83
take that type of health concern into its own hands was decided by
authorities at the Arthritis Foundation as something we should
take a position against. That may seem to a number of people to
put the Arthritis Foundation in a position of being against DMSO,
rather than pro or rather than neutral.
There are many people who think we are against it. It does not
make you popular with arthritis sufferers to tell them that what
they believe may provide them some relief is something that is
probably a ripoff and that they should stay away. They are desper-
ate, and they generally disregard such advice, and they don't like
the people who have told them that maybe they are getting hooked
into something.
The Arthritis Foundation is not against DMSO. We would be
delighted if it were established by appropriate scientific procedures
to be effective. I don't think the safety question seems to be a
major one. That is pretty clear. But the question of effectiveness
for arthritis, particularly for inflammatory arthritis, particularly
for chronic arthritis, is not clearly resolved. The question of finding
an agent that will deal with the pain problem in a disease that
goes on and/or involves a search for something that works not just
for a short-term overnight basis, but in long-term chronic use.
That is another aspect we have not heard much about today. But
it has to be a concern to rheumatologists and to the people in the
scientific community who are trying to measure the relative values
of agents of this kind.
The question concerning DMSO, of course, has been asked over
and over again: Why is it taking so long? There has been an awful
lot of looking for someone to blame, of seeking scapegoats, of re-
criminations. We have heard a lot of it today. I think this contrib-
utes to an atmosphere that makes it very difficult to establish
scientific truth. Truth is what the Arthritis Foundation is primar-
ily interested in seeing come out of all this.
Somebody at the very outset this morning used a phrase that
clicked with me. "Let's break the logjam." We couldn't agree more
that that is the most important thing to do. But not, in my view,
with compromise of accepted scientific standards.
If it is proper and appropriate and accepted to modify those
standards in this particular case, well, and good.
I would like to end with a plea that the committee ask the right
question. I sense that it has already been decided by everybody
that DMSO does work, and that the question being asked is, how
do we get this wonderful drug which works so beautifully approved
for use? I would like to propose, in conclusion, modification of that
question: How can it be established with certainty the degree to
which DMSO does or does not work for arthritis? To my knowl-
edge, that has not yet been satisfactorily resolved by the scientific
method.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bennett follows, as well as his
supplementary statement, submitted for the record on March 27,
1980.]
PREPARED STATEMENT BY CHARLES C. BENNETT
My name is Charles C. Bennett. I have been on the national office staff of the
Arthritis Foundation for 13 years, at one period as Director of Public Relations, and
