Which peer-reviewed trials have evaluated modalities promoted by Pete Sulack (e.g., energy healing, herbal remedies) and what were their outcomes?

1. What Pete Sulack promotes and how he frames it

Public materials about Pete Sulack present him as a faith‑driven, functional‑medicine practitioner who promotes a mix of faith, lifestyle, orthomolecular (nutrient‑based) support, and repurposed pharmacologic agents, and who publicly recounts a personal recovery from late‑stage brain cancer as part of that approach ^{[3] [4] [5] [6]}.

2. Peer‑reviewed evidence on energy healing (a modality Sulack promotes)

A published systematic review of energy‑healing trials concluded that energy healing has demonstrated some improvement in illness symptoms across studies but that high‑level evidence consistently demonstrating efficacy is lacking and more robust trials are needed to isolate active elements and mechanisms ^[1].

3. The repurposed‑drug/orthomolecular protocol cited by Sulack

Journey to Wellness reports that a study published in the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine on September 19, 2024 introduced a peer‑reviewed protocol combining three repurposed antiparasitic drugs—ivermectin, mebendazole, and fenbendazole—together with orthomolecular support and lifestyle therapies, and that Sulack highlights this as an early but important step that still requires clinical trials ^[2].

4. How to read these findings: scope, quality, and conflicts

The systematic review on energy healing (a category, not a Sulack‑branded treatment) highlights symptom improvements but emphasizes heterogeneity, methodological limitations and the need for more rigorous randomized trials before efficacy can be declared conclusively ^[1]; the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine protocol reported on an approach combining repurposed drugs and orthomolecular therapy but, as described in the Journey to Wellness piece, is presented as an early, hypothesis‑generating protocol that itself calls for further clinical testing ^[2]. Journey to Wellness and Sulack’s own sites are advocacy and practitioner platforms that frame these interventions positively, which creates an implicit promotional angle in the reporting of early protocols and personal testimony ^{[2] [3] [4]}.

5. Gaps: what the provided reporting does not show

The supplied sources do not include independent randomized controlled trials that directly evaluate a named “Pete Sulack” regimen or confirm that the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine protocol has yielded completed prospective clinical trial outcomes; therefore, claims that a Sulack‑endorsed protocol has proven clinical efficacy are not supported by the materials provided here ^{[2] [3] [4] [1]}. The systematic review addresses energy healing broadly but does not validate specific practitioner protocols, and the Journey to Wellness item reports a protocol publication rather than trial results ^{[1] [2]}.

6. Bottom line

Peer‑reviewed literature cited in the supplied reporting includes a systematic review showing limited, mixed evidence for energy healing that calls for higher‑quality trials ^[1] and a reported Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine protocol combining repurposed antiparasitics with orthomolecular support that advocates, including Sulack, present as preliminary and in need of clinical trials ^[2]; however, there is no peer‑reviewed randomized trial in the provided material that definitively evaluates a Pete Sulack‑specific multimodal regimen or proves its clinical outcomes, and the available sources include promotional perspectives that warrant cautious scrutiny ^{[2] [3] [4] [1]}.