If I've pointed it out once, I've pointed it out a thousand times. Naturopathy is a cornucopia of almost every quackery you can think of. Be it homeopathy, traditional Chinese medicine, Ayurvedic medicine, applied kinesiology, anthroposophical medicine, reflexology, craniosacral therapy, Bowen Technique, and pretty much any other form of unscientific or prescientific medicine that you can imagine, it's hard to think of a single form of pseudoscientific medicine and quackery that naturopathy doesn't embrace or at least tolerate. Indeed, as I've retorted before to apologists for naturopathy who claim that it is scientific, naturopathy can never be scientific as long as you can't have naturopathy without homeopathy and homeopaths embrace homeopathy. Unfortunately, naturopaths have over the years been having some success in persuading state legislatures to license naturopaths, in some cases even giving them the privilege of being considered primary care practitioners. It's part of an organized effort, too, and I don't expect that effort to let up. True, the governor of Massachusetts did veto a naturopathic licensing bill that came across his desk recently, but no one following this issue expects the naturopaths to let up. As Jann Bellamy put it, the naturopaths will be back. They always are.
Indeed, in the wake of the failure to pass a naturopathic licensing bill in Massachusetts, Michael Cronin, the president of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians (AANP) lamented:
This brings up many thoughts and emotions for me. I feel disappointment over a legislative process that seems slow and unfair. And there is anger at a process that placates the desires of the Massachusetts Medical Society over serving the health needs of the public and the desire of the Commonwealth.
But he also brags:
There are currently licensing laws in 16 states (up from 5 in 1978), the District of Columbia, the United States territories of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and 5 Canadian provinces. We have 7 healthy, accredited North American colleges and there are now 43 state associations.
And urges his fellow naturopaths:
I send the highest kudos to our ND brothers and sisters in Massachusetts. May you heal your wounds and come out fighting.
In the meantime, unfortunately, they seem to be coming out fighting in my home state of Michigan. I just learned from Jann Bellamy over the weekend that a naturopathic licensing bill has been introduced for consideration by the Michigan legislature. I'm referring to Michigan House Bill 4152 (2013), which is now in the House Committee on Health Policy. Apparently it was introduced on January 31 by Representative Lisa Posthumus Lyons, who is the Assistant Floor Majority Leader and represents District 86, which encompasses a rural area the Lower Peninsula east of Grand Rapids. I couldn't find anything about her bill on her House website, but I did find a Facebook post by her congratulating Kelly Hassberger for opening her new Naturopathic Health Clinic in Grand Rapids. One notes that this particular news story notes that Hassberger focuses on "homeopathic medicine," which shows just how far Lyon's acceptance and even promotion of quackery goes.
There is, however, a rather interesting bit of information in this story:
While naturopathic doctors are licensed practitioners in the state of Arizona, they are not in Michigan.
Hassberger is working with The Michigan Association of Naturopathic Physicians and state legislators to get practitioners who graduated from accredited doctorate programs in naturopathic medicine to practice as primary care physicians in the state.
State Reps. Lisa Posthumus, Ellen Lipton and Joseph Haveman introduced House Bill 5594 to the House in May 2012.
The proposed bill outlines what would be required to be a licensed naturopathic physician in Michigan, including defining what an accredited naturopathic medical program entails, creating a naturopathic medical medical board, as well as defining the scope of practice for naturopathic physicians in Michigan.
"It would give us back the ability to use the skills we are trained in, including IV therapy among others, as well as give us the right to accept insurance, run lab testing, diagnose and prescribe prescription drugs when needed," Hassberger said. "I want to give the public an understanding of the differences between my training and other programs in Michigan. My goal is to be here and develop awareness and help to get that bill through.”
So this is not the first bite at the apple that Lyons has taken. Notice how Hassberger refers to "IV therapy." Naturopaths shouldn't be let anywhere near an intravenous line, much less IV therapy, because in the hands of naturopaths IV therapy usually means quackery like high dose intravenous vitamin C or chelation therapy.
Sadly, this is a bipartisan effort, with Lyons being the Republican half of the not-so-dynamic duo of legislators, and Ellen Cogen Lipton being the Democratic half, representing the Michigan 27th House district, which represents Detroit suburbs such as Ferndale, Royal Oak Township, Oak Park, Huntington Woods, and Hazel Park. I know some of these towns. For instance, Ferndale is known as one of the "hipper" cities in the Detroit metropolitan area; it's not surprising to me that a Representative whose district encompasses Ferndale would be sympathetic to naturopathy to the point of being willing to make repeated attempts to pass a bill that would license naturopaths.
Let's take a look at MI HB 4152.
The bill defines "naturopathy" and "naturopathic physicians" thusly:
(3) "NATUROPATHIC MEDICINE" MEANS A SYSTEM OF PRACTICE THAT IS BASED ON THE NATURAL HEALING CAPACITY OF INDIVIDUALS FOR THE DIAGNOSIS, TREATMENT, AND PREVENTION OF DISEASES
(4) "NATUROPATHIC PHYSICIAN" MEANS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO ENGAGES IN THE PRACTICE OF NATUROPATHIC MEDICINE AND WHO IS REQUIRED TO BE LICENSED OR OTHERWISE AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS PART TO ENGAGE IN THAT PRACTICE.
The wag in me can't help but point out how stupid this definition is. Let me just put it this way. Science-based medicine relies on the natural healing capacity of individuals for the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of diseases. Think about it. Setting broken bones would be useless if the body weren't able to heal itself naturally. Surgery itself relies on the ability of the body to heal itself; otherwise cutting into the body to rearrange its anatomy for therapeutic intent would be the gravest of folly. The very definition of naturopathy is a false dichotomy between conventional medicine and "natural healing."
So what does this law authorize "naturopathic physicians" to do? The list is disturbing:
(A) ORDER AND PERFORM PHYSICAL AND LABORATORY EXAMINATIONS FOR DIAGNOSTIC
PURPOSES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PHLEBOTOMY, CLINICAL LABORATORY TESTS,
ORIFICIAL EXAMINATIONS, OR PHYSIOLOGICAL FUNCTION TESTS.
(B) ORDER DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING STUDIES.
(C) DISPENSE, ADMINISTER, ORDER, OR PRESCRIBE OR PERFORM ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
(I) FOOD, EXTRACTS OF FOOD, NUTRACEUTICALS, VITAMINS, AMINO ACIDS, MINERALS,
ENZYMES, BOTANICALS AND THEIR EXTRACTS, BOTANICAL MEDICINES, HOMEOPATHIC
MEDICINES, ALL DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS, OR NONPRESCRIPTION DRUGS AS DEFINED BY THE
FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT, 21 USC 301 TO 399D.
(II) PRESCRIPTION OR NONPRESCRIPTION MEDICINES AS DESIGNATED BY THE
NATUROPATHIC FORMULARY COUNCIL.
(III) HOT OR COLD HYDROTHERAPY; NATUROPATHIC PHYSICAL MEDICINE;
ELECTROMAGNETIC ENERGY; OR THERAPEUTIC EXERCISE.
(IV) DEVICES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THERAPEUTIC DEVICES, BARRIER
CONTRACEPTION, OR DURABLE MEDICAL EQUIPMENT.
(V) HEALTH EDUCATION OR HEALTH COUNSELING.
(VI) REPAIR AND CARE INCIDENTAL TO SUPERFICIAL LACERATIONS OR ABRASIONS.
(VII) MUSCULOSKELETAL MANIPULATION.
(D) UTILIZE ROUTES OF ADMINISTRATION THAT INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, ORAL,
NASAL, AURICULAR, OCULAR, RECTAL, VAGINAL, TRANSDERMAL, INTRADERMAL,
SUBCUTANEOUS, INTRAVENOUS, OR INTRAMUSCULAR CONSISTENT WITH HIS OR HER
NATUROPATHIC EDUCATION AND TRAINING.
(E) OTHER NATUROPATHIC THERAPIES AS APPROVED BY THE BOARD.
I suppose I should be relieved that the law would not allow naturopaths (I refuse to use the term "naturopathic physician") to prescribe controlled substances. administer ionizing radioactive substances, perform chiropractic adjustments, do acupuncture, or perform very minor surgical procedures, or to do anything encompassed in the scope of practice of physicians.
Not surprisingly, the Michigan Association of Naturopathic Physicians is very much behind this effort. Hilariously, the MANP frames their effort as being driven by a concern protecting patients, arguing that "Without licensure, it is difficult for health consumers to discern between natural health consultants and naturopathic doctors. State licensure is the only way to protect the public by providing regulation to verify the credentials of their naturopathic physicians." Never mind that those credentials are fairy dust, what Harriet Hall so aptly described as "tooth fairy science." Seriously, on its blog, the MANP is referencing articles on Mike Adams' NaturalNews.com, which is about as good a sign that it is not science-based as I can think of. Be that as it may, the MANP also argues that if the Michigan legislature doesn't pass a naturopathic licensing law, then Michigan residents seeking "natural healing" will go across state lines to get it.
Funny, they say that as if it were a bad thing.
It would appear that there's a situation here that is in desperate need of monitoring and action in my state, and I plan on doing just that. Here's hoping that in 2013 the fate of this bill is the same as it was in 2012: Oblivion.
There are NDs which do practice in Michigan already; I've seen some of them posting on Facebook. If I recall correctly, the ND in question has graced your blog previously; Doug Cutler.
He's licensed in Washington state, but practices in Michigan.
Not to sound like a conspiratorial nut, but this seems like it would benefit the van Andel and Devos families interests.
I have no use for classical homeopathy. However, finding MDs and DOs that have clinical experience with many forms of therapeutic nutrition can be difficult. Perhaps a choice with half a loaf is better than an oaf or no loaf.
Just for the record, all my paid consults have been MD or DO. However, many MD look a little homeopathic to me, and some, are practitioners of heroic medicine.
Just so you know, google for some reason has marked your site (or perhaps, one of your advertisers sites) as a malicious site.
The malware is coming from: cmi.netseer.com
I did a double take on the Republican legislator's surname, Posthumus. (She appears to have married a Mr. Lyons at some point; the web site you linked indicates that she has a compound surname.) It seems a bit ironic for somebody who is pushing licensing of naturopaths.
One other question for you Michiganders: Is it usual practice for the text of bills in your state legislature to be printed in ALL CAPS, as Orac quotes here?
If Michael Cronin were serious about "serving the health needs of the public" in Massachusetts, he and his fellow naturopaths would take down their shingles and find some other line of work.
Just my two-fifths of a nickel (Canada retires the penny today).
Here's hoping the bill licensing naturopathy fails to pass in Michigan.
@ Eric Lund: Lisa Posthumus Lyons on her own website, provides an explanation about lowercase and UPPERCASE wording of bills..
"House actions in lowercase, Senate actions in UPPERCASE"
@ Darwy: It seems to be common practice for naturopaths to set up a "practice" in a State that does not license them.
"Our members are graduates of accredited four-year, graduate-level, in-residence naturopathic medical programs. While New York State does not license Naturopathic Doctors at this time, all of our professional members maintain a license as a naturopathic physician in at least one of the fourteen states. The NYANP is actively pursuing licensure of Naturopathic Doctors in New York"
Once their quackery is licensed in a State, next on their agenda is to get insurance companies to pay for their services.
The same people who claim that naturopathy is scientific will insist that homeopathy is scientific also ... and if you keep at them, they'll eventually include vitalism, spirituality, and the existence of God into the category of the scientific, too. That's because they think "science" means trying something for yourself: having an actual experience. Someone else having the same thing happen to them is "verification." And when groups differ, then they're using different sciences.
How else can you explain the bifurcation between western science and eastern science? And why would it have to stop there? You can get northern science and southern science, American science and Scandinavian science, Ayurvedic science and Aryan science. There's no one right way for everyone. Diversity is good!
They're doing naturopathic science. Which is defined as that which naturopathic scientists do.
Re: the post's "naturopathy can never be scientific as long as you can’t have naturopathy without homeopathy and homeopaths embrace homeopathy". I think Orac you meant "and naturopaths embrace homeopathy." I like to say that homeopathy is fused with naturopathy [any who...].
Here's deep proof from a rare book:
I recently bought and scanned Wendell's 1951 "Standardized Naturopathy" [so old there's no ISBN; no preview available at books.google.com] and page 17 states regarding naturopathy's ORIGINS:
"in 1900, Benedict Lust [pronounced Loost] purchased the name naturopathy, first coined by Dr. John H. Scheel in 1895, a German homeopath [!!!], who studied the Kneipp and Kuhne methods in Europe [...in] 1901 a Kneipp convention was called for the purpose of enlarging the Kneipp treatment [...] it decided to appoint a committee with Benedict Lust as chairman [...] the committee decided that all methods of drugless healing should be practiced [...including the] metaphysical [...] mesmeric [...] homeopathy [...] spiritual: occult therapy, divine healing [...] naturo-therapy [...including] naturopathy [...and] Schroth methods [...] at the meeting it was decided to change the name from the Kneipp Water Treatment to a new name [hmmmm, how about this one I just bought that I have lying around? Be a shame to waste it!]."
And therefore "naturopathy", the cornucopia. Except, of course, these days they want script rights too.
Absurdly, in the foreword, Wendell, who has the credentials M.D. D.O. D.C. N.D. [the quadruple threat!] tells us "naturopathy is defined as a scientific system." And by the way, @Sastra, god is in the book 18 times and on page 37 the goal is "to restore health by building up the body's vital forces."
Re: "it would appear that there’s a situation here that is in desperate need of monitoring and action."
It's a shame there isn't someone / an entity nationally doing for science based medicine something similar to what Eugenie Scott and the NCSE are doing to defend standards as boots on the ground at these hearings and such.
Hell, if I could get funding even I'd try to do it.
I threw in "Schroth" from Wendell's list due to the news today of the confirmation that they've exhumed and positively identified Richard III's body.
Anyone know the connection?
Huh. So, on the one hand, we have medicine, which has changed drastically as new evidence and science becomes available. Even within the last couple decades, there have been big changes. On the other, we have naturopathy, which doesn't appear to have changed much at all, except that they've (perhaps) dropped mesmerism and are trying to get drugs as part of their repertoire.
As for an organization, there's the Institute for Science in Medicine. In fact, our esteemed host just happens to be ever so slightly involved.
If you scratch woo, you'll find religion.
"I threw in “Schroth” from Wendell’s list due to the news today of the confirmation that they’ve exhumed and positively identified Richard III’s body.
Anyone know the connection?"
Only slightly off topic: I have a friend who is otherwise sane, but takes 7000 mg of vitamin C each day. Does anyone know if there are known side effects to this kind of regimen? She seems to have some kind of hereditary tendency towards coronary artery disease, so her doctor had her take the xray exam for calcification. She came up high, was recommended an angiogram, and has decided to forego the test because "it's equivalent to 600 chest xrays." She also mentioned that her liver enzymes just came back high, and she has to deal with this first, before even thinking about the angiogram.
Does any of this make sense? In particular, is there any known liver toxicity from vitamin C? She does not drink alcohol (genetic trait that makes her sick -- I seem to recall that this is not completely uncommon in some Asians -- and she doesn't seem otherwise caught up in food fadism. The other day we were at Pollo Loco, and she had plenty of mashed potatoes, chicken, and vegetables, so it's not starvation.
@Sastra: There was a time, up until about 200 years ago, when "science" and "philosophy" were synonyms. What we now call science was generally called "natural philosophy", which is the literal translation of the modern German word for science, Naturwissenschaft. (See also Hamlet's lines, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,/Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.") But language changes with time, as does scientific knowledge, and a lot of woo pushers seem to be trapped in the language and scientific knowledge of the early 19th century. For instance, Hahnneman didn't know the magnitude of Avogadro's number--but neither did anyone else at the time (Hahnneman and Avogadro were contemporaries). We know a lot more chemistry and physics now, and what we know is incompatible with the notion that homeopathic remedies have any non-placebo effects.
Please write the member of the Michigan Health Policy Committee, urging them to kill HB-4152 that would license "Naturopathic Physicians."
Health Policy Cmte Members and email addresses:
Sorry. This is a better, more direct URL for the Michigan Legislature's Health Policy Committee Members and their email addresses:
Does anyone know if there are known side effects to this kind of regimen?
Yes, high dose vita c has antagonistic effects with numerous other vitamins and minerals. Not to mention that much will send you to the loo an awful lot.
Only slightly off topic: I have a friend who is otherwise sane, but takes 7000 mg of vitamin C each day. Does anyone know if there are known side effects to this kind of regimen? She seems to have some kind of hereditary tendency towards coronary artery disease, so her doctor had her take the xray exam for calcification.
There are of several dozen cardiac risk factor - nutrient proposals. One proposal close to your friend's calcium buildup is an effect of the active vitamin K, menaquinone-4, that helps osteoblasts deposit calcium in the bones rather than stick willy nilly in places like the arteries, Problematic calcium is noticed in guys.
....Problematic calcium arterial plaque is noticed in in VK deficient guys more often than the bone thinning. Women more often are identified for the bone thinning, or breakage, first.
Science Mom #19
high dose vita c has antagonistic effects with numerous other vitamins and minerals.
interactions with many myths and misunderstandings
Not to mention that much will send you to the loo an awful lot.
That much vitamin C as an acid *at one time* would produce a brief laxative response in the median person in good health. The same person with a severe cold could probably down 7 grams several times in one hour without the laxative effect and maybe notice reduced histamine effects.
Bob G: One risk of massive doses of Vitamin C is that in high enough concentration, it can recrystallize in the kidney and form stones.
Composer 99: Naturopaths *are* concerned with the health of their patients - they think they have too much of it and want to relieve them of the burden. Or maybe it's just the strain of carrying around full wallets.
I tried the mega C thing in the 70s, methinks that's when Pauling began pushing his notion. Still got a nasty cold or flu and quit
I canna fathom grown ups buying into NotDoctoring. But they go to school! To learn nonsense. But the gummint approves! The same one you distrust for most other things, you buy into for vitalism? Ah, wooligion.
One risk of massive doses of Vitamin C is that in high enough concentration, it can recrystallize in the kidney and form stones.
Ah, but you know that the megadosing types strongly dispute this notion. The whole thing just seems like a pointless burden to throw at the kidneys, though.
@al kimeea #24, I misread "wooligion" as "wooligans." I like both terms and intend to use them conversationally as often as possible.
"Wooligans" may be my favorite new made-up word since "regurgidrivel".
From What's The Harm on megadoses of vitamins. Over 100,000 people harmed on this list:
~ 20 years ago, I tried taking a vitamin C supplement because I was experience some gum problems. After about 10 days, I experienced gouty pains in my large toes. I did locate some information about uric acid deposits causing gout in an old textbook, took myself off the supplement and *cured* myself.
I *tested* my theory again, about six weeks after that gout incident and yes, I am sensitive to supplements of vitamin C.
I would be very careful if I am undergoing cancer treatment, as it is uncertain what the effects of vitamin C are on patients undergoing treatments for cancers:
I have often wondered if my mother, who suffers from gout, kidney stones, and stage III kidney disease self-inflicted these ailments with her lifelong habit of handful-of-supplements. It makes me really happy I broke the habit when in college-- who says laziness is never a virtue!
LL#29: The best results I've seen myself or from my friends, is where both chemo and vitamin C plus other nutrients were inadequate or failing separately but worked remarkably well together.
I would be very careful if I am undergoing cancer treatment
Yes, carefully have your nurse lock the door during infusions, if possible, to avoid accidents and awkward moments.
It is good if personal chemosensitivity test results and frequent biomarkers are available.
MSII@28: I didn't know cesium, ozone and therapeutic touch were vitamins.
Seriously, a lot of the whatstheharm site appears to me to be an argument for degreed, regulated professionals.
I actually agree with Orac that ND could use more scientific content but one has to start somewhere when dealing with widespread failure, such as conventional medical nutrition. I doubt we agree as much about what scientific findings should be prioritized, how they are weighed, and applied.
Dave@23: Severe renal impairment, oxalate stoneformers, and dehydration could interact adversely with high loadings of vitamin C. Even sodium ascorbate crystallizes at RT and over 50% solution. Conversely, vitamin C is known to prevent and reverse some kinds of kidney stones.
Of course, simple dehydration has been correctable from time immemorial. Oxalate stone formation risk for vitamin C has been mostly speculative but has been well addressed several ways for pre-existing stone formers for 40-50 years.
Narad@25: The claims for oxidative poisons, viremia and sepsis look pretty important to many. Some renal carcinomas may be responsive to vitamin C as an important component.
@ prn: I thought your *favorite vitamin* for treating colon cancer is vitamin D? Are you still using a mail-away laboratory for testing your own blood?
I suppose I should be relieved that the law would not allow naturopaths (I refuse to use the term “naturopathic physician”) to prescribe controlled substances. administer ionizing radioactive substances, perform chiropractic adjustments, do acupuncture, or perform very minor surgical procedures, or to do anything encompassed in the scope of practice of physicians.
(VII) MUSCULOSKELETAL MANIPULATION.
I suspect most naturopathetics would argue that this allows chiropractic manipulation.
LL@34: ... thought your *favorite vitamin* for treating colon cancer is vitamin D
Just because I discussed vitamin D3 doesn't mean it's "my favorite" vitamin, or that I think "that I know" that D3 is therapeutic for mCRC. Vitamin D3 is a common deficiency for colorectal patients and often requires large amounts, like over 10,000 IU per day, to achieve even basic sufficiency in the blood levels. Vitamin D3 may only address some less well known molecular pathways for CRC and is perhaps 5,6, th down on my CRC list.
The Institute Of Medicine et al pretty much missed the mark with their homeopathic 200 iu recommendation for vitamin D.
Are you still using a mail-away laboratory for testing your own blood?
Haven't been using one. If I mentioned one, it would be as an example. We have an in-town lab with home service.
wooligans regurgidrivelling wooligion
Ugh, I don't understand folks with ozone 'air scrubbers' in their house.
Ozone is a pollutant. It CAUSES asthma.
Yes, we need it in the upper atmosphere - but NOT in your house.
The link for " opening her new Naturopathic Health Clinic in Grand Rapids." doesn't work.
... While I don't like the idea of quackery legitimised, I do like the idea of them having to be regulated and proving that their medicines work. Better than the free-for-all we have now.
(D) UTILIZE ROUTES OF ADMINISTRATION THAT INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, ORAL,
NASAL, AURICULAR, OCULAR, RECTAL, VAGINAL, TRANSDERMAL, INTRADERMAL,
SUBCUTANEOUS, INTRAVENOUS, OR INTRAMUSCULAR CONSISTENT WITH HIS OR HER
NATUROPATHIC EDUCATION AND TRAINING.
Oh goody, more enemas *rolls eyes*
it is difficult for health consumers to discern between natural health consultants and naturopathic doctors
What is the difference?
Oh and I love the wooligans thing too :)
I saw two naturoquacks on a TV show and when asked by the host what limits there are to their "profession", the one responsible for the 2nd year curriculum at their Ontario Quackwarts mentioned not being allowed to "cross the anal verge". Yet naturoquacks do seem to favour rinsing the ol dirt road, if that means what I think it means.
@Melissa G thanks for the quackalicious synonym
'That' being the verge thingy
"wooligans regurgidrivelling wooligion"
al kimeea wins the internet.
Also... the thought of a bunch of naturopaths complaining about "not [being] allowed to cross the anal verge" is comedy gold.
Narad@25: The claims for oxidative poisons, viremia and sepsis look pretty important to many. Some renal carcinomas may be responsive to vitamin C as an important component.
That's fine if you say so, but it has little bearing on routine megadosing.
Thanks for the responses.
not being allowed to “cross the anal verge”
ALL THESE WORLDS
ARE YOURS EXCEPT
*claps* Impressive, Herr Docktor! You've actually managed to make an *original* Uranus joke. It's even funny! :-D
Narad@44: That’s fine if you say so, but it has little bearing on routine megadosing.
Coverage wise and conceptually, IV vitamin C is almost foundational. If one doesn't understand the easy and broad spectrum use of IV vitamin C, one might not have the confidence or knowledge for more difficult, specific applications.
I think the "routine megadosing" situation you refer to is perhaps analogous to the general, post industrial population as a technically unwashed "cargo cult" attempting to imitate modern airplane logistics. The added dimension in this modern analogy is that a hostile group keeps slaughtering missionaries that try to teach the natives to read, preparatory to training them for logistics and maintenance.
Coverage wise and conceptually, IV vitamin C is almost foundational. one doesn’t understand the easy and broad spectrum use of IV vitamin C, one might not have the confidence or knowledge for more difficult, specific applications
Can you idnicate which indications the administration of IV Vitamin C has been approved for by the FDA or EMEA? Other than scurvy, and as an adjunct to some chemotherapy regimens, I can't think of any (certainly not enough to argue for "easy and broad spectrum use").
Marginally related, and very scary
… While I don’t like the idea of quackery legitimised, I do like the idea of them having to be regulated and proving that their medicines work. Better than the free-for-all we have now.
@Flip, I disagree with having them regulated. In my experience giving them any regulatory recognition only results in their misrepresenting it as an acknowledgment of their importance, a legitimate need for their services, and an acceptance of the value in their treatments. It is better to not acknowledge them as a field of practice and deny them any license.
If their practice is legit and their treatments or services do indeed effectively diagnose and or treat medical conditions, then let them go through the customary medical training and earn an M.D.
can you cite any evidence that chemo sensitivity assays are accurate in a clinical setting?
Dave... Dave... what are you doing Dave? That doesn't go in there Dave...
The voice of HAL is me Mum's first cousin, or was
Megadoses of vitamin C- delivered via IV or in tablet or powder form- are widely accepted in woo-centric circles. Padayatty et al ( 2010) showed how prevalent these therapies are by surveying participants/ practitioners at a CAM conference- about 1 in 4 used them ( ncbinlm.nih.gov/ PLOS one.2010; 5(7) e11414). They also looked at side effects and reports of adverse reactions.
Yet according to Timothy Moynihan ( Mayo Clininc) , there is " no reliable evidence to support" alt med's position: the 1970s studies about cancer had serious flaws and there aren't newer results from clinical trials.
Googling "IV vitamin C" turned up many alt med articles ( e.g.orthomolecular, naturalnews, ANH, KUMC integrative med, various practitioners, companies selling products etc)- the two hits I cited above were the only two non-CAM or alt med in the first pages.
I am familar with it as a 'treatment' for cancer, hiv and other problems from surveying alt media. There is always the possiblity that a use will be found eventually BUT don't you think that 40 years ( 1970s- 2010s) is a very long time?
Shouldn't some good results have turned up by now?
I have heard similar buzz about various forms of mushrooms ( which I've mentioned before), niacin and phytonutrients over many years for various ills- and I can show you NDs/ woo cites from the 1990s about several of these. Still, where are the decent studies and replications that show the effects un-equivocally?
I haven't seen anything.
@ al kimeea:
Oooo- first cousin, once removed and deceased. I am nevertheless impressed.
Do you sound like that?
I agree with you. Re-read my comment.
@ Denice Walter
Like several sound I can yes. All the old ones are gone on both sides now. I don't think they ever met, but corresponded once or twice. The grandparents moved here aboot 1915 and Ma was born in the house Pop & her bros built.
Shrooms are yummy man
al kimeea - your impression of HAL 9000 gave me goosebumps...
You should hear me sing Dhai zshee Bhelll
HAL is still with us as Doug Rain is 85 this year
prn: Coverage wise and conceptually, IV vitamin C is almost foundational. [If] one doesn’t understand the easy and broad spectrum use of IV vitamin C, one might not have the confidence or knowledge for more difficult, specific applications
JGC:Can you indicate which indications the administration of IV Vitamin C has been approved for by the FDA or EMEA? Other than scurvy, and as an adjunct to some chemotherapy regimens, I can’t think of any (certainly not enough to argue for “easy and broad spectrum use”).
All most everythiing would be off label if suppliers had approved uses. IM / IV vitamin C from ampules goes back to pre WWII, perhaps before the 1938 FDA rules. It was known for diarrhea and to prevent shock.
Since then, FDA has repeatedly interfered with IV vitamin C development for over 50 yrs. In the early 60s product launch of Viron-1 was aborted by the expense of added testing requirements. Armed raids and provocations were occurring in the early 90s before DSHEA. More recently KUMC trials were disrupted by warning letters requiring NDAs to the principal supplier in 2010.
A lot of disease specific medical literature has been compiled in the book, Curing the Incurable, Vitamin C, Infectious Diseases, and Toxins, For us, as an advanced first aid in extremis, it has worked as stated when time and performance were precious.
It also simplifies antibiotic use greatly. IV vit C for several days seems to abort the climb to newer and nastier antibiotics due to accrued resistance of chronic infection, by restored sensitivity to amoxicillin +/- clavunate.
They have described the action of ascorbic acid as "virucidal."
- a 1962 paper including Viron-1 case histories from Shelbyville
Didn't do a thing for me in that regard. Also that paper gives the impression no antibiotics are required.
"...Klenner has administered chemotherapeutic agents along with [IV] ascorbic acid [, sodium] to reduce secondary bacterial infection ..."
This Dalton fellow aimed low and would under treat the more serious cases. If you hit under the threshold required, not much benefit is going to happen according several MD commentaries on high dose IV C.
Meant to say large doses Vita-C did nothing for me in any kind of virucidal sense - prevention or reduction of severity
chemotherapeutic agents are not antibiotics IIRC
The McCormick and Dalton bits appear to describe Vita-C use alone. In one case as an adjunct to bed rest as treatment for hepatitis with "a profound therapeutic effect upon this patient".
It completely simplifies antibiotic use if you don't need them.
A lot of disease specific medical literature has been compiled in the book, Curing the Incurable, Vitamin C, Infectious Diseases, and Toxins,
You're seriously trotting out someone who thinks that amalgam fillings are a source of "enormous toxicity"?
I don't think Hg politics are a good basis of ad hominem in a discussion that sounds exactly like RJ on cigarettes and Ethyl Corp on lead, decades ago. A lot of the world says thumbs down on Hg. Whatever the exact toxicity level, brux clearly establishes opportunity for transport. I don't care about the Hg debate, the dentists where I live remove Hg fillings and don't replace them (already gone), and China (coal) doesn't care what we think anyway. Perhaps the vaccine debate contaminates your views on Hg.
The book extensively compiles references on ascorbate.
"A lot of the world says thumbs down on Hg."
A lot of the world says thumbs up on Buddy Jebus...
"This Dalton fellow aimed low and would under treat the more serious cases. If you hit under the threshold required, not much benefit is going to happen..."
Shelbyville Case 1: Viral Hepatitis - "a profound therapeutic effect" for Viron-1 alone
Case 2: Infectious Mononucleosis - "rapid" "dramatic" "full recovery" Viron-1 alone.
Case 3: Viral pneumonia - patchy type - "excellent response" "shortened morbidity" as an adjunct to ASA
Case 4: acute viral type
pneumonia with secondary bacterial involvement of sinus and bronchial tree - "remarkable improvement" "markedly reduced morbidity" for Viron-1 alone.
Case 5: viral pneumonia & bronchitis - "The morbidity period in this case was definitely shortened beyond expectation." for Viron-1 alone
Case 6: generalized
viremia with bronchitis and right
recurrent laryngeal neuritis - "marked improvement"
Did I read the same paper? This guy sounds like he got all the results he expected, not "not much benefit" and for some serious things.
The title of that book screams snake oil.
I said, "If you hit under the threshold required, not much benefit is going to happen..." - IV C may work with Dalton's "small" dose, might not in individual cases.
We're on different wavelengths - you apparently don't know anything substansive about the history and use of IV vitamin C.
Dalton is quoting successes from an unknown patient series with 2 grams of C per day or injection. Other more involved doctors have said that they had cases that needed much more C to be reliable, often 25 grams, even 100 grams of C or more depending on case and circumstances to overcome chemical and biological loads due to reactive oxygen species, toxins, massive inflammation, histamine and viruses. Dalton's doses would not be considered "modern" for optimal results by a factor of ten or so.
Your assertions scream that you are totally ignorant on the subject, ascorbates at therapeutic doses.
the only one making assertions is you dear prn
you brought up Viron-1 mentioning FDA interference in the 1960's and how MEGA-C
"also simplifies antibiotic use greatly. IV vit C for several days seems to abort the climb to newer and nastier antibiotics due to accrued resistance of chronic infection, by restored sensitivity to amoxicillin +/- clavunate."
Intrigued, I find a paper from the era you mention that shows Viron-1 to be very effective without the use of any antibiotics.
And you go on about how ineffective small large doses are when compared to large large doses, when that paper clearly shows the opposite.
More cowbell, is that it?
"In 1953 we presented a case history and films of a patient with virus pneumonia. This patient was unconscious, with a fever of 106.8°F (A. corrected) when admitted to the hospital. 140 grams ascorbic acid was given intravenously over a period of 72 hours at which time she was awake, sitting up in bed and taking fluids freely by mouth. The temperature was normal." - - Klenner 1971
Your assertions scream that you are totally bullshitting on the subject, ascorbates at therapeutic doses.
You don't have your facts straight.
This particular 1948 case that you misinterpret as a large dose (Case 3, qtr page down, repub'd in 1953 too) was a long series of "small" 2-4 gram doses at 2-3 hr intervals, totaling 140 grams.
Perhaps one experience of many that contributed to why Klenner later insisted on much larger IV C doses up front, as vitamin C became available in larger quantities and was more affordable.
Link to Klenner, 1951 with case 3 that did not attach:
Yes, following your link and poking around shows that there's apparently nothing Vita-C can't cure - leukemia, scarlet fever, hepatitis, septicemia, snake bite, polio, rectal polyps... The Spanish Flu...
Quite the extensive list. Why bother with antibiotics at all?
IV C can alter the balance favorably and simplify the pharmacy. The most efficient, fastest, lowest human cost, lowest financial cost may be in combination with less dramatic conventional treatments that usually do not work by themselves either.
Standalone antiviral for initial acute presentation? Probably will often work well, outside of especially problematic things like AIDS and rabies (still with benefit).
Toxins from diphtheria, tetanus, scarlet fever and venoms are treatable. Those are observations and studies from around the world, as well as the preclinical and molecular bases.
Bacterial treatments are likely to most efficient in tandem with less dramatic antibiotics than usual in the mainstream. There are difficult bacterial infection cases were IV C was the critical adjunct after exhaustion and multiple failure of the usual antibiotic series, or even a standalone treatment. According to the Cochrane collection, survival with pneumonia may go way up with C added.
I am sure these are strange and grand sounding claims to you, that contradict conventional ignorance and multilevel hearsay. Yet published studies do show these treatment exist. They have actions consistent with their molecular mechanisms. What's more the treatments are often reproducible and measurable at the street level with modern lab support, and ready IV C or IM C.
toxins from tetanus are treatable eh? How aboot the bacteria that causes it?
Harri Hemilä discusses this.
A single poorly conducted study that's nearing Carousel isn't very inspiring and hits waaaay under the threshold @ 1g/day
I took 5-10 g/day. Don't remember the runs, but a nasty bug anyway
For tetanus, 1 gram injected in small bodies (under 12) worked well. 1 gram in much larger bodies didn't work as well. Should have titrated by kg at such low doses.
considering the patients in this study were all getting normal treatment as well as it being un-blinded or randomized or replicated even once in 30 years, it is quite the stretch to say C did anything
Pauling wasn't telling all and sundry to inject C, that prolly wouldn't have been an easy sell
AK78: [1984 study reprint] Did you get that part about 74% mortality in the control group with standard treatment including antibiotics, and **none** in the vitamin C group (ages 1-12) ?
This is consistent with other toxin neutralization data since Jungeblut,1937. All for several cents worth of sodium ascorbate. I think this is a reasonable example of the differences between those who accept IV C as likely useful and life saving in real life situations, and those who wait for more studies while criticizing IV C or the existent IV C studies.
@ prn: How did you ever miss Suzanne Humphries *latest research* into Vitamin C IV therapy for infectious diseases?
"The reason conventional medical doctors are not taught about the mechanisms of action and benefits of vitamin C in medical school, is that if they knew about it, then not only would a raft of other drugs have been unnecessary, but there would not be serious whooping cough or even deaths. Vitamin A and C would render measles really easy to treat. You’d never see meningococcal complications, because all people suspected of having it, would immediately be put on IV vitamin C and there would be no coagulopathy at all. Vitamin C antidotes DIC, the coagulopathy. The ACIP and it’s cronies wouldn’t be able to use meningococcal complications and deaths as emotional blackmail to get people to vaccinate, because people wouldn’t be scared of infections any more."
Wait. You tout Harri Hemilä and Teija Koivula as supporting Vitamin C? Did you miss this part:
A single, non-randomised, poorly reported trial of vitamin C as a treatment for tetanus suggests a considerable reduction in mortality. However, concerns about trial quality mean that this result must be interpreted with caution and that vitamin C cannot be recommended as a treatment for tetanus on the basis of this evidence. New trials should be carried out to examine the effect of vitamin C on tetanus treatment.
The trial was not properly conducted and caution is required in the interpretation of the findings.
missed, no. ignored yes
Todd: Harri followed the interpretive conventions of the Cochrane collection for recommendations to doctors, partly based on
The trial, although not conforming to current standards of test construction, represents a credible trial with the institutional need for
...partly based on non-standard test execution for randomization and blinding.
...institutional need for confirmation with a second trial anyway. In a broader science based view, one would have to account for severe systematic errors to overthrow such positive result.
It was a non-randomized, non-blinded study. The results are questionable and possible the result of chance (as noted by the Cochrane review...another bit you seem to have ignored). The conclusion that further research is needed is a standard one with the Cochrane collaborative. Anytime they find negative or equivocal results, they say "more study is needed". It is incredibly rare for them to say, definitively, that something does not work and no further study is warranted.
Also of note, that study you provided was from 1984. A search on PubMed for "vitamin c tetanus" produces zero replications. In fact, the only "study" looking at vitamin C as a treatment for tetanus is the Cochrane review, which, again, concluded that the 1984 study was flawed, unreliable and could not be used as a basis to recommend IV vitamin C as a treatment for tetanus.
Im not sure what all the fuss is about. Im an MD in Arizona and must admit in my 10 yrs since graduation from Medical School- I have been taken care of very well by my insurance companies and pharma industry. I also must admit as a seasoned practitioner I have seen the wonderful effects of Acupuncture and also Homeopathy in my patients who also see a Naturopathic Doctor. I at first thought it was Placebo but after seeing first hand how much my patients become better once they started to see the naturopath I began to wonder if maybe there is something there. So I began to research and found an accredited Homeopathic Medical School right here in Arizona (which is practically run and owned by MD's) I interviewed many of the patients getting Homeopathy to find many beyond chance or placebo were getting better ! I know many of you are just trying to pay your bills and some of you are trying to "crush" competition but always remember "Healing is not found in the hands of the Practitioner - it is only found in the Eyes and Heart of the Receiver".
Dr. Andy F. M.D.
Pain Management/ General Practice
@Dr. Andy - please explain how giving someone "water" is supposed to help anything, except dehydration?
So I began to research and found an accredited Homeopathic Medical School right here in Arizona (which is practically run and owned by MD’s) I interviewed many of the patients getting Homeopathy to find many beyond chance or placebo were getting better !
May I ask how you controlled for confounding variables? Also, what was your control group?
Dr. Andy - I'm curious why you found it necessary to include the phrase "I know many of you are just trying to pay your bills and some of you are trying to “crush” competition" in your comment. Are you suggesting that people who say that there is insufficient evidence to prove the effectiveness of homeopathy and acupuncture - not to mention their implausibility given what's known in biology, physics, chemistry, and physiology - are all acting dishonestly for their own personal gain?
Dr. Andy F
I interviewed many of the patients getting Homeopathy to find many beyond chance or placebo were getting better
A few questions about your research:
1. How many patients?
2. Suffering from what conditions?
3. What percentage got better? How does that compare to patients who received no treatment or a placebo?
Thanks in advance.