Administração de doses elevadas de riboflavina associada à eliminação dos fatores desencadeantes no tratamento da doença de Parkinson

__

Cícero Galli Coimbra – Médico Neurologista e Professor Livre-Docente
Departamento de Neurologia e Neurocirurgia – Universidade Federal de São Paulo

Em defesa da administração de doses elevadas de riboflavina associada à eliminação dos fatores desencadeantes no tratamento da doença de Parkinson do tipo esporádico
Sofrimento emocional e consumo excessivo de carne vermelha
como desencadeantes da doença de Parkinson

Prof. Dr. Cicero Galli Coimbra e Profa. Dra. Virgínia Berlanga Campos Junqueira

RESUMO

Os autores, através deste texto, não somente exercem o seu direito de resposta a críticas direcionadas publicamente por outros neurologistas ao seu estudo (Coimbra CG, Junqueira VBC. High doses of riboflavin and dietary elimination of red meat promotes recovery of some motor functions of Parkinson’s disease patients.  Braz J Med Biol Res 2003; 36:1409-1417), mas também oferecem novas evidências relativas ao valor terapêutico da correção da hipovitaminose B2 (predisposição hereditária) associada à eliminação dos fatores desencadeantes (ambientais, alimentares ou comportamentais) nos pacientes portadores da doença de Parkinson do tipo esporádico que, em contraposição ao tratamento farmacológico tradicional, constituem uma abordagem eficaz (porque direcionada à antagonização das causas da doença, não apenas ao alívio paliativo e transitório dos sintomas). Evidentemente, a demonstração do Coeficiente de Ativação da Glutationa Redutase (EGR-AC) alterado nos pacientes portadores de doença de Parkinson do tipo esporádico confirma a deficiência de vitamina B2 e inverte o ônus da prova, tornando obrigatória, sob o ponto de vista ético e técnico, a correção dos níveis desse micronutriente, ou a apresentação de dados em contrário. Também demonstram como o estresse emocional sustentado ao longo de muitos anos pode atuar como fator desencadeante (alternativo ou associado ao consumo excessivo de carne vermelha na dieta) da doença em pessoas portadoras do mesmo fator hereditário predisponente. Demonstram como o princípio da parcimônia (ou “navalha de Occam”) pode ser utilizado na compreensão da fisiopatologia da doença e no suporte à proposição de que esta abordagem efetivamente antagoniza a continuidade do processo degenerativo das células produtoras de DA. Ao final, salienta-se o conflito entre interesses econômicos e éticos que inevitavelmente emerge em decorrência do encontro de uma metodologia terapêutica simples, não onerosa, dotada eficácia largamente superior àquelas até então disponíveis, além de não ser patenteável, tornando fundamental o emprego de cautela, transparência e adesão a preceitos genuinamente científicos em manifestações relativas ao assunto.

Índice

continua:

http://www.unifesp.br/dneuro/nexp/riboflavina/

http://www.unifesp.br/dneuro/nexp/riboflavina/indice.htm

___

Morte encefálica não é morte: neurologistas, filósofos, neonatologistas, juristas e bioeticistas unânimes na Conferência “Signs of Life” de Roma, de fevereiro de 2009

A Conferência “Sinais da Vida” de Roma, de fevereiro de 2009, teve caráter médico, científico e jurídico, com participantes reconhecidos internacionalmente como autoridades em suas profissões, mesmo assim a mídia brasileira não noticiou sobre este importante evento para não comprometer o genocídio da medicina transplantadora no Brasil, que é uma indústria da morte bilionária.  O constitucionalismo brasileiro determina o direito à informação e não permite o tráfico de órgãos.

Quando em futuro próximo, os fatos relativos ao homicídio de pacientes traumatizados encefálicos estiverem públicos e expostos,  pois existentes já são e de conhecimento,  inclusive oficial, do Ministério Público Federal (que terá muito o que explicar quanto ao significado da frase “não contrariamos políticas de Estado”), os responsáveis pela morte destes inúmeros pacientes dentro dos hospitais brasileiros, com o exclusivo objetivo de beneficiar a sobrevida de pacientes de médicos transplantadores, poderão responder civil e criminalmente diante das famílias induzidas a erro mortal na “doação” de órgãos de seus filhos e parentes, tanto pela ação como pela omissão, inclusive de informações, desde 1997, neste país.

Celso Galli Coimbra – OABRS 11352

__

“Brain Death” is Life, Not Death: Neurologists, Philosophers, Neonatologists, Jurists, and Bioethicists Unanimous at Conference

By Hilary White – Rome correspondent

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09022604.html

ROME, February 26, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – If a patient is able to process oxygen from the lungs into the bloodstream, maintain a normal body temperature, digest food and expel waste, grow to normal adult size from the age of four to twenty, and even carry a child to term, can he or she be considered dead? Can a person who is “dead” wake up and go on later to finish a university degree? Can a corpse get out of bed, go home and go fishing? Can he get married and have children?

These are among the real-life stories of patients declared “brain dead” presented by medical experts at the “Signs of Life” conference on “brain death” criteria held near the Vatican in Rome last week. Ten speakers, who are among the world’s most eminent in their fields, sounded a ringing rebuke to the continued support among medical professionals and ethicists for “brain death” as an accepted criterion for organ removal.

Dr. Paul Byrne, the conference organizer, told LifeSiteNews.com he was delighted with the success of the conference, that he hopes will bring the message that “brain death is not death” inside the walls of the Vatican where support for “brain death” criteria is still strong.

Dr. Byrne, a neonatologist and clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of Toledo, compared the struggle against “brain death” criteria with another battle: “I’m sure that slavery was at one time well-accepted in the United States, and that people saw big benefits to slavery. And yes, it was difficult to go away from that but it was absolutely essential.”

“Slavery was doing evil things to persons. This issue of ‘brain death’ was invented to get beating hearts for transplantation. And there is no way that this can go on. It must get stopped.”

Participants came from all over the world to attend the Signs of Life conference, with speakers from Quebec, Alberta, Ontario, Germany, Poland, the US, Brazil and Italy. The conference hall was packed to standing-room only with physicians, clergy, students, journalists, and academics. Clergy included two senior officials of the Vatican curia: Francis Cardinal Arinze, the head of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Sergio Cardinal Sebastiani, the President Emeritus of the Prefecture for the Economic Affairs of the Holy See. Two senior members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith were also present. Conference organizers told LifeSiteNews.com that they had expected no more than a hundred to attend and were surprised but very pleased with the crowd of over 170 for the one-day event.

Conflicting voices on “brain death” criteria are still battling in the Church. In February 2005, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (PAS) refused to publish the findings of its own conference after the speakers roundly denounced “brain death” as a cynical invention to further the monetary interests of organ transplanters. The speakers said that using “brain death” for the purpose of organ harvesting results in the death of helpless patients. The PAS convened a second conference in 2007 with different speakers who, with only two dissenting, supported “brain death” for organ transplants. Papers from the 2005 conference that opposed “brain death” were excluded without explanation to their authors.

During a Vatican-sponsored conference last November on organ transplantation, at which not a single speaker raised their voice against “brain death,” Pope Benedict XVI warned in an address that “the removal of organs is allowed only in the presence of his actual death.” But on the Monday following the Friday organ transplant conference, only the PAS conference report in favor of “brain death” was posted to the Vatican website and not the Pope’s warning.

Dr. Byrne said that a major function of the Signs of Life conference was “to support Pope Benedict,” whose address in November, he said, had started to turn the Church against “brain death.”

“It’s here to demonstrate clearly that ‘brain death’ never was true death. What we’re trying to do is come back to the truth and protect and preserve the life that comes from God.

“When there are attacks on life, then we, as physicians, defend it and that is what this conference is for.”

The Signs of Life conference, sponsored privately by various pro-life organizations, including Human Life International, the Northwest Ohio Guild of the Catholic Medical Association, American Life League and the Italian organization Associazione Famiglia Domani, stood in opposition to the second PAS conference, which was titled, “The Signs of Death.”

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Doctor to Tell Brain Death Conference Removing Organs from “Brain Dead” Patients Tantamount to Murder
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09021608.html

Pro-Life Conference on “Brain Death” Criteria Will Have Uphill Climb to Sway Entrenched Vatican Position
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09021607.html

Pope Warns Organ Transplant Conference of Abuses of Death Criteria
Says, “In the question of determination of death there must not be the slightest suspicion of arbitrariness”

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08110706.html

Conference may Begin to Sway Vatican Opinion Against Brain Death: Eminent Philosopher
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09022404.html

Doctor Says about “Brain Dead” Man Saved from Organ Harvesting – “Brain Death is Never Really Death”
Expert says, “Brain death was concocted, it was made up in order to get organs. It was never based on science.”

Morte encefálica: teste da apnéia mata o paciente “potencial” doador de órgãos – Neurologista Dr. Cícero Galli Coimbra na Conferência de Roma de fevereiro de 2009

Transplantes: Revista dos Anestesistas recomenda em Editorial realização de anestesia geral nos doadores para que não sintam dor durante a retirada de seus órgãos. Se estão mortos para que a recomendação de anestesia geral?
https://biodireitomedicina.wordpress.com/2009/01/05/transplantes-revista-dos-anestesistas-recomenda-em-editorial-realizacao-de-anestesia-geral-nos-doadores-para-que-nao-sintam-dor-durante-a-retirada-de-seus-orgaos-se-estao-mortos-para-que-a-recomend/

Transplantes e morte cerebral. L’Osservatore Romano rompe o tabu
https://biodireitomedicina.wordpress.com/2009/02/01/transplantes-e-morte-cerebral-losservatore-romano-rompe-o-tabu/

Conferência “Signs of Life” pode começar a mudar a opinião do Vaticano sobre “morte encefálica”. Professor Josef Seifert, membro da Pontifical Academy of Life

Professor Josef Seifert, a propósito da Conferência “Signs of Life” da qual participou e que reuniu eminentes neurologistas, juristas, filósofos e bioeticistas, ocorrida na semana passada perto do Vaticano (fev. de 2009), diz que está claro que os transplantes são negócios bilionários e que também são úteis para muitos pacientes. Ele explica que tais motivos como a fama dos médicos transplantadores e pesquisadores e o dinheiro estão entre os interesses envolvidos que podem obscurecer a verdade sobre os critérios declaratórios da morte encefálica.

__

“It’s clear that [transplantation] is a million or billion dollar business and it is clear that also it is useful for many patients.” He said that motives such as fame for transplant doctors and researchers and money are among the “vested interests that could obscure the truth.”

Professor Josef Seifert

__

Pope Warns Organ Transplant Conference of Abuses of Death Criteria
Says, “In the question of determination of death there must not be the slightest suspicion of arbitrariness”

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08110706.html

__

Transplantes: Revista dos Anestesistas recomenda em Editorial realização de anestesia geral nos doadores para que não sintam dor durante a retirada de seus órgãos. Se estão mortos para que a recomendação de anestesia geral?

https://biodireitomedicina.wordpress.com/2009/01/05/transplantes-revista-dos-anestesistas-recomenda-em-editorial-realizacao-de-anestesia-geral-nos-doadores-para-que-nao-sintam-dor-durante-a-retirada-de-seus-orgaos-se-estao-mortos-para-que-a-recomend/

__

Conference may Begin to Sway Vatican Opinion Against Brain Death: Eminent Philosopher

By Hilary White

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09022404.html

ROME, February 24, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – While he said that he could not predict the future, Professor Josef Seifert told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) on Friday that a conference on “brain death” criteria last week had possibly opened a door to moving opinion in the Vatican away from support for the use of the criteria for organ transplants.

In an interview with LifeSiteNews.com the day after the conference, Professor Seifert said, “I’m not a prophet. On the other hand, if one believes in the Catholic Church as I do, then one must assume that earlier or later the truth will triumph and that the Church will not teach something false on central issues of faith or morals. And if that is so, and if what we say is true, I trust that it will be formulated.”

Professor Seifert is a philosopher and the rector of the International Academy for Philosophy of Liechtenstein and a member of the Pontifical Academy of Life and was a speaker at the ‘Signs of Life’ conference held last week near the Vatican.

The conference was organized by Human Life International (HLI) and the American Life League (ALL), as well as the Italian organization Associazione Famiglia Domani and other groups, to address the growing opinion in academia, medicine and even within the Church that “brain death” is a legitimate diagnosis. The conference speakers, including eminent neurologists, jurors, philosophers and bioethicists, were united in their denunciation of the “brain death” criteria as a tool in the determination of death.

Speaking at the conference on the original formulation of the so-called 1968 Harvard Criteria that created “brain death,” Professor Seifert told participants, “We look in vain for any argument for this unheard of change of determining death … except for two pragmatic reasons for introducing it, which have nothing to do at all with the question of whether a patient is dead but only deal with why it is practically useful to consider or define him to be dead.”

The two “pragmatic reasons” cited by the Harvard Report, he said, were “the wish to obtain organs for implantation and to have a criterion for switching off ventilators in ICUs.” He said these must be rejected because they “possess absolutely no theoretical or scientific value to determine death.” This conclusion was amply supported by clinical neurologists, and neurocardiologists, who told participants that a patient who is declared “brain dead” by the standard criteria, is, quite simply, still alive.

To LSN Professor Seifert responded to comments made in September 2008 by Francesco D’Agostino, professor of the philosophy of law and president emeritus of the Italian bioethics committee, that opposition to the “brain death” criteria in the Church is “strictly in the minority.” A 2006 document, entitled “Why the Concept of Brain Death Is Valid as a Definition of Death,” was signed by Cardinal Georges Cottier, then theologian to the papal household; Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, at the time president of the Pontifical Council for the Family; Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, the former Archbishop of Milan; and Bishop Elio Sgreccia, the then president of the Pontifical Academy for Life.

Professor Seifert, however, said that he did not agree with the assertion that there is a universal consensus in the Church supporting brain death. He pointed to the act in 2005 by Pope John Paul II in convening a conference to discuss “brain death” as evidence that the subject is far from closed at the Vatican. Indeed, continued interest was signaled last week by the presence at the Signs of Life conference of Cardinals Arinze and Sebastiani and two representatives of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

“There’s no official church teaching at all against the conclusion that all the speakers reached yesterday that the brain death definition is not correct,” he said.

He also said, however, that the matter of whether there is a universal consensus among medical professionals on “brain death” is not a central concern for the Church. “For the Magisterium of the Church it’s a question of whether it’s a fact or not.”

Professor Seifert also noted the address by Pope Benedict XVI in November to the participants at a Vatican sponsored conference on organ transplants in which he did not use the term “brain death” but pointedly referred only to “actual death.”

The Pope said that “the main criterion” must be “respect for the life of the donor so that the removal of organs is allowed only in the presence of his actual death,” a strong indicator that he does not accept the concept of “brain death” as indicating actual death, according to Seifert.

Professor Seifert said, “One could hope that this speech prepares the way for formulating this even more clearly with reference to brain death. Many people like the organizer, Dr. [Paul] Byrne, who organized the conference, interprets this statement in this way. Now it may be wishful thinking, but it may also be correct.”

The idea that there is a majority opinion among theological and ethics experts, including the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, in the Church in favor of “brain death” is irrelevant, he said, in the search for the truth.

“The same happened in the case of Humanae Vitae. There was a minority and a majority and the majority report said you should admit the Pill and contraception. But the Pope followed the minority report. A majority opinion is never what dominates and what should determine Church teaching is rather the truth. In the light of reason and also of Revelation, and not simply the opinion of a majority of people.”

“Particularly not the majority of scientists,” he added, “who are very fallible individuals.”

“Normally there is much more common sense in simple people than in academicians and professors who all have their theories. It’s very rare, I think, to have academicians to have the same simple pursuit of truth than among non-academicians.”

He warned that the “brain death” theory has the characteristics of an ideology.

“It’s clear that [transplantation] is a million or billion dollar business and it is clear that also it is useful for many patients.” He said that motives such as fame for transplant doctors and researchers and money are among the “vested interests that could obscure the truth.”

“For that reason, I think, if there’s a majority in favor, it doesn’t say much.”

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Pope Warns Organ Transplant Conference of Abuses of Death Criteria
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08110706.html

%d blogueiros gostam disto: