Jump to comment:

• Where's the effect?
  Richard B. Mailman
  Published on: 22 March 2016
• Feingold revisited and acknowledged
  Dr. Herbert H. Nehrlich
  Published on: 22 March 2016

• Published on: 22 March 2016

  Where's the effect?

  • Richard B. Mailman, Professor

  Dear Editor

  Having been an interested observer to the Feingold Hypothesis many years ago, I was startled to see it rise from the dead (highlighted in many medical excerpting services).

  I eagerly downloaded this article, and shortly thereafter, my thoughts could be paraphrased in a well-done American advertisement: "Where's the meat?"

  Figure 3 screamed at me one obvious conclusion: "Parents a...

  Show More

  Dear Editor

  Having been an interested observer to the Feingold Hypothesis many years ago, I was startled to see it rise from the dead (highlighted in many medical excerpting services).

  I eagerly downloaded this article, and shortly thereafter, my thoughts could be paraphrased in a well-done American advertisement: "Where's the meat?"

  Figure 3 screamed at me one obvious conclusion: "Parents are sensitive to knowing something was to be changed in their child's environment." The withdrawal phase, placebo phase, and challenge phase ALL seemed to cause identical responses in both experimental orders. Imagine if the two groups (e.g., placebo-challenge vs challenge-placebo) had instead been a repeat experiment done at a different time. For a clinical study, the obvious conclusion was "wow, really tight, repetable findings."

  Instead, some manner of statistics has overwhelmed common sense, leading to wide publicity of a "toxic effect." Most people will never read this manuscript, and the reivewers and editors owed us careful thought before opening up this Pandora's Box. The field will not Find-Gold with Feingold.

  Show Less

  Conflict of Interest:
  None declared.

  • Back to top
• Published on: 22 March 2016

  Feingold revisited and acknowledged

  • Dr. Herbert H. Nehrlich, Private Practice

  Dear Editor

  I remember the days of cramming for exams, working part-time and checking off the remaining days to the end of the torture in my diary.

  I am talking about the seventies, when petrol crises alternated with political disasters like the Nixon Gate. It was then that we first heard of Dr Feingold's revolutionary findings: Apparently, colourings and other chemicals in food and environment could caus...

  Show More

  Dear Editor

  I remember the days of cramming for exams, working part-time and checking off the remaining days to the end of the torture in my diary.

  I am talking about the seventies, when petrol crises alternated with political disasters like the Nixon Gate. It was then that we first heard of Dr Feingold's revolutionary findings: Apparently, colourings and other chemicals in food and environment could cause behaviour problems and learning difficulties. A very sexy and down to earth psychology professor persuaded many of us to forego the Hostess Twinkies, the Hot Dogs and the beautifully coloured licorice twists, fig Newtons and Oreo cookies. Of course, being mature beyond our years, we aimed to please and soon found other staples. And there was no doubt about it, the therapy was effective. Having only read the abstract I can't say whether credit was given where credit is due but suffice it to say that Feingold was ahead of his time. May he rest snugly.

  Show Less

  Conflict of Interest:
  None declared.

  • Back to top