Re: Wayne, please respond.

October 11, 2008

Hi ???

Find " it " what?

use full sentences

I don't know what " it " you are referring to.

McGill was not " Flawed " .

It is ignorance like that that makes it difficult to move HBOT forward.

It is unethical AND illegal to experiment on disabled children.

Having a control group is an " experiment " .

that is why, my current study with the UC medical School, MIND

Institute does not have a control group. They deemed it unethical.

thus, if you had read my previous postings on comparative research on

CP children, you would understand why there are very, very few drugs

that have ever been tested on CP kids... show me a anti-seizure drug

that was ever originally approved on CP kids! there never has been

one! Why, because they cannot test on those kids!

Now, I commented on various nonbrain injury conditions. And, there

are no studies on those conditions using 1.3 ATA RA!

Further, remember, those chambers are only FDA approved for " mountain

sickness " .

Do you understand, what that means?

Ed

At 08:39 AM 10/11/2008, you wrote:

>Look it up, Ed. I gave you the info to find it. Would you like to

>see the whole study? Maybe you should have attended the symposium.

>

>I am not selling chambers!

>

>Oh, and the McGill study was flawed as it didn't use a true control

>group, which is why there is a lawsuit regarding the study.

>

>Lastly, Ed, I have seen many patients, with my own eyes that have

>been treated at 1.3, and they ALL benefitted greatly. I don't need a

>pile of studies to tell me something works when I see it with my own eyes.

>Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

>

> Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > >

> > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > India) are

> > > > evidence enough.

> > > > >

> > > > >If you want to g

> > > >

> > >

> > >**************

> > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > >(<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://loca

> l.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.m

> >

>

apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00\

000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> >

> > >

October 11, 2008

I asked you to give me the paper.

You noted McGill.

McGill was published in February, 2001.

I was there.

were you?

At 08:42 AM 10/11/2008, you wrote:

>That is funny Ed. Then why is it that the results were not

>publicized until July?

>

>You are obviously biased for reasons other than helping people. I

>hope you sleep good at night knowing that people are not getting

>treatments because of what you post.

>Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

>

> Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > >

> > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > India) are

> > > > evidence enough.

> > > > >

> > > > >If you want to g

> > > >

> > >

> > >**************

> > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > >(<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://loca

> l.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.m

> >

>

apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00\

000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> >

> > >

October 11, 2008

so again, exactly what paper are you referring to?

Use full sentences, and reference footnotes.

At 08:42 AM 10/11/2008, you wrote:

>That is funny Ed. Then why is it that the results were not

>publicized until July?

>

>You are obviously biased for reasons other than helping people. I

>hope you sleep good at night knowing that people are not getting

>treatments because of what you post.

>Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

>

> Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > >

> > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > India) are

> > > > evidence enough.

> > > > >

> > > > >If you want to g

> > > >

> > >

> > >**************

> > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > >(<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://loca

> l.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.m

> >

>

apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00\

000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> >

> > >

October 11, 2008

By " it " I was referring to the study that was released in July.

Do you understand that 1.3 and 1.5 can also be done in hard chambers?

Oh, and the soft chambers can only be MARKETED for mountain sickness. They can

be used for anything.

The McGill study had a control group. The problem with their control group was

that the control group received MHBOT with ambient air. That is not a true

control group.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > >

> > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > India) are

> > > > evidence enough.

> > > > >

> > > > >If you want to g

> > > >

> > >

> > >**************

> > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > >(<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://loca

> l.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.m

> >

>

apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00\

000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> >

> > >

October 11, 2008

I sent it last night, go back and look.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > >

> > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > India) are

> > > > evidence enough.

> > > > >

> > > > >If you want to g

> > > >

> > >

> > >**************

> > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > >(<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://loca

> l.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.m

> >

>

apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00\

000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> >

> > >

October 11, 2008

The Lancet's pre-publication letters to Collet, they specifically

ordered him not to refer to the low pressure group as placebo,

control, or anything else. Other wise they would not publish.

Again, which paper are you referring to that was published last

summer? Did you read it? Do you have it?

I am not trying to fight you and every detail. But, just trying to

make sure the stuff you write is accurate.

Families depend on these pages as they begin their journey to care

for their kids.

I personally do not care if a child gets mBOT, or medicinal HBOT as

long as the brain injured child gets HBOT. But, Medicinal HBOT is

proven to be better. Every HBOT clinic that treats brain injuries

treats at 1.5 ATA 100% O2.

I have done 1.25 ATA 1.5 ATA and 1.75 ATA and, they all work, and

they all have their uses as tools in the hyperbarist's tool box.

However, if a child can only get 1.3 ATA RA, then I advocate they get

that ASAP.

Ed

That is why I founded the CHERISH Foundation

At 10:07 AM 10/11/2008, you wrote:

>By " it " I was referring to the study that was released in July.

>

>Do you understand that 1.3 and 1.5 can also be done in hard chambers?

>Oh, and the soft chambers can only be MARKETED for mountain

>sickness. They can be used for anything.

>

>The McGill study had a control group. The problem with their control

>group was that the control group received MHBOT with ambient air.

>That is not a true control group.

>Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

>

> Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > > India) are

> > > > > evidence enough.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >If you want to g

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >**************

> > > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > > >(<<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://l

> ocal.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://loca

> > l.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.m>http://local.m

> > >

> >

>

apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew0\

0000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.mapquest.\

com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> >

> > >

> > > >

October 11, 2008

can't find it.

At 10:09 AM 10/11/2008, you wrote:

>I sent it last night, go back and look.

>Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

>

> Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > > India) are

> > > > > evidence enough.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >If you want to g

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >**************

> > > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > > >(<<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://l

> ocal.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://loca

> > l.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.m>http://local.m

> > >

> >

>

apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew0\

0000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.mapquest.\

com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> >

> > >

> > > >

October 11, 2008

Ed,

It is very disapointing to read you today.

Your agressive attitude towards mHBOT is not only unacceptable, it is

also suspicious. But using the name of Dr Marois to defend your point

about 1.5 is profoundly troubling though...

This is not what we have heard in Quebec in his private communciations

and public lectures and appearances in the medias for the last 7 long

years. Maybe you should take some french courses and find out the

whole truth. Until then, I suggest you keep it to rest unless you want

to be accused of misleading others yourself.

And you claim the study was not flawed ? Haven't you heard before that

Dr Marois himself never saw the raw datas! Never. They were kept

hidden by the corrupt mole appointed by the Government which did

everything to avoid paying for children with CP ! There is too much

evidence of a major fraud and cover-up in this study to extrapolate

that 1.5 is better.

I suggest you read or re-read Dr Marois latest article:

http://www.jpands.org/vol12no4/marois.pdf

This is the final word which calls for immediate coverage. The lies

and hypocrisy must end. Now.

Thank you,

> > > >

> > > > From: Freels

> > >

> >

<<mailto:dfreels%40mindspring.dfr><mailto:dfreels%40mindspring.dfr>dfreels@...>

> >

> > > > Subject: Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > medicaid@medicaidforhmed

> > > > Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008, 3:25 PM

> > > >

> > > > Wayne,

> > > >

> > > > Thanks for answering my question by not answering my question.

> > > >

> > > > Also, please have your Savannah CP families contact me; re:

> > further HBOT.

> > > > Cell 404-725-4520. Email: davidfreels (DOT) com

> > > >

> > > > DF

> > > >

> > > > Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > >

> > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > India) are

> > > > evidence enough.

> > > > >

> > > > >If you want to g

> > > >

> > >

> > >**************

> > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > >(<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.m

> >

apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew000\

00002)

> >

> > >

October 11, 2008

,

Read my points.

The issue of " Flawed " is what those who hate HBOT use to attack the study.

The fact is science must be adjusted by ethics. That does NOT make

it flawed. That makes it real life.

As I noted, the same science is applied to anti-seizure drugs. Are

you saying that those drugs are illegally accepted... and that all

drugs that have no pediatric studies must be deemed illegal?

Or is it jsut that all pediatric drugs with no placebo groups should

be illegal?

That is what " flawed " science demands.

The facts are that there are serious ethical issue in doing research

on disabled children. So, studies have the be adjusted that support

those ethics. It does not diminish the scientific value of taht study.

Look at the sciences for Orphan Drugs and these concepts become very

clear. And, it is the basis of our medical legal system. Arbitrary as it is.

The McGill study showed that both groups of 1.3 ATA RA and 1.75 100%

O2 groups responded identically, and they both improved dramatically.

So, both are very effective in helping these kids.

That is why I advocate any and all HBOT for our kids.

BUt, I make it clear that for a lot of medical reasons, I am a more

ardent supporter of 1.5 ATA 100% O2.

I made all those things clear in my notes. Please reread the message .

I am not trying to pick fights. But, we have to state the facts as

they are. Otherwise, parents are going to go to authorities and base

their hard earned fights for their kids on things that have no basis.

The fact is mHBO has no basis to make any claims for anything other

than brain injuries. There are no publications. And, anyone who

tries to present this is KILLING HBOT for its legitimately accepted uses.

When physicians hear this, they have basis to say " HBOT is nothing but voodoo " .

And, that kills everything we are working to overcome.

Ed

At 12:54 PM 10/11/2008, you wrote:

>Ed,

>

>It is very disapointing to read you today.

>

>Your agressive attitude towards mHBOT is not only unacceptable, it is

>also suspicious. But using the name of Dr Marois to defend your point

>about 1.5 is profoundly troubling though...

>

>This is not what we have heard in Quebec in his private communciations

>and public lectures and appearances in the medias for the last 7 long

>years. Maybe you should take some french courses and find out the

>whole truth. Until then, I suggest you keep it to rest unless you want

>to be accused of misleading others yourself.

>

>And you claim the study was not flawed ? Haven't you heard before that

>Dr Marois himself never saw the raw datas! Never. They were kept

>hidden by the corrupt mole appointed by the Government which did

>everything to avoid paying for children with CP ! There is too much

>evidence of a major fraud and cover-up in this study to extrapolate

>that 1.5 is better.

>

>I suggest you read or re-read Dr Marois latest article:

><http://www.jpands.org/vol12no4/marois.pdf>http://www.jpands.org/vol12no4/maroi\

s.pdf

>

>This is the final word which calls for immediate coverage. The lies

>and hypocrisy must end. Now.

>

>Thank you,

>

> > > > >

> > > > > From: Freels

> > > >

> > >

><<mailto:dfreels%40mindspring.dfr><mailto:dfreels%40mindspring.dfr>dfreels@...>

>

> > >

> > > > > Subject: Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > > medicaid@medicaidforhmed

> > > > > Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008, 3:25 PM

> > > > >

> > > > > Wayne,

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks for answering my question by not answering my question.

> > > > >

> > > > > Also, please have your Savannah CP families contact me; re:

> > > further HBOT.

> > > > > Cell 404-725-4520. Email: davidfreels (DOT) com

> > > > >

> > > > > DF

> > > > >

> > > > > Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > > India) are

> > > > > evidence enough.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >If you want to g

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >**************

> > > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > > >(<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://lo

> cal.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.m

> > >

>apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew0\

0000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> > >

> > > >

October 11, 2008

,

RE: And you claim the study was not flawed ? Haven't you heard before that

>Dr Marois himself never saw the raw datas! Never. They were kept

>hidden by the corrupt mole appointed by the Government which did

>everything to avoid paying for children with CP ! There is too much

>evidence of a major fraud and cover-up in this study to extrapolate

>that 1.5 is better.

Look, , the fraud implemented after the study has nothing to do

with the study itself. That's the fraud associated with the

publishing of the valid study. Can you see the difference?

Collet was a fraud who committed fraud against our kids for the

purpose of segmenting them out from normal medical ethics and ruels

and to apply a different set of standards against them to deny them

they valid medical care rights.

In short, Collet committed a " Crime Against Humanity " .... this is a

very serious legal issue that he has to be held accountable for.

But, the state, or even collet, removing the placebo group is an

issue of medical ethics. I don't necessarily agree with it, given

what I know about HBOT, but it is valid for an IRB to do to protect

innocent kids from " harm " . And, it does nothing to diminish the

study. Otherwise no pediatric drugs could ever be approved for use

for our kids.

Take care,

Ed

Ed Nemeth

President, CEO

Spectrum Events

444 North Third Street, Suite 304

Sacramento, CA 95814

916-856-7044 x 339

916-856-7040 (fax)

October 11, 2008

Ed,

First and foremost, I am a huge supporter of HBOT. The only point I was making

when you started this argument was that the portables were just as feasible for

treating CP as the hard chambers.

Second, I am confused. A few posts ago, you said that the mild chambers were

only approved for mountain sickness. Now you are claiming that they are useful

in the treatment of brain injury. Which is it?

Regardless, I am not trying to argue, as it does no one any good. What I am

trying to do is provide information to people based on what I have seen,

experienced, and read.

If you remember, this whole argument started when I told the lady with the CP

child that mild was as good for treating CP. You immediately started to

question my statement. The McGill study actually showed mild was as good as

high, I agree with you. What I may have misinterputed was your using that study

to base your position on using only high pressure, which you have made clear is

your belief.

I will send you the study I was refering to later this evening.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > > India) are

> > > > > evidence enough.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >If you want to g

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >**************

> > > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > > >(<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://lo

> cal.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.m

> > >

>apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew0\

0000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> > >

> > > >

October 11, 2008

Dear Nameless One,

I was pointing out what you do not know or understand.. that is all.

You specifically noted that mHBOT is proven for:

>anaerobic infections (gas gangrene, necrotizing fasciitis, fourniers

> > >gangrene, crepitant cellulitis), arterial gas embolisms, late

> > >effects radiation injuries (radiation cystitis, proctitis,

> > >enteritis, myelits, soft tissue radiation injuries and

> > >osteoradionecrosis) as well as mundane indications line preservation

> > >of skin flap/grafts and diabetic ulcers.

> > >

> > >Mhbot (1.3 and 1.5) does work in all of the above.

> >

This is simply not true!

Now, I will argue that mHBOT is helpful. and far more helpful than

Hyperbarists will agree with.

BUt, it simply is not proven.

All studies on those conditions have been completed at 2.2, 2.4 2.8

ATA 100% O2.

I have never seen any peer reviewed publications or research ever

done on those conditions using mHBOT.

And, that is the beginning and the end of the discussion.

We can both agree it is helpful. But, claiming any more is selling snake oil.

And, I for one have fought far too hard for the legitimate use of

HBOT for our kids to have it down graded to snake oil.

Ed

At 03:32 PM 10/11/2008, you wrote:

>Ed,

>

>First and foremost, I am a huge supporter of HBOT. The only point I

>was making when you started this argument was that the portables

>were just as feasible for treating CP as the hard chambers.

>

>Second, I am confused. A few posts ago, you said that the mild

>chambers were only approved for mountain sickness. Now you are

>claiming that they are useful in the treatment of brain injury. Which is it?

>

>Regardless, I am not trying to argue, as it does no one any good.

>What I am trying to do is provide information to people based on

>what I have seen, experienced, and read.

>

>If you remember, this whole argument started when I told the lady

>with the CP child that mild was as good for treating CP. You

>immediately started to question my statement. The McGill study

>actually showed mild was as good as high, I agree with you. What I

>may have misinterputed was your using that study to base your

>position on using only high pressure, which you have made clear is

>your belief.

>

>I will send you the study I was refering to later this evening.

>

>Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

>

> Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > > > India) are

> > > > > > evidence enough.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >If you want to g

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >**************

> > > > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > > > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > > > >(<<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http:/

> /local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://lo

> > cal.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.m>http://local.m

> > > >

> >apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><<http://local.mapquest.com/?nc

>

id=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://lo\

cal.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> >

> > > >

> > > > >

October 11, 2008

Ed,

I never once said it was proven through any study. What I did say is that I

have seen it used on all those conditions (with the exception of gas embolisms)

with great success. Especially with diabetic ulcers.

Brett

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Re: [ ] Wayne, please respond.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >The number of clinical trials (including the recent study out of

> > > > > India) are

> > > > > > evidence enough.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >If you want to g

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >**************

> > > > >New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.

> > > > >Dining, Movies, Events, News & amp; more. Try it out

> > > > >(<<<<http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http:/

> /local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://lo

> > cal.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><http://local.m>http://local.m

> > > >

> >apquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002><<http://local.mapquest.com/?nc

>

id=emlcntnew00000002>http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002>http://lo\

cal.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)

>

> >

> > > >

> > > > >

Sign In

Re: Wayne, please respond.

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Activity