HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 11:30:11 GMT
Server: Apache
Last-Modified: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 23:20:55 GMT
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 5415
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html

<HTML><HEAD>
<TITLE>Times Open to Alternatives</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF">
<FONT COLOR="003F00"><H2><CENTER>MEDIA WATCH:<BR>

TIMES OPENS A CRACK TO OAM;<BR>

QUACKBUSTERS LIVID</CENTER></H2></FONT>
<P>
<FONT COLOR="003F00"><CENTER><H3>From The Cancer Chronicles #14<BR>

� Feb. 1993 by Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D.
</H3></CENTER></FONT>

<P>

The big media news this season was the front page article in the Sunday New York Times (1/10/93) headlined, "U.S. Opens the Door Just a Crack to Alternative Forms of Medicine." Written by Pulitzer Prize-winner Natalie Angier, the lengthy story mainly details conflicting views in the scienti�c community on the OAM. Most readers found the article positive, especially in a shorter version that ran in papers around the country. 
<P>


The fact that the NIH, "long a stern protector of the most rigorous brand of science," according to Angier, is "about to start venturing into the realm of alternative medicine" got mixed reviews from scientists. "Some researchers," Angier reported "hail the initiative as visionary, but others liken it to governance by horoscope."
<P>


The article attempted to convey the historic signi�cance of these events. But, while prominently featuring the new director, Joe Jacobs, it ignored the people and processes that brought this unique of�ce into existence, especially the pioneering efforts of Rep. Berkley Bedell and Frank Wiewel. While the Sunday paper has  itself now "opened a crack," the daily Times including the influential Science Times still maintains total silence on the subject.
<P>


The OAM is giving �ts to professional opponents of alternative therapies, called quackbusters. In November, Internal MedicineNews and Cardiology News  published a lengthy interview with three members of the National Council Against Health Fraud,  Drs. William Jarvis, Stephen Barrett and Victor Herbert. Dr. Herbert was most emphatic, calling the innovative new of�ce a "rip-off of the public of $2 million which will be thrown away redoing what the government already did," an apparent reference to the Of�ce of Technology Assessment Report on unconventional cancer therapies. This 1990 report actually found 130 peer-reviewed articles in support of such therapies and recommended further testing.
<P>


 "They are screening garbage looking for diamonds," Herbert went on. "There are no diamonds in garbage."
<P>
 

The new NIH of�ce, the Mt. Sinai (NY) oncologist claimed, is simply "a way created by con artists to promote cons as a legitimate therapy."
<P>


Dr. Jarvis called the hundreds of participants at two successful NIH public meetings "essentially cultists and sectarians....They're making the most of the public relations  value of this thing." Dr. Jarvis declared that "there was political meddling by insiders in Washington that created this [OAM] because of their own naivete." The implication is that the $2 billion-a-year War on Cancer was created without "political meddling," while this attempt to �nally test alternative therapies, receiving 1/1000th of NCI�s funding, is a political rip off. 
<P>


Dr. Herbert repeated his charges in a book review in the 12/17/92 New England Journal of Medicine. He charged that "a deceived Congress, at the urging of a misguided former congressman" forced the NIH to "waste $2 million in 1992 and 1993 to attempt to validate 'alternative therapies.' " Congress, he continued, required NIH to include on its committee "a number of persons who make their living promoting health cons...." No names were given.
<P>

Such charges are also heard in the Cancer Letter, which has reported that ACS board members are "incensed" over the word "alternative" in the of�ce's title. They falsely claimed NIH waived "conflict of interest rules, which permit advocates and practitioners of unconventional methods...to serve as of�cial paid consultants to the government." The newsletter retracted this false statement on 12/11/92.
<P>


ACS's Henry Lynch suggested forming a coalition with groups dealing with heart, lung and arthritis, because that�s "where all the quacks hang out," but Helene Brown of California suggested using ACS's influence with the incoming secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS): "I think we can get a political solution without getting up a coalition." ACS seems to be on a collision course with the OAM.

<P>

<CENTER>###</CENTER>
<P>
<HR>
<MULTICOL COLS=2 GUTTER=10>
Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D. is the author of eight books and three documentaries
on cancer-related topics. He is an advisor on alternative cancer treatments
to the National Institutes of Health, Columbia University, and the University
of Texas. He researches and writes individualized "Healing Choices" reports
for people with cancer. For information on <A HREF="../brochure.html">Healing Choices</A>, you can send us an instant <A HREF="form3.html">message</A> or contact:<BR>

Coordinator Anne Beattie <BR>
@ 144 St. John's Place,<BR>
Brooklyn, NY 11217<BR>
Phone 718-636-4433<BR>
Fax 718-636-0186<BR>
E-mail: <A HREF="mailto:mail@ralphmoss.com">mail@ralphmoss.com<BR>
Web site: <A HREF="index.html">http://www.ralphmoss.com<BR>


<P>

</TR>
</TABLE>
<P ALIGN=Center>
</MULTICOL>
<P>
<HR>
<CENTER><A HREF="index.html"><IMG SRC="pix/home3.gif" WIDTH="83" HEIGHT="34"><BR>home <BR> articles on  <A HREF="media.html">media and cancer</A> </A><BR></CENTER>
<FONT SIZE=2>

</BODY>
</HTML>
