I had forgotten all about the most common medical use of O2, namely for patients with severe breathing difficulties due to emphesema (sp?) and/or advanced age, etc. My mother-in-law spend her last months in a nose mask, sitting next to an oxygen tank, so I should have remaind aware. But my current involvement with HBOT (hyperbaric oxygen therapy) ~ something decidedly different ~ is intense enough to block out other memories, I suppose.

In our case, we never had to make an "either/or" decision to go with HBOT to the exclusion of anything else, because we had no other real alternative. Peggy's neurologist "prescribed" large does of a non-prescription supplement, Co Q-10, as a kind of "can't hurt" attempt, an effort that has recently seemed promising for treating different but similar neuological problems ~ and we have NOT discontinued the Co Q-10 when starting the HBOT. In fact, Dr. Harch never recommends that any other treatment be discontinued, and always offers the HBOT as an additional effort.

HBOT is not technically "experimental" for neurological applications, but it is unapproved for reimbursement as treatment for many such conditions. The term used in this situation if "off-label" rather than "experimental." The kind of large-scale double-blind testing generally required for Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement is unlikely to be easily done, because it is so expensive, and no drug company is likely to finance the research because there is no potential large-scale profit: you can't take out a patent on oxygen!

There is a similar problem in the UK in regard to approval/reimbursement from National Health. In his book, Harch tells about a group of patients in Scotland who have pooled their resources and now own an HBOT clinic where a staff of MDs are their employees. This gets around some bureaucratic red tape ~ the doctors would not be allowed to own and operate such clinics in the UK, but they are allowed to work at them.