ALL SUBSTANCES ARE POISONS.
THERE IS NONE WHICH IS NOT A POISON
THE RIGHT DOSE DIFFERENTIATES A
POISON AND A REMEDY
Paracelsus: 1493 - 1541
The above quote
is more surprising for its antiquity than for its common sense. Parcelsus was arguably the most eminent
physician of the middle ages. As the historians of science tell us: we stand on
the shoulders of giants. In the spirit of Paracelsus' dictum, we need to seek
the right doses very carefully and from unlikely sources, not neglecting
folklore as a source of knowledge.
Vlhjalmar Stefansson was a unique arctic explorer in that
he learned to live as the Eskimos do, off the land. This enabled him to remain
healthy during expeditions of several years duration without returning to
civilization for more supplies. At one point, during a sojourn in one of our
cities, he participated in a nutritional experiment that demonstrated how the
Eskimos' diet is adequate even though almost entirely from animal sources. An
interesting detail: they ate the adrenal glands of their prey. It turned out
that these glands are high in vitamin C. Vilhjalmar also told his nutritionists
that the Eskimos had taught him that you must never eat polar bear liver
because it would be fatal within 24 hours. After the main experiments were
complete and successful in demonstrating that an all meat diet could be
adequate if you eat most of the giblets, one of the scientists obtained a polar
bear liver and found that one ordinary sized portion of it contained 1,000
times the human daily requirements of vitamin A, an acutely fatal dose.
Other vitamins are
medically useful even in unnaturally large doses. Vitamin C as ascorbic acid is the least toxic substance for
acidifying the urine. A dose of 10 to
30 times the daily requirement suffices for this frequently desirable end.
Vitamin C also enhances the absorption of iron by maintaining the iron in its
bivalent form--very useful for people who are "donating" maximum
amounts of their own blood prior to elective surgery. This procedure prevents transmission of blood borne
diseases. Another example: 50 to 100
tines the requirement of niacin (vitamin B3) taken daily becomes a powerful
drug for lowering cholesterol. Niacin
is not used very much for this purpose because it has an almost universal side
effect (which can usually be overcome). These large doses also occasionally
affect the liver, but no more often than the prescription medications with
which niacin competes. You could be forgiven for wondering why the enormous
dose of a vitamin used for a totally different purpose is not a
prescription-only drug, as the others are, given that niacin in these doses is
at least as toxic.
About 10 years ago the FDA (Federal Drug Administration)
proposed to limit the per tablet dose of non-prescription vitamins to 2-3 times
the daily requirement. The health food industry responded with campaign
contributions to congressmen of both parties and requests to their customers to
write to the congress. The voices of the FDA and interested experts were drowned
in a flood of dollars. Now the public spends billions of dollars per year on
unproven "alternative" remedies, an order of magnitude more than the
cost of national campaign expenses. I
am sure that other special interests, not in my sphere of knowledge, are
achieving similar "success".
The NIH
(National Institute of Health) now has a research division mandated to study
the results of alternative medical therapies.
A year or so after congress funded this research an otherwise eminent
senator who had sponsored this new direction for the NIH chided them for few
results, stating they should have talked to a few people who were cured and
immediately approved
1
the successful remedies.
Many of us (but not enough of us) know that valid scientific results
cannot be achieved by testimonials.
Testimonials are like finding that polar bear liver is toxic. The real work comes after that.
This entire
article might be regarded as an appeal for more scientific literacy in our
educated public. Scientific literacy means some comprehension of the methods of
science, not just "gee whiz" about the astonishing accomplishments. I
am sure to bring up scientific literacy again and again.
John A.Frantz, M.D.
Chairperson-Board of Health
April, 2000
Ignorance and
credulity have ever been companions, and have misled and enslaved mankind:
philosophy has in all ages endeavored to oppose their progress and to loosen
the shackles they had imposed: philosophers have on this account been called
unbelievers; unbelievers of what? of the fictions of fancy, of witchcraft,
hobgoblins, apparitions, vampires, fairies, of the influence of stars on human
affairs, miracles wrought by the bones of saints…..fortune tellers…...with
endless variety of folly? These they
have disbelieved and despised, but have ever bowed their hoary heads to Truth
and Nature.
William
Godwin 1756-1836
BS Detection
Did you ever wonder why a
college graduate is required to have a major field of study? Four years of full
loads of course work is not enough. A subtle benefit of in depth knowledge of
at least one subject is that it permits a personal check on the reliability of
sources such as newspapers and magazines. If their information in the field in
which you are expert is seriously faulty, that is grounds for not trusting them
in an area where you are less well informed.
When I was a child, Charles
Lindbergh was rich and famous. Reporters were very anxious to quote him on
almost any topic, especially politics. Why was his opinion about matters other
than aviation so highly valued by the public? So be very careful about the
credentials of your sources. Even Lindbergh was probably not highly qualified
in aeronautical engineering.
BS can mean at least two
things. MS is "more of the
same" and PhD is "piled higher and deeper".
2