On Friday 2005-01-27 there was a
TV broadcast by Netwerk about the death of Sylvia Millecam. She died in 2001
because of breast cancer. A cancer that could have been handled in case she
would have had visited regular doctors. The diagnosing of the cancer was done by
a regular doctor. But she didn't want to undergo the required chemo
therapy. So she hoped to get rid of her disease via alternate doctors. But apparently
she visited the wrong alternate doctors, so she died.
See: http://www.netwerk.tv/index.jsp?p=items&r=netwerk&a=211510
The IGZ (the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate, see: http://www.igz.nl/bestanden/factsheet%20engels%20januari%202002.pdf
) has investigated the practices of the alternate doctors that Sylvia
Millecam did
visit. The result of this investigation is a report that can be read at: http://www.igz.nl/bestanden/Rapport%20S.M.%20definitief%2017%20februari%202004.pdf
(it is in Dutch)
In that report there is the following sentence:
|
Dutch:
In concreto is de
wijze van zorgverlening van elke betrokken beroepsbeoefenaar onderzocht en
getoetst naar de maatstaven van goed
hulpverlenerschap en/of verantwoorde zorg. Daaruit afgeleid is
gekeken in hoeverre ‘de burger in Nederland’ voldoende veilig gebruik
kan maken van niet-reguliere gezondheidszorg c.q. of
deze zorg met voldoende waarborgen omgeven is. |
English:
The way each of the involved medical care persons has
acted has been investigated. That has been done according to the standards
of responsible care. Next it has been investigated whether it is
sufficiently safe for the Dutch citizen to make use of the non regular health
care. That means:
"Is this care surrounded by
enough safeguards".
|
My problem with this igz report
What is my problem with this igz
report? It is that the igz is abusing the Millecam case to attack alternate
medicine in general.
What is the tendency of this igz report:
1) Alternate medicine is very risky, just see the case of Sylvia Millecam. It is not surrounded by safeguards.
2) There is nothing better and more reliable than regular medicine.
My experiences learn exactly the opposite thing. It can be very dangerous to
trust regular doctors.
See: http://home.wanadoo.nl/w.h.vogelaar/marfan/
At chapter 1.3 of the IGZ document you see the following sentence:
|
In Dutch:
1.3 Conclusies en aanbevelingen
Conclusie en te nemen maatregelen met
betrekking tot de casus
 |
De
in de casus betrokken alternatief werkende hulpverleners dienen naar
het oordeel van de inspectie tuchtrechtelijk en/of strafrechtelijk te
worden aangesproken op hun rol in het ziektebeloop, waarbij genezing
of levensverlenging de pas werden afgesneden en waarvan
patiënte ernstige schade heeft ondervonden. Het resultaat hiervan was
dat patiënte overleden is aan een
onbehandeld mammacarcinoom. |
|
In English:
1.3 Conclusions and recommendations
Conclusion and measures to be taken in relation to the casus.
(A casus is a case in which a certain event is used to
address a certain problem. In this case the death of Sylvia Millecam is
the event that is triggering a set of actions.)
|
The care providers working with alternative health care
practices who were involved in this casus must be sued according to
the judgment of the inspection (igz). That is because healing and the
possibility to live longer were made impossible. This has damaged the
patient severely finally causing the death. And that happened because
the breast cancer was not treated. |
|
But I can also fill in my situation in those sentence, and then the regular
doctors would have to be sued. Here follows the same sentence but now adapted to
my situation:
|
In Dutch:
1.3 Conclusies en aanbevelingen
Conclusie en te nemen maatregelen met
betrekking tot de casus
|
De
in de casus betrokken regulier werkende
hulpverleners dienen naar het oordeel van de inspectie tuchtrechtelijk
en/of strafrechtelijk te worden aangesproken op hun rol in het
ziektebeloop, waarbij genezing of levensverlenging de pas werden
afgesneden en waarvan patiënt (Wim Vogelaar) ernstige schade heeft
ondervonden. Het resultaat hiervan was dat patiënt
bijna overleden is aan een onbehandelde slaapapneu.
(En waarom bijna? Omdat er gelukkig net op tijd alternatieve
hulp verscheen. Nota bene iemand zonder enige medische bevoegdheid (Wim
Vogelaar) maar die het zowaar veel beter wist dan al die geleerde
reguliere artsen, met ziekenhuizen vol moderne apparatuur, bij
elkaar. Het is werkelijk een schande!!!! Lang leve de alternatieve
hulp!!!! Het wordt tijd dat de reguliere hulp gecontroleerd
gaat worden door de alternatieve hulp.) |
|
In English:
1.3 Conclusions and recommendations
Conclusion and measures to be taken in relation to the casus.
(A casus is a case in which a certain event is used to
address a certain problem. In this case the apnea of Wim Vogelaar is the
event that is triggering a set of actions.)
|
The care providers working with regular
health care practices who were involved in this casus must be sued
according to the judgment of the inspection (igz). That is because
healing and the possibility to live longer were made impossible. This
has damaged the patient (Wim Vogelaar) severely, finally nearly
causing the death. And that happened because the apnea
was not treated/diagnosed.
(And why nearly? Because there was
just in time alternative medical care.
Notably someone without any medical qualification (Wim Vogelaar). But
that person knew it better than all those educated regular
doctors, having hospitals full with advanced and modern equipment. It
is really a shame!!!
Hurrah for the alternative health
care!!!
It is getting time to have the regular
health care checked by the alternative
health care.) . |
|
And then 5 sentences further in the document of the IGZ there is a very
disgusting statement: There you see:
|
In Dutch:
|
Bij afwijken van de
reguliere standaard zou de hulpverlener verplicht moeten zijn dit vast
te leggen in een schriftelijke overeenkomst met de patiënt waarvan de
inhoud protocollair is vastgelegd. |
|
In English:
|
If the patient don't want to be helped by
regular medicine then
he/she should be forced to have that decision written on paper. The contents of that paper should be according to a certain protocol.
|
|
It is a ridicules and disgusting statement. You can say: The
pharmaceutical industry is very greedy to get more power.
Why do I say "The pharmaceutical industry" is very greedy
instead of saying "The igz" is very greedy. That is
because the democracy in The Netherlands is concerning health care changing into a
moneycracy. Read more...
First
getting alternate health care possibly followed by regular health care
I would say that the opposite way would be more appropriate. First trying to
get a better health with safe things and when really needed starting using
pharmaceutical drugs. And only when the patient dares to accept the well known
risks which are related to patented drugs. An example of damaging drugs are SSRI
antidepressants and COX-2 inhibitors.
See: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmhealth/42/4212.htm#a51
And then there is an important question:
Can
a patient be forced to use pharmaceutical patented drugs?
An example: A person becomes ill.
He tries to regain his health by using alternative medicine. However, he doesn't
recover. He must even stop with his job because of his health problems. Now the
big question: Can a government stop the benefit because the patient is
refusing to accept regular medical care. For example, the patient with arthritis
refuses to take Methotrexate and is instead using the more safe things as
described on page: http://www.lef.org/protocols/prtcls-txt/t-prtcl-013.html
I think that it would not be ethical when a government would refuse to
pay the benefit. Someone forcing to use patented drugs means that a government
is extraditing such a person to a foreign power (pharmaceutical industry). A
foreign power were a government has not the control to check the safety of the
various drugs. The truth of this statement is confirmed by the contents of page http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmhealth/42/4202.htm
What is 'alternate' healthcare according to the IGZ and VtK?
Let me explain what is understood as alternate medicine by igz. The VtK
(society against quackery, see: www.kwakzalverij.nl
) seems to have the necessary authority in The Netherlands to determine what is
alternative medicine and what is not. This authority is demonstrated by the fact
that they can force universities to stop activities that are related to
alternative medicine. Let me give two examples of universities that are giving
in to the forces of the VtK society:
- The Academic Centre for Dentistry in Amsterdam (ACTA) See: http://www.acta.nl/english/index.cfm
On this academy Professor dr. A.J. Feilzer was forced to stop his activities
concerning his research in the field of metal allergy. For his research he
was using the MELISA test. So the ACTA is not an independent research
center. They are simply knights/slaves of the VtK. Details about this
situation can be found at: http://www.kwakzalverij.nl/php/display/ap/490/1
(it is inDutch)
- The university of Maastricht. See: http://www.unimaas.nl/default.asp?taal=en
Here it was the Belgian professor Michael Maes that was raising the anger of
the VtK. One of the various "sins" of this professor was that he
was also working with the MELISA test. See for more info: http://www.kwakzalverij.nl/php/display/ap/489/1
(it is in Dutch)
And
what is the VtK definition of "alternative medicine".
On VtK page: http://www.kwakzalverij.nl/php/display/ap/152/74
the article is starting with the following statement:
Dutch:
Onder alternatieve geneeswijzen verstaat men behandel- en/of
onderzoeksmethoden die niet aan Nederlandse universiteiten worden
onderwezen. |
English:
Alternative medicine is considered to be the methods of treatment
and/or the methods of research that are not teached at Dutch universities. |
And seen the influence the VtK is
having on universities like the ACTA in Amsterdam and the university in
Maastricht you can say, the VtK is finally the sole point in The Netherlands where
the definition of 'alternative medicine' is determined.
But what is the VtK? And on what kind of things do they base their
conclusions.
An interesting example to show the way they are thinking is to see the way they
talk about the MELISA test. The MELISA test seems to be for them the same thing
as a red flag for a bull. It seems to make them very angry. Let me first tell a
few words about my experiences with the MELISA test. Because my regular doctors
didn't know what was causing my health problems I studied a lot about health
matters on internet. There I found a lot of information about the risks of
amalgam fillings. So I decided to get rid of all my molars. The first molars
were removed in December 2004. Then in 2005 I discovered the MELISA test on
internet. Just for curiosity I have done this test. The test was not essential
for me because I was already in the process of getting rid of all my molars. You
can see my MELISA test report at http://home.wanadoo.nl/w.h.vogelaar/marfan/ategis20050405.htm
The output looks very reasonable to me. Of course I am missing the expertise to
determine whether the MELISA test is really scientifically correct. But I was very
surprised to see a front page article in the AD newspaper at: 2005-09-17
with the big banner: ‘Dure allergietest deugt niet’
(expensive allergy test is not any good): Click here
to read the English version of the article.
A very striking statement in that article in that news paper is the following remark:
| The
Dutch society for promoting the dentistry, the Academic center dentistry
Amsterdam (De Nederlandse Maatschappij tot Bevordering der Tandheelkunde, het
Academisch Centrum Tandheelkunde Amsterdam (ACTA)) and the board for health (Gezondheidsraad)
are calling amalgam ‘safe and reliable means in dentistry”.
|
If that is the opinion of ACTA
and IGZ then it is no wonder that professor dr. A.J. Feilzer is not allowed to
work with the MELISA test. That could cause that their statement about the
safety of amalgam would appear to be wrong. That would damage their reputation.
But I think that with such a statement about amalgam their reputation is damaged
anyway. And when it would not yet be damaged in The Netherlands, it is for sure
already damaged abroad. Why? Just see www.toxicteeth.org
and www.amalgam.org And see also page
http://www.melisa.org/articles/index.html
There you see the following info. The facts of 90 persons!!!
Health
observations before and after amalgam removal
Dr.med.dent. Paul Engel, Lyss-Strasse 24,
2560 Nidau, Switzerland
Dr Engel was asked by 90 of his patients to replace
their dental amalgams with another material - mostly composites and
compomere. In this article, he reports how their health was affected
afterwards.
[129 kb]
[233 kb]
[115
kb]
|
It is amazing that in The Netherlands the usage of amalgam fillings still is
considered to be safe while in a country like Sweden it is forbidden to use it.
The
MELISA test
MELISA
test, criticized in The Netherlands, is widely used in the US for diagnosis of beryllium allergy.
See for further information: www.melisa.org
And at page http://www.melisa.org/pdf/Mercury-and-autoimmunity.pdf
you can read about:
The beneficial effect of amalgam replacement on health in patients with
autoimmunity.
There was also a discussion on the Belgian radio about MELISA in relation
with CFS. Click here
to read the article. I have translated the conclusion of that article. The
conclusion is:
| In
Dutch:
De metaalallergietest van immunologe Stejskal is inmiddels
geregistreerd, wordt erkend door verschillende verzekeringsmaatschappijen
en wordt in een vergelijkende studie als zeer betrouwbaar omschreven (8).
Het ziet er naar uit dat ze de discussie over de risico's van
amalgaamvullingen nieuw leven heeft ingeblazen |
In
English:
The metal allergy test of immunologist Stejskal has meanwhile been
registered and is recognized by several insurance companies and is
described in a comparative study as very reliable (8). It looks that it
has given a new push to the discussion about amalgam fillings. |
Is this care surrounded by enough safeguards?
IGZ comes with the following question when
talking about alternate medicine:
"Is this care surrounded by enough safeguards".
This question about alternate medicine suggests
that regular medicine would be safe. But that is absolutely not the case.
Regular medicine is absolutely
not surrounded by enough safeguards. The point is that he work of regular physicians is
not checked at all. Read more...
It would be good when the work of regular doctors would be
checked by alternate doctors. Click here to see how
an alternate doctor detected the wrong diagnose/treatment a regular doctor was
giving to a patient.
My
case is exactly the opposite of Sylvia's situation
I have visited a number of regular doctors but none of them could help me. Finally I was helped by an alternate
health care person. It was a software developer using Google. I was that person. I was
almost dying in January 2005. But fortunately I discovered the word apnea on
internet. See for more info: http://home.wanadoo.nl/w.h.vogelaar/marfan/apnea/
And click here to read about my problems
with regular doctors.
So the igz is upset about the bad treatment of Sylvia Millecam. But my case
is exactly the opposite. My regular doctors were sending me to a psychologist.
Isn't that ridicules sending an apnea patient to a psychologist? And what is
then more interesting to see? After have diagnosed myself I am now trying to get
an APAP machine paid by my insurance company. And then again I see almost
unbelievable things happen. I have to sleep a night WITHOUT an
APAP machine to have a chance to qualify for an APAP machine paid by my
insurance company. I explained to that doctor that I was considering this too
dangerous for me because I am a patient with many and heavy apnea events. But
that doctor
said that that was the only way for having a chance to get an APAP paid by my
insurance company. I refused to have such a sleep study without APAP machine. So
I contacted the igz to explain my situation. But see now in what an amazing way
the igz is handling my complaint.
At 2005-10-31 I have sent my complaint to the igz. Click here
to see this complaint in Dutch.
At 2005-11-03 I am receiving a confirmation from the igz of the receipt of my
complaint. They say that they strife after reacting to my complaint within 6
weeks!!! Click here to see their
confirmation (in Dutch).
But it is now already 2006-01-30. Far and far more than 6 weeks. And in fact it
is not a difficult question. My data (see: http://home.wanadoo.nl/w.h.vogelaar/marfan/apnea/
) is showing very clear that I am being an apnea patient. Fortunately I have money to
pay the APAP myself. But what would have been the chances to survive in my
circumstances for persons not able to spent that money. Not every person can
afford to buy an APAP equipment. It costs 2457 euro when you want to buy an APAP
machine plus FF mask at ResMed in The Hague. The only option for a patient not
having that money would be to die. That is what I almost did in January 2005.
And such an igz tries to take advantage of the Sylvia Millecam case to
"prove" that alternate medicine is dangerous. Possibly they are
putting so much energy in the Sylvia Millecam case that they are forgetting to
do their daily work.
Anyway, my case shows clearly that the igz is even incompetent to handle the
most simple requests.
Another
case also being exactly the opposite of Sylvia's situation
A patient is visiting a rheumatologist. The patient tries first to handle the
rheumatoid arthritis with safe things as described on page http://www.lef.org/protocols/prtcls-txt/t-prtcl-013.html
But the rheumatologist says that those solutions are not working adequately. He
wants the patient to use Methotrexate. However, on page http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/mtx_wcp.htm
you can see that it is a drug with certain risks. The patient goes for a second
opinion to a doctor of alternative medicine. That doctor doesn't see any need
for using Methotrexate. After having visited that alternative doctor the
rheumatologist doesn't talk any longer about Methotrexate.
A second strange fact with the same rheumatologist. The patient wants to have
a prescription for a self paid APAP
machine. However, the rheumatologist refuses to prescribe one.
The alternative doctor has no problem at all with prescribing an APAP
machine. He also detects that the airway is not optimal. So there is even a good
reason for trying an APAP machine. Click here
to know why an APAP machine can help a patient with rheumatoid arthritis.
So who is doing a good job? I think it is the alternative doctor not the
regular doctor. The regular doctor is just a good slave of the pharmaceutical
industry. For them there is apparently only one option: The prescription of a patented drug.
APAP is very threatening for the pharmaceutical industry
Many pharmaceutical drugs like Methotrexate are suppressing the immune
system. Such drugs should be avoided as much as possible because it is a very
unnatural action for the human body to do so. Now there is a lot of evidence
that in many cases an APAP can be used to avoid the usage of immuno suppressive
drugs.
See: http://home.wanadoo.nl/w.h.vogelaar/marfan/apnea/occurrence.htm
That means that a lot of income for the pharmaceutical companies will disappear
in the coming years because of the upcoming popularity of APAP machines.
Especially when those machines are becoming cheaper and cheaper. And in fact
they are already quite cheap. Just see the prices on http://www.cpap.net/manufacturers_cpaps/resmed/s8autosetvantage.htm
For 650 US dollars you buy an excellent APAP machine and a Full Face mask
costs 170 US dollars. That is together 820 US dollars. That is 678 euro.
But why is the price at ResMed in the Hague for the same stuff 2457 euro?
A government should take measures to allow citizens to take advantage from
modern findings in the area of health.
One reason why prices are here in the EU higher than in California is the
abuse of the CE mark. What is a CE mark? Click here.
The basic intention of the CE mark is OK. But it is an easy way for manufacturers
to use it in a way for which it was not introduced. When I order in
California an APAP machine then it is only easily imported in Europe when the
package is having a CE mark. The CE mark has to be placed on the package by the manufacturer.
Recently I heard that Respironics (APAP manufacturer) is the only manufacturer
that is delivering the CE mark on both boxes destined for Europe AND elsewhere.
ResMed is the opposite. Boxes sent to the US don't get a CE mark, so they
cannot be redistributed to Europe at low prices. That allows them to have much
higher prices here in Europe than elsewere in the world. An European government
should prohibit such practices. That is because the contents of the boxes
ResMed is sending to the US is exactly the same as they are sending to Europe.
In fact the CE mark is helping the pharmaceutical industry here in Europe to
prevent that too many people are too quickly discovering that there are also
safe alternatives for dangerous drugs.
This page is under construction. I intend to have a reasonable contents in
the summer of 2006.
See also: http://www.mc2world.org/mc/
