![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 40. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by ace on June 19, 2006, at 6:50:56
Ok guys, this is my last diged effort before i will have to give my best mate Nardil some time off for a break....
I'm ramming right up to 150mg/175mg a day.....
I have seen an anecdoted of someone using as much as 250+ a day, but ofcourse I can't recommend
150mg will not pose any health problems, just incresed s/effects
wish me luck
and yes, i am still the Nardil champ!!!!!!!
Ace
Posted by Vader40 on June 19, 2006, at 7:40:35
In reply to Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, posted by ace on June 19, 2006, at 6:50:56
Hi Ace. I have sent you an e-mail about Nardil today. Please answer it when you can.
Greetings. :)
Posted by ed_uk on June 19, 2006, at 12:37:53
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, posted by Vader40 on June 19, 2006, at 7:40:35
Hi
Are you new to babble?
Ed
Posted by Phillipa on June 19, 2006, at 13:16:05
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! » Vader40, posted by ed_uk on June 19, 2006, at 12:37:53
Ace please be careful. Love Phillipa
Posted by Tomatheus on June 19, 2006, at 18:51:19
In reply to Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, posted by ace on June 19, 2006, at 6:50:56
Ace,
I know that it probably seems like I'm harassing you at this point, and I apologize if I'm coming across this way.
But ***PLEASE*** ... check your newer bottles of Australian Nardil (the ones that you've been prescribed since your relapse began) to see if they have silica gel inside of them.
All of the older lots of Australian Nardil had a small grayish cylindrical object inside of them. But the bottles with an expiration date of 12/2006 or later (and possibly also those set to "expire" on 10/2006 and/or 11/2006) do not.
The little grayish cylindrical objects inside the older bottles of the Australian Nardil contained silica gel, a substance that absorbs and holds moisture. When Nardil tablets are stored in excessively humid conditions (with the relative humidity being at least 80 percent), the hydrazine in the tablets undergoes rapid chemical degradation (Lovering et al., 1983).
It is my understanding that when aqueous hydrazine is oxidized by certain agents, the ammonium ion is one of the byproducts. The ammonium ion itself it not toxic, but it typically reacts with acidic solutions (such as stomach acids) to form ammonia, which of course is a toxic substance. But the above-described oxidization of hydrazine cannot occur unless the hydrazine is first exposed to either water or water vapor. By absorbing moisture from the air before it had a chance to get to the Nardil tablets, the silica gel in the older bottles of Australian Nardil kept the tablets "fresh."
As I mentioned in a previous Psycho-Babble message (http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060604/msgs/654250.html), I experienced a month-long remission (my first true remission since my depressive symptoms set in full-force six years ago) when I was taking a specially prepared version of the Australian Nardil. The response that I had was nothing like the euphoric hypomanic "highs" that I had during my "up" periods on Paxil. On the contrary, I felt *just right* in every way. Experiences that were supposed to make me feel good made me feel good, and experiences that were supposed to make me feel sad made me feel sad. Likewise, tasks that were supposed to be simple were simple, and tasks that were supposed to be difficult were difficult. I experienced little to no insomnia, and for the first time ever, I did not struggle to get out of bed after a full night of sleep. I would just wake up as most people do. For once, I finally felt like I knew what it was like to be fully human and to experience the range of feelings and emotions that most people experience. It was wonderful ... and I wasn't euphoric, just extremely satisfied and grateful to finally have the opportunity to live life as it was meant to be lived.
But a few days after I started taking the Australian Nardil from one of the newer bottles without silica gel, I started sweating profusely and developed severe urinary retention (a known effect of ammonia toxicity). A few days later, the antidepressant response that I had been receiving from my specially prepared version of the Australian Nardil was practically nonexistent. As long as I stayed on the Australian Nardil, I was not able to regain any kind of lasting antidepressant effect, let alone full remission.
I know that you weren't taking the specially prepared version of the Australian Nardil that I was taking, but I somehow doubt that it's a coincidence that both of us just happened to start feeling significantly worse on the Australian Nardil within a month's time -- which also just so happened to be right around the time when the first silica gel-free bottles of Australian Nardil were put into distribution.
I could be wrong, but I strongly suspect that as long as you continue to take the Australian Nardil from bottles without any silica gel inside of them, your response to Nardil won't be nearly as favorable as it used to be.
And if I'm correct in deducing that the silica gel in the older bottles of Australian Nardil prevented the hydrazine in the Nardil tablets from degrading into ammonium (and other byproducts), increasing your dose of the Australian Nardil will probably do no good. Sure, you'll get more phenelzine sulfate from a higher dose, but you'll also get more ammonium, which basically means that you'll get more *ammonia* once the ammonium inside the tablets reaches your stomach (assuming that my deduction is correct).
According to Lockwood et al. (1979), ammonia is "highly neurotoxic and, along with other factors, undoubtedly contributes to the development of encephalopathy and coma that is often a terminal event in patients with severe liver disease."
I don't think that it's correct to assume that a dose of 150 mg/day won't pose any health problems. There has not been any research on the effects of phenelzine at such a high dose, and even though a few other Psycho-Babble users might not have developed health problems at 150 mg/day, there is no guarantee that you won't. And even though I can't say this for sure, it's my *guess* that anybody who did take 150 mg/day of Nardil without developing any health problems was probably taking a "fresher" version of Nardil than what you're currently taking.
So ***PLEASE***, for your own good, check the bottles of Australian Nardil that you've been taking lately to see if there's any silica gel inside of them. If the bottles don't have one of those little grayish cylindrical objects inside of them (like the old bottles did), the Nardil that you've been taking since the onset of your relapse is probably not as "fresh" as the Nardil that you took before your relapse.
Now as I said, I could be wrong, but I don't think that "taking Nardil to the EXTREME," as you put it, will do you any good. In fact, I think it might make matters worse for you psychiatrically speaking, and it will probably significantly increase your risk of developing liver failure.
What (I think) you need to do is contact someone at either Link Pharmaceuticals or the appropriate Australian regulatory agency (whatever the Australian equivalent of the FDA is) to see if anything can be done to recall the existing silica gel-free bottles of Australian Nardil and/or ensure that every bottle of the Australian Nardil that's distributed from this point forward has silica gel inside of it. If you need any help in doing this, please let me know.
Ace, I wish you luck in whatever you decide to do, but I strongly urge you to consider what I've written. I know that it may seem like I'm trying to belittle your efforts to go "extreme" with the Nardil, but I firmly believe that the only way you'll ever feel the way that you used to on Nardil will be if Link starts putting silica gel back in its Nardil pill bottles.
Also, if you'd like to e-mail me, please feel free to do so. My e-mail address is tomatheus50@gmail.com.
Thanks,
Tomatheus==
REFERENCES
Lockwood, A. H., McDonald, J. M., Reiman, R. E., Gelbard, A. S., Laughlin, J. S., Duffy, T. E., et al. (1979). The dynamics of ammonia metabolism in man. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 63, 449-460.
Lovering, E. G., Matsui, F., Curran, N. M., Robertson, D. L., & Sears, R. W. (1983). Hydrazine levels in formulations of hydrazine, isoniazid, and phenelzine over a 2-year period. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 72, 965-967.
==
> Ok guys, this is my last diged effort before i will have to give my best mate Nardil some time off for a break....
>
> I'm ramming right up to 150mg/175mg a day.....
>
> I have seen an anecdoted of someone using as much as 250+ a day, but ofcourse I can't recommend
>
> 150mg will not pose any health problems, just incresed s/effects
>
> wish me luck
>
> and yes, i am still the Nardil champ!!!!!!!
>
> Ace
Posted by ace on June 19, 2006, at 21:55:05
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, posted by Phillipa on June 19, 2006, at 13:16:05
> Ace please be careful. Love Phillipa
Thanks darlin'
I'm preety sure everything will be cool!
God Bless,
Ace
Posted by ace on June 19, 2006, at 21:58:25
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! » ace, posted by Tomatheus on June 19, 2006, at 18:51:19
> Ace,
>
> I know that it probably seems like I'm harassing you at this point, and I apologize if I'm coming across this way.
>
> But ***PLEASE*** ... check your newer bottles of Australian Nardil (the ones that you've been prescribed since your relapse began) to see if they have silica gel inside of them.
>
> All of the older lots of Australian Nardil had a small grayish cylindrical object inside of them. But the bottles with an expiration date of 12/2006 or later (and possibly also those set to "expire" on 10/2006 and/or 11/2006) do not.
>
> The little grayish cylindrical objects inside the older bottles of the Australian Nardil contained silica gel, a substance that absorbs and holds moisture. When Nardil tablets are stored in excessively humid conditions (with the relative humidity being at least 80 percent), the hydrazine in the tablets undergoes rapid chemical degradation (Lovering et al., 1983).
>
> It is my understanding that when aqueous hydrazine is oxidized by certain agents, the ammonium ion is one of the byproducts. The ammonium ion itself it not toxic, but it typically reacts with acidic solutions (such as stomach acids) to form ammonia, which of course is a toxic substance. But the above-described oxidization of hydrazine cannot occur unless the hydrazine is first exposed to either water or water vapor. By absorbing moisture from the air before it had a chance to get to the Nardil tablets, the silica gel in the older bottles of Australian Nardil kept the tablets "fresh."
>
> As I mentioned in a previous Psycho-Babble message (http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060604/msgs/654250.html), I experienced a month-long remission (my first true remission since my depressive symptoms set in full-force six years ago) when I was taking a specially prepared version of the Australian Nardil. The response that I had was nothing like the euphoric hypomanic "highs" that I had during my "up" periods on Paxil. On the contrary, I felt *just right* in every way. Experiences that were supposed to make me feel good made me feel good, and experiences that were supposed to make me feel sad made me feel sad. Likewise, tasks that were supposed to be simple were simple, and tasks that were supposed to be difficult were difficult. I experienced little to no insomnia, and for the first time ever, I did not struggle to get out of bed after a full night of sleep. I would just wake up as most people do. For once, I finally felt like I knew what it was like to be fully human and to experience the range of feelings and emotions that most people experience. It was wonderful ... and I wasn't euphoric, just extremely satisfied and grateful to finally have the opportunity to live life as it was meant to be lived.
>
> But a few days after I started taking the Australian Nardil from one of the newer bottles without silica gel, I started sweating profusely and developed severe urinary retention (a known effect of ammonia toxicity). A few days later, the antidepressant response that I had been receiving from my specially prepared version of the Australian Nardil was practically nonexistent. As long as I stayed on the Australian Nardil, I was not able to regain any kind of lasting antidepressant effect, let alone full remission.
>
> I know that you weren't taking the specially prepared version of the Australian Nardil that I was taking, but I somehow doubt that it's a coincidence that both of us just happened to start feeling significantly worse on the Australian Nardil within a month's time -- which also just so happened to be right around the time when the first silica gel-free bottles of Australian Nardil were put into distribution.
>
> I could be wrong, but I strongly suspect that as long as you continue to take the Australian Nardil from bottles without any silica gel inside of them, your response to Nardil won't be nearly as favorable as it used to be.
>
> And if I'm correct in deducing that the silica gel in the older bottles of Australian Nardil prevented the hydrazine in the Nardil tablets from degrading into ammonium (and other byproducts), increasing your dose of the Australian Nardil will probably do no good. Sure, you'll get more phenelzine sulfate from a higher dose, but you'll also get more ammonium, which basically means that you'll get more *ammonia* once the ammonium inside the tablets reaches your stomach (assuming that my deduction is correct).
>
> According to Lockwood et al. (1979), ammonia is "highly neurotoxic and, along with other factors, undoubtedly contributes to the development of encephalopathy and coma that is often a terminal event in patients with severe liver disease."
>
> I don't think that it's correct to assume that a dose of 150 mg/day won't pose any health problems. There has not been any research on the effects of phenelzine at such a high dose, and even though a few other Psycho-Babble users might not have developed health problems at 150 mg/day, there is no guarantee that you won't. And even though I can't say this for sure, it's my *guess* that anybody who did take 150 mg/day of Nardil without developing any health problems was probably taking a "fresher" version of Nardil than what you're currently taking.
>
> So ***PLEASE***, for your own good, check the bottles of Australian Nardil that you've been taking lately to see if there's any silica gel inside of them. If the bottles don't have one of those little grayish cylindrical objects inside of them (like the old bottles did), the Nardil that you've been taking since the onset of your relapse is probably not as "fresh" as the Nardil that you took before your relapse.
>
> Now as I said, I could be wrong, but I don't think that "taking Nardil to the EXTREME," as you put it, will do you any good. In fact, I think it might make matters worse for you psychiatrically speaking, and it will probably significantly increase your risk of developing liver failure.
>
> What (I think) you need to do is contact someone at either Link Pharmaceuticals or the appropriate Australian regulatory agency (whatever the Australian equivalent of the FDA is) to see if anything can be done to recall the existing silica gel-free bottles of Australian Nardil and/or ensure that every bottle of the Australian Nardil that's distributed from this point forward has silica gel inside of it. If you need any help in doing this, please let me know.
>
> Ace, I wish you luck in whatever you decide to do, but I strongly urge you to consider what I've written. I know that it may seem like I'm trying to belittle your efforts to go "extreme" with the Nardil, but I firmly believe that the only way you'll ever feel the way that you used to on Nardil will be if Link starts putting silica gel back in its Nardil pill bottles.
>
> Also, if you'd like to e-mail me, please feel free to do so. My e-mail address is tomatheus50@gmail.com.
>
> Thanks,
> Tomatheus
>
> ==
>
> REFERENCES
>
> Lockwood, A. H., McDonald, J. M., Reiman, R. E., Gelbard, A. S., Laughlin, J. S., Duffy, T. E., et al. (1979). The dynamics of ammonia metabolism in man. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 63, 449-460.
>
> Lovering, E. G., Matsui, F., Curran, N. M., Robertson, D. L., & Sears, R. W. (1983). Hydrazine levels in formulations of hydrazine, isoniazid, and phenelzine over a 2-year period. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 72, 965-967.
>
> ==
>
> > Ok guys, this is my last diged effort before i will have to give my best mate Nardil some time off for a break....
> >
> > I'm ramming right up to 150mg/175mg a day.....
> >
> > I have seen an anecdoted of someone using as much as 250+ a day, but ofcourse I can't recommend
> >
> > 150mg will not pose any health problems, just incresed s/effects
> >
> > wish me luck
> >
> > and yes, i am still the Nardil champ!!!!!!!
> >
> > Ace
>
>
Thanks so very very much for this...I'm actually printing this out. As far as I know, the Nardil I take is the same Nardil I took when i started it 5 or so yrs ago (when it had AWESOME results),,,, but, i will ring Link up, with this message in my hands to make sure of the situation. I very much appreciate the time, effort and care u put into that message.Thanks so much friend!
Ace
Posted by ace on June 19, 2006, at 22:00:45
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! » ace, posted by Tomatheus on June 19, 2006, at 18:51:19
Liver failure is ONE thing I can consider as dangerous...good point there....
Posted by Vader40 on June 19, 2006, at 22:53:00
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! » Vader40, posted by ed_uk on June 19, 2006, at 12:37:53
Hi Ed. Yes this is my first post.
Vader.
Posted by Vader40 on June 19, 2006, at 22:57:39
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, posted by Vader40 on June 19, 2006, at 7:40:35
Ace have you read the e-mail I sent you yesterday to xxxxxx Is this your e-mail?
Vader
Posted by Phillipa on June 19, 2006, at 23:02:42
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, posted by Vader40 on June 19, 2006, at 22:57:39
Don't post publically someone's E-mail address with out their permission he may want it private.If you want to check it use babblemail. Phillipa
Posted by Vader40 on June 19, 2006, at 23:42:44
In reply to Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, posted by ace on June 19, 2006, at 6:50:56
First of all I am sorry for my bad english. This is for someone who wants answer. I have been taken nardil for 12 days 60 mg per day in two doses.
How many time i will have to wait until the nardil takes effect? Because until now i feel nothing.
How many quantity of nardil do you recommend me to take until it takes effect? And how must I take it?
I am desperate, I feel like i would have to wait an eternity to feel the nardil begins to act.
Posted by gardenergirl on June 20, 2006, at 0:11:20
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, posted by Vader40 on June 19, 2006, at 22:57:39
Please do not post any personal or identifying information about another poster without their permission. I've edited your post above to remove the email address you posted.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civilFollow-ups regarding these issues should be directed to Admin and should of course be civil. Dr. Bob has oversight over deputy decisions, and he may choose a different action.
Regards,
deputy gg
Posted by gardenergirl on June 20, 2006, at 1:00:34
In reply to Posting personal information about another » Vader40, posted by gardenergirl on June 20, 2006, at 0:11:20
I've been told that Ace has previously posted his email address. I'm not sure then that your posting it was against the rules. I apologize for citing you inappropriately.
gg
Posted by ace on June 20, 2006, at 1:18:51
In reply to I think I owe you an apology, Vader40, posted by gardenergirl on June 20, 2006, at 1:00:34
> I've been told that Ace has previously posted his email address. I'm not sure then that your posting it was against the rules. I apologize for citing you inappropriately.
>
> ggyeah, anyone can have my email!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by gardenergirl on June 20, 2006, at 2:31:36
In reply to Re: I think I owe you an apology, Vader40 » gardenergirl, posted by ace on June 20, 2006, at 1:18:51
Thanks, Ace. I do indeed apologize to Vader40.
gg
Posted by jedi on June 20, 2006, at 4:26:18
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, posted by Vader40 on June 19, 2006, at 23:42:44
> First of all I am sorry for my bad english. This is for someone who wants answer. I have been taken nardil for 12 days 60 mg per day in two doses.
>
> How many time i will have to wait until the nardil takes effect? Because until now i feel nothing.
>
> How many quantity of nardil do you recommend me to take until it takes effect? And how must I take it?
>
> I am desperate, I feel like i would have to wait an eternity to feel the nardil begins to act.Hi Vader40,
For me, a long time user of Nardil, it takes about five or six weeks for the med to take effect after the right dose is reached. The published effective dose is 1mg/kg of body weight. Of course, some people respond to less and others to more. The first couple of times I used Nardil for my major atypical depression and social anxiety, the effect was like night and day. When the medication started working it was like no other med I have ever taken. And I've taken more than 35 different combinations of meds. If you have high anxiety or social anxiety, I've found the use of a benzodiazapine, such as Klonopin, can help you get through the bad times until the Nardil starts to work. I still take clonazepam at 1mg on a daily basis, for my social anxiety.
Good Luck and Get Well,
Jedi
Posted by Phillipa on June 20, 2006, at 21:18:57
In reply to Re: I think I owe you an apology, Vader40 » ace, posted by gardenergirl on June 20, 2006, at 2:31:36
I need to apologize too. Ace I thought you said not to give out your E-mail? Love Phillipa
Posted by ace on June 20, 2006, at 23:08:27
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! » ace, posted by Tomatheus on June 19, 2006, at 18:51:19
Hey friend!
Now, the Nardil take, have always taken, since 5 yrs ago, has not and does not have silica gel inside them. Unless my eyes decieve me grossly.
The Nardil I take has always been the same in terms of the lack of this silica gel issue.
However, I am going to ring both Link and the TGA (equivalant governmental body to FDA in Australia) to see if any incipients have changed over time. However, I don't believe they have. I believe the Nardil which caused bliss 5 yrs ago is the same Nardil as I take now.
My biggest mistake was to cease Nardil when it was providing an UNBELEAVABLE robust remission of my depressive illness, indeed, it was causing a 'healthy' euphoria, and start Clomipramine.
This, I believe began the cycling in and out of healthy euphoria, and subsequent declining in theraputic effect. However Nardil still does provide significant help. But, in contrast to yrs ago, it does not seem to be able to "keep me going" with its euphoria even in the face of negative environmental factors. I believe enzyme induction provides a clue, but I have many theories.....
Just a question, with regards to the oxidation of aqueous hydrazine, are you certain the ammonium ion is one (of many) by products????
And what other byproducts can you ascertain?Thanks so much friend, pls respond!
Ace
Posted by Tomatheus on June 21, 2006, at 5:28:10
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! » Tomatheus, posted by ace on June 20, 2006, at 23:08:27
Ace,
I guess I need to clarify some of my statements from my previous post:
** I am not claiming that the actual formulation of the Australian Nardil has changed. As far as I know, the medications' excipients are still as follows: mannitol, povidone, maize starch, magnesium stearate, and the film coating (Opadry 20A25096 Red).
** It was not my intention to make it seem like silica gel was an ingredient in the Australian Nardil. What I'm saying is that *each bottle* of Australian Nardil used to have a little gray cylindrical object filled with silica gel inside of it (along with the 100 tablets). The new bottles, with an expiration date of 12/2006 or (probably) later, only have the tablets inside of them -- no silica gel.
I know this because I used to order the Australian Nardil from an online pharmacy (I live in the U.S.) and take it using a special enteric capsule preparation method. Until I received the bottles with an expiration date of 12/2006 on them, they always had silica gel inside of them. And as I mentioned in my previous post, I started feeling drastically worse -- both physically and mentally -- within a few days of taking the Australian Nardil from one of the new silica gel-free bottles.
** When the tablets inside the new silica gel-free bottles of Australian Nardil leave the factory, they're probably not much different chemical-wise from the tablets that were in the older bottles that had silica gel inside of them. But the Nardil tablets inside the new silica gel-free bottles do not have the "protection" against moisture that the tablets in the older bottles had (and the "protection" that I'm referring to is, of course, the silica gel that was in the older bottles).
So, for example, if the bottles of Nardil that you received during your last visit to the pharmacy (assuming that you receive the original Link bottles with 100 tablets in them) were exposed to significant amounts of moisture at any point between when they left the factory and when you received them from your pharmacist, the tablets inside those bottles probably aren't "fresh." In other words, any hydrazine that might have formed from the phenelzine sulfate in the tablets probably underwent extensive chemical degradation as a result of being exposed to too much moisture.
In a study of time-dependent hydrazine levels in phenelzine and other hydrazine-derivative medications, Lovering et al. (1983) found that phenelzine tablets from one lot ("Lot C") contained an average of 47 micrograms of hydrazine and that the tablets from a second lot ("Lot D") contained an average of 40 micrograms of hydrazine. For both lots, the measurements that I referred to in the previous sentence were taken before the tablets were exposed to any experimental conditions. The authors of the study also found that hydrazine levels in phenelzine tablets dropped considerably after the tablets were stored at 80 or 100 percent relative humidity. They further went on to state that "the data obtained from the samples stored in sealed containers show that these decreases can be attributed to chemical degradation rather than evaporation of the hydrazine" (Lovering et al., 1983, 966).
I suppose it's theoretically possible that the Nardil bottles that you picked up on your last trip to the pharmacy *might* not have been exposed to enough moisture since arriving from the factory for the hydrazine inside the tablets to undergo significant chemical degradation. This possibility, however, is not very likely considering that the instructions on the bottle say to refrigerate the medication. If your pharmacists followed the instructions on the bottle and kept your Nardil refrigerated before dispensing it to you, then the tablets that you received were almost definitely exposed to more than enough moisture to potentiate the degradation of hydrazine.
Finally, regarding your question about the oxidization of aqueous hydrazine, the research reports that I've come across do suggest that the ammonium ion could result from the oxidization of aqueous hydrazine (N2H5+), depending on what the oxidizing agent is.
In reviewing the literature that had been published on the oxidization of hydrazine in solution up to that point, Cahn & Powell (1954) identified three oxidization reactions:
1) N2H5+ = 4e- + N2 + 5H+
2) N2H5+ = e- + NH4+ + 0.5N2 + H+
3) N2H5+ = 2e- + 0.5HN3 + 0.5NH4+ + 2.5H+
According to Cahn & Powell (1954), some oxidizing agents give one of the three reactions identified above, and others give reactions 1 and 2 together. (That's about the extent to which I can make sense of the article, given my limited knowledge of chemistry.)
As you can see, reactions 2 and 3 would both produce the ammonium ion (NH4+) as one of the byproducts. Other byproducts of the oxidization of hydrazine include nitrogen gas (N2), the hydronium ion (H+), and hydrazoic acid (HN3).
To be honest with you, I don't know enough about chemistry to tell you whether any of the excipients in the Australian Nardil could react with aqueous hydrazine to produce any of the oxidization reactions that Cahn & Powell (1954) identified.
But I can say the following:
* Ammonium has been confirmed to be a byproduct of the oxidization of hydrazine, at least in the presence of certain oxidizing agents.
* After I started taking the Australian Nardil from the new silica gel-free bottles, I experienced several signs of mild hyperammonemia: urinary retention (I had none when I was taking my specially prepared version of the Australian Nardil until I received the silica gel-free bottles), lethargy, poor coordination, agitation, and reduced appetite.
* Even if it's the case that ammonium is not produced as a result of the moisture-induced chemical degradation of hydrazine in Nardil tablets, the absence of silica gel inside the newer bottles of the Australian Nardil does allow for the accumulation of excessive moisture inside the bottles. And as Lovering et al. (1983) demonstrated, the hydrazine in phenelzine tablets that are stored in humid conditions undergoes rapid chemical degradation.
So, if nothing else, the silica gel that was inside the older bottles of the Australian Nardil (those with expiration dates older than 9/2006 -- and I'm not sure about 10/2006 or 11/2006) helped keep the chemical composition of the tablets intact between the time that the Nardil left the factory and the time that you picked it up from your pharmacy. And, considering that I began feeling mentally and physically awful within days of taking the Australian Nardil from the silica gel-free bottles (and the fact that over the past two or three months you've reported receiving a less robust response on Nardil than you had been receiving previously), I think that Link Pharmaceuticals and the TGA definitely need to be notified about the potential therapeutic consequences of shipping out Nardil bottles without any silica gel inside of them.
I hope this helps. Please let me know if you have any additional questions or if there's anything else that I can do to help make Link and/or the TGA aware of this situation.
(A very tired) Tomatheus (even with my screwed-up sleep schedule)
==
REFERENCES
Cahn, J. W., & Powell, R. E. (1954). Oxidization of hydrazine in solution. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 76, 2568-2572.
Lovering, E. G., Matsui, F., Curran, N. M., Robertson, D. L., & Sears, R. W. (1983). Hydrazine levels in formulations of hydralazine, isoniazid, and phenelzine over a 2-year period. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 72, 965-967.
==
> Hey friend!
>
> Now, the Nardil take, have always taken, since 5 yrs ago, has not and does not have silica gel inside them. Unless my eyes decieve me grossly.
>
> The Nardil I take has always been the same in terms of the lack of this silica gel issue.
>
> However, I am going to ring both Link and the TGA (equivalant governmental body to FDA in Australia) to see if any incipients have changed over time. However, I don't believe they have. I believe the Nardil which caused bliss 5 yrs ago is the same Nardil as I take now.
>
> My biggest mistake was to cease Nardil when it was providing an UNBELEAVABLE robust remission of my depressive illness, indeed, it was causing a 'healthy' euphoria, and start Clomipramine.
>
> This, I believe began the cycling in and out of healthy euphoria, and subsequent declining in theraputic effect. However Nardil still does provide significant help. But, in contrast to yrs ago, it does not seem to be able to "keep me going" with its euphoria even in the face of negative environmental factors. I believe enzyme induction provides a clue, but I have many theories.....
>
> Just a question, with regards to the oxidation of aqueous hydrazine, are you certain the ammonium ion is one (of many) by products????
> And what other byproducts can you ascertain?
>
> Thanks so much friend, pls respond!
>
> Ace
>
>
Posted by ace on June 22, 2006, at 6:48:25
In reply to Re: Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! » ace, posted by Tomatheus on June 21, 2006, at 5:28:10
Sorry man, have to be real quick...library closing....
There has NEVER been anything other than 100 orange pills in my Nardil bottle. There is no product with it...ie. no silicia gel...
I'm sure you know what u mean...like when their is a dessicate in a product (clothes)
Posted by Psycho Killer on June 22, 2006, at 12:59:37
In reply to Taking Nardil to the EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, posted by ace on June 19, 2006, at 6:50:56
I have read that you have all these disorders
Major Depression
Social Phobia/Anxiety
Derealization phenomena with phobic anxiety:
OCD
GADMan this is too much for anyone. I will give an advise: To kill yourself
Here you have a web that will help you a lot:
[xxx]
A big salute ACE in madness.
Posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 13:34:44
In reply to Ace you are a fu***ing madman, posted by Psycho Killer on June 22, 2006, at 12:59:37
> I will give an advise: To kill yourself
Please don't suggest that others harm themselves or use this site to exchange information that could be used to harm.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civilFollow-ups regarding these issues should be directed to Admin and should of course be civil. Dr. Bob has oversight over deputy decisions, and he may choose a different action.
Regards,
deputy gg
Posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 13:35:44
In reply to Ace you are a fu***ing madman, posted by Psycho Killer on June 22, 2006, at 12:59:37
Posted by Dr. Bob on June 22, 2006, at 14:57:25
In reply to Please be civil » Psycho Killer, posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2006, at 13:34:44
> Please don't suggest that others harm themselves or use this site to exchange information that could be used to harm.
Also, please don't post under more than one name at the same time or change your posting name without following these steps:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#names
I'm going to block this name, please either return to your previous one or switch (following the above steps) to another new one.
Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.