The self-reinforcing circle of improbable beliefs

As a follow on to yesterday's post, there are a couple of other interesting things in Dr Peter Dingle's recent newsletter.

Dr Dingle also takes the oppotunity to promote his UWA extension courses on subjects such as how to cure diabetes — which is a strange topic for a non-medically qualified person to lecture on, as well as a seminar run by Mindd held, appropriately enough, at the Murdoch University School of Chiropractic ("Murdoch University — where too much magic is never enough").

While the history of Dr Peter Dingle's association with the University of WA Summer Schools appears to have been almost completely purged from the web, enough remains to show that in Autumn 2009 he was offering:

Dingle says do the DEAL and forget dying - until you're ready to do it. ...

Clearly the DEAL, and his beliefs, have failed to meet their exaggerated claims.

It would also seem that the University of WA have reconsidered the appropriateness of allowing the use of their institution to legitimate the offering of health advice by someone with no qualifications to do so.

But on to the even more disturbing stuff... Mindd (Metabolic, Immunologic, Neurologic, Digestive, Developmental) are one of those legitmate looking health organisations that promote ideas which, if not part of the lunatic fringe, are definitely sitting right next door to them. Why, then even have a link on their home page to a Professor who has cured her son's autism and won a Bent Spoon Award! Their home page states:

Our focus is on paediatric disorders such as Autism, ADHD, Asthma, allergies, chronic illness, learning and language delay, and digestive and behavioural disorders. Research is showing that these children are coming from families with a history of brain-immuno-gut disorders such as allergies, digestive disorders, anxiety and depression.

The rise in childhood disease signals a need for preventative healthcare that focuses on cellular health by optimising nutrient intake while minimising toxins.

This almost sounds sensible, but that last paragraph contains meaningless phrases so beloved of alties: 'cellular health' and the terrible effects of unspecified 'toxins'.

These people are still pursuing the autism/gut/mercury nexus that Andrew Wakefield so successfully, and on the basis of no evidence, promoted.

Many in the ASD community blame mercury in vaccines for causing autism. Note that the vaccines contain LPS or other toxins from microorganisms. It is possible that LPS and other microbial toxins also play a key role in the vaccine damage.

[...]

We are in total agreement, and offer as our own evidence, scientific articles and many positive results from using a diet that eliminates neurotoxin-producing bacteria and fosters intestinal healing.

In view of the research, we have to consider Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) a poison, as toxic as mercury and other heavy metals, LPS has drastic consequences for those in the ASD Community. Fortunately, dramatic improvements may result after its removal.

Toxins from the gut are apparently the cause of autism, ADHD, allergies, Coeliac Disease, childhood diabetes, schizophrenia, depression and epilepsy.

"The vast majority of epilepsy cases in children are due to toxin accumulation in the brain. When the amounts of toxins reach dangerous levels the brain sends an electric discharge to get rid of it all in one go. So, an epileptic fit is a safety valve for the brain, a cleansing procedure. In order to help the child we need to remove the toxins. In the majority of cases, these toxins come from the gut, so treatment has to concentrate on the child's digestive health." Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride.

This process is so simple, and so well understood, that it can be illustrated by a simple graphic:



This leads to a range of symptoms. EoR isn't sure why a number of conditions are repeated over and over, but did find the number of times OCD appears amusing.



While they don't actually come out as anti-vaccination (presumably, they leave that to the chiropracters), they do provide inaccurate scare stories:

Mercury levels are steadily rising from industrial activity. Main sources include dental amalgams, fish, coal burning, and until recently the preservative used in childhood vaccines (thimerasol). Thimerosal contains 50% mercury and was used in MMR vaccinations in Australia until recently. Unsafe levels of mercury can cause speech and learning difficulties, poor concentration and can lead to autistic behaviour.The flu shot still contains mercury

Did you notice that quick slip from discussing mercury in vaccines, to the reference to "unsafe levels of mercury", almost as if they wanted you to believe that vaccines contained unsafe levels! Pretty classy misdirection indeed! The medical experts at Mindd seem to have a poor understanding of chemistry and also seem to be unaware that:

TThiomersal has been used in medical products and vaccines for more than 60 years and is the most commonly used preservative in multi-dose vials. It has a very long safety record. There is no evidence anywhere in the world that thiomersal in vaccines has caused any developmental or neurological abnormalities, such as Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), autism or any other health problem. Thiomersal, which contains a small amount of mercury, was removed from vaccines given to young children in Australia simply as a precaution to reduce the theoretical risk of exposure to mercury in babies, particularly those of very low birth weight. Pre filled syringes, which do not require the preservative, are available for vaccination of children aged six months to 35 months.

The best way to deal with these issues is by broadly embracing every possible form of improbable therapy, including:

Complementary Medicine, cranial sacral therapy, nutrition, Chiropractic care, speech and neuro-developmental therapies, energy medicine, acupuncture, holistic dentistry, Functional neurology, Ayurvedic & Chinese medicine, yoga, meditation, osteopathy, naturopathy, and homeopathy.

And, of course, their true beliefs can be determined by their support of Generation Rescue (an autism cult), and the affilations of their WA practitioners also show how many have DAN! training. It is unsurprising to see Dr Igor Tabrizian listed there, given his links to Dr Peter Dingle.

And so the world of improbable beliefs comes full circle.

Cancer is a modern illness (2)

Dr Peter Dingle, as he admits himself, is not a medically qualified doctor and has no time to research such matters. It is interesting, therefore, that his April/May newsletter has him providing health advice on cancer.

Perhaps the most dreaded of all diseases is cancer. It will kill around 1/3 of Australians. Unfortunately with our one dimensional health model we have continued to focus on the treatment rather than the prevention and as a result more people die. While cancer is largely untreatable, despite the miracle cures you hear about in the media, it is largely preventable. There is no miracle cure for cancer nor will there ever be. The rates of cancer and death from cancer continue to increase despite the billions of dollars injected into treating the illness. Only a few minor cancers are treated effectively with modern techniques yet we still keep doing it.

This is scary stuff. Cancer will kill you! It can't be treated! There will never be a cure! Doctors adopt a 'one dimensional health model'! The paragraph continues, in direct conflict with that claim:

One cancer however, is showing significant reductions in its occurrence and all future predictions show it reducing even further, lung cancer. The occurrence and the rates of deaths from lung cancer are on the decline, no because of treatment but because of education and prevention.

EoR expects that Dr Dingle's devoted readers will not notice that the 'one dimensional health model' includes not just treatment, but also education and prevention. Perhaps that is why we are seeing so much advice not to smoke, to drink less, to eat a healthy diet, and to exercise?

Despite the claims by specialists that say we don’t know why we are getting so many cancers it is obvious that it relates to our diet, environment, attitude and our lifestyle and there is abundant information to show that changing these parameters can dramatically reduce your risk of cancer.

If in doubt just look at the cancer statistics of countries that have different lifestyles and diets.

Most of the cancers of today were either rare or unheard of just 100 years ago and are still rare in many countries where people live on traditional diets. Breast cancer rates for example are around 1% of the woman in populations living on traditional foods in rural Japan and China and around 13% in Australia.

So there's that 'cancer is a modern illness' meme again.

EoR isn't sure why Dr Peter Dingle singles out Japan and China. Even Australia where, apparently, cancer is a modern, incurable epidemic, has lower rates in rural areas (but poorer outcomes due to lower access to those 'one dimensional' health care services), as noted by the Cancer Australia:

People living in very remote rural areas of Australia have lower incidence rates, but higher death rates, for all cancer types when compared to the community as a whole.

Dr Peter Dingle also fails to take into account that cancer is related to ageing. Since lifespans have been increasing, the number of cancers has also, but

Numbers of cancers diagnosed each year increased by 26 per cent from 1993 to 2003. Given the ageing of the Australian population, increases in population size and the fact that the risk of most cancers increases with age, annual numbers of new cancers are predicted to keep rising. However, while the number of people diagnosed with cancer is rising due to these factors, when we adjust rates to consider our ageing population, incidence rates were about the same for all cancers combined in 2003 as they were in 1993.

And, since Dr Peter Dingle isn't able to look at any of the research, he clearly remains unaware that

More than half of all cancers diagnosed in Australia are successfully treated, and survival rates for some common cancers have increased by more than 20 per cent in the past two decades. In general, Australian survival rates for cancer are high by world standards. Five-year survival rates for the most common cancers affecting men (prostate) and women (breast) are now more than 80 per cent.

So his claim that cancer is 'largely untreatable' is patently false and that 'Only a few minor cancers are treated effectively with modern techniques' is so wrong it would be funny if people weren't actually getting health 'advice' from this man.

Breast cancer survival rates have also steadily been increasing (p.127) so his claim that 'more people die' as a result of focusing on treatment is also patently false.

Of course, 'cancer' is not an illness, as Dr Peter Dingle seems to think, but a grouping of many illnesses of different types. Causes, etiologies, and treatments are multifactorial (and far from 'one dimensional').

Given the fact that breast cancer (to take only one, smaller, grouping of cancers) is more common amongst higher socioeconomic individuals, p116, (to take only one variable) shouldn't Dr Dingle actually be arguing that women's incomes should be lowered? Or is that too 'one dimensional'?

EoR notes that TAM Australia is touting for business:

The audience of 600 highly science-literate and obviously highly enthusiastic people offers a perfect opportunity if you or anyone you know has relevant and appropriate products or services to promote.

EoR trusts that Dr Peter Dingle will take up this opportunity.

Cancer is a modern illness (1)

Well, it appears all those alties were right, and cancer is a modern disease that was unknown in the ancient world. A paper in Nature Reviews Cancer (which is embargoed for a full year (!) for electronic access so only subscribers can access it) is reported in a University of Manchester press release. This finding is based on analysis of hundreds of Egyptian mummies, as well as reports in literature and earlier animal studies. Just exactly what was examined is unclear in the press release:

The team studied both mummified remains and literary evidence for ancient Egypt but only literary evidence for ancient Greece as there are no remains for this period, as well as medical studies of human and animal remains from earlier periods, going back to the age of the dinosaurs.

[...]

As the team moved through the ages, it was not until the 17th century that they found descriptions of operations for breast and other cancers and the first reports in scientific literature of distinctive tumours have only occurred in the past 200 years, such as scrotal cancer in chimney sweeps in 1775, nasal cancer in snuff users in 1761 and Hodgkin’s disease in 1832.

Presumably the full paper provides further information, especially since the body of literature, records, reports and papryi from early Egyptian to late nineteenth century would, presumably, be too large to examine in full. Their study gives a clear result (EoR's emphasis):

Professor Rosalie David, at the Faculty of Life Sciences, said: “In industrialised societies, cancer is second only to cardiovascular disease as a cause of death. But in ancient times, it was extremely rare. There is nothing in the natural environment that can cause cancer. So it has to be a man-made disease, down to pollution and changes to our diet and lifestyle.”

But what about those ancient cases of cancer that clearly aren't modern?

Professor David – who was invited to present her paper to UK Cancer Czar Professor Mike Richards and other oncologists at this year’s UK Association of Cancer Registries and National Cancer Intelligence Network conference – said: “Where there are cases of cancer in ancient Egyptian remains, we are not sure what caused them. They did heat their homes with fires, which gave off smoke, and temples burned incense, but sometimes illnesses are just thrown up.”

She added: “The ancient Egyptian data offers both physical and literary evidence, giving a unique opportunity to look at the diseases they had and the treatments they tried. They were the fathers of pharmacology so some treatments did work

[...]

She concluded: “Yet again extensive ancient Egyptian data, along with other data from across the millennia, has given modern society a clear message – cancer is man-made and something that we can and should address.”

Finding cancers in ancient Egypt does rather seem to dispute the conclusion that cancer is 'man[sic]-made' and a 'modern' illness, while the dismissive "sometimes illnesses are just thrown up" is simply misdirection.

New Scientist examines these claims, noting that there are multiple natural and genetic causes of cancer, that many modern cancers are a result of lifestyle choices rather than a toxic environment, and that many modern cancers are due to increased longevity.

Cancer Research UK discuss the history of cancer, noting that dinosaurs probably suffered from it, and the earliest record of tumours (in the breast) is found in an ancient Egyptian papyrus. Hippocrates also wrote about cancer.

A homeopathic dilution of ethics

Sadly, EoR was unable to attend the oxymoronically titled Australian Homeopathic Medicine Conference, but it is clear that recent events have had little or no impact. There is no discussion of legal or ethical issues, but topics included "Homœopathic Treatment of Uterine Fibroid and Ovarian Cyst", "Efficient Homœopathic Care of Critical Cases of Malignancy from an Overseas Perspective" and "Treating People with Cancer, is Homœopathy an Option ?".

Yes. Homeopathy is an option. Just not a very bright one.

The fun isn't quite all over though, since the public are invited to "Experience Homeopathy" at a public open day on the 12th of November.

Experience Homeopathy – Public Open Day 2010 is a free event for any member of the Victorian community who would like to learn more about the principles of the profession, practice of homeopathy and the scope of treatment.

The discussion of principles should be interesting, but EoR suspects it's not ethical principles, but only magical principles, especially since one of the speakers is

a world authority on homoeoprophylaxis - the use of homoeopathic medicines for specific infectious disease prevention. He has undertaken the world's largest long-term study of parents using such a program, completing a PhD research program at Swinburne University, Melbourne, in 2004 on this subject.

EoR is amazed that you can get a PhD for describing how minute doses of water prevents infectious diseases. A quick check at Swinburne University shows that it's a PhD from the Graduate School of Integrative Medicine which is now, apparently, defunct. And the paper doesn't prove homeoeoprophylaxis, but rather (EoR's emphasis):

The Potential Value of Homoeoprophylaxis in the Long-Term Prevention of Infectious Diseases, and the Maintenance of General Health in Recipients

Not only did it fail to prove homoeoprophylaxis works:

The effectiveness of the program could not be established with statistical certainty given the limited sample size and the low probability of acquiring an infectious disease. However, a possible level of effectiveness of 90.3% was identified subject to specified limitations. Further research to confirm the effectiveness of the program is justified.

but the author's conclusion is bizarre:

It also appeared possible that a national immunisation system where both vaccination and HP were available to parents would increase the national coverage against targeted infectious diseases, and reduce the incidence of some chronic health conditions, especially asthma.

In other words, homoeoprophylaxis has no discernable effect, but it works really well, as long as you use it with real vaccination.

While other homeopaths are forced to publish retractions for making similar claims, these homeopaths blithely continue to make these claims to the public, proving how homeopaths have so successfully diluted their principles until they have disappeared entirely.



EoR shakes his head in bemusement.

zn+1 = zn2 + c

Benoit Mandelbrot, 1924-2010



Fractals

"Being a language, mathematics may be used not only to inform but also, among other things, to seduce."
Quotations by Benoit Mandelbrot

Chaos theory tamed

Image source

Another small trial trumpeted by the media

Yoga counteracts fibromyalgia (and many other places on the net):

According to new research conducted at Oregon Health & Science University, yoga exercises may have the power to combat fibromyalgia — a medical disorder characterized by chronic widespread pain.

The study involved 53 women, had a control group, and was randomised and blinded.

Comparison of the data for the two groups revealed that yoga appears to assist in combating a number of serious fibromyalgia symptoms, including pain, fatigue, stiffness, poor sleep, depression, poor memory, anxiety and poor balance. All of these improvements were shown to be not only statistically but also clinically significant, meaning the changes were large enough to have a practical impact on daily functioning. For example, pain was reduced in the yoga group by an average of 24 percent, fatigue by 30 percent and depression by 42 percent.

Oh, so yoga doesn't counteract fibromyalgia, so much as reduce some of the symptoms? As some of the commenters on that report note, there was also no comparison with exercise per se.

The actual published study is a little less triumphant. The intervention group actually undertook a range of therapies since yoga doesn't just include the traditional exercise component:

Each Yoga of Awareness class included approximately 40 min of gentle stretching poses (see details below), 25 min of mindfulness meditation (e.g., awareness of breath, awareness of awareness itself), 10 min of breathing techniques (e.g., full yogic breath, breathing into sensation), 20 min of didactic presentations on the application of yogic principles to optimal coping, and 25 min of group discussions (e.g., experiences while practicing yoga at home).

EoR wonders whether it was a synergistc effect, so that 'yoga' provided the stated improvements, or might it have been any one (or combination) of exercise, meditation, breathing techniques, presentations or group discussions? The authors also note that, while there were strong beneficial outcomes from their study,

Major limitations of our study should be noted. The generalizability of these preliminary findings is restricted by the small sample, the absence of follow-up, and over-reliance on self-report data. Moreover, as stated above, any conclusions are especially limited by the lack of an attention placebo or active control condition

The same issue of Pain also includes a paper on psychological interventions for fibromyalgia, reported in a Commentary as:

Using meta-analytic strategies, the review by Glombiewski et al. [5] (in this issue) on treatments for fibromyalgia provided conclusive evidence for the efficacy of psychological interventions in managing this enigmatic pain problem. Specifically, the authors reported that psychological treatments yielded significant reductions in pain, sleep problems, depression, functional status, and catastrophizing.

The same Commentary also notes, however:

As in all reviews, however, the Glombiewski et al. paper raised a number of questions that only additional research could meaningfully address. One issue is the weak methodological quality of many of the studies reviewed. The treatment literature on fibromyalgia, unfortunately, is notable for its lack of adequate controls, limited follow-up, inconsistencies in defining clinical outcomes, and confusion over rationally integrating treatment approaches with key symptoms. These methodological limitations have raised questions about the efficacy of potentially effective treatments and their systematic use in clinical practice.

---

Carson, J.W., Carson, K.M., Jones, K.D., Bennett, R.M., Wright, C.L., & Mist, S.D. (2010). A pilot randomized controlled trial of the Yoga of Awareness program in the management of fibromyalgia. Pain 151 (2010) 530–539.

Glombiewski, J.A., Sawyer, A.T., Gutermann, J., Koenig, K., Rief, W., & Hofmann, S.G. (2010). Psychological treatments for fibromyalgia: A meta-analysis. Pain 151 (2010) 280–295

Nicassio, P.M. (2010). Commentary: Psychological approaches are effective for fibromyalgia: Remaining issues and challenges. Pain 151 (2010) 245–246.

More evidence 'natural' does not equal 'safe'

Obesity is a major problem and, while there are drugs available that may assist with this problem, it's always better to go down the natural route isn't it? Natural is, after all, kinder, gentler and more effective if all the marketing speak is to be believed.

A recent paper on case studies observed in the Princess Margaret Hospital, Hong Kong, begs to differ. Over the period between 2004 and 2009 sixty-six cases were observed (one of which was fatal) and eighty-one products were analysed and found to be adulterated, many with multiple contaminants.

Sibutramine was the most commonly encountered illicit agent in the current study. Consistent with previous reports [4, 7], cardiovascular effects were frequently observed. [...] Phenolphthalein, a laxative that was withdrawn due to potential carcinogenicity, was found in illicit weight-loss supplements both in the current as well as previous studies
[10]. Similarly, despite being banned, fenfluramine has been frequently encountered as adulterants. [...] Laxatives and diuretics were found in illicit proprietary weight-loss products, and are presumed to decrease body weight by loss of water and bowel contents. However, these compounds do not possess genuine or long-lasting weight-loss effect. Animal thyroid tissues were also detected, as has been reported previously.

As Science 2.0 notes, this is of concern not just for Hong Kong residents:

While the research concentrated on cases in Hong Kong, the work raises worldwide concerns. These slimming products are widely available over the counter not only in Hong Kong, but in other countries where drug regulation is relatively non-comprehensive. In addition, anyone can buy them over the Internet even if they live in regions with tighter regulatory control.

So it would seem those people seeking out the 'natural' alternative to avoid all those dangerous drugs and their nasty side-effects are often doing neither and, in fact, often utilising dangerous and withdrawn drugs to achieve their goals.

---

Tang, M.H.Y., Chen, S.P.L., Ng, S.W., Chan, A.Y.W., & Mak, T.W.L. (2010). Case series on a diversity of illicit weight-reducing agents: from the well known to the unexpected. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. “Accepted Article”; doi: 10.1111/1365-2125.2010.03822.x

The fault is not in our stars

Remember those advertisements in comic books touting the power of hypnosis to make you masterful and powerful and irrestible? Well, they've not disappeared, but only moved on to the net. Cosmic Technologies (or CosmiTec as they prefer to be called) offer you Secret Astrology Seduction Techniques that sound more than a bit creepy but are probably perfectly acceptable if you're a stalker:

You can have the edge over so much other (secret) lovers. You will know things nobody ever will know or understand.

By astrology seduction techniques, you will learn how to attract your secret lover and how to handle her or him. You will know the likes and dislikes of your target. You will know what to do and what to avoid.

You will be in control.

So it's not like you might want a relationship or a partner. No, you want a target that you can control. You can entice a woman to your lair, you can conquer the person you have been hunting. Sometimes woo is just weird, but sometimes it gets distinctly disturbing.

Elsewhere on the site EoR discovered astro-homeopathy, boldly combining two nonsensical systems into one metawoo.

So, for example, it is found that Moon-Pluto connections (aspects or configurations) in a female horoscope may indicate problems to conceive a child due to 'blocked feelings'. A dose of Belladonna LM 18 (this remedy has a Moon-Pluto signature) weekly is able to free the woman of blockages so that a pregnancy can occur.

CosmiTec promise you can determine the gender of your child by simple astrological methods:

According to Dr. Eugen Jonas [psychiatrist and astrologer], this is also the moment of maximum fertility. If this moment also falls at the time of your estimate ovulation, we are pretty shure you will conceive, though there is anecdotal evidence that the lunar phase angle returns overpowers the menstrual cycle and that you CAN get pregnant by having intercourse during menses!

Practically, you have to look at your natal chart and count the distance between the Sun and Moon (also called the luminaries) in a counterclockwise direction and always starting from the position of the Sun.

CosmiTec are not foolish (regardless of the impression their website claims may give), and only promise a 70-75% success rate. Since any random guesses would average around 50-50, guessing the sex of a child is one of the easier psychic predictions to make, especially when only the ones they get right are going to be included in the testimonials.

And then there's sexual horoscopes. EoR had been expecting something about conjunctions with Uranus, but was disappointed.

Given that astrology gives equal influence to all astronomical bodies (in other words, there is no inverse square law of decreasing effect over distance such as with gravity) EoR wonders how long it takes to calculate an astrological chart these days, given the number of planets, comets, meteors, asteroids, Kuiper Belt objects, Oort Cloud objects, stars, nebulae, pulsars, black holes, dark matter and so on. And what about all the unkonwn billions of such objects throughout the universe? How can a chart be complete without taking into account all those as well? Or (gasp) could it be that astrology is just one more outdated magical belief system with no evidence base?

Religious extremists seeking to destroy fabric of Australian society

Lines are being drawn. The burqa is a weapon against women. Ban the burqa! When three of the more alarming Islamist apologists cannot give a straight answer to even one simple question about the burqa, repeatedly turning it instead into an attack on the West, what hope of an honest discussion on, say, terrorism?

Burqas are Un-Australian. They oppress women. They are worn by terrorists. They are used to hide bombs. They are confonting. This evil must stop — even now a group of religious fundamentalists who believes in a religiously based legal system that is "all-encompassing of the human condition" is trying to promote their beliefs in an attempt to destroy the wonderful homogeneity of our Land, and pollute our precious bodily fluids by publicly worshipping this woman:



Is this the sort of Australia you want to see? This is what our streets will look like:



Is this the sort of thing our forefathers envisioned when they settled and developed this vacant country to create the wonderful society we have today?

---

Note: Yes, EoR realises that Bolt, and journalists in general, doesn't distinguish between the burqa, the hijab, the niqab and the chador.

The Great Intelligence is on the march

Climate change is real, and it is already having profound effects on ecologies. Like that of the yetis which are suffering from Russia's recent record-breaking heatwave.

The yetis have become climate change refugees, forced to leave their traditional ranges, and this has brought them into conflict with bears.

Some (obviously unscientific) people confuse the yetis for wood goblins:

“Folk beliefs say that the wood goblin is the master of the woods. All animals, even bears, submit to him. The wood goblin has a strong hypnotic power, thus he is not afraid of any animal.”

The yetis are normally a gentle species, building pyramids (presumably in memory of their time as the Atlantean slave class that built the Egyptian pyramids) and chatting telepathically with all and sundry (but not, obviously, bears):

“They make strange pyramidal constructions of trunks and branches in the wood – sometimes 3 or 4 meters, sometimes only 30 cm high."

[...]

[I]t seems that local residents have already found a common language with the yetis – they leave candies for them and communicate with them mentally – yetis are believed to be telepathic. Igor Burtsev even claims that to a certain extent, yetis can imitate the human language. “I would, without doubt, call the yeti another species of man,” he says.

EoR does, however, wonder why no one has investigated the immediately obvious explanation: that these are the descendants of escaped or abandoned humanzees from Ilya Ivanovich Ivanov's experiments in the early twentieth century.

---

(The Great Intelligence)

Metatronical madness

As EoR has previously noted, people performing improbable ethods of treating disease and who, largely, are dismissive if not completely antagonistic of conventional medicine still crave the legitimisation and authority of that same conventional medicine. Hence the Australian Medical Intuitives Association, Inc, a group of 'Professional Practitioners' of 'Medical' intuition. Without those code words, it would just be some people guessing what was wrong with you based on a completely wrong view of physiology. As an example, "Diabetes is often the result of feeling unloved".

One of these 'Professional Practitioners' is Carmel Bell, who promotes Metatronic Energy® and is also the founder of the College of Medical Intuition, as well as the founder and President of the previously mentioned AMIA (the easy way to give yourself 'professional' legitimisation — set up a couple of organisations yourself, and claim their imprimatur, rather than meeting the stringent requirements of an established authority like, for example, the Australian Medical Board). And, while

She has worked successfully with thousands of people, dealing with a wide variety of concerns, ranging from panic/anxiety disorder, systemic illness, cancer, traumatic injury, nerve injury and emotional problems, to name a few dysfunctions.

she also adds the usual disclaimer

Carmel Bell is not a Medical Practitioner and claims no training in Medicine, Alternative health Fields or Psychology. A consultation with a Medical Intuitive is not meant to take the place of advice or treatment by a qualified professional in these fields. Any condition requiring medical care should be attended to by your Health Care practitioner.

The information given on this website is a guide only and is not intended to replace any advice or guidance given to you by any health care practitioner or medical practitioner that you consult with. Carmel Bell accepts no responsibility for any choices or actions you may make to your health care routine based on your interpretation of the information provided on this website.

This is slightly different from the normal disclaimer, which admist the seller has no conventional medical knowledge, since it also adds that Ms Bell has no alternative medical knowledge. In effect, she has no idea at all, and accepts absolutely no responsibility for making guesses based on her total lack of knowledge.

Also, like others of her ilk, she runs seminars (though she at least has the originality to call them 'Funshops') at AU$450, as well as training ('Price on application'). And now she has a book: When All Else Fails. She includes the breathless review Nova gave to her book:

Not many people can claim to have visited the borders of death and live to tell the tale in fascinating detail. Carmel Bell has - (on three occasions. Of all the stoires I've reead over the years, hers is one of the most extraordinary.) (...) Carmel was four years old when she somehow set herself on fire and died, albeit briefly. She travelled down the tunnel, familiar to so many near death experiences and towardsa glowing light. At the gates of heaven, JEsus and an Archangel named Metatron gave Carmel a healing gift, Metatronic Energy, which she later used to heal her bruned body and her damaged kidneys.

Wow! All those burns and severe injuries cured solely by Metatronic Energy! Because, of course, if she'd actually gone to hospital and relied on modern medical treatment and the skills of a team of medical professionals she'd acknowledge that, wouldn't she? Presumably, Metatron also advised her to register his name as a trademark as well.

It's virtually impossible to explain away Carmel's near death experience on the the night of February 15th 2009 when she had a cardiac arrest, died for 47 minutes and suffered severe brain damage. She was placed in a coma for four days and then spent six weeks in intensive care. The medical prognosis was she would be dependant on care all her life. Of course, the doctors did not take into account Carmel's indefatigable spirit - or her access to Metatronic Energy. Carmel is today a walking, talking miracle. Never was there such a case of "physician heal thyself".

Some might argue that she did, in fact, suffer brain damage. Her third death must have been fairly uninteresting, since it's not mentioned in the review. And, clearly, it's not a case of 'phsician heal thyself' since she's stated she's not a physician, not even a pretend altie sort.

Such magic belief systems, in the face of lack of evidence, rely on the personal anecdote:

One of the most touching casr studies in this book involves a deparately ill woman named Carla, a mother and wife who had lived her life for her family. Carmel uncovered Carla's deep-seated feelings of disempowerment and being trapped in life, (she also continued her raditation therapy). About a year later, Carla was free from cancer and she was living a happier life.

So, which do you think cured Carla? Metatronic Energy®, or radiation therapy?

Sadly, no matter how often Ms Bell notes that Metatron is her personally trademarked and registered angel, he doesn't seem to be listening to her. He allows himself to be channelled by others:

Metatron: These you refer to as Yeti or those termed, Bigfoot, are earlier versions of the genetic experiment on Earth, primarily from the phase of Atlantis some 20,000 years ago. At that time there were many genetic experiments on your planet. These beings are intelligent, but genetically impaired. These massive forms were genetically created using human DNA with that of the ape to create a laboring humanoid beast, a beast with greater intelligence, human like intelligence, but with imposed genetic wiring or implants that ‘unplugged’ certain areas of the brain.

(...)

You see, the grid alignments, powernodes, and white holes that exist on your planet do not just exist on dry land, most of them exist, in fact on over and under waters. Dolphins, primarily, and in a few cases whales, align their energies to these sites in assisting to balance the energy of your planet.

Who would have thought that the wonderfully newagey Atlantis, and Stalin's Russia would have had so much in common?

Metatron even seems to have branched out, providing Pippa Merivale with Metatronic Healing® which is presumably totally different from Metatronic Energy®.

He is also, apparently, providing his multidimensional healing modality via the services of a stud alpaca.

Illusory circles

Crop circles have long ago been debunked as artful pranks but, like the meme that mercury causes cancer, magical beliefs about them continue to persist.

So Jeremy Ball presents a mish-mash of spirituality and misinformation in the latest Nova under the heading of From Animal to Hu-Man.

Despite all of man's [sic] achievements in science, medicine and building and in reaching great spiritual heights, we all have animalistic tendencies, which have come out to devastating effects. [...] Well, if what prophecies tell us — and many of the signs around back them up — we are in the final days of the animal cycle. [...] Just like a spacecraft, turning at right angles before making a dimensional shift, we will lift out of the suit of base reactions, which served us well for this last cycle, leaving it behind for a new skin of lighter purer qualities. We are living in those days.

EoR has never seen a spacecraft make a dimensional jump, except in the realms of fantasy, which is pretty much where this article is based.

Crop circles are some sort of special sign from the "Great Spirit". But hang on, what about those tiresome naysayers?

I won't bother to address the doubters of crop circles because it is so obviously a true phenomenon that to cast out all crop circles as false is akin to arguing that the world is flat.

Take that, sceptics! So much for the new age when all will be lightness and fluffiness and inclusiveness. Anyway, EoR has never heard any sceptics claim crop circles are false. Where does Mr Ball get that idea from?

Crop circles, Mr Ball informs us, are some sort of chakra-energising glyphs that act in the way advertising "can program and affect our consciuosness". EoR wonders if crop circles are actually saying something like "Eat at Milliways"?

The South West of England has a hub of many energy channels and the Druidic culture that lived there performed many practices to keep the energy channels opening, flowing and evolving. They involved creating stone circles to augment the process, much like acupuncture can do for the qi meridians in your body. It is around these stone circles that many crop circles appear. The Druids worked in conjunction with extra terrestrial/higher dimensional beings to create the stone circles and it is these same beings who are involved in the crop circles.

EoR is getting rather tired by this stage of everything being "like" acupuncture.

Apart from having a flaky grasp of history (Druids flourished during the Iron Age while stone circles were built during the earlier Megalithic period, but EoR presumes if they had extraterrestrial engineering and project management assistance they may have also used those Super-Duper Acme™ Alien Time Travel Machines) this is the standard line pushed by von Daniken and his disciples: that humanity is basically stupid and incapable of anything. So much so that they can only create stone circles, pyramids, civilisation etc etc with alien help. This is a deeply depressing view of humanity when it is examined, and EoR much prefers the sense of wonder engendered from understanding that around 50 thousand years ago, humanity expanded its cognitive abilities and became capable of expressing itself in many ways, culturally, socially and mechanically.

Not for Mr Ball, though.

The crop circles in England this year have been astonishing in their intricacy and directness of message. Rather than being mere geometric expression, they are clearly pointing to an ascension process that the earth and us as cells in her body are going through.

What sort of circles do you see in this image? Wavy lines?



They are, in fact, perfect circles, but human perception distorts what you are seeing.

Interpretation requires caution.

Kicking against the pricks

Apparently the only society in the history of humanity that doesn't accept acupuncture is the modern Western world. Acupuncture has been used everywhere and everywhen. There's Ötzi the Iceman. And now there's the mummy with the irrefutable evidence that ancient Peruvians also practiced acupuncture.

Mysterious circle tattoos on a Peruvian mummy have been identified as containing burned plant material. The finding sheds light on a possible ancient healing practice that may have been based on similar principles to acupuncture.

The 1000-year-old female mummy was found unwrapped in the sand of the desert at Chiribaya Alta in southern Peru in the early 1990s. She bears two distinct types of tattoos: emblems representing birds, apes, reptiles and other symbols cover her hands, arm and lower left leg, while an asymmetric pattern of overlapping circles is present on her neck.

Maria Anna Pabst of the Medical University of Graz in Austria has determined that these are a result of acupuncture. How does she know this?

Pabst points out that the circles are close to Chinese acupuncture points. She says that tattooing a person at these points could have worked in a similar way to how acupuncture is thought to work. The plants chosen as the staining material would presumably have had medicinal properties, she adds.

Leaving aside the fact that herbs in tattoos have absolutely nothing to do with acupuncture, why is it always that these tattoos are "near" acupuncture points? Every point on the body is "near" an acupuncture point! Tattoos cover a large amount of skin. If any tattoo, anywhere, ever, wasn't near an acupuncture point, EoR would be amazed.

But wait! There's more proof!

When she showed a drawing of the tattoos to a modern-day shamanic healer in Peru, he suggested that they might have been part of a strengthening ritual on an upper-class subject.

Oh. EoR's convinced. Though he doesn't quite understand what a shamanic healer (many of whom can be found by an internet search, and many of whom are not 'shamans' at all in the traditional sense but just newage scammers — EoR has no idea what sort was consulted in this case) would have to say about acupuncture. It's like consulting an environmental toxicologist about your cholesterol problems.

Interestingly, Dr Pabst has also been involved in analysing Ötzi's tattoos.

A conservative approach to literature

Oh, the laughs Andrew Bolt creates. He has to be Australia's best answer to the claim that comedians are all leftwing.

Now that Mario Vargas Llosa has won the Nobel prize for literature Bolt wants to claim him as a conservative writer (whatever that pigeon-holing entails) and presents this as proof that great writers are conservative! And how do we know that they're great? Well, because they're conservative, of course. Really, don't be so dense. As if to prove his assertion, Bolt comes up with the most tortured grammar that actually states the opposite of what he intends (though determining just what Bolt intends with his dog whistle comments is often difficult):

Many of the greatest writers are conservatives, unlike most of those who aren’t.

So most of the greatest writers aren't conservatives? Or something. Given that example, Bolt can't even be considered a mediocre writer.

This simply demonstrates the extreme Right's need to label and categorise in order to maintain their belief in an Us (good) and Not-Us (evil).

Then Bolt comes up with a Little List of Favourite Conservative Writers (again, they're conservative because Bolt claims they are — witness his comment about Dickens).

Tolstoy's in there (yes, the arch Socialist, free-the-serfs, give-up-property Tolstoy) but strangely Ayn Rand isn't. EoR thought all conservatives had salacious images of her under their beds for 'entertainment' purposes. Though maybe she's too libertarian and not conservative enough.

Bolt's second choice is Jean Raspail. Hardly a 'great' writer, EoR would have thought. Though, if Wikipedia is to be believed, EoR can understand why Bolt would consider him the epitome of literature:

He encountered a huge controversy with his book The Camp of the Saints (1973). In it he predicted the overwhelming of Western civilization in a 'tidal wave' of Third World immigration. His critics accuse him of right-wing extremism on the basis of the views expressed in the book. The book is popular among immigration reductionists

Also, almost by definition, "great writers" means no women, and no non-Caucasians.

And, daring to invoke Godwin's Law, EoR wonders why Hitler isn't there as well for his wonderful romantic comedy, Mein Kampf? Now there's a great conservative writer. And someone who had similar ideas about racial purity and the criminal classes.

Make money now!

Nova has some wonderful advertisements, ranging from flushing your bottom with colonic cleansing to flushing your brain with various 'Secrets', as well as Tantric 'Sex Coaching' (nudge nudge wink wink). EoR considered giving the Nova Advertisement of the Month award to Maria, the "Compassionate Clairvoyant" (as opposed, presumably, to the Callous Clairvoyants) but finally couldn't go past Richard's effort since it embodies the whole basis of the newage movement:

UNCONSCIOUS MANIFESTING WORKSHOP. Increase your ability to manifest greater joy and abundance automatically by increasing consciousness. Banks Pavilion, Mt Lawley. $150 cash. Ring Richard 0407 XXX XXX

Increase your abundance by giving it away (in a suspiciously black economy manner).

Natural and healthy

Goodbye Charlie.

A chimpanzee famous for smoking cigarettes has died at a South African zoo, aged 52.

Charlie the chimp started smoking when some visitors to Mangaung zoo, in Bloemfontein, threw him lit cigarettes.

[...]

Mr Khedama said he did not believe the addiction had ended Charlie's life prematurely, as he had lived around 10 years longer than the average chimp.

Which just goes to prove those assertions made by doctors that smoking is good for you. Since smoking has now clearly been demonstrated to increase life expectancy by 25%, EoR expects that smoking as a natural, healthy alternative to pills will form part of Dr Dingle's seminars on "How to live to 101 happily and healthily".

Trust

The enforced exile to Siberia is over, the political rehabilitation continues, and our favourite health adviser is back.

This month's edition of Nova (with the theme, appropriately enough, of trust) features the return of Dr Peter Dingle PhD advising us of the facts regarding our health.

Over the last year I have researched and written widely on how pharmaceutical companies fool the public into thinking cholesterol lowering drugs work when, in fact, that's not the case. These companies benefit enormously from huge profits made by depicting high cholesterol as the cause of cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, this emphasis on lowering cholesterol has resulted in a deviation from the underlying problem of CVD and its real risk factors. It is not cholesterol levels that can cause harm to our hearts, but instead excessive inflammation and oxidisation of cholesterol that causes damage to the cardiovascular system. The problem is one of lifestyle and diet and needs to be fixed, not with a lifetime supply of drugs, but with lifestyle changes anyone can begin today.

Don't you just hate it when you're fooled by companies whose only aim is to sell you stuff and increase their profits? Dr Dingle, however, fails to mention that he's got a new book out he's selling. Nor does he seem cognizant with the fact that independent medicos, in fact, advise rather differently about cholesterol than the Big Pharma Conspiracy scenario he believes in. Of course, he's not a medical doctor, and he's also been busy with other things over the last year as well so it's probably not appropriate that EoR expects him to be an expert source in offering health advice as well.

CVD is a multidimensional disease, yet modern medicine looks at it through a one-dimensional microscope.

EoR has no idea what dimension this bizarre belief comes from. And using a loaded word like 'multidimensional' in a woo magazine like Nova is just asking for misinterpretation...

It cannot be treated with a single magic bullet — none of the chronic illnesses can be.

Erect strawman argument. Demolish strawman. Gloat.

But a multidimensional approach incorporating diet, environment, attitude and lifestyle will work.

Hmmm... Diet, environment, attitude and lifestyle. That wouldn't be another undisclosed clue to conflict of interest, would it?

Two pages later there's an advertisment for "Dr Peter Dingle" and his new book, The Six-Week Healthy Eating Planner, co-authored with Martine Dingle, ND in which, presumably, health advice is provided.

The only change is in the disclaimer in small print at the very end of the article:

Dr Peter Dingle PhD is an associate professor and researcher who has researched nutritional toxicology for the past 10 or more years. He is not a medical doctor. After completing his honours in environmental toxicology in 1988, he went on to complete his PhD in the same field in 1994. The information he presents is based on the research he and his students carry out at Murdoch University where he is Associate Professor in Health and the Environment.

So, hidden away in the middle of the paragraph is the fact that he's not qualified to give medical advice.

This game is easy, and EoR could play it as well if he wanted to. If he wanted to suggest that Dr Dingle's exhortations to eat more fish oil were dangerous advice from someone who was selling books and seminars and so on to make money on the basis of those claims, he could pull up a recent study suggesting fish oil may cause colon cancer (something EoR feels would be close to Dr Dingle's health concerns) and that scientists are working towards better drugs to control atherosclerosis. There, that's put the fear of God into everyone. Now you can buy EoR's new book Healthy Eating is Killing You!.

So who would you trust to give you medical advice? Someone with no medical qualifications? Someone who apparently can't find the time to research medical journals when his wife's life was at stake, but apparently finds the time to do so when his new book is coming out?

Professor Dingle admitted he did not "comprehensively" research the range of treatments for colorectal cancer to find what the best option was.

"There is so much research, it's very complex and time consuming," he said.

Mr Hope asked why he did not access reliable medical journals in terms of rectal cancer.

"That can be a full lifetime just looking at that," Professor Dingle said.

Someone who admits he is so woefully inexperienced in health matters it's impossible for him to comment on them?

When he was asked whether he'd analysed the substances she was taking, he said he did not because he was an indoor air quality expert and unless the substances were thrown in the air and breathed in he would not know what to do with them.

Someone who applies double standards by refusing to condemn the failed modality that led to his wife's death because it might work for someone somewhere, but condemns cholesterol drugs en masse even though they might also help someone somewhere?

Earlier, Mr Hope asked why Dr Dingle did not use his writings to highlight the dangers of accepting alternative cancer remedies.

Dr Dingle said he was wary of dismissing alternative treatment altogether in the event it was successful for someone else.

Someone who was dropped by 6PR because they felt their duty of care was threatened by having an indoor air quality expert provide health advice to listeners?

Those who can, do. Those who can't, spam.

EoR is being spammed by the Back on Your Feet Natural Health Clinic, an organisation he would have remained blissfully unaware if not for the confused attempts to spam a woo clinic on a sceptical blog. Some alties just don't have a clue.

Nonetheless, EoR was delighted to expand his knowledge of the wonders of homeopathy. For example, EoR had mistakenly assumed that homeopathy was not accepted by real medicine because it conflicted with all known rules of physics, and because it performed no better than a placebo. In reality, it is because the consultations take longer.

A typical appointment with a homeopath does take about an hour, however, and that is one reason why this science has always existed on the fringes of mainstream society. Its cures are highly efficient, but when it comes to individual appointments, they do take time.

Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843) was not only the genius who invented homeopathy, but he apparently also had a time machine in his basement.

When homeopathy originated, in the fifteen hundreds, it became immediately popular with royal and aristocratic families.

It seems it was the aristocracy who were the only people able to take advantage of the wonders of woo, but you don't need to worry because we're all the equivalent of royalty these days.

Today, we often think of the old-world existence of royalty as a “life of leisure,” but in truth, without any modern appliances or conveniences, and with states and principalities to manage, these nobles were busy individuals. A more realistic assessment of their lives would be to say that in terms of free time and income, they compared to the lives of the middle class today. Although we do all different kinds of work now, it is not usually the sun-up to sun-down toil that characterized the days of the peasants, so many of us, like the royals and aristocrats of old, have a lifestyle that is also conducive to reaping the benefits of homeopathy.

That sounds like spin for "people with disposable income can spend it on useless remedies".

EoR also thought that headaches and neck pain were caused by invisible subluxations that could only be cured by the amazing manipulations of chiropracters, but he was mistaken about this as well.

Headaches, Upper back and Neck pains are more often than not due to an attack of wind.

At this time of year when we go outside into the cold, the westerly winds attack us like a knife in the back. If your body is weak the wind will get under the skin lodging itself into the muscles. The muscles will spasm to stop further penetration into the body. Once in spasm, the muscles will pull the vertebras out of alignment impinging on the nerves and give you neck pain.

With this neck pain you are most likely to experience headaches as well. If the headache is caused by wind it usually feels like a clamp or a wet towel tightly rapped around the head. You’ll feel dizzy, blurry and have heavy eyelids as if you need sleep. You’re likely to have a runny nose and tension at the back of your head, just below the skull. (This area is called the wind gate because it’s where the wind enters)

This can be avoided by wearing a towel around the shoulders at all times. Should that fail, cupping, acupuncture and herbs will cure it, especially since the evil wind can be so insidious:

It can dive 6 levels into the body, all the way to the bone marrow. If it gets there, you will be in a lot of pain and no matter what you do to get warm it won’t work. At this stage you will need herbs for sure. So don’t let it get there!

Of course, no good altie lets their propaganda go by without a call to spam further:

Feel free to pass this on to a friend or love one. And if your friend wants to receive these articles please ask them to submit their details

EoR trusts the Back on Your Feet Natural Health Clinic is happy now it has received suitable recognition. And, since they consider The Second Sight to be a "nice blog. Good information" that they will now shut up shop.

The best evidence is no evidence

Science is based, ultimately, on evidence. Unfortunately, 'evidence' is not a monolithic construct and there are varying levels of evidence from the weak to the stronger. Based on your understanding of science, in what order would you put these various forms of evidence?

• Meta-analysis


• Clinical trials


• Case studies


• Anecdotes

If you guessed that they're ordered from weakest to most powerful evidence, then you're in good company.

EoR has already noted that glucosamine and chondroitin provide nothng more than a placebo effect. Some vets, however, argue that this doesn't apply to horses (where the use of such products is extremely popular).

Vets and supplement manufacturers have said there is no evidence that two dietary supplements declared ineffective for humans last week are also ineffective for horses.

That's an interesting stance to take: absence of evidence is proof of effect. Of course, drugs ('neutraceutical' and 'dietary supplements' are weasel words) for humans don't necessarily function the same way in equines. The fact that they don't work in humans, however, doesn't automatically mean they do work in equines but this is the argument being put forward.

"Humans and horses have different digestive systems and absorb substances differently," she said. "I like to have scientific evidence of efficacy. But people like to do something, and, as far as we know, glucosamine and chondroitin do no harm."

Other than wasting money, of course. As far as EoR knows, psychic healing also does no harm. Presumably, "leading vet" Sue Dyson would also recommend that. The continued support for a drug with no evidence for its efficacy is based on the claims of manufacturers:

Eliane Bennington of Healthspan, which owns VetVits, said: "We are not going to stop selling it — people who use it know it helps joints."

And personal anecdote:

And H&H forum users last week spoke out in support of the substances — the majority saying they found joint supplements effective. Vet Andrew McGonnell added that anecdotal evidence that the products work should not be "written off". "Many of my clients have seen benefits, and, crucially, have seen deterioration when treatment stops," he said.

Of course, if a Big Pharma company was selling a massively popular drug that had no evidence trials (indeed, trials indicating it was ineffective), EoR wonders whether the reaction would be similarly supporting.

Thistle thoughts (9)

EoR, having accidentally sat on some thistles, ponders the State of Things.

Why is that a crocodile can make clear, correct psychic predictions, but those people you have to pay can only make vague references to someone with an "M" or "A" name?

Global warming science demolished. Again.

What is it with geologists being an apparent majority of the scientifically literate who deny global warming? Bob Carter is one such example, now with his new book which he is spruiking. Hopefully titled Climate: The Counter-Consensus the book is lauded as

The counter-consensus to quasi-scientific hype and induced panic on climate change is at last assembling. Climate: the Counter Consensus examines, with thoroughness and impartial expertise, the so-called facts of global warming that are churned out and unquestioningly accepted, while the scientific and media establishments stifle or deride any legitimate expression of an opposing view.

Bob Carter is anything but impartial, as Sourcewatch notes, being a member of various right wing organisations. It's also laughable that dissent against the accepted view is somehow being 'stifled' by huge interest groups. If that were so, how could this book be published? How is it possible for this public launch? Why is it available on Amazon.com? Why is the massive global cover-up so damn inefficient? Those organising the Global World Communist Government demand answers!

EoR has also previously noted how global warming deniers manage to maintain contradictory viewpoints (rather like alties). Such as the fact that there is no consensus and, even if there were, because some people (including some scientists — of which some are even climate scientists) disagree, then the whole edifice of global warming science is destroyed.

Ah, but a 'counter-consensus' (which is a strange term in itself — are its proponents arguing for a consensus for something else, or simply saying there is a consensus and they are 'counter' to it — so their sole purpose is to be against something?) is a good thing, and the fact that the majority of climate scientists don't support that 'counter-consensus' doesn't destroy the whole edifice of global warming denial.

It's a strange, contradictory world in the mind of the denier.

Edit: More about Bob Carter's egregiousness on today's Science Show.

Various degrees of misinformation

EoR imagines that the hosts of Radio National's contrarian show Counterpoint turn the airconditioning temperature down every time they enter the studio, just to prove the falsity of global warming. This week they featured Aynsley Kellow (Professor, School of Government, University of Tasmania), who has previously appeared on their show, to discuss the great scam that is the IPCC's faking of science.

EoR will leave it to his readers to spot all the ad hominens in this short segment (clue: look for the usual suspects such as Greenpeace, Michael Mann, Rajendra Pachauri, and every lead author for the IPCC except one), but there are a few highlights worthy of note.

There is this tendency to dismiss any critic as being a denier which has politicised and made difficult the conduct of decent critical scientific discussion, critical policy discussion that you either accept the prevailing view of things or you get labelled a denier.

Professor Kellow provides a false dichotomy here. Scientists can disagree with the prevailing view of things and publish findings in the relevant literature. Those labelled deniers tend to be believers in a number of contradictory viewpoints at the same time (global warming isn't happening and it's the sun that's causing it anyway), or who have a distinct preference for cherry picking select data. In fact, it's the deniers that have politicised the 'decent critical scientific discussion'.

I've now got a rule of thumb that anyone who uses the word 'denier' should immediately not be listened to because they're not talking about science.

Well, that's certainly maintaining an open mind, avoiding all ad hominens, and carefully avoiding any prejudicial conclusions, unlike those evil scientists who are so closed minded about debate.

You should institutionalise dissent and have a kind of B Team — empanel a group of people who are sceptically minded, who want to take issue with this science and from that process of course policy makers would end up with a less clear message but probably a more accurate message.

This seems a loopy idea, and is even more politicising since it's effectively a call to include deniers on any panel. EoR fails to see how the message could then become 'less clear' (which is precisely what the right wing funders of this disinformation want) and 'more accurate' at the same time. And does Professor Kellow also support the inclusion of creationists to clarify the contentious issue of evolution? Anti-vaccinionsts to clarify and make 'more accurate' the contentious issue of vaccines? Homeopaths on any medical funding issue?

Professor Kellow also berates previous IPCC chair Bob Watson for informing the media after the third IPCC report in a blatantly alarmist manner that future warming over a hundred years would be 6.1 degrees,

all based on the assumption that if we frighten the children the horses will, you know, take better action somehow than if we have a more mature assessment.

EoR has no idea what that phrase means, and suspects Professor Kellow was making it up as he went along (and it's also another ad hominen failing to address the actual claim).

Professor Kellow states MIT reported that the 6.1 degree warming had only a 1% likelihood, and claims that Bob Watson was therefore misrepresenting the science for political ends (something deniers understand very well). Now, for such an apparently widely spread lie, EoR was unable to find much evidence of it, and certainly none that Dr Robert Watson cherry picked a single figure to promote a political case (oh, how the deniers must be laughing at the irony of their arguments by this point).

In 2000 he stated:

Climate models, using the latest emissions projections from the IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios, project an increase in global mean surface temperature of 1.5 to 6 degrees Centigrade between 1990 and 2100, with land areas warming more than the global average, especially at mid-and high northern latitudes.

So there's a range of possibilities (as modelled in 2000) rather than an absolute.

Dr Robert Watson is also on record as saying (in 2004):

So, over the last 100 years, we had seen the Earth warm about 0.6 degrees Celsius, 1 degree Fahrenheit.

Could Professor Kellow be confusing these figures and timescales?

In 2008 Dr Robert Watson was reported as stating:

Unfortunately, Professor Bob Watson is not speaking out of turn in telling the world to prepare for four degrees of global warming. "Mitigate for two degrees; adapt for four" has long been the catchphrase among climate negotiators and campaigners.

That's still not the strangely specific 6.1 degrees that Kellow mentions.

Helen-The-Pooh

Helen Frost has been keeping a relatively low media profile of late, and EoR had suspected she'd gone away, but it appears she's still pushing her particular worldview to schools and anyone else who thinks the appellation "Nutrition Educator" actually indicates any sort of training, qualification or skills in that area.

Given her preternatural obsession with faeces (or 'poo' as she terms it) EoR couldn't help clicking on the link to find out What Poo Type Are You? to be sadly disappointed that the page consists only of this:

What Poo Type Are You? Special Report

Coming Soon

EoR imagines Helen Frost is closeted away somewhere private, straining mightily to produce a movement of great import.

Meanwhile, for those who enjoy various madnesses, here is Helen Frost's Poo Fairy Song (543 kB).

Experts Reveal...

David Freedman has a new book out with the somewhat unwieldy title of WRONG: Why experts keep failing us--and how to know when not to trust them. Mr Freedman's premise is that virtually all (if not, in fact, all) of the information we receive from experts such as scientists, doctors, finance wizards and so on is wrong. To be fair, he also includes journalistic pundits, amongst whom he includes himself. This means that, if his thesis is true, his claims are most likely false and, therefore, the experts are actually correct, which means that he, as an expert, is also correct and that the experts are therefore wrong and....

EoR feels like he's in a scene from a bad SF movie where the super computer runs amok, only to be destroyed by the old "The next statement I make will be true. The last statement I made was false" line.

The introduction to the book is available courtesy of The New York Times. Part of the problem with the book is that Mr Freedman equivocates about the meaning of 'expert'. He doesn't actually mean an expert (someone who is knowledgeable in a particular area) but rather

(W)hen I say “expert,” I’m mostly thinking of someone whom the mass media might quote as a credible authority on some topic — the sorts of people we’re usually referring to when we say things like “According to experts . . .” These are what I would call “mass” or “public” experts, people in a position to render opinions or findings that a large number of us might hear about and choose to take into account in making decisions that could affect our lives. Scientists are an especially important example, but I’m also interested in, for example, business, parenting, and sports experts who gain some public recognition for their experience and insight. I’ll also have some things to say about pop gurus, celebrity advice givers, and media pundits, as well as about what I call “local” experts — everyday practitioners such as non-research-oriented doctors, stockbrokers, and auto mechanics.

So, Mr Freedman is actually arguing that the statements presented in mass media are usually wrong. This is different from an argument that experts are usually wrong. Meryl Dorey, for example, is a media 'expert' (indeed, for Howard Sattler, she is the only vaccination 'expert' worthy of presenting to his radio audience) but she is not an expert in (to EoR's knowledge) any field at all.

Mr Freedman provides a list of factoids. Most of these are misleading, inaccurate or incomplete. There may well be further support for his factoids in his book (which EoR has not read) and EoR does support the need for assessing the validity of experts (or, at least, what is usually presented as expert opinion in the mass media), but these items are flimsy:

About two-thirds of the findings published in top medical journals are refuted within a few years.

This indicates a fundamental misconception of the nature of science (and this misunderstanding also affects most of the subsequent factoids). All science is provisional (even evolution) until further research is undertaken. Also, medical journals are a subset of total science research (which is also a subset of all 'expert' advice). While Freedman focuses heavily on pharmaceutical trials, much scientific research is actually theorising and argument — it's the mass media that presents it as absolute teleological Truth.

As much as 90 percent of physicians' medical knowledge has been gauged to be substantially or completely wrong.

EoR doesn't know what to make of this. Do the majority of physicians have no idea where the spleen is located? And what is the lvel of incorrect knowledge for homeopaths?

Economists have found that all studies published in economics journals are likely to be wrong.

Presumably, this is from a study published in an economics journal.

Nearly 100 percent of studies that find a particular type of food or a vitamin lowers the risk of disease fail to hold up.

This seems to be confusing the findings of studies with what is reported by mass media as the new superfood du jour (and which alties pick up and promote endlessly as the cure for all known diseases).

Professionally prepared tax returns are more likely to contain significant errors than self-prepared returns.

Is this because more complicated tax returns are more likely to be prepared by professionals? Is this in the US, or worldwide? What does 'more likely' mean?

In spite of $100 billion spent annually on medical research in the US, average life span here has increased by only a few years since 1978, with that small rise mostly due to a drop in smoking rates.

The US medical system is a strange beast, which may not reflect the rest of the world, but Mr Freedman has chosen to equate medical research outcomes solely against lifespan. There is no assessment of quality of life, or specific disease rates.

There is a one out of twelve chance that a doctor's diagnosis will be wrong in a way that will cause significant harm to the patient.

Which means there's a eleven in twelve chance that the doctor's diagnosis is correct, presumably. Which rather negates Mr Freedman's statment that experts are almost always wrong.

Not a single NFL coach or manager was able to spot much potential in future-record-shattering quarterback Tom Brady, leaving him nearly undrafted by the league after college.

Cherry picking a single exceptional case that was missed doesn't therefore mean that the experts are always wrong.

Genetics tests are one-tenth as accurate at predicting a person's height as guessing based on the height of the parents.

Height is a function of a number of factors, not only genetics (and genetic testing is also constantly improving). These factors would be reflected generally in the parents so an assessment based on them would probably be the better method of including all these factors.

Most major drugs don't work on 40 to 75 percent of the population.

This is difficult to assess since it doesn't include whether those drugs are intended to be used on the general population, or only a specific part where they do work. Nonetheless, how do we know that these figures are correct? Presumably, because the experts tell us (EoR's brain is hurting again here). And what about the 60 to 25 percent of the population that the drugs do work on? Isn't that a positive thing? And how, exactly, does that prove experts are always wrong?

Hearing an expert talk impairs the brain's ability to make decisions for itself, according to brain imaging studies.

Which doesn't necessarily mean that the expert is wrong.

A drug widely prescribed for years to heart-attack victims killed more Americans than did the Vietnam war.

And we know this now because the experts tell us? Or are they also wrong?

Only about one percent of the scientific studies based on fraudulent data are identified and reported.

EoR finds this really bizarre. To claim that one per cent, the total number of fraudulent studies must be known. So why are they being ignored?

One-third of researchers admit to having committed or personally observed at least one act of research misconduct within the previous three years.

Researchers in all fields? An 'act of research misconduct' covers a wide field of misdemeanours, not all of which necessarily prove that experts are wrong.

Two-thirds of the drug-study findings that indicate a drug may cause harm are not fully reported by researchers.

This is a major concern regarding reporting of pharmaceutical testing. It doesn't mean that experts are wrong so much as that data is being selectively presented. Such actions are not acceptable, but not indicative of a general expert failure syndrome.

Ninety-five percent of medical findings are never retested.

Which doesn't necessarily mean that they're wrong (as Mr Freedman seems to be implying, unless he knows something the rest of us don't).

Half of newspaper articles contain at least one factual error.

Journalists are not experts (except, possibly, in journalism). Confusing them with such is what is really wrong with perceived 'expert failure' and why Mr Freedman appears to have limited himself to mass media experts.

Sixty percent of newspaper articles quote someone who says the reporter didn't get the story straight.

Again, journalists are at fault here. Arguing that experts are wrong because journalists misquote or misinterpret them (or simply state what they want the story to say) is confusing who made the mistake.

Three-quarters of experimental drugs found safe and effective in animal testing prove harmful or ineffective on humans.

Well, it should seem obvious that humans aren't actually mice and that a drug that works in mice isn't necessarily going to work in humans. This is something that is well known (except, possibly, to journalists and Mr Freedman). Finding out that the drugs don't work in humans isn't expert failure either, simply further research.

As many as 98 percent of medical researchers fail to fully disclose all potential conflicts of interest in published studies

This is similar to the failure to publish all pharmaceutical studies (positive as well as negative). A conflict of interest, in itself, doesn't invalidate findings, only make them more suspect and requiring closer scrutiny.

A third of the studies published in top medical journals contain statistical errors.

Which doesn't mean the experts are wrong, but fallible (and why does Mr Freedman seem to concentrate so much on medical research to support his much wider ranging conclusions?).

Becoming an 'expert' (in Mr Freedman's sense, though he doesn't use quote marks so the term is ambiguous) is relatively easy. Once you've been in the media (and this can be done by setting yourself up to run a seminar or release a press statement or publish a book or set up a website) the media are more likely to come back to you again (since it's easier to call on someone you already know about). This leads to a reinforcing cycle that the person is an expert because they keep appearing in the media commenting on various subjects, whether they have any qualifications in that area or not.

Journalists, even when they do consult suitably qualified persons, still are driven by the urge to write a sensational story. They either fail to understand what they have been told, or change it to suit their purposes.

In both cases the real experts have not been wrong, but the media have fooled us. Rather than disregarding experts altogether, what we need are better tools to assess which experts we shoud accept, and better methods to assess what they are saying (including better training in science and critical thinking in schools).

The Principles And Practice Of Magic

Scholarly homeopathic texts (if that isn't an oxymoron) are immensely amusing, as they strive to present a system of magic within a pseudoscientific context, complete with tables listing various levels of elements, and graphs mathematically recording strange world views. Such a text is Principles and Practice of Homeopathy: The Therapeutic and Healing Process by David Owen (London: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier, 2007).

This text comes with endorsements from people with so many letters after their names that it's like a Scrabble convention: Francis Treuherz MA RSHom FSHom (" exciting and innovative"), John Saxton BVet Med VetFFHom Cert. IAVH MRCVS President, Faculty of Homeopathy Homeopathic teacher ("a tour de force"), Dr Nick Goodman MbBS MFHom FACNEM, Dr Philip Bailey MBBS MFHom (author of Homeopathic Psychology - presumably, psychology in infinitesimal doses), Professor David Peters, School of Integrated Health, University of Westminster, London, UK ("this book drips holism") and David Reilly Consultant, Glasgow Homeopathic Hospital; Researcher and Teacher, Glasgow Homeopathic Academic Centre, as well as a foreword by Bob Leckridge BSc MB ChB MFHom.

What can you learn from this tome? Take, for example, the chapter by David Lilley on The Chronic Miasms.

Disease is an expression of creation’s perfection; it has meaning, deep significance, and is essentially beneficent. The vital force is always working at its optimal best. Even malignant disease is a manifestation of the vital force’s efforts to bring about the least harmful result in a profoundly disturbed constitution. It would rather produce a cancer than permit a process that impacts upon the emotional and intellectual spheres and impedes spiritual unfoldment. This is not always possible. However, when successful, the inherited legacy of disease is concentrated and encapsulated in a malignant lesion or process. Constitutionally a cleansing of the miasmatic state is achieved, which is manifested particularly in the emotional life. Individuation is accelerated. When the cancer miasm is dominant it often brings with it a state of increasing spiritual awareness, empathy, and a greater capacity for unconditional love.
pp231-232

That should make clear the religious underpinning of homeopathy with its calls to 'creation', 'vital force' and 'spirit'. You see, cancer is actually about "spiritual unfoldment". Having cancer is therefore a wonderful thing, as it enhances you and moves you on to a higher state of being.

The Carcinosin subject has an abiding love of nature, of animals, and of humanity, which moves them to altruism of the purest form. Their minds and senses are aesthetically attuned to all that is elevated, noble, and splendid in literature, music, and dance. Their love and compassion are intense, selfless, universal, and unconditional. The miasm of cancer facilitates the ascent of the human soul towards its divinity.
pp233-234

This is in a 'medical' textbook. Published by Elsevier*. Cancer makes you divine. And this sort of rubbish is a magical belief system that is two hundred years (at least) out of date.

But homeopathy is a science now. And science is a systematising method of knowledge (even though the book is constantly torn by its desire to simultaneously embrace the holistic "illness is a journey to wellness" trope). So Misha Norland in the chapter on Signatures:

The five elements can be thought of as gradually moving from spirit into matter and are:
1. Etheric energy – which is immaterial, reveals itself as primal non-verbal experience and as intuition.
2. Elemental fire – almost immaterial, the energy of combustion, heat and light, reveals itself as images.
3. Elemental air – dense enough to fly in, reveals itself as thoughts. These are products of the intellect, representing our discriminative awareness ‘playing’ over experiences and memory.
4. Elemental water – yet denser, to swim in, reveals itself as feelings. These inform us of our likes and dislikes.
5. Elemental earth – solid, to build with, reveals itself as sensations. These are experienced in the body directly by the five senses.
Physical pathology is the final outcome of derangement of the above elemental levels.
p279

Yes, elements, but not in the sense of the Periodic Table (presumably, this development is far too recent for homeopaths to have become acquainted with it and integrated it into their purportedly 'holistic' system). There's clearly derangement occurring here, but it seems to be concentrated in the homeopathic practitioners. EoR suspects homeopaths get all their cures from the Ebers Papyrus.

Of course, no good homeopathic text can allow vaccination to go by without pointing out the terrible evils that it causes.

Tautopathy is a type of isopathy where the causative agent is a conventional drug, where the adverse effects point to their range of action and they can be helpful when prepared homeopathically in treating iatrogenic disease or in reducing adverse effects. For example, a potency of a vaccine can help ‘unlock’ a case of vaccine damage.
p56

Homeopathy: making up imaginary diseases, and then curing them (by imaginary methods). Simple, really.

EoR does, however, find himself in agreement with Mr Owen's concluding remarks:

One thing is certain, in the future – and perhaps very rapidly – a number of the premises explored in this book will be outdated.
p420

Though he does need to point out that they've actually been outdated for two centuries. But maybe the homeopaths are still succussing and diluting that particular piece of information.

Contemporary scientifically advanced homeopaths enabling the holistic illness journey towards spiritual enlightenment

---

*Though the imprint was bought by Elsevier, itself known for links to arms dealing and fake journals.