Pathologist Edward Friedlander's criticism of liquid zeolite

Edward Friedlander (Ed) is a pathologist and who runs the website www.pathguy.com where he takes on the whole world of alternative medicine with his no-nonsense, orthodox medical outlook. Ed certainly brings a lot of interesting and cogent information to the reader, and his site is a challenge to an alternative community that is sometimes willing to peddle scientific nonsense. Here is his critique on liquid zeolite:

http://www.pathguy.com/altermed.htm#zeolite

Since we offered our first review of his critique, he had changed some of the language in response and even shown interest in further research. This shows an open-mindedness we did not expect and so we now offer a completely new review of his modified critique:

*               *               *

[Updated April 2008]

Friedlander is entirely correct to question the claim that the zeolite crystal suspension (liquid zeolite) is able to freely enter the bloodstream from the intestine. However, he is wrong in his conclusion. Zeolite IS found in blood serum after liquid zeolite is taken so it is passing through the intestinal wall. 90% of zeolite particles in NCD brand liquid zeolite range from 0.4 microns up to 5 microns, and so this makes them small enough to passively pass through the intestinal wall which limits ingestion particle size to 5 microns or less.

Friedlander would rather dismiss the idea that it is absorbed into the bloodstream altogether, stating that, "If the mineral had actually entered the bloodstream as microcrystals as the current marketers claims, it would have been the scientific marvel of the year and would have resulted in a major publication." Then again, from the orthodox perspective, enzymes cannot be absorbed through the intestinal wall despite the fact that many leading-edge doctors swear by oral enzyme therapy. As zeolite is found in blood serum and as macro-molecules have been found to pass through the intestinal lining, Friedlander is actually out of date on this one.

Regarding a dismissal of "Megamin" powdered zeolite by "local scientists" who denounced it as a "cynical scam", we all know that orthodox scientists have over the course of history denounced many things that turned out to be scientifically valid. In fact, dismissal by the orthodox establishment seems to be de rigueur for all important scientific and medical discoveries! So the denouncement of Megamin by Eastern European scientists as a "cynical scam" does not hold any water.

Friedlander's criticism of Rik Deitsch's white paper "Scientific Research monograph" is unfair considering that it was only ever meant for distribution as a research summary, not as a scientific research paper per se. Deitsch, like Kaufman, does not have a PhD and seems to be as much focused on his businesses as he is on his scientific research. But there is nothing wrong with this if he is putting out accurate and cogent scientific information in the process, which we believe he is.

Friedlander's criticism of the Lifelink patent is entirely valid, and anybody who uses it to sell liquid zeolite is, in our opinion, not being very responsible. What Friedlander does not seem to be aware of is that Kaufman does not actually have a PhD and is not an academic researcher but more of an inventor, so this needs to be taken into consideration before judging his paper. (It came out in the court case between Lifelink and Waiora that the "Dr" used before Kaufman's name is a "moniker" rather than an academic qualification.) Ideally, an academic researcher would go through Kaufman's material and extract the nuggets of gold, if indeed there are any.

The most damning statements are made by Friedlander's examination of the patent. As a pathologist, this is his area of expertise, and he in unequivocal in stating that Kaufman's research "would not pass muster as a high school science project." Reading what Friedlander says, you would have to agree that the research seems to be less than scientific. This is extremely concerning considering that liquid zeolite is often used by people with cancer with the understanding that the patent on it shows it has anti-cancer properties.

Whilst it is true that Kaufman's research is not first-class, dismissing liquid zeolite out of hand because the chief researcher of one of the leading brands does not put out quality research is not fair on the other brands of liquid zeolite. As far as we are aware, research put out by Waiora on their NCD brand liquid zeolite is kosher. (The first peer-reviewed paper on liquid zeolite is going to be published in May 2008 which will open the door to more publications. It is always a struggle to get the first new product paper published because there is no track record to reference.)

As for the statement: "Harvey Kaufman, PhD, the cancer researcher, scientist and creator of the product, has just completed a study on End IV cancer patients," Friedlander is absolutely right to red-flag this claim. Kaufman does not have a PhD and it would be illegal for him to be doing any clinical studies (and especially not on cancer patients). We have to remember that when it comes to very serious diseases, using accurate scientific information to describe the benefits of health supplements recommended for those diseases becomes a moral imperative. However, from what we have seen, the research being done on NCD brand liquid zeolite by Waiora (which is nothing to do with Kaufman) is being done responsibly and accurately.

The only problem Waiora have had is that, because they use a network marketing scheme to sell their product, in the past many distributors have got carried away with the viability of the product and have made some strong claims. But Waiora have now stepped up their efforts to stop any unsubstantiated claims.