Nerve Regeneration, Lithium, Alzheimer’s Protection & the War on Medical Freedom

An interview with Dr. Jonathan Wright (April 2015)

A Harvard University and University of Michigan graduate, Dr. Jonathan V. Wright is a pioneer in researching and applying natural treatments for healthy aging and illness. Along with Alan Gaby, M.D., since 1976 he has accumulated over 60,000 research papers about diet, vitamins, minerals, botanicals, and other natural substances and energies from which he has developed many non-patent medicine (non-”drug”) and natural treatments for health problems. Since 1983, Drs. Wright and Gaby have regularly taught these methods to thousands of physicians in the US and overseas. In 1973 Dr. Wright founded the Tahoma Clinic near Seattle where he still practices medicine. He also serves as Medical Director for Tahoma’s three health clinics, a supplement store/dispensary, and Meridian Valley Laboratory.

In 1982, Dr. Wright was the first in these United States to write comprehensive bio-identical hormone program prescriptions including estrogens, progesterone, DHEA, and testosterone and often thyroid hormones. He encouraged developing comprehensive hormone testing at Meridian Valley Laboratory to ensure hormones’ safe use. Recognized as the “Father of Bio-identical Hormone Therapy”, Dr. Wright is a popular speaker, teaching the use and laboratory monitoring of bio-identical hormones at yearly seminars.

He also originated successful natural treatment for eliminating childhood asthma, developed treatment to stop vision loss or improve vision in the majority of individuals with “dry” macular degeneration, was the first to use aldosterone to reverse age-related hearing loss, discovered the effect of iodine on estrogen metabolism and cobalt on steroid detoxification, popularized the use of D-mannose treatment for E. coli urinary tract infection, developed effective natural treatment for seborrheic dermatitis, allergic and viral conjunctivitis, and Osgood-Schlatter’s disease. In 2013, he resurrected forgotten research and treatment protocols (published in 1983, never implemented in humans since) for the use of Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (hCG) to treat severe neurological problems.

Internationally known for his books and medical articles, Dr. Wright has written or co-written 13 books, selling over 1.5 million copies, with two best sellers, “Book of Nutritional Therapy” and “Guide to Healing with Nutrition”. He authors “Nutrition and Healing”, a monthly newsletter about nutritional medicine to over 118,000 US and 15,000 overseas subscribers. I highly recommend a subscription for $74/12 monthly issues from Nutrition & Healing, 819 No. Charles St., Baltimore, MD 21201 or call (443) 353-4204.

You can reach Tahoma Clinic & Dispensary at 6839 Fort Dent Way, Suite 134, Tukwila, Washington 98188; phone 206-812-9988 and fax 206-812-9989 Fax.
Dr. Wright has been a friend since the early 1990s. I first interviewed him for The Moneychanger after the FDA raided Tahoma Clinic and tried to destroy him. That interview was entitled, “Throw Down your Vitamin-B & Come Out with Your Hands Up.” Jonathan is a hero of medical science and freedom. He kindly made time for this interview on 12 March 2015.

Moneychanger: I want to read you something from the March 2015 National Geographic.

Wright: Go ahead.

Moneychanger: The headline says, “The War on Science.”

Wright: That’s the one I chucked in the wastebasket.

Moneychanger: And you should have. Unfortunately I opened it and read, “In 2013 citizens in Portland, Oregon, one of the few major American cities that don’t fluoridate their water, blocked a plan by local officials to do so.”

Wright: Nice!

Moneychanger: “Opponents didn’t like the idea of government adding chemicals to their water. They claimed that fluoride could be harmful to human health.” Then they add this great line: “Actually fluoride is a natural mineral that, in weak concentrations is used in public drinking water systems hardens tooth enamel and prevents tooth decay, a cheap and safe way to improve dental wealth for everyone, rich or poor, conscientious brusher or not. That’s the scientific and medical consensus.”

But they leave out what you put in your newsletter: in July 2013 the Supreme Court of Israel required the State of Israel to stop adding fluoride to public water supplies.

Wright: Nor did they include that study from Harvard School of Public Health which reviewed some 20 to 30 other studies and concluded that fluoride was neurotoxic [poisonous to nerve tissue], particularly in children, and could lower children’s IQ by up to seven points. Funny, that never did make my newspapers. Did it make yours?

Moneychanger: Junk science masquerading as “pure science" rules America today. Comments like these in National Geographic make it sound as if only they have the lock on pure truth. Yet in fact they suppress scientific freedom, discovery, and truth. It’s astounding gall, astounding tyranny. 

Wright: The natural mineral fluoride is not added to drinking water. It’s actually fluorosilicic acid, not fluoride as it occurs naturally in the groundwater. 

Moneychanger: Even that can be dangerous. Where there’s a naturally occurring high concentration of fluoride in water people experience accelerated aging. 

Wright: And whitening or mottling of the teeth is a sign of it. It’s dental fluorosis and it appears in most seniors.


Moneychanger: So on impartial investigation, water fluoridation is not such a good idea but its promoters claim to be “the medical and scientific consensus.” Those words are used to pass off hogwash as whitewash. Of course, not everything the consensus accepts is wrong, but all too often when someone treads medicine’s or science’s cutting edge outside the “consensus,” he’s suppressed. That’s how it works in the United States.

Wright: You’ve heard the phrase “follow the money”?

Moneychanger: Yes.

Wright: You can follow the money to the causes of that.

Moneychanger: Exactly, and that makes it more criminal, not less—more immoral, not less.


In our last conversation you astonished me with a story. What is human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and what might it do?

Wright: Many of us have heard of human chorionic gonadotropin only from people condemning the hCG diet plan. The Europeans really researched that diet well for years. They found that a small quantity of hCG works very well with a low calorie diet for weight loss. It mobilizes fat away from where you don’t want it and moves it to where you do.

It might sound like I’m advocating the hCG diet but I’m really not. Other ways to lose weight require less rigorous calorie control and still work. But this plan did work, and it became very popular for a while. The same medical consensus people were condemning it. Now they didn’t condemn high priced weight loss drugs way with too many hazardous effects because those were patented and approved and made megabucks for somebody. But hCG is a natural product, and all natural products come under intense criticism when they become popular.

Every single human has experienced hCG: it is made by our mommies’ placenta. Every placenta in the world is loaded with it. Unless we were premature, we took a nine-month bath in hCG and it stays in us. If hCG were harmful or toxic, the human race wouldn’t be here. We need to blow away this nonsense that hCG is bad for anybody. It ain’t. It can’t be. There’s no way. 

In 1982 Dr. Patil and a colleague at the University of North Dakota, did the following astounding experiment.

They took rats—real experimental adult rats, not politicians—in two groups, an equal number of males and females. Then they cut the rats’ spinal cords in half (spinal cord transection). These little rats were not able to walk or control their bowels or bladder. 

One group of 12, six males and six females, got injections of hCG, and the other group got nothing. Franklin, in two weeks those hCG-injected male and female rats had regained bowel and bladder control. The rats that didn’t get the injection still had no bowel or bladder control and couldn’t walk. 

In six weeks the hCG-injected had not only regained bowel and bladder control, but they were walking! Walking! They’d had their spinal cords cut, they couldn’t walk, and they were walking.

Now the researchers did admit that only four of those rats were walking so normally they couldn’t tell they had had an injury, and the rest of the rats they were limping: partially disabled but walking. 

The other 12 rats that got no shots, were still messing all over the place and couldn’t walk.

The researchers were quite careful. They went in and biopsied the recovering rats right across the area where they had cut the spinal cord in half. What did they see? New neurons growing across the cut part. This hCG had stimulated neurons to grow right across where the spinal cord had been cut in half and apparently restored neural connections to the bowel and bladder control. That is just amazing. Six weeks. 

All this happened in 1983.

Moneychanger: Whoa, whoa. What is the “scientific and medical consensus” about spinal cord regeneration?

Wright: That depends on who’s consensing, but most people haven’t read this thing and don’t think you can regenerate a spinal cord at all. 

Moneychanger: They say flat out it is impossible. Spinal cord and nerves will not regenerate.


Wright: Even the journal that published this article in 1983 belonged to that consensus. You hardly ever see a journal publish an article and in the very same issue publish another article that says, “We don’t believe this research we just published.” They didn’t say it in so many words but in fancy scientific words. Who knows why they published it in the first place, but they stated they didn’t believe it could be possible.

The study’s authors were allowed to put in a small refutation. They said, “If you would look at the photomicrograph that we published with our research paper you will see what they call the nerve dendrites [projections in nerve axons of the nerve] that are re-growing the spinal cord where we biopsied them.” And they left it at that. 

They also took a tangent from that article, and this is the real cool part. They worked with two paraplegic men who had suffered accidental spinal cord transection and were paralyzed from the neck down. They gave them hCG shots. What do you know: at the end of three or four months one of them had regained all sensation. Now he wasn’t walking, but he had his sensation back. The other fellow was up walking on crutches, but he hadn’t been able to walk at all before then. End of story in that journal.

Maybe seven years later, 1990, our same researchers published another , much simpler mouse study. It just showed that after hCG, electrical transmission could be restored in the spinal cord

And that’s that. We have not been able to turn up any other research on hCG and spinal cord regeneration. What our Tahoma Clinic researcher did find were articles since 2000 about how hCG works. A 2007 article said nothing about spinal cord regeneration, but it did say that there are hCG receptor sites on every neuron. 

That’s important. A receptor site on your cell means that receptor site will be open to some stimulator, usually a hormone. If every neuron has a receptor for hCG there must be a reason for it.

In 2012 I called the researcher who did the research, Dr. Patil. I asked assistant if he had he done any research on this since. The message came back, “No, he has not done any research since. But he’s thinking of getting started again.” 

Why did he stop such promising research? Now this is nothing more than my opinion, but my guess is that shortly after the article was published in that journal and the editors slammed the article, he left the University of North Dakota, and had to go get a job somewhere else. Putting two and two together it’s pretty much the same situation as a lady researcher from Texas who published a really good study of bio-identical hormone replacement, and consequently lost her job at the university. 

How do I know that? Because I talked to her and I asked her, “Can I put that in my newsletter?” 

She said, “I’d prefer you didn’t; I’m trying to get a new job at another university and I can’t do that if I get too much publicity without being fired.” What was her offense? Doing a solid research study showing the bio-identical hormone replacement for women actually does a lot of good. 

I’m guessing that’s probably what happened in Dr. Patil’s case, but I can’t prove it. Within three or four months he was gone from that university and hasn’t published any research since. 

Why did Dr. Patil decide to try the hCG anyway? He and other researchers had noticed that during fetal development the hCG curve goes upward and reaches a peak right at the same time the nervous system is developing. So he figured there must be some correlation. Why does extra hCG get made? What in nature and creation causing this coincidence? It probably isn’t a coincidence that hCG reaches its highest concentration when the nervous system is developing and then it trails off, but never completely.

Fast forward to the 2007 research. Guess what? There are receptors for hCG on every neuron in the body, everywhere. That wasn’t known back in the 1980s but was a very perceptive observation that the hCG peaks at the same time the human nervous system undergoes its greatest development. 


I’m trying to get the word out about this because as you said, the general consensus is that nerve cells won’t regenerate. But hCG is so blinking safe, why not try if it offers any hope at all?

It’s so safe, Franklin, that humans volunteered to have a humongous dose—and I do mean humongous—of hCG given intravenously over a few minutes’ time. Both survived and neither one suffered any adverse effects.

Let me give you some numbers for neural regeneration. Dr. Patil was using 10,000 units of hCG per shot every day for a week, and then every other day for a week, and then twice a week. 

What did these two guys take intravenously? They took 150,000 units intravenously at one time, 15 times as much as Dr. Patil was using, and it didn’t hurt them. 

I’m trying to get the word out because these folks out there with spinal cord injuries do not have access to trying this tool. Nobody’s saying it’s going to work on everybody, but my goodness, the research makes it worth trying.

The one place where hCG is officially “approved” for use in human health happens to be for boys four years old with undescended testicles. Giving him hCG shots makes his testicles descend and stay there..

What isn’t approved is much more important for older guys: hCG stimulates testosterone. Not always but quite frequently hCG will bring the testosterone level up and it’s quite harmless. So many doctors would try hCG for that.


Moneychanger: How expensive is it? A 10,000 IU injection costs what?

Wright: It’s more and more expensive because some agency out there is trying to restrict it a little bit at a time, fighting it tooth and nail.

An 11,000 IU vial costs US$42, a 20,000 IU vial US$70. For the best chance of success they need twice weekly injections, 20,000 IU intramuscularly on the first day, followed by 10,000 IU every day for the first week, then 10,000 IU every other day for five weeks. Whole course of treatment would run less than a thousand bucks. 

Considering the problem’s severity it won’t cost people a whole lot of money like that $1,000 hepatitis pill, but it isn’t cheap either. The one problem of course is it isn’t “approved.”

Moneychanger: And it’s $315 for the first week’s dosage?

Wright: Yes.

Moneychanger: That’s nothing compared to what patented pharmaceuticals cost. And if hCG has applications in spinal cord regeneration, what about other nerve injuries?

Wright: Sure. It has potential for any neuron that needs regenerating. 

Moneychanger: That’s enormous. Well what about something like MS or Lou Gehrig’s or any of those diseases that affect the nervous system?

Wright: Nobody’s tried it and I don’t personally see that many folks with neurologic disease to tell you from a lot of experience. I can tell you about a 28-year-old ex-Marine who had a neck injury and was quite paralyzed, in a wheelchair. He came to our clinic, and underwent high Gauss magnetic field treatment and hCG. But he actually was able to tell the effects of the hCG because he did both the injections every other day (after a week) and the high Gauss magnetic treatment every day. 

On the days when he got the hCG shots he had all these sensations going up and down his leg and in his trunk he hadn’t felt for years, since he had injured his neck and cut off nerve flow to the rest of the body. He was getting something regenerated.

He had to go home and we’ve heard from him since that he seems to be slowly improving. The point is that he could tell that the hCG was causing sensations, as transient pain flashes or heat, and other things that point to a nervous system waking up again.

Since I’m not a neurologist or neurosurgeon I don’t see that many people for this problem, but it really is worth trying. Folks don’t have to come to our clinic for this. They only need to find a doctor who works with natural medicine because most doctors who work with natural medicine know that hCG is harmless. 

Moneychanger: What astonishes me most is that no one within the blessed scientific and medical consensus has the courage to work on this. It’s a huge frontier in medicine even to help spinal cord injuries, let alone cure them.


Moneychanger: Could we talk about lithium?

Wright: That’s another thing that can get the nervous system going. First, lithium is not a patent medication or a drug, it’s a mineral, in the same family as sodium, potassium, and cesium. Secondly, it gets this drug reputation because it’s used in very high doses for what was called manic depressive neuropsychosis, but is now called bipolar disease.

So lithium is used in high doses for bipolar disease, and at those high doses lithium can be toxic, no question but lithium is a natural element. In 2000 some doctors reported MRI studies (brain scans) and repeated them after taking lithium two months. They reported the use of lithium induced a statistically significant increase in human brain gray matter: a four percent increase.

I read that and thought, “Whoa! I can use all the brain cells I can get.” So I started taking low dose lithium at that time. The reason I’m confident in low dose lithium is simply that lithium is an element that’s not found in most people’s diet or in the water most places, but it is found in the water some places and people can tolerate small doses.

Let me read you the titles of some other research papers. This one was, “Lithium increases brain gray matter,” published in Lancet in 2000. Here’s another one from 2014: “Lithium induces new neurons in mice.” New neurons—did you hear that?

That original 2000 study about human gray matter set off a cascade of lithium research and the knowledge about lithium is so solid we can’t argue with it. Here are a few facts, from the scientific literature: 

  • Lithium induces something called dcl protein, which is directly responsible for helping the old neuron to split up and make a new neuron. It’s known that lithium induces both actions.
  • Lithium can stimulate the mitochondria and protect them from damage. Mitochondria are little energy engines inside the cells, and lithium stimulates the mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation. And that’s in the 2009 publication. What do you know? It stimulates new neurons and it stimulates the mitochondria.

Now lithium has also been known to stimulate mitochondria not just in brain cells but also in other cells. And remember, mitochondria are the energy engine of the cell. One theory holds that aging comes significantly from the mitochondria’s slow decay, and lithium protects against that.

Speaking of aging, a Japanese study of over a million people found a direct inverse correlation: the more lithium in the water the longer they lived, and the less lithium in the water the shorter they lived

By the way, folks, that was parts per million lithium in the water. They didn’t have little pills from five to 20 milligrams like you can buy at your health food store. 


Let’s talk about toxicity for a moment. You might get toxic on lithium if you’re bipolar and you’re taking a total of about 300 milligrams of lithium a day. However, folks do not get toxic on the low doses of 5, 15, 20 milligrams. Me, I’m using 20 milligrams a day and have been since 2000. I think I’m keeping all my marbles and I hope I’ve got some new ones now.

There’s some other really good stuff about lithium. With experimental animals a variety of researchers have tried a variety of things that are will kill neurons. They divide their experimental animals into two groups, one that gets lithium in their animal chow and one that doesn’t.

To boil it on down, no matter what the neurotoxin is, whether delivered intravenous or in food or what, the lithium group animals always survived the neurotoxin a whole lot better than the animals without lithium. Sometimes it’s as clear as all the ones in the non-lithium group drop dead and all the ones in the lithium group have brain damage but survive. Lithium protects neurons against just about anything.

You know that mammals have two carotid arteries going up each side of the neck? They fed lithium to one group of dogs but not the other. After they ate the doggie chow for a while they cut the carotid arteries on one side, and all the doggies had a stroke. 

In those who had the lithium in their doggie chow the strokes caused substantially less damage. That’s not symptomatic, walking around damage. They biopsied the dog brains and they found out that the ones receiving lithium suffered substantially less hypoxic damage: damage from a lack of oxygen when they lost blood flow to the brain.

Deprivation of oxygen is not even a neurotoxin, but lithium protects the neurons, like a guard standing out there at Buckingham Palace. Of course, before you take lithium you ought to be working with a doctor who’s skilled and knowledgeable in natural medicine to make sure it’s okay for you.

How do you like this title: “Lithium reduces alcohol frequency and toxicity”. And then there’s another title: “Lithium protects against ethanol neurotoxicity,” which in English means lithium reduces hangovers. 

Moneychanger: I’m sure glad to know that.

Wright: Yeah. People I work with who still like to party on Saturday night tell me that if they take this little bit of dose of lithium their hangovers aren’t near as bad as before. It’s protecting the neurons against the alcohol toxicity.

Can lithium ever hurt anybody? If we go past 15 to 20 milligrams a day, up to 40 or 50, it might mess with the parathyroid gland function and that’s why you need to be working with a doctor.

We need lithium’s general protection of the nervous system because we are exposed to so many more toxins now than in the 18th or 19th century. Who knows which ones affect what. So I not only want to have myself as many brain cells as I can get, but I also want to protect the ones I got.

Moneychanger: Would lithium help against exposure to toxins? 

Wright: That’s not a “maybe” but a “for sure,” in animal research. You can’t ethically do this to people, you know, cut the carotids and that sort of stuff. But in every animal experiment that I have read lithium has protected against the toxins they deliberately gave them to affect the brain. 


Moneychanger: What about Alzheimer’s? 

Wright: Evidence of lithium being able to prevent Alzheimer’s is so strong that there have been two research papers published with titles like “Lithium, an Alzheimer’s prevention agent?” 

Here’s how it works in science. If you’re introducing a new concept and don’t want to get stomped all over, you put a question mark after your title. In two or three papers doctors have shown the same thing. They cover point by point what happens in Alzheimer’s Disease. Then they cover point by point by point all the lithium research that says lithium blocks that one, lithium blocks this one, lithium blocks the other on, etc. And it’s very strong. 

They’re not saying that lithium protects against Alzheimer’s but look: First, it’s a new concept, and second, nobody has followed people for 50 years to see if they did or did not get Alzheimer’s in the lithium or non-lithium group. But in animal work there are three ironclad things that we can see as potential Alzheimer’s protectors: lithium, bio-identical hormone replacement, and turmeric. The first, lithium, I’ve discussed above.

Second, bio-identical hormone replacement same as what’s in our bodies when we are younger: for men that’s bio-identical testosterone and for women bio-identical estrogen. Those have been studied at Rockefeller University and found to slow the rate of accumulation of the garbage that leads to Alzheimer’s by 80 percent or more

How’d they study that in humans? These were dead humans without neurologic disease, so they cultured the brain cells and looked under the microscope at the garbage that accumulates in Alzheimer’s Disease: tau proteins, beta amyloid, and neurofibrillary tangles. All that accumulates at a certain rate. 

Then the researchers put in a “physiologic quantity” of hormone. That means the amount that’s ordinarily there, not a big dose or a little dose, simply the amount that’s usually around brain cells, testosterone with male brain cells, estrogen with the female. Much to their astonishment the rate of accumulation of intracellular garbage that leads to Alzheimer’s went down by 80 percent.

They even found the mechanism of how it happens. It turns out that amyloid and tau and neurofibrillary tangles are basically a form of cellular wastes. Have you ever seen one of those TV shows where nobody ever throws anything out, and after a while they have piles of junk with little pathways through every room? That’s what happens when there’s no hormone there. 

In each case dendrospecific hormones activate an enzyme that heads up the janitorial crew that cleans out the cells. Without testosterone and estrogen the garbage can’t be thrown away when it accumulates and you got yourself Alzheimer’s.

The last Alzheimer’s protector is that stuff from the Indian spice, turmeric, called curcumin. It has also been found to prevent Alzheimer’s garbage accumulating. Those three are pretty solid. 

Several other things are in the preliminary stages of proof. And you might guess, Franklin, that not one of them is a patent medicine.

Moneychanger: [Laughs] At least now I understand why every time we talk you ask me if I’m taking lithium.

I just have to remember to take it. And we’re talking about 20 milligrams a day or less. 

Wright: Twenty milligrams a day or less. I’ve been using 20 milligrams myself since the year 2000 and I’m not any crazier than I was before.


Moneychanger: Every time I talk to you I come away asking myself, “Why is all this so familiar to you but not familiar to the medical establishment?” That establishment is “the scientific and medical consensus” we’ve been talking about. 

People’s health is suffering terrible tragedies in America today. Diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure are epidemic, but the medical establishment pays hardly any attention to treating them nutritionally. They just get line them up for boxes and boxes of pharmaceuticals, but these have side effects and pull them further and further down. 

Wright: I see it all the time around me. One of my patients brought in a sign he found somewhere: “Why cure the disease when treatment is so profitable?”

Moneychanger: [Laughs] I’m sorry. You have to laugh—it’s not funny but you have to laugh.

Wright: What do patent medicines do? Some people call them pharmaceuticals and some call them drugs, but they actually are patented molecules, so let’s call them what they are: patent medicine.

Patent medicines can only suppress symptoms. They can’t cure a thing.

What cures? If we take a hard look at creation, human bodies are made of 72 percent water, amino acids, fat, carbohydrates, minerals, and vitamins, all from stuff in the food we eat, but it doesn’t take one molecule of patent medicine to build a human body. 

Think about it. When the mama’s pregnant, does she take patent medicine to make her baby come out strong? Exactly the opposite: she doesn’t go near that stuff. 


Here’s another way of looking at it. If your Chevy is broken will you fix it with Toyota parts? Those patent molecules are not part of the human biochemical system, so how are they to be expected to fix anything? To fix the Chevy you need only Chevy parts. To fix the human body you have to use molecules that the human body can use to rebuild itself. You can only do that with something natural, and you can’t patent a natural substance. 

When I read all this research on natural stuff, they get to the end and say, “Now we have to design a molecule that’s almost the same as the natural ones so we can patent it.” They say that right in print. They don’t want to use the natural substance because they can’t make enough bucks off it.

If we had a level playing field without folks trying to wipe out natural medicine all the time, fairly rapidly, in a decade or so, natural medicine would be curing or helping so many people so dramatically that health care cost would work its way down and the patent medicine companies would dry up. That’s exactly why they won’t allow a level playing field.


Put into your computer search engines “Fitzgerald report 1953.” What comes up will blow you away. It is a report to Congress, published in the Congressional Record but only let loose after Freedom of Information Act, as you might expect.

In 1953—I’m not kidding—Fitzgerald was an investigator for the Interstate Commerce Commission. A senator whose grandson had been cured of cancer by natural means asked him to investigate. Here’s a quote everybody can read for himself:“My investigation to-date should convince this committee that a conspiracy does exist to stop the free flow and use of drugs in interstate commerce which allegedly have solid therapeutic value. Public and private funds have been thrown around like confetti at a country fair to close up and destroy clinics, hospitals, and scientific research laboratories which do not conform to the viewpoint of medical associations.”

That quotes Benedict S. Fitzgerald, junior special counsel, United States Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, 1953. There is a long report on suppression of natural treatments right there in the Congressional Record for everybody to read. [Congressional Record, Appendix, page A5350, “A Report to the Senate Interstate Commerce Committee on the Need for Investigation of Cancer Research Organizations;” Extension of Remarks of Hon William Langer of North Dakota in the Senate of the United States, Monday, August 3, 1953.] 

That is why we are in the state we are today: the man says a conspiracy exists to stop the free flow and use in interstate commerce of natural medicines that heal.

Moneychanger: But you’ve been doing this for a long time and they haven’t stopped you yet, although they have certainly tried. Maybe there’s a reason to be optimistic. The cost of health care is skyrocketing and Obamacare will make it so much worse. That will drive a lot of doctors to quit medicine altogether.

Wright: Several of the doctors I know in our community have quit already.

Moneychanger: I know some, too. People at the top of their game said, “I can’t live with this. I can’t make enough money to keep practicing. I can’t pay my expenses.” With all that happening maybe more people will turn to alternative medicine. A huge number of people already use alternative medicine in some way or the other.

Wright: Yes, Franklin, but the more people use alternative medicine, the more they try to clamp down on alternatives. 

Here’s a plug here for a website: Alliance for Natural Health. They maintain a very well-educated staff who will continuously send you emails about the latest scheme to squash natural medicine.

Let me give you a list of schemes that I put out on my radio show


They’re trying to put compounding pharmacies out of business. [“They” always includes government regulatory agencies controlled by industry, usually working with pharmaceutical companies or professional organizations. – FS] I’m serious. And compounding pharmacies are the ones that supply bio-identical hormones. They’re trying to put them out of business with more and more restrictions. The worst is something called an office use restriction.

What’s that? Until lately I could call the compounding pharmacy and they could send me over half a dozen bottles of specially compounded magnesium without preservatives. Patient comes in with a kidney stone and we need that infusion of magnesium. It relaxes everything in the body, including the ureters. The kidney stone usually pops out after one or two injections and the patient doesn’t have to put up with the intense pain.

What’s FDA done? It is now illegal for physicians to have office use medication. We have to write a prescription for that person who’s just been wheeled in the door with kidney stones, and that person and/or member of his family has to truck all the way down to the compounding pharmacy, pick up the magnesium, which, by the way, the compounding pharmacy may not compound in advance, only on order. You’ve got to wait a couple hours for it, and then you can drive back to your doctor’s office, if he is still open by then, and now you can get your shot. That’s what they have done to it. That’s insane.

What kind of health care can you get? We can keep that stuff in stock; we’ve been doing it for 30 years, but now we can’t keep it in stock. 


Here’s another good one: let’s say you’ve got a knee or hip problem. Your doctor draws out some blood and uses the centrifuge to get platelets out of your blood. He takes those platelets and injects them into the knee or hip. That relieves a lot of people’s symptoms so they can avoid surgery for a while longer.

That’s been going on for years. Cost for treatment? $400 to $800. Guess what? The FDA has proposed that centrifuges in offices be banned, unless you have an FDA approved centrifuge and use FDA approved materials. Wait! What materials is this doctor using to inject your own platelets? He’s using your own platelets! The FDA won’t allow you to use your own platelets! FDA wants you to be forced to buy platelets processed from umbilical cords and placentas by only one special company approved to do this—imagine that! And there are two such centers in the eastern United States. You could get this treatment for $400 to $800 from your regular orthopedic surgeon. However, those two FDA-approved places, using platelets from somewhere and somebody else, cost $4,000 to $8,000. They are actually making this procedure less safe.


Here’s a really good one. FDA has proposed – los Federales, I want to call them—proposed that all listed research, vitamin research, mineral research, and botanical research, must be done according to the same procedures for investigational new drugs (IND). Well, as ANH reports, nutrition research has slowed down dramatically just since they made that proposal. They haven’t yet put the proposal into effect but they’ve proposed it and they want to enforce it at year-end. 

Why do they want to do that? In the first place because nobody can afford it except for the patent medicine companies. According to Forbes magazine FDA approval costs $1.2 billion. Look it up: $1.2 billion. 

That explains this: used to be if a woman was in danger of miscarrying her baby or had premature labor we could call up the compounding pharmacy and get progesterone compounded for 15 to 25 bucks per shot. She’d need about three to four shots. But what’s 100 bucks when you save your baby? 

Some company put progesterone through that Investigational New Drug (IND) process, presumably paid FDA megabucks for approval, and they got approved. So they sent letters to all compounding pharmacies that they are now prohibited from compounding progesterone at $15 to $25 bucks per shot. Guess what this approved stuff, Makena ®, costs? $1,500 for a shot, Franklin. 

Moneychanger: That’s criminal. The purpose of all regulation is to stifle competition. And of course, they always hide regulation behind the purple toga of concern for health, safety, etc.

Wright: Competition is not allowed. That’s why I get so angry: we don’t have a level playing field.

Did you hear about what’s happened with the non-patent medicine and natural substance called colchicine? It was used in Egyptian medicine 2000 years ago for the gout and Benjamin Franklin brought it to the United States from Europe, and it’s not patentable. Some company puts it through the IND process. They pay FDA for so-called approval and as soon as it’s approved FDA sends out a letter to all the compounding pharmacies: “Thou shalt not sell colchicine anymore.” Colchicine treatments would cost the people I work with eight cents a pill, and it sure does stop gout attacks—nice to have at 8 cents a pill. It now costs $5.45 a tablet.

All this arises from the FDA’s rule that you must put your research on natural stuff through the Investigational New Drug process.

I’m not done yet.


There’s an outfit called the United States Pharmacopoeia. They are private, but they’re part of the Big Pharma gang, and they’ve colluded with FDA. They’re supposed to be private. Guess what? They put out some new guidelines, crafted to designate estrogen as a dangerous drug, so dangerous that a compounding pharmacy will have to build a special negative pressure room so that not one molecule of this stuff will float out of that room.

What happens to it once you compound it? You take it home and you rub it on yourself. But these guidelines, which are now private guidelines, will probably be adopted by FDA unless there’s a great outcry from the public. Do you know what that will do to the cost of those bio-identical hormones, if they’re available at all? It will shoot up because you’ve got to pay $250,000 to $300,000 to put in a negative pressure room. Besides that, it’s now a very dangerous drug, which means they can charge more.


Here’s another one. These people are brazen. Los Federales put out a proposal that they could come into small testing laboratories and tell them how to develop lab tests. They specifically exempted large testing laboratories with more than a few branches. 

What’s even worse is that all laboratories, small or big, are already federally regulated. That should be a state responsibility, but they’re regulated by the Center for Medicaid Services (CMS). How they got to regulate all the laboratories we don’t know. 

Now los Federales at FDA want to add another layer of regulation. Their big reason is right out in the open. All these smaller new labs but not the big labs are developing genetic testing. FDA wants to supervise what they do because it looks like once you identify some parts of the genome you will find out that treating that person with a lot of the patent medicines will not be effective. So FDA wants to slow those small labs way down.

When we were introducing bio-identical hormones in 1982, 1983, we made sure to work at that laboratory to keep them safe by developing tests that tell you, “Oh, you’re metabolizing your hormones fine, or, no, you’re metabolizing carcinogens and you need to change your diet or take this vitamin and fix it and so forth.” The FDA hates bio-identical hormones. They tried to outlaw them in 2008; they didn’t get away with it because of the public outcry the Alliance for Natural Health helped turn up

But if they can regulate small and medium labs that have no branches then you’ll be forced to go through FDA approval for anything. The cost goes way up. If they happen to hate what you’re doing they could put more and more government roadblocks in your way. Basically we could not have developed the safety tests for bio-identical hormones under the regulations FDA now wants. If that had been in effect since 1982 we would be doing bio-identical hormones in the dark, without any safety testing.


Los Federales have made up something that you can find online called a “memorandum of understanding.” They want all the state pharmacy boards, not federal pharmacy boards, to sign it. If they do sign it, the FDA will be able to interfere with interstate commerce in compounded medication. They are proposing that if you are compounding pharmacy you should not be able to sell more than 4-5% across state lines. They want to interfere with interstate commerce. FDA is trying to get all the state pharmacy boards to sign on voluntarily. 


What’s the bottom line? Natural medicine is forced to compete on a playing field tilted 90 percent upward in favor of the patent medicine people. Worse, FDA has made more proposals to stifle natural medicine in this last year and a half than they’ve ever before floated at one time. They simply usurp jurisdiction where they have none. 

I’d encourage you to go to the Alliance for Natural Health. On their website they explain what the problem is here, and then over here post a pre-drawn letter. You put in your name and address. You can either send out the letter as written, or you can change it and bang! Send it off to your congresspeople. There’s no point sending it to the FDA. They’re not elected officials and they won’t pay anything attention. 

Will those letters do any good? Go back to 2008 when FDA tried to outlaw the major component in women’s hormones, namely estriol. They sent a letter to every compounding pharmacy in the country that said in effect, “Thou shalt not compound estriol.” What got them going? The Wyeth Company. They were responding to a “citizens’ petition” from the Wyeth Company. Right, and if I put in a citizens’ petition they’d pay a lot of attention to it. 

So FDA sent a letter to every compounding pharmacy trying to outlaw estriol. Alliance for Natural Health prepared a special email with a pre-drawn letter to Congress that explains estriol, that it is natural and in every woman’s body, it isn’t going to hurt anything, and what FDA trying to do to us. 

A lot of letters flashed off to congress. How do I know? Alliance for Natural Health saved some of the emails. One woman wrote, “Congressman So-So: If you outlaw my estriol and my bio-identical hormones, I am going to come down to your office and have PMS once a month.”

Moneychanger: [Laughs].

Wright: I thought it was excellent.

Within the first week and a half they sent 120,000 emails to Congress and funny thing, FDA just quit going after estriol. So that action saved bio-identical hormones for women.

Why do I keep going on with this? It’s unfortunate, but to maintain even the small amount of health care freedom we now have, working with safe materials and helping people’s health, we have to fight like hell for it right now.

Moneychanger: And nobody’s going to do it for you. 

Wright: So when people come to the clinic we tell them, “Please go to this website, read about the troubles, and help us out.” I also have a radio program every Saturday from noon to 2:00 Pacific Time, telling people about this every week. 

Moneychanger: We’re not talking about taking any big chances, just objecting enough that congress will be moved to do something. 

I really do appreciate your time. Sorry, I hit your hot button there but it’s my hot button too.

Wright: I appreciate you getting the word out, sir.

Article Citations for hCG

Meng X-L, Rennert OM, Chan W-Y. Human Chorionic Gonadotropin Induces Neuronal Differentiation of PC12 Cells through Activation of Stably Expressed Lutropin Choriogonadotropin Receptor Endocrinology 2007;148:5865-5873

Patil AA, Nagaraj MP The effect of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) on functional recovery of spinal cord sectioned rats. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1983 69:205–218

Patil AA, Filmore K, Hill D The effect of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) on restoration of physiological continuity of the spinal cord. A preliminary report. Int Surg 1990;75:54–57

Valdes-Socin H, Salvi R, Daly AF, Gaillard RC, Quatresooz P, Tebeu PM,  Pralong FP, Beckers A. Hypogonadism in a patient with a mutation in the luteinizing-subunit gene. N Engl J Med 351:2619–2625

Valdes-Socin H, Salvi R, Thiry A, Daly AF, Pralong FP, Gaillard R, Beckers A. Testicular Effects of Isolated Luteinizing Hormone Deficiency and Reversal by Long-Term Human Chorionic Gonadotropin Treatment J Clin Endocrinol Metab, January 2009

Liu PY et al.  A Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial of Recombinant Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin on Muscle Strength and Physical Strength and Activity in Older men with Partial Age-Related Androgen Deficiency. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2002 (July) 87(7); 3125-3135

Liu PY et al.  Do Reproductive Hormones Modify Insulin Sensitivity and Metabolism in Older Men?  A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Clinical Trial of Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin.  Eur J Endocrinol 2003;148:55-66

Buvat J, et al. Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin Treatment of Non-Organic Erectile Failure and Lack of Sexual Desire: A Double-Blind Study. Urology 1987;XXX(3):216-219

See more at

WARNING & DISCLAIMER: By publishing this material, neither The Moneychanger nor the author/interviewee recommends or endorses any specific treatment or therapy for any physical condition or disease. Neither The Moneychanger nor the author/interviewee guarantees or warrants any results from any treatment discussed, nor assumes any express or implied liability for any use to which the reader puts this information. By this interview, the interviewee does not prescribe any treatment whatsoever for anyone who is not his patient. All the information here is offered for information purposes only, subject to the reader’s own research, prudence, and judgment.

Originally published April 2015