|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDTA
Chelation: Why Is It Being Denied Access To Victims of Heart Disease?
In February, 1982, a revised insert was added
to the Medicare Carriers Manual, stating “our decision not to cover Chelation therapy for the prevention
or treatment of atherosclerosis is based on PHS’s findings that there
is a lack of well-designed, controlled clinical trials of its effectiveness,
and that the risks to health and safety attendant upon its use are a cause
for concern.” EDTA is an FDA-approved drug. It is approved for the
removal of metal ions in heavy metal poisoning. Normally, any use of an FDA-approved
drug prescribed by a physician is covered…Why, then, is EDTA the “Exception
to the rule?”
A clinical trial of effectiveness is based on statistics derived from use
on human subjects over a period of time. Physicians using EDTA for atherosclerosis
have recorded and documented an excess of 1000 reports, involving thousands
of case studies and established without any doubt that EDTA Chelation improves
circulation in atherosclerosis. Yet, red tape has consistently blocked its
acceptance and use in treatment in the United States.
FDA Refuses to Examine Evidence
Normally, when a drug is observed to improve a major killing disease, there
is a rush to research and approve the drug in order to make it immediately
available to the victims of the disease. Why, then, is there such a sluggish
response in the case of EDTA Chelation? As demonstrated by reference to
existing scientific literature, EDTA therapy is a safe and effective treatment
for atherosclerosis. In 1962, the FDA was required to examine the effectiveness
of drugs marketed from 1938 to 1962, which included EDTA. As a result of
the review, the FDA gave manufacturers the opportunity to submit evidence
to support EDTA effectiveness in treatment of occlusive vascular disorders.
The manufacturers of EDTA chose not to respond. However, the American Academy
of Medical Preventics did respond. The Academy submitted reams of data
on EDTA to the FDA, but the FDA refused to review the data! At a time when
official concern for escalating health care costs is heightened, chelation
therapy fits the criteria espoused officially for reducing costs. The therapy
does not require hospitalization, or surgery, and the lasting effects of
EDTA chelation equal or exceed those of alternate treatments. The FDA has
received extensive documentation stating those conclusions. Yet, the FDA
continues to effectively block the use and application of EDTA chelation.
These critics of EDTA repeatedly refer to obsolete studies, written by
scientists with little personal expertise in the use of EDTA for occlusive
arterial disease.
Hundreds of thousands of coronary artery bypass surgical procedures have
been performed without benefit of controlled studies to prove safety and
effectiveness. Medical insurance companies, including Medicare, have traditionally
paid for these very expensive surgical procedures without exception. The
U.S. Public Health Service evaluated and recommended against the use of EDTA
for the treatment of occlusive arterial disease. They based their conclusions
on recommendations from cardiovascular surgeons, from the American Heart
Association, and the American College of Cardiology, assuming that those
groups represent experts in the field of EDTA therapy.
Politically powerful and traditional medical organizations have a vested
interest in arterial bypass surgery. This is a $2 billion-a-year industry!
Many hospitals depend on these procedures for financial stability and the
surgeons derive their income from bypass surgery and related treatment. A
successful cardiovascular surgeon earns up to $500,000 each year. Yet, these
are the very people asked to evaluate the effectiveness of an alternative
treatment. Is there any way the FDA can claim to have obtained an unbiased
opinion?
Toxicology of EDTA: Are the Risks a Serious Cause for Concern?
Stedman’s Medical Dictionary defines toxicology as “the science
of poisons—their source, chemical composition, action, tests, and antidotes.” Normally,
one speaks of poisons as those chemicals, drugs, and biologicals that induce
severe illness, bodily injury, and/or fatality. Examples are lye, arsenic,
and cobra venom. These substances induce poisoning in minimal quantities.
One does not consider, usually, baking soda, aspirin, or adrenaline as poisons,
at least in the relatively small dosages to which we are exposed. This brings
up a key point of toxicology. That is, at what dosage, or concentration does
a chemical begin to induce poisoning? For substances such as baking soda,
the dose level has to be quite high before symptoms of illness begin. Indeed,
there is a quantitatively defined level for each and every substance beyond
which toxic reactions occur. Therefore, every substance has a point of toxicity;
even such beneficial things as water and vitamins. EDTA chelation, then,
has toxicity at some measurable level. The question arises, what is that
level at which EDTA induces toxicity, and is that level relevant to the normal
concentration used in an EDTA treatment program?
According to a recent article in the Wall Street
Journal (9/82), the American
Medical Association is quoted as stating in unconditional terms that EDTA
chelation is dangerous. Let’s see how dangerous EDTA actually is in
pure toxicological terms. Toxicology defines the lethal dose (LD50) as the
concentration of a specified substance which will induce death in 50% of
the organisms to which it is exposed. The LD50 is the official standard used
in medical pharmacology to determine and define the lethal dose and compare
it with (he drug’s effective dose, that is, the dose that is maximally
beneficial. When the effective dose equals or is only slightly less than
the LD50, there is only a minimal or no margin of safety between effective
treatment and death. The drug digoxin (digitalis), used in treatment of heart
failure, has an LD50 which is only five times greater than its effective
dose. This means, for instance, if a patient is prescribed 0.25 mg. of digoxin,
and the patient consumes 1.25 mg. of digoxin, he stands a reasonable chance
of serious poisoning, and possibly death (at a dose only 5 times greater
than the regularly prescribed level.) Thus, digoxin is a relatively dangerous
medication. If the Wall Street Journal article’s premise is correct,
that EDTA is dangerous, it is reasonable to expect that the comparative LDso
safety margin of EDTA would be at least as bad, if not worse, than digoxin.
In other words, in comparing two drugs, digoxin and EDTA, the safest drug
is the one with the highest LD50 in relation to the effective dose.
In The Scientific Basis of EDTA Chelation Therapy by Bruce Halstead, M.D.
(1979, Golden Quill Publishers, Colton, CA) reference is made to toxicological
studies of Barnes (1964), Stecher (1968), Christensen (1974), and Catsch
(1976). Using the rat as a testing animal, these investigators injected EDTA
and other drugs or substances into the abdominal cavity. The LD50 was measured
for each. The results are listed below:
LD50 Values for Drugs Injected in Rat
1. EDTA: 1900 milligrams per kilogram weight of the rat
2. Aspirin: 420 milligrams per kilogram weight of the rat
3. Digitoxin: 3.7 milligrams per kilogram weight of the rat
4. Tetracycline: 320 milligrams per kilogram weight of the rat
5. Ethyl alcohol (liquor): 1225 milligrams per kilogram weight of the rat
It is clear in this data that EDTA has a much higher lethal dose50 than the
commonly used heart medication digitoxin, the pain remedy aspirin, and the
antibiotic tetracycline. The opinion of the AMA fails to provide any new
data on LD50 of EDTA that clearly demonstrates a dangerous toxicity (which
is expected if EDTA is truly dangerous.)
A specifically named risk widely proclaimed by opponents of EDTA treatment
is its possible toxicity to the kidney, known as nephrotoxicity. A comment
can be made that all substances, as previously mentioned, have toxicity,
including kidney toxicity. The risks of kidney toxicity are dependent on
the level of the chemical in the body within a given length of time. In Halstead’s
evaluation of EDTA chelation, nephrotoxicity is generally the “result
of using dangerously high doses of the drug and too rapid a rate of infusion.” The
protocol currently under use for EDTA chelation specifies maximal concentrations
of EDTA, maximal frequency of infusion of EDTA, and provision for rest between
treatments. Yes, kidney toxicity is a documented fact, as it is with many
other beneficial drugs. But today, a case of kidney toxicity is very rare,
because of the limited dose and frequency, and careful laboratory monitoring
of the kidney and genito-urinary system.
Beyond the kidney dysfunction and toxicity, it is possible to experience
transient symptoms such as post-treatment hypocalcemia (calcium drop), and
some patients have complained of headaches, nausea, weakness, fatigue, anemia,
and dermatitis, but these reactions are rare, and may be a result of element
and vitamin deficiency. In terms of the actual chelation process, the
risks of EDTA DO NOT POSE CAUSE FOR CONCERN.
The Joy of Chelation Therapy
Can any medical treatment be a joy, a pleasure? Not many, not even a few
can claim such bliss. One treatment, however, may fill such a role. The
process of EDTA chelation therapy is noticeably cheering to the patient.
The method of chelation appears outwardly to be all-so-medical. An individual
is plugged into an I.V. bottle containing EDTA in solution. Sitting for
three to four hours, watching the liquid drip slowly into one’s arm
is hardly entertainment! Or is it? Observing a group of patients receiving
EDTA chelation in the doctor’s office is a remarkable experience.
One sees live and gregarious activity, friendly discussion, sharing medical
and personal experience, laughter, mutual and fraternal association and
even new friendships. Of course, these are hallmarks of any group activity,
but how many groups are centered around medical treatments? EDTA chelation
is not a philosophy, an encounter group, nor a fraternal society. It is
an AMA-approved treatment for lead poisoning. Moreover, it is a process
for reversing atherosclerosis, the disease that clogs the arteries. That
such a treatment is a joy is something observed in hundreds of offices
throughout the U.S., including this one, on a daily basis. It is a celebration
of hope.
What makes chelation a joy? The first and foremost concern is that EDTA
is a drug, a chemical, and therefore certain to cause certain side effects
and
possibly a serious toxicity. Nothing could be further from the truth. Let’s
look at sheer statistics. Bruce Halstead, M.D., has documented careful scientific
studies of the toxicity of EDTA. On a scale of 1 to 10, where one is the
most safe and ten is the most hazardous, EDTA ranks close to aspirin, about
2 to 3. A major heart medication derived from digitalis ranks 7 to 8. Doctors
treating a certain disease may think nothing of prescribing a drug with a
high toxicity, when its benefits outweigh the potential for harm, and when
properly administered! We hear a lot of criticism about the toxicology of
EDTA. There is no dispute that if EDTA is given in a dosage 100 times its
normal prescription, it is harmful. But the same statement can be about digitalis,
diuretics, pain medication, tranquilizers and sedatives, antibiotics, and
even aspirin. So, while EDTA is a chemical, drug, it does not often cause
side effects and rarely (very rarely) induces a serious toxicity. The same
cannot be said for many commonly prescribed medications. For a patient on
chelation therapy, experiencing no side effects or toxicity, this is a joy!
Halstead cites that in the U.S. from 1970–1980, 100,000 patients received
in excess of 2,000,000 treatments of EDTA chelation without any report of
significant toxicity. For a “drug,” EDTA has certainly demonstrated
a very effective record of safety.
One does not measure joy on the basis of escaping pain, however. How does
EDTA chelation therapy produce joy? Reversing hardening of the arteries is
one sure-fire way. EDTA treatment provides an increase m blood supply and
oxygen delivery to tissues throughout the body. Such circulatory rejuvenation
improves convalescence during heart attack and stroke; relieves symptoms
of transient ischemic attacks (mini-strokes), angina and intermittent claudication
of the extremities (pain on walking.) Work published by the International
Association of Gerontology and Aging documents EDTA’s role in reversing
the aging process by altering enzymes in the walls of the artery. Peer review
literature in 1981–82 documents significant improvements in circulation
through the carotid arteries and coronary arteries following chelation therapy
(see Casdorph, H.R. in the Journal of the American
Holistic Medical Association.)
Such studies carried out using the state-of-the-art cardiovascular tools
via nuclear scanning techniques, defines objective evidence for the role
EDTA plays in reversing atherosclerosis. When one can get up and walk several
miles without experiencing any pain, this is joy. When one can play and work
hard and cease to experience the incapacitating chest pain of angina, this
is joy. Regaining memory and concentration thought to be long gone—this
is joy. The joy is the change in relationships one shares with others following
chelation therapy!
The Men and Women Who Prescribe Chelation
In terms of international medicine in 1982, EDTA chelation therapy is being
practiced most openly in the United States. The EDTA treatment is very
prominently at what Marilyn Ferguson (author of Aquarius
Conspiracy, 1980)
terms the leading edge of medical research. Already established as a treatment
of atherosclerosis administered according to a medical protocol, it is
under close scrutiny by expert researchers in several medical universities.
Organizations supporting its use include the American Academy of Medical
Preventics in Los Angeles, CA., the International Academy of Preventive
Medicine in Kansas, the Northwest Academy of Preventive Medicine in Bellevue,
WA, the American Holistic Medical Association in Virginia, and others.
University related research was formerly carried out actively by Norman
Clarke Sr, M.D., and Norman Clarke Jr, M.D., at the Detroit General Hospital
in Detroit, Michigan. More recently John Olwin, M.D., Professor of Surgery
at Rush Medical College in Chicago, has investigated chelation therapy.
Other investigators performing university research are H. Richard Casdorph,
M.D. of Long Beach, CA.; Bruce Halstead, M.D. of Colton, CA.; Lloyd Grumbles,
M.D. of Philadelphia, PA. The National Institutes of Health and the American
College of Cardiology have been requested by the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services to carry out a well-designed evaluation of EDTA over
the next two years. It is appropriate, then, to devote some attention to
those individuals prescribing chelation.
Bruce Halstead, M.D. is a premier researcher of marine toxicology. He is
the sole author of a three-volume compendium exhaustively detailing the anatomy,
physiology, and toxicology of marine organisms. Research exploration has
brought him into medical consultation with more than 120 nations, including
a rare consulting status with the first Soviet Medical School at Moscow and
Vladivlostock. With an esteemed background in toxicology, Bruce Halstead
has established a chelating medical practice in Loma Linda and, more recently,
in Colton, CA. Halstead states in the preface of his book, The
Scientific Basis of EDTA Chelation Therapy, “After having taken an extensive series
of EDTA chelation/treatments, and having administered several thousand treatments
to others, I have developed a deep appreciation of the clinical value of
the therapy.”
In Chelation Therapy: How to Prevent or Reverse
Hardening of the Arteries by Dr. Morton Walker, numerous chelating physicians are highlighted. H. Ray
Evers, M.D., of Cottonwood, Alabama administered EDTA to Dr. George W. Frankel,
M.D., Chief of E.N.T. of two Long Beach, CA, hospitals in 1971. The E.N.T.
Chief observed his diabetic ulcers and gangrene clear up under The EDTA Chelation
prescribed by Evers. Yiwen Y. Tang, M.D., F.A.B.F.P., of San Francisco, CA,
chelated Roland 0. Hohnbaum, D.O., a Richmond, CA, chiropractor in 1975.
The photographs of Hohnbaum’s feet before and after chelation are clear
statements of medical reversal. Vascular surgeons advised Hohnbaum prior
to chelation therapy to have his legs amputated. The illustrations reveal
the elimination of the diabetic gangrene? The chiropractor was able to return
to full-time work. Robert Vance, D.O., of Salt Lake City treated Dean Baxter,
an executive of the Atlantic Richfield Oil Company of Houston in 1980. Dean
was diagnosed by coronary angiography to have 10% blockage in one heart vessel,
90% blockage in two other major heart vessels. Dean turned down flatly orders
given by several heart surgeons of Houston’s prestigious bypass surgery
centers. Instead, he traveled to Utah and received a series of EDTA chelations.
Post chelation radionuclide studies of the heart revealed major improvement
of circulatory flow through the formerly blocked vessels. Baxter was given
new medical orders to return to full activity and follow-up his dietary modifications.
The doctors who ordered bypass surgery could not believe that chelation influenced
this improvement! Harold Harper, M.D., of Los Angeles, CA., infused EDTA
in a Houston physician suffering a heart attack in 1974. The patient, Lester
Tavel, D.O., required electrical shock to restore his heart’s rhythm
to normalcy, and the heart expanded, filling the chest. Enzymes demarking
heart functioning were profoundly abnormal. Following a course of EDTA chelation
given by Harper, Dr. Tavel was reexamined and found to have normal heart
functioning.
Dr. Morton Walker narrates similar medical reports from chelating physicians
Robert Rogers, M.D. of Melbourne. Florida; Sibyl W. Anderson, D.O. of Jenks,
Oklahoma; Warren M. Levin, M.D., F.A.A.A.P., New York City; the late Carlos
R Lamar, M.D., F.I.C.A., of San Juan, Puerto Rico; Charles Farr M.D., Ph.D.,
of Norman, Oklahoma; Garry F. Gordon, M.D., of Sacramento, CA; Gus Schreiber,
M.D., of Dallas, Texas; Leo J. Bolles, M.D., of Bellevue, WA; William Mauer,
M.D., of Zion, Illinois, and more.
One Doctor's Office
Gone the sterile hushed atmosphere of the doctor's office. No more urgent
whispered voices of softly-stepping nurses hurrying on nursely errands.
Take one moment to visit the office of Dr. Jonathan Collin, M.D., a practicing
preventive medicine doctor, in Port Townsend, WA.
You park in front of a restored Victorian home, painted spring-fresh green
with leaded windows, a winding brick walkway, and of course, a picket fence.
As you pass through the gate, you already begin to relax as you admire the
manicured lawn, and feast your eyes on the multi-colored flora. As you near
the office door, you hear the hum of excited and happy voices. When you open
the door, you are at least prepared for a new experience.
At the front desk reigns Jill, office manager, guru in charge of cheerfulness,
decor, and prompt payment of your bill. In a homey room to the left are a
couch, recliners, chairs, tables, and lots of good reading. If you have a
heart problem, you are likely to spend a lot of time in this room; a not-so-unpleasant
idea, considering that here is the source of the happy voices. And why are
these folks so happy? After all, they are suffering from a serious and debilitating
disease. Perhaps, there is a joy in the experience of receiving EDTA…
Reprinted from Heart Disease In Transition: A Medical Newsletter Written
For The Patient
Jonathan
Collin, MD specializes in preventative medicine, with emphasis on
nutrition and wellness. Certain patients with circulation disorders or
toxic metal poisoning are considered for EDTA Chelation Therapy.
|
|