Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Heart Attacks, Cancer and strokes. Preventative approaches -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jrhana who wrote (1384)	9/26/2008 5:41:07 PM
From: jrhana	Respond to of 39297

In thinking about Dr. Davis, I find I really don't like his political views, but as far as his medicine goes I think he is right on. Some of his supplements may not have been proven up yet, but at least his basic plan is clearly on the money. I am sure he is helping a lot of people: In contrast <TACT: A controversial study called wasteful, pointless, and dangerous a peer-reviewed article appearing May 13, 2008 in the Medscape Journal of Medicine [2], Dr Kimball Atwood (Newton-Wellesley Hospital, MA) and colleagues wrote: "The TACT is pointless, dangerous, unethical, and a waste of public funds. It should be stopped immediately and permanently, and its origin and nature subjected to an independent, comprehensive inquiry." In the article, Atwood, who is an associate editor of the Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine, writes that chelation poses risks for patients and that the evidence against its use should disqualify it from further clinical trials. Atwood said the trial exists only because political pressure willed it into existence. The review goes on to state that the application for the trial misrepresented previous data and concealed evidence of risks, as well as lacked precautions to minimize that risk. The consent form, according to Atwood et al, reflects these shortcomings. Moreover, they say, the trial is flawed because the consent form fails to disclose financial information—particularly, that some investigators profit from chelation therapy. "There is little basis for predicting that the TACT will yield a reliable or definitive result and even less for predicting a favorable effect on clinical practice," according to Atwood and colleagues. "Numerous coinvestigators are unfit to care for subjects in a human trial or to submit trustworthy information to the NIH."> Dr. Davis could be making a lot more money with less work by setting up a chelation clinic, but he clealy wants to actually help his patients.