Honey Remedy Could Save Limbs

[Celebration]

http://www.wirednews.com/news/technology/medtech/0,71925-0.html?tw=wn_index_3

When Jennifer Eddy first saw an ulcer on the left foot of her patient, an elderly diabetic man, it was pink and quarter-sized. Fourteen months later, drug-resistant bacteria had made it an unrecognizable black mess.

Doctors tried everything they knew -- and failed. After five hospitalizations, four surgeries and regimens of antibiotics, the man had lost two toes. Doctors wanted to remove his entire foot.

"He preferred death to amputation, and everybody agreed he was going to die if he didn't get an amputation," said Eddy, a professor at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health.

With standard techniques exhausted, Eddy turned to a treatment used by ancient Sumerian physicians, touted in the Talmud and praised by Hippocrates: honey. Eddy dressed the wounds in honey-soaked gauze. In just two weeks, her patient's ulcers started to heal. Pink flesh replaced black. A year later, he could walk again.

"I've used honey in a dozen cases since then," said Eddy. "I've yet to have one that didn't improve."

[John Gauger]

1. Wow

There is so much more to learn in this world. That's why I love science. Science should investigate that. I have read about an ancient Chinese malaria treatmeant using wormwood (the stuff that makes Absinthe intoxicating) that is supposedly a miracle cure for leukemia. It works against malaria by killing iron-rich bloodcells. Once all infested cells are destroyed, there is no more malaria. Supposedly in works the same way against iron-rich tumors.

[soothsayer]

2. No, it's why you should NOT like science! Look how slow they are

to get around to investigating 'folk remedies' and stuff that medicine men and third world peoples use. Look how they denied that vitamins existed or mattered for years and years until finally coming around. Scientists are pigheaded and slow. BUT...they can come up with some cool stuff. But god, what an annoying culture they live in.

[John Gauger]

15. Yeah, I know

Dr. Carl Sagan describes some of the destructive behavior of scientists, but he is still very convincing in his defenses of science. They are just as vain, stubborn, and greedy as normal people. But I didn't want to come right out and start bashing on science for fear of seeming like a lunatic. But pointing out those negatives has now made me look like an idiot. They do need to catch up on a lot of potentially lifesaving practices.

[Orrex]

16. That "annoying culture they live in" isn't just to piss you off, you know

That pesky habit of requiring evidence has been the most effective means of demonstrably advancing knowledge. If you disagree, then please provide a better one. And if someone knows of a treasured folk remedy that's been around for millennia, let that person document its efficacy in a reproducible, verifiable way. That's what science is all about.

Rampant in our culture is the crazed notion that science is deliberately exclusionary of folk wisdom or of methods that won't funnel big bucks into corporate pockets. Sorry, but that's just not true; science is fundamentally egalitarian. Yes, individuals with a vested interest in a certain method may not support research into that method's competitor, but that's not the fault of science.

Let the advocates of the alternative method attempt to demonstrate its validity. If initial testing shows that it's effective, then let others provide independent confirmation.

And if you think that scientists live in an annoying culture, you should take a close look at the culture of pseudoscience, in which testimony trumps evidence and nonsense trumps logic!

I'm sorry that you're upset about honey's general omission from the modern apothecary's list of remedies. But don't diss science or the culture thereof just because it doesn't validate every folk remedy you know of.

[Celebration]

17. I don't have a dog in this hunt

Why should I care? Nobody has recommended to me that I have my foot amputated. Nobody has said that I would lose my life if I didn't have my foot removed. Think of all that people who have been put in that position. Think of all the people who are in that position now.

What in the heck is wrong with trying honey in EVERY case before there is an amputation??

Like I said, why should I care?

I'm not really talking about science here, I am talking about making rational decisions. And, frankly, it seems not only irrational but cruel that honey isn't used to help avoid amputation. It is not about science or experiments, it is about medical treatment, compassion and rational behavior.

I certainly do not blame the discipline of science for the failure of the medical community to follow the Hippocratic oath--First do no harm.... (note that this is FIRST, before "second, do what all your colleagues do and listen to pharmaceutical reps because you have so little time").

[Orrex]

18. Well, let's pose a hypothetical

Let's suppose that someone practices an ancient remedy that hasn't yet been formally tested by modern understanding. It may be practiced by a large community of people who swear by its benefits, and it may actually do no harm. These people are outraged to learn that modern medicine doesn't employ this particular folk-remedy, when its proponents know that it works. Well, let's see the evidence. That's all I'm asking.

In essence, you're arguing that a remedy should be adopted simply because it causes no apparent harm and because its proponents believe in it. It may very well be the case that honey has unusual beneficial properties. Well, let's see the evidence. That's all I'm asking. Is all honey equally helpful, or only certain kinds? Does it need to have pollen in it, or should it be pollen-free? These are the questions that rigorous testing would answer.

You consistently reject calls for investigation of pretty much every folk practice or remedy that you favor. Why do you resist a broadening of understanding? What is gained by the perpetuation of ignorance?

I can make a very, very long list of practices that won't cause any harm--should we therefore be required to use all of them in every case? What if I can get a bunch of people to swear that each entry on my list of remedies is useful? Would that require modern medicine to embrace my list?

Let's see... If you have a headache, wear a cap of red wool. If you have a fever, hold a potato in your armpit. If you have gout, wrap a corn husk around your wrist. Where's the harm in trying my remedies in EVERY case? It seems not only irrational but CRUEL to withhold my remedies from the patient. Why would you want to be cruel to the patient?

So honey is of some value in some cases where amputation may be required. Great. Let's see the evidence, so that we can get a more solid idea of its actual benefits. That's all I'm asking.

Like I said, why should I care?

Since you asked, the reason that you should care is that for every traditional remedy that actually works, 1,000 are of no value at all. And because a single remedy is shown to work, someone will immediately rise up to defend the other 1,000, whether or not they have any validity at all.

Your mistake is in improper compartmentalizing: Because science doesn't acknowledge {insert alternative remedy here}, science is hostile to all alternative remedies, including honey. In fact, the correct formulation is because science doesn't accept poorly-confirmed assertions, science requires a greater body of evidence than is available for alternative remedies. As certain remedies are shown to be effective, these are recognized by science and medicine. But until their effectiveness is demonstrated, they are not recognized.

I'm not really talking about science here, I am talking about making rational decisions.

No, you're talking about trying anything at all without apparent regard to its efficacy or verifiability. And if it doesn't harm the patient along the way, so much the better. You are motivated not by a desire to make rational decisions but by a misunderstanding of the scientific process as well as an over-eager acceptance of the non-verified (and often non-verifiable) remedies found in ancient traditions.

This isn't a matter of hostility or dogmatism or prejudice against ancient wisdom. It's not about a desire to hack of limbs or to be wantonly cruel to the patient.

[Celebration]

19. I'm not trying to say try every remedy!!

I am saying try something harmless (honey) and cheap (honey) to try to save people's feet. And, in this case, it saved someone's life. Others in similar situations got their foot lopped off. This has nothing to do with "science". It has to do with appropriate medical care. That is all I am talking about. Hippocrates would agree.

First, do no harm. First, DO NO HARM.

[Orrex]

20. Spare me the lecture

So if something is inexpensive and is presumed harmless, then it should be tried without bothering with empirical evidence. By what criteria do you allow one but exclude another? This doesn't just apply to honey but to a whole range of popular alternative remedies.

In this case, honey was shown to have a great benefit. Super! As I mentioned elsewhere in the thread, this has been acknowleged by modern medicine for years. But until formal data is available about a given remedy, the best assertion you can make is "tradition tells us that Remedy X is helpful." Formulate the theory, perform the experiments (as the article has described), and verify the results. Dr. Eddy has reported her findings, which is excellent, both for her patients and for medicine.

By the way, to separate medical care from science (in scare-quotes, no less) is to create a false distinction. Medicine is science.

And medicine may not yet know every last benefit of honey-application, but that's where testing comes in, see?

First do no harm. Well, no shit.

Second, don't posture a folk remedy as verified medicine until you can back it up with data. So honey works. Great! One folk remedy verified, a zillion to go.

[Celebration]

21. It is about saving limbs and saving lives

I don't have any data about honey. And yes, I feel that every person who is scheduled for amputation should try honey and see if it works for them. The anecdotal data, the folk use, and the use of it in other cultures provides plenty of evidence that it is not harmful, particularly in comparison to losing limbs. Try and prove that isn't harmful.

Again--it is about saving limbs and lives.

This is actually one of my pet topics. You see, I have been to a waiting room filled with amputees. There are so many things that could have saved their limbs that are not in widespread use--low level laser therapy is one possibility, but honey is another.

You are trying to make this about every folk remedy because there is no possible way you can justify sending people to get limbs amputated before at least giving honey a try.

And most MDs would say that medicine is as much art as it is science. I would certainly never knowingly go to an MD that disagreed with that.

[Orrex]

22. No, it's about performing medicine vs. playing to superstition

This is actually one of my pet topics. You see, I have been to a waiting room filled with amputees. There are so many things that could have saved their limbs that are not in widespread use--low level laser therapy is one possibility, but honey is another.

Whatever. Your statement is so broad as to be useless. What was the cause of amputation in each case? Did each result from a necrotic ulceration of the soft tissue in the affected limb? If you feel qualified to act as post hoc judge of the treatment these people were receiving, then hang out a shingle and go into business for yourself. You could call it "Lasers-n-Honey" and save the world from the cruel prejudices of conventional medicine.

You are trying to make this about every folk remedy because there is no possible way you can justify sending people to get limbs amputated before at least giving honey a try.

No, I'm pointing out--with considerable justification, I might add--that every verifiably useful folk remedy is taken either as a validation of folk wisdom as a whole or as proof that modern science is suppressing folk wisdom.

Your call for applications of honey in every case of amputation is simply juvenile. You do know that the cases mentioned in the article involved topical infections, right? That's super--in similar cases, where other remedies are found to be unsuitable, let's use honey. But to call for universal application of a treatment that is only shown to have a very narrow effect (mitigating infection) is dangerously irresponsible.

If I were a person of no conscience, I would enter the alternative medicine industry in a heartbeat. When alternative medicine gets it right once, it's taken as proof that folk remedies work. And when actual medicine gets it wrong once, it's taken as proof that folk remedies work.

[piedmont]

24. so how do you show that it's harmless?

Anecdotal evidence that honey is harmless is bullshit, to me. Do a controlled, replicated study and then report the results. The "first, do no harm" oath cuts both ways.

[FlaGranny]

26. Do a google about

wound treatment using sugar or honey.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/07/060727090308.htm
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/alternative/03/08/honey.healing.wmd/index.html

Here are a couple to get you started. Just because a remedy is natural does not mean it is not safe or not effective. It also does not mean the rememdy has not been tested.

[LibertyLover]

3. Honey

has antibiotic and antifungal properties that are just now being evaluated. For a while it was thought that its high sugar content was the reason for the antibiotic tendencies. Now I understand that some researchers are going beyond the high sugar content and looking at the minerals and other chemicals from the various plants honey is made from to see if that's where it gets its antibiotic properties. The ancient Egyptians used honey in a number of their medicines and poultices and had good results.

[Ian David]

4. I tried this once...

Never again!

[no_hypocrisy]

5. It's true. I use wild honey for first degree burns in the kitchen

and they heal quite quickly.

[Totally Committed]

6. Big Pharma will come down on this like a ton of bricks....

My advice: Stock up on honey soon. It will be illegal a year from now. And, Ms. Eddy will be doing time at Guantanemo as an enemy combatant for attempting to undermine the American economy by proving a homeopathic, all-natural substance could do what all Big Pharma couldn't.

Coming soon (just in from the NRA) -- BEE HUNTING SEASON.

TC

[kestrel91316]

7. As usual, the physicians are WAAAYYYY behind us practical-minded

veterinarians. Almost TEN YEARS AGO a series of articles appeared in one of our veterinary journals detailing the use of honey and sugar in wound management. These are very old, time-tested techniques which have fallen out of favor with the onset of "modern" medicine.

I have been champing at the bit to find a case to try honey on (wound management is my favorite area of practice, but in a largely housecat practice there's not much wound management going on, lol) but no luck so far. One of the articles showed a case in a very large dog, IIRC, that had a huge wound that responded very well to honey poultices.

The high sugar content pulls the water out of the bacterial cells and kills them. It's supposedly a GREAT way to manage bedsores (along with maggots).

So that's what medicine has come to in the 21st century. Honey poultices and maggots. They will still work well even when all our antibiotics have become useless.

[Celebration]

8. here is my interest in this

Early in the 1980s I burned my arm (third degree) over about four square inches. I was being referred out to a surgeon for skin grafts just when I read an article in our newspaper about a Southern Medical Journal article on burn treatment using a combination of sugar and betadine. I ordered a copy of the article and used that instead of going to the surgeon, but kept doing followups. Sure enough, it healed very quickly. It left a scar but it is on the inside of my arm at least.

A few doctors do use this treatment, but other than the fact that there are no pharma reps promoting it I have no idea why these things are not the treatment of choice, rather than "when all else fails," or never at all. The ridiculous part about this is that they would have taken this guy's foot off!! And it was only when he refused that that this was tried.

It really is a good example of everything that is wrong with our system.

The betadine/sugar combo I have recommended to several people with non healing wounds and it has worked in every case. However, some people are sensitive to iodine.

Another good tool for vets and doctors both is low level laser therapy. Some of the horse type vets use this a lot. It can be used on burns, but also for ligaments, muscles, etc.

Tell us some other tricks of the trade!! I actually sometimes use a product that mostly vets use, called AOX/PLX. It has antioxident enzymes and is good for inflammation.

[kestrel91316]

10. If it were me, I wouldn't put the betadine in the honey or sugar.

Basically almost anything you put on or in a wound kills cells, so the less "stuff" you use, the better. The best wound flush is saline solution, though with cat bite abscesses I am still stuck in the old-school dilute betadine flush thing, lol.

Where there is prolonged contact, like with a poultice, I would definitely avoid betadine. But that's just me.

I bet the laser thing in horses is great for keeping down "proud flesh". When I was in school they did a lot of plaster casts for wire cuts and bad leg wounds. The immobilization seemed to be the main thing that stopped proud flesh.

[Orrex]

9. Well, you practical minded veterinarians have an advantage

If you test an ancient remedy on Fido and Fido goes paws-up, you aren't likely facing a multi-million dollar malpractice suit. Try that same remedy on Grandpa, and you can reasonably expect to be the target of litigation.
It's great that vets are free to undertake these methods, and they're very useful in providing clues as to how to proceed in human trials, but it's just not fair to compare them as a 1:1 equivalency.

For the record, I read about the antibacterial benefits of honey poultices in some medical literature about a decade ago. Modern medicine may not yet embrace every last application of this ancient technique, but the ones that are shown to have a verifiable benefit are recognized in turn.

The danger here, as always, is that fans of ancient remedies latch onto any successful treatment, however isolated or anecdotal, and claim it as a validation of all ancient remedies, or at least as a validation of the ancient approach to medicine. Me, I'm not generally comfortable subscribing to remedies that predate germ theory, unless those remedies are borne out through modern verification.

[kestrel91316]

11. I see your point. We are at a disadvantage in that most clients

do not have unlimited funds, and insurance coverage has its limits (most don't carry pet health ins, BTW) so we have to get a problem solved PDQ before the client gives up and goes elsewhere or euthanizes. So something economical and elegantly simple like honey poultices is a nice fit with how we practice.

What's your take on the recent resurgence of maggots and leeches in human medicine??? We can't use them in vet medicine because of patient cooperation issues. Cats would just eat any that you tried to put on them, lol.

[Orrex]

12. Leeches and maggots

I've heard/read great things about the use of leeches in the reattachment of fingers and toes (not sure if it applies to whole limbs). The idea is that one of the problems of reattachment is sluggish bloodflow out of the sewn-on appendage, resulting in swelling and potential failure of the reattachment. But a carefully placed series of leeches will be more than happy to drain off the excess blood, allowing the finger or toe to get the blood that it needs without having to worry about pumping it back out again. I don't think this applies to (or works with) all digit reattachments, but it's pretty darned clever IMO.

As for maggots, I read a few years ago (in Scientific American, I think) that certain species are an excellent defense against gangrene. I believe it was the maggot of bluebottle fly, but the species in question only eats necrotic tissue, so it devours the dead bits of flesh around a wound, leaving the surrounding living tissue pink and pristine. Two benefits for the price of one, because the dead stuff is excised and the living stuff is unharmed!

I hadn't thought of the maggots-are-delicious angle. That does present a challenge for the veterinarian that a human MD doesn't usually have to face!

[kestrel91316]

13. I've often wondered it the surgeons who reattached John

Wayne Bobbitt's "part" had to use leeches to relieve venous congestion until the vasculature reestablished itself..............and if they did, how heavily they had to sedate him during treatment, lol!

Bad kestrel. An idle mind is the Devil's plaything.

[Orrex]

14. Warning: Puerile Joke

"Mr. Bobbitt, the good news is that we've arranged to have your p*n*s s*cked constantly during your recovery. The bad news is that the s*ck*r is in this jar."

(read it fast before it's deleted!)

Disclaimer: Although the John-n-Lorena story got a lot of colorful airplay at the time, I would still be loath to make a joke about if Mr. Bobbitt hadn't already done so (insofar as he appeared in a porn film called John Bobbitt Uncut)

[FlaGranny]

23. I have used honey with great results.

I had an ulcer on my leg from an infected boil. The skin around it was starting to turn black. I had no insurance at the time so I tried honey (manuka). Got it shipped overnight. Antibiotic creams had done nothing. With 24 hours the ulcer started to heal. It's the first thing I reach for now to prevent infections. I would NOT want to be without it. It puts antibiotic ointments to shame - for open wounds.

Edit: The great thing about it is that it keeps the wound moist and the sugars and chemicals in the honey control the bacteria. You never get a hard scab and it keeps the wound way more comfortable than otherwise, too. It helps you heal yourself.

[silverweb]

25. I love stories like this!

The corporatization of science and medicine has deliberately squelched the use of natural remedies that have worked for centuries.

While there is much to be said for modern science in a lot of respects, corporate greed has always managed to get in the way of finding and providing what's truly best for people and the planet.