Re: alleged “alternatives” for ADHD

[Patte Rosebank]

The danger with dubious medical tests & treatments is that some people are so convinced that something worked for them, that they cannot accept overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Which should we trust: The anecdotal evidence of people claiming to have been helped by this testing and treatment, OR the actual scientific proof provided by legitimate medical organizations made up of legitimate medical specialists who have conducted thorough scientific studies?

First of all, the primary argument against ALCAT testing is the fact that blood-testing is NOT a reliable method of testing for allergies. It produces far too many false positives and other anomalies, which are not supported by subsequent skin tests (which are highly reliable, and, therefore, the approved method of allergy testing).

Second, the argument in favour of ALCAT is entirely anecdotal. BAM claims it was “miraculous” for them, and then provides further anecdotal evidence involving friends and relatives. These anecdotes cover a wide range of medical conditions, including rashes, insomnia, obesity, bursitis, indigestion, and bronchitis. Maybe those people did see some improvement, but there’s no way of actually proving whether they did or not, or of measuring that improvement. (N.B. – The onus of proof is on those making the claims, not on those disputing them.)

Also, a hallmark of quack medical cures is that they claim to be miracle cures for a wide range of medical conditions. Such claims are a very effective way to attract a wide range of customers. (I’m just saying.)

Unfortunately, the anecdotal claims cannot be scientifically proven. The subjects of the “successful cases” cited, did not get tested by legitimate allergists, so there are no legitimate test results to compare to those of the ALCAT. “Real world” testing is not a reliable indicator, as it lacks the proper scientific controls. The arguments cited by Walt are not “CYBER/ PSEUDO-HYPOTHETICAL”. They are the ACTUAL findings of legitimate scientists and medical specialists, from around the world, who conducted extensive testing and investigation. The fact that ALCAT is not covered by any country’s medicare plans, and is even banned in some countries, supports those findings.

It is not “sniping from the sidelines” to question something, particularly if one can provide substantiating evidence of whether or not the thing is legitimate. But I can understand the feeling behind this. You’re sure it worked for you, and here are all these people saying, “It couldn’t possibly have worked. It’s a scam.”

Suggesting that people should “try SOMETHING – anything, it might work for you” is playing right into the hands of scammers. If people didn’t have that mentality, then nobody would buy those dubious medical treatments and cures that the quacks are selling. It’s bad enough that the treatments & cures don’t work, but many of them are downright dangerous—not least, because so many people will abandon legitimate medical treatments and put all their faith into the quackery, only to die soon after. If they’d stayed with the legitimate treatments, their chances of survival would have been much higher. This makes the anecdotal evidence which claims that people were able to get off medications by following the ALCAT program, very dangerous, as this could encourage others to abandon their legitimate medications in favour of the questionable “alternative” therapy.

The statement, “There have been a lot of studies that say ADD is B S – maybe they are right too?” is offensive to this community. But, again, I can understand the feeling behind it.

As for the statement that we need to “personally experience either failure or success with it”, in order to “know what you are talking about”, well, I don’t need to personally experience sticking my hand into a jar of hydrochloric acid to know that it’s going to result in serious chemical burns. Many others have scientifically proven that, and I trust their findings.

So I’ll take science, any day.

REPORT ABUSE