Goodbye Minocycline

Due to intolerable side effects, I have stopped taking my dermatologist prescribed daily dosage of the antibiotic, minocycline.

I began my own research and am currently self-medicating. I am not a doctor and I realize I don’t know what I’m doing; however, no one knows my body better than I do. Also, I am extremely dissatisfied with mainstream medicine’s treatment (or lack thereof) of rosacea. Taking antibiotics long-term and treating the symptoms but not the cause is not an option for me, especially when the only thing they will prescribe ruins my life. Also, I have seen two dermatologists and neither were willing to work with me or be flexible at all in their recommendation that I take these antibiotics, despite the side effects I endured.

SO, here I am. One suggestion is that people with rosacea may have a lysine deficiency. I took Biochemistry last semester, and actually knew what this meant! L-Lysine is an essential amino acid, meaning it is critical to the human body, especially for tissue development, and it cannot be produced by the body so it must be obtained through the food we eat or through supplements. I began taking 1,000 MG/day of lysine a week ago, and I could see the effects within a few days. (Added benefit: I bought a bottle of 100 500 MG pills at Target for about $2.50). The redness and postules on my cheeks are almost gone. It took almost a month on antibiotics before I noticed my skin was looking better. However, my eyelids continue to be puffy…some days worse than others. But I’m not even convinced this is necessarily rosacea, but perhaps an allergy or sensitivity to something. I am also going to work on converting to all natural products in terms of detergents, shower gel, shampoo, etc.

Also, rosacea has something to do with inflammation (that’s actually why they prescribe the antibiotics, because of the anti-inflammatory effects). And, certain foods have inflammatory and anti-inflammatory effects. Who would have thought! As a result, I am working on eliminating virtually all red meat from my diet, and greatly reducing the amount of dairy I consume. This means I am working towards a fruit and vegetable based diet, with the exception of fatty fish, with have omega three fatty acids, like salmon and halibut.

I realize that this is a situation that will require ongoing attention—I do not in any way think that taking a supplement is going to cure all my problems. However, I feel extremely empowered and relieved, after being given no options by dermatologists, and spending lots of money on topical and oral antibiotics, that I’m finally getting information that puts me more in control. I believe that environmental factors like foods and other things we come in contact with have a huge impact on our bodies, and these are the things that doctors never tell you. Apparently, they can make a lot more money just prescribing drugs like antibiotics.

Yeast Infection in a Bottle

There is a red butterfly flaring across my cheeks. The dermatologists are booked a month out, so I let it go for a week, then I go to Urgent Care. It burns and flares. I expect them to give me some sort of cream. Instead, the Medical Assistant brings in four different doctors and a nurse to gawk at my face.

“Sorry, hope you don’t mind,” he says. “It’s just that we don’t get to see stuff like this very often. It’s a good learning experience for us.”

I feel like a freakshow. Finally he informs me I might have lupus, an auto-immune disorder where the body attacks its own tissues. He has my blood drawn, instructs me to pee in a cup, and gives me firm directions to follow up with my primary doctor for the test results.

My test results are negative for lupus. “It’s probably rosacea,” my primary doctor says. “I’ll get you in to see a dermatologist right away.

“You have rosacea,” the dermatologist proclaims, almost instantly after meeting me for the first time.

Isn’t there some test they should perform, or something to validate this diagnosis, I wonder. Plus, it seems suspiciously coincidental that this alleged skin condition has appeared out of nowhere, immediately after experiencing the most stressful time in my life, in which my mom almost died from a stroke and spent four months in the hospital. So I ask the dermatologist what causes rosacea.

“Nothing causes it. It just happens. Especially to people with fair skin.”

I have since researched this on the web, and found no legitimate causes for rosacea, but still this answer is unsatisfactory to me. Even more unsatisfactory is the recommended treatment: topical and oral antibiotics. Long term. That’s it. It’s the anti-inflammatory component of the antibiotics that seem to help with rosacea symptoms, the small red bumps I get on my cheeks and nose, the swelling and redness in my eyelids. Yes, you heard me. Despite all the hype about our overuse of antibiotics, and the resulting increasing resistance of bacteria to antibiotics, this is the only treatment for rosacea: go on antibiotics, forever. Fun. Especially for women, who know about the consequences of using antibiotics long term…aside from reducing the effectiveness of birth control pills…you get to have…yeast infections! Shortly after I started taking these antibiotics, I experienced my first yeast infection. I was horrified. Soon after that, I stopped taking the antibiotics and went to see another dermatologist, convinced that this dermatologist would give me a different treatment option. He didn’t. And he was even more abrupt and impersonal than the first one. So, for several years, I took the antibiotics off and on….staying off the antibiotics until my rosacea symptoms reappeared….going back on the antibiotics long enough for my rosacea symptoms to disappear and my next yeast infection to surface.

The last time I went back to the dermatologist, she made no attempt to hide her impatience.

“You might as well quit expecting a miracle to happen and just start taking the medicine,” she told me. It was so blunt and impersonal that I laughed out loud. She had no interest in my personal circumstances, like stress factors in my life, or the terrible side effects of these medications.

She did follow it up, then, with, “I mean, I’m sorry to be so direct, but you might as well face the facts. You need to stay on the maximum dosage for at least a year. Then I can help you taper it off to a more minimal dosage. This isn’t something to mess around with. Especially when your eyes start to be affected.”

So now, in addition to 100 mg twice daily of minocycline (AKA yeast infection in a bottle), due to the yeast infection issue, once per month tablet of fluconazole. Plus a topical gel antibiotic, which, as the pharmacist said to me last time I filled the prescription, “You don’t want to take this long-term, because it will permanently thin the top layer of your skin.”

As I read all the warning signs about taking these medications long term…permanent yellowing or graying of your teeth and gums…is dangerous to a fetus…toxic to children under 8…extreme sensitivity to sun….discontinue immediately if you feel short of breath or light headed…and the list goes on…I’m still experiencing the discomfort of my most recent yeast infection, I’m beginning to wonder if the risks outweigh the benefits. I wish for doctors and medical professionals who treat more holistically…the whole person rather than just the symptoms, doctors who give options other than medications or surgery.

(Un)limited Term: Same Work as Permanent State Employees, With Low Wages and Few Benefits

Here is an excerpt from the first part of an article I'm working on. I've omitted references to the name of the state agency that I'm talking about.

We’ve all heard the myth about the lush benefits of state employees, but limited term employees do the same work as permanent state employees, for less money and few benefits. In the economic downtown and the state budget crisis, limited term employees are the most vulnerable.

In 2005, my 60-year-old mother suddenly suffered a massive stroke that resulted in a four month hospital stay. Although I had worked full-time for the University for three years, I had no vacation or sick time. After emergency brain surgery, my mom remained in a Critical Care Unit for two weeks. Luckily, my department showed its generous support by taking up a collection, which helped make my mortgage payment while I took time off to be with my mom. I had no vacation or sick time because I was classified as a limited term employee (LTE).

According to a University of Wisconsin Press Release (http://www.news.wisc.edu/releases/12948 ), the purpose of LTE appointments is for campus units to carry out short term or seasonal work. LTEs are limited to no more than 1,043 hours, or six months of full-time work, per year. However, an individual may hold two LTE positions, resulting in ongoing full-time work.

It is commonly known within the realm of state employment that many individuals have been working in one or more LTE positions over long periods without becoming permanent, full time equivalency (FTE) employees, and without receiving the wages and benefits that accompany permanent state employment. In a recent survey of the University's 141 limited term employees, 76% of the 69 respondents indicated that they were limited term employees for a year or more, with 27% reporting six years or more as limited term employees. The average length of LTE employment was 11.6 years. Respondents were from a variety of University departments, including custodial, childcare, clerical, technology support, recreation, marketing, and more.

Those working two LTE positions, or full-time, are eligible for health insurance, dental insurance, and retirement savings. Those who are working only one LTE position, part-time, must pay half the premiums out of pocket. LTEs, no matter how many years they have worked for the state, get no vacation, sick time, personal or legal holidays, or any other benefits that permanent state employees receive. LTEs cannot participate in University committees or governance, nor are they eligible for grants, scholarships, or professional development funds, such as those available to permanent, University classified staff. LTEs have no job security, and under state law, they are prohibited from collective bargaining (http://slac.rso.wisc.edu/isthmus-june22-2001.html )

LTEs are generally paid less than permanent full time workers, even if they do the same work. Sixty five percent of survey respondents said they earned less than $20,000 per year before taxes, and 26% reported they are the sole provider for their families. In addition to low wages, 84% of survey respondents were female. And despite their low wages and few benefits, limited term workers are highly educated: 58% had a four year college degree or higher.

When I went through the confounding process of transitioning from a limited term employee to a permanent state employee (my job was advertised publicly and I had to interview and compete with others, including current state employees, for the position I had worked in for three years), I gained an almost $5 per hour wage increase for doing the same work. I also gained union representation, annual wage increases as negotiated by union contracts, sick time, vacation, paid holidays, personal days, and more...

My Problem with Science Education

And here is my fundamental problem with science education. As I’m reading my Biochemistry textbook (published in 2007) I notice that scientists who made (apparently) important discoveries are highlighted in the sidebar of the textbook, complete with their picture and a profile of their scientific accomplishments. It’s not long before I start to realize they’re all male, and this starts to bother me. So one afternoon I sit down and go through the entire book, scouring the sidebars for examples of female scientists. There are 14 scientists featured and only one female scientist, Marie Curie, who is labeled as a “pioneer in radioactivity.” This is the kind of thing that urks me. And it gets worse.

Let me reiterate that this textbook was published in 2007.

Chapter 22, on ribonucleotides, in its discussion of DNA and RNA, features Watson and Crick as the discoverers of DNA, for which they later shared a Nobel prize. There is, of course, no mention of chemist Rosalind Franklin, whose work was the basis for Watson and Crick’s discovery, which they never got her permission to use, nor did they ever give her any credit. Although this is a highly disputed and controversial topic (there are numerous books written about it, such as The Double Helix, by Watson and Crick), there is no mention of this in the textbook. Black and white. Definitively. Watson and Crick discovered DNA. Whatever.

And it’s not like there aren’t opportunities to feature female scientists. For example, there is an extended discussion of the polyamide Kevlar, used in place of steel in bulletproof vests, and how the uniform system of hydrogen bonds that holds the polymer chains together account for the “amazing” strength of Kevlar. There is a picture of the hydrogen bonding pattern, but no mention of the female chemist Stephanie Kwolek, who synthesized Kevlar while working as a chemist for DuPont.

Why does this matter? Because I’ve done research on the lack of women in science and engineering fields, and the research says that women need to see examples of positive, successful women in science and engineering. Textbooks like this inadvertently send the message that science is a male domain.

Avoiding Science & Other Thoughts

My decision to avoid science was pretty much solidified the first semester of my freshman year in college, during Chemistry 101. The professor was a callous, stern older woman who gave long lectures without betraying a trace of emotion, multiple choice tests that required rote memorization, and long, boring labs with titrations that I found tedious and uninspiring. Perhaps I would have felt differently if I’d known how titrations could be used to develop a medication for a sick child, or to find the cure for a disease. Although I got As and Bs in Chemistry, Precalculus, and several Computer Science courses, I assumed I wasn’t good at science. I’d always been an A student in high school, and when that didn’t come as easily in college, I took no more science courses than the minimum requirements for my B.A. It wasn’t until twelve years later, after my mother had a stroke that I began to rethink my decision to avoid science. Research on the gender gap in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields includes many strategies for creating gender-inclusive STEM classrooms: smaller classes, increased percentage of female faculty, outreach programs as a bridge between high school and college, cooperative learning vs. competition, recognition of different communication styles, hands-on projects, group work, and content that is relevant to society. Perhaps I would have felt differently if I’d experienced a different type of science classroom.

There have been two times in my life when it seemed that the universe grabbed me and shook me out of my complacency. The first, when I was evacuated from the corporate headquarters of the company where I worked, from the Sears Tower, on September 11th, 2001 and was subsequently stranded in Chicago. After four years of feeling ambivalent about my place in the corporate world of software development, I quit my well paying job, sold my house, and went to graduate school.

The second time was in November of 2005, when my 60-year-old mother had a stroke that deprived the left side of her brain of oxygen, and left her with permanent left-side weakness. Ironically, this experience, the biggest test of strength and courage my family has ever known, has also been a blessing. I would never want my mom to suffer again, but she has led me to value every moment, to believe that I have the ability to change my direction if I’m not happy. And it is seeing my parents, happier together than they’ve ever been, which is my foundation.

My plan with the Master’s degree was to pursue teaching at the college level. That was before I learned that teaching English at the college level with only a Master’s degree essentially pays minimum wage, and offers no promise of any (let alone permanent) employment. And isn’t this surprising, given that our English dept. relies on almost as many instructional academic staff working in these tenuous circumstances, as they do tenure-track PhDs. This is just as bad, if not worse, as the abuse of limited term employees in higher education (but this is all another story).

Alas, I just met with my manager, and he made no mention of the agenda-less meeting drama! I am so surprised I expected that he would have a diagram about it, which he would narrate. He had another diagram, which he did narrate, but at least for now it sounds like I’m free to make my own decisions about meeting agendas.

I’m writing this all just as I found out about yet another tragedy with a friend’s struggle to have another child. My heart breaks for her, and yet I am without words. It makes all my complaints this week seem so trivial.