medical ethics
Auriculotherapy (or ear acupuncture) is the use of electrical, mechanical, or other stimuli at specific points on the outer ear for therapeutic purposes. It was invented by the French neurologist Paul Nogier (1908–1996) who published his “Treatise of Auriculotherapy” in 1961. Auriculotherapy is based on the idea that the human outer ear is an area that reflects the entire body. Proponents of auriculotherapy refer to maps where our inner organs and body parts are depicted on the outer ear. These maps are not in line with our knowledge of anatomy and physiology. Auriculotherapy thus lacks plausibility.
This single-blind randomized, placebo-controlled study aimed to investigate the effect of auriculotherapy on the intensity of Premenstrual Syndrome (PMS) symptoms.
Ninety-one women were randomly assigned to
- Auriculotherapy (AG),
- Placebo (PG),
- Control (CG) groups.
The intervention was 8 weeks long, done once per week. At each session in AG the microneedles were placed in seven points related to PMS symptoms (Anxiety; Endocrine; Muscle relaxation; Analgesia; Kidney; Shen Men; and Sympathetic). At PG the microneedles also were placed in seven points but unrelated to PMS symptoms (Tonsils; Vocal cords; Teeth; Eyes; Allergy; Mouth; and External nose). The women allocate in the CG received o intervention during the evaluation period.
Assessments of PMS symptoms (Premenstrual Syndrome Screening Tool), musculoskeletal pain (Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire), anxiety (Beck Anxiety Inventory), and quality of life (WHOQOL-Bref) were done at baseline, before the 5th session, after program completion, and a month follow-up.
The AG and PG showed significantly lower scores of PMS symptoms, musculoskeletal pain, and anxiety. On the quality of life and follow-up analysis, the significance was observed only in PG.
The authors concluded that auriculotherapy can be used as adjunctive therapy to reduce the physical and mood PMS symptoms.
If I understand it correctly (the paper is unclear), verum and placebo were both better than no intervention but showed no significant differences when compared to each other. This is strong evidence that auriculotherapy is, in fact, a placebo. To make matters worse, in the follow-up analysis placebo seems to be superior to auriculotherapy.
Another issue might be adverse effects. Microneedle implants can cause severe complications. Thus it is mandatory to monitor adverse effects in clinical trials. This does not seem to have happened in this case.
The mind boggles!
How on earth could the authors conclude that auriculotherapy can be used as adjunctive therapy to reduce the physical and mood PMS symptoms.
The answer: a case of scientific misconduct?
Recently, I came across a remarkable paper about the German ‘Association of Catholic Doctors’ and homeopathic conversion therapy. Its author is Yannick Borkens from the College of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Science, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia. I think, it is worth reading in full, but here I have just a few excerpts for you:
Even in modern Germany of the 21st century there is still homophobia and other intolerances towards different sexualities and genders. These are also evident in the presence of so-called conversion therapies, which are still offered although there are already legal efforts. Among those groups, the Bund katholischer Ärzte (Association of Catholic Doctors) is a unique curiosity. Although this group is no longer really active, it is currently moving into the German focus again due to criminal charges and reporting in the tabloid press. The aim of this paper is to bring the Bund katholischer Ärzte not only into a more scientific but also into a more international focus. Furthermore, it is an ideal example to show what strange effects homophobia can produce…
The Bund katholischer Ärzte was founded in the year 2004 as the katholische Ärztevereinigung (catholic medical association). In 2010, the name was changed to BkÄ—Bund katholischer Ärzte. The BkÄ was founded by Dr. (I) Gero Winkelmann, a general practitioner and homeopath based in Unterhaching (the second largest municipality in the district of Munich—Bavaria) (Winkelmann, 2013)…
Nowadays, the BkÄ is best known for its conversion therapies and its general homophobic attitude. On its website, the BkÄ describes these topics as special forms of therapy from a Catholic medical point of view (“allgemeine wie auch besondere Therapieformen aus katholischer-ärztlicher Sicht”) and to the extent to which certain forms of therapy are harmful or even acceptable to Christians (“[…] inwiefern gewisse Therapieformen schädlich oder für Christen überhaupt annehmbar sind”). The term therapies (“Therapieformen”) does not actually describe medical therapies, but rather actions, measures, character traits and sexualities like homosexuality. Other topics addressed by the BkÄ are abortions, the prohibition of contraceptives (condoms and birth control pills), but also medical and biologically ethical topics such as stem cell research (Winkelmann, 2020d). However, The BkÄ is primarily concerned with homosexuality and conversion therapies. But these differ from the classic and well-known therapies, which are mostly psychotherapies. On his online presences, Gero Winkelmann describes not only his therapeutic approaches but also scientific backgrounds, which however do not stand up to modern scientific knowledge and can (and should) be called pseudoscientific.
… Dr. (I) Gero Winkelmann is a German general practitioner with the additional title Homöopathie (homeopathy)… Nowadays he is best known for his homophobic and comparable views. He describes himself as a doctor who also practices his Catholic faith at work (Winkelmann, 2019). According to him, this is achieved through three pillars: Christian ethics, especially at the beginning and the end of life (“Christliche Ethik, insbesondere am Lebensanfang und Lebensende”), prayers and visits to church services (“Gebete und Besuch von Gottesdiensten”) and to participate in church services on public holidays and also on working holidays, especially as a doctor on call who works at untimely times (e.g. holidays, at night) (“Gerade als Bereitschaftsarzt, der zu “Unzeiten” tätig ist (feiertags, nachts) […] die Gottesdienste an Feiertagen und auch an Werktagen (z.B. Rorate-Amt) zu besuchen”) (Winkelmann, 2019).
The point of Christian ethics, in particular, requires a closer look. “Christian ethics, especially at the beginning and the end of life” results in a pro-life view. In the United States, this pro-life view, also known as pro-life movement, results not only in demonstrations and political petitions but also in violence, sometimes with death consequences. Since 1993, at least 11 people have been killed in attacks on abortion clinics, mostly doctors and physicians who perform abortions. The perpetrators can often be assigned to a radical Christian spectrum (Stack, 2015). In Germany, Winkelmann is both an opponent of abortion and contraceptives as well as an opponent of medical euthanasia. Before he became known throughout Germany through the establishment of the BkÄ, he founded the European Pro-Life Doctors (2020) association, which campaigns against abortion, but also against contraceptives and research such as stem cell therapy. The foundation was in the year 2000. However, there is neither an official establishment of the EPLD as an official association nor an official entry in the German association register. This also applies to the BkÄ (European Pro-Life Doctors, no publication date; Winkelmann, 2016b). In addition to the rejection of abortions and euthanasia, Winkelmann uses the EPLD webpage also to spread the view that condoms do not work and also do not help against AIDS. He explains this with the fact that the latex skin of the condom is too thin and the HI-Virus could penetrate it without any problems. According to him, this made condoms reflect a pseudo-security (Winkelmann, 2016a). Furthermore, he also defended the statement of Pope Benedict XVI, that condoms could not help against AIDS. Pope Benedict XVI stated that on his Africa trip in 2009 (Welle, 2009). Especially for men who have sex with men (MSM), the condom is an important means of protection against AIDS infections (Wirth et al., 2020). This is especially true in African countries that have a high AIDS rate. In some parts, the AIDS rate is 100 times higher than in the United States (with a similar sexual activity) (Epstein and Ashburn, 2004).
On his website, Winkelmann not only describes the scientific background of homosexuality and his conversion therapy (which, however, does not stand up to modern scientific findings) but also defends the use of conversion therapies in general. He describes that every bad state needs a reversal (conversion). Furthermore, users of those therapies should not be afraid of a reversal, inner maturation and strengthening of self-healing powers. In addition, users should not let themselves be deterred from improving the situation. Those statements prove that Winkelmann considers homosexuality to be an evil condition that requires conversion, which in turn leads to inner maturation. According to Winkelmann, there are various causes for homosexuality. The causes include hormones, liver damages, epigenetically transmitted syphilis or abuse in childhood (Lau, 2018; Psiram, 2019). Thus, he contradicts not only biological-medical but also socio-behavioral knowledge. However, his conversion therapies differ from the classic conversion therapies, which are often psychotherapies. In contrast to these, Winkelmann uses homeopathy in his conversion therapies. He himself does not call his therapy conversion therapy but constitution therapy. This constitution therapy is a whole-body therapy that is primarily intended to stimulate physical and emotional self-healing. In that therapy, he combines homeopathy with psychotherapy and religious care. At the beginning, the body is detoxified with sulfur globules and nosodes, globules made from pathological material. Winkelmann says that the therapy has already been successfully completed for many after this detoxification. It should be noted that there is no information available on the number of people who accepted Winkelmann’s offer. If the detoxification is not enough, a lengthy homeopathic therapy begins, which also includes psychological and religious support. In this therapy, Winkelmann uses Calcium Carbonicum and Clacium Phosphoricum globules. Religious support includes prayers, sacraments, anointing of the sick and the holy communion (Lau, 2018).
______________________
The article left me speechless. I don’t know what to say other than thank Dr. Borkens for publishing the paper. Therefore, I will leave this here without further comment
We have discussed the use of bleach, MMS, and related products as a so-called alternative medicine (SCAM) several times before. This regularly prompts advocates of this approach to claim that they are effective and safe. A recent case report seems to suggest otherwise. 
A 9-year-old boy presented with his brother after they accidentally ingested a small amount of undiluted 22.4% sodium chlorite. Symptoms included nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and dyspnea. Oxygen saturation remained 71% despite supplemental oxygen (15L/min). The patient was noted to have dark chocolate-appearing blood, minimal urine output, diffuse pallor, and cyanosis. He developed methemoglobinemia, renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy, and hemolysis requiring blood transfusion. The authors reveal that these are the 7th and 8th reported cases of sodium chlorite toxicity by ingestion and the second and third in children.
The authors conclude that Miracle Mineral Solution is a commonly purchased potentially lethal compound that can cause methemoglobinemia with respiratory failure, hemolytic anemia requiring transfusion, and renal failure requiring dialysis.
Despite such cases, MMS continues to be promoted for viral and many other diseases, including cancer. Anyone truthfully stating that it is ineffective and dangerous is branded as a pharma shill who is biased against MMS. Would the ‘bleach boys’ claim the same about an agency like the UK Food Standards Authority?
Let’s see!
This is what the FSA says about MMS:
… Sodium chlorite products vary in concentration, specific dosage and method of ingestion.
With products of weaker strength, any health impact from consuming these products is likely to be gastrointestinal irritation.
For stronger products, the effects can be severe nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea, potentially leading to dehydration and reduced blood pressure.
If the solution is diluted less than instructed, it could cause damage to the gut and red blood cells, potentially resulting in respiratory failure.
There are a range of alleged health benefits related to these products and all are unlikely to be authorised. Only nutrition claims listed in the GB NHC Register (Opens in a new window)may be used in Great Britain.
Health and nutrition claims are required to be authorised under retained Regulation 1924/2006 (Opens in a new window), as amended by The Nutrition (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (Opens in a new window)and The Nutrition (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 (Opens in a new window). As well as being authorised and recorded on the GB NHC Register, the claim must not be ‘false, ambiguous or misleading’.
Some health claims about this product that relate to the treatment of cancer may also be in contravention of the Cancer Act 1939.
Claims range from generic statements about ‘purifying’ the body to more specific ones around cancer and autistic spectrum disorders…
The purpose of this recent investigation was to evaluate the association between chiropractic utilization and use of prescription opioids among older adults with spinal pain … at least this is what the abstract says. The actual paper tells us something a little different: The objective of this investigation was to evaluate the impact of chiropractic utilization upon the use of prescription opioids among Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 plus. That sounds to me much more like trying to find a CAUSAL relationship than an association.
Anyway, the authors conducted a retrospective observational study in which they examined a nationally representative multi-year sample of Medicare claims data, 2012–2016. The study sample included 55,949 Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with spinal pain, of whom 9,356 were recipients of chiropractic care and 46,593 were non-recipients. They measured the adjusted risk of filling a prescription for an opioid analgesic for up to 365 days following the diagnosis of spinal pain. Using Cox proportional hazards modeling and inverse weighted propensity scoring to account for selection bias, they compared recipients of both primary care and chiropractic to recipients of primary care alone regarding the risk of filling a prescription.
The adjusted risk of filling an opioid prescription within 365 days of initial visit was 56% lower among recipients of chiropractic care as compared to non-recipients (hazard ratio 0.44; 95% confidence interval 0.40–0.49).
The authors concluded that, among older Medicare beneficiaries with spinal pain, use of chiropractic care is associated with significantly lower risk of filling an opioid prescription.
The way this conclusion is formulated is well in accordance with the data. However, throughout the paper, the authors imply that chiropractic care is the cause of fewer opioid prescriptions. For instance: The observed advantage of early chiropractic care mirrors the results of a prior study on a population of adults aged 18–84. The suggestion is that chiropractic saves patients from taking opioids.
It does not need a lot of fantasy to guess why some people might want to create this impression. I am sure that chiropractors would be delighted if the US public felt that their manipulations were the solution to the opioid crisis. For many months, they have been trying hard enough to pretend this is true. Yet, I know of no convincing data to demonstrate it.
The new investigation thus turns out to be a lamentable piece of pseudo research. Retrospective case-control studies can obviously not establish cause and effect, particularly if they do not even account for the severity of the symptoms or the outcomes of the treatment.
I have studied so-called alternative medicine for decades, and yet, I have to admit that I am learning every day. There is so much I did not know. Take this statement, for instance:
All alternative healing methods work specifically on a certain level, they are a part of the zero point energy/tachyon energy and therefore optimal to combine. For example, very good experiences have been made with homeopathy, plant extracts, Bach flowers, aura soma, bodywork, oxygen and gemstone therapy by doctors and alternative practitioners. Here, zero-point energy products were used together with other forms of therapy. Sometimes the applied remedies (e.g. Bach flowers, homeopathy) were combined with a zero-point energy product. This is done by simply placing the remedy on e.g. a zero point energy cork plate. Very good results were achieved when an applied remedy was directly converted into a zero-point energy antenna. Silica, healing earth, herbal teas and extracts, and especially water are particularly suitable for this.
The statement comes from a manufacturer that sells no end of fascinating products. This advertisement (my translation) does not hold back, for example:
Through the rediscovery of “old” Atlantic knowledge, it is now possible to use this directly for everyone.
This also includes the Atlantic energy grid. It consists of copper wire, is tuned exactly according to the sacred geometry and connected to form a grid.
In connection with a healing generator, which among other things consists of a large natural rock crystal, this copper grid has a very balancing effect on one’s own energy balance. Measurements with the Prognos measuring method (meridian skin zone measuring device) have already been carried out with success.
This therapy device has also been converted into a zero-point energy antenna. Thus the energy buffet is enlarged, the strong Atlantic energies are harmonised and the body can elegantly help itself to the energies. More detailed descriptions of the energy grid are difficult to formulate in words. Here we recommend simply testing the energy grid and feeling into it. One’s own experiences convey more than words.
All users who have used it so far are simply thrilled.
_______________________
In case you find the price for the ‘Atlantic Energy Grid’ of 5.500 Euro unconvincingly low, I recommend another product from the same manufacturer. Here is what they say about it: 
Our T 33, the Torus Tesla coil, has been newly designed and specially developed to harmonise the problems of microwave radiation, especially 5G. The combination of the Torus energy with a Tesla coil has the possibility to additionally connect a frequency generator.
The cells align themselves energetically again according to their origin, the polarity in the cells is readjusted. A true fountain of youth!
Introductory price of 7890 € is valid until all test results are available.
_____________________
Gadgets like this never fail to remind me of a post I published 10 years ago entitled How to become a charlatan. I cannot help thinking that the entrepreneurs who market them have studied my advice thoroughly and followed every word I said.
:
People often say WHAT’S THE HARM?
Why not let Prince Charles promote any nonsense he likes?
Let him be!
He means well!
He is not harming anyone!
I think this attitude is not correct. Charles’s advocacy of quackery is by no means harmless. This is one of the points I have been trying to make repeatedly, most recently in my biography of Charles.
And there are plenty of examples for this; just think of the Gerson therapy (a whole chapter in the said book). Another, less obvious example is homeopathy. Charles has promoted homeopathy during all his adult life. When he fell ill with COVID in the early phase of the pandemic, the realm of homeopathy predictably decided that he recovered so well because he homeopathic treatment. A report dated 7 April 2020, for example, is quite clear about it:
British Crown Prince Charles has been “101 per cent” cured of COVID-19 using Ayurveda and Homeopathy treatment, Union Minister of State for AYUSH Shripad Naik … “I am proud that the Ministry which I head, managed to cure such a great man, there is no greater credit than this. He may have some problem (admitting to it) because the system in his country does not give recognition to Ayurveda. He may have felt he would violate rules, that is why his refusal to admit is obvious,” Naik told a local cable news channel in an interview late on Monday. “I believe 101 per cent, that he has been cured (using Ayurveda and Homeopathy),” Naik also said.
On April 2, Naik had told a press conference in Goa, that Prince Charles had been cured of COVID-19 after seeking treatment from a Bengaluru-based alternative treatment resort, SOUKYA International Holistic Health Centre’ run by a doctor Isaac Mathai. A day after his statement, Clarence House, the official residence of Prince Charles had said that the claim was incorrect and that the royal “followed the medical advice of the National Health Service in the UK and nothing more”. The royal had been diagnosed COVID-19 positive last month.
Naik in the cable TV interview on Monday continued to insist that Ayurveda and Homeopathy had indeed cured the Prince and that it was a “victory” for Indian traditional medicine systems. Naik also said that there was no need to disbelieve the doctor Isaac Mathai, who cured Prince Charles. “The man (Dr. Mathai) himself is saying this. He is a doctor, an owner of a resort, he is trustworthy, when he says this, it is a victory of our Indian system,” Naik said.
The royal denial had little effect; Indian officials had persuaded themselves and key decision-makers that Charles’s case was proof for homeopathy’s effectiveness against COVID. Consequently, homeopathy was widely used for that purpose. As a result, millions of Indians deemed themselves sufficiently protected (possibly not taking other measures seriously). And the rest is history: in the summer of 2020, about 1000 Indians per day were reported to have died of COVID (the number of unreported deaths was estimated to be even higher).
The point I am trying to make is this: the promotion of quackery by a ‘VIP’ can have dramatic unforeseen consequences, even if (like in Charles’s case) a direct cause-effect relationship is impossible to prove.
I have published many books, and I am proud of most of them. There is little truly special about this; countless people have written more and better books than I. Yet, I think I outdo them all!
Let me explain.
I was looking on the Amazon site recently and, to my great surprise, there it was:
The book that I never wrote
Yes, I kid you not: a book published in my name that was never written by me. The publication details provided on the Amazon site were unremarkable:
- Publisher : Wentworth Press (25 July 2018)
- Language : German
- Paperback : 78 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0270059261
- ISBN-13 : 978-0270059267
- Dimensions : 15.6 x 0.41 x 23.39 cm
- Best Sellers Rank: 715,308 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- 9,695 in Encyclopaedias (Books)
The narrative description foremost told me one thing: I am not the author of this book:
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
As my name is fairly unique – I have never heard of another chap called EDZARD ERNST – this is most unusual, you must admit.
Naturally, this book fascinated me, and I decided to order a copy.
Yesterday, a hard copy of the book arrived on my doorstep. Now things became a little clearer: it is a re-edition of a German original first published in 1865. Its author is EDUARD ERNST and not Edzard Ernst. The author’s name on the book cover is thus a misprint.
What next?
Write to the publisher, of course!
I tried but had little success. It seems that two companies by the name of Wentworth Press existed, one based in Australia and one in the US. Both seem to have gone out of business some time ago – at least I could not find email addresses (if a reader happens to know more, please let me know).
So, it seems that I might be the only author of multiple books who can pride himself that, for one of them, he did not write a single line. I have been plagiarized several times but the opposite has never happened before.
Three days ago, I reported a new study of homeopathy. At the time, I had not seen the full paper. Now, thanks to a kind reader sending it to me, I can report more details.
To recap:
In this double-blind, cluster-randomized, placebo-controlled, four parallel arms, community-based, clinical trial, a 20,000-person sample of the population residing in Ward Number 57 of the Tangra area, Kolkata, was randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio of clusters to receive one of three homeopathic medicines:
- Bryonia alba 30cH,
- Gelsemium sempervirens 30cH,
- Phosphorus 30cH,
- or an identical-looking placebo.
The treatment period lasted for 3 (children) or 6 (adults) days. All the participants, who were aged 5 to 75 years, received ascorbic acid (vitamin C) tablets of 500 mg, once per day for 6 days. In addition, instructions on a healthy diet and general hygienic measures, including handwashing, social distancing, and proper use of facemasks and gloves, were given to all the participants.
No new confirmed COVID-19 cases were diagnosed in the target population during the follow-up timeframe of 1 month-December 20, 2020 to January 19, 2021-thus making the trial inconclusive.
The Phosphorus group had the least exposure to COVID-19 compared with the other groups. In comparison with placebo, the occurrence of unconfirmed COVID-19 cases was significantly less in the Phosphorus group (week 1: odds ratio [OR], 0.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06 to 0.16; week 2: OR, 0.004; 95% CI, 0.0002 to 0.06; week 3: OR, 0.007; 95% CI, 0.0004 to 0.11; week 4: OR, 0.009; 95% CI, 0.0006 to 0.14), but not in the Bryonia or Gelsemium groups.
The authors concluded that the trial was inconclusive. The possible effect exerted by Phosphorus necessitates further investigation.
When I first blogged about this, I commented with this question: If you conduct a COVID prevention trial, would you not make sure that rigorous testing for COVID of all participants is implemented? Having seen the full paper, The question remains unanswered. Here is all that the authors write about the outcome measures:
(a) Primary outcome—Occurrence of newly diagnosed (confirmed by detection of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swab by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or rapid antigen test) COVID-19 infections as per Government of India records.
(b) Secondary outcome—Occurrence of unconfirmed COVID19 cases as assessed clinically during home visits. It was defined as abrupt onset (within the last 10 days) of fever (100.4°F or 38°C body temperature) with two or more of the following: loss of taste or smell, dry cough, shortness of breath, sore throat, congestion or runny nose, headache, malaise, fatigue, myalgia, limb or joint pain, chest pain or pressure, conjunctivitis, diarrhea, nausea or vomiting, skin rashes, discoloration of fingers or toes.
The timeline was up to 30 days after completing the recommended dosage or once the person reported COVID-19 positive, whichever was earlier. Data were collected weekly by teams of homeopaths from home visits and/or via telephone, whenever required.
I am not entirely sure what this means but I think “as per Government of India records” indicates that they did not bother to systematically measure the primary endpoint of their study. Instead, they relied on the data from occasional unsystematic testing. My suspicion is further confirmed by the authors’ statement in their discussion section: “a manual search of the Government records during the trial phase could not identify a single confirmed COVID-19 positive case belonging to the study population … Enhanced numbers of testing could have changed the outcome of the trial“.
If my suspicion is true, the study is a joke – and not a good one at that. It would mean that considerable funds and efforts have been wasted. It would also mean that the conclusion drawn by the authors “the trial was inconclusive” is inaccurate. It was not inconclusive but it was fatally flawed from its outset.
Yes, today is WORLD CANCER DAY. A good time to remind us that SCAM providers are often a serious risk to cancer patients. Here is a very recent case in point:
It has been reported that a naturopath from Laval in Quebec who describes herself as a “cancer specialist” notably by offering coffee enemas, has been found guilty of the illegal practice of medicine. The Court of Quebec ruled that Annie Juneau, owner of the Vitacru Group, led people to believe that she had “medical knowledge and [that she was] was able to diagnose a health deficiency”. The fine for the offense can vary between $2,500 and $62,000 and which remains to be determined.
The College of Physicians of Quebec (CMQ) conducted an investigation where an agent claiming to be looking for information on colon therapy under an assumed name consulted the therapist. The naturopath charged a little over $300 for the visit and the purchase of prescribed natural products. During the consultation, the naturopath, Annie Juneau, claimed that “we are brainwashed by the medical community”. She introduced herself as a “cancer specialist” and explained that she could even treat patients suffering from advanced stage 4 cancer.
The website of the naturopath praised the merits of the coffee enema, a practice believed to date back to ancient Egypt, stating that “cancer patients deprived of its benefits are unable to detoxify at the speed that optimal healing requires.” ON the Internet and in person, Annie Juneau illegally led a reasonable person to believe that she could perform acts reserved for doctors, the court ruled. In her defense, the naturopath argued that her website contained disclaimers stating that she does not offer medical advice and that she clearly identifies herself as a naturopath. However, the court ruled that such disclaimers are not sufficient protection of the public.
___________________________
This case is the latest in a long row of naturopaths (and other SCAM practitioners) risking the lives of cancer patients. Here are a few recent ones that we have discussed on this blog:
The Foundation for Vertebral Subluxation has a ‘clinical practice guideline/best practices project’ that would search, gather, compile and review the scientific literature going as far back as January 1998. Their new Chapter on the chiropractic care of children was peer-reviewed and approved by 196 chiropractors from several countries and included chiropractors specializing in pediatric and maternal care such as Diplomates and others certified in such care. The Best Practices document, developed through the Foundation’s Best Practices Initiative includes a Recommendation statement as follows:
Since vertebral subluxation may affect individuals at any age, chiropractic care may be indicated at any time after birth. As with any age group, however, care must be taken to select adjustment methods most appropriate to the patient’s stage of development and overall spinal integrity. Parental education by the chiropractor concerning the importance of evaluating children for the presence of vertebral subluxation is encouraged as are public health initiatives geared toward screening of children for vertebral subluxation beginning at birth.
I am afraid there may be some errors in the new document. Allow me therefore to post a corrected version:
Since vertebral subluxations do not exist, they cannot affect individuals regardless of age. Chiropractic adjustments are thus not indicated at any time after birth. Parental education by the chiropractor concerning the importance of evaluating children for the presence of vertebral subluxation is discouraged as are public health initiatives geared toward screening of children for vertebral subluxation beginning at birth.
Or, as an American neurologist once put it so much more succinctly:
