Nitwits & Why Physicians Lose Credibility

[IdaBriggs]

78. Let me spell it out for you. I think I've made it clear elsewhere,

so pardon the repetition.

Certain forms of neuromuscular issues (including certain forms of cerebral palsy, sensory processing, developmental delays, etc.) appear to be caused by correctable micronutrient deficiencies. Those deficiencies can be caused by one or more of five separate reasons, including but not limited to prematurity, maternal deficiency, malnutrition, absorption, or exposure to teratregens. Symptoms include failure to thrive, etc. (see other post). Correction dosage is based on age/weight with easily available over-the-counter supplements available under a variety of name brands in a liquid format. For four out of five children, there can be significant improvement in symptoms within sixteen weeks, with younger children seeing faster responses. Parents can usually identify if there children are going to see improvement within eight weeks, with a pattern of improvement that includes a change in bowels within ten days, increase in appetite between fourteen and twenty-one days, and then increases in weight/height, and decreases in symptoms detailed in other post. Speed of improvement varies based on age when correction begins and amount of deficiency (micro-preemies!), with some tools (like the GMAC) showing promise for identifying correction rates.

If I could present the findings in an established format, I would. Unfortunately, because I am *not* an MD, that means standard publication / "peer review" is out, and convention attendance requires me to put out thousands of dollars as a Vendor *despite the fact I have nothing to sell.* There *needs* to be rigorous investigation, because I still don't know why one out of five see no benefit/it doesn't work for every child, and better controls need to be put in place.

I am *not* the victim of a scientific conspiracy - I am stymied by an insulated world where I do not have the cachet to explain what is going on, and any documentation I provide, including the health history of my own children, is dismissed as "anecdotal". Well, we documented 162 children within an inch of their lives for nearly a year, with results that are rightly called "miracles" by many, and *nothing is happening*.

Yes, the scientific community *should* be validating or disproving what I am reporting; if I am wrong, then they should be warning everyone about the dangers of this version of "woo" and if I am right, then they should be shouting it from the roof tops.

But I don't have an "in" to that community, other than talking / brainstorming with folks who don't want to be credited unless it is proven. I am a computer geek - not a medical researcher - and yes, I can explain it because it is already in the textbooks, but is not being applied in the NICU or by the pediatric neurologists, who should be falling all over themselves to take this task over, but are *really* busy with their own pet projects.

I reference the veterinary studies because there is already significant animal research on this topic, and it has been proven to be beneficial in the animal husbandry professions.

And it is darn inconvenient, but you know what would be *more* inconvenient? Living with myself if I wasn't doing everything I could to get this investigated, including ranting about the fact that nit-wits who don't know their heads from a hole in the ground dismiss the "miracle stories".

Until it is proven, it is "woo" -- and because it is "woo", it can't be investigated.

Lather, rinse, repeat.