Helmut Pilhar died in Paraguay on 31. August 2022. He was a prominent proponent of the ‘Germanische Heilkunde’, New German Medicine, a mixture of dangerous quackery and anti-semitism. The website of the ‘Germanische Heilkunde’ announced Pilhar’s death as follows:

In light of this dramatic news, we would like to express our gratitude to Helmut Pilhar for his many years of work in spreading Germanic medicine.

Although our relationship with Helmut has been turbulent and unhappy in the time following Dr. Hamer’s departure, we will cherish the good times; and may the energy of warm appreciation from us reach him wherever he is.
A hug, Helmut.

Bona Hamer
We were saddened to learn that Helmut Pilhar passed from this life on August 31, 2022. For a long time he rendered valuable services to Germanic medicine and brought Dr. Hamer’s discovery to many people despite enormous opposition. For this he deserves our respect.

We regret his early death very much, our sympathy goes to his family.

Working Group of Germanic Medicine

Pilhar had no medical qualifications. The Wiesbadener Tagblatt dealt with Pilhar on November 5, 2013, calling him “the loudspeaker of madness”. The electrical engineer from Austria marketed the New German Medicine (NGM) full-time. He gave lectures and organized seminars in the whole German-speaking area and beyond.

Pilhar drew attention to himself in 1995 when he brought his five-year-old daughter Olivia, who had cancer, to the NGM inventor, Hamer, thus depriving her of effective therapy. The child was eventually operated on against her parents’ wishes and is now living in good health. While the media took great interest in the “Olivia case” and an unbearable hype arose around the child’s suffering, Helmut Pilhar sold photos of his daughter to newspapers and tried to influence the reporting. The couple received 500,000 shillings for the granting of broadcasting rights. The parents were sentenced to eight months probation. For Hamer, the unsuccessful NGM therapy attempt had no criminal consequences, as he was meanwhile working from Spain outside of Austria and Germany.

The last known places of residence of Helmut Pilhar were in Paraguay in the German-speaking “private colony El Paraíso Verde” near Cáazapa in Paraguay. According to his own statements, there he would not have to witness chemtrail.

Earlier this year, I started the ‘WORST PAPER OF 2022 COMPETITION’. You will ask: what is there to win in this competition? I agree: a competition without a prize is no fun. Therefore, I suggest offering the winner (that is the author of the winning paper) one of my books that best fits his/her subject. I am sure this will overjoy him or her. And how do we identify the winner? I will I continue blogging about nominated papers (I hope to identify about 10 in total), and towards the end of the year, I let my readers decide democratically.

In this spirit of democratic voting, let me suggest to you ENTRY No 7:

This trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of a Persian herbal medicine formula on patients with COVID-19. It was conducted in Afzalipour hospital, Kerman, Iran. Hospitalized COVID-19 patients were randomly divided into intervention (Persian herbal medicine formula + routine treatment) or control (only standard treatment) groups. The intervention group received capsule number 1 and 2 every 8 hours for 7 days. Capsule number 1 contained an extract of the Glycyrrhiza glabra, Punica granatum, and Rheum palmatum, and capsule number 2 was filled with Nigella sativa powder. Participants were followed up for 7 days. The primary outcome was the number of hospitalization days, while cough, fever, respiratory rate, days on oxygen (O₂) therapy, and mortality rate were considered as secondary outcomes.

Eighty-two patients were enrolled in the study, while 79 cases completed the trial and their data were analyzed. The Persian medicine formula decreased the mean hospitalization days, so that the mean difference in length of hospitalization was 2.95 ± 0.43 days. A significant clinical improvement was observed regarding dyspnea, need for O₂) therapy, and respiratory rate in the intervention group. Fever severity, cough severity, and death percentage were not statistically significantly different between groups. No adverse effects were reported.

The authors concluded that the present study supported the use of intended Persian medicine formulas as a supportive treatment for the hospitalized COVID-19 patients in order to improve their sign and symptoms, accelerate treatment, and shorten their hospitalization day during the disease period. It is recommended to conduct more clinical studies with bigger sample size for better evaluation.

This study begs a few questions:

• Why did the researchers not use a placebo in the control group?
• Why did they include only 82 patients in their study?
• Why did they not include outcomes that were independent of subjective influences?
• Why was mortality mentioned but no data provided?
• How is it possible that, under the conditions of the study, no adverse effects were noted?
• Why did you not stress the strong possibility that the effects are entirely due to placebo responses and wishful thinking?
• Why did you publish your study in a 3rd class journal?

I also have a few questions specifically for the editor of the Elsevier journal Integr Med Res, who decided to publish this study:

• Why did nobody bother to correct the poor English of the authors?
• Do you consider it ethical to publish such a poor-quality study?
• Are you not afraid that the conclusions might send many desperate patients up the garden path?

We are still in a pandemic where hundreds of people die every day. This means we are all extremely keen to find effective treatments. But it also means that an important ethical duty rests on all concerned to do rigorous research and abstain from unwarranted conclusions that might mislead us all.

The way I see it, there are two this paper can cause harm:

1. Serious researchers will be put off from further investigating the herbal treatment. If the therapy is indeed effective, this would mean that progress is being hindered.
2. More likely the treatment is useless. In this case, this study might cause considerable harm by prompting people to rely on an ineffective therapy.

For more than seven months, the Austrian general practitioner, Dr. Lisa-Maria Kellermayr, received death threats and was verbally attacked by the anti-vaccination cult. She eventually closed her practice, no longer wanted to leave the house, and apparently lost the courage to live. Last Friday, she was found dead in her practice in Seewalchen on Attersee. The public prosecutor’s office in Wels confirmed that there were no signs of foul play. Letters of farewell had been found. It is generally assumed that, in her desperation, Kellermayr took her own life. A friend tweeted: “In the end, she begged for help – from politicians, from the police, from her medical association. It never came. The police and the medical association would mock her. They said Dr Kellermayrjust wants to seek the limelight. Politicians ignored her. Now she is dead.”

The GP had closed her practice at the end of June, only temporarily, she said initially, because she could no longer afford the costs for her security, including a bodyguard. She did not feel sufficiently protected by the police. “For more than 7 months, we have been receiving death threats from the Covid measure opponents and vaccination opponents scene at irregular intervals,” Kellermayr tweeted. Threats went as far as predicting a “massacre” in her practice. In one of the threatening letters, the author described in detail how he would first torture and then murder the doctor and her practice staff.

At the end of July, she closed her practice for good. For the doctor, who loved her profession, it was a terrible decision. “I put so much money and energy into it,” she told ‘Der Spiegel’ just one day before her death. By her own account, she had at that stage invested around 100,000 Euros in security measures.

It is claimed that Kellermayr was badly let down by the Austrian authorities. On Austrian radio, the police even stated that Kellermayr merely sought the limelight to further her career. Now an official complaint has been filed charging the authorities with neglect.

Unbelievably, the despicable agitation of the anti-vaccination cult continues even after Kellermayr’s death. Most of the agitators remain anonymous. But some are also agitating publicly, for instance, on Twitter: Harald Laatsch, an AfD member of parliament in Berlin, wrote that the doctor was a vaccination propagandist and probably “no longer wanted to live with the heavy guilt”.

After Kellermayr’s suicide, well-known German Twitter users are withdrawing from the platform. The Würzburg lawyer Chan-jo Jun turned his back on Twitter last Friday stating: “If I tweet about certain people, I get warnings in my letterbox the next day. I am reaching my limits. I’m now leaving the field to others. Until I find a concept of how an objective exchange can take place in social media.”

Doctor Natalie Grams, a well-known critic of homeopathy, is also closing her Twitter account. She plans to continue her commitment to evidence-based medicine with the help of her podcast, Grams explained in her farewell tweet.

Others reached a different conclusion. Dr. Christian Luebbers tweeted this (my translation): “Of course, I also considered deactivating my account here. However, I came to the conclusion not to do so and continue to educate people about pseudo-medicine and vaccination. I see this as necessary moral courage and will not leave the field to hate.” Personally, I agree with him.

I would like to use the tragic occasion of Dr. Kellermyr’s death as an opportunity for making a plea. It is high time that intolerance, aggression, violence, and hatred stop. Please, let us all calm down and discuss with dignity and respect whatever issues we might have. Please, let this terrible death remind us that we are all human beings. Please, let it be a lesson to all of us.

According to his own website, Andreas Kalcker is a biophysical researcher of German origin who has lived most of his life in Spain and for many years has been living in Switzerland where he has investigated and registered several international patents that deal with the therapeutic use of chlorine dioxide for both hypoxia and for inflammation, infection, sepsis and Sars -Cov 2 -Coronavirus.

Patients with fibromyalgia (FM) frequently resort to so-called alternative medicine (SCAM). In particular, osteopathy seems to be common, despite very weak supporting evidence. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of osteopathic manipulation in FM in a randomized clinical trial.

Patients were randomized to osteopathic or sham treatment. Treatment was administered by experienced physical medicine physicians, and consisted of 6 sessions per patient, over 6 weeks. Treatment credibility and expectancy were repeatedly evaluated. Patients completed standardized questionnaires at baseline, during treatment, and at 6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks after randomization. The primary outcome was pain intensity (100-mm visual analog scale) during the treatment period. Secondary outcomes included fatigue, functioning, and health-related quality of life. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed adjusted for credibility, using multiple imputations for missing data.

The ‘real’ treatment consisted of the following maneuvers. The patient was first placed in a prone position. Each vertebra from C7 to L5 was mobilized in a dorsoventral direction by progressive pressure on the spinous process (SP), and in rotation by applying pressure on the lateral surface of the SP (bilaterally). The sacral bone was repeatedly mobilized in nutation–counternutation (5–10 times). The piriformis muscles were progressively stretched. The hip joint was then progressively mobilized in extension combined with abduction and adduction to stretch the adductor, abductor, and flexor muscles (10 times). The shoulders were progressively mobilized, one by one, with a repeated circumduction movement of the glenohumeral joint (10 times). The patient was then placed in a supine position, for the following maneuvers. At the neck, bimanual traction was performed, followed by repeated mobilization in lateral flexion and in rotation (both sides, five times, 3–5 times each). At the shoulders, cranial traction was performed of both arms and then a repeated caudal traction of one arm and then the other, by blocking the clavicle, thereby opening the acromioclavicular and glenohumeral joints (three times). At the hips, repeated tractions were performed on the legs (three times) and the hip joint was mobilized by circumduction movements. Finally, the patient was placed in the lateral decubitus position for mobilization of the lumbar and thoracolumbar spine. Thrust manipulations were allowed at any level, according to the patient’s complaint.

The sham treatment followed the same order, but the maneuvers were stopped halfway through to prevent joint mobilization at the spine. At the hips and shoulders, the stretching techniques were also stopped halfway. The joint techniques were simulated, with no significant mobilization. Thrust manipulation was forbidden.

In total, 101 patients (94% women) were included. Osteopathic treatment did not significantly decrease pain relative to sham treatment (mean difference during treatment: -2.2 mm; 95% confidence interval, -9.1 to 4.6 mm). No significant differences were observed for secondary outcomes. No serious adverse events were observed, despite a likely rebound in pain and altered functioning at week 12 in patients treated by osteopathy. Patient expectancy was predictive of pain during treatment, with a decrease of 12.9 mm (4.4-21.5 mm) per 10 points on the 0-30 scale. Treatment credibility and expectancy were also predictive of several secondary outcomes.

The authors concluded that osteopathy conferred no benefit over sham treatment for pain, fatigue, functioning, and quality of life in patients with FM. These findings do not support the use of osteopathy to treat these patients. More attention should be paid to the expectancy of patients in FM management.

A recent systematic review concluded that the current evidence of manual therapy in patients with FM, based on a very low to moderate quality of evidence, was inconclusive and insufficient to support and recommend the use of manual therapy in this population. To date, only general osteopathic treatment has achieved clinically relevant pain improvement when compared with control.

The new study is by far the most rigorous one to date. This means, I think, that the best available evidence confirms that, in the management of FM,

osteopathy is a placebo therapy.

PS

When I say ‘osteopathy’ I mean the treatments as taught by Andrew Still. US osteopathy practice conventional medicine but everywhere else they adhere more or less strongly to Still’s ideas.

By guest blogger Wolfgang Denzer

Most pseudoscientific studies related to the explanation of the proposed mechanisms of homeopathy used tadpoles, wheat, or watercress as models. Results of these studies, e.g. those by Endler, Baumgartner & Co., were published in dedicated SCAM (So-Called Alternative Medicine) journals where the peers who review manuscripts have a clear tendency to support non-evidence-based studies in particular those that deal with homeopathy. In recent years several papers were published in reputable journals (see below) that purport the efficacy of ultrahigh dilution (UHD). None of these publications relates directly to homeopathy or even uses the term “homeopathy”. One thing the publications have in common is that they were either sponsored by the Russian OOO [sometimes LLC] “npf” Materia Medica Holding or co-authored by staff of that company. Materia Medica Holding produces and markets ultra-high diluted remedies that are called ‘release-active’ drugs (RA-drugs). The company founder rigorously states that their remedies are not homeopathy and that „homeopathy is doomed to have a marginal position in the modern system of therapy“. (see interview link at the end). Already a few years ago Panchin et al. (2018) analyzed several papers that involved Materia Medica Holding in one way or the other and published an article in BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine (Drug discovery today: no molecules required. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111121). His remarkable conclusion was as follows: “Surprisingly, these innovative “drugs” contain no active molecules and can be considered a new brand of homeopathy. This indicates one of two possibilities: either we are at the brink of a revolution in medicine or that something went wrong with research published in numerous academic journals.” Of course, the latter assumption is correct.

The difficulty to uncover the use of an ultra-high diluted homeopathic (oops) remedy instead of proper medication published in a study is best shown by having a look at the following publication co-authored by the founder of Materia Medica Holding Oleg I. Epstein and two of his employees:

Pathogenetic approach to the treatment of functional disorders of the gastrointestinal tract and their intersection: results of the Russian observation retrospective program COMFORT (BMC Gastroenterol. 2020; 20: 2. Published online 2019 Dec 31. doi: 10.1186/s12876-019-1143-5).

The study deals with a retrospective analysis of the effectiveness of Kolofort, “a release-active drug” produced by Materia Medica Holding. The only statement regarding the composition of the drug reads as follows: “For the treatment of FGID [functional gastrointestinal disorders], the combination of released-active form of antibodies [RAF of Abs] to S-100 protein, TNF-α and histamine (RAF of Abs to S 100, Abs to TNF-α and Abs to H), a pathogenetically targeted drug Kolofort, was developed by the Research and Production Company Materia Medica Holding (LLC NPF” MATERIA MEDICA HOLDING”) Moscow, Russia and introduced into practical medicine. The RAF of Abs in the drug provides an anti-inflammatory, spasmolytic, and anxiolytic effect ” (notations in square brackets by me). The two following paragraphs provide information (and citations of two publications in Russian) related to the clinical trials of Kolofort. At no point in the publication are the concentrations of the active components of Kolofort mentioned! Only a web search provides further information about the composition of Kolofort (see screenshot). The three active ingredients, RAF of Abs to S-100 protein, TNF-α, and histamine, are only present at concentrations of C12, C30, and C200, respectively, i. e. they are absent. Perhaps a better notation for the remedy should be RAF in Abs of histamine, meaning release-active form in absence of histamine.

Judging from the composition of Kolofort no physiological or therapeutical reaction is to be expected. Still the authors claim that “The COMFORT program has demonstrated the positive effect of treatment [with Kolofort] in the majority of patients with IBS and FD and their combination in real clinical practice”. The authors arrived at these results by analyzing a questionnaire that had been specially developed for the assessment of gastrointestinal disorders. The questionnaire is called “7*7” [seven symptoms in seven days], but not further discussed or explained in the publication. Although there exists at least one publication from 2016 where the questionnaire was used to assess symptoms of gastrointestinal ailments (Ivashkin et al. RZHGGK. 2016;3(S):24-33. https://doi.org/10.22416/1382-4376-2016-26-3-24-33) the actual validation was not published until November 2018 (online, print June 2019) which is after the Kolofort study had already terminated (November 01, 2017, through March 30, 2018). Please note that the validation was done by one of the co-authors (V. Ivashkin) of the Kolofort study. There is certainly a good explanation for post-validating a tool used in earlier studies, but I just can’t think of one right now.

There exist several more (if not dozens) of publications by this group of authors that have already been investigated. It appears that the Materia Medica Holding director Oleg I. Epstein is heavily involved in a competition of who is capable of producing the highest number of retracted publications. Here are a few of them:

Retraction: Novel Approach to Activity Evaluation for Release-Active Forms of Anti-Interferon-Gamma Antibodies Based on Enzyme-Linked Immunoassay

The PLOS ONE Editors. Published: May 3, 2018

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197086

Retraction notice to “Efficacy of novel antibody-based drugs against rhinovirus infection: In vitro and in vivo results” [Antiviral Research 142 (2017) 185–192]

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.antiviral.2019.02.010

Retraction notice to “Activity of ultra-low doses of antibodies to gamma-interferon against lethal influenza A(H1N1)2009 virus infection in mice” [Antiviral Research 93 (2012) 219–224]

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.antiviral.2019.02.011

Retraction Note: Release-Active Dilutions of Diclofenac Enhance Anti-inflammatory Effect of Diclofenac in Carrageenan-Induced Rat Paw Edema Model

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10753-013-9705-0

Retraction: Activity of ergoferon against lethal influenza A (H3N2) virus infection in mice

https://www.intmedpress.com/journals/avt/article.cfm?id=3325&pid=48&sType=AVT

Retraction Note: Effects of chronic treatment with the eNOS stimulator Impaza on penis length and sexual behaviors in rats with a high baseline of sexual activity

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41443-020-0321-x

There are probably more retractions out there, but to make it onto the current Retraction Watch Leader Board (https://retractionwatch.com/the-retraction-watch-leaderboard/) a minimum of 25 retractions is required to take over rank 30. You have to work harder Dr. O. I. Epstein!

Last but not least there is an interview with Epstein available online (https://pharmaboardroom.com/interviews/interview-with-oleg-epstein-general-director-materia-medica/) where he claimed that „We proved that we [Materia Medica] are not a homeopathy company, and 1.5 years ago, the Ministry of Public Health decreed that our drugs will no longer be classified as homeopathic.“ Wow! How?

So, what does all this tell us? There exists a pool of authors, somehow connected to Materia Medica Holding, who manage to get articles, that are nothing else but homeopathy in disguise, past the peer review of reputable academic journals. It would be easy to blame the reviewers for their not soo stringent approach. But as the Kolofort paper shows, only in-depth research may actually reveal the truth. Let’s not forget, even the retracted papers made it through to publication and only a later review scrutinized their scientific merit.

It can be assumed that Materia Medica will not stop promoting their remedies through the publication of further studies. There are already publications out there that do not include any company staff as co-authors but were sponsored by the company. Judging from the rate of already retracted paper, reputation does not appear to matter. These authors possibly work along a submission-rejection-resubmission to a different journal approach until a paper gets published.

So far the homeopathy community hasn’t taken much notice of any of the beforementioned studies, most probably for two reasons: nowhere does the term “homeopathy” appear nor were the papers published in SCAM journals but rather in academic journals above the radar of homeopaths. But it can be assumed that in future, if it fits their purpose, such studies will feature among their usual dubious double blindfolded placebo trials.

Keep your eyes open for more of this stuff and please get in touch with the editorial team of the journal concerned if you discover yet another “UHD” or “RAF” publication!

Young Australian journalist Eammon Ashton-Atkinson has survived COVID-19 and two strokes, all in the span of a month. It was reported that the 34-year-old Washington DC-based correspondent had a stroke on his chiropractor’s table after experiencing post-COVID neck pain, and was rushed to hospital. While recovering at home, he had a second stroke, losing his balance and collapsing.

He told his radio channel that the first stroke occurred while he was still on the chiropractor’s bench. He was rushed to hospital where a dissection of an artery supplying the brain (probably the vertebral artery) was diagnosed. His vision was initially severely disturbed and he had ‘pins and needles’ in parts of his body. These symptoms subsided rapidly and he was discharged home to recover. However, while resting at his home in DC, he suffered another stroke. This time a blood clot from the dissection fired into the part of his brain responsible for his balance. He was then readmitted to the hospital and treated against the blood clot. Now he is again back home and hoping to recover fully.

Were the strokes related to COVID, the vaccination, or to the chiropractic treatment? Definitely the latter, explains Eammon Ashton-Atkinson in the interview. It seems that his doctors diagnosing and treating the strokes were clear that the cause of the problems was the manipulation.

“It’s still quite traumatic to talk about,” Eammon Ashton-Atkinson told Jim Wilson. “In some ways, I’m very unlucky, in other ways I’m extremely lucky because I’m talking to you now.”

Chiropractors will surely point out that this is not a properly documented case. Almost every detail that makes a decent case report is missing.

I agree!

And why are cases like these (one might speculate that there are many of them) not adequately documented?

Because there is no post-marketing surveillance of chiropractic.

And who is responsible for establishing one?

The chiropractors, of course!

And why do they not create reliable post-marketing surveillance?

Perhaps because that would disclose the magnitude of the risk; and that would obviously be very bad for business.

Therefore, I suggest that chiropractors finally get their act together and create adequate post-marketing surveillance. Until they have done so, they have no moral right to complain that cases like the one above are not adequately documented.

By guest blogger Hans-Werner Bertelsen

Veronika Hackenbroch wrote in an article for the German news website Der Spiegel about clusters of cases where children were born with severe birth deformities. (1) The only common factor that researchers in the Paediatrics department of the University Medical Center Mainz were able to identify through intensive communication with the mothers was that they had all visited a dentist whilst pregnant. The fetus is particularly sensitive to exogenous stimuli during early pregnancy, which is why this period is also known as the “teratogenetic determination period” (Koberg).

The data regarding the workplace exposure limit for mercury is outdated – it is based on information collected about 50 years ago in some cases. Since that time, there have been considerable advances, in particular in the fields of measuring technology and analysis. Unfortunately, these advances have yet to be utilized to provide meaningful figures on exposure to mercury vapour when removing old fillings or drilling into teeth with mercury amalgam fillings for the purpose of acute pain management. In addition to patient protection, the focus when processing existing mercury amalgam fillings is therefore also on occupational health and safety. This has not gone unnoticed by many female employees in dental surgeries that mercury amalgam can pose serious risks to unborn children. For example, a study in Norway reported an increased risk of perinatal death associated with a high number of mercury amalgam fillings. (2)

Sylvia Gabel from the German Association of Medical Professions (Verband medizinischer Fachberufe e.V.) even called for an immediate ban on toxic mercury amalgam: “Vapours pose a danger to dental professionals’ health!”. Mrs Gabel added: “The processing of amalgam in dental surgery releases mercury vapour. As 99 per cent of the dental nurses and hygienists in Germany are female and mercury has harmful effects on both fertility and the unborn child, we are exposed to a particular risk.”(3)

Researchers in Norway documented a considerable increase in the concentration of mercury in the blood after the removal of fillings as far back as 2006. (4) Toxicologists are in unanimous agreement that these peaks, which are the result of inhalation, are extremely harmful and may well have a teratogenetic effect in early pregnancy. (5) Consequently, what I am calling for is this: until such time as we know how high the mercury vapour concentrations are and as long as we “remain in the dark”, we should refrain from removing existing fillings containing mercury and performing dental drilling procedures in women of child-bearing age for ethical reasons so as to exclude the risk of deformities (see Der Spiegel article: “Waren die Schwangeren beim Zahnarzt?”, V. Hackenbroch, 20.09.19). (6)

An immediate ban on the use of mercury amalgam would be advantageous not solely with regard to the exposure to toxins of cancer patients, as the field of “alternative medicine” often recommends expensive, unnecessary and subsequently also very harmful “detox” treatments. (7) A more than questionable business from an ethical perspective: cancer patients are often looking for additional, so-called complementary therapy methods. This often sees them fall into the clutches of healers and doctors, who have no dental expertise but can identify mercury amalgam fillings very easily due to their dark colour. As I myself experienced in a so-called “alternative” dental surgery, the frightened patients, who are often in the middle of chemotherapy cycles, are then informed that they absolutely must have the mercury amalgam removed and then undergo a “detoxification therapy”. Introjects are not spared in the process: “Your body, already devastated by the chemotherapy, should not be subjected to additional chemicals.” Of course, this “detoxification” will be performed (with maximum consideration!) as a “homoeopathic” therapy. I had to observe this very lucrative “business model” often enough – and not once has a cancer patient objected. Once they fall under the charlatan’s spell, patients will allow themselves to be treated with all manner of things. Even live cells. In one patient, a single mother of two, this method triggered a fatal anaphylactic shock. (8) However, cancers and other chronic diseases are not the only reasons that bring patients with mercury amalgam fillings within the reach of dubious individuals with promises of salvation and charlatans. (9) An unfulfilled desire to have children has also led countless desperate women to ask to be parted irrevocably from their mercury-containing fillings. German health insurance companies approve these interventions, which appear logical from a toxicological perspective, and thus contribute not only to the replacement of the fillings but also to the release of mercury vapours and thus toxic peaks resulting from inhalation. Such actions can even have fatal consequences in the early stages of pregnancy.

However, the focus with mercury amalgam is not only on protecting patients from dishonest therapists and unnecessary teratogenetic risks – female staff could also benefit in general. For example, an immediate ban of the use of mercury amalgam could significantly increase job satisfaction among female employees in the dental surgery. According to Sylvia Gabel: “Strike measures were considered in the surgeries continuing use.”(10)

Each new mercury amalgam filling brings with it numerous side effects. It:

• – increases the risk of toxic exposure resulting from inhalation during removal;
• – increases the risk of corrosion products developing in the long term;
• – increases demand in the field of detox beliefs and homoeopathic charlatanry;
• – promotes the conspiracy narrative of “the dangers of conventional medicine”; and, in doing so,
• – often undermines patients’ confidence in treatments appropriate for the indication and, along with it, the often-vital compliance;
• – fills not only the cavity in the tooth but also the charlatans’ pockets.

I believe it is time to give dental health a helping hand with an intelligent combination of contemporary prevention concepts and harmless filling materials. Currently, the political will is merely a small seed. The seed must now germinate and grow.

REFERENCES

1. “Waren die Schwangeren beim Zahnarzt?”, V. Hackenbroch, 20.09.19 2. https://www.zwp-online.info/zwpnews/dental-news/wissenschaft-und-forschung/schwangerschaft-und-amalgam-risiken-bei-hohen-mengen 3. https://www.dzw.de/amalgam-ausstieg-ngo 4. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29320025/

5. Prof. Eschenhagen, Toxicology Hamburg-Eppendorf in personal correspondence dated 23.01.2020 6. Comment dated 05.07. https://onkelmichael.blog/2021/07/03/ist-eine-entfernung-bestehender- amalgam-restaurationen-problemlos-und-bedenkenlos-durchfuhrbar/comment-page-1/? unapproved=4000&moderation-hash=d5b63e66f5045bfa12d829a88eddf1b0#comment- 4000 7. Prof. E. Ernst: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/dec/05/detox-myth-health-diet-science-ignorance 8. http://scienceblogs.de/kritisch-gedacht/2012/02/08/insider-bericht/

9. Prof. Jutta Hübner (Oncology, Jena) in personal correspondence dated 21.01.2020

10. Sylvia Gabel in personal correspondence dated 18.06.21

Beer is the main food source of isoxanthohumol, a precursor of 8-prenylnaringenin, the strongest phytoestrogen identified to date. As phytoestrogens are reported to reduce perimenopausal symptoms, this study evaluated if daily moderate consumption of beer with (AB) and without alcohol (NAB) could improve menopausal symptoms and modify cardiovascular risk factors.

A total of 37 postmenopausal women were enrolled in a parallel controlled intervention trial and assigned to three study groups:

• 16 were administered AB (330 mL/day),
• 7 to NAB (660 mL/day),
• 14 were in the control group and received no beer.

After a 6-month follow-up of the 34 participants who finished the trial, both interventions (AB and NAB) significantly reduced the severity of the menopause-related symptoms. Moreover, AB had a beneficial net effect on psychological menopausal discomforts compared to the control group. As the sex hormone profile did not differ significantly between the study groups, the effects of both types of beers (AB and NAB) are attributed to the non-alcoholic fraction of beer. Furthermore, moderate NAB consumption improved the lipid profile and decreased blood pressure in postmenopausal women.

The authors concluded that a daily moderate AB and NAB consumption may provide an alternative approach for postmenopausal women seeking relief from mild to moderate climacteric symptoms. Moreover, NAB was found to have a beneficial effect on LDL-C, ApoA1, and DBP measurements, all known risk factors for cardiovascular disease. However, these results must be considered as preliminary and will require confirmation with larger sample sizes.

The clinical implications of daily moderate AB and NAB consumption have been revealed in this study, but the mechanisms of action and impacts on sex hormones remain unknown. The most effective quantity of beer, with or without alcohol, that can be safely consumed by a postmenopausal woman still needs to be determined, taking into consideration factors such as age, genetics, and ethnicity.

I am impressed and only have this comment: let’s please not forget the male menopause …

and if they ever did a trial, can I please go in group AB?