Sorry for my delayed reply.
1) As you say, the average remission rate is around 25% (average of 26 and 24). And, John was kind enough to say that "generally" the remission rate would be around 35% with Biologics. Let's say a 30% remission rate. Does this really mean that, on the average, out of 100 patients who take biologics for UC treatment, only 30 achieve clinical remission and that 70 of them do NOT achieve clinical remission (this is the definition of remission rate, is it not?)
Statistically speaking -- yes, that is correct.
2) You had mentioned that there are some options with higher remission rates (than biologics) that are not recognized by doctors. Would you be kind enough to mention them? I am keeping all options on the table and I would like to consider all of them before jumping into the biologics treatment methods. Is it against the policy / rules to mention about these alternative methods in this forum? If it is not, kindly mention them.
No it's not against the rules.
There are two prevailing theories about
IBD right now. 1) Auto-immune / immune deficiency 2) Infection or auto-infection (your own gut flora)
I am currently exploring #2. The main suspect for infection is mycobacterium avium paratuberculosis (MAP).
These two websites will explain all:
The doctor (Dr. Borody) who has come up with the antibiotic protocol for MAP infection was also the doctor who invented the protocol for treating stomach ulcers due to h. pylori. H. pylori was considered an alternative fringe theory for stomach ulcers until the researching doctor drank the bacteria, developed ulcers within days, and then successfully treated it with antibiotics that Dr. Borody figured out. The discovering doctor won the Nobel Prize.
Now Borody has moved on to treating people who have IBD with antibiotics. There are a bunch of doctors worldwide who are going this route. Their remission rate is higher than 50% and the clinical studies continue to demonstrate this. Unfortunately these doctors are still a minority. I personally believe that the low success rate of biologics is because we're suppressing the body in the presence of an occult infection. MAP is hard to culture from humans, only two labs in the world can do it at present -- unlike in cattle (where it comes from) where it's extreme easy and they've been doing it for over 100 years. Because standard tests don't find it, the GI community is assuming IBD is always auto-immune.
I recently tested positive for MAP at the Otakaro Lab in New Zealand. They're the most accurate lab in the world right now for MAP testing. If you want to go this route, get tested first. It takes 30 days. I'll be starting the triple protocol shortly.
If you want more studies linking MAP to IBD I can post them here, but I'm going to be starting another thread shortly so I don't have to keep repeating myself.