Flutterby™! : Seeking a publication

Seeking a publication

2009-07-14 17:31:03.875233+00 by Dan Lyke 9 comments

The internet has taken its toll on my research skills. Anyone got ideas on how to track down the "Journal of Naturopathic Medicine 5(1):74-76, 1994"?

[ related topics: Net Culture ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-14 17:51:35.022902+00 by: John Anderson

Here's a (purported) list of libraries that hold it:

<http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=ti%3A/The%20Journal%20of%20naturopathic%20medicine.>

Here's the National Library of Medicine catalog and holdings pages:

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=nlmcatalog&cmd=search&term=1047-7837.>

<http://locatorplus.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&v1=1&ti=1,1&Search_Arg=9112937&Search_Code=0359&CNT=20&SID=1>

This page has the ISSN:

<http://journalseek.net/cgi-bin/journalseek/journalsearch.cgi?field=issn&query=1047-7837>

#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-14 17:55:40.682876+00 by: brennen

John Anderson above seems to have it covered pretty well, but I was going to suggest hitting up whatever large-ish state research university happens to be nearest.

#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-14 19:33:16.72655+00 by: ebradway

I just submitted an inter-library loan request. It usually just takes a couple days and I'll get a PDF scan of the article. Hope you have the page numbers right! The year was off - it's 1995.

#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-14 22:09:23.910947+00 by: Dan Lyke

Thanks, Eric! Interesting, this is an article oft-quoted in discrediting a particular alternative medicine therapy (published in an Naturopathy journal, so we're starting out pretty alternative), weird that the cite got the year wrong... I'll have to see if there are more sources out there.

#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-15 06:07:11.820429+00 by: ebradway [edit history]

Not exactly sure about the year. The journal started in 1990, which means volume 5 should be 1994. Have to double check. Full citation from here:

Austin S, Baumgartner E, DeKadt S. Long term follow-up of cancer patients using Contreras, Hoxsey and Gerson therapies. Journal of Naturopathic Medicine 1995; 5:74-76.

Interestingly, Wikipedia cites it as:

Austin S, Dale EB, DeKadt S (1994). "Long-term follow-up of cancer patients using Contreras, Hoxsey and Gerson therapies". Journal of Naturopathic Medicine 5 (1): 74–76.

Must be the medical conspiracy at work...

#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-15 14:05:26.994081+00 by: Dan Lyke

It doesn't help the "there's no medical conspiracy here" notion that when I email the "ask us anything" link at Sloan-Kettering asking for a specific cite, "which paper is this web page referring to in paragraph 3...", and I get back:

You can check the National Cancer Institute Web site for more information on Gerson Therapy http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/gerson/Patient.

Uh. Yeah. Google gave me that, and I'm trying to track down the sources from there, too. Sigh.

#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-16 15:24:48.708816+00 by: ebradway

Just got the article and forwarded it to Dan. Conclusion:

We have shown that both Gerson and Contreras therapies, like their conventional counterparts, were unable to cure a wide variety ofadvanced cancers. The American Cancer Society (ACS) itself would acknowiedge that several aspects of the Gerson diet, if used prophylactically, might reduce risk. It remains critical, however, to distinguish between preventive measures and successful treatment of/ate-stage disease.

The article is very superficial. The authors attempted to follow patients with late stage cancers treated at the various clinics in Tiajuana using the three modalities. All of the patients died who were treated with two of the modalities: Gerson and Contreras. It's significant that the authors note that allopathic treatments for late stage cancer are no more effective.

Several patients treated with the Hoxsey modality did survive. The authors note that the American Cancer Society did summarily dismiss the herbs used in the Hoxsey method as useless without any apparent clinical trial.

The authors also note that the diet recommended by the Gerson modality (i.e., a mostly raw-food diet with lots of fresh vegetable juice) is an effective preventative treatment for cancer even though it's not effective in treating late-stage cancer.

#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-16 16:28:58.09877+00 by: Dan Lyke

Yeah, one of the things that concerns me about Gerson is the very problem that these authors ran into: Nobody seems like they're actually tracking patient diagnoses and treatments. It's one thing to say "our treatment is effective", it's quite another to nail that down with specific numbers, diagnoses relative to conventional allopathy, and 5 year survival rates.

One the one hand, I look at Charlene down from a size 18 to a size 6 and say "fantastic!", on the other I cringe at what I might face should she come down with something that allopathy cures easily and Gerson claims to cure but doesn't.

#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-16 22:09:02.060941+00 by: ebradway

I might face should she come down with something that allopathy cures easily and Gerson claims to cure but doesn't.

Having a wife that is much like Charlene, I've come to accept that she wouldn't be the same person if she didn't have her beliefs. If the allopathic treatment deprives her of her sense of self, her soul, then saving her physical body through that treatment doesn't really save what I love. It's still dies.

I haven't had to face the question myself, so I've left it unanswered, but what extent should measures be taken to save your life?