Editor—I would take issue with the statement that there is almost no evidence to support the claim that the internet harms health.1 A search of Medline, for example, identifies a report in the Annals of Internal Medicine (www.annalsw.org/issues/v133n11/nts/200012050-00006.html) that describes the case of a patient who died of kidney and liver failure after using hydrazine sulphate (as recommended by the Kathy Keeton website, www.kathykeeton-cancer.com) as an alternative treatment for cancer.2
On another occasion a nurse in the United States was charged with manslaughter after giving MICON—a non-toxic treatment given over 24 hours (www.edensinstitute.com/micom.html)—to a patient with cancer (see www.ncahf.org/digest/01-18.html).
In addition to these examples there are other cases when people find a “cure” on the web and use this, possibly at the expense of conventional treatment. A newspaper article in England (www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/wiltshire/archive/2000/11/23/devizes_news_county2ZM.html) told of a local patient with cancer who raised money to go to a private clinic in Mexico to receive treatment with Laetrile (laevo-mandelonitrile-beta-glucuronoside). The article quoted local (Mexican) doctors as being “confident” that this would cure the cancer. In contrast, the National Cancer Institute reports that “Laetrile has shown little anticancer activity in animal studies and no anticancer activity in human clinical trials” (www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cam/laetrile.htm).
Medical misinformation is a problem on the internet. The danger is that vulnerable people will adopt these unproved treatments at the expense of proved conventional ones.
References
- 1.Smith R. Almost no evidence exists that the internet harms health. BMJ. 2001;323:651. . (22 September.) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Black M, Hussain H. Fatal hepatorenal failure associated with hydrazine sulfate. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133:877–880. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-133-11-200012050-00011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]