HBOT Conversations:
Dr. Paul Harch & Birth Injuries/ Cerebral Palsy

Dr. Paul G. Harch, M.D. has used hyperbaric oxygen therapy to treat more than 100 different conditions, including stroke, dementia, autism, and traumatic brain injury. His goal is to help his patients get their lives back using hyperbaric oxygen therapy.

He is the author of The Oxygen Revolution and is considered an International expert and pioneer in the field of Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT). His informative, and comprehensive guide on HBOT has helped countless souls better understand what HBOT is and how it directly affects the body at the genetic level.

This episode on birth injuries with a strong focus on Cerebral Palsy (CP) is the fifth in a nine episode series that will be released weekly with Dr. Harch.

Subscribe. Join the discussion. Share the hope.

Watch the Podcast

In episode 5 of 9, host Edward di Girolamo speaks with world renowned HBOT expert, Dr. Paul G. Harch about birth injuries and Cerebral Palsy (Chapter 5 of his book, The Oxygen Revolution).

In Dr. Harch’s book he describes the trip down the birth canal as one of the most high-risk journeys any human will ever make. Dr. Harch educates us on how traumatic birth experiences can trigger Cerebral Palsy diagnoses in young infants, and how premature babies are at great risk for Cerebral Palsy since they are born with the center of the brain undeveloped, still very fragile and prone to spontaneous bleeding.

Every day desperate parents around the world seek alternative healing therapies for their children with cerebral palsy. Dr. Harch dives deep into the use of Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT) for the treatment of Cerebral Palsy and other neurological birth disorders, and explains the reasons why parents should embrace this therapy.  Essentially, Dr. Harch describes Cerebral Palsy as a wound to the brain, so it should respond to Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy the same way as other brain injuries. He confers that it absolutely does.

Dr. Harch reveals success stories of CP children who have had found hope and new life from Hyperbarics.  In response to these stories and hearing that it works to heal and ease life-long debilitating CP symptoms, di Girolamo wants to know why more parents aren’t seeking out HBOT to help their cerebral palsy children?  Harch relays that there’s too much inconsistent medical literature out there, and in many ways it’s just plain wrong. For example, a parent asks their doctor, “How about HBOT to treat Cerebral Palsy?”— the doctor might be unfamiliar with the therapy, so he/she checks the online medical database for HBOT and CP.  Unfortunately this doctor will likely find some skewed data, leading the doctor to respond with “so….. I don’t think it’ll help”. Although, as Dr. Harch explains, the exact opposite is what’s true; HBOT absolutely helps CP patients.

One example given is that a well respected peer-reviewed medical journal, The Lancet, published medical literature on HBOT and CP announcing there was no proven benefit to use Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy to treat Cerebral Palsy. But, the inconsistency there was that the control group was defined as a placebo, and that was not right.  In response, Dr. Pierre Marois and his team, released a retrospective study on HBOT in the treatment of Cerebral Palsy that showed studies and numerous reports demonstrating the positive effects of Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT) in children with Cerebral Palsy.

Dr. Harch suggests our viewers dive into his 2021 presentation at the Team Luke3 Hope for Minds pediatric brain injury conference.  Dr. Harch provided a summarization of all of the science showing that Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy had extremely positive effects on every stage of the stem cell process.  Additionally, Dr. Proefrock’s presentation from the same conference, “Current Trends in Naturopathic Treatment of Pediatric Neurological Injury” reveals stem cell data for children in the midst of HBOT treatment; showing that the children who have had Hyperbaric treatments produced 4x the amount of stem cells compared to those who did not.

Dr. Harch explains the roadblock for using Hyperbaric Oxygen for treatment of CP is still extremely difficult to get around, and he references the 2012 article by Novak and Badawai, Last breath: effectiveness of hyperbaric oxygen treatment for Cerebral Palsy as an example. In this article, they concluded that “Hyperbaric Oxygen does not have a clinically important effect on gross motor and self-care function in children with Cerebral Palsy.” Dr. Harch clarifies why they were wrong on the science, and how information like that is what’s preventing the average medical doctor to recommend HBOT for Cerebral Palsy.

di Girolamo and Dr. Harch urges viewers to find out for themselves if HBOT could be a good therapy for them or their loved one(s) living with CP. If you would like to dive into the world of Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy for the treatment of Cerebral Palsy, HBOT News encourages you to find a licensed Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy facility with hard mono-chambers or hard multi-place chambers, and act on this responsibly. Just like anything in the world of modern medicine, you can be injured or do more harm than good if HBOT is not administered correctly.

All of the data and success stories Dr. Harch reveals paints a much different picture than what the medical industry is showing us. Go try Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy sooner than later to treat, heal, and ease the symptoms of Cerebral Palsy. We trust that HBOT can also change your life!

Subscribe Now, It’s Free !

[contact-form-7 id="65934" title="Subscribe"]

Guest

Dr. Paul G. Harch

Dr. Paul G. Harch, MD

Dr. Paul G. Harch, M.D. is a clinician in emergency medicine and hyperbaric medicine who is the former director of the University Medical Center Hyperbaric Medicine Department and LSU Hyperbaric Medicine Fellowship. Currently, he is a Clinical Professor of Medicine in the Section of Emergency Medicine at LSU School of Medicine in New Orleans. He graduated from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine after graduating from the University of California at Irvine with magna cum laude/Phi Beta Kappa honors.

Dr. Harch initiated and continues to be a private practice that has resulted in the largest case experience in neurological hyperbaric medicine in the world. In this practice, he adapted the concepts of conventional hyperbaric oxygen therapy to wounds in the central nervous system, which spawned the subsequent academic and research practice. Harch HBOT is the best place to receive oxygen therapy treatments, and patients have traveled from more than 50 countries to be treated by Dr. Harch himself.

Harch HBOT – Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy Clinic

5216 Lapalco Blvd.
Marrero, LA
504-309-4948
hbot@hbot.com
https://hbot.com/

 

Recent HBOT News

[Calciphylaxis. A call for interdisciplinary cooperation].

Abstract: Calciphylaxis is a rare, often very painful and potentially life-threatening disorder at the interface between nephrology and dermatology. It is characterized by skin lesions and ulcerations following calcification and occlusion of cutaneous arterioles. Most...

Clinical Trial – The Effects of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine on Spinal Anesthesia Using Diluted Low-Dose Bupivacaine for Transurethral Resection of Prostate in Elderly

Spinal block is the most common anesthetic technique for transurethral resection of
prostatectomy (TURP). Most patients undergoing TURP are elderly and frequently present with
cardiopulmonary and endocrine diseases. Low-dose local anesthetic is commonly administer to
limit the block level to minimize the hemodynamic changes. However, sometimes it may not
provide an adequate level of sensory block. Thus, intrathecal additive is frequently
administer with local anesthetic to improve analgesic effect.

Dexmedetomidine(DXM), a selective 2-adrenoreceptor agonist, has been used in the epidural
space in humans without any reports of neurological deficits. Previous clinical studies
showed that intravenous dexmedetomidine administration prolonged the sensory and motor blocks
of bupivacaine spinal analgesia. But clinical studies about the use of intrathecal DXM with
local anesthesia in humans are scarce in the literature. Kanazi et al. found that 3μg DXM
added to 12 mg spinal bupivacaine produced the significant short onset of sensory and motor
block as well as significantly longer duration of sensory and motor block than bupivacaine.
And Al-Mustafa et al. reported that intrathecal dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to 12.5mg
bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia has a dose dependant effect on the onset and regression of
sensory and motor block.

In our previous study, low-dose diluted bupivacaine 5 mg provided sufficient anesthetic level
when opioid was added with local anesthetic. However, opioid-induced side effects, such as
pruritus, nausea, or vomiting, could be an obstacle in common use. The aim of this study is
to evaluate whether DXM-low-dose bupivacaine spinal anesthesia can provide the effective
spinal anesthesia and postoperative analgesia with minimal side effect compare to the local
anesthetic only group.

This study was conducted in a randomized, double-blind, controlled fashion. Patients were
randomly allocated to DXM group or Saline group. DMT group received hyperbaric bupivacaine
0.5% (1.2 ml) (6 mg) in dextrose 8% solution + DMT 0.3 ml (3 µg)-in total, bupivacaine 0.4%
(1.5 ml) intrathecally and Saline group received hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% (1.2 ml) (6 mg)
in dextrose 8% solution + normal saline 0.3 ml -in total, bupivacaine 0.4% (1.5 ml)
intrathecally. After spinal block, the level of sensory block, defined as the dermatomal
segment with loss of pain sensation to pin-prick with a 22 G hypodermic needle and cold
sensation to alcohol swab was measured every 2 min after intrathecal injection. The
investigators recorded the peak sensory block level, time to peak block level from
intrathecal injection, blood pressure and heart rate, and analgesic supplementation during
operation. The maximum motor block level was assessed according to the modified Bromage
scale. During postoperative period, the frequency of analgesic requirement, time to the first
analgesic request, and pain scores were evaluated by blind investigator.