US DoD funding of Scientology Detox Programs and Gulf War Veterans

Hi guise. I found a few interesting things while researching Canadian Scientology-affilated doctors. It looks to me like the US Department of Defence is funding research into Scientology-based detox. Comments? Can anyone confirm this?

Overview of the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program (CDMRP) and the Gulf War Illness Research Program (GWTRP)
http://www.va.gov/RAC-GWVI/docs/Minutes_and_Agendas/Minutes_Feb2011_AppendixA_Presentation02.pdf
(scroll down to page 5, slide 10)

Similar dox mentions a Dr. David Carpenter. Is he a Scientologist?
http://www.va.gov/RAC-GWVI/docs/Minutes_and_Agendas/Minutes_June2010_AppendixA_Presentation9.pdf
(scroll down to page 10, slide 20)

Dr. David Carpenter:
http://www.xenu-directory.net/news/library.php?t=David Carpenter
http://web.archive.org/web/20071024144711/http:/www.philly.com/inquirer/health_science/daily/20071007_Clinics_results_make_9_11_responders_believe.html

Also, Dr. David E. Root. I believe he is a known cult apologist and possible Scientologist. He apparently made a presentation to the Presidential Special Oversight Board for Department of Defense Investigations of Gulf War Chemical & Biological Incidents on November 20, 1998.

(Scilon website) http://www.detoxacademy.org/pdfs/testimony.pdf

Can anyone verify this presentation was given, using non-Scilon sources?

http://cdmrp.army.mil/search.aspx and plug "Hubbard" and "Detoxification" into the Abstract Keywords boxes at the bottom of the form.

http://www.albany.edu/news/8212.php#

wooot

What's a Psychologist doing as co-investigator?

Dr. Gayle Morse, PhD - her CV: http://works.bepress.com/gayle_morse/cv.pdf

http://www.schoolmoldhelp.org/content/view/732/208/

Are we ready to email the CDMRP yet?

Related arkle:
http://xenewz.wordpress.com/2011/06/12/poisoning-veterans-with-scientology/

It would be interesting to find out if Dr Carpenter's study has been completed, what protocols were used (Niacin dosage especially) and what the results are. A properly conducted study on the "Hubbard Method" might just put the nail in Narconon's coffin.
I think in absence of any solid evidence that he is a scilon, either more research or a low-key inquiry about the study results would be in order. He seems to be a reputable researcher and his statements in the article I quoted above sound like he's intrigued enough to do the research, as opposed to being a scilon advocate. Or he could be preparing to do a fake study, but these things are usually peer reviewed several times (before, during, and after) so it would be hard to pull off.

Edit: the grant was apparently 2009, so some results might be available.

LESS SCIENTOLOGY, MORE DRUGS!!!!

http://www.sovereignindependent.com/?p=24509

I think the funding is through to 2013. The grant may have been approved in 2009.

Hopefully, the study will be peer-reviewed (as long as the peers aren't biased towards L. Ron Hubbard). The co-investigator, Dr. Kathleen Kerr is listed as the Chair of the Directors of Narconon in Canada.

PDF poon stuff on NARCONON/PURIF - http://fairgamestop.org/health-narconon.html

especially relevent: chris owens & the oaklhoma health board's things

CDMRP: PublicAffairs@amedd.army.mil 301-619-7071

Paging intelligence to the white courtesy phone: Dox on Dr Kerr?
(edit: PM sent)

Dr. Kathleen . Kerr, is the Director/Trustee of NARCONON INCORPORATED, which is actually ABLE CANADA,
and big shot Brad Melnychuck

I can supply complete, full copies of Health Ministry Intervention REPORT, plus the College of Physicians.

Plus copies of ORIGINAL COMPLAINTS with REBUTTALS to their Response?

How else can I help?

.

Are they funding a program to give the purif to gulf war vets? This looks like the DoD provided a grant for a study of the purif.

The items quoted ITT refer to a study only, with 50 Gulf War vets as participants/subjects.

Thanks for this. I of course don't want you to jump the gun on revealing your actions/results, but can you say whether Narconon has been officially discredited in Canada, or any of its provinces (i.e., not allowed to provide their "services")? Or are the cases still making their way through the bureaucracy? From following your thread I'm assuming the latter but would be happy to be wrong!

inb4remoteviewing

This is newsworthy. Forward links to Tony Ortega at the Village Voice

tortega@villagevoice.com

Narconon is not banned in Canada. It needs to apply for accreditation in the Province of Quebec, which David Love is working hard to prevent them from getting.

Pooned.

in answer to your question, here are the locations in Canada



Narconon Alberta
123 Woodland Circle
S.W Calgary
T3E 1V7
1-403-686-6123
Narconon Eagle's Drug Rehabilation Nest
13051 Lanark Place
Surrey, British Columbia
V3V 6S2
1-604-320-3309
Narconon Vancouver Drug Prevention
415-1450 Street
Vancouver, British Columbia
V6J 3K3
1-780-637-4702
Narconon Trois-Rivieres
7535 Boul. Parent
Trois-Rivieres, Quebec
G9A 5E1
1-877-782-7409 toll free

There is no "1450 Street" in Vancouver.

I don't know about the other addresses above but the Narconon Vancouver location is:

Narconon Natural Detox/Rehab&Prevention
660A Leg In Boot Square, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4B3
(604) 873-1762 ‎
narconon dot org

I'm trying to know if Canada is instructing United States on medical issues, yes or no?

I'm trying to pry out of all the above whether or not Canadian doctors are instructing U.S. doctors on what criteria they deem relevant for grant approval and for U.S. doctors to forward that on in their own grant application processes. thanks.

I don't read any of that in any of the above. A Canadian doctor, who is also Director of Narconon Canada, is a named co-investigator on a US Government funded study of the Narconon-style detox routine. The issue would be lack of objectivitiy on the part of the Canadian as a Narconon principal, not whether she is influencing the grant process.

We do not yet have confirmation of the study protocol. The Technical Abstract posted above by Anon PTS says there is a sauna detox but there is no mention of Niacin.

So tl;dr this is an independent study into effiacy of the Purif rundown correct?

Double blind?

If so please fund this study so scientific proof can be reached.

I don't see how it is double blind (maybe single blind) since subjects would know if they were in a sauna or not. The comparator is "usual care". What is the waitlist for?

From post #3:

A potential source of bias is the fact that 2 of the principal investigators are linked to Scientology.

Also, the study purports to detoxify Gulf War veterans but it does not actually measure their toxin levels before and after the treatment. In other words, the study can't prove that the "Hubbard Regimen" detoxifies anyone. Hubbard's theories about detox is junk science and this study does not prove otherwise.

Human studies are reviewed by a institutional review board. The FDA reviews the boards at least yearly. If they are biased the FDA closes the institution down. They are rabid about it, they shut down several universities' studies until a new board was put in place. It would be interesting to inquire what institutional review board they use for that study. That should be public knowledge.
Can you find a link to the grant?

I think the main reason the study has been designed in this way is that research is still ongoing into figuring out exactly what toxin is at work in gulf war syndrome. I know great progress has been made recently, but, as the other grants show, work is still ongoing into nailing it down. Because of this, measuring toxin levels becomes less important, since you don't have a mechanism to investigate yet. Still, blood tests for common toxins are pretty easy to do and the proposed mechanism by which the purif works is detoxification, so why not take measurements while you're at it? The scope seems unnecessairly limited, but still a valid design.

As for the waiting list, if the participants are all volunteers, then they think they're signing up for an investigation into this procedure and so you need them all thinking that they're going to have the same treatment. This is particularly important when you're dealing with something like gulf war syndrome and you're taking subjective measures (quality of life, fatigue, pain, ect). Often times when you have people dealing with a mysterious illness, just the thought that you're trying a new treatment that could help is enough to make people feel better short term. So you want to try and control for that. Hence telling the participants that they aren't receiving the treatment yet because they're on a "waiting list." Another issue is that ethically, you're required to offer the treatment to all participants eventually. This is standard in things like drug and therapeutic trials.

If the research is being conducted through a university then the proposal will most likely be reviewed by the IRB of the institution for which the lead investigator works. If this study has received a grant then it has also probably already received IRB approval.

The grant was to the State University of New York, Albany (post 3 ITT)

Pre-grant investigation: (source:http://cdmrp.army.mil/pubs/pips/gwirppip.pdf page 2)

More info on two-tier review in CDMRP is here: http://cdmrp.army.mil/about/2tierRevProcess_text.shtml
2009 Peer Review Participants here: (grant in question was 2009) http://cdmrp.army.mil/gwirp/reviewers/gwirp09reviewers.pdf

Nice find, HR.

Holy fuck is this retarded.

Dr. Kerr's website

http://www.dfcm.utoronto.ca/research/researchers/kkerr.htm