Maggots as Good as Gel in Leg Ulcer Treatments

Reader Comments
Back to article

Actually the article by US News is more correct that the misinformation you are going by. I will not go into all the in incorrect info but print just a few of the misinformation in the BMJ artilce.
In short, the study proves that maggot therapy was 5 times faster in >debridement than control therapy. It also proves that when maggot >therapy is stopped immediately after debridement and treatment >returns to conventional therapy (instead of continuing maggot >therapy for maintenance debridement or stimulation of wound >healing), then the healing rate slows down back to normal, and >healing is not significantly faster than control (healing was only >one week earlier with maggot therapy, which was not statistically >significant). All prior reports and studies have demonstrated that >the healing rate is accelerated with maggot therapy, and slows dows >within a couple weeks of stopping therapy.
>
>This was not a study of maggot induced wound healing, but rather >maggot debridement, followed through to wound healing. It should be >touted as a great success for maggot therapy; but instead is being >reported by some as a failure . . . as though being as good as the >number one treatment is a failure. A true study of maggot therapy >for wound healing would have continued maggot therapy beyond >debridement, truly comparing hydrogel to maggot therapy, not >hydrogel to hydrogel for 32 weeks after maggot debridement.
>
>Not only did they follow maggot debridement with 32 weeks of >hydrogel just like the control therapy (no wonder the time to >healing was the same), but what's more, they STOPPED compression >therapy during maggot therapy. This is very bad study design, >because everyone agrees that compression therapy is the most >important component in the treatment of venous stasis ulcers. So the >maggot treated arm actually had to compete with compression therapy >. . . a very unfair comparison. And this was not even noted in the >abstract nor the press release. It was not MDT vs hydrogel but >rather MDT vs hydrogel AND compression therapy. Very biased study; >very biased assessment, very biased press release; and it was the >press release that all of these articles are about, since the study >was not released until after the articles were written.
>
>>

Pamela of FL 12:55PM March 27, 2009

I have to agree with offsuit of XX. US News did poor editing of this article and left out pertinent facts of this study, such as some patients complaining about pain from the maggots so that the maggots had to be removed.
My advice to everyone here is to obtain any news of scientific progress from peer-reviewed journals, and not the mass media. In peer reviewed scientific journals there are lower chances of relevant information being left out due to editor incompetence. In this case the US News reporting on this topic is biased and not representative of the facts.

dbc of TX 12:55AM March 21, 2009

Forty-five years ago in Navy survival training I was taught to let flies lay their eggs in open wounds before binding them up, if medical help was not available. I think the resistance to using maggots in medicine is a cultural bias that views insects as pests to be exterminated at all costs. Nature has so much to teach us but in our arrogance we refuse to heed its lessons.

Wiley Knight of HI 6:44PM March 20, 2009

The comments are what would be expected from readers that keep up with their news on a weekly basis from a printed format. offsuit is completely right. How could some readers
come to their conclusions from this general info article. Cell regeneration is a complex
process. Leeches and maggots had their time eons ago. Let it go. There is no cost benefit from medicinal maggots (stop harvesting maggots from the trash folks, it's not the same) versus medicinal gel. Drop the crystals and stop offering gifts to the the alien gods.
Modern medicine can be advanced by harvesting nature - not replaced.

BIGTEX of TX 6:25PM March 20, 2009

These things remove the dead tissue only. Surgery removes large areas of tissue around the wound, not just the wound. These hungry little guys repair the wound while leaving the surrounding area intact. Look at some of the many medical images! Not only do the wounds heal VERY well but the resulting scar/area actually looks BETTER that a surgical procedure on a comprable body part. Yes, it is shocking to see some of these imiges but you must read the articles that explain what you are viewing. Many of the doctors who use this type of treatment have countless stories of limbs and lives saved as a result. Makes an interesting read for an inquiring mind.

widestaringeyes of FL 6:17PM March 20, 2009

When I was a child in the 1930's our Parish Priest was a WW-I veteran who had been wounded and lay on the battlefield for several days. Maggots got into his wounded leg, and this was credited with saving his leg and his life.

Eugenia of TN 5:26PM March 20, 2009

You really cannot believe one study from the UK can you really? Why not do some research on it and then comment. Maggot therapy does more than eat dead infected tissue. They also kill all the bacteria and excrete enzymes to promote healing. Nothing man can come up with does this all three things at once. Plus it is way cheaper than conventional treatments. Maggot in USA costs less than $100.00. Name something cheaper than that??As far a effective, studies prove that maggots work better! Lets see when you are facing certain amputation and your docs tell you you have no choice but amputation. You'll ask for maggots. They can save toes and feet from certain amputation. Plus they work on gangrene, pressure ulcers and for your info they were used on two of the Naval Lieutenants burned at the Pentagon on 9/11. It is used in hundreds of hospitals and doctors offices across the country. Just not enough doctors know enough about them. They need to do the research along with you!!!!

Pam of OH 5:04PM March 20, 2009

I thought this concept has been known for a while. I suppose we still need scientific testing to back up what nature already has ready for us to use? We try to better nature - oftentimes we do - but sometimes, nature has the cure right under our noses, or in this case, our rotting trash.

Jcolier of GA 5:04PM March 20, 2009

In the novel, Lord Grizzly, about real life mountain man, Hugh Glass... he is attacked by a grizzly and left to die by friends. He crawls to Fort Kiowa with his open wounds and broken leg. He is unable to reach or treat his wounds, but maggots infest them, and eat up the dead tissue, leaving the whole tissue behind. Gross, but effective.
The author has a second bear licking off the maggots from Hugh Glass who is playing dead.

Dave of OR 4:42PM March 20, 2009

@DJ, this is hardly alternative or complementary - it's actually got scientific data backing it up, which makes it just plain medicine. CAM treatments are by definition all talk and little or no walk - or else they'd just be plain ol' medicine, rather than having to rely on some silly qualifier like "alternative". Is penicillin "alternative" just because it comes from a fungus?

John of WI 4:38PM March 20, 2009