Mr A K Fletcher 26 Berry Drive Paignton Devon TQ3 3QW
14/08/96  


Parkinson's Disease Society   http://www.parkinsons.org.uk
22 Upper Woburn Place, London
-fax: 0171 383 5754

 
Dear Mr Fletcher,
Thank you for your letter about elevating the head end of the bed for the treatment of Parkinson's Disease. I have discussed your theories with one of our medical experts on Parkinson's Disease who has advised me that he has used the technique of raising the head end of the bed in people with Parkinson's who suffer from low blood pressure as a treatment for their low blood pressure. However, the mechanism whereby this technique is of benefit to those with low blood pressure is well known and differs from that which you propose. The results of a trial to test efficacy of raised beds for PD might be confounded by the effect on blood pressure.
There is no substantive evidence to support a formal research project to evaluate your proposal.
I am sorry that this outcome is less encouraging than you had hoped. With best wishes Yours sincerely

Helen Pask  Research Coordinator

Add a comment

13/10/1997
S.I.A (Spinal Cord Injuries Association)
76 St James,s Lane
London    N10 3DF

Letter From John D Mason (T9 and T10. ) https://www.spinal.co.uk/


Attention of Lyn Punchard, Editor of Forward And Vivienne Davies
Dear S.I.A.
In response to your recent letters to Mr Andrew Fletcher and to the article you included on page 18 of the July-August addition of Forward, my  own improvements while which included an account  of participating in his trial and research.


The Article


I had a conversation with Lyn Punchard and discussed in detail how this simple therapy has helped to stimulate sensation of touch well below the damaged area of my spine, which is at T9 and T10.

I made this quite clear at the time of the telephone interview and also know that Mr Fletcher would not have told S.I.A that my injury was T11 and T12. The fact that sensitivity of touch has now reached my pubic area since I started sleeping with the head of my bed raised by 12 inches should be pointed out clearly in a future article in order to present an accurate account of the benefits gained from this therapy.
There have been many positive improvements in my physiology, some which could only be attributed to stimulation of the damaged nerves in my spine. Which were confirmed as a complete spinal cord injury by Dr Grundy of the Salisbury Spinal Cord unit.


Could you please call me at my home which I have found in this treatment to discuss the main benefits?

Your letters dated 24th September and October 6th are very negative considering that little or nothing is on offer for spinalcord injured people! I do not understand why you have adopted this attitude towards this exciting research. If I had adopted a negative attitude then the benefits which I now have, which enable me to live in a flat as a self sufficient adult would undoubtedly have remained a dream.

Julian Boustead whom I have known since we were at Odstock together following spinal cord injury is also concerned that the SIA attitude to this research is far to negative to say the least.
I do hope that you will adopt a more positive attitude as we the injured depend on organisations like yours to make sure that the very latest developments no matter how insignificant are made available to us immediately in order that we may judge for ourselves what is worth exploring.

Sincerely  John D Mason.

Add a comment

NewScientist

King's Reach Tower, Stamford Street, London SE1 9LS % 3 > 2. 7 <

Switchboard: 071 261 5000 Fax: 071 261 6464

Andrew Fletcher 26 Berry Drive Paignton Devon TQ3 3QW

18 April 1995

Dear Andrew,

First let me apologise for having taken so long to write to you about your ideas on how solute concentration gradients could drive fluid flow. Working on special projects, as we have been for the past few weeks, often makes it difficult for us to deal with other suggestions as quickly as we would like to.

In this case, the delay is especially unfortunate as, having now had time to think about your ideas in the light of the comments by Dr Cutler, I'm not persuaded they have a strong claim on our space at this stage. Let me explain why.

As I see it, your core idea is that scientists have overlooked one of the most important mechanisms driving fluid flow in trees and plants—namely, the effect that concentrated phloem solutions at the tops of plants have on more dilute fluids at the roots (the downward force of one causing the other to be sucked up). The problem for us is that the picture cannot really be this simple. As Dr Cutler points out, sap in phloem tends to move in the direction of demand, laterally as well as vertically: what happens to the fluid flow system when the concentrated solutions are all in the bottom half of the tree? If the downward force of the "heavy" solution was the main thing then presumably the tree would be in trouble.

But we know trees don't (normally) run into this kind of trouble, which suggests that even if there is a contribution to fluid flow from the phenomenon you describe, it must be less important than capillary action and other forms of root pressure.

As to the wider implications of the phenomenon, I'm afraid we cannot see a strong case for giving them publicity in the absence of good correlative evidence, though we appreciate that your intention at this stage is merely to air them in a speculative fashion.

I'm sorry we can't be more positive, particularly in light of the delay. I am returning the copy of the video and tape.

 

Best wishes,


David Concar

 

Life Sciences Editor

Registered Office: IPC Magazines Ltd., King's Reach Tower, Stamford Street, London SE1 9LS Registered Number: 53626 England -Qi^- member of the Reed Elsevier pic group

  Add a comment

Trouble With Charities


The Simplicity of IBT has probably been the greatest wall to climb. It sounds too simple and costs nothing, therefore it cannot work is often drawn as a conclusion by the majority of people who read about Inclined Bed Therapy. Another is, if it were this simple, why has no one discovered it before?

Everyone knows you have to raise the legs to relieve the pressure in the veins and reduce oedema is a favourite. Clearly we can see the opposite is correct by the photographs on the first page.

For several years, I put the whole theory on the backburner because I got fed up with having everything thrown back in my face, particularly by the charities, medical profession and a few brave scientists. Some of the replies from the professionals were nonsensical and reflected badly upon these most learned of people. I became infuriated by their immature reactions and despondent by their contempt and worse their vested interests in keeping a tight lid on this gift to mankind. The trouble is, for this simple theory and therapy to become validated it automatically means that many professionals in high-ranking positions become invalidated and redundant.

Take cot death (crib death or Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) Tilt the baby’s crib and drastically reduce the chance of the child dying. Asian mothers proved this by having the baby in bed resting on the pillow next to mums face. Sleeping on an angle was the ingredient caused by the pillow is the reason “the professionals” were wrong! they predicted statistics would show bed sharing would raise the incidence of cot deaths. Wrong!

The sweating sickness ravaged Europe in the Tudor period several times wiping out millions of people. They had no defence or pharmacy, yet somehow worked out that if the person affected laid down to sleep they were dead by morning. Placing two guards at the bedside preventing the person from lying down meant they often survived.

The foul air was eventually swept away by a tempest and with it went the disease. Some records show an unusual amount of rainfall and floods followed by high humidity. In this thread, high humidity is mentioned in relation to ms attacks, but it is also mentioned by many people who have suffered a cot death in the family, the air was sticky and uncomfortable was one reply in a documentary about SIDS.

Dr Chantler (senior research advisor to the Foundation for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Now rebranded the Lullaby Trust, http://www.lullabytrust.org.uk/ at her home in London during a meeting after observing some experiments and hearing my humble witterings about tilting a cot a long time ago now said and I quote; ‘My God, I think you have solved it’. When asked what she thought I had solved, as I was expecting her to make a comment about the tubular experiments and gravity, she added and I quote; ‘Cot deaths’! Later I wrote to Dr Chantler as nothing much had happened with the foundation asking why she had not acted upon her promise to help make this known to the public or at least have a trial conducted, she replied to everything in my letter except my reference to her saying I had solved cot deaths. Puzzled, I began to slowly fathom out that without cot deaths there would be no foundation for sudden infant death syndrome. The only way research could be conducted would be for me to convince the medical profession. Yes, not the FFSIDS who happily rake in huge amounts of money, but myself being a complete outsider with pathetic odds would have to take on the might of the medical cartels and convince them sufficiently to accept that their own literary bible they trained from was in error. A huge brick wall was built between myself and the FFSIDS and they have blissfully avoided this important discovery collecting £millions. Do I blame Dr Chantler? No, she had the decency to accept the evidence before her and must have faced the same brick walls that I have in trying to get these powerful moguls to put their own lucrative jobs in jeopardy.

But what about the MS Society, after all, the local chapter had observed all of their members who tilted their beds, about 1% of the people that heard my lecture at their ms venue, supported by Roger Kirk, who shared what had happened to himself when he tilted his bed. This small group of people, some of who were later interviewed by the Multiple Sclerosis Resource Centre in Essex for the Raised Bed Survey Report now posted on this thread, provided some convincing evidence that ms could be reversed to some degree simply by tilting a bed.

One would think this would suffice to involve the Multiple Sclerosis Society.

After a long arduous fight to be taken seriously, the charity eventually submitted and agreed that if I could come to London to meet doctors and staff, an appointment would be made, and indeed it was made. More to the point I kept to the appointment deadline bringing along 2 friends at my own expense.

On arrival, the building was impressive, however not a single person was there to meet with us. We ended up trying to convince a somewhat embarrassed receptionist who knew nothing about physiology, and realised it was an impossible situation we went to the MSRC, fortunately we had made another appointment for the same day with another ms charity in East Stanstead Essex, miles away from London, who at least did have the courtesy to meet with us and hear what we were saying. So many promises were made that day, so much excitement by the results and reports. They loved the therapy and theory, yet for a long time nothing much happened. By now, it was slowly beginning to dawn on me that perhaps it was me who was not thinking laterally and I should have seen it coming from miles away. That old familiar vested interests began to pop up written across peoples face behind all of those smiles, blinks and nods designed to make you feel relaxed and supported, guess many people reading this can relate to it.

A long time later, A major bed manufacturer paid the MSRC to conduct the report and agreed to pay towards a controlled study. Sadly, yet another charity had to wise up to the fact that if they advised their members that sleeping on a slope could greatly improve their condition, perhaps it would not be long before their favourite subject became fully understood and they would no longer be required. Maybe I am wrong and all of these reports from people who have tried IBT and found great relief from conditions including ms, spinal cord injury, cerebral palsy, psoriasis, varicose veins, oedema, Parkinson’s disease, visual impairment, respiratory problems, thrombosis, and many more somehow had a placebo effect or divine intervention. But this would surely mean something far greater is at work than 2 blocks of wood under a bed. Indeed it does. Circulation is everything to everyone, without circulation we are dust!

I received a phone call a few years ago from Lawrence who was then the manager at the MSRC. He said; “I am not frightened of you Andrew” and then put the phone down. I still to this day do not know what he meant by it?

It is true that I have had some serious battles with the charities, it is also true that the charities feel threatened by the possibility of someone finding a cure for their chosen industry. It is also true that IBT helps people to recover and may or may not completely cure them of their ills, but it most certainly is a valuable tool in our armoury for self preservation!

Will it work for everyone with ms? Probably not, but with Dr Franz Schelling’s foresight and Professor Zamboni’s corroborated recent observations showing venous closures, we might begin to understand why some people with ms do not respond to IBT as well as others.

Andrew

Add a comment

Andrew K Fletcher

“Summer Haze” 26 Berry Drive,

Paignton,

Devon,

TQ3 3QW UK

 

Peter Cardy "Chief Executive"

MS Society

25 Effie Road, London SW6 1EE

Tel 0171 610 7171 FAX 0171 736 9861

MS National Help line: Free phone 0808 800 8000

Email: info@mssociety.org.uk Web-site: http://www.mssociety.org.uk

Chairman: Sara Phillips Hon Treasurer: Maurine Dickson Medical Advisor: Professor Alan Thompson

Registered Charity 207495

Dear Mr Cardy

 

Thank you for responding to the people who took time to write to you, many of whom I am sure would be trying this therapy and participating in this important study.

I will forward your letter to the people on my mailing list and hope that this will satisfy their need to understand the MS Societies position on the inclined bed therapy.

You say that neither you nor the MS Society are opposed to this therapy, yet you have done nothing to see whether it works or not and I find this hard to accept given the fact that the pilot study, reported by John Simkins, stated in 1997 that this should be investigated further.

If you doubt the validity of my work, then challenge it and conduct an independent study or help me to compile the statistics from this one.

Incidentally, the study that is running and proving highly effective is proof that it is not impossible to conduct a study and also proof that studies do not cost millions of pounds to conduct.

Your comments that it is practically impossible to conduct a trial of something that is thought to work with a whole range of unrelated conditions, raises some important considerations. For instance, did you know that most drugs used in veterinary practice are exactly the same as those used for us? Or that many medicines are used to treat multiple conditions and that many conditions are treated with multiple drugs.

Also, you say unrelated conditions in your letter. This strikes to the very heart of my success, because I say that these conditions all have a common denominator, which I believe relates to the circulation of bodily fluids and posture in relation to the effects of evaporation and gravity on said circulation. I would be delighted to show you my working models, which show irrefutable evidence for gravity driven circulation.

Several physiotherapists and no less than five neurologists-one of whom now sleeps inclined, have shown a great deal of interest in the logic behind the inclined bed.

Your comments of "If something starts to suggest convincingly that there is a specific effect for MS, then we may be able to do something, leaves me somewhat confused. Are you saying that you are now prepared to examine the data from the study? Or are you saying that all of the evidence we have already collated is of little interest to the MS Society.

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that the messages on the message board tell the whole picture. If everyone posted their reports on the message board the MS Society would have to act! Furthermore, the study is currently showing evidence of long term progressive MS Reversal!

I ask you again to assist with this study.

Sincerely         Andrew K Fletcher

Add a comment
Go to top