Articles by Dr. Erdman are for informational purposes, and are not to be taken as specific medical advice.
This week a huge new metastudy was released comparing organic foods with conventionally grown foods. This study is a review of 343 prior peer reviewed studies from around the world. It is the largest review of organics ever completed. The study put a very positive light on organics showing better nutritional content and significantly less toxicity than conventionally grown foods.
You would think a study like this would be big news for
health loving people and be reported with lots of positive media attention. The
truth is that it was immediately attacked by the media and those promoting the
conventional growing market. The question is who do you believe?
Almost any information put forth by independent researchers
that challenges the big companies that control the market place is certain to
draw immediate condemnation, whether it is accurate or not. This includes big
drug companies, the big agriculture market or global warming advocates.
Discerning where the truth lies is a difficult task. There
are actually research and verification studies performed on research and
trials. Peer reviewed supposedly means it has been scrutinized and verified by
independent panels. Unfortunately, that is not always happening these days.
In 2010, three researchers from Harvard and Toronto listed
all the published trials on the five major classes of drugs. They then looked
to see two things: was the outcome of the trial positive for the particular
drug, and who funded the trial. As they say, follow the money. The results? Out
of 500 trials, 85% of the industry funded trials were positive and only 50% of
the independent funded studies were positive.
In 2007, researchers looked at all the studies for
‘cholesterol lowering’ statin drugs. A total of 192 trials were found. Industry
funded trials were 20 times more likely to be positive than those with
independent funding. Where is the
integrity of the researchers?
Similar fraud occurs even in research on good things. Take
the studies done by Dr. Dipak K. Das of the University of Connecticut on
resveratrol and red wine. Although there are plenty of good studies on this
topic, Dr. Das was blinded by research money flowing to him. He ended up
fabricating data in 145 instances.
Look at the global warming industry. We are inundated with
claims of doom due to warming temperatures. It is now a proven fact that NASA
and NOAA scientists, in a politically motivated attempt to rewrite history and
claim global warming, deliberately altered years of temperature data! The data
actually shows we are in a cooling trend, not a warming trend. But, that didn’t
fit the agenda, so they simply made it up.
So what’s my point? Ultimately the message is that just
because you hear a drug or treatment is backed by science, it is in no way a
guarantee of its safety or effectiveness. Likewise, if an alternative treatment
has not been published in a medical journal or proven by scientific method, it
does not mean it has no value or is unsafe.
We should be skeptical but open to new advances in treatment
or products. You need to realize you are responsible for your family’s health,
not me or anyone else, and certainly not drug companies vying for your dollars
with pseudoscience and falsified studies.
If you have questions, seek out a qualified health consultant who understands
health, not just disease, at a foundational level. Find someone who has experience helping
others resolve health challenges. In the chiropractic profession, I think we
understand these principles. It is not my job to heal you, but I can help
identify avenues you can pursue in your journey to better health. Take control
of your own healthcare. You are ultimately responsible for yourself.