RSS and ITSAN

Everyone is trying to get an edge into the therapy of the RSS suffering patients. The NEA, ITSAN and others are all selling something with the promise of huge success. In addition the websites routinely beg for donations. ITSAN in its recent webpage from March 31, 2016 states they have gotten into a new partnership with Dr Wong Skin Care Products. This partnership is “intended to raise awareness of TSA.”

Apart from blunt truth our lives sink decadently amid the perfume of hints and suggestions.

Whitehead

The skin care line which lists a “breakthough” contains ingredients that are natural, herbal and non-steroidal are supposed to contain Eastern botanicals with the rigor of Western sciences. There is no proposed evidence of any magical ingredient or any magical combination that would have anything to do besides lubricating the skin. No other benefit is evident, no matter how much marketing. For sure they should not be used on the irritable skin of the RSS patients until allergy has been ruled out. This vague promise of a new awareness and a partnership to help unsuspecting, searching, suffering RSS patients is unconscionable. ITSAN, when I started the site several years ago was intended to be scientific, helpful and intent in helping TSA sufferers. This was to occur by leading the patients to good medical care. Donations and selling of products was not in keeping with the founder’s philosophy. There are supportive medications that help patients’ symptoms but there is no magical cream. In fact, most creams irritate especially at the beginning of the withdrawal process. I cannot believe that Dr Wong’s formulations are any different.

This nod to “Eastern mysteries” smacks of snake oil salesmanship. How dare ITSAN promise the unsuspecting, suffering patients who have been lured into their website with the promise of help and cure by offering this unproven simplistic preparation. I am sure that monies have changed hands. Transparency is required.

About the Author: Dr Marvin Rapaport, MD

In 1978 I initiated and set up the contact and photo dermatitis clinic at UCLA. There was a need to evaluate a large group of patients who exhibited severe eczematoid rashes, especially on the face. Patients were referred from all over Southern California. All patients underwent a lengthy history and examination. Further evaluations included blood studies, allergy patch testing, special sunlight (photo) testing and skin biopsies. From the start it was apparent that most patients experienced a mild dermatitis on various parts of the body that progressively worsened. Their histories always included numerous doctor visits, multiple physicians, and therapy consisting of an increasing amount of corticosteroids. My testing failed to reveal any specific culprit chemicals, cosmetics, perfumes, workplace or recreational exposures. It became increasingly clear that the physician’s therapy, the corticosteroids, was invariably causing the problem. I wrote 7 scientific articles that were published in the most august peer-reviewed dermatologic journals and I gave many lectures at various dermatology meetings. To this day an unfortunate reluctance exists on the part of most physicians to accept this simple concept.