Throughout ResonCare's clinical research journey, we have achieved significant and smooth progress. However, a concern that constantly weighs on our minds is whether these clinical research outcomes can truly benefit those in need. We believe that the essential question for users is whether they will receive the intended benefits. While this is not a legal requirement, it is an imperative from our conscience.
When it comes to the therapeutic claims made in drug advertisements, can users always experience the promised effects? Is the level of efficacy limited to symptom control, or does it address the root cause, potentially leading to a cure? Are there possible side effects? Answers to these questions are often not as clear-cut as the forceful messages in advertisements. For example, a report by the Daily Mail in September 2010 noted that Viagra was ineffective for over half of men with erectile dysfunction because their testosterone levels were too low. Many physicians, let alone the general public, are unaware that low testosterone can render Viagra ineffective. Since the law permits advertising of efficacy claims, it almost serves to deceive this group of men.
Thus, efficacy claims represent a minimum legal standard. Users may not always experience the efficacy claimed by the drug. Clinical research results may not always replicate in real-world users. True efficacy is determined when users see and experience the benefits themselves. Moreover, the level of efficacy should ideally address the root cause and provide a cure, which is what users genuinely need.
To seek optimal efficacy, we believe it is essential to actively pursue inquiries, seek second opinions, observe, record, and engage in evidence-based decision-making. This enables individuals to autonomously decide whether to start, continue, or end a medical relationship. What we need is the most fundamental approach: empirical evidence, and a willingness to take on the basic responsibility of autonomy.
Levels of Effectiveness
First and foremost, it is essential to identify different levels of treatment effectiveness: easing symptoms, identifying the root of the problem, effecting a permanent cure, and eradicating any possibility of relapse. The first level is characterized by the control or alleviation of an illness; generally speaking, this control or alleviation will falter once the treatment process is discontinued. Next is going beyond easing symptoms and getting at the root of the illness A test of permanent cure can be witnessed if a patient sustains a level of improvement even after treatment is disrupted. A permanent cure, as the phrase indicates, describes the absence of the targeted illness even after treatment has been stopped for quite a while. The definition of eradicating any possibility of relapse should be self-evident enough.
Whenever we have need of medication, we owe our gratitude no matter whichever of the four levels of effectiveness is to be attained at the end of the day. Health and hope will definitely become our rewards so long as we persist with our quest—our endeavors backed by practical experiences and independent choices.
Self-Healing Indices
When someone is sick, his sleep, appetite, bowel movements, concentration, strength and mood tend to be adversely affected. As he recovers, the affected aspects will also show recuperation as well until his health is fully restored. We call appetite, bowel movements, sleep, strength, span of concentration, and mood the six self-healing indices. To date, we believe, no medical instrument can evaluate these six measures more quickly and accurately than man can himself. Keeping track of changes in these six self-healing indices allows us to determine in which direction an illness is progressing, if the adopted treatment plan is working, and if side effects are taking shape. In other words, this enables us to attain empirical results through first-hand experiences in the capacity of “autonomous patients.”
Self-Evaluation of Symptoms
It is not uncommon for a doctor to see 50 patients in just three hours, averaging 3.6 minutes for each. In that short span of time, the doctor is supposed to listen to what the patient has to report, make and explain his diagnosis, fill out medical records, and prescribe. Errors should be hardly surprising in such haste. But there is a partial remedy to this. The patient can expect to better protect himself by presenting a more effective description of his symptoms. While an oral report tends to be disorganized, putting it down on paper is a preferable alternative. What should the patient jot down? It should consist of the following:
| 1. | Description of the symptoms, including their position, severity and duration as well as their impact on daily living and work. |
| 2. | Frequency of recurrence, e.g. time/day, day/week and x/10. When they describe their symptoms, people tend to opt for either side of a coin: yes or no and the feeling of pain or otherwise. The frequency of recurrence is oftentimes ignored. But the continuously changing frequency of recurrence is really the best measure of how a symptom is evolving. It is also a key barometer of whether the adopted treatment plan is really tackling the root of the illness. |
| 3. | Conditions most conducive to recurrence, which are certainly useful for the reference of medical specialists in conducting diagnosis. Moreover, the specialists can also monitor the symptoms readily associated with the aforementioned conditions as treatment progresses. By observing if the symptoms are eased or even eradicated when such conditions do occur, they can determine if their treatment plan can effectively rectify the root of the illness. |
Identify Stages of Recuperation & Set Indices of Control and Management
Identify which stage of the health recovery process you are in, to make appropriate adjustments:
1.Waiting for Improvement Stage: The initial phase of waiting for the body to begin recovering.
2.Rapid Recovery Stage: A period where symptoms improve quickly and significantly.
3.Gradual Consolidation Stage: This stage aims to consolidate the improvements. Although the rate of improvement may slow down, interrupting the process can jeopardize the gains achieved so far.
4.Gradual Consolidation Stage: This stage aims to consolidate the improvements. Although the rate of improvement may slow down, interrupting the process can jeopardize the gains achieved so far.
Identification of different stages of returning to health is conducive to setting indices for better monitoring and tracing the treatment process. For example, there should be a maximum waiting period for the condition to start turning for the better. Readjustment of the treatment process is to be allowed only a given number of times when this expected betterment fails to materialize. When and if no further progress is made during a given period of time, it may signify that the greatest possible effectiveness has been achieved and that further progress is all but impossible. True, the length of every stage and the ultimate effectiveness vary from one case to another due to differences in treatment plans, illnesses and the patient’s internal capacities for relaying energy. But these indices of control and management are indeed concrete and useful tools in helping the patient undertake empirically supported, autonomous health management. In turn, they go a long way toward facilitating doctor-patient communication and trust.
