DOCTOR YOURSELF Newsletter (Vol. 4, No. 17, for August 5, 2004)

[Guest guest]

> " Andrew W. Saul " <drsaul

 

> DOCTOR YOURSELF Newsletter (Vol. 4, No. 17,

> for August 5, 2004)

> Wed, 14 Jul 2004 13:56:11 -0400

>

> " When arbitrary rulers are put over them, when

> government is secret, the

> people become alarmed. " (Samuel Adams, American

> patriot)

>

To for free:

> dynewsletter-

>

> The DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWSLETTER (Vol. 4, No. 17, for

> August 5, 2004)

>

> " Free of charge, free of advertising, and free of

> the A.M.A. "

>

> Written and copyright 2004 by Andrew W. Saul of

> http://www.doctoryourself.com , which welcomes 1.5

> million visitors

> annually. Commercial use of the website or the

> contents of this Newsletter

> is strictly prohibited.

>

> MULTIPLE CHEMICAL SENSITIVITY

>

> IT WAS MID-SUMMER and Rhonda had gloves on. " I have

> to wear gloves whenever

> I read, " she explained. " The problem is, I'm a

> librarian. "

>

> A librarian with multiple chemical sensitivity; talk

> about a handicap.

>

> " Newsprint is especially bad. The ink on the paper

> gives me rashes. Even the

> smell of an open book sets me off gasping, in hives,

> with a sore throat. And

> I can't wear gloves for the odors, " she added. " And

> then there's the air

> conditioning; the smell of the carpet and cleaners;

> the water from the water

> fountain that I can't drink; foods in the cafeteria

> that I can't eat; the

> unending weakness and fatigue; the depression about

> it all. What can I do?

> Aside from live in a bubble, I mean. "

>

> Rhonda, a prematurely gray woman in her forties, had

> been unhappily coping

> for years. She did indeed wear gloves at work. She'd

> probably have worn a

> respirator if they'd let her. She was a mess and, of

> the very few doctors

> willing to consider her plight, none had helped her.

>

> Multiple chemical sensitivity probably affects

> millions of Americans, but

> the medical profession is not doing any counting.

> MCS has been pretty much

> rejected as a legitimate illness. That's because " It

> may be the only ailment

> in existence in which the patient defines both the

> cause and the

> manifestations of his own condition. " (Gots RE.

> Multiple chemical

> sensitivities: public policy [Editorial]. J Toxicol

> Clin Toxicol 1995;

> 33:111-3.)

>

> Orthodox medicine generally regards people with MCS

> as sensitive, all right:

> sensitive in their heads. The stress, anxiety and

> depression that doctors

> equate with MCS may all be results of MCS. Certainly

> Rhonda fit the

> description.

>

> But this was not all in her head. It was in her

> whole body. You had only to

> look at her, or listen, to appreciate her misery.

> She was able to function,

> but only with the greatest of daily efforts.

>

> It shouldn't have to be that hard. And, I do not

> think it has to be. But

> then, I am not a physician.

>

> So let's ask some.

>

> At their website, the American Academy of Family

> Physicians offers polite,

> lukewarm compassion, but essentially regards MCS as

> a non-entity. (Multiple

> chemical sensitivity syndrome. Magill MK and Suruda

> A. American Family

> Physician, Sept 1, 1998

> http://www.aafp.org/afp/980901ap/magill.html)

>

> As evidence, the AAFP refers to statements such this

> one by the American

> Medical Association in 1992:

>

> " No evidence based on well-controlled clinical

> trials is available that

> supports a cause-and-effect relationship between

> exposure to very low levels

> of substances and the myriad symptoms reported by

> clinical ecologists to

> result from such exposure. "

>

> The American Academy of Allergy and Immunology made

> a similar statement in

> 1986, and the American College of Physicians

> likewise in 1989.

>

> But the American College of Occupational and

> Environmental Medicine's 1993

> statement must really irk MCS suffers: " The science

> is indeterminate about

> MCS as a specific entity and the cause and effect

> relationships have not

> been clearly established. "

>

> So, as you might expect, the U.S. Environmental

> Protection Agency concluded,

> in 1996, that " There is at present no medical

> consensus concerning the

> definition or nature of this disorder. "

>

> Interestingly enough, according to a 1995 statement

> by Sheila Bastien,

> Ph.D., a neuropsychologist who has served on the

> environmental illness

> advisory panels for the State of California and the

> U.S. Agency for Toxic

> Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR):

>

>

> " In 1988 workers of the EPA headquarters became ill

> when new carpets were

> installed and other remodeling took place. Some of

> the employees developed

> MCS. Some of these employees are still working at

> home, and many of them

> still have MCS or continuing illness. Some have not

> been able to go back to

> work. "

> (http://www.california.com/~hawk/MCS-Ammunition.htm)

>

> You have to love the irony there, don't you?

>

> Actually, the American Academy of Family Physicians'

> website is probably the

> most supportive " official " medical website an MCS

> sufferer will come across.

> For instance, it lists some 30 common chemical

> exposures from air fresheners

> and asphalt to tile cleaners and varnish, all of

> which may " precipitate " MCS

> symptoms. But then, AAFP goes so far as to advise

> alleged MCS sufferers to

> avoid " unproven therapies " including " rotating

> diets " and " extreme avoidance

> of chemicals. " In my opinion, behind this one may

> sense unwritten

> industry-friendly assumptions that chemicals are our

> friends, whether in

> your food or in your environment.

>

> Does AAFP share mottoes with Alfred E. Newman?

> Chemicals? What, we worry?

> " Don't worry; be happy " was a hit popular song.

> Adorable. But " Strength

> through joy " was the motto of the Nazis, the least

> environmentally conscious

> administration imaginable.

>

> I do not think anxiety or depression causes MCS; MCS

> may certainly cause

> anxiety or depression. Either way, I am quite

> certain that " putting on a

> happy face " is not the cure.

>

> Instead, I suggest that you look at ducks.

>

>

> Ducks don't get wet. They don't, you know, even

> though they wade and swim

> and dive in water. Sure, the duck's feathers will

> feel wet to the touch. But

> that's not the real ducky part. The duck's skin and

> body stays nice and dry.

> When they preen themselves, ducks keep their

> feathers oiled, and the oily

> feathers trap a layer of insulating air between them

> and the duck's skin.

> This also serves to keep the duck warm, even during

> their extended swims in

> Titanic-temperature freezing waters that would kill

> humans from hypothermia

> in a matter of minutes. Winter after winter, I've

> watched pairs of Mallards

> happily paddling around in the

> not-quite-completely-frozen waters of the

> Erie canal that flows near my home in upstate New

> York.

>

> The duck can't change its environment, so it

> fortifies itself against it.

> Whether it is fur on a polar bear or blubber on a

> walrus, animals are

> remarkably tolerant of their surroundings. I mean,

> what choice have they?

>

> In my opinion, people with multiple chemical

> sensitivity have no practical

> choice, either. Certainly, reducing environmental

> pollution and ones

> exposure to known irritants has my complete support.

> But we live in a

> strikingly imperfect world, not in a bubble, and

> that is the way it is

> likely to stay until we make our governments change

> it. We, like ducks, do

> well when we strengthen our personal defenses

> against a hostile environment.

>

> I am no friend of the toxic chemical industry, as

> those who have been

> following my involvement with the battle against the

> Diaz Chemical

> Corporation will instantly bear witness to.

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/diaz.html; scroll

> down the page for the

> background information on this issue. Incidentally,

> I was sued for libel by

> the chemical company; they dropped the case as soon

> as it got to a judge.

> Now the U.S. Department of Justice, which includes

> the FBI, is after them.)

>

> But I digress.

>

> My take on multiple chemical sensitivity is, in

> essence, not of chemical

> isolation but of nutritional insulation. Until we

> have cleaned up the world,

> you had better toughen up your body. Here's a

> fast-working approach that is

> worth a fair therapeutic trial: saturation of

> vitamin C.

>

> At least that's what Rhonda did. She was in a real

> hurry to feel better, and

> got to bowel-tolerance saturation in a day. In fact,

> in a single morning.

> After taking nearly 50,000 mg of vitamin C in the

> hours before noon, she

> left the library and went out for a lunchtime walk.

> Saturation hit at that

> very moment. Into a nearby rest room . . .

>

> Look, my job is to tell you what works. Why does

> mega-C dosing work? Several

> reasons come to mind.

>

> One: Vitamin C is an antitoxin.

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/levy.html and

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/klennerpaper.html)

>

> Two: Vitamin C is an antihistamine.

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/allergies.html and

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/titration.html)

>

> Three: Vitamin C is an antidepressant.

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/nerves.html)

>

> After this episode, she was a new woman.

>

> " The very moment I reached bowel tolerance of

> vitamin C, " Rhonda told me

> afterwards, " I had a rush of energy and a huge

> upswing in my mood. It was as

> if I'd turned on a light in a dark room. It was

> amazing, truly like night

> and day. "

>

> You should have heard her " new Rhonda " voice. It was

> light and bubbly and

> filled with vitality. The woman was a changed

> person. She had drive. She had

> confidence. Most of all, she had bare hands.

>

> " Nuts to the gloves, " Rhonda said. " From now on, I'm

> taking my C, and plenty

> of it. "

>

> A NEW " GRASS " ROOTS CONSENSUS

>

> Medical use of marijuana is now officially supported

> by the United Methodist

> Church, the Union for Reform Judaism, the

> Progressive National Baptist

> Convention, the Episcopal Church, the Unitarian

> Universalist Association,

> the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Evangelical

> Lutheran Church in America,

> and the United Church of Christ. According to the

> Washington Post (for the

> Fourth of July, no less), these diverse religious

> groups agree on a

> singularly non-theological matter: they all support

> marijuana prescriptions

> to " ease the pain and other debilitating effects of

> such diseases such as

> cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis and glaucoma. "

> (Broadway B. Blessing

> marijuana for the sick. The Washington Post, July 4,

> 2004.)

>

> Among the reasons the churches cite for advocating

> prescription marijuana

> include use by patients " trying to increase their

> appetites. "

>

> Appetites for what, exactly?

>

> For years, I taught college-level courses on the

> subject of drug use and

> abuse. Marijuana is considerably more dangerous to

> the lungs than

> cigarettes, and we all know that cigarettes are not

> exactly good medicine.

>

> Can you imagine your family doctor prescribing

> tobacco? Yet, back in the

> times of Sir Walter Raleigh, tobacco was indeed

> considered medicinal. We

> have since learned the truth about tobacco's

> undeniable dangers. All of us.

> Even Philip Morris, the world's number one tobacco

> company, now says

> cigarettes are unsafe.

>

(http://www.philipmorrisinternational.com/pages/eng/smoking/S_and_H.asp)

>

> I submit that we should ask all religious

> denominations to support the

> public's unhampered non-prescription access to

> megavitamin therapy. Vitamin

> therapy is safer, and treats causes, not symptoms.

> Suffering patients do not

> need palliative grass if they are no longer

> suffering. Or, for that matter,

> if they are no longer a powerless " patient. "

>

>

> I've been saying, " Vitamins, not drugs " for three

> decades now. It's time to

> say it again, with a new spin on the word " drug. "

>

> SOME POT-FREE ALTERNATIVES for those very same

> illnesses:

>

> GLAUCOMA

>

> There have been quite a few papers published on

> reducing intraocular

> pressure with

>

> high oral doses of vitamin C. By golly, quite a few

> are indexed on Medline.

> Most are from German and Italian medical journals

> and were published twenty

> to forty years ago (!). Usually Medline states that

> there is " no abstract

> available. " An abstract is an article summary. I

> wonder why the really hot

> articles are so often unsummarized by Medline, even

> if they are indexed.

>

> Whoa! Here's one that must have slipped in under the

> radar:

>

> " Vitamin C in high doses has been found to lower IOP

> (intraocular pressure)

> via its osmotic effect. " (Head KA. Natural therapies

> for ocular disorders,

> part two: cataracts and glaucoma. Altern Med Rev.

> 2001 Apr;6(2):141-66.)

>

> About 15 megavitamin C and glaucoma papers are

> discussed in a wonderful book

> with

>

> the blah title of The Healing Factor, written by

> Irwin Stone. Chapters 1-4

> of Stone's book

>

> are posted at http://www.vitamincfoundation.org The

> chapter you want is

> chapter 20, part of which deals with glaucoma. The

> Healing Factor is out of

> print but available on the online used book market.

> How you can read it

> without buying the book:

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/libraryloan.html.

>

> I would also recommend a look at the vitamin C links

> at the LINKS page at

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com.

>

> CANCER

>

> I've posted so many articles on this topic that I

> ask you to do a search for

> " cancer " from the top of the

> http://www.doctoryourself.com main page. You'll

> have plenty to read.

>

> MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/calcdef.html

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/ms_2.html

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/news/v2n13.txt

>

> AIDS

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/aids_cathcart.html

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/aids.html

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/vitamins_aids.html

>

> MANY READERS, after reading these articles, have

> written to ask me, " Is

> there some kind of bias at work? Why the evident

> reluctance, even open

> opposition, to nutritional therapy? "

>

> Opposition? What opposition?

>

> Oh, yes. There's this:

>

> THE WAR AGAINST SUPPLEMENTS CONTINUES

>

> The United Nations/World Health Organization has now

> officially " sounded the

> alarm about the unregulated and often unsafe use of

> alternative medicines

> ranging from acupuncture to herbal medicines and

> food supplements. " (WHO

> warns about alternative medicines: Unregulated

> herbal pills, supplements are

> often unsafe. Reuters, June 23, 2004.)

>

> The Reuters article admitted that " the WHO, which

> had no global statistics, "

> nevertheless went right ahead and " issued new

> guidelines aimed at helping

> national health authorities develop reliable

> information for consumers, who

> often purchase such treatments over-the-counter and

> fail to inform their

> physicians. "

>

> The UN/WHO " assistant director-general for health

> technologies and

> pharmaceuticals, " one Vladimir Lephakin, said at a

> press conference that

> " There is a need for strengthening control of food

> supplements in all

> countries. "

>

> Ladies and gentlemen, if this doesn't indicate the

> strength of the war

> against vitamins, nothing does. Now prescribed pot

> is OK, but

> over-the-counter supplements aren't?

>

> That doesn't even pass the straight-faced test.

>

> MEDLINE'S INDEX AND " THE " INDEX

>

> The Roman Catholic Church of centuries past was

> soundly criticized for

> creating an Index of books that good people should

> not be reading. That

> archaic and highly questionable tradition

> unfortunately lives on even today,

> but in secular form. Now there is an official

> " Index " of permitted

> scientific publications. It is the world's largest,

> with tens of millions of

> individual listings. And this Index is not located

> anywhere near the

> Vatican, but rather in Washington, D.C.

>

> Let's be fair: the Church has freely admitted it was

> wrong to restrict

> scientists such as Galileo. On the other hand, to

> this day, an unelected

> committee at the U.S. National Library of Medicine

> still decides for you

> what you may and may not have access to. This, at

> the world's largest

> medical library, smack in the heart of in the Land

> of the Free and Home of

> the Brave.

>

> And the process is all done in secret. You are not

> allowed to communicate

> with the committee members who decide in your place

> what you want to be able

> to access, worldwide, on the electronic index called

> Medline.

>

> THE CLOISTERED COMMITTEE

>

> Many Newsletter readers report receiving a form

> letter from Medline that

> said, in part, that

>

> " If the (journal review) meeting were open to the

> public, word could

> circulate about a committee recommendation before a

> final determination was

> made by the Director, NLM. Public knowledge about a

> journal reviewed and not

> recommended could caste unfair doubt on the quality

> of the journal. . .

> While names of review committee members are public

> information (Editor's

> note: And we have them, further below), NLM never

> discloses names of primary

> and secondary reviewers for specific journals.

> Observers could obtain that

> information and it could affect the openness of

> discussion and might result

> in contact with specific reviewers after the

> meeting. It is NLM's policy to

> prevent unnecessary contact with specific

> reviewers. "

>

>

> There it is: no one is supposed to communicate with

> review committee

> members, because of the looming specter of the

> exercise of unfair influence.

> Remember, now, everybody: unfair influence is OK for

> drug companies, who

> bankroll studies printed by medical journals. And

> yes, those are indexed on

> Medline. But don't YOU try to get your two cents in.

> Lobbying is for those

> with millions.

>

> But we have more votes than they do.

>

>

> I really do think we have to make this whole matter

> public. Some readers are

> already writing emails to their Congressperson and

> Senators, as suggested in

> my last Newsletter.

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/news/v4n16.txt) I am

> looking forward to seeing the replies.

>

> Questions being asked of your elected officials

> include,

>

> * Why the secrecy? Why is an unelected " advisory "

> committee making

> decisions, in private, about what the public has

> access to on the National

> Library of Medicine's tax-funded Medline service?

>

> * How objective, or biased, are NLM advisory review

> committee members whose

> credentials and training are primary medical?

>

> * How many experienced orthomolecular

> (nutritional-therapy) scientists are

> on the NLM advisory review journal committee? Is

> there even one? If not, why

> not?

>

>

> I think the whole idea of a select small group, an

> elite, an oligarchy,

> running a public library service, needs to be

> seriously and repeatedly

> questioned.

>

> IS THE NLM's COMMITTEE " STACKED " AGAINST A

> MEGAVITAMIN JOURNAL?

>

> Thanks to interested readers, we now have the names

> of the members of the

> NLM review/advisory committee. It would not be

> appropriate for any of us to

> " lobby " individual members, though, so I ask you to

> refrain from doing so.

>

> Nevertheless, I think few, if any, of the committee

> members appear to be

> especially favorably oriented towards vitamin

> therapy. This is the Journal's

> problem: a stacked deck. But this is also everyone's

> problem: these

> appointed experts are deciding what the public may

> and may not see on

> Medline.

>

> All advisory/review committee members are appointed

> by the director of the

> National Institutes of Health. I have no doubt as to

> either their

> intelligence or their dedication. I do question

> their individual and

> collective qualifications to review and judge

> objectively on a Journal that

> specializes in high-dose nutrition therapy. Think

> about it: Would you have a

> committee of very well educated, hard working music

> and art professors

> decide if JAMA and the New England journal of

> Medicine were worthy of

> inclusion in Medline?

>

> Therefore, let us take a look at the reviewers'

> professional qualifications

> and affiliations, to try to ascertain which of them

> have orthomolecular

> (megavitamin) experience or have published any

> orthomolecular papers. Do you

> think I am harping excessively on this? Well, keep

> in mind that these

> persons, listed below, are to review and either pass

> or reject an

> orthomolecular nutrition journal, which their

> committee has already, and

> repeatedly, rejected from the Medline index. Is

> there any reason to think

> any of the reviewers may be biased?

>

> Let's see.

>

>

> WE REVIEW THE REVIEWERS

>

> (whose names are all publicly posted at

>

http://www.csr.nih.gov/Roster_proto/members.asp?cid=100753 & Title=Literature+

> Selection+Technical+Review+Committee & ABBR=LSTR)

>

> CHAIRPERSON:

>

> SHEPRO, DAVID, PHD

>

> PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENTS OF BIOLOGY & SURGERY

>

> EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, MICROVASCULAR RESEARCH

>

> BOSTON UNIVERSITY

>

> (The committee chair has authored 213 papers which

> are listed by Medline.

> None appear to be on orthomolecular subjects.)

>

> COMMITTEE MEMBERS:

>

> BRANDT, CYNTHIA A , MD

>

> ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, CENTER FOR MEDICAL INFORMATICS

>

> YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

>

> (Dr. Brandt's work is listed in Medline 46 times. I

> found no orthomolecular

> papers.)

>

> CHEN, JINKUN, DDS, PHD

>

> PROFESSOR OF GENERAL DENTISTRY

>

> DIVISION OF ORAL BIOLOGY, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL

> DENTISTRY

>

> SCHOOL OF DENTAL MEDICINE, TUFTS UNIVERSITY

>

> (Because Chen is a common name, Medline has a large

> number (literally

> thousands) of returns for a " Chen J " search. None

> that I saw were

> orthomolecular.)

>

> DELCLOS, GEORGE L., MD

>

> DIRECTOR, SOUTHWEST CENTER FOR OCCUPATIONAL AND

> ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH

>

> UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER

>

> (25 Medline listings; none appear to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> DOUGLAS, JANICE G., MD

>

> PROFESSOR

>

> MEDICINE, PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOPHYSICS, PHARMACOLOGY

>

> CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

>

> (227 Medline listings since 1968. None appear to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> FREY, JOHN J., MD

>

> PROFESSOR AND CHAIR, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY MEDICINE

>

> UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON

>

> (51 Medline listings since 1973. None appear to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> KAPLAN, JERRY, PHD

>

> PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY

>

> UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

>

> ( " Kaplan J " is a common name; I saw no

> orthomolecular papers.)

>

> MANNING, PHIL R., MD

>

> PROFESSOR OF MEDICINE EMERITUS

>

> UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

>

> (Close to 50 papers; none appear to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> MCCLURE, LUCRETIA W.

>

> SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE DIRECTOR

>

> COUNTWAY LIBRARY OF MEDICINE

>

> HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL

>

> (23 papers on Medline; none appear to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> SHARPS, PHYLLIS W, PHD

>

> ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR; DIRECTOR, MASTER'S PROGRAM

>

> SCHOOL OF NURSING

>

> JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

>

> (8 papers listed on Medline; none seem to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> SIEGEL, VIVIAN

>

> EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

>

> PUBLIC LIBRARY OF SCIENCE

>

> SAN FRANCISCO, CA

>

> (19 papers listed on Medline; none appear to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> SOEHNER, CATHERINE B.

>

> HEAD, SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING LIBRARY

>

> UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA CRUZ

>

> (One listing on Medline, which does not appear to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> STERNBERG, ESTHER M., MD (6/30/2007)

>

> DIRECTOR, INTEGRATIVE NEURAL IMMUNE PROGRAM

>

> NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH

>

> NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

>

> (93 papers indexed on Medline; none appear to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> TOM-ORME, LILLIAN, PHD (6/30/2006)

>

> RESEARCH ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, HEALTH RESEARCH CENTER

>

> DEPT. OF FAMILY & PREVENTIVE MEDICINE

>

> UNIVERSITY OF UTAH

>

> (3 papers listed on Medline; none appear to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> WEISSMAN, NORMAN, PHD

>

> PROFESSOR, HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

>

> UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA, BIRMINGHAM

>

> (At least 20 papers listed on Medline; none seem to

> be orthomolecular.)

>

> SCIENTIFIC REVIEW ADMINISTRATOR:

>

> KOTZIN, SHELDON

>

> BIBLIOGRAPHIC SERVICES DIVISION

>

> NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE

>

> BETHESDA, MD 20894

>

> (Medline's editor has 15 papers of his own on

> Medline; none seem to be

> orthomolecular.)

>

> Based on what I saw, with Medline's own listings as

> my source, the National

> Library of Medicine's Medline journal review

> Advisory Committee appears to

> contain **not one single member** with

> orthomolecular training or

> experience.

>

> Not one, out of all 15 of them.

>

> Some jury, eh?

>

> If anyone feels I have erred in my conclusions, I

> invite corrections for,

> and especially letters from, any member of the

> committee who feels that they

> have not been accurately represented above.

>

> NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN

> There was once another " Index " that stood for over

> four hundred years. It

> was created and perpetuated specifically to control

> thoughts, ideas, and

> reading material. It was part of a clandestine

> power-process that Medline

> would do well to avoid emulating in any way, shape

> or form: The Inquisition.

>

> " The Congregation of the Inquisition was initially

> charged with drawing up a

> complete list of forbidden books. This list, the

> first general one, was

> published in 1559. . . The last edition of the Index

> was that of 1948; it

> was abolished in 1966 . . . During the proceedings

> against Galileo in 1633,

> his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Systems of the

> World was placed on the

> Index, where it remained until 1824. " (Albert Van

> Helden. Congregation of

> the Index; 1995.

>

http://es.rice.edu/ES/humsoc/Galileo/Things/c_index.html)

>

> From Socrates to Orwell to every home computer user

> on Earth, free-thinking

> people everywhere rebel at the very idea of thought

> control. There is little

> difference between freedom of speech and freedom of

> literature. But if

> people cannot find it, they cannot read it. If they

> cannot easily find it,

> they can not easily read it. These days, you don't

> have to burn literature;

> just make it hard to access.

>

> Please keep me posted on this issue, and I'll try to

> do the same for you.

> The NLM Journal Advisory Committee will be meeting

> in October.

>

> While you wait, you can read these

>

> FREE FULL TEXT JOURNAL of ORTHOMOLECULAR MEDICINE

> PAPERS

>

> and decide for yourself if they are worth indexing

> by your tax-supported

> National Library of Medicine's MEDLINE.

>

> Linus Pauling on Mental Illness

> http://www.orthomed.org/pauling2.htm (and

> also at

>

http://www.orthomolecularpsychiatry.com/library/articles/orthotheory.shtml).

>

> Linus Pauling Defines Orthomolecular Medicine

>

> http://www.orthomed.org/pauling.htm

>

> Principles of Orthomolecular Medicine

>

> http://www.orthomed.org/kunin.htm

>

> Orthomolecular Case Histories

>

> http://www.orthomed.org/wund.htm

>

> Nutritional Influences on Aggressive Behavior

>

>

http://www.orthomolecularpsychiatry.com/library/articles/webach.shtml

>

> High Blood Pressure and Chelation

>

>

http://www.orthomolecularpsychiatry.com/library/articles/hyper.shtml

>

> Abram Hoffer on the Megavitamin Revolution

>

http://www.orthomolecularpsychiatry.com/library/articles/hoffer.shtml

> (and

> also at

>

>

http://www.healthy.net/library/journals/ortho/issue7.1/Jom-ed2.htm).

>

> Abram Hoffer on Humphry Osmond

>

> http://www.orthomolecularpsychiatry.org/humphry.pdf

>

> Linus Pauling and Matthias Rath on Heart Disease

>

>

http://www.healthy.net/library/journals/ortho/issue7.1/Jom-lp1.htm

>

> Schizophrenia

>

>

http://www.healthy.net/library/journals/ortho/issue7.1/Jom-hk1.htm

>

> Lowering Health Costs with Nutrition

>

>

http://www.healthy.net/library/journals/ortho/issue7.2/Jom-dh1.htm

>

> Abram Hoffer on Vitamin C Deficiency

>

>

http://www.healthy.net/library/journals/ortho/issue7.3/Jom-ed2.htm

>

> The following Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine

> papers and reviews are

> posted at my website:

>

> Why Vitamin C Megadoses

>

>

http://www.doctoryourself.com/cathcart_thirdface.html

>

> Vitamin C Therapy

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/mccormick.html and

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/levy.html

>

> Vitamin E Therapy

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/evitamin.htm and

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/estory.htm

>

> Vitamin D

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/dvitamin.htm

>

> Gerson Therapy

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/gersonbio.htm

>

> Arthritis

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/JOM1.html

>

> Vitamins and Children

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/smith1.html

>

> Why Vitamin Supplements

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/replace.htm

>

> Fluoridated Water Risks

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/fluoride_cancer.html

>

> Thyroid Problems

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/thyroid.html

>

> Caffeine Problems

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/caffeine_allergy.html

> and

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/caffeine2.html

>

> Background and history of the Journal

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/hoffer_JOM.html

>

> Privacy Statement:

>

> We do not sell, and we do not share, our mailing

> list or your email address

> with anyone. We never send out advertisements of any

> kind. You may notice

> that there is no advertising at

> http://doctoryourself.com and no advertising

> in this newsletter. We have no financial connection

> with the supplement

> industry. We do not sell vitamins or other health

> products, except for Dr.

> Saul's books, which help fund these free public

> services.

>

> FREE SUBSCRIPTIONS FOR ALL to this newsletter are

> available with a blank

> email to

>

> dynewsletter-

>

> AN IMPORTANT NOTE: This newsletter is not in any way

> offered as

> prescription, diagnosis nor treatment for any

> disease, illness, infirmity or

> physical condition. Any form of self-treatment or

> alternative health program

> necessarily must involve an individual's acceptance

> of some risk, and no one

> should assume otherwise. Persons needing medical

> care should obtain it from

> a physician. Consult your doctor before making any

> health decision.

>

> " DOCTOR YOURSELF " " DoctorYourself.com " and " Doctor

> Yourself Newsletter " are

> service marks of Andrew W. Saul. All rights

> reserved.

>

> Copyright c 2004 and prior years Andrew W. Saul

> drsaul .

> Permission to reproduce single copies of this

> newsletter FOR NON-COMMERCIAL,

> PERSONAL USE ONLY is hereby granted providing no

> alteration of content is

> made and authorship credit is given. Additional

> single copies will be sent

> by postal mail to a practitioner or patient, free of

> charge, upon receipt of

> a self addressed envelope with THREE first-class

> stamps on it (offer good in

> the USA only), to Number 8 Van Buren Street, Holley,

> NY 14470 USA. (585)

> 638-5357.

>

> For information about my book, " DOCTOR YOURSELF:

> Natural Healing that Works "

> please go to

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/saulbooks.html .

>

> Subscriptions to my DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWSLETTER by

> email are free for the

> asking. Just send a blank email to

> dynewsletter-

>

> " Don't feel you owe me any respect; you can listen

> or not, as you please. "

> (Benjamin Franklin)

>

>

>