Abstract Title:

Germane facts about germanium sesquioxide: II. Scientific error and misrepresentation.

Abstract Source:

J Altern Complement Med. 2004 Apr;10(2):345-8. PMID: 15165415

Abstract Author(s):

Bonnie J Kaplan, G Merrill Andrus, W Wesley Parish

Article Affiliation:

Departments of Paediatrics, and Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, and Alberta Children's Hospital, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. [email protected]

Abstract:

The preceding paper reviewed the anticancer properties and safety of bis (2-carboxyethylgermanium) sesquioxide (CEGS). An examination of those data leads one to question why this information has not stimulated clinical trials in patients with cancer. The answer is discussed in this paper, which traces the history to an error published in the scientific literature in 1987. The reliance by subsequent authors on secondary sources, citing only the error and not the correction published in 1988, constitutes part of the explanation of why CEGS has been neglected. A second factor is also considered: careless reporting about any germanium-based compound as if the many thousands of germanium compounds were all the same. This combination of a publication error, careless writing, and the reliance on secondary sources appears to be responsible for the neglect of the potential clinical use of this unique germanium compound.

Study Type : Commentary
Additional Links

Print Options


Key Research Topics

This website is for information purposes only. By providing the information contained herein we are not diagnosing, treating, curing, mitigating, or preventing any type of disease or medical condition. Before beginning any type of natural, integrative or conventional treatment regimen, it is advisable to seek the advice of a licensed healthcare professional.

© Copyright 2008-2024 GreenMedInfo.com, Journal Articles copyright of original owners, MeSH copyright NLM.