[Ibogaine] FW: Small, well-designed trial of ibogaine for opiate detox

Steve Coss coss at blodgettsupply.com
Thu Feb 21 08:25:40 EST 2008


I have sat back and watched this discussion and at times I can see where Mr. Wodak is coming from. This last statement is a bit on the bizarre side though. I quote "The question you ask, why isn't more research carried out, is important 

Research gets carried out when either: (i) there are strong theoretical arguments why a treatment might work; or (ii)  there is some empirical data suggesting that a treatment does work. 

So far, neither of these conditions have been met

best wishes, 

Alex

 I mean the fact that someone can take this medicine after having been on opiates for 20 years and have absolutely no withdrawal symptoms whatsoever is the definitive answer to both of his questions. I thought he was worried about possible side effects of taking Ibogaine. I agree there has not been any studies so far other than the 5000 plus people that have taken it. 

I think there are legitimate questions about the long term safety of this drug. One of the things in this drugs defense is that you might only have to take it once, so any side effects are greatly minimized. If I am not mistaken the other drugs that have been mentioned here are drugs that are taken over a period of time. 

None of this back and forth is going to answer the question of safety, only testing  will do that. But to suggest that there "are no strong theoretical arguments that the treatment might work or that " there is no empirical data suggesting that the treatment does work" is disingenuous at best.

 

What would be so wrong with doing a test in a country that allows this drug. Billions are spent on the war on drugs, slice off a few million and do some testing in St. Vincent's and prove us wrong.

Steve

 

 

________________________________

From: ibogaine-bounces at mindvox.com [mailto:ibogaine-bounces at mindvox.com] On Behalf Of Nick Sandberg
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 4:11 AM
To: Ibogaine List; Ken Alper
Subject: [Ibogaine] FW: Small,well-designed trial of ibogaine for opiate detox

 

More correspondence.

Nick

 

________________________________

From: Alex Wodak [mailto:awodak at stvincents.com.au] 
Sent: 21 February 2008 04:38
To: Nick Sandberg
Subject: RE: Small, well-designed trial of ibogaine for opiate detox

 

Dear Nick,

 

I was invited to give this talk

 

I didn't ask to be invited 

 

Having been invited I accepted

 

I set out my views on the subject I was invited to speak on in the form of an Abstract

 

I gave no though to debating 

 

You then wrote to me  - something that I have never heard of before - to castigate me for what I said in the Abstract

 

I have made it clear that I am neither for nor against ibogaine 

 

The way medicine has worked since thalidomide, now I know you think it manipulative of me to mention this fact, is that new medications are considered ineffective and unsafe until proven otherwise

 

But this is the approach taken throughout the developed world

 

And the evidence that ibogaine is effective and safe just isn't there

 

You have conceded that

 

And that's all that needs to be said on the subject from my perspective

 

Rants from you and no matter how many others will not change my judgment

 

What will change my perspective is papers published in respected peer reviewed publications reporting rigorously designed studies which provide solid evidence of the efficacy and safety of the drug

 

The question you ask, why isn't more research carried out, is important

 

Research gets carried out when either: (i) there are strong theoretical arguments why a treatment might work; or (ii)  there is some empirical data suggesting that a treatment does work. 

 

So far, neither of these conditions have been met

 

best wishes, 

 

Alex

 

Dear Alex,

My position is that there is easily enough evidence, from the existing studies, animal studies, and the vast amount of accrued personal experience to suggest that the treatment would work. 

As to your statement that "Research gets carried out when either: (i) there are strong theoretical arguments why a treatment might work; or (ii)  there is some empirical data suggesting that a treatment does work." - I would consider this personally to be a naïve statement. It reflects a belief system that the existing model for developing medications is adequate and that the only factors that are considered are the usefulness and efficacy of a proposed medication. I submit that there are many other factors involved here and that they need to be looked at and addressed too. 

 

I submit that the existing model for developing new medications is grossly biased towards shareholder profit and clearly underserves negatively marginalized groups like those dependent on illegal drugs. I am not against capitalism but it is clear to me that having the development of new medications almost solely in the hands of for-profit entities does not work. A pharmaceutical corporation has a legally protected mandate to develop only those medications which it deems to offer the highest returns for its shareholders. They have developed clear lines, in my opinion, as to the types of medication that should thus be developed - namely maintenance drugs with clear patent rights, and those that do not threaten in any way the financial viability of existing treatment modalities. This, I submit, is their legally enforced position. They will not develop something like ibogaine unless public awareness is raised and a lot of pressure brought to bear. This is what I am trying to do and I am dialoguing with you because, to me, you are apparently putting your head in the sand on this matter. I think you could take a much stronger and more positive position without compromising your academic integrity.

 

Nick

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mindvox.com/pipermail/ibogaine/attachments/20080221/32c44828/attachment.html>


More information about the Ibogaine mailing list