Reconstructive therapy and other alt. medicine

[cmac2012]

Anybody ever heard of reconstructive therapy? I read about it in some flier trying to sell a book about alt. medicine techniques. Could be pure snake oil, I fully realize, but some of the other items mentioned in the promo are solid, in my experience, primarily the eschewing of sugar.

I read "Sugar Blues" years ago -- the before and after pictures of the author on the back were pretty amazing -- and I decided to give it a go. Did it religiously for 2 years and it definitely improved my health and sex appeal.

I fell off the wagon for years but I turned over a new leaf a couple of months back, and just in time.

Anyhow, this reconstructive therapy stuff is supposed to be useful for tendons and joints. In the link, they claim that it's not widely promulgated by physicians because theirs not a lot of money in it, and no expensive pharmaceuticals involved.

I don't want to be a sucker, but if there's something out there that will take some of the miles off'n of my right wrist, I'm game to give it a go, but I need to do some research first.

More:

http://www.prolotherapy.com/articles/faberrjpws.htm

[cmac2012]

This from the second link:

The result is that the treated joint is stronger than the original joint, providing more support and strength - as mentioned by Scott in his letter - and lowering the potential of future injury (see Illustration 3). Two studies performed by the Department of Orthopedic Surgery at the University of Iowa-one published in the Journal of Orthopedic Research and one published in Connective Tissue Research - show that both ligaments and tendons can increase up to 40 percent in strength and size with this therapy. Exercise alone cannot do this.

The medical community is not noted for its rapid assimilation of therapies that require hands-on training, as this one does. Regardless of that, this therapy is becoming known and used at a relatively rapid pace. Presently, there are approximately 250 doctors who can administer reconstructive therapy across the country. This number is growing as more medical schools, like the University of California at San Diego, continue to research and publish the favorable results.

I found a list of physicians who do this at www.getprolo.com.

I'm going to see if I can find the published reports above and check it out. Hope it's not too good to be true.

[aklim]

Let me ask you a simple question. We know that hospital stays are being cut down to a minimum for cost reasons. We know that most doctors are no longer independent practitioners and are part of an insurance, HMO, etc, etc. We also know that there is a "escalation path" whereby you don't get to start with the most drastic ($$) procedure unless you have to, IOW you start simple and cheap and work your way up. Don't you think that most doctors would be doing this if there were a real benefit with fewer side effects because the insurance company would want them to try it first?

This is a play off the "What your insurance company, doctor, mechanic, garbage collector, etc, etc doesn't want you to know." Today, the doctors treat according to guidelines published. If money can be saved, do you think insurance companies will shoot themselves in the foot to help the drug companies?

[cmac2012]

From what I can gather, this is fairly new and is still gaining acceptance. Article says the U. of Cal med. school in San Diego is looking hard at it and publicizing results. Doesn't sound like quackery to me if that's the case.

I'm going to see what I can get from the Univ. directly -- avoid the purely anecdotal route.

[732002]

"Results of double-blind studies - in which neither the physician nor the patients knew which patients were getting the proliferant -were published in The Lancet, one of the most prestigious medical journals. These studies show that 88 percent of patients treated with reconstructive therapy improve."

They fail to give the results of those that got the placebo in the study.
Was it also 88 percent? Given time most injuries will improve.

" lies, damned lies and statistics "

[cmac2012]

Good point, and one that's worthy of further research. I hope to find these studies and come up with some good info. I haven't spent any money on it yet.

A lot of conditions are self healing but joint problems are not the best in this category.

[Mistress]

CM- I'd be warry (sp) of someone injecting something that contains phenol (toxic acid) in my joints....I have seen some tissue necrosis from patients being injected with "natural, vitamins" and it ain't purty. If you can't ingest it and have it help why does it have to be injected? If it was my wrist, I'd stay away from it. Find out how long after the blind studies the patients had relief. And remember, if you inject something into an area there will be scar tissue.

If its real bad, do a cortizon injection by a GOOD orthopod.

[cmac2012]

Another good point, I've heard before that all sorts of 'natural' substances do not work out well at all if injected.

Some of this stuff could be real good at getting semi-desperate people to fork over serious funds however.

The article claims the U of Cal, SD is big on it so, if that's true, surely someone there could be reached by phone and steer me to some of their published results.

[Larry Delor]

There is a Doctor in my area, and on his website, he says he uses "hyperosmolar dextrose" for the injections.

I hope that compound is unlike phenol.


EDIT: I got curious, and did a search. Besides coming up with sites similar to the original one that cmac posted, I came across this descriptive pdf file. http://www.hospira.com/Files/TPN_10_Dextrose_Inj.pdf

[Mistress]

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Another good point, I've heard before that all sorts of 'natural' substances do not work out well at all if injected.

Some of this stuff could be real good at getting semi-desperate people to fork over serious funds however.

The article claims the U of Cal, SD is big on it so, if that's true, surely someone there could be reached by phone and steer me to some of their published results.

Just a note on Phenol, if it gets spilled in an office, the whole place has to be cleared out.....its that poisonous.

[beevly]

Keep in mind that mercury, rattlesnakes, and poison ivy are all natural too.

Remember when DMSO was all the rage with the miracle-cure crowd (early 80's)? People were actually injecting that into their joints too.

[aklim]

Originally Posted by beevly

Keep in mind that mercury, rattlesnakes, and poison ivy are all natural too.

Remember when DMSO was all the rage with the miracle-cure crowd (early 80's)? People were actually injecting that into their joints too.

The problem is that there is a sucker born every day. To add the word "natural" would invite them to come take a look. Like you said mercury and all that are natural. Most people equate natural with harmless.

It is an excellent paint stripper so if you have a poor paint job in your joints, you could have it cleaned out.

I think they are trying to prey on the notion that people blame the doctor for charging high fees. Most of them work for insurance companies who would save a bundle if the procedure were successful. Why wouldn't the insurance companies direct them to this procedure if it could work? If a company does something sleazy like that, can we trust any results they publish? So it was done by the University. What were the conditions of the test? Was it a FDA laboratory which follows FDA procedures? If not, why?

[75Sv1]

Maybe check out some more moderate natural cures. I'm reading 'Detox" by Brenda Watson. She has been on PBS. Also, look at Dr. Mark Hyman and Dr. D'Amato. More diet type changes.
Tom