Category Archives: Alternative Medicine

Republican J.D. Vance wins Ohio primary after Donald Trump endorsement

Trump's pick for the Ohio GOP candidate, J.D. Vance, wins a spot in the November Senatorial election.

Cody Godwin, USA TODAY

In the Ohio Senate race, former PresidentDonald Trumps endorsement lifted a media personality and outsider candidate to the GOP nomination over a crammed Republican field.

Now, Mehmet Oz, better known as Dr. Oz, hopes thatTrumps influence will come to bear in Pennsylvanias Republican Senate primary, where he holds a thinlead in the polls, according to RealClearPolitics.

Trumpendorsed Oz last monthin his bid to replace retiring Republican Sen. Pat Toomey.

Ozs celebrity status has made him the subject of intense scrutiny by his opponents, who have questioned his loyalty to the country because he holds dual U.S. and Turkish citizenship.

Aside from Oz, the main contendersin the Republican primary are Dave McCormick, a former hedge fund manager, and conservative political commentator Kathy Barnette.

On Politics newsletter: Keep up with the latest breaking politics news

Roe's midterms impact: The Roe v. Wade decision could upend the midterms. Here's where it might matter most

2022 midterm elections: The most interesting Senate races to watch, from Georgia, to Pennsylvania and Florida

Ohio GOP Senate nominee: Who is J.D. Vance?

Oz is best known for his nationally syndicated television program the Dr. Oz Show, which came to an end with his Senate run. Ozs ascent to fame began with frequent appearances on the Oprah Winfrey show, where he appeared as a health expert,before finally getting his own show in 2009.

He had worked as a heart surgeon at the New York Presbyterian Hospital, according to his biography on the Dr. Oz Show website.

In the medical community, Ozs promotion of alternative medicines has made him a controversial figure. Some doctors have gone as far as to publicly call for Columbia University, where Oz taught, to cut its ties with the now Senate candidate, Vox reported.

The university removed Ozs profile from its website, the Daily Beast and others reported, following his Senate race entrance.

Oz earned his doctor of medicine from the University of Pennsylvaniain 1986. He also has an undergraduate degree from Harvard University and a Master ofBusiness Administration from the University of Pennsylvanias Wharton School.

Oz'sparents immigrated to the U.S. from Turkey. His father, Mustafa, had also been a surgeon.

Oz was born on June 11, 1960 in Cleveland, Ohio. He is 61 years old.

Ozs campaign website lists more than a dozen issue areas. In his first campaign ad, Oz appealed to his medical background and addressed the COVID-19 pandemic.

They took away our freedom, Oz said in the ad. Without making us safer.

His campaign site notes Ozs opposition to business shutdowns and support for keeping children in schools. He also told Fox News he was opposed to vaccine mandates.

Another focus of the Oz campaign is energy independence, which was one of manyissues highlighted in Trumps endorsement statement. Hiscampaign site says Oz supports slashing regulations on the fossil fuel industry to increase domestic energy production.

The rest of Ozs platform runs the gamut on the GOP's defining issues during Joe Biden's presidency.

Election security, cancel culture, and get tough on China, are all focuses of the campaign along with more classic Republican positions ongun rights, the economy,immigration and abortions.

On Twitter, Oz weighed in on the leaked majority opinion draft written by Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito, agreeing with Alitos rebuke of Roe v. Wade.

Aside from Trump, Oz is backed by former RepublicanTexas governor Rick Perry and Fox News Sean Hannity. J.D. Vance, theOhio GOP Senate nominee, and former Republican presidential candidate and Housing and Urban Developmentecretary Ben Carson also support Oz.

One of Ozs children is his daughter Daphne Oz, a chef and TV personality, who hosts a cooking show that replaced her fathers show. In 1985, Oz married his wife Lisa, with whom he has four children.

Follow this link:

Trump is backing 'Dr. Oz' in the Pennsylvania Senate race. What to know about the ex-TV show host - USA TODAY

The captive breeding of lions to meet the rising demand for alternative medicine and ornamental industries should be halted in order to save the majestic carnivore that roams African jungles, lobby groups said on Wednesday.

The World Animal Protection and Blood Lions said in a joint statement issued in Nairobi, the Kenyan capital, that cruelty meted out on lions in captivity was a reason to halt the practice and allow them to roam freely in their natural habitats.

Edith Kabesiime, the wildlife campaigns manager at World Animal Protection said that legislation should be enacted to ban caging of lions on commercial farms amid threat to their physical and emotional health.

According to Kabesiime, the survival and welfare of lions and other iconic carnivores in Africa was in jeopardy amid caged rearing, trophy hunting and habitat loss.

She urged African governments to support community-driven conservation of lions as opposed to captive breeding that was fueling the spread of pathogens.

Kabesiime lauded South Africa in its pledge to phase out captive breeding of lions adding that a ban on trade in their parts including bones could aid efforts to boost their population in the wild.

A joint study by World Animal Protection and Blood Lions, an advocacy group, that was published in early May noted that breeding lions in a captive environment undermined their health and comfort.

Based on data collected from South Africa's commercial lion farms, the study concluded that captive breeding contravened global best practices on protecting the carnivores from human-induced and climatic threats.

"It is clear from review of scientific literature available that a multitude of animal welfare challenges are associated with caring for lions in captivity," said the study.

Louise de Waal, the director of Blood Lions said that captive breeding, poaching, habitat loss and fragmentation posed an immense threat to the survival of the big cats despite their contribution to tourism and ecological balance. Enditem

Here is the original post:

African lobbies call for end to captive breeding of lions as threats intensify - China.org.cn

What risks would you take if you were only able to function for one, maybe two hours a day? The rest of the day, you must lie down with an eye mask on while listening to something quiet. You can't work, exercise or drive. You can't leave the house for more than an hour or two once a week.

Would you risk an increased chance of skin cancer? Or possible vision damage and blindness?

I would. I am.

Many years ago, I woke up one morning unable to move my body from my bed. It felt like a tonne of wet cement had been poured on top of me and I couldn't shift it. I struggled to answer questions, read, remember things and connect ideas. Getting myself up or out of the house to work became an extreme sport.

After eight years visiting doctor after doctor, I was diagnosed with a disease known as Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME).

ME has no treatment or cure. Millions of people are joining this cohort via long COVID, which shares striking similarities with ME. Both patients and doctors are in a murky world of unknowns.

But I am one of the lucky ones: I've become a human experiment.

If there's a chance a treatment could increase my capacity so I can work, or drive, or socialise independently again, I will try it. When you're trapped with a debilitating illness, any different feeling can be a welcome relief.

I experiment with different medications under the guidance of trusted medical professionals. As I see it, medication is technology. Why wouldn't I use technology to try and improve my quality of life? That's not to say it's a simple or easy process.

For years, I was shunted between different doctors for extensive, expensive tests. They couldn't find anything that medicine had a treatment for. I tried lifestyle changes and alternative therapies to no avail. Finally, I decided it was time to experiment.

I was referred to a specialist with an interest in ME and, when I asked him whether there was anything we could try to "improve my capacity", he was up for the challenge. Each appointment, we discuss different medications we have heard of in the ME space (all are designed to treat other illnesses). Together, we weigh their potential risks and benefits.

My specialist reviews my bloods and decides whether a particular medication is appropriate for me to trial and at what dosage. Each time he says: "We have no idea what will happen and there are no guarantees", and I ask about potential side effects to monitor for and hazards to avoid. We discuss how expensive the medication is and where I can find it. Then we monitor my body's response.

This morning, I took nine pills. Three of them are "private non-PBS prescription", which means they are expensive and untested for treating my illness. Four of the pills slightly increase my brain function to the extent that I wouldn't be able to write this without them but neither my doctor or I know why.

Some medication trials have been ineffective. One drug caused my vision to blur so I couldn't see or read. My specialist at the time advised me to "wait it out" but I decided to pull the pin. Years later, the same medication would end up helping me, I just have to get regular eye tests.

Some of the medication has suppressed my immune system and made me vulnerable to dangerous viruses. Some have caused headaches, gut infections, skin infections, staph infections, anxiety, mood swings, drenching night sweats, constipation, diarrhoea, vertigo, twitching, itching... the list goes on. Many of the medications cause nausea. Sometimes it's manageable, sometimes it's miserable.

These technologies have a way to go. But on my current regime, I can get up and shower (with my shower seat) most days. Sometimes I can write. If I have notice for a big event with loved ones, I can socialise and recover. For me, these are life changing gains.

In an ideal world, though, these medications would be properly tested in controlled studies rather than on very sick people.

Some disabilities are "over medicalised". Disabilities are often seen as medical problems when many really arise from a lack of accessibility. As Dylan Alcott recently explained, when he is in an accessible space, he is not disabled. It is inaccessible spaces that disable him. This is the social model of disability.

Inaccessibility disables me, too stairs and lack of seating or rest areas limit my capacity to move through the world and participate in society. But I am also disabled by a lack of medical attention, research and funding for my disease. In my experience, the thing that most disables people with energy limiting chronic illnesses like ME and long COVID is that governments, medical funding bodies and scientific research communities do not see the problem.

Perhaps one of the reasons for this lack of focus and funding is because most ME patients are women. Diseases predominantly affecting women receive significantly less research funding. This means women and gender diverse people's bodies are still poorly understood in medicine.

Shockingly, female animals and humans were excluded from medical testing until very recently. Women have been prescribed drugs for decades without them having been tested on female bodies.

This lack of knowledge is compounded by the incentive for doctors to provide short consults, limiting the potential for women's complex illnesses to be properly treated. Together, these factors result in doctors too often distrusting women and gender diverse people's accounts of their own bodies.

Millions of people globally, up to 80 per cent of them women, present to doctors with the debilitating symptoms of ME. Some doctors tell us to rest or lose weight or see a psychologist. An infectious diseases specialist smiled at me indulgently and suggested I was "just tired" because of my work as a lawyer. One senior immunologist said I would "probably" get better because I was not obese and had a positive attitude; there was "no need" for a further appointment.

Both were wrong because ME is a complex neuro-immune disease. I haven't worked as a lawyer since 2014 and though my optimism has survived, so too has my disease.

Funding is urgently needed for research into ME so that one day when I, and millions of others, go to the doctor, they are not only able tell me what's wrong, but how they can treat it. Instead of saying "we don't know what will happen", they can say "this should give you some relief".

For more information about ME click here. To support homegrown research into ME check out the National Centre for Neuroimmunology and Emerging Diseases at Griffith University.

Alice Rumble is a disabled writer and advocate living with ME. She shares her stories of disability on Instagram at @alice_rumble.

Posted13 May 202213 May 2022Fri 13 May 2022 at 7:00pm, updated13 May 202213 May 2022Fri 13 May 2022 at 10:32pm

Go here to see the original:

I'm one of thousands of Australians with chronic fatigue syndrome but I'm lucky: I've become a human experiment - ABC News

The treatment landscape continues to expand across nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with the FDA approvals of multiple agents, including targeted therapies such as sotorasib (Lumakras) and lorlatinib (Lorbrena), according to faculty from an OncLive State of the Science Summit on lung cancer.

The event, chaired by Christine Bestvina, MD, assistant professor of medicine, hematology and oncology (cancer), University of Chicago Medicine Comprehensive Cancer Center, highlighted updates across the lung cancer landscape, including the use of frontline immunotherapy in NSCLC, plus the role CTLA-4 inhibitors could play in this patient population.

Bestvina was joined by her colleagues:

Below, Fidler, Weinberg, Bestvina, Feldman, and Vokes summarize the main messages from their presentations.

Fidler: Comprehensive next-generation sequencing [NGS] is essential for [patients with] stage IV adenocarcinoma. [NGS] should include RNA sequencing and circulating tumor DNA [ctDNA] assays, [which] can maximally capture targeted alterations. We saw that with a [2018 report by Charu Aggarwal, MD, MPH, of Penn Medicine,] where some of the alterations were only captured in the ctDNA assays.

Perioperative PD-L1 [testing] could be useful to guide multimodality therapy, and EGFR testing should be performed on resectable patients that may pursue a neoadjuvant chemotherapy [plus] immunotherapy approach, given the overwhelming disease-free survival benefit with osimertinib [Tagrisso] for [patients with EGFR mutations].

Weinberg: Sotorasib received [FDA] approval in May 2021 for patients with KRAS G12C[mutated] metastatic NSCLC in the second-line setting or later. Adagrasib is a KRAS G12C inhibitor, but it is not yet approved.

In general, [KRAS G12C inhibitors] are tolerated well. Gastrointestinal [adverse] effects [AEs] and liver abnormalities are the largest treatment-related AEs. There is emerging data in studies that we should keep an eye on in terms of combination treatment thats ongoing.

Lorlatinib was approved in March 2021 for the treatment of patients with ALK fusionpositive metastatic NSCLC. Alectinib [Alecensa], for most [clinicians], is still our go-to first-line [treatment] for patients with ALK fusionpositive metastatic NSCLC. But I would consider lorlatinib in the first line if the patient has significant central nervous system metastasis. [It is important to] be aware of the unique [AE] profile of lorlatinib.

Selpercatinib [Retevmo] was FDA approved in May 2020 [for the treatment of patients with RET alterationpositive NSCLC]. Pralsetinib [Gavreto] was approved in September 2020 for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC with RET fusions. [Notably], selpercatinib has less myelosuppressive [AEs].

Larotrectinib [Vitrakvi] was approved in November 2018 [for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with solid tumors that have an NTRK gene fusion without a known acquired resistance mutation, are metastatic or where surgical resection is likely to result in severe morbidity, and have no satisfactory alternative treatments or that have progressed following treatment]. Entrectinib [Rozlytrek] was approved in August 2019 for the first-line treatment of solid tumors harboring NTRK fusions without resistance mutations. [Additionally], there are emerging second-generation inhibitors to overcome on-target resistance.

Bestvina: Immune monotherapy is whats preferred for patients [with NSCLC] who have high PD-L1 [expression], although chemotherapy [plus] immunotherapy may be preferred in never smokers or patient [who present with more aggressive disease]. Chemotherapy [plus] immunotherapy is whats recommended to for [patients with] a [PD-L1 tumor proportion score of] less than 50%.

The addition of a CTLA-4 [inhibitor] may be helpful for certain patient subgroups. But stay tuned, because lots of combination trials [are expected] to read out soon.

Feldman: In the paradigm of treatment for extensive-stage SCLC, we want to consider clinical trials. In the first-line setting, [treatment options include] etoposide [and] platinum [chemotherapy combined with] either atezolizumab [Tecentriq] or durvalumab [Imfinzi]. In the second-line setting, we have an FDA approval for topotecan and lurbinectedin [Zepzelca]. Many investigators prefer [liposomal] irinotecan instead of topotecan, although that is an off-label usage.

In the third-line setting for patients who havent had a checkpoint inhibitor, one can consider pembrolizumab [Keytruda] or nivolumab [Opdivo]. Otherwise, we still have agents such as paclitaxel and temozolomide [Temodar] to consider in the third-line setting.

Vokes: Survival [rates] in resectable lung cancer are still too low. Although we should be happy with the [current] results, we shouldnt be content and say we dont have to look any further. Targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved treatment outcomes, and resection is the key. [Treatment can be given before or after surgery], but the key is to cut [the disease] out, [if possible].

[The use of] adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapies are evidence based. Osimertinib is [FDA] approved [as an adjuvant treatment following tumor resection in EGFR-mutated NSCLC], and atezolizumab [is approved for use as an adjuvant treatment following resection and platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with stage II to IIIA NSCLC with a PD-L1 expression on 1% or moreof tumor cells]. Moreover, neoadjuvant nivolumab and [platinum-doublet chemotherapy was recently approved for adult patients with resectable NSCLC].

More:

Targeted Therapies Continue to Expand the Treatment Paradigm in NSCLC - OncLive

A nationwide baby formula shortage is causing frustration and fear for parents in the country.

Over 40 percent of formula is currently out of stock across the country, according to Datasembly. This is due to the closure of a major formula production plant back in February, which was only made worse by pandemic-related supply chain issues.

And while the plant has announced its plans to reopen in the coming weeks, the reality is that parents are still at least a month away from being able to find their preferred formulas back on the shelves.

What do you need to know about this formula shortage, and what can you do to make sure your child is receiving the proper nutrients in the interim? We spoke with experts to find out.

The issue behind the formula shortage is two-fold. First is the widespread supply chain issue due to the pandemic, which has affected everything from cars to Nutella.

To make matters worse, in February, the Food & Drug Administration closed Abbott Nutritions Michigan factory after Abbott voluntarily recalled brands of its formula. The formula was tied to a bacterial infection that was linked to the deaths of at least two infants.

Abbott produces Similac, a routine milk-based formula, as well as Similac Advance and other specialty formulas for babies with certain allergies.

The Biden administration has said that they are talking with suppliers in an effort to get more formula on store shelves.

This has led to parents struggling to find appropriate formulas for their kids. They are traveling out of their geographic areas and ordering products online, where not everything meets the same standards as formulas produced in the U.S., said Dr. Matthew Harris, who practices in pediatric emergency medicine, emergency medical services, and pediatrics at Northwell Healths Cohen Childrens Medical Center in New York.

Rebecca Romero, RD, LD, CLC, on the clinical nutrition and lactation team at Nationwide Childrens Hospital in Ohio, said parents are having difficulty getting enough formula to feed their children.

Due to the infant formula shortage, parents are facing the very serious problem of not having enough formula available to feed their children, added Romero. Many stores are having supply issues and parents are being forced to drive store to store to find their childs formula. Additionally, we are seeing an increase in families preparing homemade formula or mixing foods not intended for infants with formula, which can be very risky and compromise the developing infants health.

If your child uses a standard, milk-based powdered formula, several alternatives are available besides Abbotts recalled formulas.

For children taking a specific formula, such as one for a milk protein allergy, experts recommend looking for a similar, alternative formula for what their child is currently taking.

It is important to select a FDA-approved formula, meaning it meets safety standards and is specifically designed to provide appropriate nutrition for infants. If parents are unsure of what product would be considered a safe alternative, they should talk to their childs healthcare provider or dietitian for guidance, said Romero.

Harris noted that other companies, like Enfamil, for example, or other U.S.-produced milk-based formulas have very little difference and would be considered safe to use as an alternative.

As a father of an infant who has a milk protein allergy, which is very common, they cannot take standard formulas, which are all increasingly difficult to find in powdered form, he said. We have been successful finding liquid formulas on Amazon; however, these liquid-based formulas can be more expensive for families facing financial distress.

Right now, parents can also look at ordering online from known entities, like Amazon, Walmart, and CVS.

While this is incredibly stressful for parents as they try to provide appropriate nutrition for their children, experts stress that parents should avoid diluting formula or ordering products from unknown online retailers.

What we want to avoid is parents extending the life of the powder formula by adding water and diluting it, said Harris. That is not good for children because it causes low sodium, and that can lead to seizures, which can be life-threatening. Never dilute formula, hard stop.

Another tip is to not order formulas from websites that may not deliver products certified in the United States. Formulas produced in the U.S. that use a typical 20 calorie-per-ounce, milk-based formula have very little difference from each other.

Harris also recommends double checking any Similac product that parents do happen to find to make sure its not part of the recall.

There are still products on the shelves that are part of the recall that may not have been taken down, he said.

The FDA has also issued warnings against using homemade formula since it isnt regulated and can be contaminated or lack key nutrients.

In a 2021 warning, the FDA said some infants fed homemade formula were hospitalized due to low calcium.

These problems are very serious, and the consequences range from severe nutritional imbalances to foodborne illnesses, both of which can be life-threatening, the FDA said in the 2021 warning.

If parents do happen to find Similac, Alimentum, and EleCare powdered infant formula products, here is what they can check to ensure it is not recalled:

In addition, Abbott Nutrition has recalled Similac PM 60/40 with a lot code of 27032K80 (can) / 27032K800 (case). Parents can also enter the product lot code on the companys website to check.

As healthcare providers, we are aware of the severity of this shortage and how it is impacting families, said Romero. Providers are working closely with families daily to help provide support and guidance to ensure their children are receiving appropriate and adequate formula. Families should make sure to talk to their childs healthcare provider or dietitian if guidance is needed.

Here is the original post:

Infant Formula Shortage: Why it's Happening and What Parents Can Do - Healthline

After Marianne Sarcich underwent treatment for breast cancer in 2016, she called an acupuncturist in hopes of easing her cancer-related anxietybut made sure to be upfront.

I told her right away that I didnt think this would work, I didnt believe in it, but I was desperate, she says. Absolutely nothing else was helping. I only considered acupuncture to knock it off the list of possibilities.

To her shock, it helped. Over a few months of sessions, she felt the tightness of anxiety began to loosen, and Sarcich began considering other complementary options shed dismissed previously. She was curious about breathwork; reiki, which is a form of energy healing; mindfulness; sound baths; and yoga. All of them ended up helping her side effects in some way, she says.

As these efforts layered on top of each other, it was a huge relief, she says. These complementary therapies werent treating her cancernor did she expect them tobut they helped relieve her anxiety and improve her mood during her arduous treatments. Sarcich joined the patient advocate committee for the Society for Integrative Oncology, which recommends evidence-based holistic therapies to complement FDA-approved treatments for cancer. She also started a 1,000-member peer support group for people with cancer who are interested in complementary therapies.

If something works to address common issues in cancer care like pain, anxiety, mobility problems, depression, and fatigue, she says, you grab onto it, and you help others do the same.

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has become increasingly popular in the U.S., and among cancer patients specifically, over the past few decades. People with cancer might use complementary therapies alongside standard medical careor, in the case of alternative medicine, instead of it. Little evidence exists to support the efficacy of either complementary medicine or alternative medicine to treat cancer (and replacing standard care with alternative treatments can be life-threatening.)

But some practices, when used alongside conventional medicine, may help ease some of the unpleasant side effects of cancer treatment, according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), in a practice known as integrative medicine. A growing number of comprehensive cancer centers are offering integrative medicine, and in 2018, for the first time, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) endorsed the Society for Integrative Oncologys evidence-based guidelines recommending certain integrative therapies during and after breast cancer treatment.

Each complementary therapywhether meditation, hypnosis, yoga, tai chi, acupuncture, cannabis, supplements, chiropractic, reflexology, nutritional therapy, aromatherapy, energy healing, massage, music therapy, dance, or one of the many othershas a different level of evidence behind it, according to NCI, and people with cancer should discuss them with their health care provider before starting any.

One study published in JAMA Oncology in 2019, using data from 2012, suggests that about 33% of cancer patients in the U.S. use CAM. The real number is likely much higherprobably around 80%, says Dr. Steve Vasilev, medical director of integrative gynecologic oncology at Providence Saint Johns Health Center and professor at Saint Johns Cancer Institute in California.

When I started practicing 30 years ago, patients were asking about fad therapies like snake venom, he says. But now, theres much more interest in evidence-based therapy like acupuncture or nutritional changes. Fortunately, we now have more data that these really can be helpful.

One of the most significant upsides to complementary therapy is that it helps the patient feel empowered, says Dr. Lakshmi Rajdev, chief of hematology and oncology at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York. Being diagnosed with and treated for cancer can be overwhelming and stressful, and many people feel swept along in the health care system, she says. Choosing complementary options can help people feel in control, which is psychologically important.

Data supports the use of these complementary therapies in reducing stress and improving coping skills, which both benefit treatment overall, says Rajdev. They may not change the way the disease progresses, but they do help patients deal with their illness, and thats hugely important.

Another major benefit is that they can reduce treatment side effects, especially those that affect quality of life, like depression, nausea, headaches, and pain. With ASCOs endorsement and based on existing evidence, the Society for Integrative Oncology recommends meditation, music therapy, and yoga for anxiety, depression, and stress reduction among people undergoing breast cancer treatment, along with massage for improving mood and acupuncture and acupressure for reducing nausea and vomiting after chemotherapy.

Cancer treatment has also improved recently, which can make complementary therapies appear to be more effective than they used to, adds Dr. Jack Jacoub, an oncologist and medical director of MemorialCare Cancer Institute at Orange Coast Medical Center in California.

Cancer therapy is dramatically different than it was even five or 10 years ago, he says. There are still side effects, but were moving away from chemo and into targeted therapies that come with less nausea and pain. That means complementary therapies dont have to be as intense to work. With minor muscle tightness, for example, maybe just a few sessions of massage can be helpful.

One challenge is that some therapies, such as acupuncture, may take weeks or months to result in meaningful mental and physical shifts, Vasilev says. A few months can be significant for someone with cancer, especially when theyre struggling through intense symptoms like nausea and anxiety.

The bigger potential downside is interference with conventional treatments, which is why patients should always tell their health care providers if they are using any therapies outside of what theyre prescribed. The JAMA Oncology study found that among the people with cancer who used CAM therapies, 29% did not tell their doctors, which is potentially dangerous. Interference with cancer treatments mainly occurs with supplements, herbs, and vitamins, Rajdev says. Even though these may be naturally derived, some have been found to reduce the efficacy of chemotherapy.

Nearly every patient asks me about supplements because they want to boost their immune system, and they tend to get deluged with advice from friends and family members about what to take, Rajdev says. The best advice here is to wait until after treatment for those, and focus instead on complementary therapies that dont have potential interactions with chemo or pain medications.

Usually, exercise is the most effective non-medical therapy to add to cancer treatment, she says. Ample evidence suggests that regular activity can significantly mitigate cancer treatment effects, so doing yoga, or even just walking more, can provide a safe immune boost.

Rather than integrating complementary therapies into a conventional cancer treatment plan, which might include typical treatments like radiation, surgery, and chemotherapy, a patient pursuing alternative medicine would do CAM therapies instead of standard medical treatment.

Alternative medicine has little, if any, evidence of efficacy and may cause harm. In some cases, using these therapies in place of medical strategies could worsen your condition, says Jacoub.

Its a natural reaction to search for other answers, especially if youre suspicious of the health care system or youve had negative experiences, he says. Cost may be another issue, where youre concerned about how much cancer care will entail, so you want to try an alternative therapy first. Unfortunately, there is simply no compelling evidence that any of these therapies work for standalone cancer care, and they may cause you to delay treatment.

A notable example is Apple co-founder Steve Jobs, who was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in 2003 when he was 48. He initially decided to reject conventional treatments and instead used dietary changes, botanical formulations, juicing, and acupuncture, but he shifted his opinion nine months later and opted for surgery, followed by targeted immunotherapy treatment. He died seven years later, and experts say its impossible to know if that delay shortened his life or whether those alternative therapies had any benefits. However, Jobs biographer Walter Isaacson later noted that the tech icon came to regret his decision to delay surgery and subsequent treatment.

Despite the risk and lack of evidence, the lure of alternative medicine persists. According to a 2018 survey conducted by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, about 40% of Americans believe cancer can be cured through alternative therapies alonea statistic the American Cancer Society calls alarming, since research suggests people who use alternative therapies in place of standard cancer treatments have much higher mortality rates.

Standing at the precipice of cancer treatment can be terrifying. Complementary therapies may help you navigate forward, especially since they provide a much-needed sense of control, Sarcich says.

There is a sense that you need to do something, because if you feel powerless in the midst of all this, it can be terrible, she says. As long as its safe, Why not try everything? Its likely youll find a few options that will stick, and that youll actually love, even when you didnt think that would be the case.

If your chosen therapies arent potentially interfering with cancer treatment, there are usually only upsides to choices like art therapy, yoga, reiki, or massage, adds Rajdev.

The data on interventions like these is compelling, and Im a believer in some of these since Ive seen them help my patients, she says. The first step is to talk with your oncologist and make a plan together.

More Must-Read Stories From TIME

Contact us at letters@time.com.

Read the rest here:

Complementary Therapies for Cancer Care: What Research Says - TIME

Alternative medicine systems were the order of the day way before modern-day medicines gained popularity across the world.

Ayurveda which originated in the Indian subcontinent is believed to be over 3,000 years old. The word is a portmanteau of Ayus (life) and Veda (science) which translates to the science of life.

Ayurveda takes a comprehensive approach via herbs, exercise, meditation, massage, exposure to sunlight, and controlled breathing to keep the body, mind, and spirit in balance.

People use this treatment to cure several ailments, including diabetes and heart and neurological ailments.

While scepticism surrounds the benefits of alternative medicine, people across the globe still choose traditional systems for holistic healing.

From Asian to Native American medicine systems, SocialStory takes a look at five traditional systems deemed to benefit people.

With origins in Europe, naturopathy diagnoses ailments as an indication that the bodys natural ability to heal itself is compromised. It goes beyond treating the ailment to restoring the natural processes by which the body heals itself.

Naturopathy, which translates to nature disease, is practised throughout Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the US.

The holistic system combines alternative systems like homoeopathy, acupuncture, and herbal medicine, and the often use of more modern practices like bio-resonance, ozone therapy, and colonic irrigation.

Acupuncture is derived from ancient Chinese medicine and is based on the release of energy in the body

Acupuncture is a treatment derived from ancient Chinese medicine, where fine needles are inserted at certain sites in the body for therapeutic or preventative purposes.

The practice involves the stimulation of subcutaneous sensory nerves and the muscles, which leads to the body producing natural stimulants such as pain-relieving endorphins.

The release of Qi leads to the restoration of good health. Acupuncture is believed to provide relief from chronic pain, tension-related migraines, and headaches. Besides, it is used in the treatment of joint pain, toothaches, insomnia, anxiety, depression, and infertility.

Most people say the treatment causes little to no pain, with only a slight soreness after the session.

Unani medicine or Tibbis a traditional Arabian system that can be traced back to the texts of ancient Greek physicians like Hippocrates and Galen, later refined by Arab physicians like Avicenna.

Unani medicine is based on achieving harmony and balance between the body, mind, and the soul. The system believes a healthy body has a balance between seven principles arkan (elements), mizaj (temperament), akhlat (bodily humour), aaza (organs and systems), arwah (vital spirit), quwa (faculties or powers), and afaal (functions).

Tibetan medicine or Sowa Rigpa (the science of healing) is an ancient healing practice from Tibet based on the principle that the basic purpose in life is happiness.

Practitioners analyse the patients unique inborn nature or constitution and recommend supportive lifestyle choices. The system goes to the source of the problem to help achieve health by striking a balance. It believes the mind is the source of suffering, and a healthy mind will lead to a healthy body.

Based on the Four Tantras that keep the three bodily humours wind rlung, bile mkhris pa, and phlegm bad kan in balance, these tantras are

Tibetan medicine treats an individual based on their nature and constitution

Japanese or Kampo medicine system is over 1500-years-old and has its roots in Chinese medicine.Based on herbal formulations, Japanese medicine has around 148 Kampo formulas, officially approved as prescription drugs.

In fact, some doctors use Kampo medicine with chemotherapy in cancer treatment. It is a popular choice for people with gastrointestinal tract disorders and inflammatory bowel diseases. Kampo also prescribes acupuncture and moxibustion but relies primarily on herbal formulas.

Moreover, several universities have begun research in Kampo medicine.

Excerpt from:

From Naturopathy to Unani, 5 alternative medicine systems popular across the world - YourStory

The area has a new medical-care option with the recently opened Northwestern Medicine Lake Bluff Comprehensive Health Center.

The 10,000-square-foot facility opened its doors at 525 Rockland Road in Knollwood, the unincorporated area adjacent to Lake Bluff. Both Northwestern Medical Group emergency and family doctors will work at the center, as they will continue to serve at the nearby Northwestern Medicine Lake Forest Hospital.

This center was built from the ground up to specifically better serve our local patients, and offering those with nonemergency health conditions, but who promptly need to see a health care professional, an alternative to waiting in an emergency room, Lake Forest Hospital President Marsha Oberrieder said in a statement.

Director of operations Robin Zacher said there is on-site imaging allowing for X-rays, along with a laboratory.

It takes us to a higher level of immediate care access, she said.

Next to the immediate care clinic will be a family physician center, where people can go for needs such as annual checkups and routine screenings for both adults and children.

The clinic is open 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Mondays through Fridays, and Zacher said the hope is to eventually have seven-day-a-week service.

Also envisioned for the future is drive-up access for COVID-19 testing, plus a social work component to the facility.

Zacher adds the Lake Bluff area location will be closer for local residents as Northwesterns two closest immediate care clinics are in Vernon Hills and Gurnee.

This will be another area entry into the immediate care market as NorthShore University HealthSystem already operates a facility at 71 Waukegan Road.

Visit link:

New Lake Bluff-area health center offers area residents 'an alternative to waiting in an emergency room' - Chicago Tribune

Back and joint pain are so common that medical reports estimate four out of every five people will suffer from it during their life. Two brothers who are also physicians have launched SpineZone medical clinics with a holistic approach to help relieve some of that pain.

Drs. Kamshad Raiszadeh and Kian Raiszadeh oversee SpineZone, which works with patients through online technology and clinical treatments to stabilize muscles and increase flexibility.

The brothers said they strive to treat their patients without surgery or opioid use.

There are 10 SpineZone clinics nine in San Diego and one in Orange County. Newer clinics in Rancho Bernardo, which opened March 1, San Marcos, Sorrento Valley and Eastlake/Chula Vista joined the established clinics in Del Mar, Encinitas, La Mesa, Mission Valley, Oceanside and Santa Ana.

Kamshad Raiszadeh, who has 20 years of experience with a broad range of spinal surgeries, founded SpineZone in 2005. His brother, who has spent more than six years in sport medicine, joined in 2015.

Kamshad Raiszadeh, chief medical officer at SpineZone, completed medical school at UC San Francisco, orthopedic surgery residency at UC Davis and his fellowship at the Hospital for Joint Diseases/NYU in New York City. Raiszadeh said over time he noticed a dramatic increase in patients turning to surgery for treatment of neck and low back pain. But many were not getting their desired long-term results, he said.

By treating the whole person, and the various and complex causes of pain in the body, we found we could decrease surgeries and increase the patients quality of life long term, he said.

Kian Raiszadeh, CEO of SpineZone

(Courtesy photo )

Kian Raiszadeh, CEO of SpineZone, graduated from UC Berkeley and completed medical school at UC San Diego, and now works as a sports medicine physician at Kaiser Permanentes San Marcos Medical Center. He said across the industry, he believed patients were being overtreated with surgery, imaging and medication for back and neck pain.

He founded a software company that focuses on helping patients manage their chronic conditions, but said joining forces with his brother was the best strategy. He still sees patients several days a month at Kaiser Permanente to keep his skills sharp, he said.

The SpineZone treatment begins with the patients first visit.

We offer a very customized, hands-on approach, beginning with an initial evaluation that takes about 60 minutes to complete, Kian Raiszadeh said.

The evaluation covers everything from the patients strength and posture to nutrition and emotions.

Our clinics have medical grade equipment allowing them to get very specific strength data, for example, he said.

After the evaluation, a custom, comprehensive treatment plan designed to provide pain relief is started that includes a health coach for patients.

Our medical team evaluates the progress of every patient on a weekly basis and they can step in and recommend any needed services, Raiszadeh said.

Medical oversight in the form of customized care and one-on-one services for issues with diet, sleep, nutrition and opioid use complete the SpineZone experience.

Many times, patients come in our clinics desperate for help, but they arent being given the right tools, Raiszadeh said.

A number of factors need to be addressed, such as strengthening core muscles, the mind/body connection and nutrition, Kamshad Raiszadeh said.

For many patients, fear or other factors can cause avoidant behavior and lead to downward spirals, he said. Nutritional factors, such as weight control, muscle building and an anti-inflammatory diet, also need to be addressed for many patients to feel pain relief.

Raiszadeh put much of this information into a book, Take Back Control, in which he dispenses practical advice and tools for those suffering chronic back and neck pain. The book is sold on http://www.amazon.comand http://www.takebackcontrol.com.

I can give most patients an option other than surgery, he said. We call this slow medicine. Stick with us for six to ten weeks and youll see a difference. Everyone is on one team, helping to manage your condition.

SpineZone is aligned with physicians at Sharp Health, Scripps Health and Providence, and the groups online program has expanded nationally. The brothers have plans to expand their clinics throughout California and beyond.

SpineZone Rancho Bernardo can be reached at 858-381-3858; the clinic is located at 11770 Bernardo Plaza Ct. Suite 101. Patients can schedule at any clinic by calling 844-316-7979. For more information, visit: http://www.SpineZone.com or the Facebook page.

See original here:

Business Spotlight: SpineZone clinics offer alternative treatments for back, neck pain - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Its never been a secret that we at SBM are not fans of Dr. Mehmet Oz. Its hard not to have encountered him before, given his fame and now his full embrace of President Trump for his campaign to become the Republican nominee for the Senate from Pennsylvania. As you might recall, Dr. Oz was a young rising star in academic cardiothoracic surgery in the 1990s, and even I have to admit that his achievements back then were impressive. Then something happened. Dr. Oz embraced reiki, founded Columbia Universitys integrative medicine program, and ultimately, after having met Oprah Winfrey and been featured on her show periodically as Americas Doctor (which led me to start referring to him as Americas Quack beginning years ago), hosted The Dr. Oz Show, which ran for nearly 13 seasons; that is, until Dr. Oz cut the last season short a few months ago and ended his show to run for the Senate for Pennsylvania. Of course, Dr. Oz being the long-time quack and grifter that he was, it didnt faze him in the least that he had lived in New Jersey, not Pennsylvania, and worked in Manhattan for decades; he voted absentee in 2020 using his wifes parents address in the Philadelphia suburbs. When last we discussed him on SBM, unsurprisingly Dr. Oz was pulling a common quack trick by challenging his critics (in this case, specifically Dr. Anthony Fauci) to a debate.

Those of us who promote science-based medicine and try to counter quackery and antivaccine misinformation have long lamented how Dr. Oz, despite promoting misinformation about health for over a decade, maintained his positions at Columbia University as professor and vice-chair of surgery at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, as well as the medical director of the Integrative Medicine Program (i.e., Columbias quackademic medicine) program at New York-Presbyterian Hospital. Its a lament that we tended to repeat almost any time Dr. Oz hit a new low in promoting quackery (which was depressingly not infrequent). We kept wondering why Columbia would continue to employ him in such high level leadership positions for so many years, despite his increasingly awful reputation in medicine for promoting quacks like Joe Mercola and even Mike Adams. Thats why a spate of stories that appeared over the last couple of days caught my eye:

Given Dr. Ozs history, I thought it would be interesting to discuss what happened in relation to his longstanding leadership positions at Columbia University, calls for Columbia to disassociate itself from him over the years, and his general history of having promoted dietary supplement scams, cell phone-cancer pseudoscience, homeopathy, psychic mediums, and other quackery going back decades.

The first story about this appears to have been the Huffington Post report, published in January:

TV doctor-turned-politician Mehmet Oz has apparently retired from clinical practice and his faculty role at Columbia University since announcing his Senate run in Pennsylvania.

Oz, who once served as vice chair of the surgery department, now holds the title of professor emeritus of surgery at the Ivy League school.

The title reflects the fact that Oz, 61, no longer sees patients, according to a Columbia spokesperson, but its unclear how long hes been retired from his clinical practice. Oz didnt have the emeritus title as recently as last month, just after he launched his campaign.

An emeritus status is conferred to retired professors and faculty members in recognition of distinguished service to the university and eminence in their discipline, according to the university.

The university didnt respond to questions about when the change took place or how involved Oz still is with its medical faculty. Oz is also now a special lecturer in the surgery department.

More:

Columbia Universitys Irving Medical Center maintains a page for Oz, listing an office for him at its Washington Heights campus and noting that he specializes as a board-certified cardiac and thoracic surgeon.

But as of early December, Oz was still listed as a professor of surgery and as director of the Integrative Medicine Center a department that, according to its description, would combine traditional medicine with alternative practices such as acupuncture, meditation and yoga. Its unclear what happened with that role.

I was actually surprised at how long ago this news article was published, as I thought I had become a bit of an expert on Dr. Oz and his quackery. Yet, for some reason, before the more recent reports (the other three in the list, all of which were published over the weekend), I had never heard about the change in his status at Columbia University, nor had I known that he had stopped seeing patients at least a few years ago. Indeed, it made me wonder whether the very convenient resurrection of the Huffington Post story two weeks before the May 17 Pennsylvania primary election next week was the work of one of Oz Senate rivals. Whatever the reason the story resurfaced, Ill mention again how Ive often wondered how Dr. Oz could hold those leadership positions at Columbia and host a daily hourlong syndicated TV show with an insatiable maw for new material, and still maintain competence at a surgical specialty that, even among surgical specialties, is very technically demanding. It requires regular practice to be able to stay slick and smooth sewing those little blood vessels together so that the anastomosis stays open and doesnt clot, for instance.

Its also interesting to note that if you click on the original Columbia webpage link for Dr. Oz mentioned in the HuffPo report, the page is no longer there, and the Wayback Machine at Archive.org gave me an error message searching for it. Interestingly, his former page at the Department of Surgery at Columbia returns an access denied message, but the Wayback Machine does return a version of it as late as December.

As mentioned in the article, it would make sense if Dr. Oz had been kicked up to emeritus status, as that is frequently what happens when long time faculty members retire. It allows them to keep a title, continue to have access to university email and library services, while maintaining some connection to the university for teaching or part-time research. (Indeed, I hope that when I finally retire I can become an emeritus, as one of my partners did a couple of years ago.) However, apparently the HuffPo article got that part wrong. Although a January 26 addendum to the story states that Dr. Oz became a professor emeritus and special lecturer in 2018, the story in The Daily Beast notes:

His name no longer appears in website searches for doctors with the schools Irving Medical Center. A Columbia faculty listing still says Oz has an office, along with the role of special lecturerthough not professor emeritus. But as with a handful of other names on the list, Ozs listing no longer links to his faculty page, as it did one week before he launched his campaign. (Nearly every other faculty member without a link is no longer affiliated with the medical center; one of them died last year.)

The outgoing message on Ozs voicemail for the listed number is quite dated, directing callers to medical services when Oz stopped taking patients four years ago. The message also advertises audience tickets to his now-extinct daytime TV show.

The timeline Im getting here is that four years ago Dr. Ozs position at Columbia changed. Whether he stepped down or was pushed out, apparently he no longer had a leadership position at the medical school, nor did he even (again, apparently) continue to have a position as a full professor in the department of surgery there. What truly happened in 2018 is likely known only to Columbia University administration and Dr. Oz himself. What these reports do reveal is that, whatever happened, both the university and Dr. Oz kept it on the down-low, which led to the headline of The Daily Beast story on Saturday, Chickenshit Move: Columbia Quietly Cuts Ties With Dr. Oz:

Dr. Daniel Summers, a Boston-area pediatrician and writer, called Columbias stealth purge a chickenshit move.

Their handling of his status there is a massive blot on their reputation. What a chickenshit thing to do, Summers told The Daily Beast.

Dr. Summers is not wrong, of course. It was a rather cowardly way of cutting ties with Dr. Oz after he had been there for more than three decades, during most of which he promoted his brand and quackery. However, even after that, Dr. Oz remained a presence on the Columbia website. Knowing how university websites tend to work the way that I do, I rather suspect that the usual slow (or nonexistent) process of updating Columbias website to reflect Dr. Ozs true status ran headlong into the news coverage of Dr. Ozs impending Senate campaign that began in late 2021, leading to a panicked scrubbing of the website. In other words, its unlikely that the most recent scrubbing was anything nefarious, but Dr. Summers does have a point that, if Columbia and Dr. Oz severed ties four years ago, it was rather slimy to have done it so secretly that no one really noticed until Dr. Oz decided to run for the Senate. That, of course, assumes that this severance occurred in 2018 and not a few months ago.

As bioethicist Art Caplan notes in a story from The Guardian yesterday:

The prominent medical ethicist Dr Arthur Caplan, who in 2014 accused Oz of promoting fairy dust, told the Guardian he was not surprised Columbia had quietly eliminated Oz.

They wont have a press conference in the middle of this guy running for the Senate saying they were throwing him out it could be seen as trying to influence an election, it could be risking bad blood should he become a senator, said Caplan, professor and founding head of the Grossman School of Medicine Division of Medical Ethics at New York University.

My question becomes, What took so long? Hes been a huge danger to public health in the US and around the world for a long time with respect to quack cures for Covid and touting quackery to treat diseases.

I was among the voices saying he had to be removed years ago. And I still think its the right thing to do because he really has forfeited credibility as a doctor. Whether that will matter in terms of the election, we shall see.

I think it should, I doubt it will.

All of this is true but assumes that this severance occurred a few months ago, when Dr. Oz first decided to run for the Senate. If it happened in 2018 and the Columbia website just never reflected it until now, then the reasons mentioned by Dr. Caplan dont apply. Whatever happened, though, I think its useful to relate Dr. Ozs history at Columbia and wonder why Columbia defended him and maintained him in multiple leadership positions at its medical school for so long. I also cant help but briefly relate an incident very much like what Dr. Caplan described from years ago when a group of doctors did try to shame Columbia into doing something about Dr. Oz, an effort that backfired spectacularly.

As I said at the beginning of this post, Ive long been extremely critical of Dr. Oz, even having coined the term Americas Quack to describe him, an obvious riff on Oprahs name for him, Americas Doctor. Of course, Dr. Oz didnt catch Oprahs eye for just being a rising star in academic surgery in the 1990s. Rather, long before Oprah ever noticed him, Dr. Oz had made a name for himself by embracing pseudoscience and mysticism in the form of reiki. However, his embrace of pseudoscience goes back to long before even the 1990s, back to his childhood, as related by Julia Belluz at Vox in 2015, in which she noted the disconnect between his promising start and what he had become:

Oz has achieved some of the greatest scientific accomplishments of his career at Columbia. While a resident there, he was the four-time winner of the prestigious Blakemore research prize, which goes to the most outstanding surgery resident. He now holds 11 patents for inventing methods and devices involved in heart surgeries and transplants. This includes helping to research and develop the left ventricular assist device, or LVAD, which helps keep people alive while theyre awaiting a heart transplant. Oz had a hand in turning the hospitals LVAD program into one of the biggest and most active in the world.

Dr. Oz has been a rare beast on one respect. Its pretty uncommon these days for an academic physician or surgeon to spend his entire career after medical school at one institution, but thats what Dr. Oz appears to have done, starting with his residency, after which he became junior faculty and made his way up the academic ranks. Whatever the shape of his career, I always imagine what could have been if Dr. Oz had not been seduced by the siren call of quackery. Can you imagine the scientific and surgical accomplishments that he might have made in an alternate timeline in which, instead of embracing reiki and then other forms of nonsense, he had stuck to science-based medicine and research? Unfortunately, though, as Belluz notes, the roots of Ozs experimentation with alternative techniques go all the way back to his childhood, and that his departures from evidence-based medicine have gotten more extreme as hes become more famous. Although he had had exposure to quackery as a child in Turkey, his turn to the dark side appears to have really accelerated after he met his wife:

There was another influence, too. While he was studying for his medical degree and MBA at the University of Pennsylvania, Oz met his wife, the actress Lisa (then Lemole). Lisas dad was also a cardiothoracic surgeon who embraced alternative medicine and Eastern mysticism, and, according to a profile in the New York Times, her mother believed fervently in homeopathy.

In 1994, Oz launched the Cardiac Complementary Care Center at Columbia-Presbyterian with a certified perfusionist and registered nurse, Jery Whitworth. The center, one of the first of its kind in the nation, was created, in part, as a response to consumer demand for comprehensive care, Oz and Whitworth wrote in a 1998 scholarly article.

I also note that Lisa Oz herself became a reiki master, and later in the 1990s:

They also used audiotapes to try to subconsciously relax patients before surgery and brought reiki or energy medicine into the operating room. Reiki, an ancient Japanese healing art, has never been shown in scientific studies to alter the outcomes of patients. One high-quality study on the effect of reiki on pain in women after C-sections showed that it had no effect. Science-based thinkers have wondered whether its ethical to continue studying reiki, given that we know it works no better than a placebo and we may be diverting funds from treatments that could actually help people.

Ozs work with the center drew critics. One Mount Sinai physician told the New York Times in 1995: I call practitioners of fraud practitioners of fraud. Its my feeling that the [center] has been promoting fraudulent alternatives as genuine.

I cant help but note that Belluz cited an article by Steve Novella and me that questioned whether clinical trials of magic (like reiki and homeopathy) could ever be ethical. (Spoiler alert: We concluded that the answer wasand isno.) I also cant help but note that the problem of academic medical centers legitimizing quackery under the guise of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) or integrative medicine is nowhere near unique to Columbia, although Columbias integrative medicine center under Dr. Ozs leadership was one of the pioneers (if you can call it that) of integrating quackery into medicine. Just look at the examples of the Cleveland Clinic, UC-Irvine, UCSF, Georgetown, the University of Michigan, and many others, if you dont believe me. Dr. Oz, unfortunately, is merely the most famous example (among the general public, at least) of physicians integrating mysticism, pseudoscience, quackery, and just plain grift into medicine.

In any event, instead of Dr. Oz continuing his research prowess to provide actual advancements in cardiothoracic surgery and cardiology, instead we got the huckster Oz, Americas Quack. But why? Michael Specter once noted in 2013, quoting Dr. Oz:

I would take us all back a thousand years, when our ancestors lived in small villages and there was always a healer in that villageand his job wasnt to give you heart surgery or medication but to help find a safe place for conversation.

Oz went on, Western medicine has a firm belief that studying human beings is like studying bacteria in petri dishes. Doctors do not want questions from their patients; its easier to tell them what to do than to listen to what they say. But people are on a serpentine path through life, and that is the way it is supposed to be. All I am trying to do is put a couple of road signs out there. I sit on that set every day, and that is what I am focussing on. The road signs.

As Ive long noted since I read that article, back when our ancestors lived in small villages, medicine consisted of shamans, priests, and magicians who couldnt actually do much for anything other than relatively minor physical injuries, for which they could bind up wounds, sew up lacerations, and splint fractures. Then, they could do little or nothing to treat serious infections and other diseases. If people got better, it was usually because the disease was self-limited or the victims were fortunate. Oz also appears to buy into the false dichotomy that drives me crazy whenever I hear it: Namely that in order to be a good holistic doctor, you have to embrace the quackery that is much of what is now referred to as CAM or integrative medicine. My retort is always that you dont have to become a quack to be holistic. I also question Ozs romantic view of these healers. It sounds all too much like the noble savage myth, a case of Oz falling for romantic primitivism, which he seems to want to fuse with modern medicine.

If you want to know why Dr. Oz promotes so much quackery, Ill refer back to Specter, who explained it by letting Dr. Oz speak for himself and asking Oz how he can feature on his show people like Joe Mercola, who are anathema to science and promote pure quackery. This passage is what I view as the central exchange in Specters entire article, as to me it revealed exactly why Dr. Oz has been the way he is and why he promotes the quackery he promotes:

Im usually earnestly honest and modest about what I think weve accomplished, Oz told me when we discussed his choice of guests. If I dont have Mercola on my show, I have thrown away the biggest opportunity that I have been given.

I had no idea what he meant. How was it Ozs biggest opportunity to introduce a guest who explicitly rejects the tenets of science? The fact that I am a professorone of the youngest professors everat Columbia, and that I earned my stripes writing hundreds of papers in peer-reviewed journals, Oz began. I know the system. Ive been on those panels. Im one of those guys who could talk about Mercola and not lose everybody. And so if I dont talk to him I have abdicated my responsibility, because the currency that I deal in is trust, and it is trust that has been given to me by Oprah and by Columbia University, and by an audience that has watched over six hundred shows.

I was still puzzled. Either data works or it doesnt, I said. Science is supposed to answer, or at least address, those questions. Surely you dont think that all information is created equal?

Oz sighed. Medicine is a very religious experience, he said. I have my religion and you have yours. It becomes difficult for us to agree on what we think works, since so much of it is in the eye of the beholder. Data is rarely clean. All facts come with a point of view. But his spin on itthat one can simply choose those which make sense, rather than data that happen to be truewas chilling. You find the arguments that support your data, he said, and its my fact versus your fact.

The problem, of course, is that Mercola was overjoyed to be on The Dr. Oz Show, recognizing it correctly as a great opportunity to promote his brand. Did Dr. Oz point out all the quackery that Mercola promotes? (I think you know the answer to that one.) Worse, its clear that Dr. Oz bought into what has become known as the post-truth narrative, in which science is just another way of knowing, another religion so to speakbefore the term post-truth was coined. Sadly, it was all of a piece with Ozs other stated desires in the article, namely to have healers the way we used to hundreds or thousands of years ago. Many of those healers were shamans or priests, and much of what they did was little more than placebo medicine and faith healing. So for Dr. Oz to pine for a return to that time made perfect sense in the context of his other activities. Of course, Im sure that Dr. Oz has always imagined that he will integrate those ancient healing practices with modern medicine. Thats what integrative medicine is, after all.

Its long been clear that Dr. Oz is a huckster, dedicated to being a showman more than he was ever dedicated to scienceor even being a shaman-healer. Thats why one consistent thread throughout Dr. Ozs career going back 30 years (at least) is his uncanny ability to promote his brand while defending it quite effectively from attack. Julia Belluz noted that in her article:

Monique Class, a family nurse practitioner and another former employee of the center, said the media attention negatively affected their work. It became about Oz. Not about the project. Not about the patients. Not about the work. That all became secondary to his rise to the top.

It wasnt uncommon, Class said, for Oz to say some version of the following to her or to the other employees: Give me a patient because the cameras are coming in, and tell me what I need to know.

Class said, He was always acting. He didnt know this patient. He was not connected to this patient. Wed give him a two- or three-minute sound bite and hed sit there in front of the cameras like hed done this work and had this deep connection.

Which is actually exactly the opposite of what shaman-healers did and also an indication that its not about the patients but rather about Dr. Oz and his brand. Shamans actually tried to form attachments to their patients based on their long history of living in the same villages and communities, of which patients and shamans were both part. In contrast, Dr. Oz has long used his patients as steppingstones to become famous, which he justified to Michael Specter thusly:

One day, I asked Oz whether he minded that many of his medical peers criticized him for following the dictates of daytime television more than the demands of scientific truth. I have always played offense, he responded. So I dont care what people call me. I used to. I felt that to say I was an entertainer was dismissive. But it is part of what I have to do. I want to get my message across to people who are not going to get it in other ways. And I cant do that if I am not palatable to the people who watch the show.

Im sure he tells himself the same thing about his decision to become a carpetbagger from New Jersey running for Senate in Pennsylvania, just as he did when he invited Donald Trump to appear on his show before the 2016 election. Im equally sure that he told himself the same thing back when he started promoting hydroxychloroquine and other unproven treatments for COVID-19 two years ago, when the pandemic was new.

The perfect example of Dr. Ozs uncanny ability to defend his brand occurred in 2015, when a group of ten doctors led by Dr. Henry Miller wrote a letter to the Dean of the Faculties of Health Sciences and Medicine at Columbia University arguing that Dr. Mehmet Oz shouldnt be on the faculty at Columbia University because of his disdain for science and for evidence-based medicine, as well as baseless and relentless opposition to the genetic engineering of food crops and an egregious lack of integrity by promoting quack treatments and cures in the interest of personal financial gain. The letter produced a fair amount of media attention at the time, but I predicted that it would backfire for a simple reason, which Ill briefly explain now.

Of the ten signatories, two were from the Hoover Institution, a conservative think tank based at Stanford University whose fellows tend to be climate change denialists. In other words, its an institution whose commitment to science is highly questionable to nonexistent in one area, and its attacking Oz for pseudoscience? Two others are affiliated with the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), a group that is pro-science when that science aligns with industry interests, particularly the pesticide industry. ACSHs late president Elizabeth Whelan was known for dismissing any concerns about various chemicals as potential health hazards as chemophobia and even referring to chemophobia as an emotional, psychiatric problem, which is not very skeptical at all. Indeed, as Ive mentioned before, a few years ago, when ACSH invited me to be on its board of advisors, I turned it down because I perceive ACSH as going too far in the other direction (not to mention the problem of its behaving largely like an industry shill) to the point that it takes the germ of a reasonable idea (that theres too much fear mongering about chemicals) and takes a despicable turn with it by implicitly likening concerns about chemical pollutants and other chemicals that might cause health problems to mental illness by labeling them chemophobia. More recently, ACSH demolished whatever credibility it might have had as being about science more than politics when a week after President Trumps inauguration ACSH President Hank Campbell published an article on its website heartily endorsing Trumps picks for key science and medical posts. (I note that the article is no longer there, producing an Error 503 message of This article is temporarily unavailable. Please check back in a few days, but thankfully the almighty Wayback Machine at Archive.org has preserved it.)

I bet you can see where this went. Dr. Oz is nothing if not masterful at propaganda. He struck back on his show, sighing heavily about ten mysterious doctors with industry ties to for trying to shut him up because he criticized genetically modified organisms (GMOs), before predictably attacking the ACSH using predictable lines of attack, many summarized in a TIME interview with Dr. Oz that was so pro-Oz that I thought someone from his staff had written it:

With a few clicks and some simple searches, a remarkable web of intrigue emergedone that the mainstream media has completely missed. The lead author, Henry I. Miller, appears to have a history as a pro-biotech scientist, and was mentioned in early tobacco-industry litigation as a potential ally to industry. He also furthered the battle in California to block GMO labelinga cause that I have been vocal about supporting. Another of the letter signees, Gilbert Ross, was found guilty after trial of 13 counts of fraud related to Medicaid. He is now executive director of American Council on Science and Health, a group that has reportedly received donations from big tobacco and food and agribusiness companies, among others. Another four of the 10 authors are also linked to this organization.

The attacks were particularly devastating, as cheesy as they were on his show, because they were mostly true. ACSH is basically an astroturf organization that represents industry interests, particularly for the food and pesticide industries. Its stances on vaccines, alternative medicine, and GMOs do align largely with those of SBM, but also largely for the wrong reasons (particularly GMOs and pesticides). Basically, the stunt resulted in a lot of attention from the press on ACSHs more unsavory elements and history, to the point that even Ross himself regretted signing the document, saying in an interview:

Given the mistake I made more than 20 years ago, I now recognize that I should not have added my name to (the) letter, Dr Ross is quoted as saying. Even though I believed in the letters content to focus attention on the often-questionable medical advice Dr Oz dispenses on TV I see that by doing so it only opened me up to personal criticism. It also diverted necessary attention away from challenging many of Dr Ozs unscientific claims. My involvement was solely based on trying to protect Americas public health.

Ya think?

I also cant help but note that one of the signatories of the article is someone whos become rather famous since the pandemic hit, Dr. Scott Atlas, the neuroradiologist with no expertise in infectious disease, epidemiology, or public health and was associated with the conservative Hoover Institution think tank who headed up President Trumps coronavirus task force in 2020. He was known for advocating for fewer interventions to slow the spread of the virus, consistent with his admiration for the Great Barrington Declaration and its let COVID rip strategy to achieve natural herd immunity.

Currently, the polls that Ive seen show the contest for the GOP nomination for Pennsylvania Senate to be close, with some polls showing Oz leading and others showing him behind, but none by that much and the overall trend being that Dr. Oz is slightly behind. Its still possible that Oz could win the primary.

Still, if politics is the reason that Columbia finally severed ties with Dr. Oz (or at least led them to finally fire him from his leadership positions), all I can say is that its sad that it took politics, rather than Dr. Ozs long promotion of quackery and pseudoscience to motivate the administration there to do the right thing, something that should have been done at least a decade ago. Unfortunately, if Dr. Oz overcomes the odds and becomes the next Senator from Pennsylvania, hell be more powerful than hes ever been and able to influence health care policy in a major way. Even if he loses (as I suspect that he will), Id be willing to bet that it wont be long before he resurfaces to quack again.

Go here to see the original:

Columbia University finally cuts ties with America's Quack Dr. Oz - Science Based Medicine