The heat of the Spanish summer increased even more, with the enormous impact caused by the decision of a judge to authorizing the application of ozone therapy to a patient “as his life was in serious danger” and “the treatments rendered had not had a positive effect” in an ICU (intensive care unit) of a Spanish public hospital.

A significant number of Spanish medical associations, including the OMC (Medical College Organization, for its acronym in Spanish), which by law groups together all medical colleges in the kingdom of Spain (a physician cannot work if he is not affiliated with a medical college) and the AEMPS (Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products, for its acronym in Spanish).

In a few weeks ozone therapy made headlines in different media whose contents included statements from medical associations, or opinions of “experts” opposed to ozone therapy, accusing it of having no scientific basis, of not having demonstrated safety or efficacy, even qualifying it as pseudo therapy.


AEPROMO in the midst of the intense attack that ozone therapy was receiving, publicly set its position in a reasoned and duly substantiated statement dated August 16, 2021. However, despite the efforts made, it was not published by any mass media.


The AEPROMO “Ozone Therapy Global Journal”, published the letter “Who decides what a pseudo-therapy is? Evidence vs hasty opinions on ozone”.


Letter sent to the journal and signed by 10 professionals, all specialized in their respective areas: 8 physicians (3 university professors), a lawyer/physician, and a doctor in social and health sciences, without “any conflict of interest due to being linked to the application, research or sale of ozone.”


We invite you to carefully read both the AEPROMO release and the letter published in the “Ozone Therapy Global Journal”


This content is also available in: Spanish