Talk:Hypoadrenia

message: I know this is a vague topic.  But they are widely enough referred to as a term, that there ought to be an article covering the three of them. I just don't know what belongs in it, as I'm no expert. So I have drafted a brief attempt at an introduction, set up redirects from "adrenal exhaustion" and "adrenal fatigue" to this article, and leave it to others more to fill in the rest more fully and accurately. FT2 06:44, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: I

message: I'm not a huge expert on this, but lines like "Could it be that the adrenal glands and adrenal fatigue or insufficiency do in fact explain so many psychological and psychiatric disorders so well that such explanations pose a threat to the mental health and pharmacology industry by replacing psychotrophic drugs and therapy with a common sense lifestyle?" seem seriously NPOV to me, heh. Could a more experienced editor take a crack at it? I'll take a go myself tomorrow if no-one else steps in. There's nothing wrong with including opinions like that, but only with proper attribution; in the article it's said in a very leading, suggestive way, it's clear the author is advocating his own point of view.
Kupos 21:54, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, working on fixing this up a bit. I cut out a huge chunk of the introduction - it was an interesting viewpoint, but it was more of an indictment of modern lifestyles than a neutral summary of the issue. I'm cutting out the quote about herbal remedies too, it wasn't really presented neutrally, and I doubt it's an opinion with mainstream acceptance. I also made a minor fix in the paragraph about the adrenal glands in the introduction. They don't derive their name from "adrenaline", the name is derived from "ad-renal", literally "on the kidney". Adrenaline derives its name from them. Kupos 16:04, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Took away the NPOV warning, it looks okay to me now, although I admit I had to chop out a lot. If you have any problems with this, please put the NPOV warning back and we'll see what we can do.Kupos 16:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I have an illness highly consistant with syptoms associated with "hypoadrenia". It may not have a maintream-accepted cause yet, but the descriptions here and elsewhere are far too specific and accurate for me to think the condition itself is bunk. I hope more research is done in this area.
Powanikutin 19:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  name and cause may be bunk but not the condition itself 

message: I was recently diagnosed with hypoadrenocorticism, which is adrenal exhaustion.  I took a saliva test, as recommended by my doctor, and the results show that I was ridiculously low on the hormones secreted from the adrenal glands.  I have been extremely depressed and constantly stressed out for the past five months, so it was no wonder I was running on empty.  But based on the symptoms, I think that I have had lower adrenal function for many years (basically as long as I've been depressed).  My life has been profoundly affected by this, and I am excited at the thought of actually feeling good for once, both physically and mentally.  I don't know what's going on with this disorder and "mainstream" medicine, but this article seemed to me to hint that this disorder is made up.  I know that it is not.  And while "alternative" medicine may not have so many published findings, all I know is I was miserable for five months and traditional medicine didn't help at all.  I went to a naturopathic physician for the first time ever, and in three weeks he helped me turn my life around.  I don't know how it works, but it should not be so discounted and made to sound less valid.140.160.129.65 04:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hmmm... 

message: It has a tone that suggests the condition is a false disease, thought up by "alternative" practitioners. Fact is, I know of many doctors: MD's and endocrinologists, that consider this a very real condition and test and treat it in their practice. Fadein 21:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is definitely biased 

message: I am a clinical administrator at a multi-disciplinary health clinic (MD, DC, and physical therapy).  We do test for this in our patients, and I tested positive for it myself and am taking adrenal support supplements with excellent success thus far.  I wanted to point out an excellent non-internet source that draws the distinction between hypoadrenia and "relative" hypoadrenia.  The article I read was from Applied Kinesiology by David S. Walther () Pp.470-479.  This is a fairly extensive article that talks about the difference between complete and catastrophic adrenal failure versus relative dysfunction of the adrenals.  There are also associated symptoms listed and testing to confirm the diagnosis.  It was published in 1988, so it is nearly 20 years old, but I'm sure there is some new research available on the subject.
Anyway, the distinction I wanted to draw here is that as far back as the 80's, clinical texts have been trying to discern where the disease (and maybe it's better to call it a disorder, since in my case it was easily correctable with proper vitamin supplementation) starts.  We all know where it ends with things like Addison's disease, but between a healthy individual and someone with Addison's disease is a person whose adrenals are on the way towards failure.  That is where Walther stated that "relative" hypoadrenia comes in and starts producing frustrating, panacea-like (but possibly diagnose-able) symptomatology.  
Walther acknowledged in the article the strong possibility of misdiagnosis or of health professionals failing to recognize the symptoms at all, but given the importance of the diagnosis to people who suffer from this problem (and the relatively simple and preventative treatment of vitamin supplements) I would say it is unwise and possibly irrisponsible to marginalize those who seek treatment for it by suggesting that hypoadrenia is a fringey or non-standard diagnosis.  The question of mainstream versus non-mainstream status is a moot one.  Mainstream medicine "preventatively "screens for cancer in millions of patients with no symptoms at all.  It would seem negligently inconsistent to not preventitively screen patients who are already showing symptomatology associated with adrenal dysfunction.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gomerwiki (talk • contribs) 18:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hypoadrenia vs "relative" hypoadrenia 

message: I'd be interested to see a section on how Hypoadrenia is diagnosed. I noted the list of symptoms, but wonder how these symptoms become attributed to Hypoadrenia.
Under "biological background", I am curious about the statement:
"Organs such as the brain, the endocrine system-- including the sympathetic and parasympathetic systems, and the various glands contained therein, which were not evolved for, or designed to handle and respond optimally to, constant stimulation may therefore, under modern social conditions, become constantly or abnormally stimulated. "
Perhaps this is not the place for a comprehensive discussion of this, but I'd like to see a little support for the first part that asserts these systems were not evolved for constant stress. I can easily imagine conditions in prehistoric situations that might generate stress for very long times --- famine, competition for habitat, migration, climate change, prolonged illnesses, etc. As a species, our survival seems to suggest we have some ability to adapt to these things. 
12.168.233.77 (talk) 04:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A couple of unanswered questions: 

message: I'm not an expert in this subject, or I would definitely edit this! It is very disappointing to read an article entry that is written from start to finish in a biased way, inferring that this condition "isn't real". I'd like to see some science for BOTH positions. That would at least make it useful.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by AspenRivers (talk • contribs) 16:28, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You might be looking for adrenal insufficiency, which is the "real" condition.  This is primarily an alternative-medicine concept.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This entry is not neutral!