BUTEYKO: Why all this opposition from a.s.a?
Question:
This is really aimed at new people to a.s.a. You will have noticed a ferocious hostility towards Buteyko on this news group. Given that: 1. Buteyko therapy has a proper physiological explanation, a working model and a therapy properly based on that model, 2. It is astonishingly effective as evidenced both anecdotally and through scientifically conducted clinical trials, and it has been scrutinized by the ever vigilant media 3. It does not confilct with conventional asthma management, 4. There is masses of free information on it on the net. Several books have been written on it. 5. While Buteyko practitioners are still in very short supply, you can access self-help/DIY kits at very reasonable cost. 6. There are some simple free instructions on our web site you can try for yourself before you go any further. 7. James Hooper, an experience practitioner, has made available a DIY/self help instruction kit for children for free from his web site. 8. It is not a patentable commodity. There are not secrets. We have no magic powders, pills etc. which only licensed doctors can dispense for profit. To understand this you have to go back to 1996 – 1998 when a group of us started posting to this group based on our own experiences. It was immediately assume that Buteyko was some sort of scam, although nobody here ever gave any credible explanation of how this "scam" could possibly be implemented. Nevertheless, Buteyko was mercilessly trashed by characters like Colin. They screamed for Clinical trials. In 1998 the first clinical trial in the West was published in the Medical Journal of Australia. The results were quite stunning, like a 96% reduction in bronchodilators in 12 weeks. This was a double blind placebo controlled trial in which The word "Buteyko" was never mentioned and the control group was given conventional diaphragamtic breathing and relaxation exercises. What do you think Colin et al.. would make of this? He now expects us to believe that these eminent researchers cheated on the results. What else can he say? We argued over this absurdity ad nauseum, but still he persists with this garbage. Next I started posting references to Chronic hyperventilation literature. Buteyko just reverses chronic hyperventilation, and as a result we’re seeing these reversals in asthma. Problem is nobody read the references. CBI was so cocky, it took him over a year to realize that the reference he didn’t like (because it was from a psychology journal) had been replaced with a whole wad of references I found later. He then had the gall to complain that this was a sneaky trick!!! He commented on my posts, not even having read them! I must have posted over 30 references, none of which he read. He eventually read some of the titles, but I could actually prove that in one of these references he discredited, he had not even read the headings and in another he had not even read ther first line! But because he is a doctor and the people in this group have such blind faith in doctors, his critique stands. I spent years arguing every single point that is still raised on this ng against Buteyko. Everything they raise has been explained. With the sort of behaviour we see from what apparently is a doctor posting to this group, the arguments just became futile. So I’m afraid you’re just going to have to excuse me for not wasting any more of my time repeating these explanations. The stuff is all on record, but you’ll have to search relly hard because it goes back to around 1996. I don’t think Google was even invented then. Please give Buteyko a try. It costs you nothing to try, it does not conflict with conventional asthma management and the only thing you stand to lose is your asthma. Don’t let yourself be put off by these ego-tripsters. Peter Kolb BSc(Eng) MSc(Med) CPEng(Biomed) Biomedical Engineer Free information provided by grateful ex-asthmatics http://www.wt.com.au/~pkolb/buteyko.htm
Response:
> This is really aimed at new people to a.s.a.
Because the veterans already know better. We’ve had this discussion and know that But* can’t hold up to close scrutiny. > You will have noticed a ferocious hostility towards Buteyko on this > news group.
No more so than any other scam. > Given that: > 1. Buteyko therapy has a proper physiological explanation, a working > model and a therapy properly based on that model,
Wrong. There is no evidence to support the physiologic model and most of the references given by the proponents actually argue against it. That is the first key to evaluating these arguments. You must look up the references. They (by this I mean PK) have a habit of posting long, impressive looking, lists of references that when read turn out to not say what they claim. > 2. It is astonishingly effective as evidenced both anecdotally and > through scientifically conducted clinical trials, and it has been > scrutinized by the ever vigilant media
Anecdotes run both ways. The little research that has been done is flawed and does not show a benefit. The most commonly cited study, Brisbane, was down right fraudulent with the authors claiming blinding that didn’t exist, had other fatal problems, and an author that was so disgusted that she pulled her name from he paper. > 3. It does not confilct with conventional asthma management,
Another Lie. Buteyko practtioners hold that "overbreathing" is the cause of asthma and that asthma meds contribute to this by encouraging increased breathing. They will tell you to stop your meds. > 4. There is masses of free information on it on the net. Several > books have been written on it.
Ever hear of a free book? When you go to the websites and newsgroups you will quickly be directed to where you can buy videos and seminars. PK used to sell them right on his website but after we repeatedly called him on his claims of not making any money from it he removed them. He runs a private e-mail list now and I’m sure has a way of letting you know where you can buy them that is not so easy for us to find as just looking up the link he gives us. > 5. While Buteyko practitioners are still in very short supply, you can > access self-help/DIY kits at very reasonable cost.
Ah, there you have it. The reasonable cost is frequently several hundred dollars. BTW – Prof. Buteyko finds self help courses in his method to be worthless and dangerous and advises against them. > 6. There are some simple free instructions on our web site you can > try for yourself before you go any further.
See above. > 7. James Hooper, an experience practitioner, has made available a > DIY/self help instruction kit for children for free from his web site.
See above. Then when you aren’t doing well he will tell you that you are not doing it right and advise you to sign up for individual coaching at a large expense. > 8. It is not a patentable commodity. There are not secrets. We have > no magic powders, pills etc. which only licensed doctors can dispense > for profit.
That old argument? That is frequently claimed by scam artists and is not true. If he has a unique treatment he can patent it. If it works there is nothing keeping conventional docs from using it. If a conventional doc found that he was able to cure severe asthmatics it logically follows that he would quckly gain a loyal following and make a mint. > To understand this you have to go back to 1996 – 1998 when a group of > us started posting to this group based on our own experiences.
Basically, they would organize discussions on this n.g. to try to get people to come over to alt.asthma.buteyko, which was essentially dead. The only posts there were from few regulars talking about recruiting people from a.s.a and a few curious onlookers who would quickly be directed to a website (which sold videos and courses) and to Peters mailing list. > It was > immediately assume that Buteyko was some sort of scam,
No – people waded through the piles of crap PK hurled at us and evaluated each paper – only to determine that most of it had nothing to do with asthma and the few that did deal with asthma did not support But*. > although nobody > here ever gave any credible explanation of how this "scam" could > possibly be implemented.
Huh? How is any scam implemented? A bunch of guys get on the Internet/Usenet and find some victims, frequently people with a chronic disease, and claim to have a cure. Then they sell them the secret. > Nevertheless, Buteyko was mercilessly > trashed by characters like Colin.
Awww I feel so left out. > They screamed for Clinical trials. > In 1998 the first clinical trial in the West was published in the > Medical Journal of Australia.
That is the trial I mentioned above. > The results were quite stunning, like a > 96% reduction in bronchodilators in 12 weeks.
Sure, sure. They told the people to stop using them and they did. Duh. In objective tests of lung function the But* group stayed the same while the control group got worse. There was no improvement in the But* group. Generally, in a controled trial the control group gets optimum therapy from Univeristy specialists and so improves. That is why we need controls – to tell how much improvement was from better conventional management and how much was from the intervention. In this case what we learned was that the But* didn’t hurt over the few weeks that it was used (chronic inflammation in asthma takes years to do its damage) and that the researchers were either incomptetant at treating asthma or were intentionally trying to influence the results. > This was a double blind > placebo controlled trial in which The word "Buteyko" was never > mentioned and the control group was given conventional diaphragamtic > breathing and relaxation exercises.
That is a lie. The blinding was lost. The authors knew it. They submitted the paper with this claim anyway. The lie was only discovered later. > What do you think Colin et al.. would make of this?
That it was just more propaganda? > He now expects > us to believe that these eminent researchers cheated on the results.
It is a well established fact. > What else can he say? We argued over this absurdity ad nauseum, but > still he persists with this garbage.
Gee, some how the truth just won’t go away. Annoying, isn’t it? > Next I started posting references to Chronic hyperventilation > literature. Buteyko just reverses chronic hyperventilation, and as a > result we’re seeing these reversals in asthma. Problem is nobody read > the references.
I did. They were almost explusively referring to hyperventilation in anxiety. None claimed that there was such a thing as chronic hyperventilation aoutside of panic attacks as Petey claims. What they meant was that the anxiety is chronic and when the person has a panic attack they hyperventilate. > CBI was so cocky, it took him over a year to realize > that the reference he didn’t like (because it was from a psychology > journal) had been replaced with a whole wad of references I found > later.
IOW – when we exposed his references to the psychiatric literature he tried again. Does cocky now mean "knowlegable"? Huh, I hadn’t heard that use before. > He then had the gall to complain that this was a sneaky > trick!!!
Hmmm….claiming that there is this thing called "chronic hyperventilation syndrome" that involves subtle, imperceptible, increases in breathing leading to asthma and then citing research that refers to acute panic attacks that also happens (?) to be part of a syndrome named the same thing (hoping nobody would go look up the article and discover that the CHVS mention in the title doesn’t apply to asthma)…….yep, I still think it is sneaky. If I didn’t read the references how did I know? > He commented on my posts, not even having read them!
See above. > I > must have posted over 30 references, none of which he read.
All read -none relevant. > He > eventually read some of the titles, but I could actually prove that > in one of these references he discredited, he had not even read the > headings and in another he had not even read ther first line!
Good! That should be easy to prove. > But > because he is a doctor and the people in this group have such blind > faith in doctors, his critique stands.
Funny, I haven’t noticed that reverence. I’ve always felt like I had somewhat more to prove. > I spent years arguing every single point that is still raised on this > ng against Buteyko.
Yes, but not very well – unless you count volume – in that you excell. > Everything they raise has been explained. With > the sort of behaviour we see from what apparently is a doctor posting > to this group, the arguments just became futile.
Funny, I felt the same way. > So I’m afraid > you’re just going to have to excuse me for not wasting any more of my > time repeating these explanations.
Promises, promises – we’ve heard this one before. > The stuff is all on record, but > you’ll have to search relly hard because it goes back to around 1996. > I don’t think Google was even invented then.
Yes, please go look it up. I got tired of this a long time ago. > Please give Buteyko a try.
Better to give your money to charity or invest it in a therapy that works. > It costs you nothing to try,
Yeah, right. > it does not > conflict with conventional asthma management and the only thing you > stand to lose is your asthma. Don’t let yourself be put off by these > ego-tripsters.
This is another tactic of Petey’s that you should be aware of. He tries to wear down his opponents with numerous long posts and continuing to cite bogus references. He apparently has a lot of time to devote to this. He hopes we won’t. It is also a lot easier to cite … read more »
Response:
Well, doctors don’t like "Buteyko" and I think most folks will accept their judgment. The originator of the method, Dr. Buteyko of Kiev in the Ukraine, put out a statement specifically condemning this type of dissemination, see: http://www.geocities.com/buteykobreathingasia/statement.html Inter alia the Dr. warns that: "The Buteyko Method appears misleadingly simple to practice. However, there is a specific training on how to apply this method to each individual patient. If this is done incorrectly there could be severe complications and damaging effects on a patient’s health." "I categorically state that it is exceedingly dangerous for patients to be instructed in the Buteyko Method through the medium of video, audio tapes, books, instructions and manuals." Then there is the further issue that the Buteyko method, aimed at increasing carbon dioxide levels, failed to do just this when clinically tested and did not, in the test, improve spirometry. This is what is relevant for doctors. Anyone really interested in an effective breath therapy for asthma backed by clinical testing should consider SIMT (specific inspiratory muscle training). When carefully considered SIMT appears to carry a similar message to that of Buteyko, namely that asthma is linked with orthodox medicine’s axiomatic views and can be treated more effectively by breathing exercises. These exercises are intended to restore balances keeping to cybernetic processes rather than using non-physiologic approaches with substances that simply knock out abnormal biochemical processes in asthma. However the message of SIMT is more logical and the treatment itself is both more effective and less onerous than breathholds as advocated by Buteyko. For an SIMT study, see Weiner, Chest 1992, 1357-61. In Chest 2000 Weiner (pages 722-727) stated "We believe that SIMT is safe, at least in patients with mild asthma…." In contrast "Buteyko" does not face the fact that the type of breathing exercises with breathholds has not been shown to fulfill their aim of preventing hyperventilation when not exercising. In any event there are studies showing that yoga as an example of another breathing technique does fulfill its aim in asthma treatment. For a scientific description of breathwork with one SIMT device, see http://www.powerbreathe.com/pdf/medical_info.pdf So there is really no need to do drastic and clinically unproved Buteyko breath holding exercises if you are interested in your health! A number of manufacturers are offering SIMT devices for treating asthma and their claims seem worth investigating and questioning your doc about, see Powerbreathe, which has the character or a British national prestige project with a DTI SMART award. Powerlung The breather The sports breather Threshold IMT (Model HS730, Respironics, Cedar Groove, NJ) Trainair Ultrabreathe Expand-a-Lung Ultrabreathe http://www.ultrabreathe.com/testimonials.htm Trainair http://www.trainair.co.uk/index.html?home/goodnews.htm http://www.trainair.co.uk/index.html?fitness/news13.htm Powerlung http://www.powerlung.com/lan/en/people/testimonials/index.htm While Weiner only recommends a threshold device, which stops inspiration below a certain suction pressure, many of the devices simply work as a choke with a fluid friction effect. Powerbreathe and the model HS730 are specifically stated to have a threshold function. Many devices optionally provide for expiration against a load, but the benefit of this in asthma treatment is unclear. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > This is really aimed at new people to a.s.a. > You will have noticed a ferocious hostility towards Buteyko on this > news group. > Given that: > 1. Buteyko therapy has a proper physiological explanation, a working > model and a therapy properly based on that model, > 2. It is astonishingly effective as evidenced both anecdotally and > through scientifically conducted clinical trials, and it has been > scrutinized by the ever vigilant media > 3. It does not confilct with conventional asthma management, > 4. There is masses of free information on it on the net. Several > books have been written on it. > 5. While Buteyko practitioners are still in very short supply, you can > access self-help/DIY kits at very reasonable cost. > 6. There are some simple free instructions on our web site you can > try for yourself before you go any further. > 7. James Hooper, an experience practitioner, has made available a > DIY/self help instruction kit for children for free from his web site. > 8. It is not a patentable commodity. There are not secrets. We have > no magic powders, pills etc. which only licensed doctors can dispense > for profit. > To understand this you have to go back to 1996 – 1998 when a group of > us started posting to this group based on our own experiences. It was > immediately assume that Buteyko was some sort of scam, although nobody > here ever gave any credible explanation of how this "scam" could > possibly be implemented. Nevertheless, Buteyko was mercilessly > trashed by characters like Colin. They screamed for Clinical trials. > In 1998 the first clinical trial in the West was published in the > Medical Journal of Australia. The results were quite stunning, like a > 96% reduction in bronchodilators in 12 weeks. This was a double blind > placebo controlled trial in which The word "Buteyko" was never > mentioned and the control group was given conventional diaphragamtic > breathing and relaxation exercises. > What do you think Colin et al.. would make of this? He now expects > us to believe that these eminent researchers cheated on the results. > What else can he say? We argued over this absurdity ad nauseum, but > still he persists with this garbage. > Next I started posting references to Chronic hyperventilation > literature. Buteyko just reverses chronic hyperventilation, and as a > result we’re seeing these reversals in asthma. Problem is nobody read > the references. CBI was so cocky, it took him over a year to realize > that the reference he didn’t like (because it was from a psychology > journal) had been replaced with a whole wad of references I found > later. He then had the gall to complain that this was a sneaky > trick!!! He commented on my posts, not even having read them! I > must have posted over 30 references, none of which he read. He > eventually read some of the titles, but I could actually prove that > in one of these references he discredited, he had not even read the > headings and in another he had not even read ther first line! But > because he is a doctor and the people in this group have such blind > faith in doctors, his critique stands. > I spent years arguing every single point that is still raised on this > ng against Buteyko. Everything they raise has been explained. With > the sort of behaviour we see from what apparently is a doctor posting > to this group, the arguments just became futile. So I’m afraid > you’re just going to have to excuse me for not wasting any more of my > time repeating these explanations. The stuff is all on record, but > you’ll have to search relly hard because it goes back to around 1996. > I don’t think Google was even invented then. > Please give Buteyko a try. It costs you nothing to try, it does not > conflict with conventional asthma management and the only thing you > stand to lose is your asthma. Don’t let yourself be put off by these > ego-tripsters. > Peter Kolb BSc(Eng) MSc(Med) CPEng(Biomed) > Biomedical Engineer > Free information provided by grateful ex-asthmatics > http://www.wt.com.au/~pkolb/buteyko.htm
Response:
> I guess the only real way to avoid this is to block this portion of the NG. > I must say it’s been quite some time since I’ve filtered a NG. > Bruce
At least he was courteous enough to give you an easy target in the subject line to filter. — CBI, MD
Response:
> I’m going to give you an example of how the doctor you trust (CBI MD) > abuses your trust on this news group. He said: >I did. They were almost explusively referring to hyperventilation in >anxiety. None claimed that there was such a thing as chronic >hyperventilation aoutside of panic attacks as Petey claims. What they meant >was that the anxiety is chronic and when the person has a panic attack they >hyperventilate. > The following article I have referenced many times and not only that, > several times I have actually quoted directly from the article.
Yes, he has. It has been discussed several times and does not support But*. This is a good example of some of the tactics a few of us have mentioned. He will post volumes over and over in the hopes that his detractors won’t keep up and that some of it might strike a cord with a new recruit. If you are willing to take the word of the veterans of this group ignore it. If you like to make your own decisions then do a Google search and read the previous discussions. If you want to just take Petey’s word for it then you will get what you deserve. — CBI, MD
Response:
I’m going to give you an example of how the doctor you trust (CBI MD) abuses your trust on this news group. He said: >I did. They were almost explusively referring to hyperventilation in >anxiety. None claimed that there was such a thing as chronic >hyperventilation aoutside of panic attacks as Petey claims. What they meant >was that the anxiety is chronic and when the person has a panic attack they >hyperventilate.
The following article I have referenced many times and not only that, several times I have actually quoted directly from the article. In fact once again, here are the first two pages of that article by a British Cardiologist, Professor LC Lum. All the other literature on chronic hyperventilation says exactly the same thing…. that this condition is not understood by the mainstream medical community. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 19, pp. 375 to 383. Pergamon Press, 1975. Printed in Great Britain HYPERVENTILATION: THE TIP AND THE ICEBERG L. C.Lum* * Papworth & Addenbrookes Hospitals, Cambridge, England. OVER THE PAST decade, some 700 cases of the hyperventilation syndrome have been studied in the respiratory physiology department of Papworth Hospital. 82 per cent had no detectable pathology. The remainder had well documented pathological states, but their symptoms were largely or entirely related to overbreathing. This survey does not include a very considerable number of patients in whom hyperventilation was present, but who also had organic disease of sufficient severity to produce symptoms; e.g. cardiac infarction. We have paid particular attention to the cardiological aspects of this syndrome, which shows up in medical clinics under many other guises; largely because these cases have been through the double sieve of cardiological and respiratory physiological investigation. Under the heading of"hyperventilation syndrome" standard English texts mention only the classic triad of massive overbreathing, paraesthesiae and tetany: a syndrome well known to any recent graduate. But spontaneous tetany is one of the rarest manifestations of hyperventilation and in my experience occurs in about one per cent of cases. This is merely the tip of the iceberg; the body of the iceberg, the ninety nine per cent who do not present in this fashion (and are not accorded the dignity of a mention in any standard English text), presents a collection of bizarre and often apparently unrelated symptoms, which may affect any part of the body, and any organ or any system. The many organs involved are often reflected in the number of specialists to whom the patient gets referred, and my colleagues have variously dubbed this the "multiple doctor" or the "fat folder syndrome". Indeed the thickness of the case file is often an important diagnostic clue. Table 1 lists the main symptoms observed by a general physician in a series of 270 cases. Symptoms may show up anywhere, in any organ, in any system; for we are dealing with a profound biochemical disturbance, which is as real as hypoglycemia, and more far-reaching in its effects. Such patients are often pursued relentlessly With every investigative device known to modern science, and end up with the label of "anxiety state" and the implication that they are inadequate or in some way inferior. They may be advised: "pull yourself together, it’s only your nerves" or possibly a more sympathetic surgeon may be persuaded to tinker with or remove the complaining organ–an organ, which, I may say, is merely protesting against an unbalanced diet deficient in carbon dioxide, bicarbonate, oxygen, and calcium ions: to name but a few of the well-known biochemical disturbances which accompany acute hypocapnia. TABLE 1. HYPERVENTILATION CARDIOVASCULAR: palpitations, tachycardia, precordial pain Raynauds phenomenon NEUROLOGICAL: Central: dizziness, disturbance of consciousness/vision Peripheral: paraesthesiae, tetany (rare) RESPIRATORY: shortness of breath. "asthma" chest pain GASTROINTESTINAL: globus, dysphagia, epigastric pain aerophagy MUSCULOSKELETAL: muscle pains, tremors, tetany PSYCHIC: tension, anxiety GENERAL: fatiguabifity, weakness, exhaustion, sleep disturbance nightmares TABLE 2. NON-ORGANIC DISEASE IN MEDICAL OUTPATIENTS PRESENTING SYMPTOMS GASTROINTESTINAL: Abdominal distension, constipation, diarrhoea, vomiting, burping [44] C.N.S: Twitching eyelids, headache, giddiness, fainting, diplopia [21] RESPIRATORY: Difficulty in breathing, cough [19] CARDIOVASCULAR: Precordial discomfort, palpitating missed beats [15] SKELETAL SYSTEM: Weak limbs, painful limbs, vague pains [6] GENERAL SYMPTOMS ONLY: Weakness, irritability, insomnia [10] MISCELLANEOUS: 13 {Gottlieb 1969} Some forty years ago Kerr, Dalton and Gliebe wrote [1] "Patients presenting the well known pattern of symptoms haunt the offices of physicians and specialists in every field of medical practice. They are often shunted from one physician to another, and the sins of commission inflicted upon them fill many black pages in our book of achievement." Unfortunately I believe this to be still true today, despite the many and excellent reviews which have appeared in the intervening years [2-5]. Among the sins of commission are fruitless operations on the abdomen, the spine, and other organs– invasive investigations which are not without risk–and, even worse, damaging diagnoses like epilepsy and cardiac infarction which may create chronic iatrogenic invalidism. The high incidence of these cases in various clinics has been reported many times, varying from six per cent in specialist clinics such as gastro-enterology [6] and cardiology [7] and in otherwise healthy wives of service personnel [8], to ten per cent in the office of a general physician [9]. Burns and Howell [10], in a study of disproportionate dyspnoea, found hyperventilation in ten per cent of controls. Gottlieb [11] in 1969 reported that forty per cent of patients presenting at his London medical outpatients had no detectable organic disease. His table of symptoms (Table 2) is almost identical with the symptoms of hyperventilation, but he failed to mention this possibility at all. He called them all "anxiety states". This I believe to be the commonest diagnosis under which hyperventilation is mislabelled, and it is especially damaging. It implies inadequacy or constitutional inferiority; it tempts the doctor to dismiss the very real and often painful symptoms of a biochemical disturbance as imaginary or due to a low pain threshold, and it swells the tide of tranquillizer consumption which threatens to inundate the health service. So here again is what CBI says: >I did. They were almost explusively referring to hyperventilation in >anxiety. None claimed that there was such a thing as chronic >hyperventilation aoutside of panic attacks as Petey claims. What they meant >was that the anxiety is chronic and when the person has a panic attack they >hyperventilate.
This is what LUM says: He called them all "anxiety states". This I believe to be the commonest diagnosis under which hyperventilation is mislabelled, and it is especially damaging. Now as you can see, this totally contradicts what CBI is saying. In fact the whole article is about how doctors are misinterpreting chronic hyperventilation exactly the way CBI is misinterpreting it. This isn’t the only aticle I’ve quoted. Others I quoted like Magarian’s "Hyperventilation: a diagnosis begging for recognition" actually say it in the title. In this case CBI has not even read the title!!!! In a recent survey doctors were found to be the third most trusted group in the community (interestingly, behind nurses). We trust doctors. How morally reprehensible is it for a man in such a trusted position to so deliberately lie and deceive the people who trust him! He claims to have read all the articles. As you can see he has not read this article, even though it has been presented to him on a platter. He didn’t even have to get the article out of the library. Others under CBI’s wing, such as Eric Jarvis, base their assertions on the assumption that CBI actually has done the research and has read the articles and has commented honestly about them. Take this quote from Eric: >usually when pressed he can >be made to post a few references to scientific studies…which leads to a >wonderful interchange as each one gets picked off as irrelevant, faked, >discredited, or about something else entirely
Perhaps the newer readers on this group will understand the futility of trying to argue with this mob. They won’t discuss rationally. Their arguments are entirely based on lies, deceptions and twisted truths. They are a bunch of ego-tripsters who care more about their image on this group than your asthma. They will accuse me of the same. But as any rational human being familar with asa knows, this is not a news group on which Peter Kolb could hope to go on an ego trip. Peter Kolb Biomedical Engineer Free information provided by grateful ex-asthmatics http://www.wt.com.au/~pkolb/buteyko.htm
Response:
>Wrong. There is no evidence to support the physiologic model and most of the >references given by the proponents actually argue against it. That is the >first key to evaluating these arguments. You must look up the references. >They (by this I mean PK) have a habit of posting long, impressive looking, >lists of references that when read turn out to not say what they claim.
Even worse – after we point out what the references really state, Peter still uses them as support (hoping that others will not be smart enough to actually look them up). — "What Sept. 11 did was remind us that there are times when we must fight for our country, that, indeed, there are things – our liberty, our democracy, our belief in human rights and human dignity – worth fighting for." Newsday.com editorial – 27 May 2002
Response:
>When I first got to this group it seemed like every thread was about this >and I got curious so I first looked up the product and all I got was >advertisements and such.
About the same time, I emailed one of the research doctors at National Jewish Medical and Research Center in Denver, Colorado, asking about Buteyko. The doctor replied that she had never heard of Buteyko, although she was not necessarily opposed to trying new things. That sort of answered the question for me. It’s one thing to be ardent in one’s views, not accepting "new or untested" methods, alternatives, etc., but it’s quite another thing to actually be open to alternatives, and yet not even know about them? One would expect that an active medical researcher working at one of the world’s preeminent respiratory research centers would be at least be aware of Buteyko… Or is this just a "down under" thing…
Response:
I guess the only real way to avoid this is to block this portion of the NG. I must say it’s been quite some time since I’ve filtered a NG. Bruce – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->This is really aimed at new people to a.s.a. >You will have noticed a ferocious hostility towards Buteyko on this >news group. > There is hostility towards quackery. Do not presume that we treat you > different from any other fraud. >Given that: >1. Buteyko therapy has a proper physiological explanation, a working >model and a therapy properly based on that model, > However the model is based u[pon a flawed theory that has never been > demonstrated. >2. It is astonishingly effective as evidenced both anecdotally and >through scientifically conducted clinical trials, and it has been >scrutinized by the ever vigilant media > Name one clinical trial that concludes that B is ‘effective. You are > lying again. >3. It does not confilct with conventional asthma management, > You have claimed in the past that asthma medications make asthma > worse. You have recommended that asthmatics stop taking their > medications in favor of your patent remedy. >4. There is masses of free information on it on the net. Several >books have been written on it. > Anybody can publish the most inane drivel on the net. We know better > than to assume that everything we read on the net is accurate. Books > are no different, anybody can have a book printed. What matters is > actual scientific research that demonstrates your theory. >5. While Buteyko practitioners are still in very short supply, you can >access self-help/DIY kits at very reasonable cost. > Why should we want to? You are selling a therapy that at best is > unproven. >6. There are some simple free instructions on our web site you can >try for yourself before you go any further. > Why should we? >7. James Hooper, an experience practitioner, has made available a >DIY/self help instruction kit for children for free from his web site. >8. It is not a patentable commodity. There are not secrets. We have >no magic powders, pills etc. which only licensed doctors can dispense >for profit. > Note standard claim that doctors somehow profit from prescribing > medications. If they make this claim – can we believe anything else > they say? > — > "What Sept. 11 did was remind us that there are > times when we must fight for our country, that, > indeed, there are things – our liberty, our > democracy, our belief in human rights and human > dignity – worth fighting for." > Newsday.com editorial – 27 May 2002
Response:
>This is really aimed at new people to a.s.a. >You will have noticed a ferocious hostility towards Buteyko on this >news group.
There is hostility towards quackery. Do not presume that we treat you different from any other fraud. >Given that: >1. Buteyko therapy has a proper physiological explanation, a working >model and a therapy properly based on that model,
However the model is based u[pon a flawed theory that has never been demonstrated. >2. It is astonishingly effective as evidenced both anecdotally and >through scientifically conducted clinical trials, and it has been >scrutinized by the ever vigilant media
Name one clinical trial that concludes that B is ‘effective. You are lying again. >3. It does not confilct with conventional asthma management,
You have claimed in the past that asthma medications make asthma worse. You have recommended that asthmatics stop taking their medications in favor of your patent remedy. >4. There is masses of free information on it on the net. Several >books have been written on it.
Anybody can publish the most inane drivel on the net. We know better than to assume that everything we read on the net is accurate. Books are no different, anybody can have a book printed. What matters is actual scientific research that demonstrates your theory. >5. While Buteyko practitioners are still in very short supply, you can >access self-help/DIY kits at very reasonable cost.
Why should we want to? You are selling a therapy that at best is unproven. >6. There are some simple free instructions on our web site you can >try for yourself before you go any further.
Why should we? >7. James Hooper, an experience practitioner, has made available a >DIY/self help instruction kit for children for free from his web site. >8. It is not a patentable commodity. There are not secrets. We have >no magic powders, pills etc. which only licensed doctors can dispense >for profit.
Note standard claim that doctors somehow profit from prescribing medications. If they make this claim – can we believe anything else they say? — "What Sept. 11 did was remind us that there are times when we must fight for our country, that, indeed, there are things – our liberty, our democracy, our belief in human rights and human dignity – worth fighting for." Newsday.com editorial – 27 May 2002
Response:
> This is really aimed at new people to a.s.a. > You will have noticed a ferocious hostility towards Buteyko on this > news group.
actually what you’ll see is a total contempt for the fraudsters and charlatans who make money by selling materials related to this discredited supposed therapy and an utter fury at Peter’s consistent lying and self contradiction (all of which you can look up for yourself on Google…the difference between us and Peter is that he relies on lies and rhetoric whereas much of the opposition to his posts is based on logic and hard evidence) I get angry because this bastard is trying to sell videos by lying to you…he will now deny making any money out of B*teyk* just as he has done before…again the evidence is there on Google that he will eventually have to retract such claims and admit that he has a financial interest in the promotion of B*teyk* training materials > Given that: > 1. Buteyko therapy has a proper physiological explanation, a working > model and a therapy properly based on that model,
wrong it has a physiological explanation that is 50% moonshine and 50% wishful thinking…you have been pulled up on this every few months for as long as I can remember…you are wrong…you have been proven wrong…at times you have even admitted to being wrong…you, sir, are a liar making an error is one thing…it can be forgiven…having a different but entirely reasonable interpretation of something is fine…however you tell outright lies repeatedly, back track when you are caught out…and then, as you are doing now, return to the original lies again…that is the action of somebody who either needs psychiatric treatment or jailing for fraud > 2. It is astonishingly effective as evidenced both anecdotally and > through scientifically conducted clinical trials, and it has been > scrutinized by the ever vigilant media
bollocks…no trials that have been properly conducted have found ANY evidence that it actually works…as for the media, a couple of years ago the BBC reported an article from The Onion as if it were news not a spoof…the media are suckers for fraudsters like you just as much as anyone else > 3. It does not confilct with conventional asthma management,
actually it does…masking the symptoms of an asthma attack as a first line of defence can lead to serious problems over time…the sensible and conventional method of dealing with it is to investigate the reason for the attack and deal with it…learning to pretend that you don’t have asthma, but just happen to breathe more shallowly than you need all the time is not a smart move > 4. There is masses of free information on it on the net. Several > books have been written on it. > 5. While Buteyko practitioners are still in very short supply, you can > access self-help/DIY kits at very reasonable cost.
here we go…this is where Peter takes his cut as far as we can tell by the way > 6. There are some simple free instructions on our web site you can > try for yourself before you go any further.
against the advice of B*teyko himself of course > 7. James Hooper, an experience practitioner, has made available a > DIY/self help instruction kit for children for free from his web site.
seriously stupid > 8. It is not a patentable commodity. There are not secrets. We have > no magic powders, pills etc. which only licensed doctors can dispense > for profit.
nope…you make the profits off training sessions and videos instead
because, Mr Kolb, you in particular are a liar, a cheat. a charlatan, a fraudster…want to try and sue me for that…the evidence on ALL of those claims is available in Google’s archive > To understand this you have to go back to 1996 – 1998 when a group of > us started posting to this group based on our own experiences. It was > immediately assume that Buteyko was some sort of scam, although nobody > here ever gave any credible explanation of how this "scam" could > possibly be implemented. Nevertheless, Buteyko was mercilessly > trashed by characters like Colin. They screamed for Clinical trials. > In 1998 the first clinical trial in the West was published in the > Medical Journal of Australia. The results were quite stunning, like a > 96% reduction in bronchodilators in 12 weeks. This was a double blind > placebo controlled trial in which The word "Buteyko" was never > mentioned and the control group was given conventional diaphragamtic > breathing and relaxation exercises.
false…utterly false…rather typical of Peter’s sales pitch…he’s hoping that whilst it’s the holiday season he’ll catch enough of the medics away from the newsgroup so that he can get a free ride to sucker a few of you into buying videos…this has all been covered many times before…the evidence is in the Google archive…you can’t successfully lie about the history of a newsgroup, it’s all on record…tough luck Peter > What do you think Colin et al.. would make of this? He now expects > us to believe that these eminent researchers cheated on the results. > What else can he say? We argued over this absurdity ad nauseum, but > still he persists with this garbage.
you always aim your attacks at Colin and sometimes at myself because we are scientifically trained laymen…but it wasn’t only Colin that refuted your claims about the Brisbane study was it?…you know that perfectly well but you choose to lie…again…some of the other people who managed to turn up the contradictions and errors within the study were doctors and medical researchers…if you’ve forgotten, Peter, you could use Google to refresh your memory…but I don’t think you have forgotten…I no longer believe you make honest errors…I’m convinced you are either mentally ill or a shyster – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Next I started posting references to Chronic hyperventilation > literature. Buteyko just reverses chronic hyperventilation, and as a > result we’re seeing these reversals in asthma. Problem is nobody read > the references. CBI was so cocky, it took him over a year to realize > that the reference he didn’t like (because it was from a psychology > journal) had been replaced with a whole wad of references I found > later. He then had the gall to complain that this was a sneaky > trick!!! He commented on my posts, not even having read them! I > must have posted over 30 references, none of which he read. He > eventually read some of the titles, but I could actually prove that > in one of these references he discredited, he had not even read the > headings and in another he had not even read ther first line! But > because he is a doctor and the people in this group have such blind > faith in doctors, his critique stands.
this is not true…Google has the evidence > I spent years arguing every single point that is still raised on this > ng against Buteyko. Everything they raise has been explained. With > the sort of behaviour we see from what apparently is a doctor posting > to this group, the arguments just became futile. So I’m afraid > you’re just going to have to excuse me for not wasting any more of my > time repeating these explanations. The stuff is all on record, but > you’ll have to search relly hard because it goes back to around 1996. > I don’t think Google was even invented then.
Google has records gong back long before that, Peter…it has got the Deja archive…your duplicity is all on record where anyone interested can refer to it > Please give Buteyko a try. It costs you nothing to try, it does not > conflict with conventional asthma management and the only thing you > stand to lose is your asthma. Don’t let yourself be put off by these > ego-tripsters.
don’t pay money to fraudsters if you want to gain ALL the benefits of breath control then take a yoga course, or do speech training for actors, even do a singing course…all are available cheap and even free all over the world…all of them will give you far better breath control and understanding of your breathing than ANYTHING Mr Kolb is offering…and you won’t have somebody lying to you and offering false promise (at least not if you pick the right tutors…after all there are frauds in most fields) none of which will cause you to "lose" your asthma…that’s the big lie Peter is trying to sell…that not having any symptoms right now means not having asthma ever…but it will help keep it under control — eric www.ericjarvis.co.uk "I am a man of many parts, unfortunately most of them are no longer in stock"
Response:
When I first got to this group it seemed like every thread was about this and I got curious so I first looked up the product and all I got was advertisements and such. So I emailed the FDA’s and they said that this would be discontinued if they didn’t tell people to still take their meds. The rest they said was a waste of time. I would post the letter but lost it when my computer crashed and burned and I lost everything. Write to the FDA and ask about it and check for yourselves. UM MOM Susan
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> This is really aimed at new people to a.s.a. > You will have noticed a ferocious hostility towards Buteyko on this > news group. > Given that: > 1. Buteyko therapy has a proper physiological explanation, a working > model and a therapy properly based on that model, > 2. It is astonishingly effective as evidenced both anecdotally and > through scientifically conducted clinical trials, and it has been > scrutinized by the ever vigilant media > 3. It does not confilct with conventional asthma management, > 4. There is masses of free information on it on the net. Several > books have been written on it. > 5. While Buteyko practitioners are still in very short supply, you can > access self-help/DIY kits at very reasonable cost. > 6. There are some simple free instructions on our web site you can > try for yourself before you go any further. > 7. James Hooper, an experience practitioner, has made available a > DIY/self help instruction kit for children for free from his web site. > 8. It is not a patentable commodity. There are not secrets. We have > no magic powders, pills etc. which only licensed doctors can dispense > for profit. > To understand this you have to go back to 1996 – 1998 when a group of > us started posting to this group based on our own experiences. It was > immediately assume that Buteyko was some sort of scam, although nobody > here ever gave any credible explanation of how this "scam" could > possibly be implemented. Nevertheless, Buteyko was mercilessly > trashed by characters like Colin. They screamed for Clinical trials. > In 1998 the first clinical trial in the West was published in the > Medical Journal of Australia. The results were quite stunning, like a > 96% reduction in bronchodilators in 12 weeks. This was a double blind > placebo controlled trial in which The word "Buteyko" was never > mentioned and the control group was given conventional diaphragamtic > breathing and relaxation exercises. > What do you think Colin et al.. would make of this? He now expects > us to believe that these eminent researchers cheated on the results. > What else can he say? We argued over this absurdity ad nauseum, but > still he persists with this garbage. > Next I started posting references to Chronic hyperventilation > literature. Buteyko just reverses chronic hyperventilation, and as a > result we’re seeing these reversals in asthma. Problem is nobody read > the references. CBI was so cocky, it took him over a year to realize > that the reference he didn’t like (because it was from a psychology > journal) had been replaced with a whole wad of references I found > later. He then had the gall to complain that this was a sneaky > trick!!! He commented on my posts, not even having read them! I > must have posted over 30 references, none of which he read. He > eventually read some of the titles, but I could actually prove that > in one of these references he discredited, he had not even read the > headings and in another he had not even read ther first line! But > because he is a doctor and the people in this group have such blind > faith in doctors, his critique stands. > I spent years arguing every single point that is still raised on this > ng against Buteyko. Everything they raise has been explained. With > the sort of behaviour we see from what apparently is a doctor posting > to this group, the arguments just became futile. So I’m afraid > you’re just going to have to excuse me for not wasting any more of my > time repeating these explanations. The stuff is all on record, but > you’ll have to search relly hard because it goes back to around 1996. > I don’t think Google was even invented then. > Please give Buteyko a try. It costs you nothing to try, it does not > conflict with conventional asthma management and the only thing you > stand to lose is your asthma. Don’t let yourself be put off by these > ego-tripsters. > Peter Kolb BSc(Eng) MSc(Med) CPEng(Biomed) > Biomedical Engineer > Free information provided by grateful ex-asthmatics > http://www.wt.com.au/~pkolb/buteyko.htm
Response:
Related Posts