Is Comparative Effectiveness Research "rationing"?

Coffee Brown, University of New Mexico, Talk Radio News

Robert Zirkelbach of America's Health Insurance Plans explains that CER is not rationing.


01:41
Listen

Comments

[Julia Schopick]

I listened to your audio interview, and have read a great deal about the Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) that is being planned by the Administration. But, when all is said and done, I fear that the biggest thing wrong with CER is NOT that it will ration treatment. (I don’t think it will do that.) But I DO think there is a good chance that the CER will end up recommending a less expensive version of the “same-old-same-old” treatments that have been used for years -- and that are often so ineffective.

The point that I think NO ONE has yet adequately addressed is that several extremely effective, lifesaving, inexpensive treatments may be completely LEFT OUT of the comparative effectiveness research mix. Why? Because these treatments are NOT manufactured by large pharmaceutical companies.

I am referring here to two kinds of treatments: (a) “alternative” treatments; and (b) lots of science-based treatments that are, unfortunately, often unfairly called “anecdotal.” As far as I can tell, these treatments are called “anecdotal” for one reason, and one reason only: because they haven’t gone through the billion+ dollar double-blind randomized clinical trials. (AND, as many of us know, most of these “trials,” of course, are conducted and paid for by Big Pharma! A vicious circle.)

I have interviewed pioneers in the successful use of several of these science-based, though often called “anecdotal,” treatments on my website, HonestMedicine.com. The specific treatments I have written about so far are: LOW DOSE NALTREXONE for autoimmune diseases, such as multiple sclerosis and lupus; the KETOGENIC DIET for pediatric epilepsy; and INTRAVENOUS ALPHA LIPOIC ACID, for diabetic neuropathy and organ regeneration. Each of these three treatments has been helping thousands of people with very serious, often life-threatening conditions for OVER THIRTY YEARS.

Why, then, don’t I think that these treatments (and others like them) will be included in the comparative effectiveness research?

For proof that my suspicions are well-founded, all you have to do is go to the website for the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, and watch the video of the recent Senate Hearings on Integrative Medicine and the new health plan, where Drs. Mehmet Oz, Mark Hyman, Andrew Weil and Dean Ornish testified. (The video is titled titled “Integrative Care: A Pathway to a Healthier Nation.”)

There, you will find the following interchange between Dr. Mark Hyman and Sen. Tom Harkin (at 142:00 to 142:36):

DR. HYMAN: (re the Comparative Effectiveness Research that is being planned): “What are we comparing things TO? Drug to drug? Procedure to procedure? Or are we comparing the current medical practice with the best available things we’re talking about [e.g., integrative treatments]?”

SEN. HARKIN: “I’m afraid — I share your fear — that it’s going to be a comparative analysis between this treatment and that treatment.”

DR. HYMAN: “Within the allopathic model.”

And by the way, without stating it directly, when he refers to the “allopathic model,” Dr. Hyman is, of course, referring to the PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY MODEL. It’s the only model the American Medical System acknowledges.

I also have a fascinating interview on my website with Dr. Burt Berkson (MD, PhD), pioneer since the 1970s of the use of Intravenous Alpha Lipoic Acid. In it, Dr. Berkson speaks eloquently about how our medical education system actually teaches doctors NOT to be curious about more innovative, less expensive treatments — such as the three I have written about.

I would be glad to share the links to all the articles and videos I have alluded to in this comment. (I originally wrote a version of this comment that included all the links – but I think the links kept my comment from being posted -- so I rewrote it, without the links!)

I wish us ALL the best of luck with our new healthcare system. I strongly believe that we must work really hard to get our important messages to the healthcare decision-makers in Washington, D.C.

I am confident that talk radio can help to get this important message out there. I would be personally available for interviews on this topic – and can also recommend many other very reputable people for interview, as well.

Thanks for helping to be part of the solution! I appreciate your time, and your help with this.

Julia Schopick
HonestMedicine.com