ASTHMA IN CHILDREN (August 8, 1970)

Sir: Dr Vincent Bristow's comments (Journal, May 16, 1970) are remarkable, not for scientific criticism, but for their offensive, personal bias, and I am surprised that such a letter should appear in print in the Journal.

Dr Bristow's competence to make such assertions must be suspect when he displays obvious and complete ignorance of the principle and practical application of my system of asthma management; may I suggest that the type of generalized assessment and innuendo, based on subjective personal opinion, is irrelevant to scientific consideration, and as such has no practical or theoretical value for readers of the Journal?

I am deeply saddened, on behalf of asthma sufferers, that my endeavours to attract the attention of the medical profession to my unique system of methods, and the potentialities of this much-needed new approach to the medical problems of asthma, has not received the attention deserved by the successful result of the practical application of the methods already acknowledged by the National Health and Medical Research Council as “notably successful ”. Does this silence by those whom it may concern indicate complacent tolerance of the limitations of palliative drug therapy in asthma management and unquestioning acceptance of its undoubted harmful consequences? (See Journal , May 4, 1968, “In the years 1964-1965-1966 the asthma mortality rate for all ages increased by nearly 40%; and May 25, 1968, “It is obviously vital to examine the possibility that the increasing number of deaths is due to treatment which has changed in recent years”.)

Or does the lack of response mean that no scientific criticism or argument against my findings in asthma aetiology or my natural, physical drug-free methods of treatment, scientifically based on these findings, can be presented by your readers?

7 Bourke Street, A. James.

Wollongong, N.S.W. 2500