Letter writer: Research doesn’t support chelation therapy’s effectiveness

Graphic by Lori Deaton

After reading the article “Back in the Groove” [Feb. 25, Xpress] and the [letter to the editor] by Dr. James Biddle [“Empowered Medical Consumer Reaped the Benefits,” March 11, Xpress], I feel compelled to comment on chelation therapy.

The article suggests that Mr. [Bill] Sites staved off coronary bypass surgery for 25 years with chelation therapy.

The implication that chelation therapy was beneficial for Mr. Sites and that he was an “empowered medical consumer” who “reaped the benefits” of such therapy, is seriously misleading.

While the concept of chelation therapy as a drug to bind metal ions involved in the formation of vascular blockages and thereby prevent or reverse heart disease is appealing, the evidence supporting this claim has been anecdotal and based on scientifically unsound, uncontrolled studies.

The effectiveness of chelation therapy has been evaluated in several prospective, randomized trials.

A double-blind, randomized controlled trial, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA. 2002;286(4):481-486), showed that chelation therapy had no beneficial effect in patients with proven heart disease. A review of all clinical investigation pertaining to the effectiveness of chelation therapy for coronary heart disease (Ernst, Am Heart J 2000;140:139-141) concluded that there was no evidence that chelation therapy was efficacious beyond that of a placebo, and furthermore that this treatment should be considered obsolete.

Chelation therapy is not covered by health care insurance and is costly, averaging $4,000 of out-of-pocket expense to the patient.

Although coronary bypass surgery is certainly not a cure-all, it is the most scrutinized and tested procedure in medicine, and no therapies to date have had better results in terms of the quality-of-life indicators or long-term survival in patients with heart disease.

My point is that the medical consumer does need to be well-informed as to the proven, scientific effectiveness (or lack there of), potential risks and benefits for all options used in the treatment of heart disease and to remember the old adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

— Stephen Ely, PhD, MD
Asheville Heart


Thanks for reading through to the end…

We share your inclination to get the whole story. For the past 25 years, Xpress has been committed to in-depth, balanced reporting about the greater Asheville area. We want everyone to have access to our stories. That’s a big part of why we've never charged for the paper or put up a paywall.

We’re pretty sure that you know journalism faces big challenges these days. Advertising no longer pays the whole cost. Media outlets around the country are asking their readers to chip in. Xpress needs help, too. We hope you’ll consider signing up to be a member of Xpress. For as little as $5 a month — the cost of a craft beer or kombucha — you can help keep local journalism strong. It only takes a moment.

About Letters
We want to hear from you! Send your letters and commentary to letters@mountainx.com

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

2 thoughts on “Letter writer: Research doesn’t support chelation therapy’s effectiveness

  1. jimbo

    Well said Dr. Ely. I checked out the website of Dr. James Biddle (who congratulates someone for undergoing chelation and staving off cancer for 25 years) and his number one therapy at his alternative clinic is thermography…a totally quack treatment with no proven efficacy for breast cancer detection and which can lead to false positives and/or non-detection. Oh, and surprise, surprise, Dr. Biddle is also certified in Chelation Therapy. Talk about unethical…to talk up a sham-therapy (with no studies to back it up) while offering it at his clinic. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Breast_thermography

  2. Joan

    Sincere thanks to Dr. Ely for taking the time to post a rational and specific response to unsubstantiated claims of miracle treatments. It is appreciated.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.