Is Iridology Nonsense?
by Rosalie Savage, Dip. Nutrition, Cert. Iridology

An article by E. Ernst, Archives of Ophthalmology (Vol. 118, No 1, Jan. 2000), states that iridology is widely practised by naturopaths and other natural health practitioners (“non-medically qualified”). Ernst give a brief description of how iridology is used, what is looked for in the iris and the chart system used for checking which organ or part of the body relates to signs of dysfunction.

He goes on to describe research which has looked at 77 publications evaluating the “diagnostic validity of iridology”. In experiments using iridologists and ophthalmologists to diagnose kidney and gall bladder disease(es) from iris photographs Ernst points out that no significant results were achieved. Other studies produced similar results and therefore do not endorse iridology as a worthwhile form of diagnosis. He goes on to say that in may be leading to false diagnosis, which may cause harm to the patient if they are treated incorrectly or on the other hand, giving a patient a diagnosis of wellness when thee may be a serious disease which results in delay in treatment.

Other consequences stated are that it is waste of both time and money.  An article by S. Barrett, M.D. entitled “Iridology Is Nonsense” is similar to Ernst’s though probably more scathing in its criticism, offering examples of the failure of iridology to make correct diagnoses, the dangers of mis-diagnosis and the same three disadvantages of being prescribed the wrong treatments and wasting time and money.

Response:

There are some flaws in the cited article which need to be addressed.  Firstly, from my own observation and knowledge gained in Iridology class, iris photographs are useful in looking for signs of disease or dysfunction in a person’s health, however, it must be said that they are not ideal (possibly even when a highly sophisticated camera, multiple photographs and a stereomicroscope is used), states S. Martin, in his article “Proof – or Propaganda”, as they may show distortions of true colour because of light variation, shadow on the iris, reflected light, reflections of the camera flash or other photographic lighting, plus the variations in colour during the developing process.  Mr. Martin also points out that the eye is curved and multi-layered, which affects accuracy of photographs.

Next, the issue of seeing just a photograph to make a diagnosis is rarely done for the following reasons:  natural health practitioners and naturopaths see their patients as a whole, unified being.  The means that many other things are taken into account when a patient is seen.  For example – a full case history, perhaps blood pressure, pulse and respiration rate readings are also taken, observation of the patient (skin colour/tone, overall physical and mental condition) plus family situation, occupation, previous medical history, medications, lifestyle factors, etc. and of course experience and intuition as a practitioner.  As Simon Martin explains in the article “Proof – or Propaganda”: iridology is an adjunct to all of these – it is not used in isolation.  Iris signs are then checked for indications of diseases – iridology does not make exact diagnosis, rather it points to an area of dysfunction – e.g. signs of a dysfunctional pancreas may show as orange marks or wash over a specific part of the eye, or up to four pancreatic gland areas may show as “lacunae” or lesions.  This indicates that the pancreas may be dysfunctional – the patient needs to be checked for Diabetes, etc.

Recommendations will be made to the patient in a calm, professional manner if there are significant findings in the iris or irides.  The patient will generally be advised to see their medical practitioner for further tests. (1).

A study by S. Demea (Romania) concludes that a study of 57 hospital patients using iris examination “can be very useful for diagnosis of a certain general pathology, in a holistic approach of the patient.”  Hence, iridology as a science, measurable and evidence-based is recognised in certain areas of medical practice.

“Iridology’s Blind Side”

George Nava True II writes that iridology has many shortcomings:

• it doesn’t seem to be taught in medical schools
• it is not practiced by “competent doctors”
• no evidence to support the connection of an iris-body inter-relationship
• various, differing iridology charts exist which varies diagnosis
• unreliable as a diagnostic tool
• various studies conclude that “the diagnostic skills of an iridologist are no better than guesswork”
• a famous 20th century pioneer of iridology was reputed being put on the spot after agreeing to pick patients with kidney disease from those without; being unable to do so and claiming the disease couldn’t be assessed – knowing that why did he agree to do the assessments?
• iridology is a pseudoscience
• false-positive results can be made

Response:

• in the Ukraine, iris diagnosis was used when working with Chernobyl accident victims. They believe it to be “a science of much promise in Ukraine.”   (2)
• it is seen in the Ukraine as a valid, easily learned, quick method which yields a large amount of information.  (3)
• it is more valuable as a tool of diagnosis in certain “general pathology.” (4)
• due to the individuality of irides, certain signs of disease / dysfunction are not the same on every patient.  (5)
• a study at the Royal Adelaide Hospital by UK Iridologist, Farida Sharan, will involve the observation of constitutional and hereditary possibilities / likelihood which play a role in the development of disease  (6)
• the patient must be present in order for a proper examination to take place (7)

Studies and further reports.

In an interview of Prof. Dr. Christolph Letzel, by editor of Iridology Plus (an on-line Iridology magazine) / President of the Canadian Institute of Iridology, Agota Csekey, Prof. Dr. Letzel was asked if in his opinion iridology should be considered as a science.  He replied that iridology is at a point “where it can be claimed to be a science and scientific.”    He went on to qualify this by saying that the “science of the iris” is really the iris signs which make it possible to devise a treatment program for patients.  This is based on research carried out by Prof. Vancouver both in Germany and Russia.

Prof. Dr. Letzel says that that in Germany, iridology is supported by the government and that it has an interest in the research on the subject.  Medical schools in Germany do have some natural health training, though it is handled differently in various institutions.  He states that iridology gives clues to where to find dysfunctional organs / systems.  This gives the natural practitioner a head start by pointing to constitutional and other weaknesses.

He emphasises that “a precise clinical diagnosis” (and test results) is also vital in addition to an iris examination in some cases.  Prof. Dr. Letzel says that further research is being carried out by Prof. Vancouver.  The study aims to improve the system(s) currently used.  Dr Vancouver’s patients are in many countries, plus he is very involved with German and Russian schools which teach iridology.  The patients with various medically diagnosed diseases are studied to help determine an improved system of iris diagnosis.  This is on top of previous discoveries.

Prof. Dr. Letzel mentions a German Professor (Herget) whose publications on iridology and Constitutional Medicine provide up-to-date, important, scientific information on iridology.

What does a student of Iridology say?

• iridology is both an art and a science – the art is in skilful clinical observation and experience; the science is in excellent training by long-term, experienced, dedicated practitioners of iridology, well set up studies, etc.
• mistakes are possible – even in medical diagnosis!
• other parts of the eye are routinely examined by medical practitioners for signs of change (eg. The sclera for discolouration, the pupil for size abnormalities, the retina for damage, etc.)

Bernard Jensen say (in his book “Visions of Health”, co-author D.V. Bodeen, 1992:

• analysis is the term to be used, rather than “diagnosis”
• “The art and science of iridology is the evaluation of tissue integrity, including inherent strengths and weaknesses, collectively called ‘constitution’ ” – tissue integrity is at the heart of good health – evaluation of the less-than-perfect tissues falls into the realms of iridology’s usefulness
• effects to tissue integrity can be cased by many things, eg:
• altitude, climate, blood circulation & pressure changes, chemical imbalance and toxicity, inherent factors / genetics, glandular and metabolic problems, trauma and psychosomatic factors.
• clinical examination is vital
• knowledge of anatomy, physiology, pathology and clinical nutrition is important when examining iris signs
• other information is included – eg tests, analysis   (8)

Jensen’s list of “What Iridology can Show” (partial):

• main nutritional needs
• inherent strength, weakness or organs, glands, tissues
• organs in greatest need of assistance and healing
• general amount of toxicity in organs, glands, tissues
• inflammation and its activity and location
• bowel sluggishness or under-activity, spasticity, inflammation, narrowing, stricture, imbalance of bowel flora, etc.
• under or over-active circulation
• nerve depletion
• gland conditions
• organ dysfunction affecting another area of the body
• lymphatic congestion
• nutrient assimilation dysfunction
• mineral depletion
• physical, mental fatigue / stress
• iatrogenic conditions
• pre-clinical conditions (eg. cardio-vascular, pre-diabetes)
• miasms
• health level, healing ability
• healing signs
• possible wheat allergy
• infection (sources)
• acidity, catarrh
• suppression of catarrh
• potential for senility
• adrenal exhaustion
• ability to resist disease
• unity of symptoms
• healing crisis / disease crisis
• Herring’s Law of Cure (the body’s response to treatment)
• quality of nerve energy in the body
• general health of the body   (9)

Jensen’s list of “What Iridology Cannot Show” (partial):

• blood pressure, blood sugar levels (an other levels revealed by blood tests)
• specific drugs used by the patient prior to examination
• surgical operations
• diseases by name
• amount of uric acid in the body
• patient’s diet
• cause and time of body injuries
• link between levels of tissue inflammation and other specific disease or disease symptoms
• sex of patient (M/F)
• asbestos or silicosis in body
• hair loss
• yeast infection
• problem with a specific tooth
• if patient taking oral contraceptive
• pregnancy
• necessity of operations
• presence of tumour and size of tumour
• haemorrhages in body
• differentiate between drug side-effects or disease symptomatology
• presence of MS, Parkinson’s Disease, AIDS, STD’s, cardiac artery blockages, gall-stones, kidney stones
• sexual orientation
• cause of menstrual irregularities (eg. thyroid dysfunction) (10)

CONCLUSION

It is important in any profession or discipline to have the facts that support (and also question) its legitimacy.  In the case of iridology it is vital because of the controversy surrounding this holistic health care practice.  Improvement in tests, trials and scientific equipment will, in time, give iridology the probability of being fully proven as a structured, measurable and valuable “tool” in clinical situations.

The articles cited within this assignment give any student, professional or interested lay-person the opportunity to view both sides of the story – even the famous iridologist Bernard Jenson admits it presently has its limitations, though within them “its unique value can be properly defined”.

References:

1. Iridology Lectures, Term 1, Nature Care College, Sydney NSW Australia
2. Pokanevych, W. Iridology in Ukraine. Article in Ukrainian PMID: 9695599 [PubMed -indexed for MEDLINE] BMJ 1988 Dec 17; 297 (6663): 1578-81
   
3. Ibid
   
4. Demea S., Correlation between Iridology and General Pathology. Oftalmologia.
   2002;55(4):64-9 (Original Article in Romanian) - PMID: 12723182 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Lik Sprava. 1998 May; 152-6
   
5. Martin, S.    Proof - or Propaganda   Magazine article received in Iridology class, magazine unidentified due to photocopy error.
   
6. Ibid
   
7. Ibid
   
8. Jensen, B. Dr., Bodeen, D V, Dr.,   Visions of health (1992) Avery/Penguin Putnam Inc., New York, USA    Pgs 17, 16, 13, 34-5, 73
   
9. Ibid, Pgs 74-6, 78-9, 82-4
   
10. Ibid, Pgs 84-6

Bibliography:

Barrett, S. MD., Iridoloqy is Nonsense, (article revised 23/7/01), www.quackwatch.org/01 QuackeryRelatedTopics/iridology.html

Csekey, A. Constitutional Medicine & Iris Diagnosis Article in "Iridology Plus" (on-line magazine), interview with Prof. Dr. Christolph Letzel. Author is the President of The Canadian Institute of Iridology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. cdn_inst_of_irid@hotmail.com

Demea S., Correlation between Iridoloav and General Pathology. Oftalmologia, 2002;55(4):64-9 (Original Article in Romanian) - PMID: 12723182 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Lik Sprava. 1998 May; 152-6

Ernst.E. MD,PhD,FRCP(Edin), Iridology - Not Useful & Potentially Harmful. Archives of Ophthalmology, Vol. 118 No. 1, January 2000 (JAMA & Archives; http://archopht.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/120

Iridology Lectures, Term 1, 2004, Nature Care College, Sydney, NSW Australia

Knipschild P, Kleijnen J, ter Riet G, Looking for gall bladder disease in the patient's iris
BMJ. 1988 Dec 17;297(6663):1578-81.
PMID: 3147081 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Jensen, B. Dr., Bodeen, D V, Dr.,  Visions of health (1992) Avery/Penguin Putnam Inc., New York, USA

Martin, S.    Proof - or Propaganda   Magazine article received in Iridology class, magazine unidentified due to photocopy error.

Nava True II, G.   (author using_gen name?) Iridology's Blind Side.
www.netasia.net/users/truehealth/lridology.html

Pokanevych, W. Iridology in Ukraine. Article in Ukrainian PMID: 9695599 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] BMJ 1988 Dec 17; 297 (6663): 1578-81