Articles by Saul Green

Regarding the Commentary by Edzard Ernst on peer reviewers and alternative treatements,1 how can this study be called a randomized and controlled study when the reviewers are "conditioned beforehand" with the fact that one of the treatments is "unconventional"? Did the study authors identify the nature of the unconventional treatment? Was it scientifically valid with respect to obesity? Was there a rationale reason for using it? Ernst gives no consideration to these factors. The results r

The letters by Clifton Blincoe and W. Crawford Clark published in The Scientist, (12[2]:8, Oct. 26, 1998) under the heading "Homeopathy and Alternative Medicine" emphasize the role that the placebo effect plays in alternative medicine and homeopathy. (The letters refer to articles published previously: S. Bunk, The Scientist, 12[18]:1, Sept. 14, 1998; D. Viza, The Scientist, 12[18]:8, Sept. 14, 1998.) The recent article by Sandra Blakeslee, "Placebos Prove So Powerful Even Experts Are Surpri

Wherever did Paul Smaglik get the idea that the boost in the National Institutes of Health's Office of Alternative Medicine (OAM) budget to $20 million was "unexpected" (P. Smaglik, "Office of Alternative Medicine Gets Unexpected Boost," The Scientist, Nov. 10, 1997, page 7)? In my opinion it was coldly calculated. No one, not even Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), would have expected Congress to give OAM institute status and a budget of $200 million. But by demanding just that and forcing the Congress

That consequence is the fact that the very nature of these treatments will require a "testing process" that could go on for as much as 10 years. Meanwhile, patients will continue to be "had." When rigorous scientific trials on laetrile, vitamin C, hydrazine sulfate, chelation therapy, chiropractic, and homeopathy proved them worthless, did the alternativists accept the results and quit foisting them on medical consumers? No way! They are still prompting them today. So what will all of OAM's te