A reader asks:
I purchased a negative air ion generator from the CET store almost two years ago and it has improved my life immeasurably. I am less depressive and it seems to have also had the happy “side effects” of significantly reducing my snoring as well as some sinus problems. Obviously anecdotal accounts such as mine are easily discounted, but the clinical research (including that supported by CET) should be harder to ignore. Yet, it seems that almost no clinicians are presenting air ionization to patients as an option and interest in air ionization continues to be mostly confined to a relatively small community of researchers. Do you have any thoughts as to why negative air ionization does not appear to be making much progress in the medical community at large?
Amen and amen. Moving the medical establishment is one obstacle–we are learning that the new generation of psychiatric residents is far more receptive to these ideas than their elders steeped in psychopharmacology, but that portends a generational shift that could take 20 years. Additionally, the FDA provides us no attention, we think because manufacturers are happiest to make a ‘quick buck’ without regulation, and won’t submit (expensive) applications for prescription approval. From CET’s point of view, the major result is the absence of research support that would lead FDA to satisfaction with this significant, non-phamaceutical medical innovation. It is very important for people like you to make their personal findings known and try to jog the system…