are hardly likely, given China's weak foreign exchange position, to grant Peiping the cheap prices it wants and the long-term credits it needs to cover its purchases. China's basic economic ills will not be cured by a simple change of trade channels. Nevertheless, its Nevertheless, its trade with the Communist bloc now is dropping from the heights of several years ago, while trade with the non-Communist world promises to grow. The veering course of China's trade is a major development on the world scene. China is not breaking with the Communist bloc in favor of alinement with capitalism, but her contacts with capitalist nations are bound to increase as the rift with Russia widens.

Another trend of great potential significance has entered the picture: the huge expansion of Soviet wheat buying in the West. The U.S.S.R. contracted in September for the purchase from Canada, for delivery by the end of 1964, of a half billion dollars worth of wheat-about 6,500,000 tons. Some of that grain is to be delivered to Cuba, but none to China. In the past, Moscow, like China, has bought wheat elsewhere, but not, of course, in the United States where administration policy, until recently, prohibited such sales.

Washington, while severely limiting trade with Communist countries, has recently urged American businessmen to export more goods in an effort to redress the unfavorable balance of payments and stop the outflow of gold. At the recent White House Conference on Export Expansion, President Kennedy advocated a 10-percent increase over our present $21 billion export volume which, he said, would "practically" solve the balance-of-payments problem.

The administration's decision to sell surplus U.S. wheat and feed grains to Russia and other Communist nations in Europe removes a major contradiction of our earlier policy: We will no longer be urging more exports while refusing to sell wheat to the Soviet. Now our new wheat shipments pose this question: If hungry Soviet citizens, and even Cubans through Russian transshipments, may eat of hallowed American wheat, shall Chinese citizens go hungry?

The silence of Members of Congress, along with the general acquiescence of the American press in the existing state of affairs, evidences the absence of domestic pressures strong enough to change our fruitless campaign to isolate China behind a wall of embargoes. Yet, there are west coast businessmen and shippers who remember past trade profits and who are chafing at Washington's restrictions. Any considerable expansion of China's trade with the West would lead other American entrepreneurs to challenge the policy that bars them from selling to a nation of more than 700 million consumers.

In the immediate situation, then, the obvious question seems to be: What is the value of our present policy? The New York Times observed recently that "Speculation about China falters because nearly nothing is known of the thinking of the younger Communist generation in Peiping." How shall we learn, if we continue to be barred by the State Department from putting foot on China's mainland? Our policy is equally barren in the economic sphere: A total American embargo is useless in the presence of China's alternative sources of supply. Nor can there be hope, or even straightforward discussion, of global nuclear controls, disarmament, or world stability, without taking revolutionary China into account. A stubborn American stance off the China coast will neither preserve our interests nor guarantee that the existing situation will be maintained. Our immobility does not ameliorate, but rather aggravates, the grave difficulty of our dilemma.

A

As Abbe Raynal once wrote, "There is an infinity of political errors which, being once adopted, become principles." Commitments

and positions determined a decade ago inhibit adjustment of our current policy toward China. The administration has shown signs of discomfort in its present cramped position. In a seemingly inspired dispatch from Washington, the New York Times reported that the Kennedy administration was haunted by a policy paradox respecting Communist China: "Administration leaders, including President Kennedy, are saying that Communist China will be the Nation's No. 1 foreign affairs problem over the next decade. But their policy planners report that virtually no fresh ideas on the subject are percolating in the Government." Under Secretary of State Averell Harriman later remarked on a television program that "There was a certain period when anyone who questioned our policies toward China was considered something of a traitor," and then went on to voice what was presumably an official invitation to a nationwide debate on the Government's China policy. "The only way the American gets to understand such questions," he observed, "is through debate."

This invitation must be viewed with some reserve. The administration did not wait upon an expression of public opinion before formulating its current China policy, and it should be able to find its own way out of the labyrinth. It needs only the determination to follow the thread back. Unfortunately, it is evident that given the involvement of our China policy in domestic politics, the administration has no intention of adopting a radically changed approach in east Asia. Adlai Stevenson, as the American representative to the U.N. General Assembly, argued in the December 1961 debate on the Chinese representation issue that "The de jure authority of the Government of the Republic of China [the Nationalist regime on Formosa] extends throughout the territory of China." And although Presidential Candidate John F. Kennedy had said in 1960 that Quemoy and Matsu were "not essential to the defense of Formosa," in June 1962, as President, he effectively reaffirmed the Eisenhower policy regarding those offshore islands and Formosa.

What, then, was the significance of Harriman's references to a debate on China? We have some hints. Laurence Barrett of the New York Herald Tribune staff subsequently reported from Washington that the United States, "in a roundabout whispered dialog with unrecognized Communist China, has revived the question of exchanging delegations of newsmen." If that is true Washington might as well save its (whispered) breath. Peiping stated categorically, in the era of John Foster Dulles, that it was not interested in any such exchange; there is no reason to assume that the Chinese regime has changed its mind.

But the matter may go somewhat deeper than the exchange of newsmen. Speaking at the World Affairs Council in Boston recently, Under Secretary Harriman upheld the official American stand against trade with China. But, in contrast to Washington's action of a few years ago, when it effectively blocked the proposal of an American businessman to sell wheat to China-then in the midst of an agricultural disaster-Harriman proclaimed that grain was an exception to the rule. He implied that we should not prohibit the sale of food to the hungry.

The administration's expressed willingness for a debate on China policy may be genuine to the degree that Washington presumably hopes there will thus be created a public demand which would support a relatively minor shift in policy. This seems to promise little enough. Still, it is conceded that with our China-Formosa policy frozen into principle as well as written into law, any substantial change in policy would require considerable effort over an extended period. But a defrosting must begin somewhere. The sale of grain to China, if it desires to buy,

whether this year or next, offers the opportunity to make a start.

Even after such a beginning, most of the task of developing proper relations would still remain. The present policy maladjustment goes too deep to be corrected easily or even painlessly. The amelioration of SinoAmerican relations can hardly come by insistence on an American victory.

Washington could readily go further by unilaterally lifting-since it unilaterally imposed-its prohibition of travel of Americans to China. In all logic, it could-and shouldabolish its total embargo upon general trade with China and place that trade on a level with our trade with other nations of the Communist bloc. At the height of the 1958 Formosa Strait crisis, the late Secretary of State John Foster Dulles himself suggested that if an effective cease-fire in the strait were achieved-and the cease-fire could be de facto instead of depending upon written agreement-something should be done toward reduction of the Chinese Nationalist garrisons on the offshore islands, It is now 5 years since that storm blew over. Is it not time to do something toward reducing the danger of being dragged into a war over the continued presence of Nationalist garrisons on islands which are historically and legally intrinsic parts of mainland China?

It is only by bringing genuine peace to the Formosa Strait, and reaching a final determination of the status of Formosa, that relations between China and the United States can be put on a normal basis in the long run. The way to normal relations with China is obviously circuitous and arduous. But it has to be undertaken, and given world developments, this would seem to be a good time to begin the long journey back. Above all, let us have the debate that administration spokesmen say they desire. Our present China policy clearly does not meet adequately the challenge of the evolving political and economic situation in East Asia. It is high time to develop a new policy.

A new policy, to be effective, would necessarily be based upon concepts other than those that now seek to outlaw and contain Communist China. Communist China. That hypothetical policy should assume that (1) there is practically no likelihood that the existing order in Peiping will be replaced by Chiang Kaishek's regime or anything resembling it; (2) the Chinese revolution has by no means reached its end, and, consequently, can be expected to send out shock waves over an extended period; and (3) this renascent Chinese power does indeed create new problems for the world and for the United States, but such problems are better solved by endeavoring to integrate China into the community of nations than by trying to isolate her and brand her as unfit for human society.

President Kennedy, in his widely acclaimed American University address, called for a reexamination by Americans of their attitude toward the Soviet Union. "No government or social system," he said, "is so evil that its people must be considered as lacking in virtue." The time has come to apply this thought to the Chinese nation as well. No matter what our feelings about Communist China, within its borders lives onefourth of all humanity.

TRUMAN URGES WHEAT FOR CHINA Probably the most experienced cold war veteran of our time is former President Harry S. Truman. During his administration NATO was formed, the Berlin airlift conducted, and most of the Korean war fought. Although in some ways as tough-minded about the Communists as even BARRY GOLDWATER might wish, the former President said:

"I question whether it has been altogether wise for the United States to sit by and wait for China to ask us for help to meet the

hunger problems of millions of helpless Chinese. We have wheat and other grains to Why not simply offer it? We have always been responsive to the plights of other people without waiting for them to beg.

Hunger is everyone's concern.

"Why not get off our high horse and make a tender of wheat and other grains to China without any kind of fuss or maneuvers? It could be a step in the direction of peace." Warning that his proposal would be called appeasement or worse, Mr. Truman reminded Americans that historically they were not "of a narrowly selfish nature" and have made "tremendous contributions to the needy and less fortunate of the world."

Both considerations of humanity and the requirements of peace call for an end to the isolation of China. The former President believes that an offer of U.S. surplus wheat might be a beginning-and we fully agree with the independent man from Independ

ence.

IN

THE COAL PIPELINE-THE TEGRAL TRAIN-LONG DISTANCE TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICITY Mr. MOSS. Mr. President, having introduced S. 2066, a bill to grant the right of eminent domain for the transportation of coal by pipeline, I should like to call attention to other newly developed media through which the coal industry of Utah stands to advance steadily in the years ahead.

First, it is important that my colleagues understand that Utah's coal mines are an integral component of our overall economy. The coal industry itself is presently doing a $25 to $30 million business in our State. It stimulates railroad freight business and is a vital source of revenue for suppliers and equipment manufacturers.

More than one-tenth of Utah's total area contains workable coal deposits. In a little more than 100 years, some 270 million tons have been produced, yet almost 14 billion tons remain. Our maximum production took place in 1947, when 7,429,000 tons of coal were extracted. In the ensuing decade and a half, output has roller-coasted too freely, with production dropping from 5,159,000 tons in 1961 to a distressing low of 4,270,000 tons last year.

Utah's coal business needs a stimulant, particularly in hard-hit Carbon County. The mining companies and the United Mine Workers of America have cooperated marvelously to keep prices low and quality high. Our mines are equipped with the most modern devices that scientific and engineering technology has yet made available, thus permitting a steady increase in output per man-day. A large portion of the commercial coal produced in our State is water washed or air cleaned so that slate and other undesirable refuse are removed before the product is shipped to market.

In an economy of sharply rising fuel requirements, it is disappointing that Carbon County and other areas looking to better things for coal are still waiting for demand to improve.

But, Mr. President, there may be great things in store for coal as a consequence of two transportation innovations. The coal pipeline which operated over a 108mile stretch in eastern Ohio for several

years was responsible for reducing transportation costs by more than $1 per ton. Because of the competition, determined railroad officials adopted the unit-train concept and are now able to undersell the pipeline tariff on that particular run.

Through similar competition in the West, coal will go places. It will generate electricity for the sprawling California market, and it will bring needed dollars into Carbon County and other parts of

our State.

Of a certainty, the unit train-like the coal pipelines-offers an opportunity to move coal from our mines to the west coast at tremendous savings over conventional transportation methods. Many railroads in the East, the South, and the Midwest are already utilizing the full train-load method of carrying coal from mine to market. By picking up all the cars at a single mine or gathering yard, running them through nonstop to their destination, and then emptying the cars so that they may be turned around and sent back without delay, railroads have been able to effect remarkable economies in freight handling. On August 16 of this year the Philadelphia Electric Co. filed a new electric service tariff with the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, claiming that a savings of $4.4 million was made possible through the use of solid trains of coal operating directly from coalfields to local powerplants. The announcement emphasized the advantages that can accrue to the consuming public when a revolutionary method of transportation is adopted. Using only conventional equipment hoppers that may have been in service for many years-some of the eastern mines have been able to reduce freight costs from 85 cents to $1.50 per ton on coal moving from northern West Virginia and western Pennsylvania to the east coast. Eventually even more efficient integral trains-with cars of greater capacities than those now in ordinary use, and with motive power not confined to front and rear of the train-will make still more attractive freight rates possible.

Another technical breakthrough which opens new horizons for coal is the improved efficiency in long distance transmission of electricity. During the past year a group of electric utility companies announced plans for construction of two 800,000-kilowatt generating units in western Pennsylvania, power from which will be carried over long lines into Philadelphia and Newark, with tielines to the New York metropolitan area. Late last month the engineering firm to coordinate the design and manage construction of the 500,000-volt lines was named, and-according to present schedule-power from one of the huge generating units will be in transmission sometime in 1967.

Utah, too, expects to benefit by the technological advances that permit transmission of electricity over greater distances without substantial line losses. Actually, this new technique could well be used in conjunction with the pipeline or integral train to make coal-generated electricity available on the west coast. The fuel might initially move over pipe

line or train to a generating station situated beyond the final mountain range on a site where there is abundant water, yet far removed from the metropolitan area. The long distance transmission line would close this remaining gap.

Bituminous coal mined in Utah and other Rocky Mountain States has for more than a decade been considered as a potential source of energy for the electrical requirements on the Pacific coast. As long ago as 1949 the late Bert P. Manley, who was executive secretary of the Utah Coal Operators Association, wrote for a national utilities publication an article entitled, "The West Coast Looks to Coal Fuel." The article noted the great availability of coal in Utah and other Rocky Mountain States, flatly predicting that this solid fuel would become the source of power for generating plants in southern California.

The Pacific Gas & Electric Co., in a report published in the Oil and Gas Journal of September 16, 1963, foresees a steady increase in the use of coal in the electric energy market in Western States. Utah coal, the report indicates can provide substantial supplies to the California market within a few years.

Mr. President, the right of eminent domain for the coal pipeline provided in my bill is essential to the allout development of the coal industry. It is a vital step in reducing a handicap that has impeded coal's ability to compete. Railroads have demonstrated their ingenuity in meeting the challenge, with sharply reduced freight rates resulting from development of the integral train. Meanwhile, the ever extending transmission lines carry additional hope for coal, and when the coal industry progresses, so does Utah and all our mining States.

FIGHTING QUACKERY

Mr. WILLIAMS of New Jersey. Mr. President, automobile models change every year, and so do the forms of quackery directed at the gullible, suffering people of our Nation. The old nostrums have been replaced, to a large degress at least, by the electronic machine, the new drug that cures nothing, and new gadgets and formulas sold by the most modern sales methods.

To help the American public realize the dangers and losses that can result from quackery, the American Medical Association and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration last week cosponsored the Second National Congress on Medical Quackery. Their warning: Quackery is on the increase, and the biggest single group of victims are the elderly citizens of the United States.

The Second Quackery Congress was a significant followup to the first congress, held 2 years ago. It also developed testimony given by witnesses at hearings conducted by Senator PAT MCNAMARA for the Senate Committee on Aging last January. The work begun at that time will now be continued by the Subcommittee on Frauds and Misrepresentation Affecting the Elderly in the same committee. As chairman of that subcommittee, I intend to continue the inquiries begun so well by Senator Mc

NAMARA against quackery and other frauds against the elderly.

The interest aroused by the recent congress should help make the work of the subcommittee more productive than it would have been. A public alerted to the quackery menace should be all the more help to us as we make our inquiries. The AMA and the FDA-and every speaker who participated-are to be congratulated for an excellent program.

Mr. President, the AMA News ran an editorial in its October 28 issue to explain the purposes and method of the congress. Another excellent summary appeared in an Atlantic City (N.J.) Press editorial of October 25. I ask unanimous consent to have both printed in the RECORD.

In addition, I would like to draw the attention of the Senate to a recent series written by Charles Schaeffer of the Advance News Service here in Washington. This series appeared earlier this month in the Newark Star-Ledger and other Newhouse newspapers. Mr. Schaeffer has drawn a vivid and valuable portrait of quackery today, and I believe that his writing will be of help to everyone concerned about this problem.

There being no objection, the editorial and article were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

[From the AMA News, Oct. 28, 1963]
FIGHTING QUACKERY

The Second National Congress on Medical Quackery, sponsored by the American Medical Association and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, is another attempt to increase public awareness of health frauds and to find new methods of fighting the medical mountebank.

This won't be easy. It will take the efforts of physicians, the press, community groups, business organizations and Government agencies. The American public is not stupid but, as Samuel Hopkins Adams said, "Our national quality of commercial shrewdness fails us when we go into the open market to purchase relief from suffering." Most of the quack's victims are intelligent people, some of whom are desperate and all of whom are cunningly misled.

The public is vulnerable to the modern quack. The public has learned, for good reason, to respect advertising, and many quacks are masters of advertising. In this age of rapid communication, the quack reaches more people than ever before and often through respectable media. The quack's "discovery," couched in atomic age jargon, may come as no surprise to a public familiar with the language of science and accustomed to legitimate medical breakthroughs.

Moreover, many people are misguided because of the quack's ability to gain favor among prominent persons in positions of leadership. Fake healers through the ages have been able to get testimonials from the nobility, literary men and politicians. In the 18th century, hundreds of Englishmen sought the nostrums of William Reed, a tailor, who treated Queen Anne and was made a knight of the realm. In our own day, Senator PAUL H. DOUGLAS and others have taken up the cause of krebiozen. Quackery is especially tragic in an age when proper medical care has so much to offer.

The American Medical Association has fought quackery for 116 years. It keeps track of charlatans throughout the country and exposes them at every opportunity. The AMA's high ethical and educational standards are designed to protect the public. The

First National Congress on Medical Quackery, held in 1961, led to widespread State and community campaigns of public education. the Post Office Department are constantly The FDA, the Federal Trade Commission and seeking tighter antiquackery regulations.

There is much that the individual physician can do. Delegates to the National do. Delegates to the National Medical Convention, the meeting at which the AMA was formed in 1847, stressed this point: "It is the duty of physicians, who are frequent witnesses of the enormities committed by quackery, and the injury to health and even destruction of life caused by the use of quack medicines, to enlighten the public on these subjects, to expose the injuries sustained by the unwary from the devices and pretensions of artful empirics and imposters."

In protecting his patients against charlatans, the physician is practicing good preventive medicine. The intimacy of the physician-patient relationship as it exists in this country provides the ideal setting for discussions that can save lives and money. Reports of quackery should be brought to the attention of the local medical society, so that the entire profession can take action.

Leonard W. Larson, M.D., past president of the AMA, has cited two needs in the battle against medical con men: "We must not only prove the worthlessness of quackery, but we also must establish confidence in sound medical and health care."

The physician's practice of sound medical care is basic to the struggle against quackery. His role is frequently delicate and difficult. He must have the complete trust of patient and family when, in desperation, they are tempted to turn to the charlatan. The physician can, through courtesy, patience, and reason, do much to show that not hope but only a cruel illusion of hope is on the side of the quack.

[From the Atlantic City Press, Oct. 25, 1963] THE DANGER OF QUACKERY

The medical quack can be and often is a killer. Were quacks merely merry oafs who bilked the gullible, peddling hair growers, bust developers, and sundry other weird nostrums and potions, they would hardly suffer the unceasing attention of the Food and Drug Administration, the American Medical Association, State and Federal health agencies, and better business bureaus.

But quacks can be as dangerous as they are cruel. Any time wasted on useless remedies by persons who have contracted diseases urgently requiring early diagnosis, such as cancer or arthritis, can result in hastened death.

Thus the American Medical Association for more than a decade has been concentrating its antiquack activity on the charlatan who professes to have discovered a magic cure for cancer. Of late the AMA's propaganda and exposure has been considerably broadened. Two years ago the association joined the Food and Drug Administration in sponsoring the first National Congress on Medical Quackery. This symposium in the Nation's Capital resulted in widespread State and community campaigns of public education about medical quacks and health charlatans who peddle worthless treatments.

A flyer sent out to editors to announce the second such national congress, slated in Washington for this weekend, took the form of a sack of low-grade uranium ore. The sponsors noted that it wouldn't make an atom bomb-neither would it "cure disease as claimed by fakers, quacks, and charlatans."

Just as the discovery of electricity gave birth to numberless devices for which miracle cures were claimed, so radioactivity is today's hotbed of quackery. Medical charlatans thrive also where orthodox medicine fails fully to meet public needs, as in curb

ing cancer. The so-called wonder drug Krebiozen was finally ruled worthless by the FDA and the National Cancer Institute only on October 16.

Quackery has been a menace, of course, since the earliest days of medicine. Indeed, the healing arts originated with the priestmagician, the witch doctor, of primitive tribes. The first recorded prescription for a hair grower was that made up for Queen Ses of Egypt at about 3400 B.C. It was a mixture of dogs' toes, date refuse, and asses' hooves. It is believed to have been quite as effective as today's hair restorers. Quack devices and treatment cost the public about $1 billion a year. And the sad fact is that the suckers are the fearful, the sick in spirit, the elderly, and those who can least afford the luxury of wishful treatment.

[From the Long Island Press, Oct. 7, 1963] BOOMING QUACKERY RACKET: MODERN WITCH DOCTORS SWINDLE THE SICK AND GULLIBLE (By Charles Schaeffer)

(NOTE.-Modern witch doctors equipped with fancy machines and scientific-sounding names-but still smelling of snake oil-are on the rise. They are swindling the sick and gullible out of billions. Here's the first in a series of five reports on this growing health menace, the booming quackery racket.)

Lincoln said it: "You can even fool some of the people all of the time."

Today, giddy Americans bent on proving him right are foolishly pouring out an estimated $1 billion for fake health machines, phony "cures," and worthless stay-young concoctions.

Most will lose a bankroll in the quest for shortcut health-others something more important: their lives.

No one can begin to judge the toll of despair or anguish of the really sick who fall prey to health hucksters. Or count the red faces of the pitchmen's patsys who belatedly discover they suffer from nothing worse than bad judgment.

They can't fool you? Don't be too sure. Quackery is no longer the shady business of the sideburned hawker of snake oil. It is a high-powered, slick, booming businesscommercial, almost respectable, urbane and modern.

Brazen health faddists and fakers, glibly mimicking medical terms and outfitted with impressive-looking machines, are hoodwinking people of every shade of education and intelligence.

Every day charlatans challenge scientists, doctors and officials in the Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Trade Commission, the Post Office, and the American Medical Association.

Indeed, there seems no limit to the ingenuity used by frauds to bilk the legions of sick or miserable who will grasp at anything for relief: Spectro chromes, uranium gloves for arthritis, radioscopes, microdynameters, seawater, aspirin, and vitamins peddled by other names at fancy prices, to name a few.

Now the war is getting hotter. Irked FDA officials last year seized or oversaw voluntary destruction of 1,168 microdynameters-an $875 device its manufacturers claimed could diagnose lurking disease by measuring the body's electrical currents.

The FTC, taking the brunt of 7,000 complaints a year, recently persuaded several manufacturers to stop advertising medical miracles for fancy massage machines.

The Post Office, cracking down on medical quackery by mail, boasts a 98 percent conviction rate against claims ranging from bust developing to sinus trouble cures.

Invading the murky world of nutritional food and diet-pill peddlers is toughest of all for Government sleuths. The job is made no easier by many of America's 10 million nutrition and vitamin faddists who believe

they are making themselves healthier or thinner, when indeed they are not.

Nevertheless, campaigns of public education and warnings are beginning to dull some of the glitter of the health magician-and cut into his profits, too.

Says Dr. Kenneth L. Milstead, Director of FDA's Bureau of Enforcement: "We're making an impact in the nutritional food area. Sales are falling off."

On October 25-26 FDA will join AMA in the second National Congress on Medical Quackery here. Some 600 doctors, State and Federal health detectives and psychiatrists will try to diagnose the chronic disease, quackery, and what can be done to cure it. Oliver Field, director of AMA's Department of Investigation, regards the conference partly as preventive medicine to vaccinate the public against quackery.

Figuring the national quackery bill exactly is impossible, since much of the money flows through the hands of illicit operators. But the experts believe at least $1 billion goes down the drain this way: $250 million for worthless arthritis treatment and cures. $500 million for phony food supplements, dietary concoctions, and unneeded vitamins; $250 million for a wide range of useless gimmicks, gadgets, and nostrums for diagnosing and curing ailments ranging from cancer to baldness.

Quackery is big business. Many of its promoters are well heeled and adroit in evading the law for a fast buck.

Worse, it is sometimes a deadly business. Dinshah P. Ghadiali from India did a flourishing business with his Spectrochrome Institute until the U.S. Government prosecuted him in 1947 for repeated violation of the food and drug law.

Testimony showed that Ghadiali, who claimed 15 degrees including an "honorary M.D.," told an elderly diabetic to stop taking insulin. While using the spectrochome, the diabetic went into a coma and died.

An epileptic who testified that the same machine had helped him collapsed on the witness stand from an epileptic fit.

The court fined Ghadiali $20,000, but he escaped prison because of his age. After 5 years' probation he was reported working again.

Listen to Dr. Leonard W. Larson, former

AMA president: "Quackery gives birth to cults, fads, and fanatics. It floods the Nation's mailboxes with propaganda *** with illiterate, incoherent testimonials * * * with moronic praise and rantings about the merits of this or that type of cure.

"The worst harm caused by quackery, however, is when it keeps sick people from getting competent medical attention for serious

disorders which-if left to the ministrations

and phony remedies of the quack-can be fatal."

[From the Long Island Press, Oct. 8, 1963] THE DIAGNOSIS GADGETS: A "MAGIC" MACHINE

THAT WAS JUST A MECHANICAL FLOP (By C. Schaeffer, Press Washington bureau) Not long ago Government inspectors got wind of a grandiose scheme for a kind of medical automation to take the work out of being sick. The idea was simple: Just turn the job of diagnosing and treatment over to machines.

At the peak of their popularity, thousands of practitioners, including a few misguided medical doctors, employed devices peddled by the creator of the Electronic Medical Foundation, the late Dr. Albert Abrams, of San Francisco.

With his system of radionics for treatment the practitioner needed no more skill than is required to take a patient's blood sample and send it to Dr. Abrams' laboratory.

Promptly, the doctor's radioscope spewed out a diagnosis, which was mailed to the sender with a handy reminder about other machines available for treating the disease.

Curious Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials decided to put the machine to an acid test. They mailed samples of animal blood, blood from a dead man and ersatz blood of colored water.

The machine, of course, flunked. It couldn't tell the blood of the living from the dead nor even pick out the colored water. Shortly, FDA got a Federal court injunction prohibiting the radioscope.

The court banned 13 treatment machines which either produced a weak magnetic field or emitted shortwave radio waves-both worthless in treating disease. Yet, it is possible some are still in use today.

Why do quacks keep popping up with magic machines and why do the gullible bite? First, there is much that is inconclusive about modern medicine. When a genuine doctor is unable to pinpoint or alleviate a chronic ill, the sufferer is apt, in desperation, to turn to the glib assurances of the quack.

Even though he cannot cure the sufferer, the quack-unlike a real doctor-can exude optimism. The idea is to get the patient in front of the machine for several fast (and expensive) treatments, maybe sell him a machine in the bargain, and send him on his way-uncured and maybe sicker than ever.

Tragically, modern medicine's use of some legitimate machines helps the quack to operate behind a screen of electronic mumbojumbo. Most patients can't tell one dial from another. So the quack exploits this ignorance along with his copycat talent for making the fake item look real.

FDA's public information director, Wallace F. Janssen, recently told a chiropractors association convention: "There are no machines or devices which are capable of diagnosing or treating all manner of diseases simply by turning dials or applying electric contacts to the body. Do not believe the salesman who claims to have such a machine."

Mechanical quackery is as old as the charms and amulets primitive man used to ward off evil spirits. Even George Washington accepted medical aid from a man the Encyclopedia Britannica calls a quack.

Washington was President, Dr. Elisha Perkins hatched the idea that magnetized metals could draw disease from the

body. In 1796 he invented metallic tractors, two pointed rods 3 inches long.

Dragged over an infection, the fork literally was supposed to yank out disease. Perkins tried it on the president who believed, as did hundreds of other educated people, that the thing worked.

Perkins' son got rich selling tractors in England. But a skeptical American doctor

made some tractors of wood, which does not

hold magnetism, and won testimonials for his

treatment.

Today, modern mechanical quackery flourishes under sophisticated new guises. And it takes the combined skill of FDA, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the American Medical Association, the Post Office, the Better Business Bureau, and others to keep it in check. Even so, useless machines account for many millions of the Nation's $1 billion annual quackery bill.

Could a change in the law strengthen FDA's hand? Its experts think so. Now, FDA must prove a device is ineffective no matter how This consumes endless obvious the case. hours chasing around the Nation to catch miscreants shipping their hokum over State borders.

Some FDA officials believe they could make a big dent in device quackery by making applicants prove the safety and effectiveness of their machines-the way the drug law now reads.

Still, the Government does outwit distributors of useless devices. Just a year ago the U.S. Supreme Court, in effect, outlawed a machine called the microdynameter by refus

ing to consider an appeal by the manufacturer, the Ellis Research Laboratories, Chicago.

The microdynameter is nothing more than a simple device for measuring electric current installed in a flashy cabinet. Its promoters claimed it could detect disease by measuring weaker current supposedly pulsing from diseased organs.

Actually, FDA investigators proved the amount of the current flowing through the machine had nothing to do with diseasebut depended upon the amount of moisture on the skin.

Said an FDA official wryly: "Whether you had diabetes or syphillis depended on how much you were sweating."

What's more the machine was fooled more often than not when FDA experts hooked it up to a dead body just to see what would happen.

Recently, 18 FDA district offices reported seizure of 282 microdynameters and voluntary destruction of another 811. FDA Commissioner George Larrick has called the device "a peril to public health because it cannot correctly diagnose any disease."

He said "Thousands of patients are being hoodwinked by its use into believing they have disease which they do not have, or failing to get proper treatment for disease they do have."

The lure of the blinking light, the buzzing machine and the jiggling dial are irresistible. Shortly after FDA closed the micro-dynameter file, U.S. marshals were seizing sunlamps, marketed with exaggerated healthgiving powers, and electronic doo-dads built to measure the state of your nerves along with chronic fatigue, distress, depression, worry, and fears.

[From the Long Island Press, Oct. 9, 1963] THE ARTHRITIS SWINDLE: PAIN CAN MAKE A VICTIM CLUTCH AT ALMOST ANY STRAW (By Charles Schaeffer) Scene: A Senate committee investigating medical quackery.

The witness: Jerry Walsh, a victim of crippling arthritis for 22 years.

"I know I went from copper bracelets to buckeyes (chestnuts) to find a cure. had a chiropractor break one of my legs I've tried vibrating machines and diets, and with his special treatment.

"Yet continually I went back, maybe to the tune of $2,000 or $3,000 or more. You don't keep track of the dollars. You are always looking for relief."

Now 40, Walsh was a promising athlete when he got arthritis as a Christmas present

in 1940. Sentenced to life in bed, he arose after 4 years using sheer willpower and managed, through strenuous doctor-supervised exercise, to walk again. He then went to work for the Arthritis and Rheumatism Foundation, which has launched full-scale war on quack cures.

Today Jerry Walsh says he "is sick and tired of being exploited." Yet if someone came along with glib assurances of a cure, recently told Senators investigating he quackery, he would listen.

In a way, Jerry Walsh symbolizes the agony of arthritis everywhere, clutching at straws. They've heard there is no cure for arthritis. Still * ** maybe.

The mystery of arthritis-what causes it, why its pains come and go-is a setup for the quack. He exploits the fact that the world's best medical brains have been unSomehow able to find the cause or cure. he dramatically finds a cure.

Two years ago, a congress on medical quackery found sufferers wasting $250 million a year on worthless arthritis remedies. This month they will meet again to see if a campaign of public warnings has dented the con men's market.

And a special subcommittee headed by Senator HARRISON WILLIAMS, JR., Democrat, of New Jersey, soon will investigate new frauds against older citizens.

Now nearly 12 million Americans suffer from various forms of arthritis. Probably half of them at one time or another have clutched vainly at hope for "cures."

Since arthritis rarely is fatal, most hurt only their pocketbooks by splashing in "spas," shelling out $300 for tube treatments featuring a penny's worth of useless chemicals, or swallowing ordinary aspirin disguised in fancy trappings at premium prices.

But health dangers loom, too. Just a year ago the Food and Drug Administration had to move fast to alert the public to the menace of "Liefcort," a Canadian-born nostrum. FDA Commissioner George P. Larrick called the drug dangerous and banned import into the United States. FDA said Liefcort was developed and promoted by Dr. Robert Liefman, who is wanted by U.S. marshals to answer charges involving a so-called baldness "cure." Liefman fled to Canada and is not licensed to practice medicine there, FDA charged.

Liefcort supposedly was a secret remedy. A national magazine touched off a flurry of interest by publishing an article about it. But FDA scientists found the drug contained potent hormones, estradiol, prednisone and testosterone-the first in amounts 10 times a normal therapeutic dose.

After reading about Liefcort, a 71-year-old woman flew to Canada to see Liefman. She returned to her California home with a year's supply of the drug. Later, she began bleeding internally. She was hospitalized but following operation to stop uterine bleeding, she caught pneumonia and died, FDA said.

Directly afterward promoters in St. Louis, Mo., popped up with an arthritis treatment. A Federal district judge banned the sale of this adrenal hormone cream, charging the manufacturer with false misleading claims. Commissioner Larrick then said: "There are millions of arthritics in this country who will grasp at any straw. Many are led to believe in so-called cures because of the remissions which naturally occur in the disease. By taking advantage of this, promoters can profitably sell any product falsely claimed to offer cure or relief."

Not long ago medical pirates hatched a scheme for bottling sea water and selling it for $3 a pint to supplement alleged deficiencies in arthritics.

Did they buy? Dr. R. W. Lamont-Havers, medical director of the Arthritis and Rheumatism Foundation, reports that some patients began going to their physicians with "water logging" of the body.

"This is caused by the excessive intake of salt and could have very serious consequences in patients with heart and kidney disease," he said. "There is also danger of infection from unpasteurized sea water."

Some over-the-counter medicines do, in fact, contain active ingredients, usually painrelieving salicylates found in common aspirin.

"If it has aspirin in it, it is going to make them feel better, but why pay $1 or $2 for a bottle of aspirin?" Dr. Russell L. Cecil, consulting medical director of the Arthritis and Rheumatism Foundation, told the Senate Quackery Committee.

The word arthritis literally means joint inflammation. There are probably 60 different rheumatic diseases; but the two most common are crippling rheumatoid arthritis which often strikes younger people and osteoarthritis of older people. It is sometimes called everyone's disease.

No on knows exactly what causes arthritis, but one theory is that it stems from an allergic reaction to an infection in some other part of the body. Some scientists believe the rheumatoid type is caused by a

Sound medical treatment can reduce arthritic pain and swelling. And therapy can help unfreeze some joints.

The best bet, though, is a recognized doctor. Avoid the health hucksters claiming to have a cure. It doesn't exist.

[From the Long Island Press, Oct. 10, 1963] THE CANCER "CURES": BOGUS REMEDIES, LIKE BAD PENNIES, KEEP TURNING UP (By Charles Schaeffer)

When a Federal court recently gave a Texan a 4-year suspended sentence for selling a phony cancer cure it proved this: Bogus remedies, like bad pennies, keep turning up.

The counterfeit item convicting Thomas T. G. Reynolds of the Reynolds Clinic, Palestine, Tex., actually was minted nearly 50 years before, thousands of miles away in Michigan.

It bubbled out of the cauldron of Dr. William F. Koch, embryology instructor at the University of Michigan around 1914. He called it "Koch's Glyoxide," modestly ballyhooed as a cancer treatment.

FDA investigators later said it was closer to sterile water than anything else. Dr. Koch was tried twice inconclusively, in 1943 and 1946. Then he went to Brazil.

Later, a letter reached FDA:

"At present there is a chiropracter in Palestine, Tex., advertising as follows. * 'Genuine Koch Glyoxide for cancer patients is available at $25 from the Reynolds Clinic in Palestine, Tex.' *** it is your duty to prosecute this crook.

"Sincerely yours,

"WM. F. KOCH."

Cancer quacks are the ghouls of the medical swindlers' world. They offer false hopes, profit from the dying, and, unforgiveably, deny real therapy that could effectively treat and prolong the lives of many cancer victims. Despite the fact that medical science knows only two sure remedies for human cancersurgery and radiation—some 4,000 charlatans mulct millions of dollars with a witchdoctor's cabinet of cures. These include useless machines, herbs, injections of colored water, vitamins, raw vegetables, and the like.

How do you recognize the cancer quack? Dr. L. Henry Garland. University of California School of Medicine, gives these hints: "His treatment is usually secret, or its method of preparation is secret.

"He advertises, plants stories, or distributes testimonials to support his claims. You can't find his work in reputable scientific journals.

"He hides behind the name of a highsounding organization or foundation easily confused with a real one.

"He discourages or refuses consultation with known local doctors, claiming the 'medical trust' is against him.

"His records are scanty or nonexistent. "Many of his 'cured' cases show no evidence that the patients ever had cancer."

Several years ago California, fed up with the havoc wrought by the cancer quacks, became the first State to pass a law aimed directly at this crowd. The legislature created a cancer advisory council in the department of public health. The law regulates drugs, medicines, compounds, and devices used in the diagnosis, treatment, and cure of cancer. And it bars unlicensed practioners from using them.

When lawmakers held hearings in Los Angeles and San Francisco, quacks jammed the room, taunting witnesses for the bill and booing American Medical Association and Food and Drug Administration testimony.

But California got its law and can now punish charlatans. Other States are dawdling. In the vacuum, FDA, the Federal Trade Commission, or the Post Office Department must hold off until a quack transports

Even then, convictions are hard to get. Consider the case of Harry Hoxey, now the classic example of cancer quackery. Hoxey, who ran a so-called "cancer clinic," in Dallas, testified he personally saw 6,000 patients in 1 year. In his book, "You Don't Have To Die," Hoxey said he had 10,000 patients taking his treatment.

Though he never went beyond the eighth grade, he called himself "Doctor." Authorities estimated that patients from all over the United States poured $50 million into his coffers. One Hoxey treatment alone cost $400, plus $60 in expenses. AMA called it a cough syrup, and FDA said it might have been a mild laxative, too.

It took FDA years, however, to prove a case against Hoxey. Investigators traveled more than 17,000 miles, interviewed cured patients, their families, and doctors.

They found the "cured" had either never had cancer, had received previous successful surgery or radiation, or still had the disease.

Even a U.S. court of appeals decision in 1952 holding the treatment worthless failed to stop promoters. They bought space in friendly periodicals to attack the government. When it was clear court proceedings were going to drag on indefinitely, FDA published a nationwide warning against the treatment. Eventually, many of the duped got the truth and Hoxey's business dropped, though some continued to believe his claims to the end.

[From the Long Island Press, Oct. 11, 1963] THE HEALTH FOOD FAD; GLIB PHONIES RAKE IN $500 MILLION EVERY YEAR (By Charles Schaeffer) More people are falling for the phony promotion of special foods and tonics than any other products in the health field.

Food and vitamin faddism is big business today, netting promoters a conservative $500 million a year-about half the Nation's quackery take.

The Food and Drug Administration says there are about a dozen major companies in the field and a number of smaller ones. Two years ago these firms employed 50,000 fullor part-time peddlers.

One of them once had 15,000 doorbell ringers-about 7 times FDA's entire staffpushing a shotgun formula of vitamins in a secret base of alfalfa, parsley, and watercress.

Some inroads have been made by the FDA but America's hypochondriacs, neurotics, and food faddists-an estimated 10 million intelligent and ignorant alike-continue to sop up and believe the suave pitchmen of these products.

Although he has shaved his handlebar mustache, and writes bestsellers instead of haranguing a carnival crowd, the modern patent medicine man's line is as old as the snake-oil peddler's.

For behind this boom is one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated-that standard grocery store food lacks necessary nutrients and vitamins.

Noted Harvard nutritionist and Sunday Press columnist, Dr. Frederick J. Stare, who is often abused by food faddists says: "No one food is essential to health. Some 60 nutrients are. By eating a varied diet, from foods available in any grocery store, you will get them."

Does this mean vitamin supplements are always superfluous? No. Health authorities believe that most Americans get the required 12 vitamins in their regular diet-and others could if they ate properly.

For those with vitamin deficiencies (and only a licensed doctor can diagnose this) a low-potency vitamin supplement prepared by recognized drug firms can act as preventive medicine, says Dr. Stare.