MD, PhD, MAE, FMedSci, FRSB, FRCP, FRCPEd.

children

1 2 3 18

While medical experts across the world have expressed dismay at Trump’s appointment of Robert Kennedy, the ‘International chiropractors Association’ has just published this remarkable note:

Donald J. Trump made it official that he was nominating Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to serve as the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Secretary-designee Kennedy has spent his entire career championing the health of the nation through education, advocacy, research and when needed litigation.

Among his many accomplishments are protecting the environment with Riverkeeper and the Natural Resources Defense Council His work at Riverkeeper succeeded in setting long-term environmental legal standards. Kennedy won legal battles against large corporate polluters. He became an adjunct professor of environmental law at Pace University School of Law in 1986 and founded the Pace’s Environmental Litigation Clinic which he co-directed for a decade.

It would be in the Pace Law Review that the landmark paper, “Unanswered Questions from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: A Review of Compensated Cases of Vaccine-Induced Brain Injury” (https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1681&context=pelr) would be published in 2011.

Kennedy became laser focused on the autism epidemic while giving lectures on the dangers of mercury in fish, he was repeatedly approached by the mothers of children born healthy who regressed into autism after suffering adverse reactions from childhood vaccines, including their concern about the mercury-based preservative, thimerosal, being used in vaccines including the Hepatitis B vaccine given at birth. Kennedy’s approach to the issue was the same as it always, looking at the science. He assembled a team who gathered all the science and reviewed the issues with him. This resulted in the publication of the book, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak
The Evidence Supporting the Immediate Removal of Mercury—a Known Neurotoxin—from Vaccines.

After establishing and leading the nonprofit Children’s Health Defense, last year Kennedy stepped back from the organization to throw his hat in the ring to be President. Becoming the embodiment of his uncle John F. Kennedy’s famous quote, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country!”, Kennedy reached out to President Trump to form an alliance to focus on the crisis of chronic disease in the United States, and suspended his campaign to focus on the Make American Healthy Again (MAHA) Initiative.

ICA President, Dr. Selina Sigafoose Jackson, who is currently in Brazil promoting the protection of chiropractic as a separate and distinct profession stated, “Many ICA members have been supporters of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s philanthropic activities and are all in on the MAHA Initiative. The Mission, Vision, and Values of the ICA align with the stated goals of the MAHA Initiative. We stand ready to provide policy proposals and experts to serve as advisors to the incoming Administration and to Secretary Kennedy upon his swearing in.”

____________________________

 

Perhaps I am permitted to contrast this with some health-related truths about Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (my apologies, if the list is incomplete – please add to it by posting further important issues):

  • Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has, since about 20 years, been a leading figure of the anti-vaccine movement.
  • During the epidemic, he pushed the conspiracy theory that “the quarantine” was used as cover to install 5G cell phone networks.
  • He claimed that “one out of every six American women has so much mercury in her womb that her children are at risk for a grim inventory of diseases, including autism, blindness, mental retardation and heart, liver and kidney disease.”
  • He wrote that, “while people were dying at the rate of 10,000 patients a week, Dr. Fauci declared that hydroxychloroquine should only be used as part of a clinical trial. For the first time in American history, a government official was overruling the medical judgment of thousands of treating physicians, and ordering doctors to stop practicing medicine as they saw fit.”
  • He pushed the conspiracy theory that COVID-19 had been “ethnically targeted” to spare Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people.”
  • He claimed in a 2023 podcast interview that “There’s no vaccine that is safe and effective”.
  • In a 2021 podcast, he urged people to “resist” CDC guidelines on when kids should get vaccines.
  • He founded Children’s Health Defense’ that spreads fear and mistrust in science. One chiropractic group in California had donated $500,000 to this organisation.
  • In 2019, he visited Samoa where he became partly responsible for an outbreak of measles, which made 5,700 people sick and killed 83 of them.
  • He called mercury-containing vaccines aimed at children a holocaust. In 2015, he compared the horrors committed against Jews to the effects of vaccines on children. “They get the shot, that night they have a fever of a hundred and three, they go to sleep, and three months later their brain is gone. This is a holocaust, what this is doing to our country.”
  • He repeatedly alleged that exposure to chemicals — “endocrine disruptors” — is causing gender dysphoria in children and contributing to a rise in LGBTQ-youth. According to him, endocrine disruptors are “chemicals that interfere with the body’s hormones and are commonly found in pesticides and plastic.”
  • He stated “Telling people to “trust the experts” is either naive or manipulative—or both.”
  • He plans to stop water fluoridation.
  • He slammed the FDA’s “suppression” of raw milk.
  • He said that a worm ate part of his brain which led to long-lasting “brain fog.”
  • He has a 14-year-long history of abusing heroin from the age of 15. The police once arrested him for possession; he then faced up to two years in jail for the felony but was sentenced to two years probation after pleading guilty.
  • He stated: “WiFi radiation … does all kinds of bad things, including causing cancer…cell phone tumors behind the ear.”
  • He claimed that rates of autism have increased even though “there has been no change in diagnosis and no change in screening either.” Yet, both have changed significantly.
  • He wrote: (Fauci’s) “obsequious subservience to the Big Ag, Big Food, and pharmaceutical companies has left our children drowning in a toxic soup of pesticide residues, corn syrup, and processed foods, while also serving as pincushions for 69 mandated vaccine doses by age 18—none of them properly safety tested.”
  • He stated that cancer rates are skyrocketing in the young and the old – a statement that is evidently untrue.
  •  He authored a viral post on X: “FDA’s war on public health is about to end. This includes its aggressive suppression of psychedelics, peptides, stem cells, raw milk, hyperbaric therapies, chelating compounds, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamins, clean foods, sunshine, exercise, nutraceuticals and anything else that advances human health and can’t be patented by Pharma. If you work for the FDA and are part of this corrupt system, I have two messages for you: 1. Preserve your records, and 2. Pack your bags.”
  • He has also aligned himself with special interests groups such as anti-vaccine chiropractors.
  • He stated categorically: “You cannot trust medical advice from medical professionals.”
  • He said he’s going to put a pause on infectious diseases research for 8 years.
  • He promoted the unfounded theory that the CIA killed his uncle, former President John F. Kennedy.
  • He linked school shootings to the increased prescription of antidepressants.
  • An evaluation of verified Twitter accounts from 2021, found Kennedy’s personal Twitter account to be the top “superspreader” of vaccine misinformation on Twitter, responsible for 13% of all reshares of misinformation, more than three times the second most-retweeted account.

 

PS

Let me finish with a true statement: The World Health Organization has estimated that global immunization efforts have saved at least 154 million lives in the past 50 years.

 

 

This pragmatic, randomised controlled trial was conducted between September 2018 and February 2021 and compared the difference between primary homoeopathic and conventional paediatric care in treating acute illnesses in children in their first 24 months of life. It was conducted at the Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy (CCRH) Collaborative Outpatient Department of the Jeeyar Integrated Medical Services (JIMS) Hospital in Telangana, India, a tertiary-care hospital that provides integrated patient-centric care, using homoeopathy and Ayurveda alongside conventional medicine.

One hundred eight Indian singleton newborns delivered at 37 to 42 weeks gestation were randomised at birth (1:1) to receive either homoeopathic or conventional primary care for any acute illness over the study period. In the homoeopathic group, conventional medical treatment was added when medically indicated. Clinicians and parents were unblinded.

The study’s primary outcome was a comparison of the number of sick days due to an acute illness experienced during the first 24 months of life by children receiving homoeopathic vs. conventional treatment. Sick days were defined as days with any acute illness (febrile or afebrile) reported by the parent and confirmed by the physician. Febrile illness was recorded when body temperature, measured via the ear canal, exceeded 37.5 °C.

The secondary outcomes compared were as follows:

  • The number of sickness episodes, defined as illness events (febrile or afebrile), reported by the parent and confirmed by the physician.
  • Number of respiratory illness episodes and days during the 24 months. Respiratory illnesses included infections in any part of the respiratory tract (nose, middle ear, pharynx, larynx, trachea, bronchi, bronchioles, and lungs) .
  • Number of diarrhoeal episodes and days during the 24 months. Diarrhoea was defined as three or more episodes of watery stool/day, with or without vomiting, with indications of dehydration, weight loss, or defective weight gain.
  • Anthropometric data included weight (measured by electronic scales to the nearest 5 g), height (measured in triplicate to the nearest 0.2 cm using a rigid-length board), head circumference (HC), and mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) (measured with a standard measuring tape to the nearest 0.2 cm every 3 months until the 24th month).
  • Developmental status was evaluated according to the Developmental Assessment Scales for Indian Infants (DASII) every 6 months from the age of 6 to 24 months.
  • Direct cost of treatment for illnesses during the 24 months, including cost of medications, inpatient admissions, investigations, supplements, and treatment outside the hospital facility or study site (consultation and/or medicines).
  • Use of antibiotics during the 24 months, defined as the number of antibiotic episodes during the study.
  • Mortality: death due to any acute illness episode.

The results show that children in the homoeopathic group experienced significantly fewer sick days than those in the conventional group (RR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24-0.58; p < 0.001), with correspondingly fewer sickness episodes (RR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.87; p = .013), as well as fewer respiratory illnesses over the 24-month period. They were taller (F (1, 97) = 8.92, p = .004, partial eta squared = 0.84) but not heavier than their conventionally treated counterparts. They required fewer antibiotics, and their treatment cost was lower.

The authors concluded that homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, was more effective than conventional treatment in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illnesses in the first 24 months of life. It necessitated fewer antibiotics and its overall cost was lower. This study supports homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, as a safe and cost-effective primary care modality during the first 2 years of life.

Here we have another study designed in such a way that a positive result was inevitable. Both groups of children received the necessary conventional care and treatment. The verum group received homeopathy in addition. There were no placebo controls and everyone knew which child belonged to which group. Thus the verum group benefitted from a poweful placebo effect, while the control group experience disappointment over not receiving the extra attention and medication. One might argue that newborn babies cannot experience a placebo response nor disappointment. Yet, one would be wrong and in need of reading up about placebo effects by proxy.

A+B is always more than B alone

To boldy entitle the paper ‘Homoeopathy vs. conventional primary care in children during the first 24 months of life’ and state that the trial aimed to “compared the difference between primary homoeopathic and conventional paediatric care in treating acute illnesses in children in their first 24 months of life”, is as close to scientific misconduct as one can get, in my view!

Yet again, I might ask: what do we call a study that is designed in such a way that a positive result was inevitable?

  • misleading?
  • waste of resources?
  • unethical?
  • fraud?

And again, I let you decide.

 

PS

I feel disappointed that a decent journal published this paper without even a critical comment!

 

Approximately 30% of children diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), the most prevalent mental health disorder in children worldwide, do not respond to conventional pharmaceutical treatments. Previous studies of homeopathic treatment for ADHD have been inconclusive. The objectives of this randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial were to determine if there

  • (a) is an overall effect of homeopathic treatment (homeopathic medicines plus consultation) in the treatment of ADHD;
  • (b) are any specific effects the homeopathic consultation alone in the treatment of ADHD;
  • (c) are any specific effects of homeopathic medicines in the treatment of ADHD.

Children aged 6-16 years diagnosed with ADHD were randomized to one of three arms:

  • Arm 1 (Remedy and Consultation);
  • Arm 2 (Placebo and Consultation);
  • Arm 3 (Usual Care).

The primary outcome was the change of CGI-P T score between baseline and 28 weeks.

There was an improvement in ADHD symptoms as measured by the Conner 3 Global Index-Parent T-score in the two groups (Arms 1 and 2) that received consultations with a homeopathic practitioner when compared with the usual care control group (Arm 3). Parents of the children in the study who received homeopathic consultations (Arms 1 and 2) also reported greater coping efficacy compared with those receiving usual care (Arm 3). There was no difference in adverse events among the three study arms.

The authors concluded that, in this study, homeopathic consultations provided over 8 months with the use of homeopathic remedy was associated with a decrease in ADHD symptoms in children aging 6-16 years when compared with usual treatment alone. Children treated with homeopathic consultations and placebo experienced a similar decrease in ADHD symptoms; however, this finding did not reach statistical significance when correcting for multiple comparisons. Homeopathic remedies in and of themselves were not associated with any change in ADHD symptoms.

This is an interesting study. It – yet again! – confirms that the effects observed after homeopathic treatments are not due to the remedie but are caused by the interaction with the homeopath. To put it more clearly:

HOMEOPATHIC REMEDIES HAVE NO SPECIFIC EFFECTS; ANY BENEFITS ARE DUE TO THE EFFECTS OF THE THERAPEUTIC ENCOUNTER AND OTHER NON-SPECIFIC EFFECTS.

‘ARS TECHNICA’ recently reported that the maker of a homeopathic nasal spray is refusing to recall its product after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found evidence of dangerous microbial contamination.

On 18 September 2024, the FDA therefore warned consumers to immediately stop using ‘SnoreStop nasal spray‘—made by Green Pharmaceuticals—because it may contain microbes that, when sprayed directly into nasal cavities, can cause life-threatening infections:

FDA is warning consumers and health care professionals not to use SnoreStop Nasal Spray, distributed by Green Pharmaceuticals Inc., Camarillo, Calif., because it may have microbial contamination. SnoreStop Nasal Spray was previously sold on the company’s website and other sites.

The use of microbially contaminated nasal spray can potentially lead to infection, which can be life threatening in certain patient populations, such as immune-compromised individuals. This unapproved product is marketed for children beginning at age 5 and adults with unproven claims that it opens air passages and relieves congestion.

Consumers who use SnoreStop should contact their health care professional with questions.

FDA recommended Green Pharmaceuticals recall their SnoreStop Nasal Spray product on Aug. 13 and Sept. 12, 2024. The agency reiterated its recall recommendation multiple times during this time. To date, the company has not taken action to recall this potentially dangerous product from the market.

FDA inspected Green Pharmaceuticals facility in April 2024 and uncovered laboratory test results that reported significant microbial contamination in SnoreStop Nasal Spray lot number 2460. FDA investigators found evidence that some products in this lot had been repackaged and distributed to customers for use as single units and in kits.

Following FDA’s inspection, on Aug. 8, 2024, Green Pharmaceutical destroyed the remaining SnoreStop Nasal Spray from lot 2460 and other products the company had on-hand. Green Pharmaceuticals subsequently stopped selling nasal spray products on their website. However, the agency is concerned that consumers may have purchased contaminated SnoreStop.

Previously, FDA issued a warning letter to Green Pharmaceuticals on Dec. 16, 2022, for distributing unapproved drugs and lack of quality controls over the products they sell. Additionally, the company voluntarily recalled one lot of SnoreStop NasoSpray on June 9, 2022, after FDA testing found the product contained microbial contamination identified as Providencia rettgeri. SnoreStop NasoSpray was renamed as SnoreStop Nasal Spray following this recall.

FDA encourages health care professionals and patients to report adverse events or quality problems experienced with the use of any medication to FDA’s MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program:

  • Complete and submit the report online; or
  • Download and complete the form, then submit it via fax at 1-800-FDA-0178

‘ARS TECHNICA’ reported that, instead of discarding the batch, the FDA inspectors found evidence that Green Pharmaceuticals had repackaged some of the contaminated lot and distributed it as single spray bottles or as part of a starter kit.

This isn’t new territory for the company. In 2022, Green Pharmaceuticals got warnings from the FDA and issued a recall due to microbial contamination in its SnoreStop nasal spray. In June 2022, the FDA held a conference with the company over findings of bacteria and fungi in the spray. Some of the results suggested high levels of microbial contamination. “The individual sample results varied between 420 and up to 6,200 colony forming units (CFU)/mL for total aerobic microbial count… and between 30 and up to 3,800 CFU/mL for total yeast and mold counts,” the FDA reported in a December 2022 warning letter sent after the fact.

The FDA noted finding the specific bacterial pathogen Providencia rettgeri, an opportunistic germ that can lurk in health care settings. It’s most often linked to urinary tract infections, but it can also cause pneumonia, brain and spinal cord infections, heart infections, and wound and bloodstream infections in vulnerable people, according to a 2018 review.

“The high bioburden in conjunction with the route of administration with this drug product poses a high risk of harm to vulnerable patients, including children,” the FDA wrote in its warning letter. Green Pharmaceuticals recalled SnoreStop in June 2022, after its meeting with the FDA.

Aside from the gross microbial contamination, the FDA also noted in its letter that SnoreStop appears to be an unapproved new drug, illegally claiming to treat a disease without FDA approval. SnoreStop is said to contain dilutions of: nux vomica (a natural source of strychnine), belladonna (deadly nightshade), Ephedra vulgaris (a source of the drug ephedrine), hydrastis canadensis (a toxic herb), Kali Bichromicum (potassium dichromate, which is considered toxic and carcinogenic), Teucrium marum (similar to catnip), and Histaminum hydrochloricum (Histamine dihydrochloride).

__________________

There is, of course, no evidence that any of these ingredients – in any dilution or potency – can make people stop snoring.

Acute encephalitis syndrome is a health burden to a populous country like India. It is characterized by a sudden onset of fever, altered sensorium with or without seizures, irritability, abnormal behaviour, or unconsciousness. This study aims to augment further evidence on the effects of add-on homeopathic treatment in reducing mortality and morbidity in children.

This comparative retrospective study included children hospitalized with acute encephalitis syndrome between July 2016 to  December 2016. The researchers compared the parameters of children for whom decisions on Glasgow Outcome scale and Liverpool outcome score aided by add-on homeopathy against those of children from the same year when the add-on homeopathy was not used. All the children were on conventional supportive care and treatment tailored to each child. We also counted the days until the resumption of oral feeding and the length of hospital stay.

Ordinal regression analysis on analyses on 622 children (IH +CSC=329; IMP only=293) was done. Odds of a shift towards increased recovery were superior in the homeopathy-added group than in the IMP group without adjustment (crude OR 2·30, 95% CI 1·66 to 3·20; p=0·0001) and with adjustment (adjusted OR 3.38, 95% CI 2·38 to 4.81; p=0·0001). There was 14.8% less mortality and 17.4% more recovery in the add-on homeopathy group compared to CSC alone. Individualized homeopathic remedies commonly used were: Belladonna (n =238), Stramonium (n =17), Opium (n = 14), Sulphur (n=11) and Hyoscyamus niger (n = 7).

The authors concluded that this retrospective cohort study advocates for add-on homoeopathy in children suffering acute encephalitis which can produce notable improvements in terms of mortality and morbidity. Further studies in different settings are warranted.

If responsible physicians come across such an unexpected and implausible finding, instead of publishing it unchecked, they must properly test the hypothesis in a rigorous trial. As it stands, the results are meaningless and might even do untold harm, if some doctors drew the conclusion that homeopathy saves lives in acute encephalitis.

The most likely explanation for the reported outcomes is that there was considerable selection bias in recruiting patients to this study. The less severely ill patients might thus have ended up in the homeopathy group. The plausibility for the outcomes being due to the homeopathic treatment is virtually zero.

So, why did the authors of this paper publish such utterly unreliable findings and did not even include a hint of critical thinking? I think their affiliations might go some way in answering this question:

  • Ramesh Prasad, Clinical Trial Unit Homoeopathy,BRD Medical College and Hospital, GorakhpurAlok Upadhyay, Clinical Trial Unit Homoeopathy (Viral encephalitis) BRD Medical College and Hospital, Gorakhpur
  • Vinod Kumar Maurya, Clinical Trial Unit Homoeopathy (Viral encephalitis) BRD Medical College and Hospital, Gorakhpur
  • Preeti Verma, Clinical Trial Unit Homoeopathy (Viral encephalitis) Medical College and Hospital, Gorakhpur
  • Shashi Arya, Clinical Trial Unit Homoeopathy (Viral encephalitis) Medical College and Hospital, Gorakhpur
  • Supriya Singh, Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy
  • Purnima Shukla, Clinical Trial Unit Homoeopathy (Viral encephalitis) BRD Medical College and Hospital, Gorakhpur
  • AK Gupta, Clinical Trial Unit Homoeopathy (Viral encephalitis) BRD Medical College and Hospital, Gorakhpur
  • Arvind Kumar, Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy
  • Praveen Oberai, Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy
  • Raj K Manchanda, Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy, New Delhi

And why did they take all of 8 years to publish this nonsense?

Search me!

‘Conversion therapy’ has previously been a subject on this blog, e.g.:

But sadly it is not just a field for homeopaths. It has long been known that religious cults dabble it conversion therapy. Now, it has been reported that a church body enabling “gay exorcism” as conversion therapy and believing in witchcraft is conducting a major expansion in Scotland. The attitudes of the “Forward In Faith Church International Incorporated” (FIFCII) have been described as promoting “vicious homophobia and misogyny”. The FIFCII has even been accepted by the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR), despite these extreme beliefs. The church states that women should provide sex for their husbands whenever they desire it. Its ministers regularly oversee miracles, which allow crippled people to suddenly walk and all manner of ailments to be suddenly cured at mass evangelical gatherings.

Two overseers for Scotland have been appointed – seeking to set up in Glasgow, Fife, Edinburgh and Aberdeen. Premises have already been bought in Edinburgh for a Scottish HQ. The National Secular Society (NSS) has raised concerns about FIFCII. NSS human right lead Alejandro Sanchez said: “This organisation promotes vicious homophobia and misogyny, and may well be endangering lives with reckless allegations of witchcraft. Any suggestion it is acting in the public benefit and worthy of charitable status is absurd. We know from experience OSCR has been either unable or unwilling to take action against religious charities that foster intolerance and extreme views. It is now time legislators urgently review ‘the advancement of religion’ as a charitable purpose. It must not be used as a back door for religious groups to promote conversion therapy and the subjugation of women.”

The website of FIFCII describes the exorcism of a man possessed by a “homosexual spirit”. One “Apostle’s Update” blog post on the charity’s website in 2017 describes how the spirit “bound him for many years” but that he was freed during a “miracle night” in St Kitts and Nevis. The blog states: “The atmosphere on Sunday was electric as there was too much joy in the church.” Another blog entry describes the ‘deliverance’ of a 14 year old girl in Zimbabwe who was taken nightly to “eat human flesh and drink human blood” as part of a ‘witchcraft’ ritual.

The founder of the Forward in Faith Church reportedly amassed a personal fortune of $130 million by the time of his death last year, aged 100. “Apostle” Guti was regarded as spiritual leader by many but was criticised by some for his support for Robert Mugabe. Guti formed the Zimbabwe Assemblies of God Africa (Zaoga) in 1960. That led to the creation of a media empire, a university, a hospital and numerous schools, as well as more than 100 publications. His church has the third largest membership in Zimbabwe after the Roman Catholic Church and the Johanne Marange Apostolic Church. It claims to have spread its ministeries to 168 countries, with over three million members.

At an event at last year’s Zimbabwe Ezekiel Guti University – formed by the church’s leader in the city of Bindura, a team of evangelists were reported to have been set free from possession. The report states: “We thank our father Apostle Dr Joseph Joe Guti for sending us a powerful team of evangelists during the week of Spiritual Revival Festival. Many people were set free from spiritual husbands/wives, some were delivered from abnormal period pains and blood flow, others delivered from witchcraft, satanism and marine spirits as well as healings from sight problems.” A blog from 2015 praises the deliverance of 17 people in Zimbabwe from “spiritual husbands, bitterness, homosexuality, witchcraft, satanism – to mention a few”.

In its UK annual report for 2023, FIFCII, reveals its blueprint for Scotland. It declares that the it is growing fast due to “tithing” – where the congregation hand over 10% of their income to the church. It states: “Scotland has seen a big increase in numbers due to the influx from Zimbabwe through the work visa program. This has benefited us in many ways, not least with tithing but also as many of them were already leaders in Zimbabwe. They are eager to do the work of God in their new places of worship. An area calling for attention for church growth is the possibility of new assemblies. We are looking to establish one in Dundee in 2024 and possibly Fife as well, areas which are both to the east between Edinburgh and Aberdeen assemblies. Scotland Province might be small in size but mighty in heart and serving a big God. We are confident that 2024 will be a year with bigger, greater, mightier blessings than we have already seen or even believed possible.”

At the end of 2022, FIFCII bought its own ”provincial centre”, for Scotland in Edinburgh, which is still being renovated, with use of donations. The organisation admits that its extreme beliefs can be a blocker – due to equality laws. The report states: “Finding affordable places of worship can be challenging in some places from practices that are against our guidance, rules and policy, like being asked to sign an agreement to support same sex marriages.”

In the UK, charities are legally required to act in the public benefit but OSCR has tended to turn a blind eye to the most controversial Old Testament beliefs if they are held in the name of religion. The Scottish Government is seeking to legally ban “conversion therapy” that aims to change any individual’s sexuality. A public consultation was launched in January this year and legislation could follow. Equalities Minister Emma Roddick announced the consultation in a statement that claims conversion practice are “damaging and destructive acts” that violate the human rights of those who undergo them. She adds: “Sadly, these practices happen today, and they have absolutely no place in Scotland. We are committed to bringing an end to conversion practices, and to protect LGBTQI+ people from the trauma and harm they can cause.”

According to its website, the ministry has “spread to most of the major cities of the United Kingdom including, London, Manchester, Birmingham, Belfast, Glasgow and Cardiff.

Whooping cough is on the rise in many parts of the world; and it’s far from harmless. It has been reported that 9 infants died from whooping cough in England between November last year and the end of May 2024. Altogether a total of 7599 cases of whooping cough have been confirmed in England this year, with cases continuing to rise from 555 in January to 920 in February.

In France too, cases of whooping cough are rising among all ages, the French health authority has warned, saying vulnerable groups should check their vaccinations are up to date. Cases of the illness – called coqueluche in French – have been rising since the start of 2024, states Santé publique France (SPF). It has called for people to be vigilant.

I have recently argued that this might be not least due to the irresponsible advice of homeopaths. But homeopaths are by no means alone in this.

According to advice from MOTHER EARTH LIVING several natural home remedies help alleviate whooping cough symptoms (as well as cold and flu symptoms) and clear the pertussis infection. A teaspoon of fresh garlic juice taken 2 to 3 times a day is a potent, effective treatment.

A pinch of the Indian curry spice turmeric, taken at least twice a day, relieves whooping cough symptoms and helps clear the bacterial infection. (Odorless garlic and turmeric capsules may not be as effective as fresh ingredients, whose odors can be minimized by chewing fresh mint).

Ginger has antiviral, antibacterial, antiparasitic, antifungal, anti-inflammatory and expectorant properties. It boosts the immune system, warms and induces sweating (which helps push fever and toxins out of the body), and calms coughs and sore throats quickly. It also stimulates appetite, which is important to sick individuals weakened by infection.

____________________

There are numerous further SCAM-sites that give advice to use this or that SCAM. The recommended treatments all have one thing in common: they do not work to prevent or treat whooping cough.

If one member of your family has caught the infection, please do me a favour:

avoid SCAM and see a real doctor.

 

In response to criticism voiced against Australian chiropractors’ decision to re-commence manipulating children, the Australian Chiropractors Association (ACA) president, David Cahill, welcomed the updated statement on paediatric care by the Chiropractic Board of Australia. “The statement serves to reinforce the confidence the Australian public has in chiropractic care provided by registered ACA member chiropractors,” said Cahill.

The Safer Care Victoria Review has shown chiropractic care for children to be extremely safe. Of the 29,599 online submissions received from across Australia (the largest survey of its kind), there were no reports of harm to a child receiving chiropractic healthcare. Of those submissions, 21,824 responses were from parents who had accessed chiropractic healthcare for their children, and there was not a single report of significant harm in these submissions. “In a particularly strong endorsement, 99.6% of those parental submissions affirmed that chiropractic healthcare benefitted their child highlighting the exemplary safety record of chiropractic healthcare,” Cahill said.

ACA member chiropractors are healthcare professionals who effectively treat a wide range of musculoskeletal disorders. Chiropractors are 5-year university degree educated healthcare professionals, equipped with expertise enabling them to tailor the appropriate care for people of all ages including children. Established in 1938, the Australian Chiropractors Association (ACA) is the peak body representing chiropractors. The ACA promotes the importance of maintaining spinal health to improve musculoskeletal health through non-invasive, drug-free spinal health and lifestyle advice to help Australians of all ages lead and maintain healthy lives.

_________________________

Mr Cahill and the Australian Chiropractors Association have thus demonstrated that they fail to understand how one needs to establish the benefits and harms of a therapy. That chiropractic spinal manipulations are “extremely safe” cannot be established by an online survey which might or might not have been manipulated by the chiropractors who have an interest in not loosing the lucrative option of treating children. It cannot even establish “the confidence the Australian public has in chiropractic care”.

Mr Cahill and the Australian Chiropractors Association should know that chiropractic spinal manipulation – just like any other intervention – must be evaluated according to accepted principles of risk-benefit analyses. No proven benefit and a possibility of harm mean that the risk-benefit balance fails to be positive. And this means that it is irresponsible to use chiropractic spinal manipulations.

Mr Cahill and the Australian Chiropractors Association, however, seem to not know even the essentials of ethical healthcare. The obvious conclusion, therefore, is to send the lot of them back to school.

On 8 March 2019, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) Health Council (CHC) noted community concerns about spinal manipulation on children performed by chiropractors and agreed that there was a need to consider whether public safety was at risk.

On behalf of the CHC, the Victorian Minister for Health, the Hon. Jenny Mikakos MP, instructed Safer Care Victoria (SCV) to undertake an independent review of the practice of chiropractic spinal manipulation on children under 12 years. The findings of this review are to be provided to the Minister for reporting to the CHC. To provide expert guidance and advice to inform the review, SCV established an independent advisory panel. The panel included expertise in chiropractic care, academic allied health, health practitioner regulation, healthcare evidence, governance, paediatrics and paediatric surgery, and musculoskeletal care, and had consumer representation.

The main conclusions were as follows:

  • … spinal manipulation in children is not wholly without risk. Any risk associated
    with care, no matter how uncommon or minor, must be considered in light of any potential or likely
    benefits. This is particularly important in younger children, especially those under the age of 2 years in
    whom minor adverse events may be more common.
  • … the evidence base for spinal manipulation in children is very poor. In particular, no studies have been performed in Australia … The possible, but unlikely, benefits of spinal manipulation in the management of colic or enuresis should be balanced by the possibility, albeit rare, of minor harm.

The main recommendation was straight forward: “Spinal manipulation, as defined in Section 123 of National Law, should not be provided to children under 12 years of age, by any practitioner, for general wellness or for the management of the following conditions: developmental and behavioural disorders, hyperactivity disorders, autism spectrum disorders, asthma, infantile colic, bedwetting, ear infections, digestive problems, headache, cerebral palsy and torticollis.”

The Chiropractic Board of Australia nevertheless decided they would re-start manipulationg babies. On 11/6/2024 The Sydney Morning Harald reported:

Chiropractors have given themselves the green light to resume manipulating the spines of babies following a four-year interim ban supported by the country’s health ministers. In a move slammed by doctors as irresponsible, the Chiropractic Board of Australia has quietly released new guidelines permitting the controversial treatment for children under two. The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) hit out at the decision, saying there was no evidence supporting the spinal manipulation of babies and children and that the practice should be outlawed. ‘‘There is no way in the world I would let anyone manipulate a child’s spine,’’ said Dr James Best, the college’s Specific Interests Child and Young Person’s Health chair. ‘‘The fact that it hasn’t been ruled out by this organisation is very disappointing and concerning. It’s irresponsible.’’ …

Subsequently, it was reported that the federal health minister has intervened in the Chiropractic Board of Australia’s controversial decision to allow practitioners to resume spinal manipulation of children under two and is seeking an urgent explanation.

As pressure mounts on chiropractors to ditch the treatment, federal Health Minister Mark Butler confirmed on Thursday that he would also raise the issue with his state and territory colleagues at a meeting of health ministers in South Australia on Friday.

“The Health Minister is writing to the Chiropractic Board seeking an urgent explanation on its decision to allow a resumption of spinal manipulation of infants under two, in spite of two reviews concluding there was no evidence to support that practice,” a spokeswoman said.

___________________________

This course of events can only be surprising to those who are not familiar with the chiropractors’ general attitude. Chiropractors have always put income before ethics and safety. This, I fear, is not a phenomenon confined to Australia or to the care of children but one that beleagues this profession worldwide from the days of DD Palmer to the present.

This study sought to identify if an Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) integrating complementary medicine has low antibiotic prescribing.

The researchers conducted a retrospective analysis at the level-2 NICU of the Filderklinik, an integrative medicine hospital in Southern Germany, to compare antibiotic use locally and internationally; to compare neonates with suspected infection, managed with and without antibiotics; and to describe use and safety of complementary medicinal products.

Among 7778 live births, 1086 neonates were hospitalized between 2014 and 2017. Two hundred forty-six were diagnosed with suspected or confirmed infection, their median gestational age was 40.3 weeks (range 29-42), 3.25% had a birthweight <2500 g, 176 were treated with antibiotics for a median duration of 4 days, 6 had culture-proven infection (0.77 per 1000 live births), and 2.26% of live births were started on antibiotics. A total of 866 antibiotic treatment days corresponded to 111 antibiotic days per 1000 live births and 8.8 antibiotic days per 100 hospital days. Neonates managed with antibiotics more often had fever and abnormal laboratory parameters than those managed without. Complementary medicinal products comprising 71 different natural substances were used, no side effect or adverse event were described. A subanalysis using the inclusion criteria of a recent analysis of 13 networks in Europe, North America, and Australia confirmed this cohort to be among the lowest prescribing networks.

The authors concluded that antibiotic use was low in this NICU in both local and international comparison, while the disease burden was in the mid-range, confirming an association between integrative medicine practice and low antibiotic prescribing in newborns. Complementary medicinal products were widely used and well tolerated.

I have often suggested that somone does a study to assess the usage of meat products in a vegetarian restaurant. I am sure it would generate resuts that are at least as meaningful as the ones reported by the team of anthroposophic geniuses responsible for this paper. Here are their affiliations:

  • 1ARCIM Institute, Filderstadt, Germany.
  • 2Department of Pediatrics, Filderklinik, Filderstadt, Germany.
  • 3Department of Neonatology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
  • 4Center for Integrative Pediatrics, Fribourg Cantonal Hospital, Fribourg, Switzerland.
  • 5Department of Community Health, Fribourg University, Fribourg, Switzerland.
  • 6Institute of Precision Medicine, University Furtwangen, Furtwangen, Germany.

Say no more!

1 2 3 18
Subscribe via email

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new blog posts by email.

Recent Comments

Note that comments can be edited for up to five minutes after they are first submitted but you must tick the box: “Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.”

The most recent comments from all posts can be seen here.

Archives
Categories