Talk:Ana Aslan

message: The article lacks balance, casting its subject in too favourable a light. Biruitorul 04:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: True, in other words the 6-7 million were not the real reason why Ceauşescu supported the use of the drug, but because it was a ROMANIAN product. That was the reason.
Also, the fact that FDA did not approve the drug is not a reason to consider a drug as being a hoax, because FDA it is well known of stopping many drugs as being too natural. Many are saying that GH3 was not approved by FDA, not because of it's power for anti aging, but because the findings of Ana Aslan showed that the drug is also curring some other disease. Also the death rate is minimized in some conditions as shown in her documents presented and APPROVED by European Congress of Gerontology.
The above paragraph (written by another author), like the biographical page on Dr. Aslan, contains a few unsubstantiated opinions. To clarify, the FDA has never denied or withdrawn approval for a drug based on its "being too natural." All FDA applications are public documents, as are all decisions concerning drug approval and all evidence presented (by the manufacturer and other parties) to the FDA in favor of and against its approval. The process is not carried out in back rooms or in secret. The public is always invited to comment and attend, or even testify at, FDA meetings concerning the approval process for any drug. Denial of approval by the FDA, of course, is not evidence that the drug is a hoax because the FDA does not address the question of whether drugs are hoaxes. They are concerned with the safety and effectiveness of drugs, and the fraudulent promotion of drugs.
Procaine HCl (the primary active ingredient in GH3) has been available in the US as an injection since 1905. Since then, in light of newer safety evidence concerning allergic reactions, breathing difficulties, and circulatory problems, and the introduction of the safer alternative Xylocaine (lidocaine) in 1948, its use has declined, but it remains an approved drug under the FDA for specified clinical uses.
In truth, there is nothing natural about the formula in GH3. Its components are synthetic. In 1994, the US Congress actually deregulated most natural and traditional medicines, classifying them as Dietary Supplements. Although they still fall under the regulation of the FDA, they are more widely available today in the US than ever before.
A thorough review of the research literature shows that GH3 simply has no effect on any signs of aging. It has been tested thoroughly in several countries. Couple this lack of evidence supporting effectiveness with the risk of systemic introduction of a potential allergen, and there you will find the basis for the FDA's lack of approval. Many Americans endorse the FDAs function of keeping ineffective and potentially dangerous drugs off the market, and all the evidence from controlled studies (many cited on the Wikipedia page for Gerovital-H3) support that view of GH3.
The claim that the FDA withheld approval due to the number of diseases it is purported to cure is also specious. All FDA-approved antibiotics cure a wide variety of diseases. Aspirin and codeine (FDA-approved drugs) both treat numerous conditions effectively. The only FDA limitation on the number of symptoms or diseases a drug is approved to treat is that a New Drug Application (NDA) is required for each use and each delivery method of that drug. Each use is approved or denied based on evidence presented by the manufacturer supporting the safety and effectiveness of each use. No GH3 manufacturer has provided evidence of either to the FDA, despite the enormous profit motive for gaining access to the American market.
Finally, information concerning the "European Congress [of/for] [Clinical] Gerontology" is extremely difficult to find online. A number of research conferences have been held with similar names, but such conferences neither approve nor endorse any product or scientific finding. The only approval involved in a research conference is approval to present data to research colleagues. Presentation of new data at a research conference marks the beginning of scientific debate as to the validity of the presenter's claims.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.174.110.147 (talk) 03:35, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FDA is far for being "everyone". 

message: Please read what others have to say:
http://www.canadianprescriptionsavers.com/articles/article-procaine_hydrochloride.html
Excerpts from the above Web site:
"In 1970 Dr Alfred Sapse renewed interest in GH3. While serving his internship in Romania, Dr Sapse met those treated by Dr Aslan, and was able to study the research documents. 
When asked why he decided to revive interest in GH3, Dr Sapse, referring to Dr Aslan's patients, replied "Their ailments were either gone or greatly regressed, at least to the point where they did not bother these old people. I know what I saw. it was incredible.13" 
"Dr P. Luth of the Municipal Hospital Offenbach/Main, Germany has conducted extensive research using GH3 over many years. By directly injecting GH3 into geriatric patients, Dr Luth has noted the dramatic change in appearance and behaviour of those he has treated. Dramatic improvements in skin conditions, sleep patterns, blood pressure and heart arrhythmia have proved common in those receiving GH3.21"
Alarmingly enough, it takes entities from Canada or Mexico or Europe to convince FDA that a certain medicine/vitamin/dietary supplement is better than the ones existing in US.
See: SANDOZ Calcium (somehow FDA managed to reject SANDOZ), Bayer Aspirin (about the only European pill that made it into the States, together with the VW beetle), and last but not least, the most recent contraceptives
(did FDA approve those, or still thinking about it, for the next 10 years, until US develops their own version, and then have a "valid" reason for rejecting European products???)
Anti-Romanians need not reply.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.170.214.213 (talk) 12:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Before throwing mud 

message: One sentence went out of its way to say there was no peer reviewed etc. and that there were serious side effects etc but I had little difficulty in finding peer reviewed material. It just wasn't in English. I think someone had an axe to grind! Gingermint (talk) 23:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  I got rid of a sentence 

message: I can't believe this article. This anti-aging stuff about procaine is communist mytholohgy! It seriously lacks real scientific foundation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.102.61.162 (talk) 20:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  communist myth, nothing scientific 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ana Aslan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130116131100/http://www.ana-aslan.ro/index_en.htm to http://www.ana-aslan.ro/index_en.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:04, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Ana Aslan was of Armenian descent and her father’s name was Mkrtitch Aslanyan and Wiki has to put corrct information and not wrong or false Armishka (talk) 07:42, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Her father was Armenian, her mother Romanian. 79.56.3.15 (talk) 11:07, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ana Aslan