Archive for July, 2010
Finally, we have received the government’s response to the Science and Technology Committee’s Evidence Check on Homeopathy. It’s not good. Rather than act on the recommendations to stop NHS funding and MHRA licensing of homeopathy, the government have completely copped out and kept the status quo, whist somehow agreeing with the evidence check. The government seems to be trying to pander to both scientists and homeopaths, and as such the response is horrible to read. I’ll go into detail later, but in the meantime I’ll leave it to Martin Robbins at the Guardian.
The response is being discussed in the media, and last night our own Michael Marshall from the Merseyside Skeptics Society and 10:23 campaign appeared on BBC Radio 5Live (1:48 in). He was joined by presenter Tony Livesey, and not one, but two homeopaths: Dr Brian Kaplan, a medical doctor and fellow of the Faculty of Homeopathy, and Mary English, a “qualified homeopath”.
Brian Kaplan came across as rabid, massively overplaying the government’s decision on homeopathy. Mary English seemed nice and polite, but as expected she only bought anecdotal evidence to the table. The debate felt unbalanced, even for the BBC’s standards, and seemed like an ambush, although Marsh did well to keep a level head and put across his points calmly and succinctly. To be fair, the first two callers made good points about the studies of the efficaciousness of homeopathy. However, support for homeopathy was taken from a couple of callers, who again could only come up with anecdotal evidence.
Which brings me to my first issue: why don’t the BBC train their presenters in the basics of critical thinking? For example, you do not counter systematic studies and randomized double-blinded controlled trials with a couple of personal anecdotes! The presenter, Tony Livesey, actually said “That wasn’t an anecdote, that really happened!” when Marsh pointed out that a caller’s story about his daughter’s experience with homeopathy was an anecdote. Is it unreasonable to expect a BBC presenter to know what an anecdote is? He also seemed impressed by authority, noting that Brian Kaplan is a medical doctor, and accepting that Mary English had trained in homeopathy for five years. In my opinion, the qualifications of the debater are irrelevant, bullshit is still bullshit. If you ever hear me saying anything like “Trust me, I’ve got a PhD”, then please shoot me.
My second point is to do with the BBC’s obsession with ‘balance’. Now, balance is fine if you are discussing something subjective like an art exhibition or Mel Gibson’s latest crap film, but when discussing scientific issues, things are different. Science should be recognized and discussed by people who have at least a modicum of scientific understanding, not pseudoscientists with vested interests. If the BBC were discussing the rights and wrongs of murder, would they have the Prime Minister squaring up to Peter Sutcliffe? Would you see the head of the NSPCC discussing the merits of child abuse with a catholic priest? I think not. Sort it out BBC!
Every month, the Merseyside Skeptics Society holds a lecture in the grandiose setting of the Vines. Thursday night’s guest was none other than David Aaronovitch, acclaimed journalist and author of Voodoo Histories.
The MSS are a highly socialable, friendly bunch, and I was lucky enough to sit right next to David Aaronovich before his talk, where he was kind enough to share a few anecdotes with us over a beer. When the event itself started, MSS President Mike Hall gave Mr Aaronovich a warm humorous welcome, although he seamed more concerned about the welfare of David’s brother Ben Aaronovich, a scriptwriter for Dr Who!
David’s talk was engaging and passionate, as he effortlessly explored the conspiracy theories in his book Voodoo Histories, including the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the death of Princess Diana, and of course 9/11. Each one was skillfully demolished in turn, and it was a joy to hear his thoughts on the mindset of people who cling to such ludicrous beliefs such as “9/11 truth”. I could have listened for hours, but sadly due to time constraints host of InKredulous Andy Wilson had the unenviable job of cutting him off!
Copies of Voodoo Histories were available at a discount (bargain!) during the interval. I bought a copy, and David was kind enough to sign mine “To Dr Tom!”. Fortunately, someone was around to capture the meeting on camera.
The second half was a Q and A, although each question seemed like a valid excuse to hear more of David’s entertaining thoughts on conspiracy theories. I asked a question on the irreversible mindsets of conspiracy theorists and skeptics, but before I was handed the microphone Mike Hall was kind enough to congratulate me on my PhD graduation! I was touched! Dr Who?
To conclude the evening, and in keeping with the jovial atmosphere, Mike Hall got David to sign one of his brother Ben’s Dr Who books, which was a lovely little moment. After much more chatting and a few drinks, the night was over, everyone I met went home very chuffed. It felt like another step forward for the skeptic cause on Merseyside.
Forthcoming talks look very promising, with August seeing MSS President Mike Hall giving a talk on God, before Dr Evan Harris turns up in September. These events (and the skeptic socials in Dr Duncan’s) are always great fun, and it feels like there is a real skeptic community in Liverpool now. If you see me there, be sure to say hello!
Gillian McKeith has managed to embark on a spectacular failure with Twitter. Firstly, she has a go at a random twitterer who had a go at her, then she pretends that her Twitter account doesn’t actually belong to her. Following that, she tries to remove all record of her social networks on her website. However, a brilliantly lazy web designer just commented out the code, so it was there for anyone who has the ability to right-click then select “view source”. Now, it’s exploded all over Twitter and Gillian McKeith is once again looking like a total arse.
That, and the diploma mill she went to corresponded with has announced it will shut down. Happy days.
Plenty of people have written excellent blogs about this:

I’ve a heard a few times on Twitter that the manager of the German football team, Joachim Loew, looks a bit like Professor Brian Cox, particle physicist and documentary maker extraordinaire. I’ve wedged them together for the hell of it.
Surprisingly, I found getting two pictures of these men making the same expression to be almost as difficult as squaring the circle. Brian Cox is nearly always grinning from ear to ear like a cheeky schoolboy, whilst Joachim Loew invariably has the stern face of the stereotypically professional efficient German.
Maybe Loew will have a smile on his face come Sunday?
The big celebrity news here in the UK is that pop singer Cheryl Cole (nee Tweedy) has been diagnosed with malaria following a holiday to Tanzania. In their infinite wisdom, the BBC News website has decided to run an article entitled “Anti-malarial pills didn’t stop me getting the disease”. As I type, it is at number seven on their “most read” list, and is even featured on the front page of the site, captioned “Malaria Misery: Cheryl has it, and the pills don’t always work”.
The article itself is a story from Katie Fraser, and it details her symptoms following a trip to the Soloman Islands. She claims she took anti-malarial drugs everyday, and also used a mosquito net and repellent spray, yet still caught malaria. The take-home message appears to be “don’t bother with antimalarials, they didn’t work for me”, but it’s also got a whiff of “don’t trust doctors” about it, as she was misdiagnosed as having flu three times.
People tend to be curious about diseases when a celebrity catches them, so why on earth have the BBC deemed it necessary to publish and promote an unfortunate, individual scare story? The article does NOT stress the importance of antimalarials when traveling abroad, and in my opinion publishing it is dangerous. Any neutral could come away thinking “antimalarials don’t work, so why bother?”.
If you feel like I do and want to complain to the BBC, you can do so here. You’ll need the full URL of the article, which is http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/10522909.stm. Thanks.
Followers of quack medicine and general wingnuttery will be well aware of naturalnews.com, home of “Health Ranger” Mike Adams. It’s always worth perusing if you want to keep up with the latest “all natural” nonsense, but there was one recent article in particular that caught my eye.
The article in question is on natural male contraception. One recommendation is to eat papaya seeds, which apparently affects the infertility of rats and rabbits. I’ve no idea if a study has been done on humans, but it seems like a breeze compared to the other option: dangle your testicles in 116 °F (46°C) water (just below the pain threshold, supposedly) for 45 minutes a day every day for 21 days. This should keep you sperm-free for 6 months.
Now, I’ve got so many questions. Firstly, where is the evidence that this works? Did someone carry out experiments to determine the optimal time and temperature, or did Kim Evans (the author) just make it up for a laugh?
Second, what exactly is the technique involved? Can you boil the kettle, fill a teacup with hot water, wait until it cools to the right temperature, then squat over it naked whilst holding your old chap out of the way? How do you maintain the temperature of the water? With an industrial waterbath? Also, what are you supposed to do for 45 minutes? Listen to music? Read a book? Hope the dog doesn’t wander in?
Third, how would this be introduced into a relationship? I can picture the scene: a girlfriend is cuddling with her boyfriend on the sofa, she’s surfing the net. “Look what I’ve found on naturalnews.com darling!”.
Insane. What’s wrong with condoms or the pill?




