PARTIAL LIST OF ENDORSEMENTS TO AVMA LETTER:
 

(Full documentation available for all endorsements. Documents received by regular mail or otherwise delivered with a hand-written signature are indicated by the word "[signed:]". All other documents were received electronically with the understanding they would be cited as having been "electronically signed" by the sender[s]. Endorsements arriving after submission of the letter to Dr. Freeman [on 6/24/98] will be forwarded to him at a later date.) ***

(This list is extensive)
 

Dear Dr. Imrie,

I would like to become a signatory to the Council's letter of objection to the 1996 AVMA Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine. I believe these guidelines fail to convey the appropriate skepticism of practices that the lack of objective documentation of safety and efficacy should dictate. It is a mistake to imply that these procedures are legitimately either alternate or complementary to scientifically based conventional practices until the standards applied to verify conventional medical/surgical therapies have been applied. The veterinary profession should preserve its integrity by insisting that each specific application of these procedures be scientifically evaluated before creating a safe haven for practitioners of these methods to continue their unrestricted use. It is gratuitous of the AVMA to suggest that "alternative medicine" should only be practiced by those who have been trained in these disciplines, when there are no certified programs for doing so. The lack of rigor in ad hoc "training" will not elevate the status of these methods, and should be abandoned in favor of promoting scientific evaluations by investigators with appropriate credentials

David H. Knight, DVM
Professor of Cardiology
School of Veterinary Medicine
Chief, Section of Cardiology Veterinary Hospital
University of Pennsylvania
900 Delancey Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6010

**********

I agree entirely with all the statements made in the following letter: [.] I am Director of and lecturer in Veterinary Anesthesiology at the Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies at the University of Edinburgh.

Eddie Clutton, BVSc MRCVS, DVA, Dip ECVA
Department of Veterinary Clinical Studies
Easter Bush Veterinary Centre
Roslin, Midlothian, SCOTLAND EH25 9RG

**********

As a veterinary academic working in the United Kingdom I was alarmed to hear that an organisation of such international standing as the AVMA has endorsed "alternative therapies" as valid veterinary procedures. I am disappointed to think that the country that has been in the vanguard of the modernisation of veterinary science world wide has allowed itself to be influenced by peddlers of quack medicine and charlatans to the inevitable detriment of the animals under our care.

Dr BM Corcoran MVB DipPharm, PhD, MRCVS
Senior Lecturer and Head of Cardiopulmonary Service
Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies
The University of Edinburgh,
Edinburgh, EH9 1QH

**********

Although not a Vet myself, I am the Associate Dean for Research here and have a very close interest in the growing threat of pseudoscience both in the Veterinary and Medical worlds. Hence I am in very close sympathy with your aims. I will circulate the information to my colleagues here at the Dick Vet.

Peter J. Brophy
Associate Dean for Research,
Professor of Veterinary Anatomy & Cell Biology
Dept. of Preclinical Veterinary Sciences,
University of Edinburgh,
Summerhall, Edinburgh EH9 1QH, UK
Email: Peter.Brophy@ed.ac.uk

**********

I agree fully with the above letter! I am a scientist and an owner of a cat, and it therefore upsets me to learn that pseudo-science and charlatans are active within the the American Veterinary Medical Association, disguised as "alternative" and "holistic medicine." It makes me think of Trofim Lysenko's so-called michurinist science of the Soviet Union of 50 years ago -- we do not want this in America, or elsewhere! It is great to see that some people take action!

Jesper Sjostrom M.Sc. in Molecular Biotechnology, Uppsala University, Sweden
D.E.A. de Differenciation, Genetique et Immunologie, ENS de Lyon, France
Ph.D.-student, Dept of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
Research Associate at CytoTherapeutics, Inc., Lincoln, Rhode Island, USA
Jesper Sjostrom, 89 North Main Street #4, Mansfield MA 02048
E-mail: jsjostrom@cyto.com, Per_Sjostrom@brown.edu, jessjo@ki.se

N.B. The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of my employer.

**********

I fully agree with the letter to John I. Freeman reproduced below. I am a physicist, retired from Argonne National Laboratory.

George S. Stanford

***********

I support the excellent defense of science contained in the above letter.

Lynda Callicotte
Microbiologist and Skeptic
New Brunswick, NJ

**********

I agree fully with the views expressed in the letter above, and I support the suggestions that are made.

Matthew A. Smith,
Neuroscientist
Center for Neural Science, New York University
4 Washington Place, Room # 809
New York, NY 10003

**********

I agree with the letter below.

Gary P. Posner, M.D.
Contributing Editor
"The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine"

**********

I Agree strongly with this letter. I am a physician. This stuff is very disturbing.

John J Green DO
Charleston, WV

**********

I agree with this.

Jerome Gordon
Attorney & animal lover
Reseda, California

**********

I agree with the attached letter.

John C. Pezzullo, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacology
Associate Professor, Department of Biomathematics and Biostatistics
Georgetown University Medical Center
Washington, DC

**********

I have read the complete text of Dr. Imrie's letter to Dr. Freeman, and I am in complete agreement.

Dr. William T. Colwell. Jr. [signed:]
PhD. Organic/Medicinal Chemistry
Menlo Park, California

**********

If the AVMA persists in this type of thing, I believe they deserve to be held up for ridicule. I agree with this letter. Please add my name.

James S. Miller, PhD. [signed:]
Chair and Professor of Biology
Goshen College
Goshen, Indiana

**********

I whole-heartedly agree with this and am completely against scientific or medical quackery in any form.

William D. Wood,
Biochemist/Medical Technologist

**********

I agree.

Charles R. Mathews, M.D., FCCP, Diplomate ABIM.

**********

I entirely agree with the following letter, and feel that much more work needs to be done prior to the acceptance of these practices into veterinary medicine. As well, the practices that are being discussed are currently a matter of debate among human medical practitioners, thus supporting the likelihood that they are largely ineffective, except through psychosomatic treatment. I am a molecular biologist, established reptile breeder, and a veterinary student. I am currently residing in Pullman, Washington.

Adolf K. Maas.

**********

I agree whole-heartedly with Dr. Imrie's position and fully support a critical, academic, (i.e. scientific) review of the veterinary "alternative medicine guidelines."

Scott L. Fausel, VMD [signed:]
Hyde Park, VT

**********

[Attached: copy of the AVMA letter in its entirety]

Gary Hurlbut, DVM [signed:]
Pacifica, California

**********

I agree wholeheartedly.

Bruce Max Feldman, DVM (May 11, 1998) [signed:]
1518 California
Berkeley, California, 94703

**********

Here's my signature on [the AVMA] letter. Please include it as you see fit.

Edward L. Thompson, DVM [signed:]
Toluca Lake, California 91602

**********

I agree with the content and fully support this letter.

Ron Rosner, DVM [signed:]
Grass Valley, California

**********

I agree with this!

Roy Haralson, DVM [signed:]
Everett, Washington

**********

Great letter! you can sign me up.

Mike Paros, DVM
Centralia, Washington

**********

I agree with the above for the following reasons, among others:

1. - The guidelines state that veterinary acupuncture and acutherapy are now considered an integral part of veterinary medicine." I find this unacceptable since acupuncture and its offshoots have never been demonstrated to be beneficial in humans beyond the possibility of a placebo effect.

2. - They further state that sufficient research exists documenting efficacy of chiropractic in humans. My comment: No, it does not and I would welcome being pointed in the direction of any evidence that is the case in any areas other than possible efficacy in certain cases of lower back pain - and even there is no indication that chiropractic treatment is any more effective than other types of manipulation.

3. - It is also claimed that "in veterinary medicine, 'the assurance of education in veterinary chiropractic is central to the ability of the veterinary profession to provide this service'." This is irrelevant because there is no shred of evidence that chiropractic has any basis in scientific reality. The basis chiropractic tenet, the so-called "subluxation," has been demonstrated time after time to be nonexistent.

4. - Additionally your guidelines state: "clinical and anecdotal evidence exists to indicate that veterinary homeopathy may be beneficial" and that "...it is imperative that veterinary homeopathy be practiced only by licensed veterinarians who have been educated in veterinary homeopathy." This is a preposterous statement since the principles of homeopathy run counter to every law of physics and chemistry. This impossibility applies equally to animals and humans.

I am a consumer advocate who is especially interested in protecting people and their pets from fraudulent healthcare modalities. I reside at 4562 Dear Trail Court in Northbrook IL, 60062. Email: tgobbi@aol.com.

Kurt Youngmann

**********

I would like to be on your petition protesting the incursion of pseudo-science into the field of veterinary medicine. Professionals should set a standard of excellence for our society, not devolve down to its lowest common denominator.

John Kelly
Glendale California

**********

I agree with this letter. I am a concerned dog and reptile lover

Douglas Taylor

Marsha Taylor

**********

Couldn't agree more with the letter above -

Leslie Irizarry, (Speech Pathologist)
Seattle, WA

**********

I agree wholeheartedly with the above intervention -

David Irizarry (BMET)
Seattle, WA

**********

I am appalled at the introduction of pseudoscience into veterinary medicine: this is cruelty to animals, pure and simple. I should like to express my agreement with the [preceding] letter:

Dr. George W. Atkinson (retired)
1755 Comstock Lane
San Jose, Californai 95124

**********

I completely agree with all of the above.

Daniel Timothy Strain
concerned citizen
Houston, Texas

**********

As an owner of many pets who spends a great deal of money for their medical care every year, I would like to state that I agree whole-heartedly with the letter by Dr. Imrie et al. I am, frankly, dismayed that these "Guidelines" were published by the AVMA. I assure you that I will immediately remove my animals from the care of any veterinarian who states that he or she uses acupuncture or homeopathic medicine, until and unless they can show me properly designed scientific studies which show these highly questionable methods are actually effective.

Barbara A. Meissner

**********

Please refer to the attached letter from yourself to Dr. Freeman. I am in complete agreement with you on this issue and, as a concerned citizen and pet owner, am appalled to think that I could find myself in the position of having to worry about whether or not my veterinarian is going to "treat" my cat Diana with unproven alternatives such as acupuncture or homeopathy. I do hope that, if worse comes to worse, and the recently adopted guidelines are not revoked, the consumer will have ready access to a list of veterinarians who intend to utilize this kind of treatment. This way I can avoid the acupuncturists and embrace the scientists.

Joel Grant
Bothell, WA

**********

I, too, am appalled at this development. As an educated consumer of veterinary services, I want to be assured that the veterinarian with whom I am dealing understands the science behind his or her practice. I want no part of unproven methods or practices.

Bill Hoyt
Middletown, CT

**********

I agree with the content and import of this letter. I am a dog/horse/goat/sheep/cat owner and an animal lover. I will not use a veterinarian who subscribes to unproven, unscientific methods to treat my animals. We do not need a repeat of Philippine " psycho surgery" or "therapeutic touch" nonsense in animal care.

Jim Berry
610 Eden Estates Dr.
New Braunfels, TX 78132

**********

I agree with this,

Ed LaBonte - concerned citizen
Worcester, MA

**********

As an animal lover, a high school science teacher, and a naturally skeptic person, I'd like to submit my name to be included on the Task Force's letter concerning pseudoscientific practices in veterinary medicine. The potential for abuse--and the disregard for the health and safety of animals by the American Veterinary Medical Association -- is disturbing. I hope that the combined force of this letter will exact some change in the current system.

Shawn Yasutake
Golde, Colorado

**********

Eric R. Barnes,
Concerned citizen
Dover, DE

**********

I agree with this.

I am a concerned consumer of Veterinary services.

William K. Thomson
Centerville, Ohio

**********

I agree with the content of this letter.

Steve Johnson, (Electrical Engineer, Chiron Diagnostics)
2171 Washington Ave.
Memphis TN 38104

**********

I agree with the content of your letter. Please add my name and e-mail address to your support list. My wife and I are both in human health care (registered nurse and nursing home administration, respectively). At home, we have three dogs and two cats. I have always found the alternative therapies to be very suspect. The typically wild claims are rarely backed up with true, objective scientific methods and reasoning. I applaud your efforts to call JAVMA's endorsement of such therapies to the attention of the public. Even if they claim that they have not endorsed these therapies, they have just used weasel words to do so. Especially maddening is their evasion of supporting their case by claiming it is none of your business. Sounds more like they are afraid of scrutiny.

John Barton

Bonnie Barton, RN

**********

That all of this doesn't go without saying among veterinarians alarms me, so I feel compelled to comment that I totally agree with the above individuals on this matter.

Sandy Watson
Concerned Animal Lover
Simi Valley, California

**********

I fully agree with and support the mission of the NCAHF Task Force on Veterinary Pseudoscience as described in their letter to John I Freeman, president of the AVMA.

Rebecca Hartong
Concerned citizen and animal lover,
Fairfax, VA

**********

As a nurse, an animal lover, and a longtime proponent of scientific inquiry, I agree with the above letter and I am appalled at these guidelines. Animals cannot make informed decisions about their care, nor can they participate willingly in the placebo effect. For the AVMA to legitimize so-called alternative veterinary practices in an industry largely unregulated by third-party payors sounds like an attempt to increase revenues at the expense of gullible owners and vulnerable animals.

Anne E. Jones RN, MA
Director, Wizdom Medical Services
1700 Diagonal Road
Alexandria, VA 22314
Fax: 703-548-7902

**********

I agree with this letter.

Ronda Matthews Cluff (rcluff@mondec.monmouth.edu)
a responsible pet owner and an animal rights activist
Eatontown, NJ

**********

As a pet owner and firm believer in protection against health fraud and mysticism masquerading as science, I support the following letter and would boycott any veterinarian who uses alt med modalities.

Sincerely

Brian D Madigan
Syracuse, NY

**********

I wholeheartedly agree with you on the general principle of opposing what is, in essence, quackery for animals. If acupuncture is approved, why not ground up tigers' paws for breeding horses? Advocates of rationality must draw the line now. I am an administrator by vocation, but I am also a concerned person by nature. Unproven medicines are different from methods which have no rational basis for their supposed efficacy. Please forgive me if I seem to rant above, but this "holisitic" nonsense does not belong in medicine, human or animal. Or in this century for that matter.

Glenn Crawford
Concerned Citizen
Toronto, Ontario, Canada

**********

I concur wholeheartedly.

Jon Blumenfeld
Pet Owner
CT Chapter Chairman, The New England Skeptical Society
Norwalk, CT

**********

I fully agree with this note.

Stephen J. Goodson
3434 Aviary Way
Lake Ridge Virgnia 22192

**********

As a rational pet owner from Austin, Texas, I agree completely with this letter.

Jeff Dee

"It is as morally bad not to care whether a thing is true or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to care how you got your money as long as you have got it." -Edmund Way Teale, "Circle of the Seasonns", 1950

**********

--- I agree with this.

Viggo Andersen
concerned skeptic
Copenhagen, Denmark

**********

Stop the nonsense [.]. We will consider any vet dishonest or willfully negligent [in failing to] inform themselves that alternative medicine has been shown to be nothing but quackery and pseudoscience.

Godfrey & Carol Baumgartner (BSEE, Med Office Mgr.) [signed:]
2467 Betlo Ave
Mountain View, California 94043-4105 ,

**********

Stephenie J Frederick [signed:]
2243 E. Crescent
Alameda, CA sjfred@earthlink.net

**********

I am strongly against alternative medicine without double blind proof of any true scientific help [.]

Leonard Avedian [signed:]
1441 Avacado 602
Newport Beach,
California 92660-7707

**********

Al Collins [signed:]
1618 Gunderson Ave
Berwyn, Illinois

**********

Chris G. Oldman [signed:]
Redondo Beach, California

**********

I'm a member of the National Council Against Health Fraud, Inc., and I'm in complete agreement with this petition.

Don Paulin [signed:]
17052 Green St. #25
Huntington Beach, California 92649

**********

Asking people to pay for non-scientific and unproved treatment [.] is unacceptable in any practice of medicine.

Jean Miller [signed:]
e-mail:
5028 243 Ave. NE
Redmond, Washington 98053

**********

Richard J. Edelman [signed:]
433 N. Camden Dr.
Ste. 1124
Beverly Hills, California 90210

**********

Keep up the battle against foolishness, and keep me posted if possible. Thanks!

George Giannakoulias [signed:]
President, Free Thinkers of USF
Clearwater, Florida 33765 e-mail:

**********

I, too, oppose the certification by official medical organizations of fraudulent or pseudoscientific techniques as beneficent, as much in the case of animal medicine as with human.

Everett Young [signed:]
3274 Longleaf Rd.
Tallahassee, Florida 32310

**********

Francois Choquette [signed:]
Santa Monica, California

**********

Endorsing fraudulent medical treatments should be considered cruelty to animals!

Kat Arbour, Physical Therapist [signed:]

Dave Kacal, Clinical Psychologist
117 N 15th #2401
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101

**********

Where I live, many people have as much respect for vets as they do for used car salesmen. Your guidelines sanctioning the sale of dangerous and useless drugs and therapies will give people a lower opinion yet of the profession.

Rosemary Jacobs [signed:]
President
Spay/Neuter Fund,
Inc. 3 Main St.
Derby Line, Vermont 05803

**********

I agree with this letter and am very dismayed at what the AVMA has done. I hope they consider the advice of the Task Force.

Bill Ross 5-15-98 [signed:]
A Concerned Pet Owner
Troy, Ohio

**********

I heartily agree with the entirety of this letter. Human alternative medicine is heavily based on the mind-body connection and the feel-good properties of alternative therapies. My animals cannot be persuaded that these will work, and thus the placebo effect seen in humans is likely to be weak if there at all. The advancement all of medicine relies on the testing of [all] new "conventional" AND "unconventional" therapy, adopting ones with positive effects, and throwing out those without. Alternative medicine, most of which has [either] been [in]adequately studied or has been demonstrated to be quackery-laden, has little place in veterinary medicine. Please consider [this letter] carefully and realize that the current position of the AVMA on alternative therapies is more detrimental than it could ever be beneficial.

Lisa Dryer
Psychology/Pre-Med Student, Carleton College
Northfield, MN, USA

**********

I am in agreement with the below subject letter. Although the AVMA is a US institution, what happens in the US often follows in Canada; therefore my particular concern. Pseudo-science and irrationality have no legitimate role, no matter why, when or where.

Laurie Forbes
Chemical Engineeer & dog owner
Calgary, Alberta, Canada

**********

As a physicist, I am appalled by claims that quantum mechanics somehow provides a scientific basis for alternative medial therapies. I am saddened to see that veterinary medicine is now also falling victim to what I have called "quantum quackery." I fully support the efforts of those vets who are speaking out against the 1996 AVMA Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine.

Victor J. Stenger
Professor of Physics
University of Hawaii

**********

As a scientist and an animal lover, I endorse the above letter. Our animals depend on us to make sound judgments with respect to their medical care, and this responsibility must not be shirked by condoning veterinary quackery.

Rebecca Long, Nuclear Engineer
President, Ga. Council Against Health Fraud, Inc.
Owner: http:
2277 Winding Woods Dr.
Tucker, Ga 30084 USA

**********

Thanks for the opportunity to co-sign the attached letter. I am in complete agreement with both the tone and the particulars. The shoddy thinking of the AVMA gurus is nothing less than astonishing.

I am a professional geneticist, retired from my most recent position as Director of the Clinical Genetics Lab at Children's Hospital in Oakland, California. Prior to that, I was Director of the CGL, and Adjunct Professor of Pediatrics, at the University of California at San Francisco. I am a Board-Certified Clinical Cytogeneticist, and a Fellow of the AMA's College of Medical Genetics.

Let's hope that together we can reverse the AVMA's slide into intellectual and professional oblivion.

William D Loughman, PhD, FACMG
Berkeley, California USA
wdlkhl@ibm.net

**********

I fully agree with the above letter. As a practicing veterinarian (35 yrs), I am very concerned about the number of my colleagues who are employing alternative (now "complementary") modalities. I believe that these pseudoscientific methods and beliefs constitute nothing less than fraud on the pet-owning public. I would urge the AVMA to seriously reconsider these Guidelines"

L. Paul Lanctot, V.M.D (UP 63)
21 N. Sugan Rd.
New Hope, Pa. 18938

**********

I support the position set forth in Dr. Imrie's letter and oppose any form of voodoo medicine, i.e, "alternative" medicine, that relies on unsubstantiated, unvalidated, and untestable hypotheses. Scientific medicine is the only medicine worth the name. Anything else is Dark Ages "medicine".

Robert L. Fitzke, JD
2831 Lake Lansing Rd.
Lansing, Michigan, USA, 48823

**********

I support your letter contained on your website. I am a Computer Scientist and concerned citizen.

Aditya Mishra
ICQ Pager: 1131674
homepage:
Voice mail:

**********

I would like to add my name to the above letter and endorse the statements. The use of unproven, unscientific therapeutic methodologies on animals where they cannot even profit from "placebo" (suggestion) effect is not appropriate for reputable Veterinarians and reflects upon those honest, sincere and medically scientific veterinariy practitioners.

Robert G. Grimes
Jacksonville, Florida, USA 32257-5601

**********

Please add me to the list of endorsers of your excellent letter to the AVMA.

Tim Gorski, MD, FACOG
chairman, Dallas/Fort Worth Council Against Health Fraud
Arlington, Texas

**********

My name is John F. Bentley. I would very much appreciate your reading the following letter. I completely support the views expressed therein, and in the true spirit of free, scientific debate, I would urge you to allow the NCAHF to participate in the review of the Guidelines proposed by the AVMA.

John F. Bentley, DVM, MS
Veterinarian
Masters Degree and Residency in Veterinary Surgery from Auburn University
College of Veterinary Medicine
Mobile, AL, USA jfbent@concentric.net

**********
I want to personally endorse the letter below and give my support to those principles and standards promulgated by the NCAHF Task Force on Veterinary Pseudoscience.

Robert Paeff, DC (Signed)
Town & Country Medical
81709 Doctor Carreon Blvd., Suite A-3
Indio, CA 92201-5509
Riverside County-California, USA

**********

Please add my name to the letter confronting the AVMA on the 1996 guidelines on Alt. and Comp. Vet. Med. Human as well as animal care should be based on evidence not marketing.

John H. Renner M.D.
President l998 National Council for Reliable Health Information (formerly the NCAHF).
Clinical Professor of Family Practice,
University of Missouri,
Kansas City, Missouri

**********

I concur with Dr. Imrie's and Dr. Ramey's concerns as detailed in the above letter. The acceptance and endorsement of poorly validated and even nonscientific theories and techniques by the (once) scientifically based medical and veterinary communities undermines the basis on which the best decisions can be made for the health care and well being of humans and animals. We do not need to return to the Dark Ages of superstition in order to provide care. Why not use iridology? It supposedly worked for an owl in Europe.

Janice A. Lyons, RN, MAEd
Director, CINAM, inc. (Current Issues In Alternative Medicine)
Asheville, North Carolina

**********

I wholeheartedly agree with the Task Force statement, and I would expand on one point.

The use of acupuncture, whether in animals or humans, is based on a primitive medical ideology which claims that a mystical "energy" of some kind moves through channels called "meridians." An imbalance in the flow of this alleged energy supposedly produces illness; balance can allegedly be restored by sticking needles into the patient at supposedly critical points along these meridians. The principal difficulty with this ideology is those meridians; they do not exist.

Notice that I do not state that the meridians have not yet been discovered, nor do I state that their existence cannot be confirmed. The anatomy of the human body and of the animals of interest to veterinary medicine is understood down to the sub-cellular level. The meridians, provably, DO NOT EXIST.

It is disturbing to discover that the organized veterinary profession appears to endorse an ideology such as the one acupuncture is based on, which is critically dependent for its validity on a notion that is provably false. As a pet owner, I plan to question the veterinarians I consult as to their adherence to such ideologies; I also see a bright future ahead for veterinary malpractice attorneys.

James C. Giglio
1512 Jasper Street
Wheaton MD 20902
Computer programmer, former high school science teacher.

**********

I whole-heartedly support the efforts of the NCAHF to discourage the use of unproven treatments by veterinarians. The promotion of such treatments is immoral, unscientific, and unprofessional.

Lewis Vaughn
Executive Editor
The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine
Editor
Nutrition Forum
Amherst, New York

**********

As a physicist I am extremely concerned about false medical claims made on the basis of physics, most typically regarding quantum mechanics. No medical claim can ever meaningfully use quantum mechanics as its foundation. It is scary that the proponents of alternative therapies for animals are so willing to move "forward" based on material of which they have no understanding.

As a scientist I fully support the letter above.

Roahn H. Wynar
Atomic and Molecular Experimental Physics
Columnist, The Daily Texan, Student Newspaper of the University of Texas at Austin
http://www.ph.utexas.edu/~rwynar

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits." - Einstein

**********

I agree with this. I am a biochemist/microbiologist and an animal lover.

Lance C. Russell, MS
Department of Pathology
University of South Alabama
2451 Fillingim Street
Mobile, Alabama 36617

**********

I to am concerned regarding the "quick to endorse" attitude that the AVMA has adopted regarding alternative therapies. It is surprising considering that malpractice is of concern to every practicing veterinarian in the US today. The premise of good practice as opposed to malpractice is based upon a level of performance and a standard of care expected by ones peers and the public. These standards are based upon tried and proven therapies, where possible, supported by a body of medical/scientific literature. The high standards and integrity on AVMA appear to have been compromised with their attitude regarding alternative therapies. If a practicing veterinarian wants to offer other alternative services to the public then that is a personal/business decision but not one the AVMA should concern itself with.

I agree with your letter regarding this issue. I am a small animal veterinary internal medicine specialist at Washington State University in Pullman Washington. Please share these concerns with the AVMA membership and all who may be interested.

Michael P. Moore, DVM, Ms, dip ACVIM, int. med.

**********

As a dog-owner and an advocate of scientific medicine, I enthusiastically support the NCAHF Task Force letter criticizing the AVMA's 1996 Alt Med Guidelines. The acceptance of pseudoscientific nonsense in veterinary medicine adds further credence to the push to replace much of medicine (human as well as veterinary) with mystical nostrums. Veterinarians should be held to high scientific standards.

Patrick Curry
Consumer Activist
Pittsburgh, PA

**********

I am in support of the attached letter concerning veterinary pseudoscience. Since 1992 I have taught an elective course on "alternative medicine" to medical students, and have read widely concerning the various methods falling under this broad heading. These methods have not been shown to be safe and effective, and many of them are based on principles which are contrary to scientific knowledge. It is disappointing that pseudoscientific medical approaches are increasingly being used in veterinary medicine. I support your efforts to ensure that the standards of veterinary medicine be based on scientific knowledge.

Thomas J. Wheeler, PhD
Associate Professor of Biochemistry
University of Louisville School of Medicine

**********

Based on extensive personal experience scientifically reviewing the claims of so-called alternative medicine, I agree with the NCAHF Task Force's objections to the AVMA guidelines. Homeopathy's premise of repeated dilutions would have one conclude, "If nothing works, then twice nothing must work even better." Surely the AVMA would not have us accept such nonsense.

Dr. Saul Green
Previously: Cancer Researcher, Memorial Sloan Kettering Institute
Currently: President, ZOL Consulting, New York, NY
Author of over 40 professional publications

**********

I am concerned about unscientific practices making their way into veterinary medicine, both as a physicist who cares about the public appreciation of science, and as someone with two cats who frequently need veterinary attention. It is bad enough coping with feline heart problems, without worrying whether their vet is subjecting them to dubious "alternative" therapies.

Taner Edis
Physicist
5255 Norma Way #163
Livermore CA 94550

**********

We are not veterinarians nor medical practitioners (we do have several degrees between us), but we are firmly committed to the value and importance of a strictly scientific approach to gaining knowledge (as described, e.g., in Carl Sagan's wonderful book, "The Demon-Haunted World: Science As a Candle in the Dark"). We have read and endorse the letter above and encourage you to use our names and our address in its support.

New approaches, even seemingly irrational ones, should perhaps sometimes be tried, but should never be admitted to the canons of good practice, in human medicine or in that for any other species, without demonstration of effectiveness through rigorous testing under the most controlled conditions possible. Anecdotal evidence is occasionally sufficient to generate rigorous research, but is never sufficient for concluding that practices of any kind have the purported effect.

Ed and Diane Buckner
4029 Benell Ct
Smyrna GA 30082-3905

(Ed is a soon-to-be-retired educational researcher and is Regional Director for the Council for Secular Humanism; Diane is a retired teacher.)

**********

I endorse the letter to the AVMA.

Paul Bernhardt, M.S. (Member, American Psychological Society)

**********

By adding my name to the signers of this letter I am protesting the spread of quackery into veterinary medicine. It's bad enough that, out of ignorance, fear, and/or desperation, many humans choose worthless or unproven therapies for themselves. However, there can be no excuse for people to subject pets and other animals (which have no choice in the matter) to "cures" that are not based on credible scientific evidence.

Andrew A. Skolnick, M.S., associate editor,
Journal of the American Medical Association
(for identification purpose only),
Forest Park, IL 60130

**********

I fully endorse evidence-based medicine and I reject if any unproven therapies are introduced in veterinary medicine. You may put my name on the list of supporters. Good luck with your campaign !

Prof. Dr. Felix R. Althaus, Director
Institute of Pharmacology & Toxicology
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine
University of Zürich
Winterthurerstrasse 260
CH-8057 Zürich, Switzerland

**********

I wholeheartedly endorse this letter and look forward to your response.

Eric Reinertson, DVM
Section Head Equine Dept.
Iowa State University, College of Veterinary Medicine

**********

Several years ago I inquired of the AVMA evidence for the use of acupuncture and chiropractic in animals. I knew, and still know, that acupuncture and manipulation and other "alternatives" are ineffective, and that perceived improvements are the result of altered perceptions, misinterpretations of events, causality error, and emotional distortion of observations.

No one at the AVMA could give me references for effectiveness. I was referred to a then official, who was a practitioner or believer in acupuncture, and he could not produce scientific evidence for effectiveness. My quest ceased there.

I am pleased to endorse Dr. Imrie's position on this matter. Continued endorsement of "alternatives" by the AVMA lends undue credence to these ineffective methods and perpetuates erroneous opinion. It also lends credence to inappropriate claims of effectiveness in humans.

Wallace Sampson MD
Past Chair, Board of Directors, National Council Against Health Fraud
Editor in Chief, The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine
841 Santa Rita Ave
Los Altos CA 94022

**********

Hear, hear!! I fully endorse you and your associates stand on these issues. It is most disheartening but we encounter first year veterinary students who subscribe to these fads and their purveyors. It is almost impossible to reeducate these "students" and convince them of the wisdom of using scientific principles to judge a therapy before using it. I hope you are successful in making organized veterinary medicine responsible to scientific standards. The endorsement by the AVMA is very disturbing to me... Please add my name to your list.

David R. Gross, DVM, PhD
Professor & Head
Department of Veterinary Biosciences
College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Illinois

**********

As a film critic for the New York Daily News, I am accustomed to separating fact from fiction and appreciating each for what it can offer. So as an avid follower of science and the companion of an African Gray parrot, I find your new AVMA Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine appalling and dangerous, both intellectually and on behalf of the poor animals (like my parrot) who would be deprived of adequate health care because of the superstitions of some of their owners. "Dumb and Dumber" was a very successful movie in terms of audience adoration, but that does not make it an important movie in terms of filmmaking technique; please do not acquiesce to New Age lobbyists merely because they are persistent. Science and medicine are about weeding out fact from fiction, very much like movie criticism.

Jami Bernard
NYC
JamiBern@aol.com

**********

I have read the following letter and agree with the concerns expressed regarding the AVMA Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Medicine. I have asked Drs. Imrie and Ramey to include me along with other concerned veterinarians in objecting to AVMA's endorsement of such questionable therapeutic modalities. In fact, in AVMA's own Principles of Veterinary Medical Ethics under Testimonials and Endorsements, subsection (b), it is considered unethical to endorse any procedure which has not been subjected to peer-review with the results of properly controlled clinical studies published in a recognized scientific journal. It goes without saying that our national organization must be held to the same level of ethical standards as its members.

Nat T. Messer IV, DVM
Associate Professor, Equine Medicine and Surgery
Diplomate, American Board of Veterinary Practitioners
Certified in Equine Practice
Member, AAEP Board of Directors, District IV

**********

I enthusiastically support the excellent defense of science contained in the above letter.

Richard Hill MA VetMB PhD DipACVIM MRCVS
Assistant Professor
University of Florida,
College of Veterinary Medicine,
Gainesville FL

**********
I am just becoming aware of the AVMA stand on homeopathy and must say that as a clinician, researcher and teacher I vigorously object to the stand that has been taken. I believe we - the profession - should make medical recommendations only based on sound scientific principles and evidence - essentially the peer review process; I am unaware that veterinary homeopathic medicine has met these criteria. I hope you will support full publication of this controversy in the JAVMA as well as full announcements of the AVMA committee membership and process which will reassess this official stand in 1999.

Brendan McKiernan, DVM ,Diplomate ACVIM
Professor of Medicine
University of Illinois

**********

The ONLY way to establish the effectiveness of a substance is to subject it to scientific studies. Any medical professional has an obligation to require studies for a particular remedy, and to recommend/not recommend accordingly.

Faith Thibodeau, MS, RD, LD, CDE (registered dietitian, certified diabetes educator)
Saco, Maine

**********

I have been concerned about recent trends in alternative medicine and believe that most, if not all of them are being vigorously promoted by those who would most likely profit from them and labeled as legitimate medical practices by associations and committees who seem to be anything but critical in their examination of the efficacy of such therapies.

For many years I've made a hobby of studying paranormal and extraordinary claims and have become disturbed at the increasing gullibility of not only the general public, but of professionals as well. The advent of some New Age may be welcome to Hollywood celebrities and astrologers but should be well distanced by those who have a profound commitment to standards of rigor and excellence, most notably those in health care.

Health care professionals must learn the lessons of the past and realize that their obligation is to practice only that which can be unequivocally demonstrated as a legitimate therapy. Where animals are concerned, they have no choice but to be dumb victims of whatever therapy we humans administer. Since they have no choice and are utterly unable to make judgments for themselves, it is particularly distressing that they are being subjected to these demonstrably bogus treatments.

As a person who knows the value of rigorous science in the evaluation of medical practices as well as a person who loves pets, I appeal to you to suspend these practices until proper medical evidence is available. I assure you, it will not be forthcoming, as some of these practices have already been adequately debunked. In the meantime, if any vet performs such practices on my pets and they suffer consequences as the result of having been denied the best available conventional treatments, I will sue for malpractice. I will also investigate the possibility of liability on the part of those in the AVMA who produced the alternative "guidelines" and advocated or permitted the use of such invalid therapies from a position of central authority and respectability within their profession.

Brant Watson (teacher, pet lover, advocate for rational inquiry)
Pasadena, Md.

**********

I concur and whole-heartedly support the letter above. [.] I am deeply concerned that veterinarians would get involved in this folderol and especially that the AVMA would endorse unproven treatments. As a engineer by education, I am constantly perplexed that people will so readily accept such things without rigorous examination. Would any of them want to fly in an airplane designed by "alternative engineers" or flown by "alternative pilots"?

I am a long-time horseman (27 years), riding instructor (22 years), and now a professional trainer. I've worked with and trusted my horses' lives to wonderful, skillful veterinarians who care deeply about the animals they treat and, for that reason, are extremely careful about what they use. They also understood the economics of owning a horse and wouldn't prescribe, sell, or perform some expensive therapy that they didn't have strong evidence for without explaining the risks, possible benefits, costs, and confidence they had in the therapy.

I am now the head (Forum Manager) of the Horses Forum on CompuServe, but this does not necessarily represent the views of CompuServe nor PetsForum Group, Inc., the operator of the Horses Forum. I've been a volunteer instructor, clinician, examiner, and leader in the United States Pony Clubs, Inc. (tm) at the local, regional, and national levels for almost 25 years, but this statement also does not represent the views of the United States Pony Clubs, Inc. nor of any other member, leader, or official of the USPC.

George C. Slusher, Lieutenant Colonel, USAF (Retired)
BS, MS, Mechanical Engineer (MIT)\
Eugene, Oregon, USA gslusher@rio.com

**********

Most people are of sound mind and have the freedom of choice to find information about and to select the modality of medical care they want. This entails accepting responsibility for their actions. Since the choice of medical care affects their own health it is their right to exercise this choice. Animals, however, have no such choice or freedom of action, and therefore need to be protected against ineffective and harmful veterinary practices.

I am an anaesthesiologist who also has a master's degree in biochemistry and a special interest in pseudoscientific medicine.

Dr.Leon Retief
Bellville, South Africa

**********

I have reviewed the Guidelines as published by the AVMA, as well as the above letter written by the NCAHF Task Force, and am in complete agreement with the Task Force in their response. At the behest of the animal-owning public, the veterinary profession has been organized, regulated, and sponsor research to improve the quality of health care provided to animals. The position taken by the AVMA is a huge step backwards from this goal. In my career, I have been a private practitioner (Texas), university practitioner (Virginia Tech), instructor (Oklahoma State University), researcher (Johns Hopkins University), and regulatory official (FDA Center for Veterinary Medicine). I have a solid grasp of the extensive documentation which supports "traditional" veterinary medical practice. This documentation simply does not exist for the vast majority of "alternative" modalities. It is thus quite frustrating to find these modalities placed on equal footing with scientific practice by the very organization which is supposed to protect the veterinary and animal communities from poor medical practices. I fervently hope that the AVMA will reconsider and rescind these poorly conceived guidelines.

Michael Scott Davis, DVM MS
dritwist@aol.com

**********

We agree entirely with the following letter to Dr. Freeman.

Charles A. Liles & Kimberly B. Williams
Freelance skeptics and animal lovers
Lafayette, LA

**********

I support the comments and principles outlined in the above letter. The public, who looks to the American Veterinary Medical Association for sound advice, has been given misinformation by the AVMA on alternative therapies. I urge you to correct this situation immediately and follow the suggestions outlined in the above letter.

John E. Madigan, DVM, Diplomate ACVIM
Professor
Department of Medicine and Epidemiology
School of Veterinary Medicine
University of California, Davis, California 95616

**********

I fully concur with the above statements. When I seek healthcare for myself, I only use Doctors who use science based treatments because I want the most efficatious treatments possible. I will in the future, when seeking treatment for my cat, find out if the Veterinary Doctor condones or agrees with the AVMA's view point on "alternate treatments" (read, ineffective and non scientific treatments). I will seek treatment for her elsewhere if he does. I want the best scientific treatment for her. I am a retired Geographic Information Systems Supervisor, and just waving my hands at the computer (the equivalent of an alternative treatment) never has and never will make a smart map, or any other kind, for me.

John R. Bilderback bildrbck@ix.netcom.com
19101 Nadal St. #140
Canyon Country, CA 91351-1291

**********

I applaud the work you're doing to combat pseudoscience in veterinary medicine. Since I also love animals, I am against animal treatments that have not been proven to be safe and/or effective. I am an exercise physiologist and registered dietitian in private practice.

Ellen Coleman, RD, MA, MPH
Member, NCAHF
Riverside, CA.

**********

I have read the letter from you to the AVMA. I agree completely with the views expressed. I have taught, researched and practised veterinary science for over 50 years and am concerned at the increase in alternative therapies in the branch of veterinary science in which I am most involved - equine track practice. Each time I visit the US I become more disturbed at the decrease in the proportion of science in this type of practice. Because of the amount of good research being done the proportion should be increasing. I find this very worrying.

Clifford H G Irvine BVSc 1 June 1998
postgraduate doctorates in Science and Veterinary Science from Sydney, Massey and Otago Universities.

I am also a Fellow of the Royal Society (NZ) and a Fellow of the Australian College of Veterinary Scientists
Professor Emeritus, Animal and Food Science Division, Box 84,
Lincoln University, New Zealand

Prof. C.H.G. Irvine, DSc, DSc (hc), DVSc
Equine Research Unit
PO Box 84
Lincoln University
New Zealand

**********

As a board certified Internist who confronts the quackery of Alternative Medicine daily I whole heartedly agree with the above comments. Let us, as reasonable and scientifically trained professionals, lend our expertise to accurate and reliable information rather than misinformation.

Kerry D Friesen, M.D.
P.O. Box 598
Collegedale TN, 37315

**********

I agree with and strongly support the attached letter.

Robert Altenburg
concerned skeptic,
Mechanicsburg, PA

**********

As a person trained in science, I heartily endorse the following letter to the President of AVMA from you [Dr. Imrie] and Dr. Ramey. I am concerned when proponents of "folk medicine" try to supplant treatment established by solid scientific research and proven practice. I am also an animal lover and do not wish to see veterinary medicine degraded.

Joanne N. Green, M.S., General Science
Public school science teacher, retired
Hydrologist, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, retired
Seattle, Washington, U.S.A

**********

I have read your letter to Dr. Freeman and fully agree with you. While we know a "placebo effect" sometimes helps human patients, it makes no sense at all to expect any placebo benefit to animal patients. Treatments for veterinary patients must be based on scientific evidence, i.e., what we know through controlled and repeatable experimentation. I believe those who promote alternative treatments such as acupuncture are trying to take advantage of the widespread lack of scientific understanding on the part of the general public. I applaud you for resisting this.

Patricia Lewis
Research technologist, retired,
University of Washington
Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

**********

As a cat owner, rabbit owner, and concerned skeptic, I enthusiastically endorse the above letter. Caring for ill pets is sufficiently stressful that one does not need to subject them to unproven, so-called complementary medicine.

Kristine Danowski, B.A., M.Ed.
Ph.D. student in pharmaceutical chemistry

**********

By profession, I manage the Northwest America portion of a data network owned by Societe Internationale de Telephonique Aeronautique (SITA), a not-for-profit organization owned by over 500 member airlines in 224 countries. I have hepatitis C and was fortunate enough to receive a life saving liver transplant. HCV patients and their families are frequently the target of medical quackery that sometimes leads HCV patients into rejecting conventional treatment. I am unalterably opposed to "alternate medicine" which has no scientific validity, whether it is for people or animals. Thank you for taking a courageous stand against the medical Luddites who are trying to lead us back into the dark ages.

David Lang
President and Educational Chairman,
Hepatitis Education Project

(a non-profit organization registered in the State of Washington)

**********

I have read the statement of the AVMA on alternative medicine. I share your concern that untested and unproven methods are being recommended. The recommendations are a serious departure from scientific medicine, and can certainly be a disservice to the animals under one's care. The websites of NCAHF and Quackwatch can provide ample information on what is valid and what is not in health care.

Donald P. Shedd, MD
former chief of head and neck surgery,
Roswell Park Cancer
Institute, Buffalo, NY

**********

I concur.

Jack Raso, M.S., R.D.,
Director of Publications,
American Council on Science and Health
New York, New York

**********

I agree with ALL of the above!

Barry L. MacDonald, BVSc
St Andrews Veterinary Clinic
St Andrews, NSW, Australia

**********

I am a member of the CAIRP (Centro Argentino para la Investigación y Refutación de las Pseudociencias), a skeptic foundation in Argentina. Actually, we are planning to propose a Law Project to the Congress, against pseudosciences. [.]

Marcelo Montifiore
Buenos Aires, Argentina

**********

I have read the following letter and wholeheartedly agree with the concerns expressed regarding the AVMA Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Medicine. The outrageous practices of the "alternative therapists" represent an excellent example of a syndrome that the media have dubbed "The Dumbing Down of the American Public". That these activities should have been given such a broad-sweeping endorsement by the AVMA is both troublesome and incredible!!

Philip J. Johnson
Associate Professor of Internal Medicine
College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Missouri
Columbia, Missouri 65211

**********

I recently received a copy of your outstanding statement calling on the AVMA to hold the practice of veterinary medicine to the rigorous standards of science. I wholeheartedly and enthusiastically endorse it.

Whether cherished family pets or commercial livestock, Americans should accept only the best possible medical care for their animals. Investigators can only prove that a therapy is safe and effective by scrutinizing it with sufficient care to insure that they are not fooling themselves. That defines the scientific methods. The scientific methods are exactly those investigative procedures which, when properly applied, consistently yield reliable answers. Clearly, when it comes to the health of our family or pets or our livestock, we must eschew any lesser standard.

Shawn Carlson, Ph.D.
Executive Director
Society for Amateur Scientists
Adjunct Professor of Physics
San Diego State University

"The Amateur Scientist"
Scientific American Magazine

**********

I agree with this letter.

Rex Hodge
Concerned citizen
Jacksonville, Forida USA

**********

I am a research scientist who is very concerned with the degradation of scientific thinking. I have no principled objection to 'alternative' medical practices, but I object strenuously to the promotion of use of unproven technique, especially when the limitations of such techniques are disguised by pseudoscience. Contrary to the many claims of alternative therapists, fields such as acupuncture, chiropracty, and homeopathy have not thus far borne fruit under true controlled scientific research. Until they do, I consider any organization that condones their use to be treading dangerously near to quackery. And yes, this includes such otherwise prestigious organizations as the AVMA.

I am a neurophysiologist specializing in the neural control of movement, although lately I've been diverted into neural systems involved in cognitive processing. Please add me as a signatory to the included letter,

Steve Tillery, Ph.D. -- Neurophysiology
Research Service, Syracuse VA Medical Center

**********

We have recently accepted into the Australian Veterinary Association a special interest group called the Australian Association of Holistic Veterinarians. The aims and objectives of this group are broadly based on the AVMA statement about these type of therapies. They encompass, herbal, homeopathic, Reiki, chiropractic, and other forms of "Alternative therapy". We already have a special interest group based on acupuncture.

I was and remain opposed to the unquestioning acceptance of such treatments, and believe that the Australian Veterinary Association is a science-based organisation and should expect all its groups to subject their beliefs to scientific scrutiny. I further believe that the Holistic group of veterinarians could form their own group without any questioning from the AVA and have only sought to link themselves with the AVA to gain a "stamp of approval" from being associated with mainstream scientific veterinary medicine.

I have organised a group of similar-minded veterinarians and we have formed the Australian Veterinary Skeptics Association to try to rationally examine the basis for the claims made for the efficacy of the "alternative therapies". If these claims are without a rational scientific basis we will say so.

I support your call for a scientific examination of these therapies and also a review of the AVMA's position on them.

Dr Roger Clarke, BVSc, MRCVS, FACVSc
Registered Veterinary Specialist - Small animal surgery,
Bundoora Veterinary Hospital
Bundoora, AUSTRALIA
E-mail rclarke@ava.com.au

**********

I have an open mind on the issue of alternative therapy. I have witnessed and experienced some fairly compelling positive results temporally associated with some of these approaches. However, I also understand the limitations of determining efficacy and safety of clinical treatments based on clinical experience. Although there are many individuals who contest that these approaches are valid, one has to account for a degree of entrepreneurial - as well as other - bias associated with unmasked (not blinded) evaluations of these treatments. In addition, one has to account for bias evident in the AVMA document.

I welcome research in this area and completely agree with your letter to the AVMA.

Joseph J Bertone, DVM, MS, Diplomate ACVIM
Practitioner and concerned for the integrity and stature of our profession.

**********

I agree totally with this stance. We are inundated with so called veterinary chiropractic and acupuncture claims here in Missouri. Most make absolutely no sense at all and I am continually amazed at how easily professional people are willing to forget the basics tenets of science to embrace these (not) alternative treatments. Please add me to the list.

Kevin G. Keegan DVM, MS, Diplomate ACVS
Assistant Professor - Equine Surgery
College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Missouri
Columbia, Missouri 65201

**********

The letter below reflects both common sense and critical scientific thinking on the issue of so-called alternative veterinary practices and has my support .

Dr. John Allen Paulos
Professor of Mathematics
Temple University
author of "Innumeracy" and "A Mathematician Reads the Newspaper"
Philadelphia, PA

**********

THE ENDORSEMENTS CITED PRIOR TO THIS POINT WERE SUBMITTED TO AVMA PRESIDENT FREEMAN (AND 22 OTHER RECIPIENTS) ON 6/9/98. THE FOLLOWING ENDORSEMENTS, RECEIVED SUBSEQUENTLY, WERE SUBMITTED ON 6/24/98.

**********

I have recently been in a personal struggle with Malignant Lymphoma. I have chosen "slash-burn-poison" treatment (surgery, radiation, chemotherapy) and I hope it has been successful. Before I could begin conventional treatment I was deluged by phone and mail from charlatans promoting hypnotherapy, naturopathy, herbal remedies, dietary modifications (nutraceuticals, "gummie bears" with phytochemicals). One of the proponents of nutraceutical therapy was a plumber by trade. I soon became inundated by these kind people and found it necessary to become verbally recalcitrant. I believe that the harm and false hope given to an unsuspecting public is criminal. There is a place for physical therapy and there may be some defense for the use of placebo therapy but the majority of applications of Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine are practiced at the expense of the patient and the owner.

I am a teaching radiologist and see the practice of Veterinary imaging at a compromised level that is not confined to the practitioner. I am concerned that the quality of Alternative medicine is no better and it has little or no scientific base.

I agree in principle with the following letter. Charlatan's exploit all potentials through ignorance or by design. Each of us has been guilty of errors, diagnostic or therapeutic, and we have validated them using our individual modification of Koch's postulates. I would hope that each specialty would carefully review the text of the following letter and make certain of their own practices. Many treatments and procedures originate from anecdotal experience. Hip dysplasia provides a clear example of the pseudoscientists dream. Vitamin C, pectineal tenomyotomy, TPO, acetabular rim augmentation, nutrition, heredity, etc.-------where is Science? Equine medicine complements the problem with "firing", radiation therapy for arthritis, "blisters", luminescent therapy, hydrotherapy, ultrasound therapy, thermographic diagnoses, etc.--------where is Science? Obviously the weaknesses inherent in the profession should not be used to justify introducing more fraudulent health care.

Please record me as being in non-agreement with the following guidelines. [Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine (Approved by AVMA House of Delegates, 1996)]. I would be delighted to be a part of reviewing current practices and alternative and complementary practices. Focus should be broad to improve the Profession and protect it from decay.

Ronald D. Sande DVM, MS, PhD, DACVR
Professor, Veterinary Radiology
Washington State University,
Pullman, WA.

**********

"Alternative" and "Complementary" have become politically correct-terms for questionable practices formerly (and correctly) labeled quackish and fraudulent. My Web site provides copious documentary detail.

Having read the 1996 AVMA Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine, I heartily endorse Dr. Robert Imrie's suggestions.

Stephen Barrett, M.D.
Board Chairman, Quackwatch, Inc.
email: sbinfo@quackwatch.com
URL: http://www.quackwatch.com

**********

As an avian specialist and laboratory diagnostician, I am disgusted with the quacko trend in vet med. As you will see from the attached file 'fattybird' (MWord 98 Mac/Windows but saved in text) compiling the discussion, I don't shy away from confrontation. It is even more distressing when some of the quacks are certified specialists in their respective countries. I am joining the ncahf as a professional member and applaud your efforts.

I bet you have a hard time getting the big conferences accepting your speakers because they are pandering to what they think the DVMs want.

Alan M. Fudge, DVM, Dipl ABVP-Avian Practice
California Avian Laboratory
Avian Medical Center of Sacramento
Seminars in Avian and Exotic Pet Medicine (WB Saunders Co)
6114 Greenback Lane
Citrus Heights, CA 95621 USA GPS:Lat38.678782 Long121.319744

**********

I, Holland Carley-West, agree with the above statements.

Consumer advocate. Birmingham, AL U.S.A.

**********

I completely agree with the attached letter. Two years ago, when my dog was sick, someone suggested I try acupuncture. I guffawed at the thought of my dog lying still for needle pricks. I thought it was the silliest thing I had ever heard. Little did I know. Quack treatments might help humans through the placebo effect, but they can't help animals. Using untested treatment on animals amounts to cruelty to animals. I am shocked that the AVMA has endorsed these treatments. Will they next endorse trepanation?

Lucy Jayne Kamau, Professor
Department of Anthropology
Northeastern Illinois University
Chicago, Illinois 60625

**********

I strongly support the NCAHF [NCRHI] initiative in opposing the AVMA Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine and wish to add my name to the letter. As a long time AVMA member, use of my dues to support a position on unscientific medicine is unacceptable. As a veterinarian and research scientist it is truly depressing to observe the resurgence of empirical nonsense as a replacement for rational therapy.

Franklin A. Ahrens, D.V.M.,Ph.D.
Professor of Pharmacology
Dept. of Biomedical Sciences
College of Veterinary Medicine
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011

**********

I agree with the above letter. I am an educated layperson, a wilderness EMT, and a search and rescue dog handler. I am particularly concerned about any AVMA "endorsement" of homeopathy and the serious public health risks to humans and animals that can result when animal owners forgo vaccination and scientific medicine. All medicine must be able to withstand rigorous scientific scrutiny.

Heather Houlahan
Chairman, Allegheny Mountain Rescue Group
Pittsburgh, PA

**********

I have read the AVMA guidelines on alternative veterinary medicine (posted on your web page). I feel deeply concerned that the AVMA is asserting that treatments like cranial manipulation and magnets "constitute the practice of veterinary medicine". I have read your letter in response to the guidelines and feel that what you have written reflects good common sense. The AVMA should not support, or appear to support, unproven therapies.

As an owner of several pets, I need to know that my veterinarian is using sound science in the treatment of my animals. It is essential for a veterinary professional organization to be aware that when a loved pet is ill, an owner is vulnerable to anyone promising a cure. If an owner relies on a veterinarian's compliance with AVMA guidelines to decide whether the veterinarian is offering a legitimate treatment, then the AVMA has to accept responsibility for any resulting exploitation. I strongly encourage the AVMA to review its guidelines on alternative methods and to stick to what is medically correct rather than politically expedient. The people reviewing the guidelines should be skilled in the scientific evaluation of claims and should press for well-documented evidence of effectiveness before supporting the use of alternative methods.

Denise Blackman

**********

I agree with the above letter.

Paul Ham,
Member of The Society For Sensible Explanations.
Seattle, Washington

**********

I support the following, strongly agree that so-called 'alternative' or 'complimentary' therapies should be subjected to the same rigorous testing and review expected of scientifically-based modalities of treatment, and that they should not be endorsed by the AVMA if and until such treatments are scientifically demonstrated to be effective.

Stacy Scott
graduate student of archaeology
concerned pet owner
San Francisco, California, USA

**********

Prior to posting this note, I investigated the matter of alternative veterinary medicine for my own edification. In so doing I reviewed a copy of the Journal of the American Holistic Veterinary Medical Association (November, 1997-January 1998) and "The Holistic Veterinary Handbook" by William Winter, DVM, published in 1997, ISBN: 1-880090-47-3.

Like most issues, there are many shades of gray regarding alternative veterinary medicine. We all must find our own point at which we decide to draw the line between good and evil. However having expressed this caveat, my personal view is that there are some serious wrongs being committed in the name of Holistic medicine and that the AVMA has probably erred in allowing some of these practices to be included in the realm of Veterinary Medicine, albeit as 'alternative, complementary medicine.'

While some alternative therapies for animals such as acupuncture, physical therapy and possibly even chiropracty have reasonable scientific bases upon which they can be validated, other components do not. Holistic alternatives such as "Vital Forces", emanating from electromagnetic fields of humans or crystals, denial of the validity of vaccines, and dilution of drugs/poisons to ridiculously small doses are in the realm of quackery. I also have serious doubts about the efficacy of 'nutraceuticals and holistic botanicals, most of which I view as being akin to shots in the dark, statistically indistinguishable from placebos.

In accord with Dr. Imrie, I see the crucial flaw in holistic medicine as not only being unsubstantiated by the scientific process, but in opposition to the scientific process of validating medical therapies (R. Kidd, J. Am. Holistic Vet. Med. Assoc. 1997-1998, Vol. 16 (4) p.9. The potential for benefit to animals from many holistic therapies is so small, that animals receiving such therapies could be viewed as being harmed because they are de facto being denied valid therapies that have a far greater probability of helping them. To look back on this issue for a historical perspective: many people died unnecessarily or prematurely from cancer because they chose to take laetrile therapy rather than rational therapies such as chemotherapy, radiation or surgical ablation of their cancers. Of note, proponents of laetrile even tried to call this cyanide containing compound vitamin B-17 (G.E. Gross, World Without Cancer, The Story of Vitamin B17, 1974, ISBN: 0-912986-09-3). In the introduction of this book Mr. Griffin states: "Dedicated to the millions of cancer victims and their loved ones whose suffering has been the tragic cost of scientific arrogance and political vested interest. May the story presented in this book help to arouse an indignant public awareness which, alone can break the hold of these deadly forces."

Given this perspective, I believe a case could be made for charges of animal cruelty to be made against holistic ractitioners and animal owners who deny their patients and pets valid therapeutic assistance in lieu of holistic therapies which do not have a valid or comparable therapeutic rationale.

In their commentary on the issue of alternative medicine, JAVMA editors Smith and Tessier, JAVMA 1996, Vol. 209: Page 1026, note that the AVMA committee on Alternative and Complementary Medicine expressed concern that, "Because . there is a void in the number of veterinarians capable of, or willing to provide these services to their clientele, animal owners are seeking out non-veterinarians to perform these procedures." My response to this concern would be to ask: Do we want to keep quackery out of the realm of Veterinary Medicine or do we open our doors to include it?

Robert C. Speth, Ph.D.
President-Elect, Society for Veterinary Medical Ethics
Professor of Pharmacology
Washington State University
Pullman, Washington

**********

THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEEDING ENDORSEMENTS WERE SUBMITTED TO AVMA PRESIDENT FREEMAN, AND 22 OTHER RECIPIENTS, ON 6/24/98. THE FOLLOWING WILL BE SUBMITTED AT A LATER DATE.

**********

I agree with the following letter, and I am quite frankly ashamed that the AVMA, having heretofore stood as a symbol of the proud scientific tradition of American veterinary medicine, has chosen to endorse these unproven and questionable therapies. If it were not bad enough that logic and physics do not support these therapies, now our official Organization does!

Paul M. Potenza, DVM
New Canaan, CT 06840

**********

I completely agree with the attached letter from the NCAHF Task Force on Veterinary Pseudoscience. As a veterinary scientist I consider the acceptance of "alternate therapies" by the profession in Canada and in the United States to be a repudiation of science and of evidence based medicine. I am an associate professor (of physiology) in the Ontario Veterinary College.

Harold Chapman, Ph.D., M.Sc., B.V.Sc .
Dept of Biomedical Sciences
University of Guelph,
GUELPH, ON N1E 3E3
email: hchapman@uoguelph.ca

**********

My name is Bryan J Hilbert. I am an equine practitioner-surgeon from Perth, Western Australia. I graduated from Melbourne University in 1971, did my Masters at WSU in 1974 {Assistant Professor} and was a Lecturer/Senior Lecturer at Murdoch University from 1977-1984. From there I went to the University of Minnesota as Professor of Large Animal Surgery for 2 years. I am a Board Certified Surgeon and a Fellow in the Australian College of Veterinary Scientists.

I support wholeheartedly the work of the National Council for Reliable Health Information and I am happy to be a signatory to the Task Force's letter.

PS I am a member of the AVMA, AAEP and ACVS.

Bryan J Hilbert
Epsom Equine Centre
47 Epsom Avenue
Ascot
Western Australia 6104

**********

We as toxicologists are receiving more inquiries about the safety of many "natural" remedies when used in animals, so your message is particularly timely.

Frankly, I am appalled at what can be found on the internet relating to alternative veterinary medicine. Unfortunately, I don't believe that we are really educating our students about alternative therapies currently being used and whether or not they are scientifically sound. It seems to me to be critical to begin to offer veterinary students appropriate information about alternative medical approaches so that they can make up their own minds about their efficacy......approached in the right way, I believe that most students would decide for themselves that many "therapies" such as homeopathy as so ludicrous as to be worthless.....at least they might begin to view these alternatives with a more critical eye.

I will be responding to the AVMA as suggested....I hope other ABVT Diplomates will do the same. I would also like to add my name to your roster. Please let me know if I can be of additional help.

Dr. Robert Poppenga
secretary-treasurer
American Board of Veterinary Toxicology
University of Pennsylvania
New Bolton Center
382 West Street Road
Kennett Square, PA 19348

**********

While I fully endorse the points made in the above letter, I would also like to express my profound disappointment in the AVMA for adoption of the 1996 "Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine". As a long standing member of the AVMA, a significant amount of personal embarrassment resulted from my initial reading of these "Guidelines". We should all be concerned with the significant increase in reference to the many "magic" cures for both humans and animals being advocated by some in the press, self-serving pitchmen and pseudo-scientific organizations. I hope the AVMA takes the time and effort to fully reevaluate their position. Such an effort would surely be in the best interests of the public, member veterinarians and the AVMA itself.

Michael J. Parnell, DVM, PhD, Dip.ABVT, ABT
Chief, Rocky Mountain Veterinary Branch
Rocky Mountain Laboratories
National Institute of Allergery and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
Hamilton, Montana
Chief, Rocky Mountain Veterinary Branch
NIH/NIAID/Rocky Mountain Laboratories
903 S. 4th Street
Hamilton, MT 59840

**********

Dr. Imrie: With regard to the appended letter to the AVMA, I applaud your interest and actions, and am in entire agreement. There is no question that the veterinary profession has made serious regression from the level of professionalism it had attained by hard work during the middle years of this century. The current emphasis on economics is well justified considering the state of current affairs; however, we seem to have chosen to insure economic survival by committing professional suicide. It is imperative for the public interest and our scientific standing that we resist incursions of nonsensical treatment modalities designed to beguile the unwary.

James E. Benson, DVM, (University of Illinois, 1974)
21 years in private practice
MS, Veterinary Pathology, Iowa State University, 1997
PhD, Veterinary Pathology, in progress
Address: Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, Iowa State University, Ames 50011
email: jebenson@iastate.edu

Member of the AVMA (ashamed to admit) since 1974.

**********

Unproven therapies - they have no place in veterinary medicine.

Emily Rosa, Age 11
Guiness World Record Holder,
Youngest person ever to have serious research published in a major medical journal (JAMA)
711 West 9th Street
Loveland, CO 80537

**********

To reinvent veterinary science as a profession with both alternative practices and scientific medicine is attempting the impossible, i.e. trying to make anti-science and science compatible. It simply will not work. Adopting alternative practices will lead to misery, endless confusion, and the erosion of public trust.

Linda Rosa, RN
Chair, Questionable Nurse Practices Task Force for
National Council Against Health Fraud (for identification purposes only)
711 West 9th Street
Loveland, CO 80537,

**********

The profession has a chance to police itself before it gets as bad as nursing has become. You shouldn't let the silent epidemic of irrationalism and anti-science succeed in supplanting good and humane care with wishful thinking.

Larry Sarner
Chair, National Therapeutic Touch Study Group
711 West 9th Street
Loveland, CO 80537

**********

Looking at alternative medicine and scientific medicine as philosophies, there are some marked differences. Scientific medicine looks for testable information and strives to design better experiments to correct problems in past experimental design. Alternative medicine philosophies are not so interested in experimental design or meaningful testing. Scientific medicine is not based on unproven concepts, while alternative medicine is (that's why it is alternative). Most of alternative medicine philosophies have existed longer than modern scientific medicine. Around the turn of the century (90 years ago) medical schools decided to publish experiments so they could be shared with other schools and allow criticism and re-testing of information. This allowed scientific medicine to develop large quantities of relatively reliable information. Most of what is known (quantity wise) was due to this simple concept. Alternative medical philosophies have not generated large quantities of reliable information.

Acupuncture has been around as a philosophy for thousands of years, yet did not become the main source of knowledge of medicine. The reason why? The philosophy is based on chi (Qi) and meridians which are undetectable unknowable and unproven. The teaching of acupuncture is still not limited to testable information from well designed experiments. I think that acupuncture has a place in veterinary medicine but it needs to extract itself from the imagination of people who lived thousands of years ago and from the imagination of many of the current proponents.

Chiropractic philosophy originally included the concept that all disease was caused by unknown forces created by misalignment of vertebrae. Today there are many practitioners who have dropped that concept (progress!). Unfortunately there are many practitioners who claim that mysterious unproven forces are at work. I think that chiropractic manipulation has a place in veterinary medicine once some reasonable studies are done to show some benefit in animals. Similarly chiropractic philosophy needs to shed the imagination of it's founder and those who still practice magical medicine.

Homeopathy was founded as a philosophy a couple of hundred years ago with idea that all disease could be cured by giving substances that caused similar symptoms and that diluting these substances increased their effect by imparting some magical force to the diluent. These concepts that homeopathy is based on remain unproven. The idea that a solution containing mostly water may be useful in treating disease seems reasonable to me as there are drugs that work on very low doses. To say that the effect is caused by the water having some magical memory which only remembers substances which were intentionally added and then diluted is a massive jump in conclusion.

These philosophies have failed to generate and distribute reliable information, so even if they have something to add to the practice of medicine it's difficult to distinguish between the useful and useless. I'm waiting for alternative philosophies to generate quantities of useful information or to drop the imaginary concepts of their founders and proponents who believe in magical medicine. Until that happens endorsing these philosophies will result in useless treatments being performed on unsuspecting and undeserving animals, not to mention that the veterinary profession will loose respect for allowing these practices to take place.

David Haas DVM
Lihue, Hawaii

**********

I am in full agreement with the following letter.

Bruce Steele, MVB MRCVS
Equine Veterinarian
Hillsborough, Co. Down, Northern Ireland

**********

Dr. Imrie - please add my name to your letter. I wholly agree with the comments of my colleagues Drs. Sande, Speth, Parnell, and Poppenga.

Patricia A. Talcott, MS, DVM, Ph.D., DABVT
Dept. Food Science & Toxicology
Holm Research Center
University of Idaho
Moscow, ID 83843
ASL/WADDL
or

**********

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiments expressed in this letter. In a world where technology and education are advancing at an astonishing rate I find in disturbing that pseudoscience and "snake oil" have become so common and believed in by so many. It would seem that for many people in the United States science is what they read in the newspapers or see on TV and they have no concept of what is good science.

We look forward to your response.

Steve Fairbrother D.V.M.
Diplomate American Board of Veterinary Practitioners
Equine Practice
Bellevue, ID 83313

**********

I agree with the text in: . It's generally a bad idea to allow badly researched methods to be used anywhere, not just in veterinary practice.

Kim Bruning,
3rd year Biology student.
Wijk en Aalburg,
Brabant, The Netherlands

**********

Dear Dr. Imrie: I'm a Chinese animal lover. From 1982-1985, I had to practise acupuncture and traditional Chinese medicine on human patients when I worked as a registered nurse at Longhua Hospital, Shanghai. It was one of the top ten national scientific and technological projects that I and my co-workers worked on. But all I saw there was how deep the corruption of human nature can be. Double-blind testing was unheard of then. Patients were routinely lied to about what treatment they would be receiving. I was never clear about what was working, since Western medicine and Chinese were used together all the time. One thing was certain, though, that whenever there was an emergency, Western medicines (from adrenaline to antibiotics) were unfailingly used. To be forced to work in that hospital for those years not only left me with psychological wounds but also created in me a strong sense of responsibility for telling the truth.

It is true that I was only a nurse and there may have been something very important that I was not able to catch on to at the time of my practicing. It is also true that failure of a treatment to work on human patients is not necessarily an indication that it won't work on animals. Despite the fact that I am so disgusted with Chinese medicine and the way it has been practiced so far, both in China and here in Canada, I remain open-minded towards it. All I want from the alternative medical and veterinary practitioners is that they show me some non-anecdotal evidence. And I haven't got any so far. Besides, I can't recall ever seeing or hearing of anything like an ancient Chinese medical text that dealt with animal illness.

By the way, I happened to talk to one of those alter-vets here in Victoria, B.C. All I got from him with respect to his acupuncture practice was an argument that acupuncture has been used for thousands of years in China. This argument seems to me to be just as flawed as to say that people are justified in believing that the earth is flat since that was believed by human beings for thousands of years in the past.

I fully agree with what you wrote in your letter to the AVMA. Please feel free to put me on the list of the endorsements to the letter. And I thank you for making such a good effort to keep the veterinary world healthy and sane.

Yixi Zhang,

(MA student in philosophy at UBC, Canada who owns a dozen guinea pigs, two cats, one rabbit, one hamster and a German Shepherd, presently living in Victoria, B.C.)

**********

I agree with the above letter in its entirety. As a general practitioner in private practice I often see clients who have such leanings, who themselves have been so treated and who seek such care for their pets. I feel sorry for them as their pets are not well served and the owner seeks to throw away his/her resources rather than face the fact that for many illnesses there is no treatment. The beliefs are pervasive in society generally, however, and with the proliferation of stores offering "crystal healing" materials, "rune" fortunetelling kits and a resurgent belief in witchcraft and the like among the young, it's no surprise owners seek this "care" for pets. There will always be those willing to sell what someone will buy. "There's a sucker born every minute", applies. I don't wish to stand idly by and offer tacit approval by not objecting, loudly. I am ashamed of the AVMA's "politically sensitive" stance on this issue.

Arnold L. Goldman DVM, MS
Canton, CT

**********

THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEEDING ENDORSEMENTS WERE SUBMITTED TO AVMA PRESIDENT FREEMAN, AND 22 OTHER RECIPIENTS, ON 7/11/98.

Following communicating with Dr. David Ramey regarding the use of alternative therapies in horse practice, I would like to add my name to your letter to the AVMA. I was previously unaware that this organisation (of which I was previously a member while a Resident in Equine Internal Medicine at Washington State University) actually endorsed these various practices.

I am currently the Director of the Jim Joel Equine Sports Medicine Centre at the University of Bristol in England, and Programme Director of our BSc (Hons) in Equine Science. As a referral practitioner working mainly with competitive athletic horses, I am constantly faced with clients who are bombarded by outrageous claims of efficacy of a wide range of alternative remedies, most of which appear to have no basis in science whatsoever. As such, much of my time is spent defending a scientific approach to my own area of veterinary medicine. My further interest in this issue is that I am responsible for running a science degree programme in Equine Science, the focus of which is exercise physiology and biomechanics. As such, one of our principal aims is to produce high calibre science graduates to address the world of horses and equine sport with an objective approach, and to help dispel the myths that abound at the hands of the plethora of charlatans that currently permeates the industry.

Jeremy Naylor BVSc PhD MRCVS

Jim Joel Equine Sports Medicine Centre

Department of Anatomy
University of Bristol
Langford, Bristol BS18 7DU

**********

I agree totally with the above letter. My wife and I love our pets dearly and would be ashamed if they should suffer at the hands of any veterinarian who practiced such quackery (a deserved label unless and until proven otherwise) in place of effective treatment.

Ed Bittner,
concerned citizen, skeptic, animal lover
Grafton, OH

**********

As a pet lover and concerned consumer, I agree with this letter 100% and strongly urge the AMVA to authorize only those alternative procedures and treatments that pass rigorous scientific tests. To do otherwise casts strong doubt on the credibility of your organization. When the AVMA cannot be relied upon to uphold scientic standards of excellence, it sadly reflects on veterinary practitioners as well. Although I currently reside in Toronto, Ontario, I am a U.S. citizen and remain very much concerned about what is going on in the U.S.

Leslie Jandreau < leslie_jandreau@hotmail.com>
1664 John Street
Thornhill, Ontario, L3T 1Y9

**********

I have witnessed a horse chiropractor attempt to "manipulate" the fused spine of a horse. I have observed another horse chiropractor request a horses owner to touch her animal while he held her hand and, with his free hand, "felt the energy flow" in the horse -- this to look for "obstructions". The owner "completed the circuit" between chiropractor, owner and horse.

If you believe this is good medicine or practice or anything other than (at best) foolish waste of time then I have lost a lot of respect for the AVMA.

Your positions on alternative medicine are bordering on unscientific and unsound. Please return to rational science.

Bill Perry

**********

I strongly agree with the attached letter. It does a grave disservice to veterinary medicine when the profession allies itself with fringe science. The scientific education that veterinarians receive in veterinary colleges should be a life long pursuit; divergence into areas of quackery and "medicine shows" should not be encouraged within the main body of the single largest organization of veterinary practitioners in the country.

I am Robert J. Eisner, V.M.D. I am in charge of the veterinary diagnostic and animal health laboratory of the New Jersey Department of Agriculture.

**********

I endorse this letter.

William M. London, Ed.D., M.P.H.
Consumer Advocate
Fort Lee, NJ 07024

**********

I agree strongly with this letter. I am a physician and professor of human physiology.

Roberto Annovazzi, Dr.
roberto@reborn.com
Ribeirao Preto, SP Brazil

**********

I am an equine practitioner and have been a member of the AVMA and the AAEP since my days as a student (1967). I agree with Dr. Imrie's letter describing the inappropriateness of the recently adopted "AVMA Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine." It is incomprehensible to me that a prestigious organization could adopt such non-scientific nonsense.

Jim Henderson B.Sc.(Agr), D.V.M.
3763 Olde Base Line, Inglewood, Ontario, L0N 1K0
Email hossdr@msn.com

**********

I am in full agreement with the above correspondence addressing veterinary quackery.

Julia Campbell
Molecular Biologist/Technical Director

**********

The position of the AVMA delineated by the content of "Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine," in not condemning or even seriously questioning equine pseudoscience, absolutely astounds me. I fully support the stance taken in the following letter from the NCAHF Task Force on Veterinary Pseudoscience coordinator.

I am an equine veterinarian, Thoroughbred horse owner, breeder and trainer from Perth, Western Australia.

DR B.J. (Charlie) Stewart
EQUITECH HORSE PERFORMANCE LABORATORY
Perth, Australia
fax 61 + (08) 94551882

**********

I agree with this position. I am an equine veterinarian.

Ruth V. Sobeck, DVM
Palos Verdes, CA, USA
RSobeckDVM@worldnet.att.net

**********

As a retired academic physician, it appalls me to see unproven remedies promulgated in human medicine. I now understand that similar actions also occur in veterinary medicine. I thoroughly endorse the letter appended to this message.

My endorsement is based upon decades of clinical practice, in which placebo effects are obvious. Furthermore, I helped advise a research project on acupuncture by one of our students (a resident), in which acupuncture needles were placed in either correct or incorrect acupuncture points, and the results evaluated by someone who did not know where the needles had been placed. There was no difference between the success in either group-- about 30% "relief" in both cases. This clearly shows that acupuncture should be doubted as anything but a method based upon the placebo-response.

In addition, I once flew to Pennsylvania to evaluate the claims of someone who claimed to be able to cure horses of the "heaves" by injections of dilute substances likely in barns. We tested using controlled injections, and no one (not me, not the therapist, nor the veterinarian who examined and rated the degree of heaving) knew the contents of the injections. There was no difference between the "active" and the control injections. This taught me that the "healer" can be fooled, even when treating animals.

Chiropractic is practice devoid of any factual basis. And homeopathy is based upon dilutions so great that nothing of the original substance remains.

It is an indication of a great lack of judgment for any organization to "endorse" these highly questionable practices.

Please register my indignation at such action.

Sincerely,

Don L. Jewett, M.D., D.Phil.
Emeritus Professor, Orthopedic Surgery
Univ. of California, San Francisco, CA.
dj@abratech.com

**********

I completely endorse the positions expressed in the above letter, and would like to add my humble voice to that of the distinguished signatories thereto.

We live in a world awash with pseudoscientific claptrap. If persons choose to subject themselves to "alternative therapies" which lack any efficacy and may do positive harm, that is in part their free choice, no matter how deluded. But those who own animals are stewards of their well-being. An animal has no choice in the therapies which may be applied to it, and most times it has few ways of indicating suffering or distress. It behooves animal owners to apply rigorous, qualitative expectations of the therapies applied to their animals, and to reject the desire to project subjective, human expectations or beliefs onto the animals in their charge. To extend the suffering of an animal, or to cause it additional suffering, by applying an ineffective remedy in place of proven therapy is morally deficient, inhumane and an affront to basic human values.

Johan P. Bakker
Engineer, Author, Animal owner (horses, llamas, dogs, whatever, you name it)
Brighton, Michigan

**********

THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEEDING ENDORSEMENTS WERE SUBMITTED TO AVMA PRESIDENT SWANSON, AND 18 OTHER RECIPIENTS, ON 9/5/98.

I'm dismayed that the AVMA has irresponsibly adopted the above guidelines. I am an animal lover who has witnessed my girlfriend's putting her two dogs through the unproven therapies of acupuncture and colloidal silver, as prescribed by her quack veterinarian. She is still paying the bills while her dogs have both died, perhaps sooner than they should have because of these unscientific practices.

Stephen Daniels
Syracuse, NY

**********

As a private practitioner who has seen numerous animals subjected to ineffective and sometimes harmful "alternative" therapies, I would like to add my name to the list of endorsers of the letter to the AVMA concerning their position stance on alternative therapies.

I DO represent the rank-and-file veterinarians, and I think it's important that the AVMA knows how we feel.

Deborah W. Kemmerer, DVM
West End Animal Hospital
103 SW 140th Terrace
Newberry, FL 32669

**********

As a concerned citizen, I support the views of the accompanying letter.

Maurice Volaski, Flux Software
Philadelphia, PA

**********

As a practitioner of 20 years experience, who took to heart the principles of science based medicine that I was taught in veterinary school, and who has been continually reminded of the necessity of sound and rigorous scientific methods in ongoing research by the standards espoused and maintained in JAVMA and other respected veterinary journals, I must say that I agree completely and wholeheartedly with the letter below.

I cannot think of a single good reason for not promptly initiating this review process and including task force members.

David T. Roen DVM
Clarkston Veterinary Clinic
1409 Peaslee Ave
Clarkston WA 99403

**********

As a senior nursing student, dog lover, and cat owner, I have to add my name to the list of those opposed to veterinary quackery. An ethical veterinary practitioner will use those methods which have been proven efficacious, rather than endangering the pet's life (and, coincidentally, wasting the person's time and money.)

I know that I would be utterly heartbroken were my sheepdog to be killed indirectly by omission of legitimate therapy. So few people already invest time and money in their animals' health care - which to me makes it all the more critical that we not dilute the animal health care dollar by wasting it on unproven therapies.

Heather Brock
Anchorage, Alaska

**********

I agree completely with the letter below. Under no circumstances should any of these unproven therapies by advocated by a reputable professional organization just because they are "popular" or touted in the "popular press".

I want my pets to receive the best possible, scientifically based veterinary care available. Your advocation of these "alternate medicine" therapies is counter to that wish.

A concerned pet owner,

Mary Mitchell
Raleigh, North Carolina

**********

As someone trained in the science of Zoology, and as a professional dog breeder, I would immediately discontinue the services of any veterinarian who professed to practice any of the fraudulent pseudosciences such as homeopathy, naturopathy, acupuncture, chiropractic, etc., or used any of the methodologies offered by these inanities. Particularly in the field of veterinary medicine where the patient has no ability to convey their reactions or conditions verbally and therefore depend entirely on the considerate and compassionate observations and care of the physician and owner, the use of methods which have continuously either been proven bogus or at least have been held in serious question by the accepted sciences, cannot be used without more certainty of their effectiveness and safety. I certainly would not expose any of my family members to such quacks, let alone the animals which are under my care. Do not demean yourselves and your profession by association with these obnoxious and intellectually reprehensible alternative medical practices.

Harry Booker (Zoologist, dog breeder)

**********

I completely agree with the following letter

Marc P. Laxineta DVM Equine Veterinarian

**********

As a practicing equine racetrack veterinarian and animal lover by nature, I salute your efforts and eloquently composed letter directed to Dr. Freeman, AVMA President, challenging the "AVMA Guidelines for Alternative And Complementary Veterinary Medicine" and wholeheartedly agree with the letter's content and position.

Paul R. Plante, BS, MS, VMD.
Equine Veterinary Medicine and Surgery
Pompano Beach, Florida

**********

I would like to add that I agree with the content of this letter.

Dr. G.F. "Andy" Anderson D.V.M.
Veterinarian (Equine Practice)

**********

I am very worried and angry how "alternative" medicine is invading veterinary practice today. Sad to say, it is a symptom of a broader societal move towards irrationality and retreat toward medieval quackery. (See for example the furor of the "science wars" beginning with Alan Sokal's parody circa 1996, and Gross and Levitt's excellent book, Higher Superstition.)

As a biologist, lifelong dog lover, alpaca rancher and ardent supporter of the rational, evidence-based approach to science and problem solving, I resent how some veterinarians now are adding various "alternative" therapies to their regular practice, and their clientele is eagerly waiting and ready to pay for it, regardless of whether the treatment has any basis in standard science.

I applaud the efforts of the TFVP in its attempt to keep vet med based on good science rather than falling into the pseudoscience promulgated by the alt med world. Once alt med successfully invades the American Veterinary Medical Association, our dogs, cats and livestock had better learn quickly how to describe their discomforts in standard English.

Bill Burley
Seattle, Washington.

**********

After reading this letter, I feel compelled to endorse it wholeheartedly. Today's "Alternative" pseudoscience pervading every facet of medicine is a disappointing tide and one that professional organizations should be stemming. Endorsement of these guidelines would diminish the scientific and professional standing of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Please consider working with the NCAHF taskforce to put your association on firm scientific footing.

Mark Sigurdson BSc.Pharmacy
Medicine Shoppe Pharmacy
Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta, Canada

**********

As a practicing veterinarian for the past 26 years my concern is increasing as I see proponents of alternative modalities of treatment continue to extol the virtues of non-proven alternative treatments. I support the position of the above letter.

Donald Hamilton D.V.M.
CSU '73
docdon@gj.net

**********

I agree with the above.

Gregory Pokrywka MD
skeptic and herpetoculturist.

**********

I feel compelled to add my name to the growing list of concerned citizens, scientists, physicians and veterinarians who denounce the AVMA's "Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine". This document is not worthy of an organization with such a pre-eminent position in veterinary medicine.

I strongly urge the AVMA to reconsider these guidelines and adopt a position similar to that of the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association.

Position:

"The Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA) maintains that for any homeopathic, natural, herbal, biologic, or "parabiologic" product to be approved as a veterinary drug or biologic, the manufacturer must provide substantive data proving efficacy of action, freedom from adverse side effects on the animal, and freedom from residues or potentially harmful contaminants."

Background:

All substances defined as drugs to be administered to animals must have a curative or corrective purpose and, in the interest of public safety, any product used as a drug or biologic in food production must be not only efficacious but safe and free from harmful side effects.

(July 1990 - C06390)

Although this statement only addresses therapeutic products, and does not go far enough in condemning the quackery and fraudulent practices that have crept into our profession, it is a much more rational approach than that of the AVMA.

Dr. Drew Bowles, DVM
Toronto, Ontario
mailto:abowles@ica.net

**********

I definitely agree with the following letter. Far too many unproven medical treatments and unregulated herbs are being promoted to the populace. I'm disappointed that a "respected" medical association would be a party to junk science.

Jane B Lucke RN
316 West 9th St Aberdeen
Washington 98520

**********

Just thought that I would add my thoughts to this: I had a chiropractor try to treat our family dog, gave it one treatment, wanted to give it many more. I intervened, when I heard how many treatments were needed to "correct spinal problem" later took dog to a vet who discovered liver cancer. Although I cannot prevent family members from looking widely for cures for dog, the painful spinal adjustment that I saw could not possibly help anything, and certainly increased the time to get real treatment. Sounds like fraud to me, not only a misdiagnosis, but an expensive and unneeded treatment series recommended that I doubt one spec of evidence for. I would prefer that unqualified people using unproven techniques would be prevented from preying upon the gullible

Don Clow
4511 Twin Pine Dr NE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
52402-1727

**********

I strongly support the views expressed below, and am very concerned about the uncritical adoption of unproven "alternative" therapies. As a horse owner and regular veterinary client, I would love to see the AVMA instead take a leading role in critically evaluating these therapies with strong double-blind studies, so that the good may be absorbed into regular veterinary practice and the bad and ineffective exposed and junked.

Elaine Lindelef
Glendale, CA, USA

**********

I agree with the following.

Guillaume Tourrette, Chemist
Dublin, Ireland
< tourretg@tcd.ie>

**********

I agree fully with the views expressed in the following letter and I support the suggestions that are made.

R.L. Capella
Skeptic and editor of medical manuscripts
Boston, MA 02135 capellarl@mindspring.com

**********

In light of questionable acts among veterinarians of "Alt-med" practices with no scientifically verified studies which prove their efficacy and not to mention having witnessed a local veterinarian use her bare hands to squeeze our dog's scent glands and perform an examination of the area without washing beforehand I think an unsuspecting public needs to be made aware of such things via AVMA and locally enforced laws. A governing body such as the AVMA needs to enforce such guidelines and encourage local and state governments to compel and enforce the standards agreed upon (where patrons of veterinarians can complain) via Better Business Bureaus, State Licensing Departments, and a form of Inspections committees that arrive unannounced to spontaneously inspect a veterinarians business either or both as disguised patrons and formal inspectors. In closing, thank you for providing an opportunity for those concerned to make their opinions known.

Debbie D'Amico, concerned citizen

**********

I agree with this.

Rosalind Dalefield BVSc PhD DABVT
Veterinary Toxicologist
St Albans, Herfordshire, United Kingdom
rdalefie@rvc.ac.uk

**********

I wonder to what extent the practice of veterinary medicine is determined by the will of our clients. It is clear to me that in the last 10 years the American public has been intrigued by alternative therapies and quite willing to pay for them. I can honestly admit that a significant influence on my decision to take the IVAS course (no small investment of time and money!) was the fact that my clients were hiring other veterinarians to perform acupuncture on their horses. I think that part of this client demand is "fad"; when one person in a boarding/training stable utilizes some alternative therapy, others are inclined to think they really should do likewise. Of course this is not limited to alternative therapies; how many times have you been asked to inject a horse with some recognized therapeutic agent because the client thinks their horse suffers from the same ailment as its stablemate, or just to enhance the likelihood of competitive success? Clients seem to be very willing to skip the traditional medical examination and cut right to the therapy of their choice. Our willingness to go along with this "shortcut" only serves to tell the client that the traditional medical examination is a waste of their time and money, or that it is their responsibility, not the veterinarians, to decide on the treatment choice.

On the other hand, I think that another strong driving force behind the demand for alternative medicine is the very real appeal to someone that has only met with failure with traditional (scientific) medicine. When I had a period of severe pain from a bulging cervical disc, unresponsive to medical management, I had no problem adding acupuncture to my own therapeutic choices. I was in pain and depressed and any potential cure seemed valid. It does not surprise me at all when clients opt for alternatives if scientific methods fail to obtain the results they seek.

It is perhaps most politically correct to assume alternative therapies such as acupuncture and chiropractic are valid until proven otherwise. Let's be honest and scientific in our pursuit of the truth, testing these therapies with the same scrutiny that we apply to any new drug that is developed for the market today. In the mean time, does the client not have the right to chose whatever therapy they want for their animal? The question remains: who should provide (and profit by) alternative therapies? When veterinarians are the providers, do they not imply that this therapy is inherently accepted by their peers (including the AVMA)? If I recommend acupuncture as a mode of therapy to a client, they are very likely to accept my decision to utilize this therapy -- simply based on my credentials and trust. I presently do not recommend acupuncture as a treatment modality; if a client insists that they want to utilize this therapeutic mode, I will provide it at this time only if I feel there is no better therapy available. Am I convinced that it has anything more than a placebo effect? No.

As for homeopathy, I would argue that this has no place at all in veterinary medicine. I am in the sad position of working with a client who is losing dogs to parvoviral infections that she "vaccinated" with some homeopathic concoction. There is no reason that I can see to give this alternative the "OK until debunked" status. I consider it debunked and veterinarians that practice it should be liable for malpractice litigation.

If what I have said is an endorsement of your letter to the AVMA, feel free to attach it. I've been in practice long enough to recognize that some therapies work even though we don't know why (oxytetracycline for tendon contracture in foals) and some well-accepted modes of therapy will disappear with time (periosteal stripping for angular deformities in foals appears to be going this route). I think the status of acupuncture in veterinary medicine in 10 years is anyone's guess right now.

"Robert Baratt, DVM" rbaratt@99main.com

(IVAS certified)

**********

I'm concerned that the AVMA Guidelines promote alternative therapies which could harm animals and deny them the best medical care and so I support the Task Force letter.

Pet owner and concerned citizen,

Beth Zimmerman zimm1@bright.net

**********

Please include me among those who are in support of and agreement with the information presented in the letter you, Dr. David Ramey, and others wrote to the AVMA following the broadcast of the 1996 Guidelines for Alternative and Complementary Veterinary Medicine.

Catherine G. Stiner, DVM
Bloomfield, NY (USA) chilli@frontiernet.net

**********

I am an equine practitioner with 21 years in the field of veterinary medicine. Three years ago I decided to take the IVAS veterinary acupuncture course to hopefully get an extra tool to diagnose and treat performance problems in horses. I went into this endeavor with a lot of hope and optimism. As time went on, the optimism faded as I found much of the material presented in the course as well as by many alternative therapy practitioners to be unproven and unscientific. Furthermore, in the last three years of using acupuncture in the field I have found it [acupuncture] to be non-efficacious in most cases. I now see more and more practitioners ignoring the scientific biomedicine they spent so much time learning in veterinary school and going totally to unproven techniques of acupuncture, homeopathy, and chiropractic when there are very acceptable, proven therapies available to them. The more I see this, the more it frustrates me to know that the AVMA sanctions these modalities that are not proven, encouraging these "fringe" practitioners. Many times I see these veterinarians actually harming their patients by withholding scientifically proven therapies. I encourage the AVMA to step back and withhold their endorsement of these alternative modalities until some proof can be found that they work.

Paula Orcutt, DVM BHVS@aol.com
Spencer, MA , USA
(IVAS certified)