[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: NY TIMES SLAMS ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE ON FRONT PAGE



I feel quite affronted by her crapola.  I have the alternative medicine of all time, and I am known by the Office of Alternative medicine, and every pharmaceutical house in the country, and completely ignored!  If I had the money for a FDA NDA, I would get out of alternative medicine and go main stream.  If not that, I wish a major pharmaceutical house would license my patent US 5,409,905 (CURE FOR COMMON COLD).  Come see the truth about zinc and the common cold at our URL site http://www.coldcure.com/  You might want to prepare yourself for a major shock.

-- 
George Eby, Inventor 
http://www.coldcure.com/


In article <4qahk2$jim@news.wco.com>, dnoche@mail.wco.com says...
>
>Nimnodius <nodrog@itsa.ucsf.edu> wrote:
>>John:
>>
>>I noticed in your recitation that you failed to actually point out what 
>>Gina Kolata's piece said that was WRONG.
>
>Well, ok - I can tell you what I thought was wrong with this piece of 
>propaganda.  And it is that.  When I went to the NY Times Syndicate page 
>to look for an e-mail address for them I was impressed by that big Squibb 
>ad dominating the page.  Cute.  They hadn't posted Gina's yellow 
>journalism piece yet. 
>
>Incidently, my local newspaper cut her article down to where it almost 
>made sense and put it on A5.  Good for them.
>
>Ok - here goes:
>
>jhammell@ix.netcom.com(John Hammell) wrote:
>>                    ON FRINGES OF HEALTH CARE,
>>                    UNTESTED THERAPIES THRIVE
>>           By Gina Kolata NY Times 6/17/96 Front Page
>
>First off, even tho Kolata's article has this headline, there is no real 
>discussion of *why* these "untested" therapies are thriving.  Many of 
>them have been tested but people are choosing to ignore results of tests 
>done in the 1950's and earlier.  There's a lot of good work to be brought 
>forward.  Also non-American test results are ignored - can't trust those 
>backward folks in Great Britain, France, Italy, Switzerland, Australia, 
>and Germany after all - they're not *Americans*.
>
>This whole article is insulting to most human beings.  It's assumed that 
>if we find something works for us that hasn't been "proven" that we're 
>gullible.  I believe that our First World populations are far more 
>educated and less vulnerable to "placebos" than she or the MD's want to 
>believe.   Since my personal experience includes having my reports 
>dismissed by MD's and RN's as recently as 5 years ago that are now 
>standard parts of what many of them are now telling their patients and 
>publishing in pop med articles I believe my body first and them second.
>
>I am snipping some of John's comments here for brevity only.  The 
>original article is at news:4q6c9i$he2@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com
>
>Use this as an URL and you'll get to the original.  Important info is in 
>the beginning of this post.
>
>>     From green algae pills to coffee enemas, from acupuncture to
>>aromatherapy, alternative medical treatments have grown into a big
>>business and a powerful force in modern medicine, alarming many in
>>the medical establishment and largely escaping scrutiny from
>>regulators.
>
>Now coffee enemas is a good one to get people going (sorry, couldn't 
>help myself) off on this topic.  The green algae pill mention of course 
>shows she's spanning the range of "alternatives".   But the coffee enemas 
>prejudice the whole thing from the start.  Nice rhetoric.
>
>>     
>>     Although folk remedies have been around for centuries, often
>>co-existing with the treatments offered by orthodox medicine,
>>medical experts say that over the past 10 years, more people have
>>been turning to more kinds of alternative therapies than ever
>>before. 
>
>Again, there is no follow up on this intriguing statement.  Why are more 
>and more people finding relief outside the patented FDA-approved 
>medicines?   There are a lot of very valid reasons - not one of which is 
>mentioned in this article.
>
>
>>A national telephone survey, published in the New England
>>Journal of Medicine in 1993, found that one out of three Americans
>>used unconventional therapies which can range from taking vitamin
>>C for a cold 
>
>Since when is taking Vitamin C for a cold unconventional?  Where has she 
>been?   Does anyone know one single physician who has ever told his 
>patients *not* to take Vitamin C for a cold?
>
>
>>to going to Mexican clinics for outlawed cancer
>>treatments. 
>
>The use of "outlawed" is interesting here.
>
>
>>The survey also found that Americans spent $13.7
>>billion in 1991 on such treatments.
>
>And most of them paid directly out of their pockets for these - without 
>benefit of insurance co-payment.  Most of this money was *earned* and if 
>they were truly incapacitated, hard to come by.   Right here is a 
>significant vote of confidence esp. if these include repeat purchases.  
>But is this discussed?  Noooo.  We are asked to believe that this is 
>evidence of how foolish people are.  Uh, HUH!! 
>
>>     
>>     Another national survey, published in 1994, found that 60% of
>>doctors had at some time referred patients to practitioners of
>>alternative medicine. 
>
>However we are not told why, in which kinds of cases, or the outcomes of 
>these referrals.  Why not?
>
>
>>The highly prestigious Beth Israel Hospital
>>in Boston, which is associated with Harvard Medical School,
>>recently set up a center for alternative medicine, as did Columbia
>>University. And five years ago, the Federal Office of Alternative
>>Medicine was established as part of the National Institutes of
>>Health to provide the public with information on alternative
>>treatments and to find out what works.
>>     
>>     A growing number of health insurance companies, which
>>increasingly set the standards for care, now cover once obscure
>>treatments like naturopathy. Practitioners of Naturopathy say that
>>disease arises from blockages of a flow of a life force throughout
>>the body and that cures follow from treatments like acupuncture and
>>homeopathy, treating patients with infinitesimal amounts of
>>substances that in larger doses might produce symptoms of disease.
>
>Now wait a minute.  I've never heard of Naturopathy.  Sorry.  I have 
>found acupuncture extremely effective for certain problems.  I haven't 
>tried homeopathy because the theory sounds odd to me although I'm 
>beginning to wonder if they aren't supplying effective treatments in 
>spite of the theories rather than because of it.
>
>The way Gina states it, homeopathy sounds a lot like vaccination in 
>theory - although she doesn't point that out.   But by saying that 
>acupuncture and homeopathy are embraced by this "Naturopathy" she manages 
>to cast "reasonable" doubt on both.  But I don't understand in what way 
>that connection is valid for presenting accupuncture or homeopathy.  Both 
>predate whatever Naturopathy is - it may approve of these two 
>pre-existing modes but both of them stand on their own and are not 
>related.  So what was she trying to do here, hmmm?
>
>See the prejudicial nature of her writing?   It looks "reasonable" but in 
>fact is very twisted.  We'll be seeing more and more of this propaganda 
>as we get closer to the Medical Access hearings and the GATT mess in 
>October.
>
>>Meanwhile, many makers of alternative remedies have been reporting
>>record sales. This financial growth is a direct result, analysts
>>say, of a 1994 Federal law curbing the regulation of the industry
>>by the Food and Drug Administration.
>
>NO, NO, NO!!  What a liar she is.  The "new" regulation maintained 
>the status quo in the face of the FDA's demands for guns and money to 
>fight a war against chamomile and other "dangerous" substances like 
>Vitamin C.   The 1994 regulation was forced into existance by the very 
>unreasonable desires of the FDA to increase its authority.   They were 
>already arming agents and making unwarranted (really - in the legal 
>sense) seizures at the time the legislation was passed.  (IMHO the FDA 
>boys had been watching too much "Miami Vice" and wanted to get some of 
>the same kind of adrenal rushes.  At least it sure looked that way.)
>  They needed curbing and most of Congress came to see the need to 
>restrain them.   So what the new law did was state the status quo as 
>regulation.   See this anywhere in her article??  No way, Jose!  Too 
>close to the truth to suit the drug companies that are buying the NY 
>Times.   
>
>     
>>     Many doctors, scientists and Government officials sharply
>>criticize the practice of alternative medicine, saying that at best
>>it does no harm
>
>This is a problem?  And again, let's not specify whether we're taking 
>about a cup of peppermint tea as a decent, safe decongestant or the 
>notorious coffee enema.  Are these people complaining about the Vitamin C 
>she mentioned above?   Who knows?   She's neatly lumped them all together 
>so we can get our knee jerking when the Pavlovian bell is rung.  The 
>trigger is supposed to be "alternative medicine".  Is your knee jerking 
>yet?   If not, read on and fall into the trance she's planned for you.
>
> and at worst it can do real danger. While
>>conventional medicine adopts procedures that are consistent with
>>scientific hypotheses, and drugs must be stringently tested and
>>approved by the F.D.A., alternative medicine practitioners can use
>>therapies based on whims or discredited science, and their methods
>>have not undergone rigorous tests.
>
>Notice that there is no case made here that some of these remedies have 
>been "tested" for thousands of years.   I'll bet $5 chamomile was used to 
>settle stomachs 4,000 years ago.  Anybody?
>
>Let's not mention that the FDA approves drugs with dangerous side-effects 
>designed to provide a patented substitute for naturally occurring, 
>unpatentable substances that do a better job more safely.  I've already 
>mentioned peppermint as a decongestant - how about real progesterone 
>instead of Provera?  It's being used in Europe much more than the United 
>States most likely because Wyeth-Ayerst doesn't have the power there that 
>it does with the FDA. 
>
> 
>>     
>>     The critics of alternative medicine 
>
>And they are the only ones you'll see quoted here except for Weill whose 
>quote seems relatively meaningless - I can only guess that she plucked it 
>from a context within which it had some bearing on something.
>
>>point to reports about the
>>dangers posed by some alternative treatments. Herbal preparations
>>like ma huang, used in dietary supplements and widely available
>>mood-altering products, have caused deaths,
>
>Has ma huang killed anybody?  I really don't know - does anybody reading 
>this?   I'd really appreciate the info.
>
> as have coffee enemas,
>
>Have they?  Seriously.  Would this be due to a particular form of 
>administration?  Like "high colonic"?   I don't ever remember hearing of 
>anyone dying of coffee enemas per se.  Has anybody else?   Really want to 
>know.  This smells like a lie to me or at least a gross 
>misrepresentation.
>
>>said to treat cancer and other diseases by detoxifying the body.
>>The National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute has documented cases
>>of kidney failure and death in people who have had chelation
>>therapy- the intravenous injection of the synthetic chelating agent
>>EDTA- advertised as a treatment for heart disease and ailments like
>>Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's and sexual impotency.
>
>I really don't know about chelation.  Again, I'd be glad to hear about 
>it.
>>     
>>     The very name "alternative medicine" is Orwellian newspeak,
>>implying that it is a viable option, said Dr. Marcia Angell,
>>executive director of the New England Journal of Medicine. "Its a
>>new name for snake oil," she said. "Theres medicine that works and
>>medicine that doesn't work."
>
>Dr. Marcia Angell sure has a lot to learn or is really invested in some 
>dogma.  First, Marcia, there's nothing Orwellian about the term 
>"alternative" - how many words meaning "alternative" to  describe the 
>many "alternatives" to the dangerous and sometimes ineffective 
>FDA-approved medicines do we have in English?  Hmmm?   Is it the use of 
>the word "medicine" that she finds offensive?   I guess that's it.  
>Thinks that since she doesn't want it in her "NE Journal of Medicine" 
>then the word doesn't apply.   Someone give this girl a dictionary!!  
>Puh-leeze!
>
>>     
>>     Dr. Arthur Kaplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the
>>University of Pennsylvania, said, "Some say, "Look, why not let
>>desperately ill people do what they want? Why stand between them
>>and the latest piece of shark cartilage?"
>
>Ahhh.  Finally some sense comes forward.  But not for long. 
>
>>     
>>     But he disagrees. Dr. Kaplan is gravely concerned, he said,
>>that because of alternative medicine, some patients will reject
>>reliable mainstream treatments.
>
>I think that if one were to study those who are trying alternatives 
>you'll find that we usually have been failed by the FDA approved 
>treatments and have moved on to alternatives out of sheer desperation.
>
>This "can't let them have them or they won't take what's good for them" 
>attitude is harmful, demeaning, and ignores the evidence.
>
>I could go on showing you what's wrong with this highly slanted piece of 
>garbage which has appeared not only on the front page of the NY Times (Is 
>this a new low for them or have they openly prostituted themselves on the 
>front page before?  Love to hear examples!!) but in papers which 
>subscribe to the NY Times Syndicate -  which does have several web pages 
>available for your viewing pleasure.
>
>I'm not going to proceed going through this further because it is just 
>too stupid and sickening.  Haven't you seen enough?  If not, I've left 
>the rest of the NY Times text and John's closing remarks below.
>
>Sigh...   All this so that the drug companies can make more money.  
>You'll notice that one theme that gets hammered on below is that the 
>alternative treatments are diverting money away from the international 
>"legal" cartels.  This reminds me of some rich kid with a swimming pool 
>and a pony being angry that one of the maid's sons has a second-hand 
>baseball glove.  "How dare he!!"  Check it out and see if I'm not right.
>
>But if this doesn't answer your original question, Nimnodius, about what 
>exactly is wrong with this article, I can go on!!  Let me know!
>
>Thanks,
>
>dn   
>
>
>> Practitioners of alternative
>>medicine, he said, encourage patients to think that "somehow, just
>>by being outside the mainstream, nothing is risky or dangerous or
>>has side effects." It is, he said, "ridiculous to say that
>>chemotherapy can cause side effects but chelation therapy or coffee
>>enemas, thats completely beyond risk."
>>     
>>     Alternative medicine encompasses a range of treatments outside
>>those commonly accepted by the medical establishment. Generally,
>>such treatments have not passed clinical trials. Although many
>>medicinal herbs have pharmacologically active components, the focus
>>of alternative medicine is not to isolate and test these
>>ingredients.
>>     
>>     Alternative medicine includes therapies offered by
>>chiropractors, acupuncturists and homeopaths. Also included may be 
>>treatments like aromatherapy, the use of aromatic oil for
>>relaxation, which is also promoted as a cure for hundreds of
>>diseases. Alternative medicines include herbs, taken for various
>>ills; green algae pills, said to foster alertness, and shark
>>cartilage, promoted as a natural cure for cancer.
>>     
>>     The regulation of alternative practices varies. All states
>>license chiropractors, but some license acupuncturists,
>>naturopaths, homeopaths, and practitioners of Chinese medicine.
>>Some practitioners are M.D.s or have D.O.s, doctor of osteopathy
>>degrees, but others come from a broad range of backgrounds, ranging
>>from correspondence courses to academic programs in schools that
>>specialize in the field.
>>     
>>     Some supporters of alternative medicine say that it offers a
>>much needed antidote to high-tech, impersonal, cost-driven health
>>care, and that even if the treatments are not cures, they could
>>have powerful placebo effects. They say it emphasizes a different
>>view of health, one based on natural healing and nontoxic
>>interventions. Dr.Andrew Weil, author of the best selling book
>>"Spontaneous Healing" (Alfred A. Knopf, 1995) and director of the
>>program in integrative medicine at the University of Arizona
>>College of Medicine, said that alternative medicine "resonates with
>>the spirit of the times."
>>     
>>     But the critics also point to reports of people with serious
>>illnesses who have failed to pursue standard treatments in favor of
>>alternative treatments that have not worked.
>>     
>>     Anita Gergasko, of Hazlet, N.J., was 58 when she died in a
>>hospice from metastatic breast cancer, which she had fought for
>>seven years. She had a mastectomy, her husband George Gergasko aid,
>>but refused her doctors urging that she have chemotherapy, treating
>>herself instead with massive doses of vitamin C and herbs. when the
>>cancer later spread to her brain, she agreed to chemotherapy but
>>also took megadoses of vitamin B-12, which can counteract the
>>chemotherapy drug she was taking.
>>     
>>     "On her deathbed she made me promise that I would see to it
>>that nobody else in her family and none of her friends would get
>>involved with this stuff," Mr.Gergasko said.
>>
>>THE APPROACH
>>A Reliance
>>On Anecdotes
>>
>>     The rise in alternative treatments can be explained in part by
>>the limits of modern medicine. Even though conventional, science-
>>based medicine has reached unsurpassed heights of technical
>>sophistication, it is still far from perfect. For many ills, it has
>>nothing very effective to offer; doctors can seem hurried and
>>brusque, and conventional treatments can be costly or painful.
>>     
>>     But alternative therapies, unlike conventional ones, have not
>>passed rigorous scientific tests showing that they are safe and
>>effective. Generally, the only assurance patients have that
>>alternative treatments will work is anecdotal evidence from other
>>patients and practitioners. That dismays leaders of conventional
>>medicine, who say that such evidence is not reliable because
>>patients and their practitioners fervently desire success and are
>>inclined to judge a treatment more promising than it is.
>>     
>>     Dr.Weil, of the Arizona program, said he realized that
>>alternative medicine treatments had not met scientific standards
>>for efficacy ad safety. But "a great many things in standard
>>medicine are not proven either- we just do them," he said.
>>     
>>     Doctors do sometimes find that conventional treatments are ill
>>advised. For example, doctors no longer advise stress reduction to
>>treat ulcers. Even reducing the amount of salt in the diet is
>>increasingly in question.
>>     
>>     But Dr. Caplan said Dr. Weil's response blurred the
>>distinction between conventional and alternative medicine.
>>"Medicine at least has a tendency to be self-correcting and self
>>critical," he said. "In lots of areas of alternative medicine, I
>>haven't seen anybody even admit to the possibility of error."
>>     
>>     Dr. Weil said that as a practitioner, rather than a
>>researcher, he was satisfied with a "different standard of proof,"
>>like reports of patients who say they were helped. For disorders
>>with no know cure, Dr. Weil said, "If I am faced with an immediate
>>need for a treatment that might alleviate suffering or possibly
>>promote a cure, and if I can assure myself that a treatment is
>>safe, it is reasonable to try it."
>>     
>>     But Dr.Richard A. Friedman, director of psychopharmacology at
>>New York Hospital- Cornell Medical Center, said, "Not only is it
>>impossible for Dr. Weil to know if an untested treatment is safe,
>>he also cannot know if it is dangerous." Untested treatments, Dr.
>>Friedman said, "range from harmless placebos to deadly poisons, and
>>the consumer has now way of knowing which is which."
>>
>>The Debate
>>Natural Healing,
>>Or Quackery?
>>
>>     Dr.Weil and others who support various forms of alternative
>>medicine say it represents the rediscovery of a different way of
>>thinking about health, one that forsakes rigid medical models and
>>looks instead to natural ways of helping the body heal itself.
>>     
>>     Dr. David M. Eisenberg, who directs the new alternative
>>medical center in Boston and who conducted the national telephone
>>survey on alternative medicine said in an interview that for many
>>people, alternative medicine might be a way of taking charge of
>>their health or finding a practitioner who will take the time to
>>listen to them. For many, the only harm is to their pocketbooks.
>>     
>>     But in a study published in 1991 in the New England Journal of
>>Medicine, Dr.Barrie R. Cassileth, an adjunct social psychologist at
>>the University of North Carolina who studies patients experiences
>>with alternative cancer therapies, found- to her surprise, she
>>said- that terminal cancer patients treated with coffee enemas and
>>other alternative treatments were more miserable than those treated
>>with chemotherapy and radiation and that their survival time was
>>the same.
>>     
>>     Dr. Stephen Barrett, a retired psychiatrist and a board member
>>of the National Council Against Health Fraud, sees another danger
>>in the growth of alternative medicine, which he calls "quackery."
>>     
>>     "Quackery isn't necessarily about selling products or
>>services- its about selling misbeliefs," Dr. Barrett said. "For a
>>quack to thrive, he has to promote unwarranted distrust. If you can
>>convince someone that the Government is not going to give you
>>accurate information on any health matter, that doctors and
>>researchers cannot be trusted, than that person will be damaged. If
>>you are not sick, these misbeliefs may not cause you serious harm,
>>but if you are sick, they may kill you."
>>     
>>     Still, several voices within orthodox medicine have softened
>>their criticism of alternative practices, though often for reasons
>>that do not include a belief in their efficacy. At the American
>>Cancer Society, a spokeswoman, Susan Islam, said the term "unproven
>>methods" had recently been replaced by "complementary and
>>alternative methods" because of a concern with "political
>>correctness." The term "unproven" she said, "is not P.C."
>>
>>The Regulations
>>Industry Flourishes 
>>Under New Rules
>>
>>     In 1994, Congress passed the Dietary Supplement Health and
>>Education Act, which essentially did away with regulations on
>>alternative medicines that called themselves foods or dietary
>>supplements. Virtually overnight, it revolutionized the industry.
>>     
>>     Under the new law, products like herbs, shark cartilage or
>>vitamins can be sold and promoted as cures for diseases or as
>>treatments to enhance health as long as the claims were not made on
>>the product labels. Manufacturers can make product claims in books,
>>pamphlets and signs in stores where the products are sold. Before,
>>manufacturers could make no health claims that the F.D.A had not
>>approved.
>>     
>>     The leading supporter of the act was Senator Orrin G. Hatch,
>>Republican from Utah, a state whose dietary supplement industry has
>>sales of $1 billion a year. Dietary supplements include vitamins
>>and formulas for gaining weight, as well as herbs, shark cartilage
>>and melatonin.
>>     
>>     Critics of the new law say it has exposed cancer patients to
>>outrageous claims for useless treatments. Dr. Charles Myers,
>>director of the cancer center for the University of Virginia, says
>>the law has "opened Pandora's box."
>>     
>>     But Mr. Hatch, who takes dietary supplements, is proud of his
>>role in getting the law passed. "These products have worked for
>>people and helped people," he said. "You show me a doctor who says
>>they haven't helped, and I'll show you a prejudiced guy."
>>     
>>     Some alternative treatments are not regulated because they
>>existed long before there were any regulations. Homeopathic
>>remedies, for example, have never been subjected to testing for
>>effectiveness because they were around before the F.D.A. had laws
>>requiring that. They can stay on the market because the F.D.A.
>>considers them safe.
>>     Other treatments are permitted because practitioners use a
>>legal product; chelation therapy uses EDTA, which is approved for
>>lead-poisoning therapy. Treatments like coffee enemas and fruit
>>juice diets for cancer are not regulated by the F.D.A. because they
>>do not involve drugs.
>>     
>>     By all accounts, the alternative medicine business has grown
>>explosively in recent years. In 1995, the stock of publicly traded
>>dietary-supplement companies increased in value by up to 80
>>percent; so far this year it is up 50 percent, said Matthew Patsky,
>>an analyst for the Boston firm Adams, Harkness and Hill and a
>>specialist in the dietary supplement business. The 1995 increase
>>for the Dow Jones Industrial Average was 33.5 percent; for this
>>year it is 10.4 percent.
>>     
>>     After the 1994 act became law, Mr.Patsky said, "there was a
>>recognition that there was not much risk in selling dietary
>>supplements." So investors became interested, and that "has created
>>an opportunity for these companies to go ahead and raise money in
>>the public markets," he added.
>>     
>>     The market for dietary supplements has grown by about 15
>>percent a year in the past few years, and one part of it, the
>>herbal market, has grown by about 25 percent a year, he said. In
>>contrast, the market for brand name foods has grown about 2 to 3
>>percent a year, Mr.Patsky said.
>>     
>>     Purveyors of specific therapies report unprecedented public
>>interest. The American Colon Therapy Association, which promotes
>>colonic irrigation, reports a 50 percent growth in the number of
>>practitioners in the past year in the United States, with about 500
>>now practicing.
>>     
>>     Alternative medicine is finding more acceptance among
>>insurers. In 1992, the American Western Life Insurance Company
>>offered a plan that used naturopaths rather than conventional
>>doctors. That plan accounts for 25 percent of new business this
>>year, a representative of the company said.
>>     
>>     Richard Coorsh, a spokesman for the Health Insurance
>>Association of America, said several state legislatures were now
>>requiring insurance companies to cover various alternative
>>therapies, like chiropractor and naturopath services. Insurance
>>plans in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut must pay for
>>chiropractors, and New York insurance plans must pay for
>>podiatrists. But so far, insurance companies in New York, New
>>Jersey and Connecticut don't have to pay for other alternative
>>treatments.
>>     
>>     "When you examine how much money is being spent," said
>>Dr.Raymond Kenhard, an oncologist at John's Hopkins University and
>>president of the American Cancer Society, "you really would demand
>>that there is some evidence or what you are receiving."
>>_____________________________________________________________
>>
>>Please forward this article! Please refer to my notes about calling
>>members of Congress in support of S.1035 / HR 2019 The Access to
>>Medical Treatment Act. Please send your rebuttal to this horrendous
>>article to the NY Times National News Dept at 229 W.43 St. NY, NY
>>10036. (They don't give out a fax number.)
>>
>>If you have anything to say to Gina Kolata of the NY Times, she can
>>be called via 212-556-1234. 
>>
>>Call Dr.Marcia Angell, executive editor of the New England Journal
>>of Medicine at 617-734-9800, FAX 617-734-4457
>>
>>Call Dr.Arthur Kaplan at Center of Bio Ethics, University of
>>Pennsylvania at 215-898-3055.
>>
>>If you'd like to see the Office of Alternative Medicine publish a
>>rebuttal, call their press secretary, Anita Green at 202-496-1712. 
>>Be sure to call your Congressman and Senators to ask that they
>>cosponsor HR 2019 S.1035 The Access to Medical Treatment Act- which
>>allows an individual to be treated by any licensed health care
>>practitioner with any treatment method they desire as long as:
>>
>>1) The treatment causes no serious harm other than reactions
>>experienced with routinely used medical treatments for the same
>>medical condition and,
>>
>>2) The patient is fully informed about the treatment and its
>>possible side effects. This is a freedom of choice issue. The US is
>>currently ranked a dismal 17th in life expectancy, and high medical
>>costs are breaking the back of this country. Lost cost alternatives
>>will help improve the health of Americans due to their preventive
>>nature. The Access to Medical Treatment Act opens up a closed
>>system to the use of alternative treatments, encouraging free
>>market competition which will help bring medical costs down.
>>
>
>
>
>>
>>I, for one, was mortified to see the research studies being funded by 
>>OAM.  What a load of crappola.  What this area needs is some 
>>sophisticated methodologists sitting down to design excellent studies in 
>>this area.  What they got was a bunch of duffers who are going to do 
>>surveys and phone interviews and focus groups.
>>
>>You know what they'll end up with?  
>>
>>Misc.health.alternative
>>
>>"People go to a lot of alternaopaths and really really really really 
>>like them - at elast the ones we got to interview"
>>
>>Great - just what this field needs more anecdote and opinion.
>>
>>--
>>
>>Very very disappointedly,
>>
>>nim
>>
>>PS: did you notice that the top 4 sellers of supplements grossed > 
>>$2 billion last year - that must explain why no one will fund research 
>>in this area - no money to be made . . .
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>
>"the Internet may fairly be regarded as a never-ending worldwide 
>conversation.  The Government may not, through the CDA, interrupt that 
>conversation.  As the most participatory form of mass speech yet 
>developed, the Internet deserves the highest protection from governmental 
>intrusion."     Judge Stuart Dalzell
>
>




References: