Dr. Christina Chambreau: Another Homeopath Giving Bad Advice about Heartworm Disease

Dr. Christina Chambreau is a veterinary homeopath about whom I’ve written before (1,2) because she is both an advocate for magical, pseudoscientific nonsense and against science-based medicine. I have also written about the dangerous advice alternative practitioners, especially homeopaths, often give about the prevention and treatment of heartworm disease, a potentially fatal parasitic infection (3). I recently came across an article which brings these two subjects together, and reminds us why no one who believes in homeopathy should ever be trusted with the healthcare of your pet no matter how much they protest that they are really believers in science or scientific medicine.

Scientific Heartworm Prevention and Treatment
As is the case with vaccines, it is ironic that alternative practitioners try to sow fear and mistrust about the very therapies that have been so successful at preventing and treating a disease which so-called “natural,” pre-scientific practices like homeopathy and herbal medicine were never able to successfully control. They are, of course, correct on the basic point that these agents can have side-effects. Nothing with any effect at all is without side-effects in medicine. That is just the reality of tinkering with systems as complex as living beings. However, the frequency and severity of the risks are consistently less than alternative vets claim, and they ignore the very substantial benefits that offset these.

The best source of science-based information concerning prevention and treatment of heartworm disease is the American Heartworm Society (AHS). Yes, this organization has ties and sponsorship from companies that produce heartworm medications (as one small part of their often multi-billion dollar business) as well as companies that provide heartworm testing and unrelated veterinary products. Does that mean there is some potential for bias? Of course. Does that mean that none of the controlled scientific research done by or referred to by the AHS in making its recommendations is valid and it should all be ignored in favor of the haphazard personal experiences of a few alternative vets? Of course not!

Financial bias can have a subtle influence on both scientific data and the opinions of individuals. But there is nothing unique about the relationship between the AHS and pharmaceutical companies or other industries. Disclosure helps doctors and pet owners be aware of the risks of such relationships, but it is not an excuse to ignore good quality scientific evidence, which contains mechanisms to limit the influence of financial bias. And the alternative veterinary community has exactly the same sort of sponsorships and other financial arrangements with herbal medicine companies, homeopathy manufacturers, makers of other products used in alternative medicine, and schools teaching alternative therapies. These folks are no less under the influence of financial and other forms of bias than anyone else, they simply choose to claim they are and that their opinions and experiences are somehow more reliable than scientific research.

The AHS guidelines for preventing and treating heartworm disease have proven to be very successful at maximizing benefits and minimizing risk, and they are continuously updated and improved as new research is done. The opinions, experiences, and faith of “holistic” vets in pseudoscientific nonsense like homeopathy or unproven hypotheses like herbal remedies are not a trustworthy substitute for science-based guidelines.

Chambreau on Science-based Methods
Of course, in order to promote her own alternative to scientific medicine, Dr. Chambreau has to begin by attacking conventional practices, as alternative vets so often do.

The drugs adversely affect many dogs.  Any symptoms can become worse (weakened vital force produces many symptoms).

And her evidence for this is?

Over the years at holistic and homeopathic conferences, various veterinarians have reported problems with each of the preventatives.

[I] have seen few problems. One was a Boston Terrier who tried to re-landscape the yard, moving heavy boulders until we stopped the preventative.

From the AHVMA conferences, many holistic veterinarians feel that dogs do fine [without preventatives].  We all agree that the drug companies are suggesting doses too high and too often.

Hmmm. So despite the scientific research that shows the incidence of adverse effects form heartworm preventatives to be extremely low, a few CAVM vets at a conference think they’ve seen problems, including the obvious side-effect of dogs pushing rocks around because of the toxic meds they were taking. What could be more convincing evidence?

Chambreau on Preventing Heartworm Disease

Keep you dog as healthy as possible using homeopathic principles.  A healthy dog will kill those migrating larvae…The solution is to make your dog as healthy as possible by vaccinating the least, feeding the best diet (probably a raw meat…and treat the energy problem…Homeopathy is great for this. A healthy dog will be very unlikely to be ill from heartworms.

In high mosquito hours of the day stay in or use an herbal repellent.

Your dog could become infected…yet not be ill from the infection at all…. A healthy body should tolerate a low level of parasites. Therefore, many clients choose to use no preventative and I support them in that choice.

If you are very afraid of your dog getting heartworms, give the preventative

carefully. Observing your dog will give you clues that you need to try one of the other preventatives or use none at all….Learn how to ask yes/no questions of the universe B dowsing, pendulum, intuition, applied kinesiology talks of checking with nature for all your decisions in life and teaching a yes/no finger method)….You can certainly do energy healing after giving a preventative such as Reiki or Healing Touch which you can learn top [sic] do yourself or go to a practitioner.

Ok, so the best option is to use magic and untested alternative dietary strategies to keep your dog health, and then just don’t worry about it. Your dog might not get heartworms, and if he or she does, all the magic will make it just a minor problem. This is ignorant and dangerous nonsense, of course. There is no evidence raw diets help ward off parasites, homeopathy is completely useless voodoo, and “energy medicine” is just religion masquerading as healthcare. Heartworm disease, on the other hand, is a serious and often fatal malady that can easily kill your pet if appropriate prevention and treatment are not used. This kind of willful blindness to facts and wishful thinking substituting for medical advice is deeply unethical.

As for herbal mosquito repellants, this is at least a suggestion that could be effective if particular remedies were tested to see if they effectively repel fleas, but so far there is no such evidence, so it’s just more wishful thinking. None of the suggestions Dr. Chambreau makes for heartworm prevention have any basis in reality except the use of conventional preventatives, which she presents with unjustified fear-mongering and then suggests be accompanied by several varieties of quackery: Dowsing is superstitious nonsense, Reiki is more faith healing, and applied kinesiology is a delusion or a scam.

Dr. Chambreau on Heartworm Treatment
Treatment of heartworm disease is risky. While the medications used to kill heartworms do have some potential risks, the benefits of treating the disease far outweigh these. And the most significant risk is from the death of the heartworms themselves, which is going to apply to any therapy that is effective, “natural” or not. However, Dr. Chambreau leaps into recommendations that are pure fantasy with no hesitation, as usual.

Herbs and homeopathic treatment for adult heartworms are about 75% effective.

Most dogs seem to recover from heartworm infection without the conventional drugs and without serious heart problems. There is, of course, a risk that your dog has an energy weakness for heart problems and if infected, will have serious problems.  A healthy dog will usually have no heart problems and the worms will die in a year or so on their own.

So despite the overwhelming evidence that homeopathy is nothing but a placebo, she claims a high success rate for it as a heartworm treatment. She also suggests herbal remedies are effective, and while this is more plausible, it has not yet been demonstrated that any herbal treatments are as safe or effective as conventional treatment. Of course, she makes the even more ridiculous claim that a healthy dog won’t need treatment, and then tries to weasel out of responsibility for any dogs who suffer from heartworm infestation by claiming they have an “energy weakness for heart problems,” which is a meaningless bit of misdirection to justify the failure of ineffective or unproven treatments.

Bottom Line
The sort of nonsense Dr. Chambreau recommends is often dismissed even by skeptics as fundamentally harmless because homeopathy, Reiki, and many other such interventions don’t actually do anything at all, so they can’t directly harm patients. But the danger of telling pet owners to avoid safe and effective preventatives and treatments for serious disease is great, and substituting magic and wishful thinking for medicine is both dangerous and unethical. It is hard to understand why vets who put pets in unnecessary danger in this way can get away with doing so, but the best those of us committed to science-based medicine can do about it is expose their bad advice for what it is and hope pet owners will be skeptical and wary of this kind of quackery.

Posted in General, Homeopathy | 25 Comments

Oximunol is now Vivamune, and Still More about Marketing & Profit than Science

The faux science journal Integrative Veterinary Care has recently been pushing a supplement called Vivamune on their Facebook page, so I thought I’d investigate and see what the product was about. It turned out to be an interesting look into the business side of the supplement market.

Vivamune, currently marketed by a company called Avivagen, turns out to be a repackaging of Oximunol, a supplement marketed by a company call Chemaphor (of which Avivagen is a subsidiary). I wrote about Oximunol/Vivamune way back in 2010, and at the time the product was a nice example of marketing outstripping science in the supplement arena. Sadly, the changes in name, ownership, and marketing strategy that have occurred since, and even the scant additional research published in the intervening 5 years, have not changed the basic fact that this product relies on taking a tiny bit of promising but limited science and using it to cash in on the hopes and fears of pet owners.

What is Vivamune/Oximunol?
The core idea behind this supplement is a number of chemicals collectively identified as OxC-beta by the company. These are produced by oxidation of beta-carotene, the pigment that gives carrots their characteristic color and which is a precursor of Vitamin A. The theory, which is perfectly plausible, is that these compounds have biological effects which might enhance the function of the immune system and influence inflammation. However, as usual the statements made by the company in its marketing are much more exciting and dramatic than this humble hypothesis.

Vibrant health made simple

Revolutionary immune supporting active ingredient

Many beneficial health effects

Promotes normal mobility, and relieves occasional stiffness especially in older pets

Soothes skin-related issues associated with seasonal allergies

In pets, OxC-beta supports overall vitality and energy, mobility and joint function, as well as a healthy skin, coat and gut.

Results observed in food animals include healthier growth, better utilization of feed and decreased morbidity. In food animals, it is intended that use of OxC-beta avoids the feeding of antibiotics.

The claims made are pretty vague, as required both by supplement regulations which allow only “support” claims rather than specific treatment claims and also, as we will see, by the lack of specific evidence to support more specific claims. Nevertheless, the implication of wide-ranging and dramatic health benefits is clear. All the usual marketing buzzwords can be found as well, including “holistic,” “natural,” “organic,” and so on. The company does appear, however, to have abandoned some of the language used in marketing Oximunol which suggested their product might have a role in preventing or treating cancer.

Though the company is still marketing to pet owners, the emphasis appears to be on the potentially much more lucrative livestock market, and ultimately the human supplement market. The goal is apparently to market OxC-beta as a growth promoter in food animals, to replace the use of antibiotics for this purpose, which is being limited and in some cases banned by regulatory authorities due to concerns about antibiotic-resistance.

“In OxC-beta, we have discovered a natural alternative technology to antibiotics that we’re now targeting to improve productivity in livestock,” president and CEO, Cameron Groome, says… “We can quickly turn on enough OxC-beta production to generate tens of millions of dollars of revenue,” Mr. Groome suggests. “What we need to do is complete the sales cycle with those companies that can become multimillion dollar customers. That’s what we’re doing now…”

Does It Work?
The Vivamune/Oximunol marketing emphasizes the scientific credentials of the company’s leaders and the scientific basis for their product and claims:

Scientifically formulated

Rigorously researched and developed in Canada by a dedicated team of chemists, biochemists and veterinary immunologists

We have already had three peer-reviewed scientific papers published in leading journals on its chemistry and biology

The reality is a bit less impressive.

My original article on Oximunol was prompted by a press release suggesting an in-house “clinical trial” had been conducted on the product and that “A full report of the study is being prepared for submission for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.” I have not been able to find any evidence that this study has been published beyond the company’s own marketing statements in the intervening five years.

There are a number of published studies referred to on various Avivagen web pages and in other press releases. One paper in PLOS One presents some in vitro and lab mouse data indicating OxC-beta has some physiologic effects. Another study published in the American Journal of Veterinary Research found evidence for some effects of OxC-beta on white blood cells in vitro and in the lungs of Holstein calves. A study in poultry presented at a conference in Korea suggested some protective effects against a bacterial infection of the intestines, and another unpublished Korean study in pigs suggested OxC-beta might have growth promoting properties. The company has announced additional livestock studies in Asia, where it appears to be focusing its marketing efforts.

This research certainly suggests the chemicals in OxC-beta have measurable effects, and that some of these effects might be useful in preventing disease or promoting health. But as usual, the research is preliminary and very limited, and it does not justify widespread use of this supplement, especially in pets. There are still no clinical studies showing any benefits of any kind for dogs and cats, and only the most preliminary studies showing any benefits in food animals that might justify widespread use or effectively replace antibiotics as growth promoters in feed. The exuberance of the advertising has more to do with marketing and profits than with science.

Is It Safe?
As I often have to remind people, the absence of strong evidence for benefits from a medical therapy also means an absence of strong evidence for safety. The use of marketing terms like “natural” and “organic” are not reliable indicators of whether or not a product is safe. And while the chemicals in OxC-beta are derived from a food which, in itself, is safe to eat in reasonable amounts (though you can turn your skin yellow from eating too many carrots) that doesn’t mean the supplement is automatically safe.

Vitamins and other “natural” substances found in foods can cause serious harm if taken in quantities larger than normally found in food. The makers of OxC-beta specifically market the supplement on the basis that it contains far more of the chemicals they are interested in that one could get from a normal diet: “ While the process of carotenoid oxidation occurs naturally in the plant world (and to at least some extent in animals), the products of that oxidation reaction are present in such minuscule amounts that it would be physically impossible to get the full benefit just by increasing vegetable consumption.” The possibility of some risk cannot be ruled out except with appropriate research.

Avivagen claims to have run safety studies on dogs at ten times the recommended dose, but these do not appear to have been published or submitted for any regulatory review. The studies that have been published in other species do not report any significant side effects, but these are limited studies on small numbers of animals, which we all know from the experience of the pharmaceutical industry do not always guarantee safety in the much larger and more diverse general population, and most are funded or run by the company marketing the supplement.

Bottom Line
The idea that oxidation products of beta-carotene might have beneficial health effects is certainly plausible, and there is some preliminary data to support this. However, this product has been marketed as all-purpose tonic for pets for at least five years under two different names, and the manufacturer has yet to provide any reasonable published evidence of meaningful benefits in dogs and cats. And while there is slightly more evidence to suggest usefulness in some food animals, even this is not robust enough to justify widespread use.

The company repeatedly claims to be committed to a science-based approach and yet clearly acts in ways that have more to do with economic goals than scientific priorities. This is yet another example of the fact, which many users of dietary supplements fail to understand, that companies in the supplement business are no less motivated by profit and no more committed to the welfare of patients than pharmaceutical companies. The fact that they deal in largely unregulated substances they may label “natural” does not make their products safer nor their motives any purer than those of the conventional pharmaceutical business.

Posted in Herbs and Supplements | 4 Comments

SkeptVet’s Acupuncture Adventure- Part 5: Anesthesia and Analgesia

Introduction
The latest lecture in my acupuncture course concerns the use of acupuncture in patients undergoing anesthesia and surgery. Most of the lecture focuses on the potential role of acupuncture in reducing pain or mitigating some of the undesirable effects of sedatives and anesthetics. Use in reducing pain has always been one of the most common and widely accepted of claims for acupuncture, as well as one of the most difficult to validate convincingly given the influence of placebo and other non-specific effects and the challenges of designing effectively blinded acupuncture studies.

The lecturer was, as usual, very clear about not using acupuncture as a substitute for conventional treatment: “Acupuncture has a role in perioperative pain control but should be introduced as an adjunct rather than replacement for conventional anesthesia and analgesia.” She also admitted that the effects of even apparently positive studies were modest (effect sizes of perhaps 10-20%) and that the evidence was only “robust” in her view for needling that employed electrical stimulation.

This is consistent with my view of the evidence that the effects sometimes claimed for acupuncture might be more appropriately seen as effects of electrical stimulation of the nervous system. Reframing the discussion this way might reduce the infiltration of TCM nonsense into attempts to approach the study of electrical stimulation of this sort scientifically, and it might be less likely to give unearned legitimacy to pseudoscience than calling this “acupuncture.”

Studies
A large number of studies were referenced, and I have tried to read as many of these as possible and look at their findings objectively. Several experimental studies do show evidence of potentially beneficial physiological effects, though again the clinical value of these interventions would need to be demonstrated with appropriate clinical research.

Groppetti, A. M. Pecile, P. Sacerdote, V. Bronzo and G. Ravasio. Effectiveness of electroacupuncture analgesia compared with opioid administration in a dog model: a pilot study. British Journal of Anaesthesia 107 (4): 612–18 (2011).

The first study I’ll mention is one I have discussed before. The authors claims to have “demonstrated the ability of electroacupuncture to decrease anaesthetic and analgesic requirements in dogs during and after surgical neutering.” However, as I pointed out in my previous evaluation, the effects were minimal and of questionable clinical relevance, and the comparison treatment was a drug likely to have little or no meaningful analgesic efficacy. At best, the study showed some measures of pain, though not all nor the most objective ones, might respond to electrical stimulation, perhaps as a form of diffuse noxious inhibitory control. This does little, however, to support the idea that acupuncture as traditionally practiced, has significant value as a post-operative analgesic.

To her credit, the instructor of this course did acknowledge some of the limitations of this study, including the poor choice of comparison agent, though she still interpreted the results more charitably than I would.

Langenbach MR, Aydemir-Dogruyol K, Issel R, Sauerland S. Randomized sham-controlled trial of acupuncture for postoperative pain control after stapled haemorrhoidopexy. Colorectal Dis. 2012 Aug;14(8):e486-91.

The authors of this study performed acupuncture and an attempted sham-acupuncture procedure on patients in additional to conventional pain control. The study suffered from all of the usual problems with acupuncture studies. The therapists, of course, were not blinded. Arguably the patients were not blinded either since the acupuncturists judged whether their needling was appropriate based on trying to induce the “de-qi” sensation, a subjective feeling patients often experience with acupuncture. If control subjects did not have a similar sensation, particularly if they had experienced acupuncture previously, then they would be aware of the treatment they were getting. Also, the sham acupuncture involved actual needling, which often seems to have as much effect as needling at chosen or traditional sites.

Finally, the outcome measure, pain, was subjective and so likely subject to potential bias, especially with ineffective sham control. Objective measures, like HR and BP, were not affected.

The primary outcome, a difference in pain scores between conventional and acupuncture groups, was not achieved, so the study essentially failed to show a benefit. However, there was a statistical difference in pain scores between the sham and verum acupuncture groups, which one would expect if patients were able to determine whether they were getting verum or fake acupuncture treatment.

The authors’ bias was clear in their conclusion, which despite the failure to find the primary outcome they had predicted stated, “Although the difference between verum acupuncture and conventional analgesia was not statistically significant, this study has partly confirmed the analgesic efficacy of acupuncture.”

Skarda, RT. Tejwani, GA. Muir, WW III.  Cutaneous analgesia, hemodynamic and respiratory effects, and ?-endorphin concentration in spinal fluid and plasma of horses after acupuncture and electroacupuncture. AJVR. 2002;63(10):1435-1442.

This study rotated a small number of horses through three conditions- needling, needling with electrical stimulation, and no treatment. The primary outcome tested with a skin twitch or avoidance response to a heating element placed on the skin, intended to be a measure of pain response.

There was no blinding, and both the stimulus (a heating element manually held on the horses’ skin) and the response (skin twitch or avoidance movement) have some element of subjectivity, bias cannot be ruled out. The authors recognized this, but though they chose to have all assessments done by the same investigator to minimize individual variation, they did not blind this assessor to the treatment.

The authors reported that horses tolerated higher temperatures before reacting with needling and electrical stimulation than with no treatment. There was not sham acupuncture treatment, and beta-endorphin levels did not differ among the groups.

Culp LB, Skarda RT, Muir WW 3rd. Comparisons of the effects of acupuncture, electroacupuncture, and transcutaneous cranial electrical stimulation on the minimum alveolar concentration of isoflurane in dogs. Am J Vet Res. 2005 Aug;66(8):1364-70.

This study rotated 8 laboratory beagles though three conditions: needling, needling with electrical current applied, electrical current applied through electrodes placed on the skin as would be done for transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in humans. The subjects were anesthetized, and the goal was to determine if the minimum alveolar concentration (MAC), that is the level of gas required to achieve full anesthesia, was reduced by the treatments.

All three treatments apparently reduced the MAC (8.4% for needling, 10% for needling with electrical stimulation, and 13.4% for TENS). According to the authors, needling with electrical stimulation and TENS reduced MC by a statistically significant amount while needling alone did not, though the appropriate statistics were not reported in the paper. This would appear to show that any effect was due to the electrical stimulation, regardless of how it was applied, not to “acupuncture” per se. Most other values measure, such as heart rate, blood pressure, etc., did not show significant effects.

It is difficult to see how this study could be viewed as validating acupuncture as an analgesic or anesthetic treatment, though again it does support the idea that electrical nerve stimulation, done  through “acupuncture” needles or by other means, may have some useful effects.

Suo XY, Du ZH, Wang HS, Li JG, Wang YL, Yao SD, Chen WM. The effects of stimulation at acupoint ST36 points against hemorrhagic shock in dogs. Am J Emerg Med. 2011 Nov;29(9):1188-93.

This was, by far, the most compelling paper discussed in this course so far. Though the model used is disturbing on an ethical level, it does appear to show some unequivocal and potentially significant effects. Thirty dogs were divided into 5 groups (whether they were randomly divided is not stated). One group was anesthetized and had unspecified surgical procedures. The other groups were all anesthetized and had a sufficient volume of blood removed do induce a state of circulatory shock. Of these, some were treated with needling and electrical stimulation at a designated acupuncture point (“electroacupuncture”), some were given needling and electrical stimulation at a supposed “non-acupuncture” location, some were given the electroacupuncture after the vagus nerve was severed, and some were placed into shock and received no treatment. The goal was to identify objective physiological responses to the treatments that would reduce the effects of the induced shock state.

All of the measures of cardiovascular function (such as blood pressure) and other indicators of shock (such as blood lactate level) were significantly improved by the electroacupuncture treatment compared to no treatment, and none were significantly altered by the non-acupuncture electrical stimulation. Most interestingly, the effect of the electroacupuncture was abolished by cutting the vague nerve, suggesting a mechanism by which the electrical stimulation of the nervous system could have influenced the response to the induced shock. Some, though not all, of the differences with electroacupuncture were large enough to potentially be clinically relevant.

Clearly, this model shows that the electroacuuncture treatment had objective and significant physiologic effects on dogs with induced hemodynamic shock, and in demonstrating the effects can be blocked by vagus nerve transection it provides a plausible mechanism for these effects im terms of stimulation of the autonomic nervous system. However, there are several features of this study which raise questions.

There was, for example, no needling without electrical stimulation, which is how acupuncture is often done. As I have pointed out repeatedly, the best evidence for objective and potentially meaningful biological effects for acupuncture come from studies using electrical stimulation, and it seems quite likely that it is this stimulation, rather than the use of needles or the selection of needling locations according to traditional methods that is responsible for any real benfits electroacupuncture might have. In many studies, other kinds of electrical stimulation, such as conventional TENS, have effects equivalent to electroacupuncture, which supports this interpretation. However, as in this study some research suggests that the selection of locations for electrical stimulation, with or without needling, may sometimes make a difference in the effects seen.

This study also does not provide direct evidence of a clinically relevant therapy. Clearly, one would not subject a dog in naturally occurring hemorrhagic shock to 30 minutes of electroacupuncture as a primary therapy, when there is far stronger evidence at all levels that fluid replacement and other interventions are more effective and appropriate. Electrical stimulation such as used in this laboratory odel might be a useful adjunctive treatment in such a situation, though from a practical perspective I suspect it would be logistically challenging to employ needling and electrical stimulation to a critical patient receiving intensive care in an emergency hospital setting.

However, this study does provide the best evidence I have yet seen for effects of electrical stimulation through acupuncture needles that might be significant and useful. It reinforces that there is some plausibility to the use of such needling and electrical stimulation even if it has little to do with traditional acupuncture methods.

Acupuncture Anesthesia
For the first time in this course, the lecturer did stray into what I consider complete nonsense by suggesting, albeit somewhat hesitantly and obliquely, that acupuncture might be effective as the sole form of anesthesia for some surgical procedures. She did not appear to be suggesting this actually be done in veterinary patients, but she did appear to believe some of the bogus claims that in China “acupuncture anesthesia” has been convincingly demonstrated to work. This is a popular misconception that has been debunked in detail elsewhere:

The ‘Acupuncture Anesthesia’ series from Science-bases Medicine:

  1. “Acupuncture Anesthesia”: A Proclamation from Chairman Mao (Part I)
  2. “Acupuncture Anesthesia”: A Proclamation from Chairman Mao (Part II)
  3. “Acupuncture Anesthesia”: A Proclamation from Chairman Mao (Part III)
  4. “Acupuncture Anesthesia”: A Proclamation from Chairman Mao (Part IV)
  5. ‘Acupuncture Anesthesia’ Redux: another Skeptic and an Unfortunate Misportrayal at the NCCAM

The article Nonsense with Needles from the Acupuncturewatch site also covers this claim in detail. The bottom line is that investigations of claims for the use of acupuncture as a sole anesthetic agent in China uncover a large number of reasons to disbelieve these claims:

  1. Patients receiving acupuncture anesthesia almost always receive conventional sedatives (such as phenobarbitol), narcotic pain medications (such as meperidine), and local anesthetics in addition to acupuncture.
  2. Only 5-10% of  surgical cases employ acupuncture anesthesia, and only healthy, young, adult patients undergoing relatively straightforward procedures are selected. These are the patients most willing and able to withstand procedures with incomplete or inadequate pain control. We must remember, people can endure surgical procedures without any anesthesia or pain control, and they have done so for thousands of years before the invention of modern anesthetics and pain control drugs. It is dangerous and, in this day and age, unnecessary, but it is possible.
  3. Witnesses from outside China who have seen these procedures often report signs of discomfort in patients who, for cultural and political reasons, are not free to honestly acknowledge or report their discomfort.

Bottom Line
The evidence discussed in this lecture generally does not support a claim of significant beneficial effects for acupuncture, defined simply as needling traditional points, in anesthetic and surgical patients. However, there is some evidence that electrical stimulation through acupuncture needles does have some objective and potentially useful physiologic effects. As I have often said, isolating and validating these effects in clinical patients, and separating them from the mythology attached to traditional acupuncture would be useful, but it is quite challenging given the dense concretion of ideology and faith-based practices associated with acupuncture.

In general, the instructors of this course have been measured and reasonable in their claims and have relied on scientific evidence to support them, though they do seem to interpret this evidence more favorably than seems justified to me. The only significant lapse in the science-based perspective I have seen so far has been the apparent acceptance of claims regarding acupuncture anesthesia in China, claims which are clearly false.

Posted in Acupuncture | 4 Comments

Antioxidants for Pets- It’s Complicated

The subject of anti-oxidants comes up fairly often on this blog. This is largely because the oxidation and free-radicals are often viewed as fundamentally destructive forces responsible for aging and many types of illness, and preventing the malign effects of these compounds by introducing anti-oxidants in the diet or as supplements is often lauded as a near miraculous way to prevent and treat disease. As is so often the case, however, the truth is far more complexed, nuanced, and riddled with uncertainties. The basic chemistry of what free-radicals and antioxidants are is well-described in this Wikipedia article.

The concept that free-radicals cause damage to cells and tissues and that antioxidants, produced by the body and ingested in foods, can help to mitigate this damage is a simple and relatively sound idea. This can be easily demonstrated in test-tube experiments and laboratory animals. However, extensive research has not generally supported the extension of this idea to the extremes it is often taken to by proponents of alternative diets and supplements who rely on the idea to promote their beliefs. In fact, such research has often found that antioxidants can actually cause harm, such as increasing cancer risk, and interfere with medical treatment, such as chemotherapy for cancer. It turns out, the body sometimes uses oxidation and free-radicals as a tool of the immune system, and suppressing these is not always a good thing even when it can actually be done. Life is always more complicated than our desire for simple answers leads us to imagine.

In terms of pet foods, a variety of antioxidants are used as preservatives and for presumed nutritional benefits. There is certainly evidence to support the use of antioxidants as food preservatives, though not to support the claims alternative medicine advocates often make that “natural” antioxidants, such as Vitamin E, are safer than “artificial preservatives.” The evidence is a lot less clear, however, about the purported health benefits of antioxidants added to food or given as supplements. A living organism eating food with thousands of chemical compounds in it over years is vastly more complex than the simple, in vitro models often used to support claims of health benefits from antioxidants.

Because health effects over long periods of time are difficult to measure, and to associate with particular substances in food, proxy markers of the effects of antioxidants are often used in studies of dietary supplementation. However, it is not clear how reliable such markers are in predicting the benefits to health and longevity that really matter, and studies using proxy markers cannot be viewed as proof that a supplement has a real benefit. Similarly, studies that evaluate supplements by measuring markers of immune function or other proxy values do not necessarily prove these supplements have clinically meaningful benefits.

There is little direct research on antioxidant supplementation, in food or as nutritional supplements, for producing health benefits in dogs and cats. A handful of studies show some potentially promising effects on proxy markers, and a couple seem to show some clinical benefits, but the evidence is scant and weak. The harmful effects of antioxidant supplementation in humans has only emerged with studies of large numbers of individuals over periods of time far longer than typical veterinary trials, so while few specific safety risks are known for common antioxidants, the assumption of safety made for most is not justified.

The bottom line is that most of the claims concerning the benefits of antioxidants are based on theory or indirect and limited evidence. The specific antioxidant given, the form in which it is given, the other components of the diet, the species, health status, and individual makeup of each animal, and many other factors all influence the effects of antioxidants. Whether such effects are strong enough to be clinically significant, and whether they are beneficial or harmful if they do have a real effect, is a complicated question, and simplistic, strong claims are not justified.

Here are previous posts related to this subject:

The Myth of Antioxidants?

Resveratrol 1

Resveratrol 2

Resveratrol 3

Resveratrol 4

USDA Confronts Misleading Hype about Antioxidants in Foods

More Evidence Antioxidants May Increase Cancer Risk

Canine Nutrigenomics by Dr. Jean Dodds; Science as Windodressing

Evidence Concerning Vitamin and Mineral Supplements-Safety and Efficacy

Ocu-Glo 1

Ocu-Glo 2

SELECT- An Example of Why Clinical Trials Aren’t Just the Icing, They Are the Cake

 

And here are a few publications discussing the limited evidence regarding antioxidants and pets:

Antioxidants in Veterinary Nutrition. Steven C. Zicker, Karen J. Wedekind, Dennis E. Jewell. Vet Clin Small Anim 36 (2006) 1183–1198.

Acetyl-L-carnitine and alpha-lipoic acid supplementation of aged beagle dogs improves learning in two landmark discrimination tests. Milgram NW, Araujo JA, Hagen TM, Treadwell BV, Ames BN. FASEB J. 2007 Nov;21(13):3756-62.

Chronic antioxidant and mitochondrial cofactor administration improves discrimination learning in aged but not young dogs. Siwak CT, Tapp PD, Head E, Zicker SC, Murphey HL, Muggenburg BA, Ikeda-Douglas CJ, Cotman CW, Milgram NW. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2005 Mar;29(3):461-9.

Learning ability in aged beagle dogs is preserved by behavioral enrichment and dietary fortification: a two-year longitudinal study. Milgram NW, Head E, Zicker SC, Ikeda-Douglas CJ, Murphey H, Muggenburg B, Siwak C, Tapp D, Cotman CW. Neurobiol Aging. 2005 Jan;26(1):77-90.

Influence of dietary antioxidants and fatty acids on neutrophil mediated bacterial killing and gene expression in healthy Beagles. Hall JA, Chinn RM, Vorachek WR, Gorman ME, Greitl JL, Joshi DK, Jewell DE. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2011 Feb 15;139(2-4):217-28.

The effect of vitamin C supplementation in healthy dogs on antioxidative capacity and immune parameters. Hesta M, Ottermans C, Krammer-Lukas S, Zentek J, Hellweg P, Buyse J, Janssens GP. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl). 2009 Feb;93(1):26-34.

A combination cocktail improves spatial attention in a canine model of human aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Head E, Murphey HL, Dowling AL, McCarty KL, Bethel SR, Nitz JA, Pleiss M, Vanrooyen J, Grossheim M, Smiley JR, Murphy MP, Beckett TL, Pagani D, Bresch F, Hendrix C. J Alzheimers Dis. 2012;32(4):1029-42.

Supplemental vitamin C appears to slow racing greyhounds. Marshall RJ, Scott KC, Hill RC, Lewis DD, Sundstrom D, Jones GL, Harper J. J Nutr. 2002 Jun;132(6 Suppl 2):1616S-21S.

Effect of feeding a weight loss food beyond a caloric restriction period on body composition and resistance to weight gain in dogs. Floerchinger AM, Jackson MI, Jewell DE, MacLeay JM, Paetau-Robinson I, Hahn KA. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2015 Aug 15;247(4):375-84.

Effect of feeding a weight loss food beyond a caloric restriction period on body composition and resistance to weight gain in cats. Floerchinger AM, Jackson MI, Jewell DE, MacLeay JM, Hahn KA, Paetau-Robinson I. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2015 Aug 15;247(4):365-74

 

 

Posted in Topic-Based Summaries | 1 Comment

Unregulated Herbal Products and Supplements Send 23,000 People to the Emergency Room Annually in the U.S.

Many times, I have written about the risks of herbal remedies and dietary supplements, and about the folly of not regulating these and requiring the scientific testing for safety and efficacy that is required of real medicine (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). A recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine adds further evidence to the risks of such unregulated products.

Geller, A. et al. Emergency Department Visits for Adverse Events Related to Dietary Supplements. N Engl J Med 2015; 373:1531-1540

This study found that the major causes of harm from supplements included accidental ingestion by children, and heart problems in young, otherwise health adults using them for weight loss or for greater “energy.” However, even micronutrients were responsible for emergency room visits and hospitalizations in older Americans.

Nothing that has a measurable effect on the body, even if it has benefits, is without risk, and these products won’t be safe or useful until we require manufacturers to produce reliable scientific evidence about their effects before they are allowed to sell them.

Methods

We used nationally representative surveillance data from 63 emergency departments obtained from 2004 through 2013 to describe visits to U.S. emergency departments because of adverse events related to dietary supplements.

Results

On the basis of 3667 cases, we estimated that 23,005 (95% confidence interval [CI], 18,611 to 27,398) emergency department visits per year were attributed to adverse events related to dietary supplements. These visits resulted in an estimated 2154 hospitalizations (95% CI, 1342 to 2967) annually. Such visits frequently involved young adults between the ages of 20 and 34 years (28.0% of visits; 95% CI, 25.1 to 30.8) and unsupervised children (21.2% of visits; 95% CI, 18.4 to 24.0). After the exclusion of unsupervised ingestion of dietary supplements by children, 65.9% (95% CI, 63.2 to 68.5) of emergency department visits for single-supplement–related adverse events involved herbal or complementary nutritional products; 31.8% (95% CI, 29.2 to 34.3) involved micronutrients. Herbal or complementary nutritional products for weight loss (25.5%; 95% CI, 23.1 to 27.9) and increased energy (10.0%; 95% CI, 8.0 to 11.9) were commonly implicated. Weight-loss or energy products caused 71.8% (95% CI, 67.6 to 76.1) of supplement-related adverse events involving palpitations, chest pain, or tachycardia, and 58.0% (95% CI, 52.2 to 63.7) involved persons 20 to 34 years of age. Among adults 65 years of age or older, choking or pill-induced dysphagia or globus caused 37.6% (95% CI, 29.1 to 46.2) of all emergency department visits for supplement-related adverse events; micronutrients were implicated in 83.1% (95% CI, 73.3 to 92.9) of these visits.

Conclusions

An estimated 23,000 emergency department visits in the United States every year are attributed to adverse events related to dietary supplements. Such visits commonly involve cardiovascular manifestations from weight-loss or energy products among young adults and swallowing problems, often associated with micronutrients, among older adults. (Funded by the Department of Health and Human Services.)

 

Posted in Herbs and Supplements | 10 Comments

Happy National Veterinary Technician Week!

It can’t be said enough that we vets would be worthless without veterinary nurses/technicians, and most people will never understand how hard and important their job is. But this brilliant song from one of the technicians I’m lucky enough to work with comes close!

 

Posted in General | 1 Comment

Science & Reason Triumph Over Fear and Misinformation in California: Again!

Examples of the victory of fear and misinformation over science and reason in public policy are easy to find, and I find myself writing about them often. But occasionally the pendulum swings in the right direction for a bit, and we gain a little ground in the never-ending conflict between rational, science-based governance and faith-based, anti-science politics. My own state of California has provided a welcome example this year.

In the spring, I worked to support the passage of SB 277, a bill eliminating non-medical exemptions from school vaccination requirements, and I was thrilled to see the bill pass the legislature and be signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown in June. IN his signing statement, the governor emphasized that “the science is clear that vaccines dramatically protect children” and that “the evidence shows that immunization powerfully benefits and protects the community.” Despite the hysteria and misinformation marshaled against the legislation, both the legislature and the governor made rational decisions in the best interests of public health.

Even more encouraging is the failure of the opposition to SB 277 to generate enough public support for a referendum overturning the measure. California’s referendum system too often makes public policy decisions a popularity contest, but in this case even the relatively low number of citizens needed for the referendum process could not be sufficiently misled to support this anti-vaccine measure.

Only a few days ago, the governor signed yet another important public health measure, SB 792, which requires childcare workers in daycare facilities and other settings to be appropriately vaccinated. The anti-science and anti-government hysteria associated with this bill was, if anything, even more strident and absurd than that regarding SB 277, yet the legislature and the governor did what was best for the public based on science, not fear.

Finally, Governor Brown recently took another tough stand on a science-based issue, this time vetoing a “right-to-try” law, AB 159. This well-intentioned but misguided legislation was intended to make it easier for people with terminal or untreatable illness to get access to experimental, unproven drugs with the notion that ”they have nothing to lose” and so should be allowed to use experimental therapies. Right-to-try laws sound like they are intended to benefit patients, but they are really part of an organized campaign to use these patients’ suffering as a toll to undermine FDA regulations and the drug approval process. The doctors at Science-based Medicine have written extensively about how these laws actually put patients at risk of greater suffering and earlier death, and how they undermine the science-based system of drug testing that protects all of us from harmful therapies. (1, 2, 3). In 24 states so far, desperate patients and their families and advocates have been used to force passage of such laws on purely emotional grounds despite the evidence that they do not help patients. These laws, like the “health freedom” movement have much more to do with a general distrust of government regulation and a libertarian political view than with evidence-based efforts to help patients.

It is refreshing, if still to uncommon, to see politicians making sound, science-based decisions about health policy and resisting the emotional, fear-based rhetoric of anti-science and anti-government activists. I’m not naïve, and I’ve seen enough change in the political winds over the decades to realize the pendulum will continue to swing, but it is worth celebrating each victory and hoping for gradual progress to a more rational, science-based culture.

 

Posted in Law, Regulation, and Politics | 1 Comment

More Evidence Antioxidants May Increase Cancer Risk

I’ve written before about why the near magical status of antioxidant supplements, supposed to be miraculous in preventing or treating disease and aging, is inconsistent with science and not supported by good evidence. Antioxidants in general, and specific supplements like resveratrol (1, 2, 3) and Vitamins C and E (4, 5, 6), and even antioxidants in foods, have proven far less miraculous than hoped or claimed by alternative practitioners, and some have even proven harmful. Some studies intended to investigate whether antioxidant vitamins can prevent or treat cancer have actually found an increase in risk. A new laboratory study provides a bit more evidence concerning the potential risks of such chemicals.

LeGall K., et al. Antioxidants can increase melanoma metastasis in mice. Science Translational Medicine. 2015;7:308.

The article is behind a paywall, but a description of the results published elsewhere suggest that antioxidants can promote tumor growth and invasion under some circumstances. This is consistent with previous research, though the actual effects in patients with naturally occurring disease is not clear.

These results don’t mean antioxidants might not have value in prevention or treatment of some diseases. But like anything which affects the complex physiological processes of the body, they can have unintended consequences. This means they must be used rationally and with appropriate research evidence to support their use, not treated as magical and safe panceas.

 

 

Posted in Herbs and Supplements | 9 Comments

SkeptVet’s Acupuncture Adventure- Part 4: Spinal Cord Injury

Introduction
This lecture had surprisingly little information about acupuncture itself. It began with a review of the pathophysiology of spinal cord injury and the typical steps for evaluating and stabilizing patients presenting with acute spinal cord injury. Most of the treatments discussed were standard, conventional therapies (surgery, anti-inflammatory and analgesic medications, exercise and physical therapy, etc), and it was emphasized that acupuncture and the other alternative treatments recommended were not intended as substitutes for standard conventional care.

This reinforces the fact that unlike course offered by the Chi Institute and others promoting a TCM perspective, the instructors of this course are making a sincere effort to approach the subject of acupuncture from a science-based perspective. I have disagreed with a number of their conclusions about acupuncture so far, but I believe their claims and the evidence they present are worth evaluating seriously, unlike the obvious mythological nonsense of TCM. Just as I challenge the stereotypes and clichés put forward about conventional medicine and veterinarians who practice it, it is important that as skeptics we not stereotype or prejudge people who make claims that we find dubious or ultimately reject as untrue.

The emphasis of the lecture was on the relationship between the physiology of spinal cord injury and the goals of therapy- controlling pain, preventing secondary injury associated with inflammation, ischemia, and other factors following the initial trauma, and preserving and restoring neurologic function. In general, the claims made for specific therapies, including acupuncture, were based on the plausible mechanism identified in the pre-clinical and animal model literature I have already acknowledged exists for needling and, especially, electrical stimulation using acupuncture needles.

My main objection to some of these claims I that they trust the translation from experimental studies to clinical patients more than I think is justified. Just because preclinical studies find effects by which acupuncture and other therapies might work doesn’t mean they will work in real patients. It only means that some clinical research is justified. And to date, that research either hasn’t been done or has been limited and unconvincing for most of the methods described in this lecture.

Non-acupuncture Therapies Suggested for Spinal Cord Injury
I will briefly discuss the main non-acupuncture therapies suggested as possible adjuncts to standard care.

  1. Polyethylene Glycol (PEG)-

PEG, and the related compound P 188, are polymers that are hypothesized to protect and facilitate repair in damaged nerve tissue. Most of the research on the effects of PEG in spinal cord injury have been rodent model studies. A systematic review identified 5 studies involving systemic administration of PEG (as opposed to direct application to the spinal cord, which would not be practical in most veterinary patients), most in rodents and one in dogs:

The extensive body of literature from Dr. Borgens’ lab on the use of PEG in a guinea-pig model of SCI has arguably served as the basis for interest in PEG as a neurooprotective agent.

Of the five studies identified in this systematic review, three utilized Wistar or Sprague Dawley rats with either clip compression or contusion injuries, one utilized a guinea-pig model with a forcep crush injury, and one utilized canines who suffered paraplegia from intervertebral disc herniations…Subcutaneously injected PEG was reported to be effective with a delay in intervention of 6?h post injury (Borgens and Bohnert, 2001), and dogs treated with PEG within 72?h of injury were reported to recover better than historical controls. In a rat SCI model, a 1-h time window of efficacy was reported by Baptiste and colleagues (2009).

With respect to non-behavioral outcomes, PEG was reported to decrease NF200 degradation, reduce apopotosis, and improve tissue sparing at the lesion site (Baptiste et al., 2009). In contrast, Kwon and colleagues (2009) and Ditor and colleagues (2007) found no significant tissue neuroprotection with PEG alone. With respect to behavioral outcomes, Borgens and Bohnert (2001) reported improved electrophysiologic recordings and the return of the cutaneous truncal muscle reflex after PEG treatment, and reported improved hindlimb recovery in PEG-treated dogs as compared to historical controls. Baptiste and colleagues (2009) reported modest improvements in BBB scores in PEG-treated animals, but no improvement on inclined plane testing. Ditor and colleagues (2007) also reported very modest improvement in BBB scores and a reduction in allodynia with PEG treatment.

This research suggests there might be some beneficial effects, though the effect size and clinical relevance cannot be determined from such lab animal studies. The canine study is the most relevant to veterinary use of PEG:

Laverty PH, Leskovar A, Breur GJ, Coates JR, Bergman RL, Widmer WR, Toombs JP, Shapiro S, Borgens RB. A preliminary study of intravenous surfactants in paraplegic dogs: polymer therapy in canine clinical SCI. J Neurotrauma. 2004 Dec;21(12):1767-77.

In this study, 19 dogs were treated with surgery and steroids (which are now quite controversial and less frequently used) as well as PEG or P 188. The outcomes were compared against historical records of dogs with similar disease treated in the past. This sort of design introduces a lot of potential confounding factors, so the results must be viewed cautiously. In this case, the PEG-treated dogs recovered better than the historic controls, however those dogs generally did much worse than is typically reported for dogs receiving standard care.

No subsequent clinical trials have yet been published, although one funded by the Morris Animal Foundation is underway at the North Carolina State University veterinary college. PEG remains a potentially useful but as yet unproven adjunctive therapy for dogs with spinal cord injury. The studies so far have not identified any significant risks, though more research is needed to ensure safety as well as efficacy.

2. Oscillating electrical fields-

Various forms of electrical stimulation have been found, in in vitro or animal model studies, to have effects on damaged nerve tissue that might potentially be beneficial to patients. And as previously discussed, some of the most positive research on acupuncture involves so-called “electroacupuncture,” which arguably is just another method of providing electrical stimulus with little in common with historical acupuncture practices. There is some limited clinical research suggesting possible beneficial effects of oscillating electrical field stimulus. According to a recent review:

This oscillating field stimulator (OFS) has been tested in two studies in dogs with sub-acute spinal injuries, with beneficial outcomes.41,42 These studies led to a phase 1 trial with an OFS in humans with acute traumatic SCI.43 The stimulator was implanted within 3 weeks after injury, and remained in place for 15 weeks. The stimulation provided significant improvement in two measures of sensory sensitivity and in seven out of nine patients improved motor scores were observed, compared to historical data for untreated patients. Although an erratum was later published concerning some discrepancies in functional scoring, the fundamental conclusions of the trial are still compelling.

  1. Borgens RB., Toombs JP., Blight AR., McGinnis ME., Bauer MS., Widmer WR., and Cook JR., Jr.: Effects of applied electric fields on clinical cases of complete paraplegia in dogs. Restor Neurol Neurosci 1993; 5:305.

  2. Borgens RB., Toombs JP., Breur G., Widmer WR., Waters D., Harbath AM., March P., and Adams LG.: An imposed oscillating electrical field improves the recovery of function in neurologically complete paraplegic dogs. J Neurotrauma 1999; 16:639.

  3. Shapiro S., Borgens R., Pascuzzi R., Roos K., Groff M., Purvines S., Rodgers RB., Hagy S., and Nelson P.: Oscillating field stimulation for complete spinal cord injury in humans: a phase 1 trial. J Neurosurg Spine 2005; 2:3.

3. Hyperbaric Oxygen (HBOT)-

I have summarized the evidence for hyperbaric oxygen therapy in detail before. My overall conclusion was:

HBOT is a biologically plausible therapy with substantial in vitro and animal model research to support possible benefits in a variety of conditions. There is, however, almost no clinical trial evidence to support its use in companion animal species. Justification of veterinary use of HBOT comes only from extrapolation from basic principles, pre-clinical research, anecdote, and extrapolation from research in humans, so this should be viewed as an unproven, experimental veterinary therapy.

There are a few indications for which the human clinical trial research provides at least a moderate degree of confidence that HBOT is effective. There are many others for which there is only limited and low-quality evidence and no clear conclusion can be drawn. Not all uses validated in humans are relevant to veterinary use, and most veterinary applications have not been directly studied in people. Overall, the evidence is strongest for adjunctive use of HBOT to facilitate healing of chronic wounds not resolving with standard therapies….For my part, it suggests to me that HBOT is a promising therapy for a variety of indications but not clearly demonstrated effective for very many even in humans, and the veterinary evidence is too weak to be very useful in making recommendations.

A systematic review of HBOT for spinal cord injury has been published:

Ninety-three studies were identified in the databa­se Pubmed. Among these, through a set of inclusion/exclusion criteria, 11 articles published between 1963 and 2009 were selected. In the nine expe­rimental studies, different ways to ap­ply the treatment were observed. The measured outcomes were: functional, histological, biochemical and electro­physiological.

In most of the studies, the results show recovery of locomotor function, histology and/or biochemical features. Regarding the two studies in clinical samples, the results are controversial. The samples are heterogeneous and the application of hyperbaric oxygen therapy is not the same for all patients in each study. Considering the results of this review, further studies are ne­cessary to define the role of hyper­baric oxygen therapy in acute spinal cord injury.

This does not amount to very strong evidence to recommend HBOT for dogs and cats with spinal cord injury.

4. Antioxidants-

This is, of course, a pretty broad and vague category. Oxidative damage has been identified as a component to secondary injury in cases of spinal cord trauma, so it is reasonable to hypothesize antioxidants might have some clinical value. However, similar reasonable hypotheses regarding the role of antioxidants in aging, cancer, and other health conditions have not held up well to rigorous investigation, so a reasonable hypothesis alone is not sufficient. A couple of examples will illustrate the complex and inconsistent research results in this area:

Yao M, Yang L, Wang J, Sun YL, Dun RL, Wang YJ, Cui XJ. Neurological recovery and antioxidant effects of curcumin for spinal cord injury in the rat: a network meta-analysis and systematic review. J Neurotrauma. 2015 Mar 15;32(6):381-91. doi: 10.1089/neu.2014.3520. Epub 2015 Jan 9.

Eight studies with adequate randomization were selected and included in the systematic review. Two studies had a higher methodological quality. Overall, curcumin appears to significantly improve neurological function, as assessed using the Basso, Beattie, Bresnahan (BBB) locomotor rating scale (four studies, n=132; pooled mean difference [MD]=3.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.40-4.45; p=0.04), in a random-effects model and decrease malondialdehyde (MDA) using a fixed-effects model (four studies, n=56; pooled MD=-1.00; 95% CI=-1.59 to -0.42; p=0.00008). Effect size, assessed using the BBB scale, increased gradually with increasing curcumin dosage. The difference between low- and high-dose curcumin using the BBB scale was statistically significant. Neurological recovery and antioxidant effects of curcumin were observed in rats with SCI despite poor study methodological quality.

Cristante AF1, Barros Filho TE, Oliveira RP, Marcon RM, Rocha ID, Hanania FR, Daci K. Antioxidative therapy in contusion spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2009 Jun;47(6):458-63. doi: 10.1038/sc.2008.155. Epub 2008 Dec 9.

Forty male Wistar rats were used, divided into four groups of 10 animals each. Group 3 received vitamin C 100 mg kg(-1) day(-1) intraperitoneally; Group 2 received vitamin E 100 mg kg(-1) day(-1) orally; Group 1 received vitamins C and E, at the same dosages; and Group 4 was the control. The vitamin therapy was administered for 1 month and then the animals were killed. A direct contusional injury was caused and functional evaluation was performed using the Basso, Beattie and Bresnahan rating scale. The rats were evaluated on the second postoperative day and weekly thereafter, until the end of the experiment.

The results were evaluated by means of the one-tailed, non-paired and non-parametric Mann-Whitney test, comparing the groups two by two. No significant difference in functional performance was observed between the groups.

The use of vitamins C and E in these rats did not improve their neurological performance. However, histopathological examination showed that the inflammatory response was less intense following administration of the combination of vitamins C and E.

The general idea that antioxidants must be good for spinal cord injury is not supportable. However, it is possible that some specific agents might provide some clinical benefit in some situations. Unfortunately, there hasn’t yet been much clinical research to identify these.

5. Stem Cells-

I have also written about stem cell therapies often, and again the conclusion has bene that there is promising preclinical research but very little in the way of clinical evidence for efficacy in specific conditions. This is certainly true for veterinary patients, and with regard to spinal cord injury specifically, the evidence is very preliminary:

Antonic A, Sena ES, Lees JS, Wills TE, Skeers P, Batchelor PE, Macleod MR, Howells DW. Stem cell transplantation in traumatic spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of animal studies. Stem Cells- PLoS Biol. 2013 Dec;11(12):e1001738. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001738. Epub 2013 Dec 17.

One hundred and fifty-six publications using 45 different stem cell preparations met our prespecified inclusion criteria. Only one publication used autologous stem cells. Overall, allogeneic stem cell treatment appears to improve both motor (effect size, 27.2%; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 25.0%-29.4%; 312 comparisons in 5,628 animals) and sensory (effect size, 26.3%; 95% CI, 7.9%-44.7%; 23 comparisons in 473 animals) outcome. For sensory outcome, most heterogeneity between experiments was accounted for by facets of stem cell biology. Differentiation before implantation and intravenous route of delivery favoured better outcome. Stem cell implantation did not appear to improve sensory outcome in female animals and appeared to be enhanced by isoflurane anaesthesia. Biological plausibility was supported by the presence of a dose-response relationship. For motor outcome, facets of stem cell biology had little detectable effect. Instead most heterogeneity could be explained by the experimental modelling and the outcome measure used. The location of injury, method of injury induction, and presence of immunosuppression all had an impact. Reporting of measures to reduce bias was higher than has been seen in other neuroscience domains but were still suboptimal. Motor outcomes studies that did not report the blinded assessment of outcome gave inflated estimates of efficacy. Extensive recent preclinical literature suggests that stem-cell-based therapies may offer promise, however the impact of compromised internal validity and publication bias mean that efficacy is likely to be somewhat lower than reported here.

Wolfram Tetzlaff. A Systematic Review of Cellular Transplantation Therapies for Spinal Cord Injury. J Neurotrauma. 2011 Aug; 28(8): 1611–1682.

Cell transplantation therapies have become a major focus in pre-clinical research as a promising strategy for the treatment of spinal cord injury (SCI). In this article, we systematically review the available pre-clinical literature on the most commonly used cell types in order to assess the body of evidence that may support their translation to human SCI patients….162 studies were identified and reviewed in detail, emphasizing their behavioral effects (although not limiting the scope of the discussion to behavioral effects alone). Significant differences between cells of the same “type” exist based on the species and age of donor, as well as culture conditions and mode of delivery. Many of these studies used cell transplantations in combination with other strategies. The systematic review makes it very apparent that cells derived from rodent sources have been the most extensively studied, while only 19 studies reported the transplantation of human cells, nine of which utilized bone-marrow stromal cells. Similarly, the vast majority of studies have been conducted in rodent models of injury, and few studies have investigated cell transplantation in larger mammals or primates. With respect to the timing of intervention, nearly all of the studies reviewed were conducted with transplantations occurring subacutely and acutely, while chronic treatments were rare and often failed to yield functional benefits.

6. Laser-

This is yet another plausible, promising, and unproven therapy I have written about at length. (Here, here, and most recently here). The little bit of clinical research specifically on treatment of spinal cord injury in dogs is mixed and inconclusive. Rodent model studies have provided some suggestion of possible benefits, but again there is no convincing clinical trial evidence that laser really helps actual clinical patients.

Ando T, Sato S, Kobayashi H, Nawashiro H, Ashida H, Hamblin MR, Obara M. Low-level laser therapy for spinal cord injury in rats: effects of polarization. J Biomed Opt. 2013 Sep;18(9):098002. doi: 10.1117/1.JBO.18.9.098002.

The effects of laser polarization on the efficacy of near-infrared low-level laser therapy for spinal cord injury (SCI) are presented. Rat spinal cords were injured with a weight-drop device, and the lesion sites were directly irradiated with a linearly polarized 808-nm diode laser positioned either perpendicular or parallel to the spine immediately after the injury and daily for five consecutive days. Functional recovery was assessed daily by an open-field test. Regardless of the polarization direction, functional scores of SCI rats that were treated with the 808-nm laser irradiation were significantly higher than those of SCI alone group (Group 1) from day 5 after injury. The locomotive function of SCI rats irradiated parallel to the spinal column (Group 3) was significantly improved from day 10 after injury, compared to SCI rats treated with the linear polarization perpendicular to the spinal column (Group 2). There were no significant differences in ATP contents in the injured tissue among the three groups. We speculate that the higher efficacy with parallel irradiation is attributable to the deeper light penetration into tissue with anisotropic scattering.

Paula AA, Nicolau RA, Lima Mde O, Salgado MA, Cogo JC. Low-intensity laser therapy effect on the recovery of traumatic spinal cord injury. Lasers Med Sci. 2014 Nov;29(6):1849-59.

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of the LILT (GaAlAs laser-780 nm) on the locomotor functional recovery, histomorphometric, and histopathological changes of the spinal cord after moderate traumatic injury in rats (spinal cord injury at T9 and T10). Thirty-one adult Wistar rats were used, which were divided into seven groups: control without surgery (n?=?3), control surgery (n?=?3), laser 6 h after surgery (n?=?5), laser 48 h after surgery (n?=?5), medullar lesion (n?=?5) without phototherapy, medullar lesion?+?laser 6 h after surgery (n?=?5), and medullar lesion?+?laser 48 h after surgery (n?=?5). The assessment of the motor function was performed using Basso, Beattie, and Bresnahan (BBB) scale and adapted Sciatic Functional Index (aSFI). The assessment of urinary dysfunction was clinically performed. After 21 days postoperative, the animals were euthanized for histological and histomorphometric analysis of the spinal cord. The results showed faster motor evolution in rats with spinal contusion treated with LILT, maintenance of the effectiveness of the urinary system, and preservation of nerve tissue in the lesion area, with a notorious inflammation control and increased number of nerve cells and connections. In conclusion, positive effects on spinal cord recovery after moderate traumatic spinal cord injury were shown after LILT.

Acupuncture for Spinal Cord Injury
The clinical trial evidence for acupuncture in dogs with spinal cord injury is limited, at high risk of bias, and confounded by the use of electrical stimulation through acupuncture needles (e.g. Here). There is, however some clinical trial evidence in humans suggesting possible benefits:

Heo I, Shin BC, Kim YD, Hwang EH, Han CW, Heo KH.  Acupuncture for spinal cord injury and its complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2013; 2013: 364216.

To evaluate the evidence supporting the effectiveness of acupuncture treatment for SCI and its complications, we conducted search across 19 electronic databases to find all of the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used acupuncture as a treatment for SCI and its complications. The methodological quality of each RCT was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the PEDro scale. Sixteen RCTs, including 2 high-quality RCTs, met our inclusion criteria (8 for functional recovery from SCI, 6 for bladder dysfunction, and 2 for pain control).

The meta-analysis showed positive results for the use of acupuncture combined with conventional treatments for the functional recovery in terms of motor ASIA scores and total FIM scores when compared to conventional treatments alone. Positive results were also obtained for the treatment of bladder dysfunction, in terms of the total efficacy rate, when comparing acupuncture to conventional treatments. However, 2 RCTs for pain control reported conflicting results.

Our systematic review found encouraging albeit limited evidence for functional recovery, bladder dysfunction, and pain in SCI. However, to obtain stronger evidence without the drawbacks of trial design and the quality of studies, we recommend sham-controlled RCTs or comparative effectiveness research for each condition to test the effectiveness of acupuncture.

Ma Ruijie, Liu Xin, Clark Justin, Williams Gail M., and Doi Suhail A.. The Impact of Acupuncture on Neurological Recovery in Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Neurotrauma. 2015. epub ahead of print. doi:10.1089/neu.2014.3866.

The effect of acupuncture on neurological recovery in individuals with SCI remains inconclusive despite previous studies and meta-analyses. The aim of the current study was to perform a more rigorous systematic review and bias-adjusted meta-analysis of studies so that the overall impact of acupuncture on neurological recovery in SCI can be determined. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only were included and were searched for in seven databases through to August 2014. Four key outcomes were assessed: neurological recovery, motor function, sensory function, and functional recovery. Several statistical approaches were compared, models were tested for robustness using sensitivity analysis, and results are presented as weighted mean difference (WMD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes and relative risk (RR) for binary outcomes. The included studies’ susceptibility to bias was also assessed. A total of 12 studies were included after exclusions were applied. Heterogeneity was evident among the studies included.

Pooled analyses showed that acupuncture may have a beneficial effect on neurological recovery (RRs: 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12–1.50), motor function (WMD: 6.86, 95% CI: 0.41–13.31), and functional recovery (SMD: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.56–1.21) and all statistical approaches concurred. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the smaller studies (sample size <30), those with acute disease, and studies that used varying acupuncture sessions demonstrated a larger magnitude of effect. However, studies were generally of poor quality and publication bias favoring positive studies was evident. Therefore, the benefit of acupuncture we report is by no means definitive and well-designed future studies are recommended to confirm this.

Even this relatively weak positive evidence must be viewed in context, however. I have discussed the issue of publication bias in the acupuncture literature before. Systematic reviews often originate from China or Chinese researchers, and there is evidence that there is a particularly large problem with publication bias in this area. One study from 1998 found absolutely no negative acupuncture studies had ever been published in China to that point. Subsequent reviews have identified significant risk of bias in the acupuncture literature:

Bin Ma, Guo-qing Qi, Xiao-ting Lin, Ting Wang, Zhi-min Chen, and Ke-hu Yang. Epidemiology, Quality, and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Acupuncture Interventions Published in Chinese Journals.  The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. September 2012, 18(9): 813-817.

A total of 88 SRs were identified; none of the reviews had been updated. Less than one third (27.3%) were written by clinicians and one third (35.2%) were reported in specialty journals. The impact factor of 53.4% of the journals published was 0. Information retrieval was not comprehensive in more than half (59.1%) of the reviews. Less than half (36.4%) reported assessing for publication bias. Though 97.7% of the reviews used the term “systematic review” or “meta-analysis” in the title, no reviews reported a protocol and none were updated even after they had been published after 2 or more years….Although many SRs of acupuncture interventions have been published in Chinese journals, the reporting quality is troubling.

Yuyi Wang, Liqiong Wang, Qianyun Chai, Jianping Liu. Positive results in randomized controlled trials on acupuncture published in chinese journals: a systematic literature review. J Altern Complement Med 2014 May;20(5):A129

This review found 847 reported randomized clinical trials of acupuncture in Chinese journals. 99.8% of these reported positive results. Of those that compared acupuncture to conventional therapies, 88.3% found acupuncture superior, and 11.7% found it as good as conventional treatments. Very few of the studies properly reported important markers of quality and control for bias such as blinding, allocation concealment, and losses to follow-up.

So while there is some positive research suggesting acupuncture may have beneficial effects in spinal cord injury, it is generally weak and subject to a significant risk of bias.

Bottom Line
This lecture was generally science-based and focused on the physiology of spinal cord injury and many standard conventional treatments. A number of non-standard therapies were also suggested. All of these, including acupuncture, have reasonable pre-clinical research evidence suggesting effects which might be clinically beneficial. However, for most of these therapies, there is very little clinical research and it is limited and not robust. For acupuncture specifically, there is weak clinical trial evidence suggesting possible benefits for this condition. However, there is a well-known problem with adequately controlling for placebo effects in acupuncture trials, and there is a significant problem with publication bias in the acupuncture literature, so these results have to be viewed with significant skepticism.

Posted in Acupuncture | Leave a comment

Evidence Update- Evidence-based Canine Allergy Treatment

In 2010, I reported on the evidence-based guidelines for treatment of allergies in dogs put out by the International Task Force on Canine Atopic Dermatitis. This extremely useful document reviewed the evidence concerning many different treatments for allergies in dogs, from topical shampoos and medications to oral medications and dietary supplements. While the lack of evidence for particular therapies does not always mean these treatments don’t work (though this can indicate a lack of efficacy under certain circumstances), it makes sense to focus our efforts on those treatments that have the best chance of helping our itchy canine companions, and these are the treatments that have built up a strong foundation of scientific evidence, from basic lab testing through clinical trials. The task force report helps us to know which treatments those are.

Olivry, T. et al. Treatment of canine atopic dermatitis: 2015 updated guidelines from the International Committee on Allergic Diseases of Animals (ICADA). BMC Veterinary Research. 2015;11:210.

The updates to the original guidelines are fairly minor. New research has led to some new treatments, including oral medications topical treatments such as shampoos. Research evidence has also clarified the role of some existing therapies. Some antihistamines, for example, which did not previously have evidence for benefits in itchy dogs now look like they might have some small benefit in mildly effected dogs, especially if given continuously and before a symptom flareup.

The evidence has also grown stronger that “allergy testing” cannot be used to diagnose allergies since positive tests can often be seen in dogs who are itchy for reasons other than allergies. These tests may still be helpful in guiding therapy, though this is not completely clear. There is also still no evidence to support using allergy tests to identify food allergies, though this is still recommended by some vets.

As for dietary supplements, essential fatty acids such as in fish oil are the only one that has any evidence of clinical benefits. What dose, source, or formulation is most effective isn’t known, and there is no clinical evidence for benefit from any other oral supplement.

 

 

Posted in Science-Based Veterinary Medicine | 6 Comments