Like it? Share it!

NGB-DONATE-DOWNLOAD

TAM2013-VERTICAL-BANNER-1

Sign up for news and updates!






Enter word seen below
Visually impaired? Click here to have an audio challenge played.  You will then need to enter the code that is spelled out.
Change image

CAPTCHA image
Please leave this field empty

Login Form



HealthMonitor Magazine Touts Quackery PDF Print E-mail
Swift
Written by James Randi   

Being curious about most literature dealing with cancer, I picked up a copy of a 36-page Guide to Chemotherapy at my oncologist’s office, since “chemo” is a process through which I passed recently, with such great success. It’s published by the Health Monitor Network, whose lawyers are careful to state that the publication

…is not intended to provide advice on personal medical matters, or to substitute for consultation with a physician.

I’ve been concerned with the fact that most literature I’ve picked up dealing with chemotherapy side-effects manage to drop in polite references to acupuncture, suggesting that patients ask their doctors whether this centuries-old nonsense might help them. This is obviously in “PC” deference to those who might also want to embrace useless woo-woo treatments. But though the first 27 pages of the Guide were free of woo-woo, pages 28 to 32 were “20 tips for thriving during treatment,” and suggestion #15 was “Try something new,” and related that the Montefiore Einstein Center for Cancer Care in New York City encourages their patients to

…try activities such as crocheting, scrapbooking, tai chi, Reiki, and even a drum circle.

Crocheting and scrapbook work fails to captivate me, tai chi can be interesting and probably therapeutic, and I’ll pass up the drum circle, being bereft of any sense of rhythm, but I recognize another form of nonsense when I see it. Now, “reiki” is a relatively new form of quackery, only having been dreamed up in 1922. It claims to use something called “palm healing,” and practitioners apparently believe that they’re “transferring universal energy” (reiki) in the form of “ki” through the process of waving their hands and thereby bringing about “self-healing and a state of equilibrium.” It’s a sort of dance with hand motions. The Westernized version uses systematized gestures, while the original, even nuttier form, “relies on an intuitive sense for proper hand patterns.” Sure.

A 2008 systematic scientific review of randomized clinical trials of reiki concluded that

…the evidence is insufficient to suggest that reiki is an effective treatment for any condition. The concept of ki underlying Reiki is speculative and there is no scientific evidence that it exists.

Both the American Cancer Society [ACS] and the National Center for Complimentary and Alternative Medicine [NCCAM] have also investigated this notion, and found that there exists no clinical or scientific evidence supporting claims that reiki is effective in the treatment of any illness, or that it has any benefits beyond possible placebo effects. Though proper placebo trials of reiki are complicated by design difficulties due to “blinding” requirements, trials conducted with adequate placebo or sham controls have shown no difference between the procedure-treated and the control groups. Even a 2009 review in The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine found that

…the serious methodological and reporting limitations of limited existing Reiki studies preclude a definitive conclusion on its effectiveness.

The ACS notes that the research surrounding Reiki has been poorly conducted, and states:

Available scientific evidence at this time does not support claims that Reiki can help treat cancer or any other illness*. More study may help determine to what extent, if at all, it can improve a patient's sense of well-being. [*my italics]

In other words, reiki does not work. It’s a sham, a silly song-and-dance routine that medical doctors like Mehmet Oz – he of The Doctor Oz Show, a TV program given to him by Oprah Winfrey – readily accept.  However, Dr. Oz may be swayed by the fact that his wife is a “reiki master,” and he regularly offers his viewers a variety of woo-woo ideas in spite of the hard fact that he’s a highly-ranked cardiac surgeon and very respected in that line of work.

I found my way through the six months of infusions of my chemo session by relating to other patients who were going through the same duress and talking them through difficult times and situations, a procedure that I think helped me as much as it did them. I submitted to the systematic poisoning to a point just short of checking out, but had the great satisfaction of knowing that the cancer cells “went” while I didn’t, which is the desired result. Reiki, acupuncture, and other forms of quackery were not involved, and for this “Guide” and the Healthmonitor to suggest their embrace, is irresponsible, in my view. Cancer can be beaten, but quackery only creates false security and an expensive “alternative” to reality…
Trackback(0)
Comments (9)Add Comment
Silly? Yes, but..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by LovleAnjel, November 21, 2011
"20 tips for thriving during treatment…try activities such as crocheting, scrapbooking, tai chi, Reiki, and even a drum circle."

This seems to fall under the category of "take up a hobby and don't dwell on the ball of death growing in your spleen" rather than suggestions for actual useful treatment (Reiki doesn't belong, unless they want you to start doing it to others to pass the time). In any case, you'd have to follow the chemo with a hippiectomy.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +7
Quackery is a failure of thinking
written by tlsimpson, November 21, 2011
As a physician, I am obligated to not lie to my patients. In fact, in the State of Arizona, if I lie to a patient I could be disciplined by the Medical Board. This is an ethical issue for physicians - simply put, having treatment that has no effective basis, and promoting that treatment - is a lie.
While Dr. Oz can enjoy his moment in the sun - years from now he will be looked at the same way we look at physicians who use to treat pneumonia with bleeding (killed George Washington), used mercury for sepsis (didn't cause autism in those folks), and other quackery.
We do not know enough about cancer to afford to have some placebo effect. Did you ever notice there is not a placebo effect where we can measure things? I never saw someone in a car accident with a ruptured spleen want acupuncture instead of anesthesia. We cannot afford to mix up real study of patients with some goof-ball idea that has no place in modern medicine.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +36
@LovleAnjel
written by sibtrag, November 21, 2011
I agree. The keywords for me are "try something new" and "during your treatment". So the suggestion is to do something else in addition to the treatment.

Two common chemotherapy side-effects are pain and depression. Any of the things listed (as well as other complementary therapies such as aromatherapy, music therapy, massage and even acupuncture can provide a simple distraction that can distract from the pain and lessen the chance of depression.

From what you say, you found that an informal support group served that function for you and for others.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Willy K, November 21, 2011
…try activities such as crocheting, scrapbooking, tai chi, Reiki, and even a drum circle.

Maybe they could add "read James Randi's Swift Blog to find out how to survive chemotherapy and learn that knowing the difference between Woo and Reality will help you."
OR
"If an 83 year old curmudgeon can survive chemo without the nonsense of CAM so can you!" smilies/wink.gif
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +13
...
written by salerio, November 21, 2011
> I’ll pass up the drum circle, being bereft of any sense of rhythm

I would take full advantage to get revenge on the kids
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
@Gus Gus
written by popsaw, November 22, 2011
"It appears to me that it was offered as possible ways for the patients to cope with the conventional treatments. Whatever works for particular individuals is a good thing, silly though it may be.

Any medical statement product or claim that is not founded in scientific fact undermines the cause of conventional medicine and has the potential, directly or indirectly to cause death. Such seemingly harmless beliefs are a gateway to homeopathic diversions from effective cancer treatment, or worse, Sylvia Brown'e'.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +9
Wait a minute . . .
written by Jadawin, November 22, 2011
Having read this post and the responses, I re-read the questionable part of the post again. It seems to me that the author of the pamphlet lumped a lot of things into the same category: "...try activities such as crocheting, scrapbooking, tai chi, Reiki, and even a drum circle".

If the category is additional or alternative medical treatments, I think that it is more than interesting that crocheting and scrapbooking would be suggested as such. If the category is possible distractions from the effects of the acknowledged medical treatment, it is at least unfortunate that the author of the pamphlet included anything in that list that could be taken as potentially medical suggestions without making a clear distinction.

I would never imagine that this was recommending or even suggesting crocheting, scrapbooking, or even tai chi as a medical treatment. Why would I imagine there was an intention to recommend anything else in that list as such, especially since it is in a list of 'activities', not 'treatments'?

And yes, I know that a lot of the more credulous readers of the pamphlet are very likely to interpret reiki as a treatment suggestion instead of an activity, and I too object to anything that lends credibility to ANY woo, even if only as a non-medical 'activity'.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
...
written by kdv, November 22, 2011
@tlsimpson

While Dr. Oz can enjoy his moment in the sun - years from now he will be looked at the same way we look at physicians who use to treat pneumonia with bleeding (killed George Washington), used mercury for sepsis (didn't cause autism in those folks), and other quackery.


I don't think Dr. Oz will get off so lightly. The physicians of Washington's day were working before the advent of science based medicine. They had no particular reason, by the standards of their day, to question the prevailing "wisdom" of these treatments, and even more importantly, they had no proven effective alternatives [antibiotics]. Their ignorance can, to some extent, be excused on that basis - they probably had an honest belief that they were doing their best for their patients.

I cannot read minds, or I'd be $1m richer, so I can't make any statements about Dr Oz's honest beliefs. However I have no doubt that he is aware of scientific evaluation, and why treatments such as reiki fail such evaluation both in theory and in practice.

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +8

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy