[Ibogaine] Reply from Alex

Nyc W. Alberts digitalcomponents at gmail.com
Wed Feb 13 12:42:53 EST 2008


It's bullshit to be tossed to the back of the bus after you've been 
invited to sit up front.

Surreal.

Wodak sounds just like the "Mason Parrish" Med School Administrator 
character in "Altered States" that gives the William Hurt character a 
hard time.

Here are some relevant pull quotes from the movie:

> /*Mason Parrish <http://imdb.com/name/nm0354024/>*: I want someone to 
> look at those X-Rays who can read them.
> *Eddie Jessup <http://imdb.com/name/nm0000458/>*: I'd rather not have 
> everyone in the Brigham in on this. It's bad enough we've got this 
> nosy x-ray technician.
> *Mason Parrish <http://imdb.com/name/nm0354024/>*: Are you all right?
> *Eddie Jessup <http://imdb.com/name/nm0000458/>*: I'm fine, Mason. I 
> tried to indicate this was just a transient thing.
> *Mason Parrish <http://imdb.com/name/nm0354024/>*: Transient ischemic 
> attack, that's what it was.
> [Addressing Arthur]
> *Mason Parrish <http://imdb.com/name/nm0354024/>*: He's got his voice 
> back.
> *Eddie Jessup <http://imdb.com/name/nm0000458/>*: It wasn't an 
> ischemic attack! It wasn't a seizure. You saw the x-rays, Mason. There 
> was clearly something anterior to the larynx that looked like a 
> laryngal sack. That's strictly simian! I obviously regressed! To some 
> quasi-simian creature.
> *Mason Parrish <http://imdb.com/name/nm0354024/>*: I'm gonna show 
> these to someone who can read them right, 'cause you're reading them 
> wrong, that's all there is to it. Because no one is gonna tell me you 
> de-differentiated your goddamn genetic structure for four goddamn 
> hours and then reconstitued! I'm a professor of endocrinology at the 
> Harvard Medical School. I'm an attending physician at the Peter Bent 
> Brigham Hospital! I'm a contributing editor to the American Journal of 
> Endocrinology and a I am a fellow and vice-president of the Eastern 
> Association of Endocrinologists and president of the Journal Club! And 
> I'm not going to listen to any more of your kabbalistic, quantum, 
> friggin' dumb limbo mumbo jumbo! I'm gonna show these to a radiologist!
> /
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> /*Mason Parrish <http://imdb.com/name/nm0354024/>*: You're supposed to 
> be reputable scientists! Not two dorm kids freaking on Mexican mushrooms!
> /
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> / *Mason Parrish <http://imdb.com/name/nm0354024/>*: It looks to me 
> like the architecture is slightly abnormal.
> *Dr. Wissenschaft <http://imdb.com/name/nm0310960/>*: Somewhat? This 
> guy's a fucking gorilla!/ 
What an asshole.

~Nyc


Nick Sandberg wrote:
>
> I got a reply back from Alex Wodak and replied, both copied below
>
>  
>
> Nick
>
>  
>
>  
>
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>
>  
>
> ________________________________________
>
> From: Alex Wodak [mailto:awodak at stvincents.com.au]
>
> Sent: 12 February 2008 23:53
>
> To: Nick Sandberg
>
> Cc: gerry.stimson at ihra.net
>
> Subject: Re: Ibogaine Talk
>
>  
>
> Dear Mr Sandberg,
>
>  
>
> It is very unusual for people to debate an abstract of a talk before 
> the paper has been presented
>
>  
>
> I was invited to do this talk and accepted the invitation
>
>  
>
> My reward for that acceptance has been to be subjected to tirades
>
>  
>
> My abstract states that
>
>  
>
> 'Published evidence for Ibogaine as a treatment for heroin dependence 
> is unimpressive'.
>
>  
>
> Please provide me with a list of publications that provides strong 
> empirical evidence for iboguaine.
>
>  
>
> I have defined in the abstract exactly the kinds of publications I need:
>
>  
>
> ''Evidence' means several rigorous scientific trials published in 
> reputable peer-reviewed scientific journals demonstrating major 
> benefits consistently and in the absence of unacceptable side 
> effects. Evidence of effectiveness preferably (but not necessarily) 
> requires randomised controlled trials where this is 
> possible. 'Evidence' is not a strong theoretical rationale'.
>
>  
>
> I note that you have already had the opportunity to provide this 
> information for me in your e-mail and have not already done so.
>
>  
>
> You refer instead to unnamed studies.  
>
>  
>
> Please provide more details: Author, title, journal, year, volume, pages.
>
>  
>
> Please do so now.
>
>  
>
> Please understand that neither of us has a monopoly on concern about 
> the plight of people you describe as 'addicts'
>
>  
>
> In my view it is not compassionate to advocate for a treatment unless 
> we know from evidence that the treatment is effective and safe (and 
> preferably also cost effective)
>
>  
>
> I am sure you know the saying 'The road to hell is paved with good 
> intentions....'
>
>  
>
> While you may regard the statment that 'Since the tragic experience of 
> thalidomide some decades ago, medicine has been based firmly on 
> scientific evidence' as manipluative, I note that you did not say it 
> was wrong.
>
>  
>
> Just as well. 
>
>  
>
> That statement is correct.
>
>  
>
> How can it be manipulative.
>
>  
>
> I have just used the very same sentence in an editorial for a medical 
> journal.
>
>  
>
> Neither of my 3 distinguished co-authors, nor the editor nor the 2 
> reviewers took exception to this comment.
>
>  
>
> I don't have any position on iboguaine  - I certainly want more and 
> better treatments for injecting drug users 
>
>  
>
> But I don't have any desire to see iboguaine come or go
>
>  
>
> My position, as outlined in the abstract, is very simple.
>
>  
>
> I assume that all interventions are ineffective, unsafe and 
> cost-ineffective until proven otherwise and that includes iboguaine.
>
>  
>
> If you want me to be impressed by iboguaine, then show me the evidence.
>
>  
>
> It's that simple
>
>  
>
> I assume after reviewing your qualifications that you do not appear to 
> have had any training in empirical research relevant to evaluation of 
> pharmaceutical treatments.
>
>  
>
> None of us can cover all the areas that this field encompasses.
>
>  
>
> Perhaps your qualifications and expetrience put you at a disadvantage 
> for reviewing scientific literature on empirical research relevant to 
> evaluation of pharmaceutical treatments
>
>  
>
> best wishes,
>
>  
>
> Alex
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Sandberg [mailto:nick227 at tiscali.co.uk]
> Sent: 13 February 2008 15:17
> To: 'Alex Wodak'
> Cc: 'gerry.stimson at ihra.net'
> Subject: RE: Ibogaine Talk
>
>  
>
> Hi Alex,
>
>  
>
> Thanks for getting back to me. It is not my intention to mindlessly 
> give you a hard time. It is not nice to be on the receiving end, for 
> sure, but I must say that if you did associate ibogaine with 
> thalidomide then it is perhaps not surprising that it happens. If not 
> then it is certainly unwarranted. The 2 papers I referred to in my 
> letter to you are as follows:
>
>  
>
> - Ibogaine: Complex Pharmacokinetics, Concerns for Safety, and 
> Preliminary Efficacy Measures - Neurobiological Mechanisms of Drugs of 
> Abuse, Volume 914 of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 
> September 2000 - Ann N Y Acad Sci 2000;914:394-401) DEBORAH C. 
> MASH,a,b,h CRAIG A. KOVERA,o JOHN PABLO,o RACHEL F. TYNDALE,c FRANK D. 
> ERVIN,d IZBEN C. WILLIAMS,e EDWARD G. SINGLETON,f AND MANNY MAYOR
>
>  
>
> - The Ibogaine Medical Subculture - Journal of Ethnopharmacology 115 
> (2008) 9-24 Kenneth R. Alper Howard S. Lotsof Charles D. Kaplan
>
>  
>
> I fully appreciate your concern as to the lack of good empiric data. 
> It is true that much more research needs to be done. I would however 
> mention that even a basic Medline search will reveal many hundreds of 
> animal studies involving ibogaine. By no means is it the primary 
> intention of all of these studies to demonstrate efficacy, but if you 
> read at least some of them I believe it will become clear that 
> ibogaine's dependence-breaking characteristics are increasingly well 
> accepted by many scientists. Academics give ibogaine to rats often to 
> better understand the mechanistic pathways involved in the 
> neurobiology of addiction.
>
>  
>
> As to the issue of manipulation. Firstly, I need to state that I am 
> basing my judgment on the abstract that was forwarded to me as being 
> written by yourself. If you did not write it then I unreservedly 
> apologise.
>
>  
>
> To be honest, I would accuse the writer of this piece of manipulation 
> on two counts. Firstly, referring to the drug Thalidomide in the 
> manner that the writer did clearly is likely to create a reasonable 
> degree of association in the mind of the reader with Ibogaine. I'm not 
> a pharmacologist but my understanding is that Thalidomide is not 
> naturally-occurring and has not been used by native peoples for at 
> least some centuries. One might claim that the word is simply being 
> used to give some historical context as to the need for extensive 
> clinical trials and, whilst I would consider this fair, I would still 
> hold that the writer is creating an unwarranted association in the 
> mind of the reader.
>
>  
>
> Secondarily, I find the picture of clinical trials that is presented 
> by the writer of this abstract utterly one-sided and, again, 
> completely manipulative. It is necessary to grasp that the business of 
> bringing new drugs to the market is almost wholly in the hands of "for 
> profit" entities. Ibogaine does not fit into the Pharm Corporation's 
> idea of what a suitable medication looks like and so they don't put 
> money in to develop it. I can give you more information here if you 
> wish. Yet the writer of this abstract fails to even mention this. If I 
> were a casual reader I would be left with the impression that ibogaine 
> simply isn't good enough, that it's been tried and found wanting. This 
> is absolutely not the case as a decent study of the background and 
> history of the drug will clearly show.
>
>  
>
> You claim you are not biased against ibogaine. That is absolutely not 
> my impression from reading that piece. I consider it absolutely 
> reprehensible to portray in such a manner a medication that clearly 
> has the potential to transform the treatment of drug and alcohol 
> dependency worldwide. I can scarcely believe that the writer of it 
> could give a damn about the plight of those who suffer with this 
> worldwide.
>
>  
>
> Nick Sandberg
>
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  
>   -=[) ::::::: MindVox | Ibogaine | List Commands ::::::: (]=-
> (][%]  :: http://mindvox.com/mailman/listinfo/ibogaine ::  [%][)
>   -=[) :::: Change Account Settings :: [Un]Subscribe :::: (]=-
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mindvox.com/pipermail/ibogaine/attachments/20080213/4f503166/attachment.html>


More information about the Ibogaine mailing list