Authorization For Administration Of Medication Form 2010: Fill & Download for Free

As a preface, this is my second answer in examining the National Medical Commission Bill, 2017. This answer will dedicate on the differences in structure between the existing Medical Council of India (MCI) and the proposed National Medical Commission (NMC), which is going to replace MCI.This answer is going to be long, so please bear with it.First we will look at the differences in composition of the two groups.The Medical Council of India.Section 3 of THE INDIAN MEDICAL COUNCIL ACT, 1951, titled “Constitution and composition of the council”The Central Government shall cause to be constituted a Council consisting of the following members namely:—one member from each State other than a Union Territory, to be nominated by the Central Government in consultation with the State Government concerned;one member from each University, to be elected from amongst the members of the medical faculty of the University by members of the Senate of the University or in case the University has no senate, by members of the Court;one member from each State in which a State Medical Register is maintained, to be elected from amongst themselves by persons enrolled on such Register who possess the medical qualifications included in the First or the Second Schedule or in Part II of the Third Schedule;seven members to be elected from amongst themselves by persons enrolled on any of the State Medical Registers who possess the medical qualifications included in Part I of the Third Schedule;eight members to be nominated by the Central Government.The President and Vice-President of the Council shall be elected by the members of the Council from amongst themselves.No act done by the Council shall be questioned on the ground merely of the existence of any vacancy in, or any defect in the constitution of, the Council.This act underwent an amendment in 2010, where the council was dissolved and a Board of Governors was established under Section 3A of the Act.3A. Power of Central Government to supersede the Council and to constitute a Board of Governors.On and from the date of commencement of the Indian Medical Council (Amendment) Act, 2010, the Council shall stand superseded and the President, Vice-President and other members of the Council shall vacate their offices and shall have no claim for any compensation, whatsoever.The Council shall be reconstituted in accordance with the provisions of section 3 within a period of 2[three years] from the date of supersession of the Council under sub-section (1).Upon the supersession of the Council under sub-section (1) and until a new Council is constituted in accordance with section 3, the Board of Governors constituted under sub-section (4) shall exercise the powers and perform the functions of the Council under this Act.The Central Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute the Board of Governors which shall consist of not more than seven persons as its members, who shall be persons of eminence and of unimpeachable integrity in the fields of medicine and medical education, and who may be either nominated members or members, ex officio, to be appointed by the Central Government, one of whom shall be named by the Central Government as the Chairperson of the Board of Governors.The Chairperson and the other members, other than the members, ex officio, shall be entitled to such sitting fee and travelling and other allowances as may be determined by the Central Government.The Board of Governors shall meet at such time and places and shall observe such rules of procedure in regard to the transaction of business at its meetings as is applicable to the Council.Two-third of the members of the Board of Governors shall constitute the quorum for its meetings.No act or proceedings of the Board of Governors shall be invalid merely by reason of—any vacancy in, or any defect in the constitution of, the Board of Governors; orany irregularity in the procedure of the Board of Governors not affecting the merits of the case.A member having any financial or other interest in any matter coming before the Board of Governors for decision shall disclose his interest in the matter before he may, if allowed by the Board of Governors, participate in such proceedings.The Chairperson and the other members of the Board of Governors shall hold office during the pleasure of the Central Government.The National Medical Commission (not yet formed)Section 4 of the National Medical Commission bill 2017, titled “Composition of commission”.The Commission shall consist of the following persons to be appointed by the Central Government, namely:—a Chairperson;twelve ex officio Members;eleven part-time Members; andan ex officio Member Secretary.The Chairperson shall be a person of outstanding ability, proven administrative capacity and integrity, possessing a post graduate degree in any discipline of medical sciences from any University and having experience of not less than twenty years in the field of medical sciences, out of which at least ten years shall be as a leader in the area of healthcare delivery, growth and development of modern medicine or medical education.The following persons shall be the ex officio Members of the Commission, namely:—the President of the Under-Graduate Medical Education Board;the President of the Post-Graduate Medical Education Board;the President of the Medical Assessment and Rating Board;the President of the Ethics and Medical Registration Board;the Director General of Health Services, Directorate General of Health Services, New Delhi;the Director General, Indian Council of Medical Research;the Director, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi or his nominee;the Director, Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh or his nominee;the Director, Jawaharlal Institute of Post-Graduate Medical Education and Research, Puducherry or his nominee;the Director, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai or his nominee;the Director, North Eastern Indira Gandhi Regional Institute of Health and Medical Sciences, Shillong or his nominee; andone person to represent the Ministry of the Central Government dealing with Health and Family Welfare, not below the rank of Additional Secretary to the Government of India, to be nominated by that Ministry.The following persons shall be appointed as part-time Members of the Commission, namely:—three Members to be appointed from amongst persons of ability, integrity and standing, who have special knowledge and professional experience in such areas including management, law, medical ethics, health research, consumer or patient rights advocacy, science and technology and economics;three Members to be appointed on rotational basis from amongst the nominees of the States and Union territories in the Medical Advisory Council for a term of two years in such manner as may be prescribed;five Members to be elected by the registered medical practitioners from amongst themselves from such regional constituencies, and in such manner, as may be prescribed.The differences I noticed.In the MCI before 2010, most of the members were appointed by either the Central Government or the state governments. Also eight members were directly nominated by the Central Government.After 2010, the “interim” board of governors which made the MCI were almost entirely appointed by the central government.Many times, cases of corruption were noticed[1][2][3][4][5] within the MCI. A parliamentary committee brought out that the MCI was plagued with corruption, with saying that the MCI became a “club” of influential medical practitioners who act without any fear of governance and regulations.[6]Also, because most of the members were appointed from the Central Government, such members were most likely to be appointed who had powerful political connections. Many times, the MCI was caught giving accreditation to shady medical colleges which were below par the minimum required standards, which were opened by some political leaders and councillors.If you examine the structure of the NMC, however, the percentage of members appointed by the governments is less. Most of the members are either heads of premier institutions, or will be elected within regional medical councils.Additional points of interest.Another point to be noted is that all powers of accreditation are not held by the NMC, unlike the MCI. It is instead divided into four autonomous boards, as said under Section 16 of the NMC bill —the Under-Graduate Medical Education Board (Under-Graduate Medical Education Board);the Post-Graduate Medical Education Board (Post-Graduate Medical Education Board);the Medical Assessment and Rating Board (Medical Assessment and Rating Board); andthe Ethics and Medical Registration Board (Ethics and Medical Registration Board).Another thing which was added in the NMC bill was the establishment of a Medical Advisory Council (under Chapter III of the bill) which will contain not only the members of the NMC, but also will contain vice-chancellors of health universities of each state, as well asthe Chairman, University Grants Commission;the Director, National Assessment and Accreditation Council; andfour Members nominated by the Central Government from amongst the Directors in the Indian Institutes of Technology, Indian Institutes of Management and the Indian Institute of Science.The function of this council is to be a platform for collaboration in medical education, training and research as well as serve a platform for states and union territories to put forth their views and opinions. This was lacking in MCI.These features will ensure increased autonomy of the medical regulatory authority, and also will foster increased transparency and collaboration with R&D facilities of the country.I hope this answer well explains the differences.Thanks for the A2A Atmaja BandyopadhyayRegards,Sandeep Das (सन्दीप दास)Footnotes[1] CBI registers case against MCI officials under Prevention of Corruption Act[2] Why is MCI secretive about charges against Dr Ketan Desai?[3] Court extends judicial custody of Ketan Desai by 14 days[4] CBI: Desai owns 10 houses[5] CIC critical of corruption in Medical Council of India, orders it to come clean[6] Medical Council of India largely responsible for corruption in health care, reveals committee - Firstpost

Guide to the Answer:A. History of VaccinationB. Major Arguments Against VaccinationThe history of vaccination is long - very long. I think in order to understand our current resistance to vaccination you need to understand the history a little. Throughout the story you will see a pattern -“We don’t like what we don’t understand, in fact it scares us, and this monster is mysterious at least!”Historians noted that people began observing the protective effect of acquiring some diseases, such as smallpox as early as 430 BC.[1] Records from the 10th century indicate Chinese physicians were inoculating through a process called “variolation” - deliberate infection with disease by blowing scabs up a healthy person’s nose. Variolation worked, too - cutting mortality from around 30% down to 1–2%.[2]Why would it take so many centuries? There were several problems. First, the early inoculation attempts worked — sort of. Often the person would get a lesser form of the disease. Sometimes they wouldn't. Sometimes they’d contract another disease. Because the physicians had no clue about other blood-borne diseases, sterile technique, secondary infections and the like, they often caused unexpected problems that were rather difficult to understand.Above everything else — no one really understood why people got sick in the first place, much less why this method of making a person sick — just less sick — worked. Germ theory of disease was proposed in 1546, and improved in 1762 — but largely ignored in favor the more plausible miasma (bad air) theory, which went back to antiquity (note to scientists — beware of “settled science”!) So the physicians by and large believed that smallpox was caused by “bad air”, and for whatever reason, exposing people to the lesions and giving them the disease this way protected them against the disease contracted through the “bad air” — particularly if a worse case of “bad air” came along.The physicians were pragmatic — they observed it worked, so they wanted to do it, but let’s be real here, the treatment is a bit gross. A lot gross. The physicians were cutting open scabs from the following types of lesions:People were terrified of this disease, and rightfully so. It killed between 30% to 100% of the people who got it, depending on the strain. Many people who survived were scarred for life. They might go blind, or become completely crippled from the disease attacking their bones and joints.Physicians were asking people to let them take fluid or powder from those pustules, and blow it up their nose or inject it right into them. Think about how frightening that must have been! They didn't even want to be near someone with the disease, or near someone who had been near a person with it because they all knew it was contagious. This was a terrible invasion of privacy.So people did what people always do — they invented a million reasons the physician should NOT do this terrifying thing to them.In 1721 a tremendous smallpox epidemic broke out in Boston. The Rev. Cotton Mather initiated a highly controversial inoculation program. Yes, that Cotton Mather, of the Salem Witch Trials — he wasn’t all bad.mezzotint portrait of Cotton Mather (Feb. 12, 1663 - Feb. 13, 1728), American Puritan clergyman.Peter Pelham, artist - http://www.columbia.edu/itc/law/witt/images/lect3/Cotton Mather was inspired by a slave named Onesimus, who told him about his inoculation in Africa, and by a letter published to the Royal Society of London in 1721 by Emanuale Timoni describing the procedure and its efficacy. He was backed by exactly one physician — Zabdiel Boylston. He faced opposition that was religious and scientific.Why do you fight God’s will? (doesn’t this sound familiar)There’s not enough evidence to use that method (not a bad science argument).Cotton Mather and Zabdiel Boylston decided to argue against the religious people with a fairly succinct message — this is no different than any other invasive medical procedure.And the scientific argument? Well — that meant collecting data. So they began inoculating people — not as many as they could have if they had had the support of the town’s physicians as a whole, but they managed to inoculate 287, and only 2% died, compared to nearly 15% of those in the city at large.[3] That largely put the matter to rest in the mind of the scientific community, and the practice was adopted to the great health benefit of the Boston community. (See graph below)The Fight Over Inoculation During the 1721 Boston Smallpox Epidemic - Science in the NewsNow, keep in mind, people still had no idea why this worked. Only that it did.Twenty years later, in 1774, a farmer in England named Benjamin Jetsay contracted cowpox. All the dairy farmers and milkmaids knew if you got cowpox, you could safely nurse people with smallpox and you wouldn't get the disease. Cowpox was much milder than any form of smallpox, so this was very good. Jetsay had heard about inoculating people with smallpox, and even though he wasn't a doctor, he decided to deliberately inoculate his wife and sons with cowpox.[4]It worked.It was another twenty years before Edward Jenner caught wind of this wonderful phenomenon, and decided to stake his career as a physician on it. In 1796, Jenner gave his first trial, inoculating a child with material he gathered from a milkmaid’s pustule. He continued his inoculations, and two years later published “An Inquiry into the Causes and Effects of the Variolae Vacciniae.”[5] The book was pretty much a hit — people read it — and debated it widely — but it wasn't really accepted by the scientific community immediately. Jenner had to do a lot of work to get this idea accepted. However, he was tireless, and vaccination spread through England, and ultimately to America as well.That’s not to say it didn't have people up in arms!James Gillray's The Cow-Pock—or—the Wonderful Effects of the New Inoculation!, Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, LC-USZC4-3147As you can see from the image abov,e there were those who thought that cowpox inoculation might turn you into a cow. Does this really seem much different than modern-day fears?All this — and people still thought disease was transmitted by “bad air”. Although several physicians working with microscopes had described microorganisms and implicated them in the bubonic plague (black death), smallpox, measles, rabies, and others, their work by and large just wasn’t accepted by physicians or the public.This work was probably set back in no small part due to the understandable fear of Antonie van Leeuwenhoek[6], “the father of Microbiology”, who developed a unique method of grinding lenses in the 1650s that enabled him to create microscopes of spectacular resolution. Due to a lack of patent law protection, he guarded his secrets and took them to his grave, and similar caliber instruments weren't developed for almost 200 years. This set back microbiology by about the same amount.The Geographer - by Johannes Vermeer - historians believe painting is of Antonie van Leeuwenhoek[7]It wasn’t until 1854 when a physician named John Snow, working to stem a cholera outbreak, realized that the disease must be transmitted by an agent present in water [8]— and that it was coming from feces of infected individuals. He meticulously detailed the contamination of water used for drinking and cooking with waste from infected individuals in a number of cases. Only after removing a single pump he believed infected with cholera did the epidemic in London subside.After another outbreak, he argued strenuously for filtration of water. He was convinced that people’s poop was contaminating water, and in drinking water with poop from sick individuals, everyone was getting sick and dying. Unfortunately for the citizens of London, and the world elsewhere, his ideas were slow to catch on. Why?It was too disgusting to accept.[9]How slow? Well, in 1854 the Italian scientist Filippo Pacini published a full description of the virus[10] that caused cholera, and in subsequent years further described how to properly treat the disease as well as how the disease became so deadly[11]. Somewhat later, and independently of him, scientific literature not being quite so easy to share in the 19th century, Robert Koch published his work describing the same bacterium[12] (1884).Now you would think the matter of cholera settled, right? It is, after all, 2019. We've understood how to combat this disease now for over 150 years.WHO Cholera Kit inforgaphic. [13]From the infographic: “Researchers estimate there are as many as 4 million cases each year and up to 143,000 deaths annually (2017).”OK, but what does this have to do with worldwide anti-vaccination sentiment?A lot, I’m afraid. You see, the persistence of cholera is only one symptom of the anti-vaccination sentiment that’s been around since the beginning of vaccination. The first cholera vaccination was available in the 1880s.[14] People are still afraid to get vaccinated even when they know they run a high risk of contracting and dying from cholera, a disease that has mortality between 10–90%, and can kill within 2 hours[15].2 hours.Did I mention there are vaccines for this? Now you’d think people would be MORE afraid of cholera than of vaccines, but — no. In fact, they’re not even afraid enough of cholera to wash their hands or drink bottled water consistently.[16] People are weird like that.Throughout history, and worldwide, people invoke the same reasons over and over and over for why vaccination is bad, or at least just isn't right for them.[17][18][19] [20][21] [22] [23] [24]Moral/Religious FoundationInvulnerabilityCost/Benefit Ratio isn't worthwhile* (this is complex)Fear of Bad EffectsNone of these are irrational — per se — not even the moral/religious foundation argument.Moral/Religious FoundationThis argument hasn't changed much. There aren’t that many groups [25]that claim a religious exemption to vaccination, and those that do aren’t under significant expansion in numbers. You’ve got the Christian Scientists, and some members of the Dutch Reformed church. For major religions, that’s it.InvulnerabilityCalvin of Calvin and Hobbes - being selective about accepting realityPeople are very good at this — feeling invincible. Invulnerable. That’s why 15% of Americans don’t use seat belts[26] and 43% of drivers admit to texting and driving[27] (seriously, people STOP IT!). When it comes to vaccines, a fair number of people don’t believe they or their child will actually become ill, so they forgo vaccines. This is a major factor in why people routinely travel without proper vaccinations.Cost/Benefit Ratio isn’t worthwhile* (this is complex)Costs of vaccination vary widely. Many people receive free or low-cost vaccination for children — but the money cost isn't the only cost involved. There’s time spent traveling to and from the provider. This may be fairly trivial in much of the Western world, where vaccinations can be received at any grocery store pharmacy as well as community clinic or hospital, but in developing nations it can present a huge roadblock. A parent may not want to deal with a child being feverish or cranky after vaccination after a tough night on a previous course. They may perceive vaccines as not being effective enough to justify the cost or inconvenience (this is especially true with influenza vaccines). A lot goes into the decision to actually get up and go get a vaccination — and people acting in rational self-interest don’t always weigh the factors the way those invested in public health would hope they should.Fear of Bad EffectsBy far and away, the current anti-vaccine sentiment roared to a new momentum with the 1998 study led by Andrew Wakefield that seemed to link autism to the combined measles mumps & rubella (MMR) vaccine.[28]Andrew Wakefield, Certified FraudThat study was a disaster from the moment of publication — and honestly, it wreaked havoc in far more than just vaccine science. In that same paper, now retracted, which cost Wakefield his medical license, [29]Wakefield et al. proposed the now terribly popular “leaky gut” theory that you can find all over the place — that GI disturbances from food cause a “leaky gut” which in turn leads to “bad blood” and every ailment known to mankind. All of it is modern quackery nonsense, and all of it widely embraced by far more than just those afraid of vaccines.The study was a disaster — with a selected sample size of 12, no control, and terrible statistics, The Lancet never should have published it. Publish it they did, and the damage was done. His co-authors ultimately retracted the paper, but Wakefield went on a martyr tour, selling his “leaky gut” hypothesis. After that, as they say, the horse was out of the barn, and hysterics piled on.“Thiomersal!” became the new rallying cry. As with the MMR issue, there was little scientific evidence for that hypothesis, and a lot against it.[30][31]In fact, there is only one serious research group pursuing this theory at this time, and they self-refer to their own studies most of the time, a hallmark of quack science. Moreover, even though the use of the preservative was phased out[32] in most of Europe and the U.S. after 1999, autism rates continue to rise — making the correlation hypothesis very difficult to support.This is the oldest, and most intractable of the problems — yet seemingly the most simple. Unfortunately, it goes hand-in-hand with distrust of authority, so reinforcement by peer networks is playing a large role in the spread of anti-vaccination sentiment.Combating this movement will require a good deal of public health work[33] — but it also is a responsibility of every parent and citizen. Talk to your friends and neighbors. Encourage vaccination with positive, fact-based information. When you see them spreading misinformation, don’t be afraid to point it out — tactfully. (OK, I admit — this can be hard!). Ultimately vaccination protects both individuals and the population.It’s a wonderful time we live in, when so many awful diseases can be prevented. Now, if only we can get everyone to fully appreciate how lucky we are!Now go check to make sure your vaccines are up-to-date.And get your flu shot!Don’t forget — immunizations are for adults, too!Relaxed. Researched. Respectful. - War ElephantFootnotes[1] http://Gross, C. P., & Sepkowitz, K. A. (1998). The myth of the medical breakthrough: smallpox, vaccination, and Jenner reconsidered. International journal of infectious diseases, 3(1), 54-60.[2] Smallpox: Variolation[3] The Fight Over Inoculation During the 1721 Boston Smallpox Epidemic - Science in the News[4] http:// Nicolau Barquet and Pere Domingo. "Smallpox: The Triumph over the Most Terrible of the Ministers of Death". Annals of Internal Medicine. Retrieved 2006-10-26.[5] http://Jenner, E. (1800). An inquiry into the causes and effects of the variolae vaccinae, a disease discovered in some of the western counties of England, particularly Gloucestershire, and known by the name of the cow pox. author.[6] Antonie van Leeuwenhoek | Biography, Discoveries, & Facts[7] The Geographer by Johannes Vermeer: Geography in Fine Art[8] http://Snow, J. (1855). On the mode of communication of cholera. John Churchill.[9] http://Chapelle, Frank (2005) Wellsprings. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press. ISBN 0-8135-3614-6. p. 82[10] http://Pacini, F. (1854). Osservazioni microscopiche e deduzioni patologiche sul cholera asiatico. tip. di F. Bencini.[11] Who first discovered cholera?[12] http://Koch, R. (1884). An address on cholera and its bacillus. British medical journal, 2(1236), 453.[13] World Health Organization[14] http://Barrett, A. D., & Stanberry, L. R. (2009). Vaccines for biodefense and emerging and neglected diseases. Academic Press.[15] Cholera - Symptoms and causes[16] http://KOZICKI, MARKUS, ROBERT STEFFEN, and MEINRAD SCHÄR. "‘Boil it Cook it, Peel it or Forget it’: Does this Rule Prevent Travellers ‘Diarrhoea?." International journal of epidemiology 14.1 (1985): 169-172.[17] The Four Main Reasons People Don't Vaccinate[18] http://Gordon, D., Waller, J., & Marlow, L. A. (2011). Attitudes to HPV vaccination among mothers in the British Jewish community: reasons for accepting or declining the vaccine. Vaccine, 29(43), 7350-7356.[19] http://Canning, H. S., Phillips, J., & Stephen Allsup, M. D. (2005). Health care worker beliefs about influenza vaccine and reasons for non‐vaccination–a cross‐sectional survey. Journal of clinical nursing, 14(8), 922-925.[20] http://Kee, S. Y., Lee, J. S., Cheong, H. J., Chun, B. C., Song, J. Y., Choi, W. S., ... & Kim, W. J. (2007). Influenza vaccine coverage rates and perceptions on vaccination in South Korea. Journal of Infection, 55(3), 273-281.[21] http://Singleton, J. A., Santibanez, T. A., & Wortley, P. M. (2005). Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination of adults aged≥ 65: racial/ethnic differences. American journal of preventive medicine, 29(5), 412-420.[22] http://Constantine, N. A., & Jerman, P. (2007). Acceptance of human papillomavirus vaccination among Californian parents of daughters: a representative statewide analysis. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40(2), 108-115.[23] http://Darden, P. M., Thompson, D. M., Roberts, J. R., Hale, J. J., Pope, C., Naifeh, M., & Jacobson, R. M. (2013). Reasons for not vaccinating adolescents: National Immunization Survey of Teens, 2008–2010. Pediatrics, peds-2012.[24] http://Francis, M. R., Nohynek, H., Larson, H., Balraj, V., Mohan, V. R., Kang, G., & Nuorti, J. P. (2018). Factors associated with routine childhood vaccine uptake and reasons for non-vaccination in India: 1998–2008. Vaccine, 36(44), 6559-6566.[25] http://Grabenstein, J. D. (2013). What the world's religions teach, applied to vaccines and immune globulins. Vaccine, 31(16), 2011-2023.[26] Policy Impact: Seat Belts[27] Facts & Statistics About Texting & Driving (Updated for 2018)[28] http://Wakefield, A. J., Murch, S. H., Anthony, A., Linnell, J., Casson, D. M., Malik, M., ... & Valentine, A. (1998). RETRACTED: Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children.[29] Doctor behind vaccine-autism link loses license | TIME.com[30] http://Gadad, B. S., Li, W., Yazdani, U., Grady, S., Johnson, T., Hammond, J., ... & Ferrier, C. (2015). Administration of thimerosal-containing vaccines to infant rhesus macaques does not result in autism-like behavior or neuropathology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(40), 12498-12503.[31] http://Uno, Y., Uchiyama, T., Kurosawa, M., Aleksic, B., & Ozaki, N. (2015). Early exposure to the combined measles–mumps–rubella vaccine and thimerosal-containing vaccines and risk of autism spectrum disorder. Vaccine, 33(21), 2511-2516.[32] Thiomersal - Wikipedia[33] The International Roadblocks To Achieving Global Vaccination

Complete Fiction.Reading the claims and explanation below, how can this possibly be true?[1]Negative ion therapy is an alternative form of health treatment that is based on the idea of using negative ions to drain the body of toxins that lead to a number of different health problems. While this pseudoscience is not generally accepted by the established medical community, many people report improvements in specific health ailments after undergoing the therapy, or making use of specially designed equipment to ride the home of irritants and toxins that inhibit the action of the negative ion charge in the space.The basis for negative ion therapy as a health care alternative rests in the idea that the atmosphere is loaded with negatively charged electrons or ions. By using those electrons to remove elements that have an adverse effect on the physical and emotional well being of the individual, the body’s natural defense system can begin to make the necessary repairs and bring the individual back to a healthy state. Because the purpose of negative ion therapy is to drain the toxins from the environment and the body, any condition that is interfering with the natural function of the muscles and nervous system are isolated and reduced through continued administrations of the therapy. As the impediments to good health are brought under control, the individual begins to enjoy an enhanced state of physical and mental health.I took the liberty of pointing out the most obviously bothersome point of the claim:"The electrons remove elements that have an adverse effect..."Now let us ask ourselves some questions:What are these elements that have an adverse effect?How exactly are electrons getting to these elements only?How are free electrons entering your body?How do electrons "remove" these elements?Now, this was obviously not written by the brightest individual. Clearly the marketing team didn't understand the different between an Ion[2]An ion is an atom or molecule in which the total number of electrons is not equal to the total number of protons, giving it a net positive or negative electrical charge.And a just an electron.In this particular case, someone is introducing an element with excess negative charge, i.e. carrying an extra electron or several. I guess the idea they have is the negative will be attracted to positive ions, bind and carry them off.Back to reality, this is not how this happens, nor is there large number of positive ions suspended in your body that need "removal".This kind of garbage is the in the same ilk as the magnetic bracelets and necklaces.Having said all that, there is some evidence of efficacy in treating seasonal depression(SAD), but the dose of ions is significantly higher than can be produced through cheap off the shelf units. Further, the evidence shows bright light therapy was more effective in treating this form of depression.[3,4,5] I would also like to point out the science does not indicate any of the other uses or effects the advertised product are boasting. Further, the exact mechanism of action at the biological level does not seem known. They are simply replicating seasonal changes, really it is more like confirming the shift in ion concentration with seasons is not a major contributing factor to seasonal depression and really not a way to treat it effectively.Negative air ionization therapy is the use of air ionisers as an experimental non-pharmaceutical treatment for seasonal affective disorder (SAD) and mild depression.For SAD, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing high (4.5x1014 ions/second) and low (1.7x1011 ions/second) flow rate negative air ionization with bright light therapy found that posttreatment improvement results were 57.1% for bright light (10,000 lux) compared with high-density ions, 47.9%; and low-density ions, 22.7%.[1] An older RCT conducted by the same authors also found air ionization effective for SAD at 2.7x106 ions/cm3.[2] A 2007 review considers this therapy "under investigation", and suggests that it may be a helpful treatment for SADnegative ion machines used in his studies are designed to mimic summer-like conditions by supplementing the sparse winter ion supply. He stresses however that although some air purifiers utilize negative ion technology, the dose of ions delivered by a typical air purifier is far too low for it to have an antidepressant effect.[1]What is Negative Ion Therapy?[2]Ion[3]Negative air ionization therapy[4]A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of bri... [Psychiatry Res. 2010][5]A Trial of Negative Ion Generation Versus Light-Emitting Diode Phototherapy for Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD)