Bolt Exposes Scientists

Andrew Bolt seems to be a little slow off the mark in pointing out that the various reviews that have examined the Climategate accusations and found them wanting of all veracity (other than a criticism regarding the handling of FOI requests) is obviously proof, not of critical examination of evidence and measured judgment, but of clear and obvious manipulation by the secretive cabal of communist world government climate scientists who only want to destroy the world, tax you to death and rape all your children! Bwahahaha!

According to the tinfoil hatted Bolt, Climategate was ignored by local media. Presumably, this shows how out of touch Bolt is with Australian media.

In Bolt's Bunker Against Green Insanity, Climategate was "a gamechanger", "a turning point", evidence of cheating and manipulation, and "a furore".

In the real world, Climategate shows how flimsy are the arguments the deniers repeat over and over, and how desperate they are to grasp on to any distorted claim to further their agenda.

Official Members of the Global Warming Conspiracy (does not include all those other organisations and individuals tasked with faking all the other evidence for Global Warming):
University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit
Dr Phil Jones
Lord Oxburgh
The Royal Society
Dr Michael Mann
Pennsylvania State University
ABC
Robyn Williams
National Science Foundation
The Australian Media

And, of course, no reference to Bolt can go by without at least one well-reasoned comment from his followers. The Thought of the Day Award this time goes to liarsofthecentury:

The moral of he story is don’t go lying and scamming people and pretending you can change the weather with taxes when in fact it is designed to destroy industry and take us back to mid evil times ,just like it says in the secret Iron mountain report that was released and the eu agenda 21 ,its all there and its a plan hatched long ago in the 50s ,once people invaded countries with arms now its by radicals and stealth ,lies and draconian laws, like those 250.000 that Wrong Wong is hiding, expose those and they are history ,why do you think they wont let anyone see them ,the real question is who are they working for?

It's Never Been Tested, But We'll Treat Everything With It Anyway

Homeopaths are at the forefront of amassing rigourous scientific evidence of the incredible power of water to heal every disease and illness known. They are particularly favoured of the customer satisfaction survey, conducted some time after providing a non-blinded treatment.

It appears homeopathy is equally effective in horses.

There are more than 138 randomized controlled trials of homeopathy in human medicine, but fewer than 20 have been performed in all of veterinary medicine and not one has involved horses.

To gain insight regarding the kinds of problems that veterinarians in the UK treat via homeopathy and owner-assessed changes after homeopathy, twelve members of the Faculty of Homeopathy veterinarians recorded data systematically at 777 consecutive homeopathic appointments for horses over a period of 12 months.1 A spreadsheet enabled the recording of information, which included:

date of appointment;
horse and owner identity (anonymised);
sex of horse;
main medical problem treated;
whether the condition was chronic or acute;
whether the appointment was new or a follow-up;
owner-assessed clinical outcome on a seven-point scale, ranging from -3 to +3, compared with the first appointment; homeopathic medicine(s) prescribed;
and whether any conventional or other complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) was being used concurrently to treat the condition.

Data from 289 horses comprised a total of 305 individual conditions identified as chronic in nature, of which 234 had a follow-up assessment. At the final appointment for chronic cases during the study period, 4.3 per cent were receiving conventional medication and 17.1 per cent were being given another CAM treatment in addition to homeopathy.

The homeopathic veterinarians treated more than 100 different conditions. The eight chronic conditions most frequently treated with homeopathy were:
arthritis
headshaking
laminitis
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
sweet itch
dermatitis
sarcoidosis
Cushing’s syndrome

At the time of the final appointment, owners assessed the impact of the homeopathy on a scale from -3 (major deterioration) to +3 (major improvement) compared to the first appointment.

For the 234 cases, a final score of +2 or +3 (moderate or major improvement) was reported in 86.7% of cases.

1. Mathie RT, Baitson ES, Hansen L, Elliott MF, Hoare J. (2010) Prescribing for chronic conditions in equine veterinary practice in the UK. Vet Rec. 2010 Feb 20;166(8):234-8.

Unfortunately, EoR's institutional subscription doesn't include The Veterinary Record, so he's unable to assess the full paper, but the summary provided is cause for concern. Where was the control group? Why use a vague 'improvement' assessment scored by someone (the owner) who is not a medical expert? Why only assess "clinical outcome" at final appointment (which, presumably, was anywhere up to twelve months later than the initial appointment). Why only choose those with chronic conditions (homeopathy is claimed to be able to treat anything)? What was done to eliminate the natural variability of chronic conditions? Of all the amazing numbers given (777 appointments, which then becomes 289 horses, which then becomes 234 horses that were actually part of the survey) why isn't the most important (the actual number of owners making the satisfaction survey response) given?

Most importantly, if there's never been a study of homeopathy to treat equine conditions, why is it being promoted so liberally?

And, finally, were all the vets involved paid up members of the The British Veterinary Voodoo Society?

I'm Not A Doctor, But...

Andy points EoR to Husband and healer 'must share blame'.

Coroner Alastair Hope has been urged to find that prominent Perth toxicologist Peter Dingle and wife's homeopath contributed to her death

On the final day of the inquest yesterday he was also urged to refer two doctors - William Barnes and Igor Tabrizian - to the WA Medical Board over their treatment of Mrs Dingle and to consider whether Mr Dingle's "emotional abuse" of his wife amounted to torture.

(...)

Counsel assisting the Coroner, Celia Kemp, said Mrs Dingle played a part in the "misadventure" that led her to forgo conventional treatment and accept the homeopathic treatment of Francine Scrayen. She said Mrs Dingle did not make the choice alone but with the influence of her husband.

"Dr Dingle's strong anti-conventional views would have influenced his wife," she said.

She said it was likely Dr Dingle, who holds no medical qualification, advised his wife against surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

EoR's observation of Dr Dingle's advice giving in the media is that he is announced as "Dr" Dingle. No clarification or disclaimer is provided as to the fact that he is not a medical doctor. If someone asks about a specifically medical condition Dr Dingle does, however, invariably state that he is "not a medical doctor". This is immediately followed by "but" and a whole slew of advice (usually involving eating more nuts and fish oils and so on and so forth).

As an example, consider this page from Dr Dingle's blog (which EoR blogged about long ago). EoR leaves it to his readers to determine whether or not Dr Dingle provides medical advice on that page, and in relation to exactly how many conditions. It's not a pretty sight.

More recently, he advises on Breast cancer Anti depressants and Fish oils, wondering "how many woman (sic) have died in the interim" of breast cancer and combined depression drug use. Fish oil, of course, is a wonder substance (and not at all a drug) that works far better in combination with chemotherapy than chemotherapy alone to prolong life. Perhaps Dr Dingle will any day now publish an article wondering how many woman have died in the interim from using alternative therapies?

The jury is still out (if such a metaphor is appropriate) on whether or not SSRIs affect Tamoxifen (EoR's emphasis):

If you take both an SSRI antidepressant, such as fluoxetine or paroxetine, and also take tamoxifen, speak with your doctor about the potential interaction between them. Your doctor may advise switching either to another type of antidepressant or another form of hormonal therapy.

If you are postmenopausal, you may be able to switch to an aromatase inhibitor, a hormonal therapy that is not affected by CYP2D6 inhibitors. In addition, make sure your doctor knows about all the medicines you take, since there are some other medications that are CYP2D6 inhibitors.

Tamoxifen remains the standard optimal treatment for premenopausal women. But regardless of menopausal status, you may be able to switch to another type of antidepressant to manage tamoxifen-related hot flashes. For medical options and other tips on managing hot flashes, read a recent article from our newsletter.

Clinical depression is a serious condition, so do not stop taking your antidepressant without consulting your doctor. Many other treatments exist for depression, including medicines that do not inhibit CYP2D6.

EoR notes that Dr Dingle makes no warning about stopping antidepressant medication in conjunction with a (real) doctor on his blog.

The level of evidence for fish oil as a treatment for depression is shown when most Google hits are for sites such as fishoilfordepression.org, christinas-home-remedies.com and oilofpisces.com. Unfortunately, the jury's still out on this one as well, with some small scale studies indicating there may be an effect (Eor's emphasis again):

A number of studies suggest that fish oil supplements may be an effective add-on (adjuvant) therapy for depression. In fact, some studies suggest that fish oil supplements may be as effective as prescription antidepressant medication — but the two in combination are more effective than either taken alone. However, more research is needed to confirm these results.

(...)

At this time, it's probably premature to make a strong recommendation for or against fish oil supplements as a treatment for depression. Consult your doctor before starting any new dietary or herbal supplement to treat depression, especially if you take other medications.

Dr Dingle again doesn't mention the strength of the studies he relies on, whether there are any contradictory studies, or whether his proclamations are based on preliminary evidence or not. Of course that, like urging people to give up their antidepressants in favour of an unproven alternative, are not in contradiction of the Hippocratic Oath because he doesn't have to adhere to any such restrictive medical standards. Not being a medical doctor.

Hopefully, though, the fish oil is working for Dr Dingle now that his friends at the ABC (though they are still showing him on Can We Help?) and 6PR have abandoned his well-reasoned and considered health advice. At least the newage journal Nova still has a place for him.

Dilbert on Homeopathy

The Mozart News Effect

Take one small study about a specific cognitive task, run through the journalistic machine of scientific misunderstanding and exaggeration, and you have The Mozart Effect.

NPR reports on how a study that showed listening to Mozart improved one spatial reasoning task for about ten minutes, became a whole industry of 'listening to Mozart will make your baby a genius' products. The latest issue of Intelligence calls it the 'Schmozart Effect'.

EoR's readers will also be aware of the role journalists played in beating up the MMR-autism scare. Recently, journalists (or one in particular, though others repeated his falsehoods unquestioningly) have also been berated for reporting misinformation on climate science.

When journalists started reporting that the cognitive researcher had claimed rock music had a negative impact on cognition, she started getting death threats. She had never made such a claim, but even if she had, are death threats any sort of intelligent response? Perhaps there's a 'Rock Music Criticism Effect' yet to be studied?

As the NPR report notes, the 'Mozart Effect' could just as easily be a 'Pearl Jam Effect', if you happen to prefer that sort of music. Which probably explains EoR's discovery of the 'Throbbing Gristle Effect'.

Bolt's Experts

Andrew Bolt continues to demonstrate his lack of understanding of scientific method, and relies on his wonderful,non-partisan, highly educated and independent readers to demolish the empty scam that is Science.

Kenskingdom ('retired school principal') doesn't like those dodgy Bureau of Meteorology graphs. They must be suspect because, as we all know, the BOM (and CSIRO, and the ABC, and Professor Stanley, and the University of Western Australia, etc etc) are all corrupt, lying, mendacious, cheating, alarmist bastards! So Kenskingdom prefers to graph the unadjusted data and what does he find? A warming trend, just not as steep as the one from the BOM data. Conspiracy exposed! Climate warming demolished!

EoR wonders why, if there really was a conspiracy, the conspirators would put out data that doesn't quite fit so nicely with their conspiratorial line, and then have to make adjustments to it which any retired school principal can so easily take and prove the lie? Wouldn't it have made more sense just to publish the faked data straight up? These dumb scientists. Not only have they got climate change wrong, they can't even fake a simple little global conspiracy! There's no hope for them.

Bolt's methods (and EoR uses that term very loosely in this context) are also obvious from his double standards in cherry picking data:

Weather is not climate, which is worth remembering when you hear the next screams of “global warming” on a hot day:

Sydney’s week of cold weather continues, with the city recording its coldest June morning since 1949 when temperatures dived to 4.3 degrees.

Just so that's clear: if weather is abnormally hot, that's because it's weather, stupid. If it's abnormally cold, that's because it's global climate cooling. Please amend your textbooks accordingly.

Of course, Bolt just loves it when extremely cold weather occurs, and it's a regular denialist card he's fond of playing.

Frankly, though, the kind of audience that Bolt is performing to (and it is a performance — an unintentionally satirical burlesque performance) is obvious from the supportive comments he gets. moronlieskickthemout, for example:

That is what it said in the leaked emails ,it was worse than all the data anywhere .You cannot change the climate with taxes morons and of course dumb as you are you know it ,this is a war against truth with lies idiots against sensible people ,just ask those labor backbenchers they i am surprised they even know their own name.

There's some crazy alternative universe somewhere where that actually made sense. Possibly.

While obvious of brisbane irrefutably points out:

it is time that scientist woke up to their own mortality. we can work, we can grow crops, we can have babies, we can make shelter for ourselves, but we can not make the sun or make the sun rise. we can find minerals but we can not make metal. we can store water but we can not make water. all the natural ingredients are provided by a creator. the scientist just need to grow up, like the rest of us, and stop pretending that they are the creator of the universe.

Meanwhile, the denialist travelling revival show is doing so poorly it's only made news in the Narrogin Observor.

Invisible Gorillas

EoR has previously noted the invisible gorilla (via the invisible bear) effect. The gorilla seems to have preceded the bear and so Professor Bradshaw was correct in referring to the gorilla as the animal exemplar of this selective perception effect.

There's a bunck of videos available, including the original, but Dan's "Monkey Business Illusion" is also well worth watching, even if you've seen the bear version and think you know what's going on.

There's also a whole book on the subject.

This experiment reveals two things: that we are missing a lot of what goes on around us, and that we have no idea that we are missing so much. To our surprise, it has become one of the best-known experiments in psychology. It is described in most introductory textbooks and is featured in more than a dozen science museums. It has been used by everyone from preachers and teachers to corporate trainers and terrorist hunters, not to mention characters on the TV show C.S.I., to help explain what we see and what we don't see. And it got us thinking that many other intuitive beliefs that we have about our own minds might be just as wrong. We wrote The Invisible Gorilla to explore the limits of human intuition and what they mean for ourselves and our world.

This has a wider importance than simply scientific research though. As a sometime bicyclist, EoR is well aware of how invisible he is to drivers.

Most people believe that unexpected or unusual events draw attention, perhaps even more than typical events. Why? In part, the belief is based on our experiences. When, on occasion, we happen to notice something unusual or unexpected, that event is remarkable. We take mental note of it and remember it. When we notice a typical or expected event, that’s unremarkable. Critically, we are, by definition, unaware of any events we don’t notice. If we fail to notice unexpected events more than expected ones, we won’t be aware of those probabilities. (...) A 42 year old bicyclist was riding down Highway 18 in the Town of Summit (in Wisconsin) when he was struck from behind by a 20 year old driver. According to the article, police are still investigating why the driver didn’t see the cyclist, but Officer Dana Hazelton noted that bicyclists rarely ride on the highway because “There’s actually a bicycle trail that’s just south of Highway 18 that’s probably 20 feet off the road that’s made for bicyclists.” In other words, people don’t expect to see bicyclists riding on the side of the highway, so they are less likely to notice them.

Homeopathy is a Religion After All

Andy points EoR to this report: Victoria tries to dilute homoeopathy problem.

A red-faced Victoria (New Zealand) University is distancing itself from a homoeopathy course offered through its continuing education programme.

"Homoeopathy: increasing your health awareness" will teach participants about the "internationally recognised, scientific medical system" in a one-off lecture.

The lecture is being given by "Art Buehler, the senior religious studies lecturer". Well, EoR can certainly see the link between religion and homeopathy. Faith in the face of all evidence to the contrary. The ritual gestures (succussion). The ritual text (Hahnemann's Organum).

EoR can also imagine just how the lecture is going to go:



Then there's this slightly older gem that EoR has discovered: Increase your height.

Forget about growth hormone injection or limb lengthening operation. They are way to expensive and dangerous for you. What you need is a safe, effective and affordable way to grow taller naturally and easily by using homoeopathic medicine

EoR loves seeing homeopathic 'doctors' arguing with each other. It reminds him of Edward Lear's and Lewis Carroll's (rather better) efforts. One advises:

I think, Baryta Carb 30 on alternate days is much better than to give it three times a day. Dr.D.Sharma, please don't mind.

So, taking the correct variety of (identical) water on the correct days is really important.

The full debate (which EoR admits he has not read beyond the first page) goes on for 33 incredibly mind numbing pages. At least it keeps them off the street.

They sought it with thimbles, they sought it with care;
They pursued it with forks and hope;
They threatened its life with a railway-share;
They charmed it with smiles and soap.

They shuddered to think that the chase might fail,
And the Beaver, excited at last,
Went bounding along on the tip of its tail,
For the daylight was nearly past.

"There is Thingumbob shouting!" the Bellman said,
"He is shouting like mad, only hark!
He is waving his hands, he is wagging his head,
He has certainly found a Snark!"

A Bunch of Bankers

Security of your financial data when using online banking is extremely important. This is why JP Morgan Chase bank is limiting access to its website to only those browsers which meet their rigourously high security standards. From July 18, 2010 if you use the wrong (insecure) browser you may not be able to access their site.

Why are some browsers not supported?
There are two primary reasons—security and popularity. There are dozens of browsers in use today, but not all offer the minimum levels of security that we require while others may not perform well with our site. The security of your accounts and private information is one of our highest priorities and some browsers, especially older versions, are simply higher security risks to use with our site.

As for popularity, we continually monitor the types of browsers that customers use to access our site. Based on that information, we know that supported browsers are used by more than 95% of our customers. If a new browser begins to grow in popularity, we will assess and test its security and performance with our site to determine whether or not we should support its use.

Why do I get a “Page Not Found” error now when I go to your site?
You may be using an outdated browser that we don't support. There are dozens of browsers in use today, but not all offer the minimum levels of security that we require while others may not perform well with our site. We strongly recommend that you upgrade your existing browser to one that we support. We strongly recommend that you upgrade your existing browser to one that we support.

So if a browser is blocked from their site, how will they be able to tell it has increased in popularity? And while some browser statistics (a notoriously arcane and inaccurate art) indicate some browsers have a lower percentage of users, on the internet that can still be millions of people, and thousands for any particular popular site. It's like a business excluding customers because they are wearing the wrong colour shirt. The only effect is to reduce clientele and damage the business's bottom line.

So, which particularly secure, popular browsers are the select few to meet the high standards of the Chase bank? Safari 3 or higher, Firefox 2 or higher, and Internet Explorer 6 or higher.

Internet Explorer 6? Perhaps the worst browser ever and the oldest, least compliant, browser still in use? A browser full of security holes? A browser even Microsoft doesn't want you to use?

There are also issues of accessibility since disabled users require specific browsers that have such low usage they don't even appear on the statistics, and mobile access (it seems no mobile users access JPMorgan Chase).

EoR feels that the JPMorgan Chase bank may, like so many before them, suffer the Streisand Effect (and many, many more sites).

This is not an approach taken by other banks. EoR's bank is quite happy to work with a browser considered 'insecure' by JPMorgan Chase. Another, PNC Bank, states:

PNC uses Extended Validation Secure Socket Layer Certificates (EV SSL) which works with high security browsers (Internet Explorer 7, Firefox 3.0, Opera 9.0, Safari 3.2, and their next generation browser versions, as well as Flock, Google Chrome and iPhone), to help you recognize when you are at the legitimate PNC site and not a "spoofed" site.

Oh, look! They're all those browsers JPMorgan Chase don't want to know about.

Somewhere in Perth...

In a homeopath's consulting rooms, a woman is having her cancer 'treated'...



Google shows 108,000 results for homeopathy cancer treatment perth (excluding as many of the Dingle links as possible).

Of course, as Michelle Hookham, President of the Australian Homeopathic Association reminds us, It is against the code of conduct for homeopaths to claim that they can cure or treat cancer.. It may be against the code of conduct, but it appears it doesn't stop them from doing it.

Clearly the Australian Homeopathic Association is just as effective in controlling its members absolute lack of standards as the treatment they promote is effective in curing or treating cancer.


World Homeopathy Week at Dr Boli's Celebrated Magazine

The Art of Anatomy

Gunther von Hagens is the sometimes (okay, often) controversial anatomist and showman who developed the process of plastination to preserve bodies. His work has been displayed in his Bodyworks exhibition, and in such television shows as Anatomy for Beginners. His latest exhibition moves from humans to animals and, while his work is certainly confronting, it can also be incredibly beautiful. Like this giraffe soaring up into the light in its sectional majesty:



More images here (caution: if you find the wonders of anatomy revealed not to your taste you may wish to go elsewhere).

Thistle Thoughts

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

If homeopathy can cure anything can it cure a belief in homeopathy?

The True Way to Cancer Freedom

Dr Dingle has recently been the subject of much opprobrium for the death of his wife from cancer. His wife chose to use homeopathy and special nutrition to attempt to treat her cancer, and refused conventional treatment such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

This is clearly the way to treat cancer, at least in animals, and it is clearly not breaking the law for an Australian company to be selling products claiming this.

Holistic Animal Medicines Pty Ltd state quite unequivocally:

Most types of cancers can be treated with natural medicines although the success rate can be much higher when the pet has had no, or minimal, chemotherapy or surgery prior to commencing natural therapies. This is because toxins in chemotherapy have serious side effects, surgery is both invasive and traumatic, and the routine drugs associated with cancer treatment can a seriously detrimental effect on the animal's immune function.

Strangely, they also state

This Cancer Support mix can be used in conjunction with other alternative medicines also, or with orthodox medical treatments including radio and chemo therapies.

But wouldn't that lower the powerful 'supporting' powers of the homeopathic water?

Readers will notice that while there are some weasel words on the page, such as 'cancer support', the page also clearly claims these are 'cancer treatments'. Indeed, the solution for bladder cancer, for example, boldly claims that it will reverse the growth of cancer, and bring about remission. Only $A120 (excluding GST — an advertising method the ACCC frowns upon).

If your dog has leukaemia, there's a treatment for that as well (though it's a little more expensive at $A150 — EoR presumes it's a little harder to treat).

Notice how the images of all the different treatments look exactly the same. Of course, this can't be true, since they've each individually come into contact with a molecule or two of their powerful active ingredients once, long ago and still remember the incredible healing power of their vibratory emanations. Either that, or it's all just water. Or alcohol. Anyway, we know you can easily tell homeopathic remedies apart, because they have different labels. Otherwise they're completely identical.



Promote Homeopathy: Stop This Crazy Thing!!!

Perth homeopaths

In Which EoR Refrains From Making Any Prick Jokes

It's not uncommon for people to be jailed on shonky evidence. One such questionable case has recently been highlighted in Vietnam.

There are some damning inconsistencies between witnesses and police statements, alibis have been ignored and, most tellingly of all, they couldn't have raped anyone because acupuncture proves they're all virgins!

However, it was not until Doctor Pham Thi Hong from Ha Dong General Hospital stepped in, submitting appeals to related agencies, did the procuracy review the case, VnExpress reported.

Hong, who has spent many years studying traditional medicine, especially acupuncture points and meridians, told Hanoi-based newspaper Dang yeu that her involvement with the case began in 2006 when she met Loi, who came to the hospital where she worked for a health check-up, another news website Vietnamnet reported.

Loi kept crying and telling her that he didn’t commit the crimes and that he had never even had sex with a woman. Hong checked a meridian under his earlobe, which, according to traditional medicine, can identify whether a man is a virgin or not, the news source said.

According to Hong, the meridian breaks after a man has sex, as it’s penetrated by a “flow of yin air” from his partner. Hong's check showed that Loi’s meridian was still intact.

However, as only those who study traditional medicine know about the meridian, Hong said it couldn’t act as convincing evidence.

She then researched the case and found various details to be unclear with conflicting information, Vietnamnet said.

The doctor sent hundreds of appeals to related agencies, and threatened to burn herself to claim the young men’s innocence.

Traditional medicine. So wonderful. So incredible. So.... unbelievable.

Arctic Circle

Arctic Circle

Gathering Moss

Dr Peter Dingle is currently doing the media rounds, including this interview on ABC radio in which he mentions how he knew nothing about homeopathy, and in fact downloaded 'the Moss Report' which informed him that homeopathy didn't work to cure cancer when his wife was diagnosed.

EoR is not questioning Dr Dingle's recollections, since that is clearly how he remembers it, but he finds the conclusion reached regarding homeopathy's non-efficacy puzzling.

There appears to be no actual 'Moss Report' but rather a whole slew of them. Dr Moss is described as

a leading author and consultant on cancer treatment, The Moss Reports provides you with a detailed, yet very readable, explanation of your particular cancer diagnosis. Bear in mind that Ralph Moss is not a medical doctor, and his information and advice are not substitutes for competent medical care.

EoR wonders why anyone would seek reputable health information from someone who isn't a (medical) doctor?

More information about him states

Moss is the author of such books as Antioxidants Against Cancer, Cancer Therapy, Questioning Chemotherapy, and The Cancer Industry, as well as the award-winning PBS documentary The Cancer War. He also wrote the first article on alternative medicine for The Encyclopedia Britannica Yearbook and the first article on complementary cancer treatments for a medico-legal textbook, Courtroom Medicine: Cancer (Matthew Bender). He is co-editor of the first medical textbook in English on non-conventional treatments for cancer, Complementary Oncology (Thieme, 2005).

There seems to be a certain slant to the treatment approach he deals with, but EoR will withhold judgement. Though he does note that Alternative Cancer Treatment Protocols strongly urges

THE MOST IMPORTANT COMMODITY is knowledge. If you've perused this site, you already know that I am skeptical about any miracle cures, many of which you have no doubt seen advertised on the internet. Most of it is sheer manure, and the vendors are shamelessly profiteering on the misery of the afflicted. On the other hand, I've had two friends die this year of cancer. Both elected to absorb the full barrage of chemotherapy (one had a stem cell transplant). Both died after suffering terribly from the treatment. If they would have had the right knowledge, one might have lived, and the other could have had a more humane passing. Having said all of this, let me cut right to the chase. The most knowledgeable person I know of when it comes to ALL the issues is Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D. A Biography of Dr. Moss is at the end of this section. Not only is Dr. Moss knowledgeable about the scientific aspects of cancer, he has a profound empathy and unique insight into the psycho-spiritual dynamics as well.

Well, EoR is prepared to believe that a Classics PhD knows more about cancer than an oncologist. After all, a Classics graduate knows more about climate change than climate scientists.

So what does Dr Moss (not a medical doctor) actually have to say about homeopathy?

2010: A landmark paper on homeopathy and cancer has appeared in the February 2010 issue of the International Journal of Oncology. Scientists at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center (MDA), led by Moshe Frenkel, MD, have confirmed the ability of four homeopathic remedies to induce apoptosis (programmed cell death) in breast cancer cell lines in the laboratory. The scientists in question were from the Integrative Medicine Program, the Department of Molecular Pathology, and the Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology of MDA. Their two Indian collaborators were from the Banerji Homeopathic Research Foundation, Kolkata, India, where these same remedies are employed clinically with apparent success. The four ultra-dilute remedies in question were Carcinosin, Phytolacca, Conium and Thuja.

2010: There is no end of critics of homeopathy on the Internet and elsewhere, who consider homeopathy to be quackeryand believe it is their bounden duty to expose this fraud whenever possible. They have trouble stretching their minds and imagining that there are other possible explanations for the action of homeopathic remedies—in other words, there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in their philosophy.

(...)

MD Anderson is ranked (by U.S. News) as America's number one cancer center and so it will be particularly interesting to see if the professional skeptics will try discredit this study with their usual sort of personal attacks. I hope that this outstanding paper will be a tipping point, wherein conventional science is finally forced to re-evaluate its rigid opposition to this puzzling but fascinating mode of treatment.

2006: If you are not familiar with Ode, you should be. It began publishing in Holland in 1995. Because of the magazine's success in Europe the publishers launched a US version in 2003. (There is also a Portuguese version.) In recent years, the magazine has earned an increasingly wide readership and a respected place in investigative journalism. Ode maintains a gratifyingly open-minded position towards non-conventional developments in medicine. For instance, last month's issue carried a generally favorable article on homeopathy. I urge you to subscribe to both of these excellent publications.

2005: Dr. Brodie had an eclectic practice. He continued to use Laetrile, but often combined his treatments with those of more conventional oncologists as well. His methods included the use of many natural substances, including herbal preparations, homeopathic treatments, intravenous vitamins and minerals, biological response modifiers, and a number of non-toxic materials, designed to activate and enhance the immune system. These were sometimes given in combination with chemotherapy and radiation, when appropriate. He believed that this combination could almost always reduce the adverse effects of conventional therapies.

2004: So, what about unconventional practitioners who spout strange theories and sport obscure degrees? There are certainly some of those, and part of the reason for their continued existence is that there is little or no organized credentialing apparatus in place for many kinds of complementary and alternative medicine. On the one hand, there are genuine schools of naturopathy, homeopathy, hypnosis, acupuncture, etc., which require long, rigorous and expensive courses of study before they will grant a well earned degree. These schools turn out skilled practitioners who offer valuable services to the community, usually at reasonable prices.

And a 2004 article in which he berates the establishment for ignoring such cancer treatments as laetrile, and Rife machines, ending with the rousing injunction

When the public and the Congress rise up against this intolerable situation — and they will — short-sighted oncologists will have no one to blame but themselves.

There's nothing there from the period when EoR imagines Dr Dingle might have been searching for information, so it may be that Dr Moss has changed his opinion of homeopathy since then, though it is more than abundantly clear that he certainly (now) believes homeopathy (among other alternative treatments) is very effective and not to be ignored at all in the treatment of cancer.

Addendum: Dr Dingle, in a post on his blog, comments

The Moss report, the most definitive report on rectal cancer also said have an operation as did the information we got from the National Institute of Health in the US when the cancer was first diagnosed.

EoR is no kind of medical expert, but he feels that Dr Moss's reports are not 'the most definitive'.

Guest Blogger

The highest power in our State has been forced to declare, through the workings of over-legislation, that the allopathic system is the only one at present recognized by the State, and so has reinstated in his position a noted allopathic physician in the Health Board. Before this decision of the Governor's was made known, there was a war of lancets, and many hard pills to swallow were administered by the rival homeopaths and allopaths. Among arguments used were those founded on the questionable statistics of the number of patients who recovered while being treated by the rival systems. Some sarcastic people, justified by the saying of the well-known Oliver Wendell Holmes, may be of the opinion that more people get well in spite of the doctors than by their help, and that a doctor is as likely to be famous from the number that he kills as from that which he cures. Something like this might have passed through the Governor's mind, for evidently he was undecided under which king death to speak or die, and showed that he is like most laymen, inclined to be eclectic; for immediately after the appointment of the allopath to that Board which will authoritatively recommend the kind of physic good for the public bowels in the event of the spread of an epidemic, and which poor patients will be forced to swallow, whatever their medical code may be, the Governor paid the high but rather sarcastic compliment to homeopathy of appointing one of its disciples to a place on the Board of Commissioners for the new State Lunatic Asylum to be located at Poughkeepsie. No doubt, the Governor thought that people divested of reason could offer no reasons against the appointment; and that if the lunatics were not improved by sugar pills, they would at least die sweetly -- a lunatic more or less being of little account. Thus it is officially settled that allopathy is good for the sane and homeopathy for the insane.
Mark Twain

H is for Homeopathy and Hoodwinking

EoR doesn't pretend to understand the way homeopathic associations are structured, nor their precise links to each other, but the Australian Register of Homeopaths Ltd links to, among others, the Australian Homeopathic Association, of which Madeleine Innocent is the WA President. As the Register notes:

Click Here to see links to the home pages of member associations, all of whose professional members are accredited by AROH

Therefore, EoR must presume they support Ms Innocent's assertion that homeopathy cures everything. She is, after all, accredited and a President of a topnotch reliable homeopathic association.

Yet another association (how many of these things are there? why so many?) linked to (and therefore its members are also 'accredited') is the The Australian Association of Professional Homeopaths Inc. (presumably, the other associations are for nonprofessional homeopaths). Here is the front page, just as EoR encountered it (click to enlarge):



While a Coronial Inquiry is taking place in Perth over the death of a woman who used homeopathy to attempt to cure her rectal cancer, the Australian Association of Professional(!) Homeopaths Inc. is touting a cancer cure on their front page, and not just any cancer cure, but a colon cancer cure! The front page links to an even more delusional page.

The foetus in the womb can be treated homoeopathically to minimize the likelihood of inherited diseases. (...) Always drink at least one litre of pure water a day, even though you may not be thirsty. Water is the most vital of all nutrients, which is critical for temperature regulation, kidney function, and to prevent constipation and colon cancer.

Oh, if only Penelope Dingle had drunk some water every day, things would be very different today...

Thistle Thoughts

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

Which is more offensive? Blasphemy, or disco?

H is for Homeopathy and Hocus-Pocus

Some excerpts from the Australian Homeopathy Association Code of Conduct:

1.5 Members shall refrain from employing, offering or undertaking work or advice beyond their professional competence.
2.4 Patients whose state of health is deteriorating shall not be attended indefinitely without the member in charge suggesting or insisting upon a consultation with at least one other practitioner to confirm the assessment and treatment.
2.7 Where there is evidence of a problem or a condition with which the member is not competent to deal, it is essential that this be made clear to the patient and that the patient is referred to an appropriate practitioner.
2.9 In announcing homœopathic services, members shall state no more than the place and time of their practice, their qualifications and the services they are offering. The information contained in such announcements shall be factual and explanatory, not in the form of emotionally persuasive advertising, not claiming superior competency or implying cure of any named disease and not offering guarantees of a particular outcome as an inducement.

EoR is confused, and wonders how claiming to cure cancer, depression and autism does not contravene these points.

The Code provides a longwinded method to process complaints, but EoR also wonders how any complaint can also be reconciled with the following point:

3.1 Members shall not criticise the skill and judgement of any practitioner, nor make any remark or statement that may undermine the patient’s confidence in that practitioner.

EoR doesn't, however, have to wonder how this might be relevant to the current Coronial Inquiry into the death of Penelope Dingle since, even before the Inquiry has handed down its findings, the Australian Homeopathic Association is already shoring up its defenses (since the filename includes 'Bingle' EoR doesn't know whether this is an editorial comment, or the AHA just can't get any of its facts right):

The AHA is not privy to the full details of the case. However, it would appear that the coronial inquiry is about the management of the case by the husband and the practitioner, not the efficacy of homeopathy. The AHA takes this matter very seriously and awaits the outcome of the inquiry to understand the nature of the allegations made.

Homeopathy is a complementary medicine. It can be used in conjunction with mainstream medicine and other modalities. It is against the Code of Conduct for Homeopaths to claim that they can cure or treat cancer. However, homeopathic medicines can be used to support and help to relieve symptoms in cancer patients, in conjunction with other treatments. An integrated health care approach is the most appropriate in cases of severe pathology.

People seeking homeopathic services should ensure that the practitioner is registered with the Australian Register of Homeopaths. AROH registered practitioners meet the government endorsed competency standards and are bound by Codes of Conduct. These codes state that practitioners need to refer on or seek a second opinion if the case is not responding to treatment.

Empty words indeed, when the WA President of the Australian Homeopathic Association claims homeopathy can cure "everything" including cancer. The efficacy of homeopathy is, indeed, in question, since it was the failure of homeopathy that led to Penelope Dingle's death. Or do the AHA believe homeopathy cured her cancer even though she died?

It seems to EoR that the AHA Press Release is basically saying that homeopathy can't cure anything, doesn't work, and if you're going to use it, make sure you use it with real medicine (because that's the bit that might cure you — unlike homeopathy, real medicine doesn't actually claim to cure "everything" everytime).

A complaint to the Therapeutic Goods Administration would also seem to be pointless. While not a toothless tiger, the TGA continues to keep its mouth firmly closed, purring softly occasionally when disturbed by someone lodging a complaint before returning to its gentle dozing state.

STEVE CANNANE: Dr Ken Harvey made a complaint against Homeopathy Plus! to the Complaints Resolution Panel. They review potential breaches of the advertising code in relation to therapeutic goods.

DR KEN HARVEY: The complaint resolution panel agreed there was a breach of at least nine sections of the Code and one sections of the Therapeutic Goods Act, including very serious sections such as promoting to the general public the treatment of serious diseases for which there was no evidence of efficacy.

STEVE CANNANE: The Complaints Resolution Panel asked Fran Sheffield to remove the claims about immunisation, and to publish a retraction which included the statement:

(Excerpt from Complaints Resolution Panel request)
VOICEOVER: We did not provide adequate evidence to support the claims made in the advertisement, and the Panel found that the claims were unlawful, misleading, and unverified and breached the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code.

STEVE CANNANE: But Fran Sheffield has refused to publish the retraction. She says she wasn't advertising - merely providing information, and sufficient evidence to back up claims about homeopathic immunisation.

(...)

STEVE CANNANE: Fran Sheffield is not alone. In 2009 a third of those found to breach the code failed to comply with the panel's recommendations.

If a failure to comply is reported to the panel, it goes back to the Therapeutic Goods Administration or TGA. But what happens next is a mystery. The TGA does not publicise what action it takes.

(...)

STEVE CANNANE: But in the meantime, practitioners are able to continue to make questionable claims about various remedies without fear of sanctions.

A recent Homeopathy Plus! email alert was headed "Homeopathy as Good as Chemotherapy for breast cancer."

H is for Homeopathy and Horror

Madeleine Innocent, WA President of the Australian Homeopathic Association, is a prolific health researcher. She has 1,100 important articles full of factual information and life-saving advice at ezinearticles. You can tell they're true because she's an 'expert'. Clearly, homeopathy is the best magic around.

It can cure broken bones. Injured in your home? Don't call an ambulance, whip out the magic water drops instead!

3. Homeopathic treatment is fast when the appropriate treatment is used. Pain, inflammation, limited movement can all improve dramatically within minutes.

4. Homeopathy does not mask or suppress the symptoms. It either works extremely well, or does nothing (when inappropriate treatment is used).

Yes! Homeopathy is so effective that it both stops pain within minutes, but doesn't mask the symptoms! It also works or it doesn't! Hint to Ms Innocent: this actally applies to anything at all ever anywhere. It can probably also think of six impossible things before breakfast!

It's also well known that homeopathy can cure eczema. It can totally heal back pain. Head injuries are another success story (a sign that the homeopathic woo fairies are working is that you may start feeling sleepy — call EoR stupid, but if he had someone with a head injury who was falling asleep, he'd be rushing them to Emergency at a real Hospital). EoR has already noted that homeopathy also cures depression, but it also cures diabetes, arthritis, and it can reverse autism:

According to the history of evidence in homeopathy, vaccinations are the main cause, if not the only cause, of autism, ADD and ADHD. Vaccinations, as well as the vast majority of medical drugs, work by depressing your immunity.

Eor's immune system must be lowered, since he's feeling depressed by now. Ms Innocent: given that 'evidence in homeopathy' is an oxymoron, there is no truth in your completely wrong and inaccurate understanding of autism and ADHD at all.

Ms Innocent's illogical thought processes are also clear when discussing why homeopathy is the best all-round health modality:

Homeopathic treatment is based on 'doing no harm', not only in its treatment, but also in the production of its medicines. Although some animals have lost their lives in the production of the medicines, almost exclusively insects, most are based on plant and mineral origins. Due to the nature of homeopathic treatment, this occurs only once. It does not need to be repeated.

Killing is acceptable, and harmless. And what about all that careless bandying about of antimatter?

With such a conflicting mindset, is it little wonder that you get one homeopath claiming that homeopathy can cure everything and that no homeopathic medicine* has ever been withdrawn for any reason, while another homeopathic organisation has withdrawn homeopathic treatment for malaria because it doesn't work.

EoR has, so far, only looked at the first page of articles listed by Ms Innocent. He doesn't have the strength to continue at this stage. Clearly, his immune system is depressed, his qi is stagnant, and he is probably surrounded by negative thoughts. Time for some drops of water — sorry, homeopathy.

*Another oxymoron, of course.