All posts by Kimball Atwood

“CAL”: a Medico-Legal Parable

Preamble From the fall of 2000 to the winter of 2002, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts convened a Special Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medical Practitioners. There were 12 members: 6 legislators, 3 MDs, a naturopath, a lawyer who represented the New England School of Acupuncture, and the chairman, who was also the Director of the Massachusetts Division of Professional Licensure. At the...

/ May 9, 2008

The Weekly Waluation of the Weasel Words of Woo #5

The Master Speaks It was a delightful surprise for me, and I hope for you fans of the W^5/2, to log onto SBM on Thursday and find this blog by Dr. Wallace Sampson. As I mentioned in that long-ago posting that introduced the topic that eventually hatched the W^5/2, Dr. Sampson is my Yoda, when it comes to the topic that he named: Language Distortions. More about that below....

/ May 4, 2008

The Ethics of “CAM” Trials: Gonzo (Part VI)

Part V of this Blog argued that the NCCAM-sponsored trial of the “Gonzalez regimen” for cancer of the pancreas is unethical by numerous criteria.† To provide an illustration, it quoted a case history of one of the trial’s subjects, who had died in 2002.¹ It had been written by the subject’s friend, mathematician Susan Gurney. A similar story was told on ABC 20/20 in 2000, albeit...

/ May 2, 2008

The Ethics of “CAM” Trials: Gonzo (Part V)

Part IV of this blog ended by observing that the NIH-funded trial of the “Gonzalez regimen” for cancer of the pancreas,† to have begun in March, 1999, was in trouble almost as soon as it started. As originally designed, it was to have been a randomized, controlled trial comparing gemcitabine, the standard chemotherapy, to the “Gonzalez regimen” of pancreatic enzymes, “supplements,” twice-daily coffee enemas, and other purported...

/ April 25, 2008

The Weekly Waluation of the Weasel Words of Woo #4

That’s What I’m Talkin’ ’bout! The new single-paragraph paradigm for the W^5/2 seems to have worked: there were 13 Waluations for the paragraph submitted in W^5/2 #3, every one of ’em good. Several themes emerged; I’ll discuss them in no particular order. When did you stop beating your wife? The passage charges that the “biomedical model,” by which is apparently meant modern medicine, does...

/ April 20, 2008

The Ethics of “CAM” Trials: Gonzo (Part IV)

A Review; then Back to the Gonzalez Regimen† Part I of this blog introduced the topic of the “Gonzalez regimen” for treating cancer: “Intensive Pancreatic Proteolytic Enzyme Therapy With Ancillary Nutritional Support” and “detoxification” with twice daily coffee enemas, daily “skin brushing,” “a complete liver flush and a clean sweep and purge on a rotating basis each month,” and more. The topic...

/ April 18, 2008

The Ethics of “CAM” Trials: Gonzo (Part III)

A Reminder (Mainly to Myself): this Blog will Eventually get back to Discussing the NIH Trial of the “Gonzalez Regimen” for Treating Cancer of the Pancreas† Which, if you’ll recall, is an arduous dietary and “detox” regimen that includes 150 pills per day, many of which contain pancreatic enzymes, two “coffee enemas” per day, “a complete liver flush and a clean sweep and purge on...

/ April 11, 2008

The Weekly Waluation of the Weasel Words of Woo #3

Last Week’s Entry: Everyone’s a Winner! The resounding total of 4 “translations” for the second W^5 entry might have been trying to tell me something…nah! I gotta say that each of the four nailed the central point: the esteemed Institute of Medicine (IOM), a subset of the esteemed National Academy of Sciences, has decided that it’s just fine—no, it is “important” and...

/ April 5, 2008

The Ethics of “CAM” Trials: Gonzo (Part II)

Laetrile and the Politics of NIH-Sponsored trials of “Alternative Cancer Treatments” Part I of this blog ended by asking how, in light of the implausible and arduous nature of the “Gonzalez regimen” for cancer of the pancreas, and the unconvincing “best case series,” the NIH could ever have decided to fund a trial of it.† This entry will begin to answer that question. In so...

/ April 4, 2008

How Can Smart People Be So Stupid?

This is a quick posting that begins to respond to the question posted today by Joe: What I don’t understand is why the majority of doctors at Columbia did not say “This is obvious abuse of patients, and it will not be tolerated here.” Given his richly-deserved malpractice record, why was [Gonzalez] even associated with Columbia? David Gorski answered it in part:...

/ March 28, 2008