Last modified: Wednesday, January 21, 2004
Other side of unapproved drugs needs to be
presented to public
Editor:
The authors of Pig Pills, Inc., The Anatomy of an Academic
and Alternative Health Fraud, are grateful for the opportunity to respond
to the latest in the series of articles in the Lethbridge Herald about
Truehope and their marketing efforts.
Over the years, The Herald has done its best to present
the distributors of unapproved drugs as local heroes. In our opinion, this
support for Truehope has interfered with objective reporting. In the
recent article of Jan. 11, the reporter portrayed us inaccurately and
presented opinion as fact. Your readers deserve more accuracy.
We strongly object to the statement that we have received
money from the drug industry to support a campaign against Truehope. The
reporter is twisting the truth. Mr. Ross is a member of Schizophrenia
Society of Ontario and, as such, was invited to speak in Ottawa at a
public meeting, as well as to the medical staff at two hospitals. The
Ottawa chapter reimbursed him for his airfare, lodging, and meals. He
received no payment for his lectures. Dr. Polevoy and Mr. Reinhold have
received nothing. We do not believe this constitutes being "openly
sponsored by pharmaceutical firms," and we reject the insinuation that our
opposition to Truehope is motivated by alleged support from the
pharmaceutical industry. It is not. We object to Truehope's activities and
the research at Calgary because they violate ethical and scientific
guidelines and Canadian law, and because they deceive and endanger
Canadians.
Since 1997 Tony Stephan and David Hardy, two local
businessmen, have distributed various products as a treatment, if not an
outright "miracle cure" for serious medical problems. Their theories and
claims are unproven, and their drug products, varying in name and formula
over time, (Synergy Quad Program, E.M. Power+, Empower+, Empowerplus),
cannot be legally distributed for research or treatment in Canada. Last
summer, Health Canada classified Empowerplus as a health
hazard.
The Herald reporter decries the action taken by Health
Canada to stop research at the University of Calgary, but doesn't seem to
have wondered why they did so. Every civilized country has stringent
ethical guidelines and regulations to protect vulnerable patients from
unethical research. The principles of respect for persons, beneficence and
justice demand (among other things) that human experiments be
scientifically valid, that risks and benefits be proportional, and that
the subjects in the research give voluntary informed consent to
participate. In many instances these conditions were not fulfilled, and we
find this objectionable.
The U.S. Office for Human Research Protection (OHRP)
investigated research with EMP at the University of Utah and concluded
that concerns about the safety of EMP and the risk to the subjects
outweighed any potential benefits either to the subjects or society. OHRP
also concluded that informed consent was inadequate and the studies were
conducted even after the university refused to approve them. (Aug. 19,
2002).
Significant adverse events have been reported with the use
of Truehope's products. Two people were hospitalized during the open label
study on subjects with bipolar disorder; Health Canada disclosed one
significant adverse event requiring medical intervention was reported to
the CADRMP (Canadian Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring Program), and noted
the hospitalization of a child in other correspondence; the SSO received a
report that a young man attempted suicide, and yet another young man
became so unstable he was hospitalized involuntarily and had criminal
charges laid against him. To make matters worse, since the Truehope
products are manufactured in the U.S., there is no guarantee the label
accurately represents the ingredients.
The reporter ignores these problems and writes, "positive
results from research are piling up for an entire range of illnesses," and
that some studies "have even been stopped early, the results are so
dramatic." It is unclear on what basis she has concluded this, and she
fails to mention that Truehope isn't selling what was used in the Calgary
research. While the reporter is free to disagree with ethical and
scientific guidelines for research on humans and Health Canada's attempts
to enforce them, she is not free to pretend they don't exist, or are
unimportant.
MARVIN ROSS, RON REINHOLD AND DR. TERRY
POLEVOY
Dundas, Ont.
Positive nativity brings out
Pharisees
Editor:
Re: LDS presentation (which was not an attempt, it was a
success).
Wow! The Lethbridge Herald printed a letter by someone who
is anti the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There's a
novelty.
Actually, I would like to thank Ian Martens and the staff
at The Herald for their wonderful coverage of the LDS nativity pageant. My
family and I had the opportunity to be a part of it and The Herald has
left us with some great memories. It really added to our Christmas and
allowed for us to feel of the Spirit during this special time.
However, no matter what service we render to the
community, it appears all the modern-day Pharisees and hypocrites come out
to play. They strain at gnats and swallow camels (you'll find that in the
Bible), play with words, feed babies steak before milk and all that other
ungodly stuff. I guess there is a lot to say about "opposition is evidence
of truth in motion." (unknown)
Again, thank you to The Herald for great memories and to
the Petersons, please "attempt" to have a happy new year.
STUART K. SOPAL
Lethbridge
Letter writers should get all the
facts
Editor:
In reply to Reg and Eve Peterson's comments about the
Mormon beliefs of the Conception and their misguided information regarding
the birth of the Saviour and the supposed conception and the presentation
of the pageant (held annually in thousands of cities throughout the
world), first things firstly: The Petersons obviously are not members of
the Mormon faith. They are apostates, having been
excommunicated.
Secondly, people in this category are always trying to
justify their fiction with so-called facts. They take one or two
scriptures for their justification. Read on: John 1:14, Jesus Christ was
the ONLY SON BEGOTTEN BY THE FATHER. The scriptures the Petersons refer to
mean that the Virgin Mary was shrouded or protected by the Holy Ghost,
while, however it happened, it was by the Father. NOT THE HOLY
GHOST.
They quote Bruce R. McConkie; I have most of his writings
and they all state that Jesus the Christ was begotten by the Father. Jesus
the Chris, a well-respected book written by James E. Talmage, gives a very
clear account that Jesus the Christ was THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF THE
FATHER. The Petersons should get all of the facts.
CASPER MEYER
Lethbridge