Dr. Weeks’ Comment: IPT is patented but not clinically proven – why?
To get a patent costs a few thousand dollars but to do adequate clinical studies costs a few million…
SOURCE: http://iptq.com/patents.htm see this interesting website maintained by an early adopter and scientist Chris Duffield, Ph.D.
Three patents have been issued for IPT in the United States, and the last two have also been issued in Canada. These are all primarily method patents. And medical method patents are generally not enforceable, except through contracts. To my knowledge, none of these patents have ever made any money for their holders, and in fact, they all cost money. However, they do serve as brief and clear descriptions of IPT, and they serve as historic markers.
The 1939 patent, of course, expired long ago. The 1990 and 1992 patents still have some years left, but their potential profitability is in doubt. Their current ownership lies with the inventors.
The 1939 patent, titled Intravenous Therapy for the Treatment of Syphilis (US patent number 2,145,869) was issued in the United States to Dr. Perez Garcia 1 for his method for treating syphilis using insulin and large doses of the heavy metal drugs available at that time, before antibiotics came on the scene. In advanced syphilis, also known as tertiary syphilis or neurosyphilis, the disease spreads to the CNS (central nervous system–brain and spinal cord), causing dementia, paralysis, and death. In the 1930s, it was considered incurable. The problem was that a heavy metal drug dose strong enough to kill the disease organisms in the CNS would also kill the patient. Dr. Perez Garcia 1 was able to use insulin to get a larger dose of the drug both into and out of the CNS, to eradicate the disease without the deadly side effects. (Interestingly, this is different from most current IPT applications, in which a goal is to use a smaller dose of drugs.) Though thousands of people at the time could have benefited from IPT treatment for syphilis, and though this was one of the only treatments demonstrated to work for advanced stages of the disease, it never caught on. And with the availability of antibiotics, it became a footnote.
Complete text of 1939 patent.
The 1990 patent, titled Insulin Potentiation Therapy (US patent number 4,971,951) was issued to Drs. Perez Garcia y Bellon 2,Dr. Perez Garcia 3, and Dr. SGA, in both the US and Canada. It aimed to be a broad patent covering IPT methods and important uses which had emerged over the five decades since the previous patent. It gives case studies for several types of cancer (breast, lung, cervical, and bone), and viral deseases (AIDS and herpes). My apologies for the confusing description of cancer as a viral disease. Some cancers probably are caused by viruses, but many probably are not. I helped write and edit this patent. But the patent attorney ignored my strong objections on this point. No big deal. Since this is a medical method patent, rather than a drug composition or medical device patent, it would be difficult or impossible to enforce (other than through contracts), although it still has about 8 years remaining.
Complete text of 1990 patent. (34k file)
The 1992 patent, titled Method for Potentiation of a Therapeutic Agent (US patent number 5,155,096) was also issued to Dr. Perez Garcia y Bellon 2, Dr. Perez Garcia 3, and Dr. SGA, in both the US and Canada. It is a much broader and longer patent, attempting to cover most possible IPT applications across the very wide field of medicine. There is a greatly extended discussion of the scientific background, and there are many more case studies. And the distinction between viral diseases and cancer is made. (Note that in recent years, Dr. Perez Garcia 3 no longer uses the enema this patent lists at the beginning of each IPT treatment, much to the relief of his patients, no doubt. ) Again, I helped write and edit this patent. And like the 1990 patent, this one is probably unenforceable (except through contracts), though it still has about 10 years left.
Complete text of 1992 patent. (77k file)