sign and just sat back and taken the

shelling

> by Dave.  But, I did nothing.  2 ladies have lost over 50% of

their

> vision and the other is undergoing surgery soon because the DMSO

> burned right through her corneas.  Shouldn't someone raise their

> hands and say "Hey wait a minute, lets think about this", or "Hey,

> the first thing anyone sees on the search engines is a cure for

acne

> rosacea (wrong term by the way) by getting rid of demodex".

Rosacea

> has lacked guidance by the medical community, has severely lacked

> nonprofit organizations for 25 years, has no doctor forum for

input,

> and has been stamped a cute cosmetic disorder.  Where are we

going?

> What are we doing?  Is anybody doing anything?  Shouldn't someone

be

> the voice of reason?  Shouldn't someone publish in dermatology

> articles and give them the same constructive criticism at his own

> expense?

>

>

>

> there also needs to be some recognition that the products have

> worked for some people (even if what about it specifically is

> working for the person is unknown).

> >

> > Personally, I'm sick of all the IPL questions just because they

> > don't apply to me currently, but obviously these are important

to

> > those asking them. I either just don't read them or skim them.

> >

> > -Kat













--

Please read the list highlights and FAQ before posting to the whole group:

  http://rosacea.ii.net



Want to Change the Face of Rosacea ? support the Rosacea Research

Foundation:

  ** http://www.rosacea-research.org **

Yahoo! Groups Links

Amen, Paul Smith.







>Deal PaulandSilus,

>

>

>Your name appears to be new in the group and perhaps this explains your

>post.  This group has evolved through discussion, differing opinion and

>dissemination of knowledge. This group is the way many people want it to be.

>Having many different opinions and theories is what makes it dynamic,

>versatile and creative. We are extremely fortuitous in have someone of Dr

>Nase's expertise and knowledge contribute to this group.   Any comments made

>by Dr Nase are thought through and he will often use empirical evidence and

>anecdotal evidence to back his points up.  Furthermore, Dr Nase is able to

>offer sound clinical advice and will quickly highlight a post recommending a

>product which maybe harmful or misleading in the Rosacea area.  Without

>someone like this, who is truly on our side, I can't help but feel that this

>group could be the target of unscrupulous marketing, by companies or fly by

>nights trying to make a quick buck.

>

>Upon reading the post by Dr Nase you draw upon for your comments, I see an

>open and informative at times critical discussion of the points made.  This

>type of dialogue is essential if we are to progress the cause of rosaceans.

>In the same light, spirit of debate and dynamism, I welcome your post.

>

>However, I would ask that you consider your future responses and

>suggestions, giving some credit and respect to the fact that Dr Nase is most

>probably the foremost source of expertise available in the Rosacea field,

>and that he continues to be there for us, over and above the call of duty.

>

>Finally, I am certain any poll taken of this group would highlight 99.999%

>gratitude and support for Dr Nase's previous and future posts.

>

>So lets hope he doesn't start up his own board...but knowing how may hours

>Dr Nase seems to squeeze out of a day it wouldn't surprise me!

>

>

>Sincerely,

>

>

>

>Paul Smith

>

>PS

>

>As I am writing this the thought just crossed my mind, "where would I be had

>Dr Nase not undertaken all his work and research", the answer is I would

>never have stumbled on his site, or bought his book.  Consequently, I would

>most likely be continuing to waste money, buying ineffective products from

>websites that made unrealistic claims about their products, as I did for

>many years!!  So giving Rosacea Research a much needed kick up the ass...

>THANK YOU DR NASE!!

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>-----Original Message-----

>From: rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com

>[mailto:rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of paulandsilus

>Sent: 12 May 2005 15:05

>To: rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com

>Subject: [rosacea] Dr. Nase rosacea support

>

>Dr. Nase,

>You are certainly passionate about how you feel this support group

>should operate. It is admirable. However, I am afraid this board

>will never be completely the way you would like it to be. As it has

>been pointed out, there are always new people asking the same

>questions, and people posting about products that have helped them,

>even if you think the products or the way they are promoted are

>discreditable. I don't know if there is any way to really control

>the whole thing. I am afraid that it is just not completely crystal

>clear what causes rosacea, and people respond to different products

>and/or treatments in unpredictable ways. Therefore there will always

>be a certain amount of confusion in discussions about rosacea,

>despite your best efforts to control that.

>

>If you really want a certain focus on the topic of rosacea, I don't

>know if there is another way for you to get it than to start your

>own board. I know you are very busy, but obviously this is something

>you care about a lot. Just a thought.

>

>

>

Well, I suppose I should admit that I have probably had more

technical disgreements with Geoffrey than most on this Board, but I

would never advocate for a moment that anyone, least of all

Geoffrey, leave merely because of a difference of opinion or

perceived motives.  Rosacea is a complex disease, and discussions

about it are bound to be multivariate.  It should be no other way.



FWIW, I have seen many demodex threads come and go here, and while I

agree they are a bit distracting, there is always something new to

be learned.  And then was sea salt (but only from the Dead Sea ...),

diets that could only appeal to a caveman, and so on.  Bizarre, but

always entertaining ...



Rick



--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "paulandsilus"

<paulandsilus@y...> wrote:

> Dr. Nase,

> You are certainly passionate about how you feel this support group

> should operate. It is admirable. However, I am afraid this board

> will never be completely the way you would like it to be. As it

has

> been pointed out, there are always new people asking the same

> questions, and people posting about products that have helped

them,

> even if you think the products or the way they are promoted are

> discreditable. I don't know if there is any way to really control

> the whole thing. I am afraid that it is just not completely

crystal

> clear what causes rosacea, and people respond to different

products

> and/or treatments in unpredictable ways. Therefore there will

always

> be a certain amount of confusion in discussions about rosacea,

> despite your best efforts to control that.

>

> If you really want a certain focus on the topic of rosacea, I

don't

> know if there is another way for you to get it than to start your

> own board. I know you are very busy, but obviously this is

something

> you care about a lot. Just a thought.

>

>

>

>

> --- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "Dr. Geoffrey Nase, PhD"

> <drnase1000@h...> wrote:

> > Hello Kat,

> >

> > ....I really like what you wrote below.  It is constructive,

> > intuitive and makes sense.  I think I can add some more points

> that

> > I think are germane to these various subjects that you brought

up.

> >

> >

> > <katwalker@j...> wrote:

> > > Without taking any sides here, the role (or non-role) of

demodex

> > > mites in rosacea symptoms and Demodex Solutions is something

> that

> > > will continue to come up on this forum.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ....Absolutely.  It will come up on any rosacea forum or support

> > group.  I have never tried to stop them from coming up, but to

put

> > some type of framework on it because it can easily take over a

> board

> > and bury rosacea.  Sincerely, I would really like Demodex

> Solutions

> > to perform clinical studies in which they use the base cream and

> the

> > cream with the anti-demodex ingredients.  I say this because the

> > base cream is probably as effective just by itself -- sublimed

> > sulfur and zinc oxide have been used for four decades to treat

> > rosacea.  So, this confuses people.  Rosacea needs less

confusion

> > and more focus.  Otherwise we are stuck in quicksand for another

> > decade.  From what I have read on their site and brief notes

from

> > studies, there is no way that they can tell whether the benefits

> are

> > from getting rid of the mites or just the sulfur/zinc oxide

> actions

> > on the skin.

> >

> >

> >

> > Newbies will always ask questions and any new study connecting

> > demodex mites to rosacea or rosacea-like symptoms will reignite

> the

> > topic, just like with any other treatmet (e.g., IPL, Accutane).

In

> > particular, since some people DO experience improvement after

> > eliminating demodex mites or after using Demodex Solutions

> products,

> > it will continue to be a source of curiosity.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ....I agree.  If it works and it does not increase flushing then

> > please use the product.  I have been very open with that

> statement.

> > But, do not associate that with demodex removal.  First, because

> one

> > cannot due to the lack of solid studies.  Second, because that

> takes

> > research dollars away from studying the heart of rosacea.  It

has

> > already removed approximately $77,000 from the NRS studies.

Boy,

> > this money could have been spent getting down to the molecular

> > level.  The genetic disorder.  The real beast.  Not a critter

that

> > may cause secondary symptoms in some people because of the

> increased

> > facial heat.  Go after the primary causes....go after the heat

> > production dysfunction and there lies the answer.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > So, I know it's frustrating to keep going over this,

particularly

> if

> > you think the role of demodex in rosacea is exaggerated, but

it's

> > not so much because people are doubting the claims made as

people

> > are either gathering rosacea info for the first time (i.e., they

> are

> > newbies) or are trying to fit some new piece of info into their

> > current conceptualization of this disorder.

> > >

> > > Also, given that we've well established that everyone is

unique

> > and everyone responds differently to treatments, I think it is

> best,

> > on any topic, that the posts try to be along one of these lines:

> 1)

> > > Seeking information/have question, 2) Posting about what has

or

> > has

> > > not worked for you personally (or stating that such and such

> seems

> > > to have worked for lots of board members),

> >

> >

> >

> > ....I agree with you up to this point.  There is no way for me

to

> > explain this easily, so I will try to be constructive and

> > considerate.  I think the worst thing this group can do is list

> > every single thing that has worked for them or heard works for

> > others.  That sounds like a dictatorship.....right?  No, it goes

> > straight to the heart of the matter, utter confusion.  We had

> people

> > posting that topical hydrogen peroxide helped their rosacea,

> > glycolic acid peels, apple vinegar, DMSO + Fluconazole, CO2

> > dermabrasion, 20% salicylic acid treatments, sun tanning, nose

> > strips, suction pore removers, malic acid treatments, citric

acid

> > topicals, benzoyl peroxide, cryosurgery (freezing of the skin),

> > topical nizoral shampoo on the face, cauterizing blood vessels

> with

> > an old fashion needle cauterizer that is more apt to cause

> scarring

> > then remove vessels, weekly pore removal with home made

> instruments,

> > OTC mite cream and crabs lotion, herpes cream, and the list goes

> on

> > and on.  None of the above are acceptable treatments by the

> current

> > medical standards primarily for safety and avoidance of skin

> > damage.  So, somehow (and I dont have the answer), we must allow

> > subjects to get posted and then constructively put a yield sign

up

> > or allow for short debates.  I try to do everything

constructively

> > and I do put up yield signs.

> >

> > Andrew had an excellent Rosacea Knowledge Support Board going

for

> > quite a while until I stepped aside due to one member and there

> was

> > then a lack of focus and forward movement.  Everyone was

throwing

> > out everything in the kitchen sink including toothpaste on their

> > face and it slowly came to a halt several months after focus was

> > gone and common sense left the building.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > and 3) Posting about new studies. While it's justified to say

that

> > Demodex Solutions or any other company is making claims beyond

the

> > scope of its product,

> >

> >

> > ....If one were to make these same claims in the science or

> medical

> > field, they would be literally thrown out the door.  None of

their

> > material would ever get published.  When you start talking about

> > near cure rates, common sense has to step in.  Many of the

people

> > that post within the first week that this cream is helping are

> > emailing me in two months to inquire why it is now hurting their

> > faces or not helping any more.........there are a lot of

premature

> > reports.  With rosacea and its tendency to wax and wane

> independent

> > of intervention, one should really wait at least 6 to 9 months

to

> > report on a product.  Delayed irritant dermatitis, rosacea

> > dermatitis and reactive flushing can start to take place after

60

> to

> > 90 days of a wonderful treatment because the product has been

> > peeling away their skin and now they are supersensitive to all

> > environmental triggers.

> >

> >

> > ++++++++++++ You know, I feel a little bit responsible for those

> > three young ladies who have corneal scarring from Dave Flemmings

> > DMSO + Fluconazole cure.  I was just diagnosed with cancer at

the

> > time and did not have the energy to debate with Dave and his 17

> page

> > demeaning retorts.  I should have stepped in sooner.  I should

> have

> > put up a strong yield sign and just sat back and taken the

> shelling

> > by Dave.  But, I did nothing.  2 ladies have lost over 50% of

> their

> > vision and the other is undergoing surgery soon because the DMSO

> > burned right through her corneas.  Shouldn't someone raise their

> > hands and say "Hey wait a minute, lets think about this",

or "Hey,

> > the first thing anyone sees on the search engines is a cure for

> acne

> > rosacea (wrong term by the way) by getting rid of demodex".

> Rosacea

> > has lacked guidance by the medical community, has severely

lacked

> > nonprofit organizations for 25 years, has no doctor forum for

> input,

> > and has been stamped a cute cosmetic disorder.  Where are we

> going?

> > What are we doing?  Is anybody doing anything?  Shouldn't

someone

> be

> > the voice of reason?  Shouldn't someone publish in dermatology

> > articles and give them the same constructive criticism at his

own

> > expense?

> >

> >

> >

> > there also needs to be some recognition that the products have

> > worked for some people (even if what about it specifically is

> > working for the person is unknown).

> > >

> > > Personally, I'm sick of all the IPL questions just because

they

> > > don't apply to me currently, but obviously these are important

> to

> > > those asking them. I either just don't read them or skim them.

> > >

> > > -Kat

> If anything, a prescription of Stromectol appears to

> be one of the safest and most effective medications

> for ruling out mite involvement.



Not really.  See the abstract below.



Logan





J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003 Nov;49(5 Suppl):S272-4.



Demodex abscesses: clinical and therapeutic challenges.



Schaller M, Sander CA, Plewig G.



Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University of Munich,

Germany. Martin.Schaller@...



A 53-year-old man had a 6-week history of confluent erythematous

papules, pustules, and abscesses of the face initially limited to the

right nasolabial fold. Histologic investigation revealed a

perifollicular infiltrate with lymphocytes, histiocytes, and many

Demodex folliculorum mites. A large number of mites were seen in skin

scrapings. The skin manifestations progressed and persisted for the

following 5 years and were unresponsive to numerous antiparasitic

treatments, including repeated oral administration of ivermectin and

external application of lindane, permethrin, and benzoyl benzoate.

Therapy with oral administration of 250 mg metronidazole 3 times a

day for 2 weeks resulted in rapid and lasting recovery. Demodex

folliculitis remains a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge.

Antiparasitic therapies used against lice or scabies may fail in

control of D folliculorum mites. In the presence of clinical and

microscopic findings typical of Demodex folliculitis or abscesses,

treatment failure with acaricidal agents does not exclude the

diagnosis. Oral metronidazole seems to work in the management of this

chronic mite infestation.

Thanks for sharing the abstract, Logan. Unfortunately, I was just

paraphrasing from a previous post by Dr. Nase... and I believe he was

pulling from a few abstracts that he was reviewing at the time.

(Original message:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rosacea/msg/a9fe36ae6e55469a) What

turned me on to the original post was the effectiveness of

Stromectol/Ivermectin, the large number of positive results reported,

and even more the saftey of it ("not one major side effect").



It's good to know that oral metronidazole is an option to use for this

as well. I think I may have even remembered low dosage Accutane as being

a theoretical helper with facial mite infestation (?).



But then again, I'm not much of an expert on these things... I'm merely

a starving physics student. :)



Ian



loganruns73 wrote:



>>If anything, a prescription of Stromectol appears to

>>be one of the safest and most effective medications

>>for ruling out mite involvement.

>>

>>

>

>Not really.  See the abstract below.

>

>Logan

>

>

>J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003 Nov;49(5 Suppl):S272-4.

>

>Demodex abscesses: clinical and therapeutic challenges.

>

>Schaller M, Sander CA, Plewig G.

>

>Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University of Munich,

>Germany. Martin.Schaller@...

>

>A 53-year-old man had a 6-week history of confluent erythematous

>papules, pustules, and abscesses of the face initially limited to the

>right nasolabial fold. Histologic investigation revealed a

>perifollicular infiltrate with lymphocytes, histiocytes, and many

>Demodex folliculorum mites. A large number of mites were seen in skin

>scrapings. The skin manifestations progressed and persisted for the

>following 5 years and were unresponsive to numerous antiparasitic

>treatments, including repeated oral administration of ivermectin and

>external application of lindane, permethrin, and benzoyl benzoate.

>Therapy with oral administration of 250 mg metronidazole 3 times a

>day for 2 weeks resulted in rapid and lasting recovery. Demodex

>folliculitis remains a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge.

>Antiparasitic therapies used against lice or scabies may fail in

>control of D folliculorum mites. In the presence of clinical and

>microscopic findings typical of Demodex folliculitis or abscesses,

>treatment failure with acaricidal agents does not exclude the

>diagnosis. Oral metronidazole seems to work in the management of this

>chronic mite infestation.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

Hello Logan and Ian,



Unfortunately, in the study Logan cited, they never recounted the

demodex (if my memory serves correct) and thus it was a general anti-

inflammatory action of oral metronidazole that helped clear the

folliculitis.  It was only one patient to so you must consider

that.  Oral metronidazole has rarely been shown to have an effect on

demodex.  It has several other actions that make it beneficial to

rosacea.  Below is one of many abstracts on the ineffectiveness of

oral metronidazole on demodex.  It also emphasizes that

demodicidosis is a distinct disorder from rosacea.  Oral stromectol

is by far the best medication to combat demodex as proven in over

120 cases in 9 recent papers.  I think there was full clearance in

95% of the patients studied.



Eur J Dermatol. 1998 Apr-May;8(3):191-2. Related Articles, Links





Unilateral demodicidosis.



A 45-year-old man presented with a unilateral, papulopustular,

rosacealike, chronic dermatitis which involved the left portion of

the forehead and the eyelids unilaterally. Many Demodex mites were

found in the follicles of the affected area. Topical crotamiton

cleared the lesions after an unsuccessful trial with oral

metronidazole. This observation provides further evidence that

demodicidosis is a condition distinct from common rosacea.



Regards,



Geoffrey

______________________________



Dr. Geoffrey Nase

Ph.D. Neurovascular Physiologist

http://www.drnase.com

______________________________









--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, ian <csciian@y...> wrote:

> Thanks for sharing the abstract, Logan. Unfortunately, I was just

> paraphrasing from a previous post by Dr. Nase... and I believe he

was

> pulling from a few abstracts that he was reviewing at the time.

> (Original message:

> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rosacea/msg/a9fe36ae6e55469a)

What

> turned me on to the original post was the effectiveness of

> Stromectol/Ivermectin, the large number of positive results

reported,

> and even more the saftey of it ("not one major side effect").

>

> It's good to know that oral metronidazole is an option to use for

this

> as well. I think I may have even remembered low dosage Accutane as

being

> a theoretical helper with facial mite infestation (?).

>

> But then again, I'm not much of an expert on these things... I'm

merely

> a starving physics student. :)

>

> Ian

>

> loganruns73 wrote:

>

> >>If anything, a prescription of Stromectol appears to

> >>be one of the safest and most effective medications

> >>for ruling out mite involvement.

> >>

> >>

> >

> >Not really.  See the abstract below.

> >

> >Logan

> >

> >

> >J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003 Nov;49(5 Suppl):S272-4.

> >

> >Demodex abscesses: clinical and therapeutic challenges.

> >

> >Schaller M, Sander CA, Plewig G.

> >

> >Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University of Munich,

> >Germany. Martin.Schaller@l...

> >

> >A 53-year-old man had a 6-week history of confluent erythematous

> >papules, pustules, and abscesses of the face initially limited to

the

> >right nasolabial fold. Histologic investigation revealed a

> >perifollicular infiltrate with lymphocytes, histiocytes, and many

> >Demodex folliculorum mites. A large number of mites were seen in

skin

> >scrapings. The skin manifestations progressed and persisted for

the

> >following 5 years and were unresponsive to numerous antiparasitic

> >treatments, including repeated oral administration of ivermectin

and

> >external application of lindane, permethrin, and benzoyl

benzoate.

> >Therapy with oral administration of 250 mg metronidazole 3 times

a

> >day for 2 weeks resulted in rapid and lasting recovery. Demodex

> >folliculitis remains a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge.

> >Antiparasitic therapies used against lice or scabies may fail in

> >control of D folliculorum mites. In the presence of clinical and

> >microscopic findings typical of Demodex folliculitis or

abscesses,

> >treatment failure with acaricidal agents does not exclude the

> >diagnosis. Oral metronidazole seems to work in the management of

this

> >chronic mite infestation.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

I for one , value Dr. Nase's input...... and after I read what he has to say, I

STILL make up my own mind about MY skin.  We are very lucky to have someone that

is straightforward with answers , which enables us to make informed decisions

about our OWN particular cases.



Where is yours and my dermatologists?  they sure aren't on here trying to help ,

are they?

I doubt mine has even read Dr Nase's book that I purchased for him.



Aimee



joy4ami <joy4ami@...> wrote:

I for one have suffered permanent skin damage from laser, BUT I do

not trash or put down anyone who DOES find positive results in the

treatment of their rosacea thru the use of laser treatments.



I don't use demodex either, BUT again, that is my choice. Dr. Nase,

your comments are often welcome, but sometimes you go to far, allow

US to decide what is best for the treatment of OUR skin. Knowledge

is power. Allow us the opportunity to discover knowledge.



Ami







--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "Rachael M"

wrote:

> Dr Nase,

>

> How has a few questions asking about demodex "taken over this

board"?

>

> Although I've chosen a non-prescription route to treatment, I'm

open to laser and medication treatments which ARE the majority of

topics on this board. I'm just not open (is that gullible?) to the

side effects of laser and medication. It's enough having rosacea.

It's quite a another thing to end up with very bad effects from

treatments.

>

> Rachael

>

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "drnase2000"

> To:

> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 1:02 AM

> Subject: [rosacea] Re: Demodex Solutions and Dr. Nase

>

>

> Now I

> > start to see demodex take over this board and that is

unacceptable.

> > Be open to treatments, but not gullible.













--

Please read the list highlights and FAQ before posting to the whole group:

http://rosacea.ii.net



Want to Change the Face of Rosacea ? support the Rosacea Research Foundation:

** http://www.rosacea-research.org **

Yahoo! Groups Links















__________________________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?

Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

http://mail.yahoo.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Knowledge is power. Allow us the opportunity to discover knowledge.



Ami





Hello Ami,



I agree that knowledge is power.  But you need the right knowledge and

information base to help guide you to the correct answer.  A little

bit of knowledge is actually detrimental sometimes and misinformation

is always hazardous.



I do discuss lasers a lot because they are soooooo complicated, but if

you really put my posts in perspective, I include dozens of treatments

other than lasers -- medical and OTC.



I have also posted several times with Brady on his board and encourage

people to use demodex solutions if it works for them -- no matter what

the mechanism.  My mind is open (has been opened surgically recently),

but focused.



Regards,



Geoffrey

______________________________



Dr. Geoffrey Nase

Ph.D. Neurovascular Physiologist

http://www.drnase.com

______________________________

Hi,



Demodex Solutions has helped a few on

this board, but their overall claims on that site are both outrageous

and erroneous. I think the point he is trying to drive home is that

we should not get caught up in this treatment course so much as to

loose sight of the bigger picture. It may help alleviate rosacea a

bit if demodex mites are present, but it certainly will not cure it.

He was not trying to alienate anyone on this board. Again I state, it

has helped some, but certainly not everyone. I guess you can say the

same about lasers or any types of medications as well. However,

medications at the right dosage and with a skilled laser

practitioner, the results can be amazing. Those treatment courses are

actually proven by many medical references whereas demodex solution's

claims are not.



Ray





--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "Rachael M" <rachael@n...>

wrote:

> Dr Nase,

>

> How has a few questions asking about demodex "taken over this

board"?

>

> Although I've chosen a non-prescription route to treatment, I'm

open to laser and medication treatments which ARE the majority of

topics on this board. I'm just not open (is that gullible?) to the

side effects of laser and medication. It's enough having rosacea.

It's quite a another thing to end up with very bad effects from

treatments.

>

> Rachael

>

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "drnase2000" <drnase1000@h...>

> To: <rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com>

> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 1:02 AM

> Subject: [rosacea] Re: Demodex Solutions and Dr. Nase

>

>

> Now I

> > start to see demodex take over this board and that is

unacceptable.

> > Be open to treatments, but not gullible.

Keep up the good work , Geoffrey !

Aimee



"Dr. Geoffrey Nase, PhD" <drnase1000@...> wrote:

Knowledge is power. Allow us the opportunity to discover knowledge.



Ami





Hello Ami,



I agree that knowledge is power. But you need the right knowledge and

information base to help guide you to the correct answer. A little

bit of knowledge is actually detrimental sometimes and misinformation

is always hazardous.



I do discuss lasers a lot because they are soooooo complicated, but if

you really put my posts in perspective, I include dozens of treatments

other than lasers -- medical and OTC.



I have also posted several times with Brady on his board and encourage

people to use demodex solutions if it works for them -- no matter what

the mechanism. My mind is open (has been opened surgically recently),

but focused.



Regards,



Geoffrey

______________________________



Dr. Geoffrey Nase

Ph.D. Neurovascular Physiologist

http://www.drnase.com

______________________________























--

Please read the list highlights and FAQ before posting to the whole group:

http://rosacea.ii.net



Want to Change the Face of Rosacea ? support the Rosacea Research Foundation:

** http://www.rosacea-research.org **

Yahoo! Groups Links

















---------------------------------

Yahoo! Mail

  Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]