You stated, as a fact (ie with certainty), that meto dramatically reduces failure of SN from vomiting. As per the SN CTB accounts most people still vomit with an anti emetic, which directly contradicts your statement...and then we have people who don't take an anti emetic, vomit, and still CTB. And then people who don't take an AE and don't vomit. We are not talking about meto's broad properties as an anti emetic in various health/pharmaceutical. We are talking about the practical application of using meto in one specific high-dose poisoning situation.
I think the research is out there for anti-emetics like meto dramatically reducing vomiting. It is why it is classified as an anti-emetic. I was never intending to say with certainty you will not vomit if you take it. We know from the wide variety of cases that people have taken meto and other anti-emetics and still vomited, and vice versa, there are those who never vomit without taking any anti-emetic in the first place. I get that.
Did you look up acute dystonia? Did you do your research? How easy would it be to CTB with that condition? How easy would it be to attempt CTB again with people hovering over you 24/7 now that you're incapacitated to the point where you can't look after yourself any more?That's not a "whoops, try again later" situation. That is a prison sentence.
I have looked up acute dystonia. It would help if you could cite your sources where you are getting this information from though. For instance, in past threads about this topic, the following
article has been referenced from the National Library of Medicine. I assume this is where you are getting your figures from, when you say a rare percentage may get acute dystonia from meto.
"Acute dystonic reactions, the most common type of extrapyramidal symptom associated with metoclopramide, occur in approximately 0.2% of patients (1 in 500) treated with 30 to 40 mg of metoclopramide per day" ... "Metoclopramide may cause extrapyramidal symptoms that generally manifest as acute dystonic reactions within the initial 24–48 hours of use."
Two important take-aways from this case study:
The estimated on-set for this rare side effect is after the drug's pharmacological action time which the NIH lists as "1 to 3 minutes following an intravenous dose, 10 to 15 minutes following intramuscular administration, and 30 to 60 minutes following an oral dose; the pharmacological effects persist for 1 to 2 hours"
This article is suggesting the rare reaction of
acute dystonia, not chronic dystonia. Acute dystonia is by definition not a life-long condition. It is a short term reaction that can occur from side-effects of many medications including this one. As stated in the
article, it is easily treatable, "
The most rapid treatment of an acute dystonic reaction caused by metoclopramide is the intravenous or intramuscular administration of anticholinergics."
My point is this from the above takeaways are that the rare occurrence of acute dystonia is not likely to interfere with the success of SN, or the effectiveness of meto as an anti-emetic. Now, if you are suggesting to not take meto as part of the 48 hour routine some people have suggested, then you may have a point. As 1/500 people may have this reaction prior to taking SN and possibly need treatment and have to explain why they were taking it in the first place.
But if you are planning on taking meto just with SN as per the PPeH, then you are concerning yourself over a rare short term condition that would occurafter you are already dead. If you arent dead, then it is most likely that you were found and taken to a hospital where you would easily be treated for
acute dystonia if it were to even occur. If you have contradicting articles / research that shows otherwise please cite your sources. But the research that has been made available to me has all concluded that meto is indeed a safe and effective choice for use with SN.
