Re: [FH] Monkey's Recheck/edema/nattokinase
- In a message dated 4/3/2005 10:33:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> I had asked the doctor about nattokinase and the other one that starts withThe tendency on the part of most medical practitioners is to err on the side
> "b." She had not heard of them, but agreed to research them. She has a
> place on-line where she posts to other professionals, and she said that two
> cardiologists have been consulting with her regarding Monkey. She said the
> response was basically "Never heard of that!" and "Why would you want to
> something that's not proven to work when you are already using something
> that is
> proven to work (Lovenox)?" pretty much echoing my vet's initial reaction. I
> sorta expecting this response from the vets, having read some of the
> information I've learned from this group on these enzymes.
of caution -- which is understandable and often the wisest course of action.
Medical science requires a great deal by way of proof before accepting new
treatments (except some tend to believe everything drug reps tell them).
However, in my opinion and I'm going to be brutally frank here, heart kitties are a
completely different story because heart kitties are terminal, they are almost
never going to have a "normal" lifespan and desperate situations often require
creative and novel approaches.
Also, I don't like the attitude of dismissing something out of hand, simply
because one has never heard of it before. Lovenox and natto have two
completely different actions. Lovenox works to prevent clotting, natto digests
existing clots, and they're not mutually exclusive -- you can use them both at the
same time. But, I can see where the attitude comes from, in light of the
tendency towards caution.
>My only "concern" would be if your vet dismissed natto or other
> So far, I'm going with our vet's recommendation not to use the nattokinase
> other enzymes. I certainly would like to hear what the group's thinking is
> on this. My thinking is that Monkey's blood flow and function are
> so I think the Lovenox is helping....if Monkey weren't getting better, I
> likely be having different ideas about trying lots of things. Also, I trust
> and love my vet, have worked with her for ten years.
non-allopathic treatments out of hand without a rational reason as to why she felt they
were not appropriate, and frankly just not knowing about something is not a
rational reason for ruling it out. Nor does just asking someone on an internet
board -- and that goes for this list too -- constitute "research". For instance,
I learned about natto and coenzyme q10 and their use in treating heart
kitties from this list, but I didn't immediately run out and start giving it to my
cat just because some people on an email support group said they worked. I
looked them up, found papers, read, considered the benefits versus risks and made
up my own mind.
If your vet did something like dig up papers on natto (they're out there)
read them and then said "I don't think natto has the fibrinolytic activity it's
claimed to have because of X, Y and Z" or even "there are no studies done in
cats and I can't recommend it because I have no idea if it's safe or not" then
THAT, imho, is a rational reason for deciding against a treatment.
I trust and love my vet too, but I've completely disagreed with him over how
to treat my little guy with no problems :) But, in the end, the most
important thing is that *you* are comfortable with Monkey's treatment and the people
who are treating her. Lovenox or other low molecular weight heparins are
perfectly fine treatments for cats with clot issues, certainly more likely to be
effective than aspirin and Monkey is improving which is *awesome* (go, Monkey!)
-- so it's not that Monkey's treatment is wildly inappropriate by any means at
all. If you're okay with it, that's what matters the most!
Just my $0.02 :)
"Until one has loved an animal, a part of one's soul remains unawakened."
- Anatole France
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]