The post More on Natural Substances to Combat Alzheimer’s first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

• The DAA received $661,000 from corporate sponsors in 2013, and $70,000 in 2012. Corporate partners like Nestlé, Unilever, Campbell’s, Arnott’s (a producer of cookies and snack crackers), and Dairy Australia make up 15% of the organization’s annual budget.
• Relationships with Big Food associations are influencing the DAA’s “healthy eating” programs. Meat and Livestock Australia, for example, which provides marketing and research to the meat industry, also funds Australia’s Healthy Weight Week through the DAA. The result? Recommendations for eating healthier do not include consuming less meat (and certainly not grass-fed free-range meat) or any meat alternatives.
• The Nestlé Nutrition Institute funds the DAA’s “Emerging Researcher Award.” The Australian press criticized Nestlé’s controversial role in promoting infant formula and undermining breastfeeding as recently as 2013. The DAA happily takes their money and Nestlé proudly claims to be the biggest employer of dietitians in Australia. They say that they have worked with their dietitians to renovate 70% of their portfolio to meet new nutritional criteria—but fail to state what those new criteria are, beyond saying vaguely that their new system “assesses a product’s nutritional contribution.” In 2014, the DAA partnered with Nestlé in their “Nestlé Choose Wellness Roadshow,” which traveled across Australia allegedly promoting healthy eating. What they ended up promoting was that “Nestlé products are the ideal partners to help you invite more fresh food into your diet.” These products include MILO (a chocolate milk mix) and instant Maggi noodle soups (similar to Top Ramen).
• There are serious conflicts of interest among the DAA “In the Spotlight” dietitians (featured on their website), showcasing twenty-one media-trained dietitians across Australia. One dietitian, who works for Kellogg’s, proudly points to a sodium reduction program and the addition of foods “with more fiber” as having “made a real difference while demonstrating economic value”; Kellogg’s sponsors a breakfast program that the DAA actively promotes. Another dietitian works for PepsiCo, the world’s second largest food company that makes  money selling some of the least healthy products.* One of the DAA’s board members currently directs the Australian Breakfast Cereal Forum of the Australian Food and Grocers Council, which works to ensure the long-term success of the food and grocery sector.

Be sure to download and read Michele Simon’s report in full. You’ll see a disturbing pattern of activity from the dietetics industry—one that crosses international borders.
* The report refers to the two dietitians as DAA spokespeople. However, DAA features them under the “In the Spotlight” section on their website. This article has be revised accordingly. The critique regarding conflict of interest remains the same. 2/18/15

The post The Dietetics Monopoly’s Cozy Relationship with Big Food—Now in Australia Too first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

• Peter D’Adamo, ND: Personalized Living (e-newsletter). A naturopathic physician, bestselling author, researcher-educator, D’Adamo is considered a world expert in glycobiology, principally the ABO (ABH) blood groups and the secretor (FUT2) polymorphisms.
• Marianne Marchese, ND (downloadable articles). Researcher, author, teacher, and naturopathic physician specializing in women’s wellness. She uses botanical medicine, bioidentical hormones, homeopathy, detoxification, IV therapy, chelation, microcurrent therapy, diet, exercise, stress management, and lifestyle changes in her treatments.
• Michael T. Murray, ND: Natural Facts (e-newsletter). One of the world’s leading authorities on natural medicine and author of over thirty books featuring natural approaches to health, and director of product development for Natural Factors supplements. He serves on the Board of Regents of Bastyr University.
• Joesph E. Pizzorno, Jr., ND: Integrative Medicine: A Clinicians Journal (print and digital). A naturopathic physician, educator, author, and researcher, Dr. Pizzorno is founding president of Bastyr University. He was also the developer of Solutions Health Advisor software.

MDs, DOs, DCs, and others recommended by our readers:

• William J. Campbell Douglass II, MD: Douglass Report (hardcopy newsletter) and Daily Dose (e-newsletter). The author of over a dozen books, Douglass also runs a health clinic in Africa and worked alongside doctors at the Pasteur Institute.
• Nan Kathryn Fuchs, PhD: Women’s Health Letter (e-newsletter). Author, public speaker, and nutritional counselor, Fuchs has been at the forefront of women’s health issues for over thirty years.
• John Mandrola, MD (e-newsletter). A cardiologist who specializes in heart rhythm disorders, Mandrola prefers treating atrial fibrillation with a change in the patient’s lifestyle and adding supplements, instead of dangerous blood thinners, beta blockers, anti-arrhythmias, and intrusive surgical ablations.
• Andrew W. Saul, PhD (website). Dubbed “the Megavitamin Man,” Saul edits the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service. His website is peer-reviewed and is completely non-commercial. It includes book reviews, articles, and interviews with other doctors.
• Jacob Teitelbaum, MD: Vitality 101 (e-newsletter) and End Fatigue (e-newsletter). A board-certified internist and nationally known expert in the fields of chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, sleep, and pain, Teitelbaum is also the founder of the Practitioners Alliance Network and author of numerous books.
• Jenny Thompson (daily e-Alerts). Director of the Health Sciences Institute, which publishes a newsletter for its members and has an extensive database for common health issues.
• Bruce West, DC: Health Alert (hardcopy newsletter). In practice for over thirty years using therapeutic and nutrient-dense foods, plant and glandular concentrates and extracts, as well as phytonutrients and phytochemicals. Over 22,000 physicians currently subscribe to his newsletter.

The post Readers Suggest More Integrative Physicians for Our Online Guide first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

• Jeffrey Bland, PhD, FACN, FACB, CNS: Synthesis (online articles and podcasts). A nutritional biochemist and registered clinical laboratory director, Bland is a former professor of biochemistry at the University of Puget Sound, and was director of nutritional research at the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine. With his wife, Susan Bland, MA, he founded the Institute for Functional Medicine. He is the author of numerous books for both the general public and for health professionals.
• Russell Blaylock, MD: The Blaylock Wellness Report (digital newsletter). Blaylock is a nationally recognized board-certified neurosurgeon, health practitioner, author, and lecturer who practiced neurosurgery and ran a nutritional clinic for twenty-six years but now focuses his full attention on nutritional studies and research. Blaylock serves on the editorial staff of the Journal of the American Nutraceutical Association and is a member of the editorial board of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. He’s also the author of four books on nutrition and health, as well as his newsletter, which is an excellent source of new ideas.
• David Brownstein, MD: Holistic Medicine (blog). Brownstein is a board-certified family physician and the author of eleven books. He received the American Academy of Integrative Medicine’s Distinguished Clinician Award for the advancements he made in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic diseases.
• Jeanne Drisko, MD: Integrative Medicine: A Healing Response (website). Drisko is director of integrative medicine and professor of orthomolecular medicine at the University of Kansas Medical Center. The only integrative doctor on the faculty of a major medical school, she also runs a clinic within the medical center. Her clinic combines the best therapies from conventional medicine with integrative biomedical practices and mind-body therapies. She is a past president of the American College for Advancement in Medicine and a board member of ANH-USA.
• Ronald Hoffman, MD: Intelligent Medicine (digital newsletter). Hoffman is the founder and medical director of the Hoffman Center in New York, and the author of numerous books and articles for the public and for health professionals. He is a past president the American College for Advancement in Medicine and a board member of ANH-USA.
• Mark Hyman, MD: newsletter (digital). Hyman addresses the root causes of chronic illness through a whole-systems medicine approach. He is a family physician and an eight-time New York Times bestselling author. Hyman currently chairs the Institute for Functional Medicine.
• Joseph A. Mercola, DO: Mercola.com (digital newsletter). Mercola is an osteopathic physician, board-certified in family medicine, and chair of Family Medicine at St. Alexius Medical Center. Trained in both conventional and natural medicine, Mercola was named “Ultimate Wellness Game Changer” by the Huffington Post. He has written several bestselling books, including one on diet. Diet advice is one of the most potentially confusing areas in integrative medicine, and we find Dr. Mercola’s authoritative advice in this area, as well as others, to be clear, simple, and extremely helpful. He is also an excellent source of new ideas.
• Mehmet Oz, MD: blog and newsletter (digital). Oz is a cardiothoracic surgeon, author, and TV personality. He directs the Cardiovascular Institute and Complementary Medicine Program at New York Presbyterian Hospital. His research interests include heart replacement surgery, minimally invasive cardiac surgery, complementary medicine, and healthcare policy. He has authored over 400 original publications, book chapters, and medical books, has received several patents, and has performed more than 100 heart surgeries per year.
• Nick Perricone, MD: Daily Perricone (digital newsletter). Perricone is a board-certified dermatologist, healthy aging expert, host of a series of PBS specials, and the author of several New York Times bestsellers. He is a Fellow of the New York Academy of Sciences, the American College of Nutrition, and the American Academy of Dermatology.
• Robert J. Rowen, MD: Second Opinion (physical newsletter, digital archive available). Rowen, a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Johns Hopkins University and the University of California at San Francisco, is certified by the American Board of Clinical Metal Toxicology. Rowan pioneered the nation’s first statutory protection for alternative medicine in 1990 in California, and is the author of several books. His newsletter is also an excellent source of new ideas.
• Al Sears, MD: House Call (digital newsletter). Sears is the founder of Center of Health and Wellness, an integrative medicine and anti-aging facility, and is the first doctor to be board-certified in anti-aging medicine. Dr. Sears has published over fifteen books. He is especially well known for his innovative work on fitness and exercise.
• Frank Shallenberger, MD: Real Cures (digital and physical newsletter). Shallenberger has been practicing medicine since 1973 and has been a pioneer in alternative/integrative medicine since 1978. He is one of only a handful of physicians in Nevada licensed both in conventional as well as alternative medicine. He is board-certified by the American Board of Anti-Aging Medicine. Dr. Shallenberger has published numerous scientific papers, and is the author of several books. He is the originator of Bio-Energy Testing and Prolozone Pain Therapy, and has trained more than 700 doctors in the use of his techniques. His newsletter is an excellent source of new ideas.
• Steven Sinatra, MD: Heart, Health, & Nutrition (digital archives, blog, and online newsletter). Sinatra takes an integrative approach to treating cardiovascular disease. In 1987, he founded the New England Heart Center, and has since become a well-known advocate of conventional medical treatments for heart disease complemented by nutritional, anti-aging, and psychological therapies. He has authored over a dozen books and contributed to many peer-reviewed medical journals.
• Andrew Weil, MD: newsletters (digital, numerous topics). Weil is a medical doctor, professor, naturopath, and a teacher and writer on holistic health. Director of the Arizona Center for Integrative medicine at the University of Arizona, Weil is an internationally recognized expert on medicinal plants as well as the author of numerous books. Despite the image that might be drawn from his luxuriant beard, Dr. Weil is regarded by some as practicing more on the conventional side of medicine.
• Julian Whitaker, MD: Health and Healing (physical newsletter and blog). Whitaker is the founder and director of the Whitaker Wellness Institute, one of the largest alternative medicine clinics in the US; he has served over 40,000 patients for over thirty years, working to heal patients with techniques based on diet, supplements, and lifestyle. He has authored fourteen books in addition to his newsletter, another source of new ideas.
• David Williams, DC: Alternatives Newsletter (physical newsletter, digital archive available).. Williams is a medical researcher, biochemist, and chiropractor, and is a leading authority on natural healing. He was among the first to write about the power of coenzyme Q10 (a powerful preventative against heart attacks), and recommended saw palmetto (a native herb in the southeastern US that among other things protects the prostate) years before most others had even heard of it. His newsletter is especially known for its in-depth and thought-provoking treatment of broader topics.
• Jonathan V. Wright, MD: Nutrition & Healing (digital and physical newsletter). Wright, one of the most renowned integrative physicians in the world, has degrees from both Harvard and Michigan, and is recognized as one of the inventors of “applied nutritional biochemistry.” He also introduced a nutritional remedy for benign prostate disease, the first successful treatment to reverse macular degeneration, the safe medical use of DHEA therapy, natural hormone replacement therapy for women, and many other revolutionary natural cures. He has written numerous bestselling books and his authoritative newsletter is also a reliable source of fresh ideas.

Other good online resources for an integrative approach to health include:

• ADVANCES in Cancer Treatment (digital newsletter, online archive). Ralph Moss’s monthly progress report on the war on cancer—not just FDA-approved drugs but also the most promising complementary and alternative treatments. Clinically oriented, but written with the patient as well as the physician and healthcare practitioner in mind.
• Life Extension Magazine (monthly magazine, archives and many other resources available online). Life Extension reports on new discoveries involving nutrition, hormones, anti-aging supplements, and the diseases that threaten many of us, such as atherosclerosis, cancer, and diabetes.
• Natural News (digital newsletter). Mike Adams’ natural health advocacy newsletter covers holistic health, nutritional therapies, consciousness and spirituality, permaculture, organics, environmental health, food and superfoods, and performance nutrition.
• Gary Null’s website (blog, Internet radio). For nearly four decades, Null has been one of the foremost advocates of alternative medicine and natural healing. A multi award-winning journalist and author, Dr. Null has written over seventy books.
• Townsend Letter (physical newsletter with website). A trusted resource and forum for the entire alternative medicine community, with info on a wide variety of alternative medicine topics.

The post Integrative Doctors—An Online Guide first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

• The American Medical Association (AMA) is the most powerful of the three groups we’ll discuss. It influences Medicare prices, has recommended that drug companies keep mercury in vaccines, and makes about $218.8 million a year on its government-granted CPT medical code monopoly. It’s also the eighth most powerful special interest on Capitol Hill, spending $18 million on lobbying in 2013.
• The Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) co-runs the medical licensure exam and is the umbrella organization for the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME). In turn, ACCME accredits organizations that provide Continuing Medical Education (CME), which is mandatory for all licensed doctors. The FSMB has a history of discrimination against integrative medicine. Allegedly a private organization, it is hard to gather much information about, but it also seems to be led by the AMA, and seems especially determined to eliminate integrative doctors by one means or another. We will be writing more about the Federation in the future.
• The American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) consists of specialty boards of medicine (e.g., the American Board of Allergy and Immunology) and offers board certification. The ABMS was formed by a conference that included the FSMB and the AMA, and considers both organizations to be Associate Members.
  Technically, board certification is not mandatory. After all, doctors are required to remain abreast of the latest medical developments in other ways, such as through mandatory CME classes. But since the FSMB controls CME accreditation, doctors are forced to play the AMA/FSMB/ABMS game, one way or another.
  Moreover, the best jobs in medicine are typically reserved for those who are “fellows” of a given board. The higher rungs of medicine are run very much like a classic Medieval guild: knowing the right people and not displeasing them will make or break your career, regardless of your talent.

The three organizations described above work so closely together that they seem to us to be virtually one entity led by the AMA. The AMA and FSMB openly collaborate on projects and initiatives, while the FSMB is officially affiliated with ABMS.
Until now, doctors who are board-certified by the AMBS must be recertified every ten years. That gives the organization considerable control over doctors, though the control is loose. But, starting this year, the AMBS is requiring that doctors go through “mini” recertification every two to five years. This would make it much easier to keep tabs on and rein in anyone daring to dissent from standard orthodoxy.
Fortunately this has been met by opposition. In April 2013, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), not an integrative but an independent and courageous group unaffiliated with the AMA, sued the AMBS for imposing “enormous ‘recertification’ burdens” that are “not justified by any significant improvements in patient care.” The lawsuit goes on to call the recertification process a “money making scheme:”

[AMBS’s recertification] brings in many tens of millions of dollars in revenue to ABMS and the 24 allied corporations. Though ostensibly non-profit, these corporations then pay prodigious salaries to their executives, often in excess of $700,000 per year. But their recertification demands take physicians away from their patients, and result in hospitals denying patients access to their physicians.

As noted above, we do not think this new proposal is simply a “money making scheme.” Nor just an intra-professional power play. We believe it is designed to stamp out doctors who dare to explore non-conventional treatments that go outside the bounds of FDA-approved drugs and surgery, no matter how commonsensical (such as changing one’s diet) they are.
In response to criticism, the AMBS has responded that certification is purely voluntary, and that doctors not willing to be recertified more often can simply opt out. We have already explained why this is disingenuous. In addition, on their Certification Matters website, AMBS itself implies that uncertified doctors are somehow less qualified and may not provide adequate care:

Being licensed does not indicate whether a doctor is qualified to practice in a specific medical specialty, such as family medicine, surgery or dermatology. One of the best ways to know if your doctor has the qualifications to provide care in a specialty is to find out if he or she is Board Certified.

On the same website, AMBS has a search tool to verify if your doctor is certified. Not surprisingly, the ABMS refuses to work with integrative doctors, and only includes ABMS-certified doctors in their database—not doctors qualified by other boards.
Integrative practitioners do have some certification boards either in existence or in creation. But none of these boards will ever be recognized by the AMA-allied medical establishment and its allies and overlords in government any more than integrative doctors themselves will be recognized.
The whole point of integrative medicine is to take the best aspects of both conventional and complementary/alternative medicine and integrate them into a sound healthcare approach. We work for a healthcare system that embraces both modalities with equality and respect. All of medicine has a common foe in greedy, monopolistic organizations that seem to us to have their own best interests in view—not those of physicians, and certainly not those of patients.
For more information on finding an integrative practitioner in your area, visit our “Find a Practitioner” webpage.

The post War on Integrative Medicine, Part One: Eliminate the Integrative Doctors first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

• McKenzie Lowe, 12 years old, suffers from diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG), an aggressive cancer of the brainstem. Because DIPG grows amidst healthy nerves, it is inoperable, and traditional radiation and chemotherapy is rarely effective. As detailed in McKenzie’s Change.org petition—which currently has over 50,000 signatures—begging the FDA to grant a compassionate use exemption, antineoplastons are “the first and only medical cure for the type of tumor McKenzie has.” As noted in a Huffington Post article about McKenzie’s struggle for access, the FDA has already permitted 471 “compassion use” exemptions for other treatments. As she has no other options left to her, why won’t the FDA grant her request?
• Liza Cozad Lauser, 46 years old, was also diagnosed with DIPG (DIPG is rare in children, but seldom heard of in adults). She was told that her cancer was inoperable, and that radiation would only buy her a year or two more with her family and friends. Undaunted, Liza searched for a cure—and discovered antineoplastons. Like McKenzie, Liza is now petitioning the FDA to grant her a compassionate use exemption. And, with no other options and nothing left to lose, why shouldn’t Liza be granted the chance to save her life? In the words of Liza’s husband, “Why would you withhold something that would give her a chance?” (Read Liza’s impassioned letter to the FDA pleading for access to Dr. Burzynski’s treatment here).

Dr. Jonathan Wright, another natural health pioneer, also wrote a Letter to the Editor of the Tacoma News Tribune about the FDA’s refusal to grant compassionate access.
In the course of its decades-long vendetta against Dr. Burzynski, the FDA has become deaf to the suffering of those patients for whom antineoplastons are their last shot at living a full, normal life. The FDA’s refusal to grant McKenzie and Liza access to Dr. Burzynski’s treatment is particularly egregious, considering the extremely limited treatment options for DIPG. As Dr. Wright told ANH-USA, “Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski has cured DIPG in some individuals with his 100% harmless antineoplastons, and FDA is denying this woman and this girl antineoplaston treatment!”
When other doctors refuse to help, and death is imminent, shouldn’t patients have the option to try any treatment that could save their life?
Action Alert! Contact your senators and representative immediately and call for a full congressional investigation into the FDA’s violation of patient rights, particularly its refusal to grant compassionate exemptions to dying patients. Send your message today!

The post Dying Patients Denied Access first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

• An adulatory (some might say “drooling”) review of Do You Believe in Magic?, Dr. Paul Offit’s flawed and deeply biased book demonizing dietary supplements and attacking high visibility CAM advocates like Drs. Oz and Mercola;
• An inflammatory “investigative report” equating dietary supplement manufacturers with criminals;
• And a series of shamelessly slanted articles smearing cancer pioneer Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski.

What is behind the mainstream media’s outright hostility to supplements and natural medicine? We can’t be sure. But we do know that the mainstream media as a whole would likely be bankrupt today without drug company advertising.
Of these three USA Today articles, the personal attack on Dr. Burzynski, who has helped so many people survive incurable cancers, seemed to us particularly offensive.
In an exclusive interview with the doctor and renowned healthcare lawyer Rick Jaffe, ANH-USA learned how USA Today’s “reporting” manipulated its readers, and then further obscured the truth by denying Dr. Burzynski his right to respond.
We’ve told you before about cancer pioneer Stanislaw Burzynski, MD, PhD, a Texas-based physician and biochemist. Dr. Burzynski developed (with his own money) a nontoxic gene-targeted cancer therapy called antineoplastons, which has been shown to control or cure some of the most “incurable” forms of brain cancer. At his clinic in Texas, Dr. Burzynski and his team of skilled doctors provided individualized multi-agent gene-targeted therapies to patients, most of whom have failed mainstream, “one-size-fits-all” cancer treatments.
Given the USA Today reporter’s previously over-the-top review of Paul Offit’s book (which contained a long and highly biased chapter on Dr. Burzynski), the doctor was not surprised to find that two new articles, “Doctor Accused of Selling False Hope to Families” and “Experts Dismiss Doctor’s Cancer Claims,” both published on November 18, were distorted and deeply unfair. According to Rick Jaffe,

Both these articles were riddled with inaccuracies and promoted outrageous far-fetched speculations. For example, they stated that all terminally ill patients cured by the Burzynski clinic were either previously cured by non-curative treatments, or perhaps that the patients never had cancer. Dr. Burzynski does not diagnose cancer; he only treats people with confirmed cancer, and most of his patients have already failed one or more forms of conventional therapy.

Jaffe also gave the reporter and the quoted “experts” a left-handed compliment by conceding, “These folks had to get very creative to dismiss the fact that so many terminally ill brain cancer patients are still alive. But that’s the nature of bias: facts don’t matter—nor do live patients who are supposed to be dead. Instead, just focus on some unfortunate terminal patients who succumbed to their disease while being treated at the Burzynski clinic.” And that’s exactly what the USA Today story did.
Independently, ANH-USA has evaluated these articles, and agrees with Mr. Jaffe’s assessment. To give just a few examples, the “Doctor Accused” article:

• Cites the lack of published random-controlled trials (RCTs) as evidence of antineoplastons’ uselessness, while omitting the fact that the efficacy of the treatment has recently been confirmed by a randomized, clinical trial by Japanese researchers. And of course ANH-USA has repeatedly had to point out that RCT’s are enormously expensive. Nobody but drug companies can afford them, and they will usually only undertake them if the treatment is under patent and therefore a government enforced monopoly. In addition, there is growing evidence that RCTs, particularly in the context of individualized treatments, should no longer be considered the “gold standard” for drug efficacy.
• Claims there is no evidence that Dr. Burzynski has cured “a single patient,” despite the fact that none of the article’s quoted experts who have reviewed even one case among the several hundreds of clinical trial patients with documented responses to the treatment or the seventy-seven patients in the brain tumor trials who are long-term survivors.
• Touts the number of cancer drugs approved by the FDA (108) since Burzynski began his trials, discrediting Dr. Burzynski’s statement that proper approval of treatments takes time. Again, Dr. Burzynski does not have the backing of a big drug company. Moreover, the speed at which drugs are approved is no indication of quality: a recent study found that in the past thirty years, 90% of all new drugs approved by the FDA were barely more effective than existing drugs, if at all. Many of these new cancer drugs show only a very small survival benefit, while antineoplastons have dozens and dozens of long-term survivors from some of the most virulent forms of brain cancer. In reality, then, the article is more an indictment of the FDA cancer drug approval process than of Dr. Burzynski!

A portion of ANH-USA’s research focus has been on how dangerous drugs are approved and prescribed for the benefit of Big Pharma, the government, and the pocketbooks of some individual doctors. However, the average consumer reading a USA Today article wouldn’t have any knowledge of this highly specific topic, because USA Today, by concealing the truth from the average consumer, generates media buzz.
Disappointed and alarmed by the USA Today’s slander, Dr. Burzynski and Mr. Jaffe asked the paper to rescind or amend their article. They refused. Seeking a constructive, balanced dialogue, Dr. Burzynski respectfully asked for an opportunity to rebut USA Today via a short op-ed or opinion piece. USA Today agreed; Dr. Burzynski submitted an approximately 450-word rebuttal that cited hard data about Dr. Burzynski’s treatments—such as the fact that of 401 brain tumor patients with a life expectancy of less than one year, seventy-seven of them survived over five years.
According to Dr. Burzynski and Mr. Jaffe, USA Today claimed that, due to the letter’s length, they were unable to print it in its entirety, and sent back an edited version that was stripped of any specific facts and statistics. To accommodate USA Today, Dr. Burzynski submitted a much shorter letter that still included hard facts. Again, the USA Today refused to publish, this time claiming that they “fact-checked” all of their letters to the editor, and “couldn’t verify” Dr. Burzynski’s statistics—“which is ironic,” Mr. Jaffe told ANH-USA, “because they certainly didn’t fact-check their articles on Dr. Burzynski.”
Action Alert! Ask USA Today to publish Dr. Burzynski’s op-ed rebuttal or at least a letter to the editor! Please write to USA Today immediately and ask them to allow the target of their smear campaign to rebut their article with the hard facts about his treatment. Please take action immediately!

The post Exclusive: Inside USA Today’s Smear Campaign Against Dr. Burzynski first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

This has been going on for nearly two decades, but has intensified lately. Government licenses are not meant to be used to enforce monopolies. Restraint of trade is against the law. It is time to call the Washington state board to account for its illegal targeting.

• MD 1: Investigated by MQAC for making a diagnosis of mercury toxicity in a teenager whose symptoms matched those listed for mercury toxicity in a standard toxicology textbook. Lab tests confirmed the diagnosis. (The teenager had been eating large quantities of canned tuna.) The case closed by MQAC after the doctor spent a large sum in legal defense fees.
• MD 2: MD 1 referred the above mercury toxicity patient to MD 2 for treatment. The patient and her parents insisted that no harm had been done, and that her health had significantly improved after MD 2’s treatment, yet MD 1 was found to be at fault for not referring the patient to enough specialists (even though she had previously seen three, including two neurologists, prior to seeing MD 2, and MD 2 had referred her to three more, for a total of six)! MD 2 was also found to be at fault for agreeing with MD 1’s diagnosis of mercury toxicity. The “expert” upon whom MQAC relied during the disciplinary proceedings had not practiced medicine in seven years, and admitted when questioned that he had miscalculated by a hundredfold the dose of the treatment material in an IV given by MD 2.
• MD 3: In the only case stemming from a patient report, a patient allegedly complained about a holistic medicine procedure (known to be harmless) which MD 3 discussed but did not use with the patient. MD 3 was also charged with diagnosing lead toxicity based on blood, urine, and hair specimens. MQAC charges included violations of interstate and intrastate commerce, unprofessional conduct and, believe it or not, “moral turpitude”! Even though MQAC found that no harm was done, and even though the complaining patient testified that he was not harmed, MQAC suspended MD 3’s medical license for five years, staying the suspension on condition that he use only MQAC-approved techniques from now on, that every three months he submit a signed affidavit that he isn’t using the technique he personally judged best, and that he meet with MQAC and be interrogated every six months in a town over three hours away. His legal costs so far have been over $250,000.
• MD 4: MQAC’s investigation concerned his use of intravenously administered vitamins and minerals. MQAC demanded to know if he had diagnosed vitamin and mineral deficiency before giving such IVs—even though less than a year earlier, NIH researchers found that high-dose IV vitamin C might kill cancer cells but did so without diagnosing scurvy (vitamin C deficiency)! In fact, of the sixteen physicians who use use IV nutritional therapy in Washington, eleven have been charged by MQAC.
• MD 5: Investigated by MQAC for “off-label” prescriptions of human growth hormone (HGH)—a natural substance and an FDA-approved medication—to four patients. “Off-label” prescribing of medications is 100% legal, FDA-recognized, and done by every licensed physician in the US. Even though it was prescribed for a specific medical condition, all patients reported improved health, there was informed consent, and none of the patients reported any harm, MQAC suspended his license for three years and fined him $5,000.
• MD 6: Another integrative doctor targeted for prescribing HGH; MQAC decided that there was not enough medical justification (as defined by MQAC) that the patient required HGH. He was placed on probation for five years, has to undergo a two-day ethics course and submit semi-annual practice reviews, and was fined $10,000.

In evaluating the treatment of MDs 5 and 6, consider the board’s treatment of another doctor, whom we will call MD X, not an integrative doctor but rather one practicing conventionally. MD X also prescribed HGH off-label, as did MD 5. However, he prescribed it for a family member (his stepson) without any recordkeeping—and did so not to treat an illness but rather to help his stepson grow taller, even though his stepson was 5’9” tall and weighed 152 pounds, normal for a young person his age. Under Washington law, HGH can only be used for the treatment of a disease or medical condition. MD X’s penalty? Nothing more than a reprimand and a $5,000 fine. In fact, five of the six charges against him were dropped because there were “mitigating circumstances:” no actual harm to the patient! This is not a leniency MQAC gives integrative physicians, or each of the doctors mentioned above would have had their charges dropped, too!

MQAC charged two other conventional doctors for prescribing HGH, and they too got off much lighter than their integrative counterparts. One was placed on two years’ probation and fined $3,000; the other was placed on four years’ probation and fined $8,000. Neither one had their license suspended or was required to submit a performance review.

There is a lot more to be told here: other unfair and malicious charges against integrative doctors, as well as leniency toward or no charges against conventional doctors with actual patient complaints of harm. Take, for example, the case of one Washington patient whose conventional physician mis-prescribed a drug contraindicated for the patient’s condition. The patient died, but MQAC refused to investigate, much less charge the doctor.

There have also been numerous complaints of sexual misconduct. In 2006 the Seattle Times found that in the previous decade, state regulators dismissed almost a third of all sexual-misconduct complaints without any investigation. Even when charges were investigated and found valid, there were no consistent guidelines for discipline, and sexual misconduct was treated as a medical error or routinely dismissed and forgiven.

In short, there is a clear pattern of bias by MQAC against integrative doctors in Washington State. This seems to us to be a clear case of the discriminatory application of Washington’s laws in order to drive integrative physicians out and protect conventional medicine’s treatment monopoly.

This is not just a recent trend. We have found other cases going as far back as 1994 in which MQAC unfairly and unreasonably targeted CAM practitioners and integrative doctors. One physician, who had been trained in biofeedback and acupuncture, had purchased an FDA-registered medical biofeedback device based on electroacupuncture, and used it for food allergy testing. When he learned that FDA had not approved the device for allergy testing (contrary to the manufacturer’s claims) he got rid of the device. Yet MQAC still found him at fault for relying on the claims of the manufacturer and saddled him with endless legal bills ending in a trumped-up “settlement.”

This situation is all too typical. The state has limitless legal resources. Physicians usually are not rich. So just the threat of legal action is often enough to create a climate of intimidation in the medical community. Also consider that a physician has invested so many years and so much money in his medical degree or license, but may lose it just by getting on the wrong side of the all-powerful medical board.

Many integrative doctors, faced with outrageous legal bills and fines because of MQAC’s baseless attacks, agree to make everything go away by signing consent decrees with often draconian and humiliating provisions. Some legal experts feel these consent decrees violate the restraint of trade doctrine, which relates to the enforceability of contractual restrictions on the freedom to conduct business.

One bright spot in all this: the Federal Trade Commission is now scrutinizing some state laws and practices that create anti-competitive behavior by physicians—such as the scope-of-practice restrictions supported by physicians who trying to monopolize their field. In Tennessee, for example, only physicians were able to provide interventional pain management services. The state legislature wrote a bill that eliminated that requirement—and FTC weighed in on the bill, to the consternation of conventional doctors in the state. Happily, the bill passed.

Perhaps MQAC should rethink its discriminatory attacks on integrative physicians in Washington State before the FTC investigates MQAC for anti-competitive behavior. Or before a lawsuit is filed to bring this restraint of trade and malicious prosecution out in the open.

As you know, Dr. Wright has developed innovative and successful natural therapies utilizing food, supplements, and lifestyle changes for a host of maladies that conventional medicine cannot cure. But his battle against MQAC’s unfounded charges is extraordinarily expensive, and he needs your help. If you have not already done so, please give generously to the Dr. Jonathan Wright Legal Defense Fund.

The post Will Integrative Medicine Be Driven Out of Washington State? first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

BURZYNSKI: CANCER IS SERIOUS BUSINESS, PART II (2013) from BurzynskiMovie on Vimeo.

Stanislaw Burzynski, MD, PhD, a Texas-based physician and biochemist, developed (with his own money) a nontoxic gene-targeted cancer therapy called Antineoplastons. This therapy has been shown to help cure some of the most “incurable” forms of terminal cancer. In the 1980s–and again in 2012–the Texas Medical Board (TMB) charged this caring and pioneering doctor with breaking a law that didn’t actually exist, and tried to revoke his medical license. Numerous investigations later—including an appearance before the Texas Supreme Court—found no violation of any law or standard of care.
A stunning documentary on Dr. Burzynski’s fight has won numerous awards worldwide. And now, Dr. Burzynski’s story now continues in the compelling follow-up film: Burzynski—Cancer Is Serious Business, Part II. This second film details his continued struggles and victories, and explores the current status of Antineoplastons’ clinical testing and the patients it has helped save.
Until July 20th, this important film is being streamed–free–over the internet by Dr. Burzynski’s allies. Simply click the video above to start watching!
For some additional background on Dr. Burzynski, please read out previously published articles:

• Outrageous New Attack on Dr. Burzynski (November 2011)
• An Update on Dr. Burzynski in Neighboring Texas (February 2012)
• Texas Medical Board’s Lawsuit against CAM Cancer Pioneer Dismissed!! (November 2012)

The post Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

The post Washington State Medical Board Further Disgraces Itself first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.