Perhaps you can try applying through the NCCAM (
Link)
Perhaps the best thing to do would be to work towards establishing that the Pauling protocol of megadose vitamin C and lysine actually promotes heart health. It won't be possible to document any differences in the incidence of MIs or strokes without running a large, long-term study which would probably cost millions, so the next best option is to have one that looks at a well-established surrogate endpoint. Maybe using imaging endpoints as in the Niaspan study would be feasible, although I'm not sure if $400,000 would cover such a study.
But there are potential issues:
- Denying patients the usual standard-of-care: would the Pauling therapy be administered in addition to conventional treatments, or instead of it? Ethically, I think the former would be more appropriate. Have any patients reported benefiting from megadose vitamin C while continuing on statins, beta-blockers, etc?
- Accrual: I presume that it would be best to enrol patients who are naive to Pauling therapy. In general, how receptive are people to Pauling therapy?
- Blinding: does the Pauling protocol require patients to take vitamin C at "bowel tolerance"? Running a trial that is blinded might be difficult if this is the case. Although even if the patients are not blinded, perhaps the actual imaging evaluation can be done by persons who are blinded to the treatment arm. Or maybe the issue can be circumvented by using Lipo-C instead of regular vitamin C, and having everybody on the same dose?
According to the NCCAM, 12% (roughly one in eight) of grant applications were approved in 2008. So I think a one in eight chance is definitely worth a shot for the Foundation.
I think it would be a good start to get an estimate of how many people in the United States are currently using megadose vitamin C for heart disease, as well as perhaps compiling some case reports. Would it be possible to contact any patients who have reported benefits with megadose vitamin C to get before and after scans?