Orthormolecular Medicine: A Unique Medical Specialty
Richard A. Kunin, M.D
In 1969 Linus Pauling coined the word "Orthomolecular" to
denote the use of naturally occurring substances, particularly nutrients,
in maintaining health and treating disease. At that time megadose niacin
therapy for schizophrenia and dietary treatment of hypoglycemia
were the major focus of the movement. Since then Orthomolecular psychiatry
and medicine have emerged as a distinct and important specialty area
in medical practice.
In the meantime, other medical movements have sprung up out of the
public demand for Hope in the face of a worsening epidemic of cancer,
heart attacks and mental illness and in response to the outcry against
adverse effects of modern medical treatments and invasive diagnostic
and intensive care procedures. Alternative therapies have come forward
to fill the vacuum left by modern Medicine, which failed to provide
effective treatments for the major epidemic diseases and in protest
against Medicine's over-reliance on pharmacology, for the drug treatments
seem to have fostered the epidemic of drug-dependence which is the major
epidemic of our time. The public majority were ready for a new medicine
based on nontoxic, non-invasive, "natural" medicines to go
with the re-discovered "natural foods".
Holistic medicine became a rallying point for the New Medicine by putting
nutrition, exercise and meditation ahead of surgery, radiation and drugs.
It was an answer to the adverse effects of MegaMedicine, the cut, burn
and poison approach to "health". And, since holistic medicine
did not focus on basic science data, it did not force a paradigm shift
in the medical establishment.
Orthomolecular, on the other hand, because it is identified with Linus
Pauling, our greatest living scientist, and because it rests on a vast
body of research in the basic and clinical sciences, does force a major
revision in medical thinking. Nutrition, which has been the stepchild
of medicine and generally considered a dead issue in medicine, suddenly
is at the crux of this new medical movement. No wonder then, that Orthomolecular
became a buzzword to the medical establishment, who saw it only as megavitamins
and judged it as quackery. By contrast, the word, Holistic became the
subject of numerous symposia, journal articles, welcomed by editors
eager to promote the image of modern medicine as a progressive and responsive
institution. But as it gained supporters, Holistic Medicine also gained
additional theories and practices, some of dubious value, some downright
unscientific. Even the most broad-minded and liberal-minded editor had
to recoil from permitting such things as psychic healing and kinesiology
within the pages of a refereed journal.
Soon the word "Alternative, came to replace Holistic in the medical
journals. Now the establishment could pick and choose individually between
the various therapies that had gathered under the holistic umbrella;
nutrition, biofeedback, chiropractic, acupuncture, herbalism, homeopathy,
massage, hypnosis, iridology, kinesiology, astrology, psychic healing
and other intuitive therapies, to name a few.
The orthomolecular movement was faltered with identity confusion and,
in fact, many of our own members seem to have chosen Holistic as their
preferred badge-word. This is good for the short run, I agree: it is
attractive to patients and profitable while being non-controversial
and safer professionally as well. In the long run, however, I think
Holistic Medicine has no future. It has already lost its identity, except
as a clearing house for medical novelty. Most important, because it
does not identify strongly with science it has lost reliability. Meantime,
Orthomolecular Medicine retains scientific reason for being: its basic
science foundations of nutrition, biochemistry and clinical nutrition
have grown at a prodigious rate. Megavitamin niacin therapy, which was considered dangerous and controversial in treating schizophrenia,
is now the standard of care in the hyperlipidemias. What began as megavitamin
therapy now employs a broad data base and a variety of therapies applicable
to numerous medical and psychiatric conditions. It is ironic that this
positive growth of orthomolecular science and therapy has actually clouded
the identity of the Orthomolecular movement. On the one hand we are
confused with Holistic Medicine; on the other we are seen only as the
avant garde of orthodox medicine. In hopes of defining our true identity
let me update the concept of Orthomolecular Medicine as a new medical
specialty.
First of all, the orthomolecular data base rests strongly on the following
areas of scientific knowledge:
- Nutrition
- Biochemistry
- Cell biology
- Physiology
- General medicine
- Immunology
- Allergy
- Endocrinology
- Pharmacology
- Toxicology
- Gastroenterology
- Parasitology
- Nephrology
- Physical medicine and manipulation therapies
- Dentistry
- Veterinary science
- Food science
- Agriculture
- Climatology
- Medical politics
The following therapeutic modalities fit the definition of orthomolecular:
- Vitamins
- Minerals
- Amino acids
- Essential fatty acids
- Fiber
- Enzymes
- Antibodies
- Antigens
- Cell therapy
- Chelation therapy
- Dialysis
- Plasmapharesis
- Hydrotherapy
- Thermal therapy
- Phototherapy
- Electrotherapy (including electroconvulsive therapy)
- Air ion therapy
- Light therapy
- Solar therapy
- Acupuncture
- Massage
- Exercise
- Biofeedback
- Hypnotherapy and other psychotherapies
All of the orthomolecular practice rests on a foundation of basic science
advances in biochemistry, biophysics, physiology, psychophysiology and
ecology. We do not eschew drug therapy or pharmacology; but we do recognize
their limitations and their potential for toxicity. Orthomolecular knowledge
gives greater choice of benefits for our patients, with less risk
of adverse affects.
Principles
Aside from these areas of interest, there are by now some well defined
beliefs and principles that also distinguish the orthomolecular practitioner
from orthodox health practitioners. These principles actually are an
important part of our professional identity. Just as knowledge of science
and therapeutics might be thought of as our Ego, these principles makeup
our professional conscience or Superego, The desire to be in the avant
garde of medical progress, to share the excitement of discovery, no
doubt, is a major source of our motivational energy or libido, our medical
Id, as it were. No, the love of our grateful patients, those we are
privileged to heal and comfort, this must be the ultimate motive. At
any rate, I think you will agree that the orthomolecular professional
is a different personality, with different beliefs and values than most
present-day practitioners of medical orthodoxy. Of course all physicians
do cherish our Hippocratic oath, but the orthomolecular identity confers
upon us additional values and beliefs. Hippocrates first rule was: "Primum
non nocere," i.e. "first, do no harm". We in orthomolecular
practice have less need for the primacy of that rule, for it is already
implicit in the essence of Orthomolecular practice, which is: "put
nutrition first".
Here is a list of 15 principles that identify the spirit of Orthormolecular
Medicine:
- Orthomolecules come first in medical diagnosis and treatment. Knowledge
of the safe and effective use of nutrients, enzymes, hormones, antigens,
antibodies and other naturally occurring molecules is essential to
assure a reasonable standard of care in medical practice.
- Orthomolecules have a low risk of toxicity. Pharmacological drugs
always carry a higher risk and are therefore second choice if there
is an orthomolecular alternative treatment.
- Laboratory tests are not always accurate and blood tests do not
necessarily reflect nutrient levels within specific organs or tissues,
particularly not within the nervous system. Therapeutic trial and
dose titration is often the most practical test.
- Biochemical individuality is a central precept of Orthomolecular
Medicine. Hence, the search for optimal nutrient doses is a practical
issue. Megadoses, larger than normal doses of nutrients, are often
effective but this can only be determined by therapeutic trial. Dose
titration is indicated in otherwise unresponsive cases.
- The Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) of the United States Food
and Nutrition Board are intended for normal, healthy people. By definition,
sick patients are not normal or healthy and not likely to be adequately
served by the RDA.
- Environmental pollution of air, water and food is common. Diagnostic
search for toxic pollutants is justified and a high "index of
suspicion" is mandatory in every case.
- Optimal health is a lifetime challenge. Biochemical needs change
and our Orthomolecular prescriptions need to change based upon follow-up,
repeated testing and therapeutic trials to permit fine-tuning of each
prescription and to provide a degree of health never before possible.
- Nutrient related disorders are always treatable and deficiencies
are usually curable. To ignore their existence is tantamount to malpractice.
- Don't let medical defeatism prevent a therapeutic trial. Hereditary
and so-called locatable disorders are often responsive to Orthomolecular
treatment.
- When a treatment is known to be safe and possibly effective, as
is the case in much of Orthomolecular therapy, a therapeutic trial
is mandated.
- Patient reports are usually reliable: The patient must listen to
his body, the physician must listen to his patient.
- To deny the patient information and access to Orthomolecular treatment
is to deny the patient informed consent for any other treatment.
- Inform the patient about his condition; provide access to all technical
information and reports; respect the right of freedom of choice in
medicine.
- Inspire the patient to realize that Health is not merely the absence
of disease but the positive attainment of optimal function and well-being.
- Hope is therapeutic and Orthomolecular therapies always are valuable
as a source of Hope. This is ethical so long as there is no misrepresentation
or deception.
The following tabulation further clarifies the role of Orthomolecular
Medicine in relation to medical orthodoxy.
| FACTOR |
ORTHOMOLECULAR |
ORTHODOXY |
| GOAL |
cure of cause |
palliation of symptom |
| DIAGNOSIS |
nutrient levels
history, physical history |
chemistry levels
physical |
| TREATMENT |
wellness model
ecologic view |
disease model
germ theory |
| ECOLOGIC VIEW |
orthomolecular
exercise
meditation
nutrient ecology and toxic factors |
surgery
radiation
pharmacology
hazy on diet and toxic factors |
| ETHIC |
safety first |
efficacy first |
| UNPROVEN REMEDY |
often useful on individual basis |
always quackery; do not use - too risky |
| DOUBLE-BLIND STUDIES |
false negatives occur, good treatment is lost |
infallible standard of proof, accept no therapy without it |
| PATIENT REPORTS |
usually correct |
unreliable data |
| RESPONSIBILITY |
patient is educated and responsible |
patient is ignorant and incompetent |
| PLACEBO EFFECT |
useful adjunct |
suspect, dishonorable |
| MEGAVITAMINS |
safe, effective medical therapy |
unsafe, unproved worthless therapy |
| INCURABLES |
treat; offer hope |
don't treat; offer no "false" hope |
The essentials boil down to 7 cardinal rules
- Nutrition comes first in medical diagnosis and treatment.
- Drug treatment is used only for specific indications and always
with an eye to the potential dangers and adverse effects.
- Environmental pollution and food adulteration are an inescapable
fact of modern life and are a medical priority.
- Biochemical individuality is the norm in medical practice; therefore
stereotyped RDA values are unreliable nutrient guides.
- Blood tests do not necessarily reflect tissue levels of nutrients.
- Nutrient diagnosis is always defensible because nutrient related
disorders are usually treatment responsive or curable.
- Hope is an indispensable ally of the physician and an absolute
right of the patient.
Finally, let me repeat, that our rallying point and badge-word must
be "Orthomolecular", a landmark concept that conveys the genius
of Dr. Pauling, who saw the need to resurrect nutrition and put it first,
not last, in our science of health and disease.
|