If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"HCN" wrote in message ... "PeterB" wrote in message ups.com... First, to be clear, chelation is not an alternative medicine but a conventional therapy for heavy-metal detoxification that has been in use since the 1940s. It still is. So why would you let a little kid be stuck with an IV with EDTA by an "ear, nose and throat" doctor? Some research shows chelation to be effective in atherosclerotic patients, as well, but AMA and the drug makers are resistant to such evidence. Not really. Plug the terms "chelation EDTA" into www.pubmed.gov and you will get dozens of studies showing it does not work for atherosclerotic patients. Do you suppose the expiration of an otherwise profitable patent on EDTA has anything to do with that? Of course not, you're a Pharma Blogger. And you are pushing the businesses of those who sell EDTA chelation for heart conditions. As for heavy metals, mercury is almost as effectively removed by chelation as lead, and regardless of mercury load, or reasons for adminstering, chelation for mercury works the same as it does for lead. Not really. EDTA is lousy for mercury. And if there is no lead (or mercury) in the system it sucks up the available calcium and other essential elements required for the proper functioning of the organs (like, say the HEART... look up hypocalcemia). There are better ones, even the more rabid anti-vax chelator champions know this http://drcranton.com/chelation/study8.htm DOUBLE BLIND STUDY PROVES EDTA CHELATION THERAPY EFFECTIVE A Pilot Double Blind Study of Sodium-Magnesium EDTA in Peripheral Vascular Disease by Efrain Olzewer, Fuad Calil Sabbage, and James P. Carter, M.D. Dr. Carter is Professor and Head of the Nutrition Department, Tulane Medical Center, New Orleans, Louisiana. Drs Olzewer and Sabbage practice in Sau Paulo, Brazil, where this study was conducted. In this small, pilot, double-blind, placebo controlled study, 20 infusions of EDTA increased walking distance in patients with claudication by 376%. Speed of both walking and performance on a bicycle exerciser were improved significantly. The improvement in chelation patients, compared with placebo, proved highly significant on statistical analysis. P=0.0003 walking p=0.00001 bicycle. Olzewer E, Sabbag FC, Carter JP: A Pilot Double Blind Study of Sodium-Magnesium EDTA in Peripheral Vascular Disease. J Natl Med Assn;82(3):174-177. Effect of EDTA Chelation Therapy Plus Multi-vitamin/Trace Mineral Supplementation Upon Vascular Dynamics: Ankle/Brachial Doppler Systolic Blood Pressure Ratio E.W. McDonagh, DO, C.J. Rudolph, DO, and E. Cheraskin, MD, DMD Dr. E.W. McDonagh is founder of the McDonagh Medical Center in Gladstone, Missouri, where he practices with Dr. C..J. Rudolph. Dr. E. Cheraskin is Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Department of Oral Medicine at the University of Alabama. ABSTRACT: A study of 117 lower extremities in 77 elderly patients with documented occlusive peripheral vascular stenosis, diagnosed by the Doppler systolic ankle/brachial (ankle/arm) blood pressure ratio is reported. This study showed that intravenous ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) chelation therapy with supportive multivitamin/trace mineral supplementation improved arterial blood flow to the legs significantly after approximately 60 days and 26 infusions (P0.001). [Note: Blood pressure is normally higher in the ankles than in the arms. An A/B ratio of less than approximately 1.0 is considered abnormal and is an indication of blockage to the flow of blood to the legs] TABLE: Effect of EDTA Chelation Therapy with Vitamin/Mineral Supplementation upon Ankle-Brachial Systolic Pressure All Patients Sample Size Ankle/Brachial Pressure Mean Percentage Change Significance of the Difference of the Means 1 initial 2 final 117 117 0.77±0.22 0.94±0.17 + 22% t=8.0041 P0.001* Lower (poorer) patients, initial A/B ratio less than 0.80 3 initial 4 final 46 46 0.55±0.19 0.71±0.25 + 29% t=3.9771 P0.001* Higher (better) patients, initial A/B ratio greater than 0.80 5 initial 6 final 71 71 0.91±0.06 1.08±0.17 + 19% t=8.9790 P0.001* *statistically significant difference of the means Journal of Advancement in Medicine Volume 2, Numbers 1/2, Spring/Summer 1989 For the full-text study, go to your nearest medical library or order The Textbook of EDTA Chelation Therapy. Benefits of EDTA Chelation Therapy in Arteriosclerosis: A Retrospective Study of 470 PatientsC. Hancke, MD and K. Flytlie, MD Claus Hancke M.D. received his medical education at the University of Copenhagen. He is general practice and is president of the Danish Chelation Doctors. He is an ABCT diplomate. Knut Flytlie M.D. received his medical education at the University of Gutenberg, Germany. He is in general practice and operates a clinic for Preventive Medicine and Chelation. He is an ABCT diplomate. ABSTRACT: In a retrospective study we report results of EDTA chelation in 470 patients, using a number of parameters, most of them objective. Although the patients acted as their own controls, we observed improvements of 80 to 90%, depending upon the measurement used. Of 92 patients referred for surgical intervention, only 10 required ultimate surgery after or during their chelation therapy, thus saving an estimated 3 million dollars of insurance money. Our experience covers a period of 6 years and we saw no severe side effects or casualties arising from the treatment. We conclude that EDTA chelation therapy is safe, effective and cost-saving. Journal of Advancement in Medicine Volume 6, Number 3, Fall 199 EDTA Chelation Therapy: Efficacy in Brain DisordersH. Richard Casdorph, MD, PhD H. Richard Casdorph, M.D., Ph.D., is Assistant Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of California Medical School, Irvine, California. He practices in internal medicine and cardiovascular disease at Long Beach, California. He received his training in cardiovascular diseases at the Mayo Clinic and received his Ph.D. degree in Medicine from the University of Minnesota. He has also taught at UCLA Medical School and has been Chief of Medicine at Long Beach Community Hospital. ABSTRACT: Fifteen patients with well-documented impairment of cerebral blood flow were studied utilizing the isotope technetium 99m. A highly significant improvement (P = .0005) in cerebral blood flow occurred following approximately twenty intravenous infusions of disodium EDTA. All fifteen patients improved clinically, including one with little or no improvement in measured cerebral blood flow. EDTA chelates and removes aluminum as well as calcium. Aluminum has been incriminated in senile and pre-senile dementia. This study is especially noteworthy in view of the fact that medical science has no other effective treatment for many of these conditions. Radioactive nuclide studies were performed at the Nuclear Medicine Department of the Lon Beach Memorial Hospital, California.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - FIGURE 1The curve on the left illustrates the normal brain flow curve. The upstroke of the A wave indicates blood flowing into the brain followed by a normal decline to point B as the washout effect of fresh blood, not containing radioactivity, reduces the level of technetium to the baseline at point B. This is followed by a slight recirculation wave C, followed by a baseline or steady level of radioactivity. The 3 sets of curves on the right indicate changes that occur to cerebral blood flow with progressively more severe cerebrovascular occlusion. As blood flow becomes impaired there is a delay of flow into the brain, causing the peak of the A wave to move to the right. This is associated with a decrease in the washout phase inasmuch as fresh blood flows less readily into the brain to wash out the existing radioactivity. This causes an elevation of b point as illustrated. The elevation of point B from normal is taken as an index of the degree of occlusive cerebrovascular disease, and conversely, the reversal of this effect, lowering of point B after EDTA is used as a measure of the benefit of chelation therapy.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -FIGURE 2 []Actual Data as measured by a Searle Radiographics scintillation camera. This represents a relatively normal cerebral blood flow for both the right (R) and left (L) sides of the brain of a 62 year-old white male with mild diabetes and arteriosclerotic heart disease. Even though this study was considered "normal," we note a slight diminution in the amplitude of the A wave over the left (L) side of the brain.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -FIGURE 3A Actual raw data, brain blood flow study of a 51 year old white female with a mistaken diagnosis of schizophrenia. This measurement showed very reduced brain blood flow.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -FIGURE 3B Brain blood flow measurements of that same patient after EDTA chelation showing marked improvement in blood flow. The patients clinical symptoms improved correspondingly.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Raw Data of this type for all 15 patients in this study can be found in in the: TEXTBOOK OF EDTA CHELATION THERAPY edited by Elmer M. Cranton, M.D. The overall results were consistent with the patient above, as summarized in TABLE 1 below.To order a copy of this TEXTBOOK click here.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -TABLE 1TABLE 1Patient Age Diagnosis Elevation of B wave: Change Number of IV Treatments Clinical Improvment Before Treatment After Treatment 1. IH 80 CVA R Brain 7 L Brain 7 4 4 + 3 + 3 13 YES 2. BM 51 Schizo- phrenia R Brain 7 L Brain 7 3.5 3.5 + 3.5 + 3.5 13 YES 3. GM 72 Cerebral Atrophy R Brain 8.7 L Brain 8 7 6.5 + 1.7 + 1.5 26 YES 4. LS 62 TIA R Brain 6.5 L Brain 6.4 3.5 3.4 + 3 + 3 20 YES 5. AN 57 CVA R Brain 5 L Brain 5 2.8 3 + 2.2 + 2 20 YES 6. EK 65 TIA R Brain 5 L Brain 4.5 3.5 3 + 1.5 + 1.5 20 YES 7. RG 66 Diabetes ASO R Brain 6 L Brain 5.6 3 3 + 3 + 2.5 20 YES 8. GK 66 TIA R Brain 4 L Brain 4 4 4 0 0 20 YES 9. VMC 67 TIA R Brain 6 L Brain 6 3 3.2 + 3 + 2.8 20 YES 10. LT 72 Cerebral Atrophy R Brain 5.5 L Brain 5 3.8 3.1 + 1.7 + 1.9 20 YES 11. MI 76 Cerebral Atrophy R Brain 6 L Brain 6 4 3.2 + 2 + 2.8 20 YES 12. EM 92 Cerebral Atrophy R Brain 9 L Brain 8 7 5.2 + 2 + 3.8 20 YES 13. HR 68 ASHD R Brain 6 L Brain 5.8 4 3.8 + 2 + 2 20 YES 14. JV 52 CVD R Brain 4 L Brain 4.5 3 3 + 1 + 0.5 20 YES 15. HB 80 ASHD R Brain 9 L Brain 7 4 4 + 5 + 3 20 YES MEAN: 6.1 3.87 + 2.28 (P=.0005) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Journal of Advancement in Medicine Volume 2, Numbers 1/2, Spring/Summer 1989For the full-text study, go to your nearest medical library or order The Textbook of EDTA Chelation Therapy. The Correlation Between EDTA Chelation Therapy and Improvement in Cardiovascular Function: A Meta-AnalysisL. Terry Chappell, MD John P. Stahl, PhD ABSTRACT: In order to establish whether there is value in treating cardiovascular disease with intravenous EDTA chelation therapy, a meta-analysis was done, based on currently available scientific literature. A thorough literature search identified 40 articles on the subject. Nineteen studies met the criteria for inclusion with data on 22,765 patients. The meta-analysis revealed a statistical correlation coefficient of 0.88, which indicates a high positive relationship between EDTA therapy and improved cardiovascular function. Eighty-seven per cent of the patients included in the meta-analysis demonstrated clinical improvement by objective before-and-after testing.Journal of Advancement in Medicine Volume 6, Number 3, Fall 1993 EDTA Chelation Therapy: A Retrospective Study of 2,870 PatientsEfrain Olszewer, MD and James P. Carter, MD, DrPHDr. Olszewer is a cardiologist in Sao Paulo, Brazil, where this study was conducted. Dr. Carter is Professor and Head, Nutrition Section, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana. ABSTRACT: Results are presented of a 28-month retrospective analysis of 2,870 patients with documented atherosclerosis and other degenerative, age associated diseases who were treated with intravenous disodium magnesium EDTA chelation therapy. Observed benefits strongly support the use of EDTA chelation therapy for those conditions. Marked improvement occurred in 76.9% and good improvement occurred in 17% of treated patients with ischemic heart disease. Marked improvement occurred in 91% and good improvement occurred in 8% of treated patients with peripheral vascular disease and intermittent claudication. In patients with cerebrovascular and other degenerative cerebral diseases, 24% had marked improvement, and 30% had good improvement. Of four patients with scleroderma, three had marked improvement and one had good improvement. Seventy-five percent of all patients had marked improvement in symptoms of vascular origin. Independent of pathology, 89% of all treated patients had marked or good improvement.Journal of Advancement in Medicine, Volume 2, Numbers 1/2, Spring/Summer 1989 For the full-text study, go to your nearest medical library or order The Textbook of EDTA Chelation Therapy. Ninety Percent Reduction in Cancer Mortality After Chelation Therapy with EDTAWalter Blumer, M.D. and Elmer M. Cranton, M.D.Dr. W. Blumer practices general medicine and chelation therapy in Netstal, Switzerland. Dr. Elmer M. Cranton (Dr. Cranton's CV is available on this website.) ABSTRACT: Mortality from cancer was reduced 90% during an 18-year follow-up of 59 patients treated with EDTA chelation therapy. Only one of 59 treated patients (1.7%) died of cancer while 30 of 172 nontreated control subjects (17.6%) died of cancer (P = 0.002). Death from atherosclerosis was also reduced. Treated patients had no evidence of cancer at the time of entry into this study. Observations relate only to long term prevention of death from malignant disease, if chelation therapy is begun before clinical evidence of cancer occurs. Controls and treated patients lived in the same neighborhood, adjacent to a heavily traveled highway in a small Swiss city. Both groups were exposed to the same amount of lead from automobile exhaust, industrial pollution and other carcinogens. Exposure to carcinogens was no greater for the studied population than exists in most other metropolitan areas throughout the world. Statistical analysis showed EDTA chelation therapy to be the only significant difference between controls and treated patients to explain the marked reduction in cancer mortality. Faculty of the University of Zurich Medical School reviewed this data Journal of Advancement in Medicine, Volume 2, Numbers 1/2, Spring/Summer 1989. For the full-text study, go to your nearest medical library or order The Textbook of EDTA Chelation Therapy This death may have resulted from an allergic response to one of the chemicals used, but chelation does work. NEWSFLASH!!! Dr. Kelly is also an allergist! Do you think he might know something about allergies? See he http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache...&client=safari (the cached site of the Univ. of Pittsburgh Medical Center, which has since removed him... Dr. Kerry is listed as: Roy E. Kerry, MD, ENT & Allergy Assoc. The most likely explanation is hypocalcemia because the EDTA pulled the calcium out of the kid's blood. If your complaint is that a doctor used a standardized treatment for a non-standardized detox, then let's be clear that you are not faulting a useful mainstream therapy, but rather the doctor for performing what you believe to be an unnecessary medical procedure, without which the child would still be alive. Just as importantly, do you know the physiology of the child or his health status prior to his mother seeking help? No, you don't. Do you know what consultation regarding risk was offered to the parents prior to their child being treated? No, you don't. When is the last time you raised holy hell about the +100,000 deaths resulting from side effects of prescription drugs each year, about which FDA does little or nothing? PeterB A shill for the husksters who sell hope and deliver nothing, or worse death to desparate parents. You failed to answer the question. WHERE were YOU when Dr Wilson KILLED Jesse Gilsinger, HCN????? Were you outraged with his FRAUD, his COVER UPS, his REPEATED & *DELIBERATE* VIOLATIONS, his continuing even though Jesse's reading was 114 - more than double the original safety limit? Were you outraged knowing that his father found this out IN THE COURT ROOM, along with the fact that: The rules for the experiment said: Even if volunteers didn't get visibly ill, if tests showed that any of them had a significant reaction called "grade 3," the experiment was supposed to be "halted" immediately. Records show there were "grade 3" reactions in more than one patient. The first time, doctors stopped, called the government and got permission to continue, saying an unusual condition with the patient might have been the cause. The second time, they stopped, called and got permission again, citing another unusual condition. But when it happened a third time, they didn't stop, didn't call. Then, a fourth time. They didn't stop or call then either In fact, just a few months before Jesse had signed up for the experiment, several monkeys given viruses similar to Jesse's got sick. And two of them died. HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO HCN!!!!! NEWSFLASH DR WILSON REMAINS ON STAFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Orac" wrote in message news In article . com, "PeterB" wrote: First, to be clear, chelation is not an alternative medicine but a conventional therapy for heavy-metal detoxification that has been in use since the 1940s. It still is. Some research shows chelation to be effective in atherosclerotic patients, No it doesn't. Yes, it does. http://www.integrative-med.com*/TOPI...h***erapy.html The Sacred Cow of Bypass Surgeryby James Biddle MD Today's topic is perhaps the most controversial of all alternative medicaltherapies - Chelation Therapy. What is it? The IV infusion of a syntheticamino acid called EDTA that binds lead and other toxic metals, pulling them outof the body thru the urine. Why is it so controversial? Because some physicians also use it to treat vascular disease, or clogging of the arteries from cholesterol plaques. Why do conventional physicians get so outraged aboutChelation Therapy? Because they think it doesn't work for vascular disease.To put this in perspective, let's first look at the usual and customary treatments for heart disease, or clogging of the coronary arteries. The conservative approach is to give medicines like nitrates and beta-blockers todecrease the heart's demand for oxygen, which lessens angina. The next approach is angioplasty, in which a catheter is used to balloon open thenarrowed part of the artery. The last approach is coronary artery bypass grafting, in which segments of the clogged arteries are replaced surgically.These procedures can help decrease symptoms, but are they needed and do they improve survival? A Harvard group of cardiologists published two studies in JAMA showing that when patients are sent for bypass surgery or angioplasty, 75-80% were judged not to require the procedure upon referral for second opinion. Then, in the journal Circulation, there was no difference in survival between patients randomized to have either bypass surgery or conservative medical treatment.Even worse, the Lancet showed that when patients were randomized to have either angioplasty or conservative medical treatment, the angioplasty group actually had more heart attacks and deaths (6.3%) than the medical group (3.3%). Therefore, the published data show that these invasive and expensive procedures are 75-80% unjustified and do not improve survival overall. ***On the other hand, studies published in the Journal of Advancement in Medicine show that of 22,765 vascular patients treated with IV Chelation Therapy, 87% had objectively-measured improvements. In addition, 30 patients with narrowing of the carotid artery had an average of 30% improvement by ultrasound after 30 treatments of EDTA. But my favorite study is from Denmark, where they gave IV Chelation Therapy to vascular patients who were already on the waiting list for either bypass surgery or leg amputation. Using IV EDTA, 58 of 65 bypass patients and 24 of 27 amputation patients were able to cancel their surgeriesand walk away.**** With such remarkable data, why is Chelation Therapy not given moreconsideration? I believe the main culprits are publication bias and paradigm boxes. ****You see, the Journal of Advancement in Medicine is not listed in the National Library of Medicine, so the "powers that be" will not consider the data.**** ***However, all the journals that are listed have refused to publish any positive studies concerning Chelation Therapy, while they are happy to publish negative studies.**** That's publication bias. A paradigm box is the limitation of our ability to consider a concept or option outside of our current knowledge and training. Physicians truly have the best interests of their patients at heart, but ***they've been fundamentally trained to reject Chelation Therapy,*** ***so are generally unwilling or unable to take an honest look at the data.*** ***Unfortunately, their paradigm box has been constructed by the huge pharmaceutical giants, who are the sole advertisers of every medical journal listed in the National Library of Medicine.*** I dare to say that they have a vested financial interest in suppressing knowledge of a relatively inexpensive, non-invasive, and non-toxic alternative for treating vascular disease. ****I've seen scores of vascular patients improve dramatically with ChelationTherapy.*** Just as in the studies above, ****I've seen about 80% respond favorably,*** which makes me think that probably 20% of patients actually will benefit from angioplasty or bypass surgery. Maybe if we limit these procedures to those who first fail a trial of Chelation Therapy, we actually can improve survival and also save Medicare from bankruptcy. tp://www.drcranton.com/chelation/ca*rter.htm Both the CCHI and the National Council on Health Fraud purport to be scientific and authoritative sources of information. A significant portion of their activities, however, have nothing to do with real quackery, but are rather a means to coerce practitioners of medicine to adhere to practices approved by medical politicians. The end result is to preserve certain monopolistic and economic advantages enjoyed by organized medicine. An important reason that research into the use of EDTA in the treatment of atherosclerosis and its complications stopped after 1960, until the mid 1980s,was because of an *** active and vicious campaign of misinformation and unjust harassment of physicians who used EDTA in their practices. Scientific researchers who showed an interest were also discouraged and harassed.*** http://www.chelationtherapyonl*ine.c...2.htm#quac***k Here is the photo of the man behind the web sitehttp://www.quackwatch.com/inde*x.html. He often attacks various health products and practices by making false claims about them, as if those claims came FROM them, and then knocks down these straw men of his own device. ****One of the most ***evil*** people on the web is a former psychiatrist who lashes out against just about every possible alternative health product or practice. It is, in fact, a hall of fame. If you are mentioned in his pages you can assume you are doing a good job! He attacks chelation therapy, of course, but he selects a "straw man" to attack. In other words, the early explanation of how chelation therapy works is well proven to be false, event hough many people are still repeating those lies. But, the more thoughtful intravenous doctors have discarded this early theory and gone on to the second theory, mentioned on another page (Click Here).After EDTA was found effective in chelating and removing toxic metals from the blood, some scientists postulated that hardened arteries could be softened ifthe calcium in their walls was removed. The first indication that EDTA treatment might benefit patients with atherosclerosis came from Clarke, Clarke,and Mosher, who, in 1956, reported that patients with occlusive peripheralvascular disease said they felt better after treatment with EDTA [AmericanJournal of Medical Science 230:654-666, 1956]. (Source) http://drcranton.com/chelation*/rebuttal.htm BUSTING THE QUACKBUSTERS REBUTTAL TO "QUACKWATCH" WEBSITE OPPOSING CHELATION THERAPY: By Elmer M. Cranton, M.D. There exist a number of self-styled medical thought-police types who call themselves "quack busters." They are fond of attacking alternative and emerging medical therapies in favor of the existing medical monopoly. They even have their own Quackwatch Internet website. It is uncertain where the money comes from to fund those efforts, but it might be enlightening to trace that money back to its original source. One investigator alleges that funding comes from pharmaceutical manufacturers. For years these so-called quackbusters have attacked nutritional supplementation with high potency multi-vitamins as "quackery." As summarized elsewhere on this website (Nutrition In The News), recent scientific studies now prove that virtually anyone can benefit from nutritional supplementation. With egg on their faces from this recent vitamin research, those same critics continue to attack chelation therapy. I will now answer, point by point, an article on the Quackwatch website by Dr. Saul Green entitled "CHELATION THERAPY: UNPROVEN CLAIMS AND UNSOUND THEORIES," in which Dr. Green attempts to discredit EDTA chelation using half-truths, speculation, and false statements. ALSO Click Here to read: A MEDICAL SCHOOL PROFESSOR BUSTS THE QUACKBUSTERS Opponents and critics of EDTA chelation, such as Saul Green, rarely state that chelation "does not work" or that chelation is "proven not to work." Instead they merely state that it is "unproven." They are evasive and set a double standard. Bypass surgery, balloon angioplasty and close to 80% of all other therapies routinely used by medical doctors in everyday practice are also "unproven," using those same unreasonable standards. Most widely-accepted and traditional medical therapies have never been subjected to double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trials costing many millions of dollars?as demanded by opponents of chelation therapy. Detractors of chelation therapy insist that large, multimillion-dollar studies be performed, giving half the patients a placebo, with the placebo group "blinded"?unknown to the investigators until the study is complete (called "double-blind" because neither the doctors nor the patients know who gets the placebo and who gets the active medication). Drug companies are required by the FDA to test new prescription drugs in this manner before they can make marketing claims. On the other hand, bypass surgery, balloon angioplasty and most other widely accepted medical procedures have never been subjected to that type of testing. Because patent protection has long since expired on EDTA, there is no source of funding for such a study. N.I.H., the government source for research money, has repeatedly refused to fund a research grant to study EDTA chelation. Saul Green makes an issue of an FTC ruling in 1998 relating to advertising for EDTA chelation therapy. Because the FDA has not yet approved EDTA chelation therapy for treatment of atherosclerosis, the FTC ruled that it is not proper to imply otherwise in advertisements to the lay public. The informed consent provided to patients by chelation doctors has always made that fact clear, but once again politically powerful critics of chelation therapy have generated adverse publicity, using what was essentially a non-issue. That FTC ruling was based partly on their opinion that professional physicians associations, such as the American College for Advancement in Medicine (ACAM), should not advertise directly to the lay public. The FTC ruling does not apply to the doctor patient relationship. Training courses on chelation therapy continue to be given to practicing physicians twice yearly by ACAM. Drug companies quickly patent their newly developed remedies, which allows them to charge high prices (usually a dollar or more per capsule, sometimes much more) to recapture their millions of dollars in expenses for the FDA-required double blind studies. EDTA is a generic drug. Patent protection expired many years ago. Double-blind placebo studies of adequate size have therefore never been funded and probably will not be funded in the future unless N.I.H. or a private foundation can be convinced to do so with either public or philanthropic funds. (In 2002 a $30 million research proposal for a multi-center study of EDTA chelation therapy is under consideration by N.I.H. Let's all hope that it gets funded.) Many highly positive smaller studies have been published proving EDTA chelation therapy, reporting objective measurements of before and after improvements. Statistical analyses of those improvements are highly significant. Summaries of those studies can be read on the following webpage: Chelation Research. A chapter from my recent book, Bypassing Bypass Surgery, summarizes the vast amount of research supporting EDTA chelation therapy. Those studies that support EDTA chelation are good science and are scientifically valid. Only if it is assumed that placebo effect could cause long-term, sustained increases in objective blood flow measurements to the brain, heart and extremities through diseased arteries can those studies be ignored. Placebo effect has never been observed to last more than 6 months. Benefit from chelation therapy comes on slowly; increasing for 3 to 5 months after treatment is complete and persisting for years after a course of therapy. Placebo benefit has never acted that way. Saul Green's quackbuster attack on chelation therapy states that those published studies are poorly designed and therefore meaningless. I challenge any educated lay reader to review those studies and not be impressed. It always desirable to have bigger and better studies. There is always room for improvement. That same statement could be made about any study ever published. All of the existing clinical data is positive and highly significant on statistical analysis. Independent researchers, at different research facilities, using different technology, were able to duplicate the positive findings of increased blood flow through blocked arteries. Statistical analysis continues to show consistent high significance. The bypass surgery and balloon angioplasty industries gross upwards of $6 billion per year. The cardiovascular drug industry takes in upwards of $100 billion dollars per year. If the existing studies of chelation therapy were to be accepted as valid, those industries would suffer enormous losses. They have no reason to want to see chelation therapy accepted. In recent years opponents of chelation have published several a number of small sham studies, falsely alleging that EDTA chelation does not work. In every instance those studies were actually supportive of EDTA chelation therapy, but they contained an erroneous conclusion otherwise. Click here for an analysis of deceptive studies. The recent PATCH study in Calgary, Canada, is a truly blatant example of that practice. That kind of junk science proves nothing, and the studies cited actually contain evidence to support EDTA chelation therapy. Nonetheless, they are quickly published in mainstream medical journals, interspersed with full-page, four-color advertisements for new and expensive pharmaceutical drugs. The news media then prominently print articles stating that EDTA chelation therapy has been proven not to work. A wise consumer will review all existing sources of information and then make up his or her own mind about what is best. A Ford salesman will most likely tell you that a Ford is superior to a Chevrolet and vice versa. Consumers should be allowed to decide what feels right for them, without being subjected to a "time-bomb-in-chest" hard-sell, with a high-pressure, frightening sales pitch at a time when they are highly vulnerable. Treadmills and angiograms are very effective and can be frightening marketing tools leading to expensive, dangerous and often unnecessary therapies. Mark Twain once said that, "If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." A similar statement could be made about cardiologists, whose only tool is a catheter with balloon attached, or surgeons with their scalpels. The same might also be said of a chelation therapist. Buyer beware! Be an informed consumer. Every therapist has their own bias. Saul Green writes that the Kitchell, Meltzer reappraisal study in 1963 showed no significant benefit. I have described their exact data on the following webpage: Chelation Critics Deceive the Public. You decide for yourself if you think it shows significant benefit or not. For political, economic and other unknown reasons, researchers occasionally interpret their data in a way that fits their personal prejudices, either positive or negative. When an unbiased, objective appraisal is made of that same data, the opposite conclusion can sometimes be supported. That has happened repeatedly with chelation therapy. The facts are presented (Chelation Critics Deceive the Public) to enable readers to form their own opinions. Saul Green states that chelation is "not recognized by the scientific community." That is not true unless it is assumed that the many highly trained physicians who administer chelation therapy are not scientific. He engages in name-calling. Doctors who disagree with Saul Green are called unscientific. Various segments of the medical community join together in professional associations with the goal of protecting their turf and maintaining a monopoly in their field as much as possible. It is not justified for one such group to state that other medical scientists who disagree are "unscientific." This merely represents a disagreement between experts, between differing factions of the medical profession-a common occurrence in any profession. Emerging, complimentary and alternative therapies often confront that type of bias. Saul Green writes that at least fifteen different reports document that EDTA did not benefit patients. That is not true! For the most part, he cites letters to the editor, which report an occasional treatment failure. No therapy is 100% effective and treatment failures do occur with EDTA. However, more than 85% of patients have been helped. These anecdotal reports of treatment failures are used by critics, but anecdotal reports of treatment success are rejected by critics. This represents more evidence of the double standard. Saul Green also misrepresents the the unscientific studies previously mentioned as documenting that EDTA chelation does not work, Chelation Critics Deceive the Public. Arteriograms before and after treatment are demanded by critics to prove benefit from chelation therapy. It is not possible, however, to accurately measure decreases in atherosclerotic plaque unless the diameter of the artery is increased by approximately 25%. In the presence of turbulent blood flow past plaques, it requires only a 10% increase in arterial diameter to double the flow of blood (Poiseuille's Law of hemodynamics as can be found in any textbook of medical physiology or biophysics). As proven in studies, arteriograms and ultrasound are not sensitive enough to consistently measure changes of less than 25% in the diameter of a blood vessel. Increases much less than that can greatly relieve or totally eliminate symptoms, and are not detectable on arteriograms. Studies which measure heart and organ function and total blood flow consistently prove that EDTA chelation therapy is highly beneficial. If patients improve their physical endurance, if exercise tolerance increases and if symptoms improve, that provides good scientific evidence of benefit. If measurements of walking distance on a treadmill with an uphill incline consistently increase after treatment and with statistical significance, that is valid scientific proof of benefit. Angiograms are not sensitive enough to measure even a doubling in blood flow. Angiograms are marketing tools frequently used to justify bypass surgery and balloon angioplasty; however, angiograms cannot show increases in arterial diameter that can increase blood flow by 200% or more. They do, however, show the surgeons where to cut and are necessary to place a balloon or stent in angioplasty. And sometimes those procedures are necessary. Saul Green is in error when he states that the Curt Diehm study in Germany did not show benefit. The raw data from that study has been analyzed by medical school professors in the United States and found to be highly positive, as documented in detail on the following webpage: Critique of the Heidelberg Study. Patients who received EDTA increased their walking distance by an average of 400%, compared to 60% increase in the control group patients, who received an active drug, not a placebo. The manufacturer of the control drug funded the study and reserved the right to manipulate and report the data in their own way. Patients who responded best were eliminated from the final data. Final results were measured immediately, 3 months before full improvement from EDTA could be expected. Analysis of raw data from that study proves that EDTA chelation therapy was highly effective in treating arterial blockage in the legs. The adverse side effects described by Saul Green were reported many years ago when massive doses of EDTA were infused in a very short time. Any medicine given in overdose can cause harm. There are no documented reports of harm when EDTA has been administered using the currently approved protocol. In rare reports of adverse side-effects, the current protocol was not followed. Even when administered improperly, 10 deaths in a million patients indicates that chelation is infinitely safer than surgery or balloon angioplasty, which result in death from complications in approximately 3 out of every hundred patients treated. Fifty thousand people die in automobile accidents every year and another 200,000 are seriously injured. I tell my patients that the drive to the clinic in an automobile to get chelation therapy is statistically far more dangerous that the chelation they receive after they arrive. More than 8,000 deaths and 200,000 hospitalizations each year result from complications of ibuprofen, naproxen, aspirin and other widely accepted pain remedies, many of which are available without prescription. EDTA chelation therapy is infinitely safer than even those treatments. Critics of chelation therapy never put things in proper perspective. Saul Green goes on to speculate about a number of theoretical reasons why chelation therapy might possibly be dangerous. He completely ignores the amazing safety record of a million patients who have received the therapy. The dangers of surgery and angioplasty are well proven, not just theoretical?three percent death rate and twenty percent or more serious but non-fatal complications. It is not necessary to merely speculate why invasive procedures might possibly cause harm. Saul Green's statements about why chelation might be dangerous have not been supported by more than 40 years of experience. The Danish study mentioned by Saul Green was misrepresented and proved nothing. It was actually a positive study and showed benefit from chelation therapy. Saul Green states that the FDA once had EDTA chelation on their list of "Health Care Frauds." The FDA has long since removed chelation therapy from that list, and for good reason. Why did they do that? In my opinion, it is a beneficial and highly cost effective therapy. BE SURE TO READ: If EDTA Chelation Therapy is so Good, Why Is It Not More Widely Accepted? by Dr. James P. Carter, MD, DrPH A Professor of Cardiology Critiques Bypass Surgery. Chelation Critics Deceive the Public by Elmer M. Cranton, MD ttp://www.life-enhancement.com/artic*le_template.asp?ID=166 PATIENTS CANCEL BYPASS SURGERIES AFTER EDTA TREATMENTS It is common place for physicians to help heart disease patients who have failed all the standard treatments to make remarkable - even unbelievable - recoveries, once given EDTA. Many patients on waiting lists for bypass surgery have found, after a series of EDTA chelation treatments, that they did not need the surgery. One particular study found that when 65 patients who had been on the waiting list for bypass surgery for an average of six months were treated with EDTA, the symptoms in 89% of them improved so much that they canceled their surgery.3 http://www.healingdaily.com/or*al-ch...elati***on.htm EDTA removes toxic metals from the blood. Studies have shown that as people age they continuously accumulate toxic metals: lead, mercury, aluminum, iron, cadmium, and arsenic, among others. The accrual of these toxins invites an increased risk for various diseases, especially heart disease. The less of these metals we have in our bodies, the more likely we are to be physiologically healthy or simply feel good, and the lower our risk for heart disease. Because EDTA is so effective at removing unwanted metals and other minerals from the blood, it has been the standard, FDA-approved treatment for lead, mercury, aluminum, and cadmium poisoning for more than 50 years. EDTA normalizes the distribution of most metallic elements in the body. as well, but AMA and the drug makers are resistant to such evidence. Do you suppose the expiration of an otherwise profitable patent on EDTA has anything to do with that? Of course not, you're a Pharma Blogger. As for heavy metals, mercury is almost as effectively removed by chelation as lead, and regardless of mercury load, or reasons for adminstering, chelation for mercury works the same as it does for lead. This death may have resulted from an allergic response to one of the chemicals used, but chelation does work. [Snip ranting] I did,,,,,,,,,,,,Yours -- Orac |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Orac" wrote snip liars lying for liars In article, Peter Bowditch wrote: From this week's update to The Millenium Project snip proven lying websites + spam -- Orac |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Orac" wrote ... In article , "HCN" wrote: "Peter Bowditch" wrote in message From this week's update to The Millenium Project Peter, This week's update is in top form. Bravo! One of the champions of the "let's chelate mercury" bunch has written a "it is not my fault" at the "Huff and Puff" blog: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-...he_b_6286.html ... gag, ick, yuck My hope is that the mother from the UK actually reveals that she got the idea from reading Kirby's book. Someone really has to explain WHY an "ear, nose and throat" doctor was sticking an IV with EDTA into a kid. I was wondering that myself. He probably discovered he could make a lot more money doing chelation therapy; it's very profitable. Of course, I have to ask whether he had the necessary safeguards in place for such a treatment, at the very least a cardiac monitor, a fully stocked crash cart, and personnel trained in PALS (Pediatric Advanced Life Support, the pediatric equivalent to ACLS) readily available. If a patient suffers a cardiac arrest from hypocalcemia brought on by EDTA chelation, there won't be time to get him to a hospital. -- Orac |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Orac wrote:
In article . com, "PeterB" wrote: First, to be clear, chelation is not an alternative medicine but a conventional therapy for heavy-metal detoxification that has been in use since the 1940s. It still is. Some research shows chelation to be effective in atherosclerotic patients, No it doesn't. The "some" research to which you refer comes from old studies with inadequate controls. Every randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial since the early 1990's (save one with only 10 patients that was never expanded upon) has failed to find any benefit to chelation greater than placebo. No study has ever documented objectively measured decreases in atherosclerotic plaque due to chelation. Thiemann's study of EDTA in its trial comparison to Fludilat in treating heart patients proves you wrong, but not by reducing arterial plaque. The likely mechanism following reduction of heavy metals in tissue is improved function of endothelial cells, allowing for increased production of a href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=11&k=nitric%20oxide" onmouseover="window.status='nitric oxide'; return true;" onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;"nitric oxide/a, a condition known as The Endothelial Relaxing Factor. That result provides for relaxation of arterial pathways and permits more efficient blood flow to the heart. The attempted coverup of these effects constitute a scandal for the pharmaceutical industry, although such a mistake was not to be repeated. Still, benefits to patients from EDTA in comparison to fludilat were so dramatic that even a deliberately flawed study could not have engendered such numbers. Today, studies funded by Big Pharma are designed to show evidence for reduction in chemical markers associated, but not linked, to actual diseases. In this manner, patients are symptomatically managed, but not pathologically resolved. The end product is a patient whose disease management requires long-term drug dependency, engendering the greatest profits with the least rate of attrition. It's been a perfect formula for quite a while -- except for one thing. The public is catching on. as well, but AMA and the drug makers are resistant to such evidence. Do you suppose the expiration of an otherwise profitable patent on EDTA has anything to do with that? Of course not, you're a Pharma Blogger. But EDTA chelation *is* quite profitable for doctors administering it. It's a relatively cheap drug and they charge $100 per infusion or more. For atherosclerotic disease, usually 20-40 infusions are recommended. That's a nice chunk of change per patient. Doctors are well-paid by any measure, however most licensed practicioners won't chance condemnation from their state medical boards over this procedure. Those who do so have taken time to look at the facts in the best interest of their patients. As for heavy metals, mercury is almost as effectively removed by chelation as lead, and regardless of mercury load, or reasons for adminstering, chelation for mercury works the same as it does for lead. Actually, no it doesn't. Lead is quite tightly bound to tissue proteins containing -SH groups. EDTA is not as strong a binder of mercury as these proteins. To remove mercury, you need to use a chelation agent containing -SH groups that has a higher affinity for mercury than the tissue proteins. ie, chelation works the same (by the same principle) regardless of the heavy metal target, whereas differences in EDTA are specific to the target, and I'm aware of differences in EDTA formulations. I would be surprised if this case was treated using MgNa2EDTA, as that would not have worked in any event with regard to mercury. This death may have resulted from an allergic response to one of the chemicals used, but chelation does work. Chelation only works for documented cases of heavy metal poisoning. There is no evidence it "works" for cardiovascular disease and even less evidence that it "works" for autism. The Thiemann study demonstrated a remarkable benefit in atherosclerotic patients, and I'm happy their attempt at concealing that evidence failed. Those who ask for peer-reviewed evidence of this assume that the same publication channels beholden to their Big Pharma sponsors will publish facts embarrassing to that relationship, and autonymously at that. It doesn't work that way. Also, the research of Dr. Amy Holmes (now retired) and Dr. Stephanie Cave, authors of "What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Children's Vaccinations," have achieved excellent results in autistic patients with chelation therapy over the years. PeterB |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
*P*ontificating*B*ull****ter wrote:
First, to be clear, chelation is not an alternative medicine but a conventional therapy for heavy-metal detoxification that has been in use since the 1940s. It still is. You are technically correct. However, when promoted for something, such as treating atuism, it falls under the broad spectrum of Alt Med. Some research shows chelation to be effective in atherosclerotic patients, as well, Effective? Interesting. Can you post anything that shows that the coronary lumina or peripheral doppler studies are increased after chelation? That would require that the studies were done prior, and subsequent to the therapy. but AMA and the drug makers are resistant to such evidence. Do you suppose the expiration of an otherwise profitable patent on EDTA has anything to do with that? Nope. They could still charge BIG BUCKS for their services in administering the treatment in their offices, etc. The cost of the chemical is miniscule, the cost of their time could be astronomical. Of course not, you're a Pharma Blogger. And you are a *P*ontificating*B*ull****ter. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark Probert" wrote *P*ontificating*B*ull****ter wrote: And you are a *P*ontificating*B*ull****ter. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
LadyLollipop wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote *P*ontificating*B*ull****ter wrote: And you are a *P*ontificating*B*ull****ter. Yes, PeterB is The *P*ontificating*B*ull****ter. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message ... From this week's update to The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/ Cheatlation. Yes, that is how it should be spelled (27/8/2005) No it shouldn't. Chealation is a valid way to treat heavy metal poisoning. The problem was using a treatment with a known risk of death for something which is has not been shown to be effective. Jeff |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Peter Bowditch wrote:
From this week's update to The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/ Cheatlation. Yes, that is how it should be spelled (27/8/2005) On Tuesday, August 23, a 5-year-old boy named Abubakar Tariq Nadama was killed by a quack in Portersville, Pennsylvania. (Read the story here.) He died because his mother believed that a charlatan could cure the boy's autism using a process called chelation. The killer, a real doctor named Kelly, is not saying much but the story is being spread around that the boy was being treated for lead poisoning. Of course this will be the story, because that is the only legal use of the chelating drug administered by the quack and he has to make sure that the FDA don't shut him down and his victims' parents can claim on their health insurance. Put another way, the quack is not only a killer but he practices insurance fraud. The mother is quite clear that she brought her son from England to have the mercury taken out of him, not lead. If Abubakar had been suffering from lead poisoning he would have been eligible for treatment under the British National Health Service, and nobody can claim that the parents didn't know this because the father is employed by the NHS. Peter, his father is an MD working for the NHS. There is no question in my mind that the CHEATlation treatment here in the US was for autism, and that any claim to the contrary is for insurance fraud purposes. The fraud of chelation is just another way for charlatans and criminals to steal more money from the parents of autistic children. They lie about mercury in vaccines, they lie about the ability of EDTA to chelate mercury (it is far more likely to extract calcium, leading to heart failure), they lie about the results they get.. They care about nothing but money, and what makes it worse is that these criminals are supported and endorsed by organisations (like Generation Rescue and TAAP) which pretend to be acting in the interests of autistic children. Here are some quotes from alternative medicine supporters expressing their outrage at this needless death: - The boy who died from EDTA chelation treatment would be just as dead if it had been done to him for lead poisoning - Of course, the press will probably not mention some of the ugly truths that are out there about how our children die from other treatments - Abubakar is a "true soldier in the struggle" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|