Journalistic balance: a case study

The West Australian, Saturday 15th January 2011.

Number of pages devoted to Queensland floods (current death toll 16): 10.5.

Number of pages devoted to Brazil floods (current death toll 540): 0.5.

Number of pages devoted to Phillipines floods (current death toll 40): 0.

Number of pages devoted to Sri Lanka floods (current death toll 27): 0.

To be fair, these last stories may have been dropped in order to free the 2 inches devoted to "Rodent Bites Genitals".

Why Andrew Bolt is so gay

The sky is falling! We're all doomed to slide down the slippery slope of faulty logic to an incestuous fate!!

According to psychic Andrew Bolt ("Two years ago I warned") the result of allowing godless gays to marry will not only destroy our wonderful conservative, capitalist, Bible-sanctioned lifestyle, but next thing you know, incest will be legal!!! Before you know it men will be kissing. In public!



This is obvious, since Switzerland already has registered partnerships which — as if you couldn't guess — are supported by the Green Party of Switzerland. Being one of Australia's top journalists, Bolt links to a Wikipedia entry. Knowing his audience, he's probably certain none of them will even go there and read the article, which shows that, regardless of his random sniping at the Greens, the Swiss partnerships are far from the same as marriage, and 58% of the Swiss people approved the change. But the evil Greens want full marriage equivalence!

But now the Swiss government has drafted laws decriminalising sex between consenting family members (Bolt is more nuanced here, linking to the rightwing Telegraph). If Bolt's Believers follow the link, they'd see that the law relates to adults only. Whether you consider sex between related individuals right or wrong, it's not about all family members:

Switzerland, which recently held a referendum passing a draconian law that will boot out foreigners convicted of committing the smallest of crimes, insists that children within families will continue to be protected by laws governing abuse and paedophilia.

If the left commie pinko green unionists are running the political agenda, how did that draconian law get through? The article also notes that there have only been three cases of incest since 1984.

But what about China, France, Israel, the Ivory Coast, the Netherlands, Russia, Spain and Turkey? All countries which have no prohibitions on "consensual incest between adults". Why does Bolt single out a possible new law in Switzerland and ignore all these countries which already allow consensual incest?

Bolt also fails to explain why his argument that allowing gay marriage will lead to incestuous marriage. Switzerland made registered partnerships legal in 2003, but changing the incest law has been around much longer:

In fact, the issue’s popped up periodically since the 1980s. Each time though uproar among the cantons or among the population has derailed the plan.

Perhaps Bolt doesn't believe in democracy?

As always, the best part of Bolt's outrage is the wonderful comments from his literate, well informed (informed by Bolt's posts) readers. The very first comment invokes GOD (yes, in CAPITALS). Nonna, demonstrating that she (?) likes to think through issues and not rely on steretypes, comments

I blame the holes in Swiss cheese and too much jodelling [sic] across the alpine valleys. Maybe the resonating sound of Swiss horns has an effect on the human brain.

Sonnshine says

Hey gay couples, it’s not about you being discriminated against for any reason whatsoever when I say this -it is simply a Christian tradition that says Man and Woman. Been going on since Adam was a boy - you can’t change it to suit yourself.

Actually, all the children of Adam and Eve were related. Talk about rampant incest!

Of course, there's the usual mish-mash of anti-Muslim sentiment as well, mixed in with suicide bombers, 'refugees' (in Boltland there are no real refugees — the word must therefore always be in quotes), and impending Sharia law in Australia (even though that would, presumably, outlaw homosexuality and incest).

Next thing you know, there'll be offspring with two fathers and Conservatives sleeping with the Greens. Now that sort of thing must really scare Bolt.

And please, don't anyone tell him that those evil scientists think incest may actually lower sexual violence.

Or that people have fulminated on exactly where (and where not) to place genitalia for many centuries (readers of a nervous disposition should be advised that the following poem contains strong language):

Oh what damned age do we live in

Oh what damned age do we live in
Since there is no Christian soul
But old Father Patrick and Griffin
Dare put their pricks in the right hole.

Oh, why do we keep such a bustle
'Bout putting a prick in an arse,
Since Harvey's long-cunted muscle
Serves Stuart instead of a tarse.

Since fucking is not as 'twas wont
The ladies have got a new trick:
As an arsehole serves for a cunt.
So a clitoris serves for a prick.

Besides, the damned tailors of France
To Great Britain's defamation
Have made better pintles by chance
Than the gods of the English nation.

But now there's nothing will do,
Their cunts are grown so wide,
Except with a French leather dildo
They get on each other and ride.
        attrib. John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester (1647-1680)

Not the Walkleys

Well, the Walkley awards for 2010, recognising excellence in journalism, have been handed out. If you needed any more proof that they're a mates’ club run by the union the commie-socialist-bleeding-heart-greenie-stalinist-lockstep-pinko-ABC-groupthinkers gave not one, but two awards to Red Kerry, while totally ignoring the excellent, well-researched and fiercely independent journalism of Andrew Bolt.

This sort of thing is just not on. In order to redress this criminal imbalance, EoR has decided to create a special award, recognising Bolt's contributions to exposing the evil hoax that is Science (except, of course, for any science that agrees with his views) with also a special acknowledgement of his advancing the science of racial types and eugenics.



Congratualions Andrew. You deserve it.

A short primer on journalism

Today's print edition of The West Australian has a front page devoted completely to one major story, with the headline blaring 'WORLD'S MOST WANTED MAN ARRESTED'. EoR is glad to learn that Osama bin Laden has finally been arrested. Oh, hang on. It isn't him, or even any of the other five most wanted, it's some other bloke.

While the online report is slightly less inflammatory, it still notes

US politicians have called for Assange to be treated as a terrorist.

Former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin described him as an "an anti-American operative with blood on his hands".

Elsewhere at The West, Paul Murray confuses leaks that confirmed things we suspected for leaks that "confirmed things we knew" (he mentions a little later Kevin Rudd's comments about China — something we didn't previously know, but that inconsistency seems unimportant to Murray). Leaks such as 'Climategate' seem acceptable though:

So, having conceded there was little available research material, the report relies on computer modelling of the small amount that is known. Sounds like a version of Climategate.

Crikey also points out the hypocrisy of the rightwing blogotariat in this matter. To summarise:

Hacked and leaked emails: good (if exposing Teh Evil Scientistz)
Hacked and leaked emails: bad (if exposing the good and wonderful politicians)
Hacked and leaked emails: good (if exposing Kevin Rudd — not a good or wonderful politician)

While one definition of consistency is "a degree of density, firmness, viscosity, etc", this essay notes:

We might say that while consistency is surely not sufficient for ethics, it is at least necessary for ethics. Ethics requires that there be consistency among our moral standards and in how we apply these standards. Ethics also requires a consistency between our ethical standards and our actions, as well as among our inner desires. Finally, ethics requires that there be consistency between how we treat ourselves and how we treat others.

Never let it be said that ethics got in the way of journalism.

Toy stores promoting paedophilia!

According to the trashier end of the media spectrum the new Barbie doll (which also contains a camera in it) is the latest moral panic that will destroy our society.

EXPERTS have slammed a new Barbie doll incorporating a hidden video camera, as a potential paedophile's paradise.

Barbie Video Girl encourages children to get creative and film themselves playing.

A tiny camera is built into the doll's necklace.

The report fails to justify its rabid claim that paedophiles will be using this as their new 'paradise'. They get a quote from a clinical psychologist who says

"I am calling for all Australians to boycott this product and to refuse to shop in any store that justifies selling this potentially pornographic tool."

which is not quite the same thing, and a spokeswoman from the Australian Council on Children and the Media who describes the doll as "disturbing".

EoR wonders just how many girls already have mobile phones. With cameras in them. The horror.

Or how many potential paedophiles lurking right near your daughters have laptops. With cameras in them. The horror.

And how much of this is simple technophobia from adults who aren't digital natives and who feel threatened by the younger generations' ease of use with these devices?

The New York Times provides a more sober account of the new toy.

“Creepy!” said nearly every boy I showed her to; “Cool!” said the girls, who immediately got the idea of the toy — to make movies from Barbie’s point of view.

It's interesting to note that the "creepy" response in the Herald Sun was from a boy journalist. Rather than focusing on how technology might be abused (Shut down the internetz! There's pr0n on it!) shouldn't the fact that this toy seems to have a specifically female-oriented attraction, and is designed to provide an outlet for girls' creativity be celebrated?

Or perhaps we should only be giving girls toys that prepare them for their proper place in the world: pregnant, in the kitchen, and definitely not competing with men?

Actually, the only thing that EoR finds truly creepy about this toy is the New York Times' x-ray photo of it...

Northam is doomed!

The Federal Government is setting up two new detention camps for asylum seekers, one of which is in Northam, northeast of Perth. EoR is deeply concerned about this matter and is glad he doesn't live anywhere near the town, given the volatile nature of the residents and what might happen. And he doesn't mean the asylum seekers.

Howard Sattler, well aware of his audience demographic, has been pushing this issue for weeks now, including a three hour broadcast from Northam with a live audience full of redneck racists (actually, one person spoke up for moderation but was quickly shouted down). Continually claiming that he's not trying to stir things up, Sattler consistently warns of riots, escapes, lack of health services and violence because of the asylum seekers. He even tried to push the line that the army camp they are to be housed in is some kind of national historical site.

Still not trying to stir things up, he allows callers to make accusations that Serco (the security company that will be operating at the Northam camp) are "playing both sides of the fence" by supervising the asylum seekers and somehow funding the people smugglers as well. While Sattler declared that he had "no evidence" to support that claim he nonetheless allowed the caller to go on at length and, at the same time, apparently had no idea where the dump button was or what its use was.

The West Australian reports on the meeting that followed Sattler's rabble-rousing rally.

Belinda McKinnon, who wore a T-shirt emblazoned with the words Bomb Their Boat, said anyone who tried to arrive in Australia without permission committed an illegal act.

[...]

One Nation State vice-president Lyn Vickery said: "They will slit your throat in a second."

Another Northam resident, John Edwards, claimed 3m-high fences would not be enough to stop detainees from escaping. "The first thing they are going to do when they jump the fence is steal my car and drive to Perth to blend in with their own kind," he said.

EoR can already hear Duelling Banjos.

And how Lyn Vickery can get to be vice-president of a political party (admittedly, a fringe, loony, racist, conspiracy-mongering party) is bizarre. Described as a sad little fantasist, his website uses the symbolism of a bomb and states

We will change the world by informing the people. By showing them how they have been lied to, conned, robbed and how what they see as "the real world" is a cunningly manufactured hell designed to reward the psychopaths who control it while at the same time milking everyone else until death! The slaves will be set free. And when that day comes "I see wars, horrid wars, the Tiber foaming with much blood"

There's extremism for you. Mr Vickery lives in a world where Bolshevism is still a threat, and Adolf Hitler a paragon of virtue to be emulated by all right-thinking, pure-race eugenicist thugs. What would the Australian media's response be to inflammatory statements made by a Muslim in the same vein, and using the bomb symbolism? Would it be the same as it is for Vickery?

Sattler has stirred the situation so successfully that the right-wing Premier of WA, Colin Barnett, is actually sounding reasonable:

Premier Colin Barnett has accused some Northam residents of prejudice after angry scenes at a crowded town meeting last night over a proposed immigration detention centre.

[...]

Mr Barnett today said he was concerned by some of the extreme statements made at the meeting, which he said were not appropriate.

“It just shows on a sensitive issue like asylum seekers, on what many will see as illegal immigration, this flares the tempers and maybe some of the prejudices that in Australian society,” he said.

“That's why issues like this need to be handled carefully, even slowly if that's what it takes, and sensitively.”

Racial vilification is not unknown to journalism, of course, nor to politicians who seek to exploit an easy and simple polarisation of views in order to increase their votes (or readers). Wayside Signals reports on a UK politician who tried that stunt and, surprisingly, has been called to task and his victory overturned. If only Australian politicians (and journalists) had the same sort of accountability. News with nipples reports how the media aided and abetted the politicians.

We – the public and the media – have been pwned by the Howard, Rudd and Gillard Governments. They wanted us to hate asylum seekers, and now we hate asylum seekers. They wanted us to think that 692 people a year is a massive problem, and now we think that 692 people a year is a MASSIVE PROBLEM. John Howard must have soiled his pants a little when he (or, more likely, an adviser) came up with “we will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come” – a sentence that’s almost nine years old to the day, and one I’ve heard trotted out constantly since then. Even my own mother (an immigrant) has used it.

To date, Howard Sattler has not come out in opposition to Hakea Prison, situated in suburban Perth, housing over 900 male prisoners, even though this is just as much a clear (and already existing) threat to god-fearing, law-abiding white Australians, nor has he organised public protests against it, or devoted hours and hours of his mean-spirited radio show to it.

In which EoR finds himself confused

Even if you disagree with my own view - that we should instead emphasise our common humanity - I suspect that public declarations of a racial “us” and “them” isn’t very effective in getting the them to help the us.
— Andrew Bolt, October 25 2010

Fewer of us and more of them
Let’s breed ourselves out and hand the country to someone more deserving
— Andrew Bolt, October 27 2010

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — 'Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.' — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.
— Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1841

Of course, sometimes a foolish inconsistency is the consistency of the little mind.

Frankenjournalism

EoR gave up subscribing to Hoofbeats magazine a long time ago when he had trouble distinguishing it from Nexus magazine. It appears things have not improved. Their latest issue covers the horror that is GM food. It sounds like the same line Nexus takes on the subject. EoR also suspects that Hoofbeats relies on the mad claims of Dr Mercola for information as well.

Major health concerns have arisen, we are told in the first paragraph of the Hoofbeats article, from industry and independent testing of GM products, even though testing is 'restricted' by the patent owners. Nonetheless, the apparent lack of evidence doesn't stop the author from listing the harmful side effects of GM feeds:

Past test findings of animals fed GM crops have included; damaged immune systems and increased allergies, development of lesions and/or pre-cancerous growths, unusually enlarged or damaged organs, temporary infertility and unexplained death.

Of even more serious concern is the findings in developing animals fed GM or in the offspring of animals fed GM. These include; immune system damage and metabolic change, smaller brain, liver and testicles, organ damage, abnormal anxiety and aggression, pre-cancerous tumor findings, up to 100% infertility in offspring and abnormally high death rates.

Numerous stock owners feeding GM feed have reported infertility and problems in stock fed GM and compensation has been paid for unexplained stock deaths in the past. Statistically, there has been a global increase in allergies and more recently, evidence of unexplained smaller birth rate averages in the USA.

Even though these damning results are clear for all to see, the Australian Government is licensing GM crops in Australia.

There were no feeding trials on the oil and Monsanto’s animal testing on the GM meal revealed an additional increase in liver weights of around 16% after only a few weeks feeding. This significant finding, indicating an increase in toxins, was ignored as the regulatory body FSANZ does not have authority over stockfeed.

Why would the government do this? Because they're in a conspiracy with Monsanto, of course! And the CSIRO (who are also at the forefront of lying about climate change — they must be so busy maintaining all their cover-ups) are involved as well.

One of the reasons governments are supporting GM crops is because they have alliances with companies such as Monsanto and plan on capitalising on their investments in biotechnology through these corporate partnerships. As early as 1992, the head of CSIRO stated it was best to get into bed with these companies.

The Illuminati plan is to force famers into a monoculture, reducing our freedom of choice.

EoR wonders how a government will increase profits by forcing the population to eat food that results in "up to 100% infertility"? Though this may possibly be a backup plan if the human culling to be introduced under the guise of climate change mitigation is a failure.

It would seem that Hoofbeats gets its information from reliable sources like the Mail Online:

Dr Seralini concluded that rats which ate the GM maize had 'statistically significant' signs of liver and kidney damage. Each strain was linked to unusual concentrations of hormones in the blood and urine of rats fed the maize for three months, compared to rats given a non-GM diet.

The study was rather more cautious:

The quantity of some sugars, ions, salts, and pesticide residues, do in fact differ from line to line, for example in the non-GM reference groups. This not only introduced unnecessary sources of variability but also increased considerably the number of rats fed a normal non-GM diet (320) compared to the GM-fed groups (80) per transformation event, which considerably unbalances the experimental design. A group consisting of the same number of animals fed a mixture of these test diets would have been a better and more appropriate control. In addition, no data is shown to demonstrate that the diets fed to the control and reference groups were indeed free of GM feed.

[...]

If a “sign of toxicity” may only provoke a reaction, pathology or a poisoning, a so-called “toxic effect” is without doubt deleterious on a short or a long term. Clearly, the statistically significant effects observed here for all three GM maize varieties investigated are signs of toxicity rather than proofs of toxicity, and this is essentially for three reasons. Firstly, the feeding trials in each case have been conducted only once, and with only one mammalian species. The experiments clearly need to be repeated preferably with more than one species of animal. Secondly, the length of feeding was at most only three months, and thus only relatively acute and medium-term effects can be observed if any similar to what can be derived in a process such as carcinogenesis or after endocrine disruption in adults. Proof of toxicity is hard to decide on the basis of these conditions. Longer-term (up to 2 years) feeding experiments are clearly justified and indeed necessary. This requirement is supported by the fact that cancer, nervous and immune system diseases, and even reproductive disorders for examples can become apparent only after one or two years of a given intervention treatment under investigation, but they will not be evident in all cases after three months of administration when first signs of toxicity may be observed. In addition, large effects (e.g. 40% increase in triglycerides) in all likelihood will be missed with the protocol of the current studies, since they are limited by the number of animals used in each feeding group and by the nature of the parameters studied. Thirdly, the statistical power of the tests conducted is low (30%) because the experimental design of Monsanto (see Materials and Methods). However, it is important to note that these short-term (3-month) rat feeding trials are the only tests conducted on the basis of which regulators determine whether these GM crop/food varieties are as safe to eat as conventional types. Given that these GM crops are potentially eaten by billions of people and animals world-wide, it is important to discuss whether the experimental design, the statistical analyses and interpretations originally undertaken are appropriate and sufficient.

Wikipedia has an interesting page on GM controversies, particularly on the issue of allergies (any GM foods that show allergy-inducing properties have been withdrawn immediately) and suggestions that they compromise the immune system (the Pusztai paper failed to include this assertion which he had made on television, and was based on a sample size of six, but this has not stopped the anti-GM campaigners promoting it as a scientific 'fact').

GM foods are certainly a contentious issue, not least the matter of patents and global corporate ownership of crop seeds. That's no reason to promote fallacious arguments and conspiracy theories. The Science Show recently interviewed Lord Sainsbury, president of the British Science Association.

David Sainsbury: Yes, I suppose that's the other consideration. We now have 30 million acres of arable land which is about 10% of it in the world producing genetically modified crops. You've got all the Indian cotton I think is Bt cotton, similar in China, you've got genetically modified soya widely grown and used in America, and there have been basically no problems from a health or an environmental point of view which, when you think about it, it's a new technology, new technology in America, no lawsuits saying 'well, I died as a result of eating genetically modified...', that is amazing. And one way of thinking is that this is the biggest clinical trial we've ever had, and it has proved a safe technology.

Like climate change deniers, the GM-Frankenfood deniers also love repeating the same old, debunked, arguments. Such as the commenter on the Science Show story who raises the case of the Indian farmers who are being forced to commit suicide as a result of GM crops. Which is not true. As the Guardian article notes, scaremongers also fail to consider the health improvements from reduced pesticide use.

Like the mobile-phones-cause-cancer scare that won't die even in the face of lack of evidence, GM scares are easy to make, but harder to prove. There may well be legitimate concerns that require study and testing, but simply repeating overhyped propaganda claims only polarises people.

The WHO provide a much more balanced consideration of the evidence, the threats, the concerns and the facts.

Different GM organisms include different genes inserted in different ways. This means that individual GM foods and their safety should be assessed on a case-by-case basis and that it is not possible to make general statements on the safety of all GM foods.

Unless you're an altie, conspiracy-theory loving, journalist.

Interestingly, EoR's local newsagency magazine filing algorithm (which places UFO and astrology magazines amongst New Scientist and Scientific American) places Hoofbeats next to Nexus.

The Red shoes

EoR welcomes Bronze Dog's announcement to blog more frequently, and to cover such topics as cognitive dissonance — the ability for people to simultaneously hold contradictory views.

Andrew Bolt has found himself on something of a roll with the John Howard shoe throwing incident. His audience love this sort of stuff, proving the 'barbarity' and 'violence' of the Left (EoR isn't able to comment on how Timothy McVeigh proves the barbarity and violence of the Right, since Bolt hasn't mentioned it, and EoR can't form an opinion until Bolt tells him what to think).



Commenters ramble on about how Peter Gray (the thrower) shouldn't be allowed to breed (Bolt's commenters are very big on 'breeding' — who should be permitted to breed, who shouldn't, and how the purity of the race from infection by inferior races should be maintained), but some also comment on Gray's Degree in Classics. EoR would have thought that this showed his determination to improve himself, but not in the eyes of Bolt's Believers:

What is a university degree in classics?

Classic cars?

Classic catches?

Classic hits (105.9 BRock FM)?

Classic nutcases?

and

How frigging useful is a classics degree I ask you? So he doesn’t work in helping with the environment which he could do with a say civil engineering degree, he gets a degree in classics. Useless.

Bolt's Believers, of course, would not see the irony that one of their heroes, the increasingly marginalised Christopher Monckton, has a Degree in Classics. Indeed, when the contradiction is pointed out to them, a commenter responds that it's a Masters in Classics, not just a Degree. As if that was some sort of devastating distinction. Presumably, a Degree in Classics is "useless" but a Masters is an Object of Eternal Admiration. Of course, Bolt's Brigades detest the "elites" (probably because many of them wouldn't qualify as such) but other "elites" (hereditary aristocrats, for example) are a Good Thing. Indeed, a love of opera is not in any way at all 'elitist'. The only distinction being (and this is an important one in Boltland) a political one.

Personally, EoR is going with the conspiracy theorists who believe Howard organised the whole incident. The shoe throwing was very half-hearted (in fact, EoR would have called it a 'shoe tossing'), they were nowhere near Howard, and Howard never flinched, almost as if he was expecting it!!!! And then there was the tweet a short time before the incident*, suggesting someone throw their shoe at him!!!! It could only have come from a Howard staffer!!!1!! It's certainly much more likely than conspiracy theories about the death of Paul the Psychic Octopus.

*In the paranoid world of Andrew Bolt, even though this wasn't visible to Peter Gray (or because it wasn't visible) this proves the culpability and bias of the ABC.

Wikileaks reveals heartwarming truth about Iraq casualties

You'd imagine it was some sort of lone rightwing libertarian crank blogger who'd claim that the recent Wikileaks publishing of documents concerning casualties in Iraq was proof that the number of deaths was wildly exaggerated by leftwing propagandists. Well, you'd be right. Australia's craziest rightwing conspiracy theorist, Andrew Bolt, believes that the Wikileaks documents prove scientists in the Lancet lied about the number of possible deaths in Iraq, inflating the figures by "at least 600 per cent" in an "infamous" paper. And those stupid scientists thought they could get away with it! Ha! Not with the keen scientific and investigatory skills of Andrew "I see no global warming" Bolt. And the ABC and the Fairfax press, being part of the global scientific conspiracy, danced right along with the fake figures.

Bolt's Brigade of the Desperately Deranged come up with the usual comments, referring to "Seppos" and "Frogs", claiming the Lancet also supports the false belief in human-caused global warming, and that this reveals "just how completely dysfunctional islamic society is". Of course, being invaded and subject to an insurgency would have nothing to do with it. It's Islam. Sorry, islam.

Even though the leftwing consistently lie about everything, Bolt fails to explain why his own employer has also apparently fallen for the same lie. Perhaps they're really secretly owned by the ABC as well?

And the infamously rightwing Australian.

What Bolt apparently fails to realise is, like other scaremongers, he is confusing two totally different data sets. The Lancet paper looked at excess mortality as a result of the war. Of these,

Deaths attributable to the coalition accounted for 31% (95% CI 26–37) of post-invasion violent deaths.

The Wikileaks documents are US Army reports of Significant Actions, and are thus a subset of total excess deaths. The original Lancet paper (which Bolt has presumably read, but either not understood, or simply ignored the parts he didn't like) was already aware of this discrepancy:

Our estimate of excess deaths is far higher than those reported in Iraq through passive surveillance measures. This discrepancy is not unexpected. Data from passive surveillance are rarely complete, even in stable circumstances, and are even less complete during conflict, when access is restricted and fatal events could be intentionally hidden. Aside from Bosnia, we can flnd no conflict situation where passive surveillance recorded more than 20% of the deaths measured by population-based methods. In several outbreaks, disease and death recorded by facility-based methods under estimated events by a factor of ten or more when compared with population-based estimates.

Luckily, one Australian paper still remains fiercely independent and can be relied on to tell the truth, and reveal the important stories that the other papers deliberately ignore (and, EoR has to ask himself, what are the real reasons they do that?). Yes, the NT News leads with a story of a man who stepped on a small crocodile and got a little bit of a fright. And a comedian who is hoping to see one of the innumerable NT UFOs, and who is promising to "cover the shapeshifting reptilian agenda to enslave humanity". Bolt probably imagines it's a factual lecture by a fiercely independent scientist putting his entire career at risk by daring to disagree with the status quo.

International readers might not be familiar with the term, but Australia has a term of praise for such people, reserved only for the few who achieve beyond the bounds of the average person: dickhead.



And remember, June 3rd is now officially National Andrew Bolt is a Dickhead Day across Australia.

---

Burnham, G., Lafta, R., Doocy, S., & Roberts, L. (2006). Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: a cross-sectional cluster sample survey. Lancet 368: 1421–28. DOI:10.1016/S01406736(06)69491-9.

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.

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)

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.

Andrew Bolt: Postmodernist Blogger?

Andrew Bolt is the master of the cut and paste and run post and then allowing his devoted followers to be variously moronic, racist, arrogant and sexist (and, quite often, all of the above). Sahara of Sydney, for example, who is upset about tattoos but clearly spends an inordinate amount of time watching pornos:

Ah yes tattoos AKA the Mt Druitt birthmark. The art of the idiot and hallmark of the lower classes. A permanent reminder of a temporary feeling.

A tattoo on a guy automatically brands him as being intellectually challenged and on a woman it’s even worse.

Strippers and prostitutes are the company your branding will associate you with. Don’t believe me? Than rent a porno or two and try to find the woman without the tatt. Believe me when I tell you that they are very few and far between.

But is Bolt really serious? EoR thinks there's a clue in his photos (two! of them) at the top of his blog...



Notice the subtle clue that both images have the top of his head cut off. Is this a postmodernist clue that all his posts are brainless?

Journalism: More Scare, Less Fact (2)

A surfer was recently killed in the south-west of Australia after a shark attack. Led by the populist press, this has resulted in the usual scare stories, and manufactured "debate".

Mario Vassallo, a keen surfer who helps promote the professional surfing circuit when it comes to Western Australia for the Margaret River Pro event, has criticised "bloody greenie huggers" who wish to protect sharks, saying: "If they want them so much then they can swim out and hug them."

(...)

"They say there are not as many now and that they are tagging them to keep an eye on them. So much for keeping an eye on them," Vassallo said. "This is getting beyond a joke."

It is difficult to accurately determine how many sharks are killed each year due to humans but experts estimate it is around 38 million just for shark fins alone, while a marine biologist suggests the figure is around 73 million a year. He goes on to note

I have never confirmed that more people are killed every year by vending machines. This certainly could be true as on average 5-6 people per year in the entire world are killed by sharks. There are numerous things far more dangerous to people than sharks such as lighting, boating accidents, bee stings, dogs, hitting deer with your car, etc and the list goes on. We always have to respect sharks as large predators as we do bears and mountain lions but the truth is they are not out to eat humans.

(...)

Literally millions of people are in our oceans every day and are not attacked (...). The risk of shark attack is very low. Less than 100 per year globally.

Shark Safe Network puts the number of sharks killed per year at 100 million, while

To put things into perspective, your lifetime risk of drowning is 1 in 1,134 and from an air/space accident it's 1 in 5,051. The chance that you will be the unlucky victim of a fatal shark attack, however, is 1 in 3,748,067. There are actually more deaths on US beaches from people being smothered by collapsing sand holes than from shark bites!

Discovery News also reports

The New England Journal of Medicine reported that from 1990 to 2006, 16 people died by digging until the sand collapsed and smothered them. ISAF counted a dozen U.S. shark deaths in the same period. Clearly, you’d be safer in the water, with the sharks.

Taronga Conservation Society Australia provide some very good statistics, noting that

Worldwide estimates state that 30 to 100 people a year are attacked. Analysis of over 1,000 case histories world wide, from the International Shark Attack File suggests an average of 30% are fatal.

Australian figures show 25% have been fatal.

Clearly, Australian sharks are actually safer than those in the rest of the world. Deaths from bee stings are two to three times the rate of shark attack deaths, but EoR can't remember the last moral panic from the press concerning "Man killed by bee - Calls for bees to be exterminated". Over 28 times as many people are killed in the US by dogs compared to sharks.

Apart from shark fins, they are also killed for their meat, their oil (used in cosmetics) and cartilage (used in chondroitin products that promote the 'sharks don't get cancer' fallacy).

Journalism: More Scare, Less Fact

The media a little while ago was full of the terrible story of how dangerous Toyota cars were. They mysteriously suffered from Unintended Acceleration Syndrome, becoming unstoppable juggernauts on the highways and freeways of the Western World, sending their terrified drivers on a nightmare ride of terror. Sound grabs of telephone calls made by terrified drivers pleading for help were played over and over. Toyota's market credibility suffered badly. Its CEO made an unprecedented apology.

It now seems that the main fault with Toyotas was the nut behind the wheel. Drivers stamp on the accelerator, panic, and fail to press the brake.

So far, this has not been reported in any of the local media to EoR's knowledge. But a scare story is so much more exciting than reporting that people are stupid.

Just so the climate denial movement's tactics: make an outrageous claim which is sure to be promoted by the nutjobs that promote denial, until it is picked up by the mainstream media who love a beatup. Even when the story is later proved false, the work of the denial movement has been done. The mainstream media rarely, and never prominently, trumpet their errors, and the denial movement can move on to the next desperate act of straw clutching, such as the fact that it is raining.

In The Forests Of The Night

Having recently looked at the persistent myth that the Australian bush is infested with wandering panthers, lions and sundry other Big Cats, EoR is pleased to report that a tiger that escaped while being transported to a vet in South Africa has been recaptured.

Tigers, native to Asia, are usually only found in zoos in South Africa, which is home to numerous species of big cats.

Fernandes said the tiger would be returning to his home at a private game reserve.

The head of a private security network coordinating the search had told Reuters it was likely the biggest tiger hunt Africa has ever seen.

Presumably, that would be because it's the only tiger hunt Africa has ever seen?

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'.