Editorial
Welcome to the first homepage edition of i2P for 2012.
In many ways it has been a slow start to the New Year because of having to deal with the “leftovers” from 2011.
One of those items for i2P was that a third-party provider to the site did not advise of a code change to the security section in our subscribe panel, creating a range of frustrated subscribers not able to get on board.
We apologise to all those potential subscribers who were unable to register with us in the second half of 2011, but if you try once more you should have no problem.
Columns
Rollo Manning: Pharma-Goss
Linda Bryant: Inside NZ
Barry Urquhart: Marketing Focus
Mark Neuenschwander: I`ve been thinking about...Recent Comments
Past Editions
Volume 1 Number 1
Volume 1 Number 2
Volume 1 Number 3
Volume 1 Number 4
Volume 1 Number 5
Volume 1 Number 6
Volume 1 Number 7
Volume 2 Number 1
Volume 2 Number 2
Volume 2 Number 3
Volume 2 Number 4
Volume 2 Number 5
Volume 2 Number 6
Volume 2 Number 7
Volume 2 Number 8
Volume 2 Number 9
Volume 2 Number 10
Volume 2 Number 11
Volume 3 Number 1
Volume 3 Number 2
Volume 3 Number 3
Volume 3 Number 4
Volume 3 Number 5
Volume 3 Number 6
Volume 3 Number 7
Volume 3 Number 8
Volume 3 Number 9
Volume 3 Number 10
Volume 3 Number 11
Volume 2012 Number 1
Health Politics
Neil Johnston: Friends of Science in Medicine
Peter Sayers: Confessions of a Frustrated Pharmacist
James Ellerson: $75.5 million in 5CPA lying idle. Why is it so?EPublications
New Legislation – too little, too late?
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version | Loretta Marron BSc |
From a Skeptics Perspective: Loretta Marron, a science graduate with a business background, was Australian Skeptic of the Year for 2007 and in 2011. | |
Estimated at over $3 billion, alternative health is now a top ten growth industry in Australia. Located in our communities, and even in some of our pharmacies, many alternative practitioners are now using unproven medical devices as part of patient consultations. However, when these devices are tested, many are failing to provide the benefits claimed.
Are these alternative practitioners willing accomplices or unfortunate victims of aggressive marketeers? And do the pharmacy owners who hire them really care?
To encourage investments that may exceed $30,000, marketeers provide detailed financing plans to practitioners that explain how to quickly amortize costs, secure future profits and to grow their business, with suggestions of projected annual incomes of over $100,000.
Capitalizing on patient trust and our unquestioning acceptance of technology, particularly when located in pharmacies, these pseudo hi-tech devices take pride of place in hundreds of natural therapy clinics.
Health World Pty Ltd , for example, is “a market leader and one of the most trusted suppliers of Natural Medicines” with complementary medicine (CM) brands that includes Inner Health and Ethical Nutrients. Metagenics is their ‘practitioner only’ products division and it also sells and trains practitioners in their own range of medical devices.
Google ‘Hemaview’ and you will get over 20,000 hits.
Consisting of a microscope, monitor and software, this $8,000+ device is used by hundreds of alternative practitioners and in some pharmacies.
Used to magnify blood cells, Metagenics claim it can diagnose everything from nutritional deficiencies to organ dysfunctions.
The system also generates lists of CM’s that are recommended for patients to purchase.
According to clinical haematologist, Professor Hatem Salem:
“The equipment has no scientific validity whatsoever and the notion that one can diagnose all sorts of ailments by examining a drop of blood on a video screen is both ridiculous and plain stupid”.
At around 50,000 Google hits, Metagenics also sell Urinary Indican Test and ZincTally tests that they claim can identify nutritional deficiencies and which also lead to the recommendation of more CM’s. Metagenics claim that their Urinary Indican test can diagnose ‘Leaky Gut’. However, according to medical experts:
“The whole notion of ‘leaky gut’ etc is without sound scientific basis”.
The Zinc Tally is meant to provide a “quick and reliable clinical test” in “assessing the status of zinc”. However, Zinc deficiency “is difficult to measure adequately using laboratory tests”.
Senior pathologists and medical experts have commented in private letters to me that the health conditions referred to are:
“grossly distorted/misused by naturopaths & others”, “the benefits of these tests are hugely overstated and there is little evidence that specific diagnosis can be made” and that they are “used to get money out of individuals who are naive and believe in alternative therapy”.
After years of campaigning, the days of unproven ‘in vitro’ devices may soon be over.
New legislation was introduced on 1 July 2010 that now requires these devices to have Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) approval.
If they are already supplied here, sponsors have 4 years to comply with this legislation.
There are, however, many questionable diagnostic devices that remain outside the scope of this legislation and marketeers will undoubtedly continue to promote them to naive practitioners.
There are, for example, ranges of electricity generating devices. Sometimes called bioimpedance (BIA), biofeedback or TENS, these types of devices have been used since the mid 19th century and have continuously been promoted for a wide range of health conditions including pain relief.
Metagenics versions of these are the BIA and Frequency Specific Microcurrent (FSM) devices, and these are also used to recommend CM’s.
In advanced courses practitioners learn how to use them to diagnose “immune, energy and digestive complaints” and to identify fat shrinkage, hydration and cellular health.
According to obesity expert, Professor Lesley Campbell, any claim that they can monitor hydration,
“toxicity, inflammation, malnutrition and poor cellular function is unscientific, unfounded” and “mumbo jumbo”.
To “clarify what constitutes unprofessional conduct” for medical goods used by their members, in 2006 the Australian Traditional Medicine Society (ATMS) introduced a Code of Conduct (3.12) that states:
“medical devices used by the practitioner must be in accordance with therapeutic goods law”.
This code does not apply to the majority of practitioners who are members of other societies or who have no affiliations.
The Sponsors of many nonsense ‘in vitro’ devices still have many years before they need to apply for a TGA listing, which may require them to provide evidence to support their claims, so they, and the practitioners who promote these devices, will undoubtedly use this period to continue to target vulnerable patients.
While improvements in legislation and professional conduct codes may eventually protect consumers from the considerable waste of money they pay as a result of these disproven diagnostics, if alternative therapists, and the pharmacy owners who hire them, really care about our well-being, perhaps they should use only TGA approved products that genuinely provide the benefits claimed.
Return to homeResearch Reports
Dr Andrew Byrne & Associates: Tranquillizer use rife amongst OTP subjects world-wide, most legally prescribedPractice Development
Neil Retallick: Are the discounters impacting community pharmacy beyond margin erosion? | open full screen
Kay Dunkley - BPharm, Grad Dip Hosp Pharm, Grad Dip Health Admin, MPS, MSHPA: Support services for pharmacists and doctors in the United Kingdom – Part 3 Royal Medical Benevolent Fund | open full screen
Staff Writer: Catch the early wave in 2012 and secure your valuable CPD Credits at the Guild Pharmacy Academy – NSW Convention | open full screen
Information Technology
Dr David More: Australian Health Information Technology LinksIndigenous Health
Preventive Medicine
Gerald Quigley: It’s Time!If any difficulty is found in subscribing, please use the "Contact Us" panel found in the navigation bar with the message "subscribe" and your email address.
Submitted by Carrie Merchant on Fri, 12/08/2011 - 15:51.
This article demonstrates pure ignorance and is very misleading. Metagenics is entirely TGA complaint and scientifically validated. The author of this article should get her blood looked at, she may be surprised at what she finds!
Submitted by Christian O'Grady on Thu, 10/03/2011 - 20:23.
"According to medical experts:
“The whole notion of ‘leaky gut’ etc is without sound scientific basis”.
Medical experts hey?
Quick search on pub med.. Too 2 minutes.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18063928
So apparently GI mucosal hyperpermiability is not a medical condiiton.
10 years time wait and see what is said..
Submitted by Mary Hammond on Sat, 04/09/2010 - 22:10.
I am, like yourself, a cancer survivor and scientist with a PHD in research of aging and degenerative illnesses. As such, my respected peers, regard science as a researcg tool, not a health solution. Unless you can come up with some answers for your biased claims concerning alternative medicine versus mainstream treatments for wellness, it may be interpreted by our fraternity that your claims are subjective and thus raise the question of bias, the latter intention being a question of possible prejudice and intent for malipulation of natural justice
Submitted by Peter Kennedy on Mon, 13/09/2010 - 14:11.
The only reason that a treatment is "alternative" is that it is not proven. If and when any "alternative" treatment is ever proven, it becomes a "mainstream" treatment because rational practitioners begin using it. (And conversely sometimes if and when a "mainstream" treatment is DISproven, some irrational practitioners then take it up and it becomes an "alternative" treatment. ) There is no question of "bias", "prejudice" or "manipulation of natural justice". Loretta is proposing that all substances and treatments for which a therapeutic benefit is claimed should be subject to the same approach on a level playing field, instead of the current legal and professional situation which is outrageously loaded in favour of so-called "alternative" treatments. Of course treatments which have not been proven to work are no real alternative at all.
Submitted by Chris Wright on Wed, 04/08/2010 - 14:36.
Whilst I agree with your views on these somewhat shonky 'alternative' treatments I'm at a loss to understand your failure to recognise acupuncture, given that it is an approved TGA treatment and is bulk-billed under Medicare.
After all, you correctly state;
“medical devices used by the practitioner must be in accordance with therapeutic goods law”.
Submitted by Peter Kennedy on Tue, 10/08/2010 - 12:27.
Chris, where did you get the idea that acupuncture is an approved TGA treatment? The fact that a medical device is included on the ARTG does not mean that the TGA approves its use as a treatment for any disease. Nor that there is any evidence of its efficacy.
Post new comment