Ban much regretted as ozone therapy saved my life

ozone-therapyBy Chin Choong Men

I am a Malaysian, 69 years of age and a patient who has benefited from ozone therapy treatment. I am voluntarily giving this feedback in light of the ban on ozone therapy by the authorities.

In Jan 2011, I suffered an intense pain in the chest that resulted in a severe headache and excessive sweating. I couldn’t walk or breathe. I was admitted to hospital and diagnosed as having suffered from a heart attack that required the insertion of stents.

However, instead of being treated by a cardiologist, I voluntarily opted for ozone therapy as my treatment of choice.

I recovered completely after one and a half months of ozone therapy together with lifestyle changes that included taking food supplements and vitamins orally. No drugs were required.

The overall principle of ozone therapy as an added treatment process to enhance normal medical treatment was adopted and is being practised by the research team and therapists of CHF Solution Sdn Bhd.

The researchers at this ozone therapy centre have researched the ozone treatment process for more than 20 years. Their scientists locally as well as overseas have developed and enhanced their ozone therapy machines patented under the name Alif1.

To my understanding, this ozone therapy centre not only manufactures the world’s leading ozone therapy machines, it has also produced world leading research in the study of ozone therapy as an added treatment process to complement normal medical treatment in the recovery of illnesses.

According to the patent owner of Alif1, their ozone therapy process has spread to many countries in the world.

But sad to say their achievements have come to naught by the announcement of the ban on ozone therapy. This ban has also denied my, as well as other ozone therapy patients’, natural right to choose our treatment process to enhance our health.

Will ozone therapy result in death? Certainly not, if there are standard operating procedures and codes of ethics observed. However the act of banning ozone therapy might indeed cause death.

In order to have standard operating procedures and codes of ethics in place, the establishment of the Ozone Medical Practitioners Association Malaysia (PPPOM) had since 2011 submitted their documented SOPs for the authorities to review and approve.

Unfortunately, the authorities have chosen to keep silent. If the authorities had reviewed these SOPs, it would have eliminated issues related to non-registered companies, their unethical practices and the danger of health hazards from ozone therapy.

In conclusion, I urge the authorities to withdraw the ban on ozone therapy and to review, enhance and enforce the SOPs and code of ethics as suggested by the PPPOM and to punish those who practise otherwise to the point that they have put their patients’ health at risk.

In doing so, the authorities will be seen as moving towards integrating traditional and complementary medicine into the public healthcare delivery system.

Chin Choong Men is an FMT reader.

With a firm belief in freedom of expression and without prejudice, FMT tries its best to share reliable content from third parties. Such articles are strictly the writer’s personal opinion. FMT does not necessarily endorse the views or opinions given by any third party content provider.