Tomfoolery Blog

Archive for the ‘homeopathy’ Category

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!

Tony Livesey: well meaning, but could do with a little scientific training

I sent this email to Fair Deal Homeopathy today. Think I’ll get anywhere with it?

Dear Sir / Madam,

I am interested in building my own repository of homeopathic medication for my own personal use. I believe 100 of your homeopathic products will cover every known ailment.

As your homeopathic products are £4.99 each, 100 products would cost £500 (rounded up). However, I wish to pay for these products homeopathically. Therefore, I wish to pay with a 2C version of £500, which is 5 pence. According to the law of infinitesimals, 5 pence is far stronger than the original £500 pounds. In addition to this, I will succuss my cheque book against a leather Bible.

I’ll let you know how I get on.

Thanks to the British Medical Association’s slaughtering of homeopathy, that very subject was discussed on BBC Radio Leeds today. Presenter Liz Green did well to introduce homeopathy as being unscientific and costing the NHS approximately £10 million per year, but she was quickly inundated by the “it worked for my dog” brigade.

Thankfully, Merseyside Skeptic’s Society co-founder Michael Marshall was bought in towards the end of the discussion to give the skeptic’s point of view. In the limited time available, I thought Marsh did very well, especially to introduce the “secondary placebo” effect to explain the effect of homeopathy on dogs.

From a personal perspective, I thought it was good to hear my own email broadcast. (I’m such a media whore wannabe). I gave three reasons why people may feel better after taking homeopathy:

1. They were going to get better anyway.
2. They were experiencing the placebo effect (or a secondary placebo effect in the case of dogs).
3. If they were taking homeopathy as a ‘complementary’ medicine, the conventional medicine may have been working.

There is also one aspect of the homeopathy argument that really bugs me: homeopathy supporters claim that the estimated £10 million per year the NHS spends on homeopathy “isn’t that much”. Well, if that’s the case, could I have £10 million from the NHS budget every year? If it’s not that much…

The whole BBC Radio Leeds Liz Green program is available here (homeopathy discussed towards the end of the show, Michael Marshall’s appearance and my email from about 1 hour 30 minutes onwards).

In the last parliament, you may remember that the House of Commons Science and Technology committee produced an evidence check on homeopathy, concluding that it should no longer be funded on the NHS. Following this, quack-supporting MP David Tredinnick wrote Early Day Motion (EMD) 908, criticising the report and supporting homeopathy. This EDM became a nice little reference, because MPs could demonstrate their scientific inabilities by signing it.

Now that the dust has settled on this new parliament, David Tredinnick is back to his old tricks in a big way. Not content with EDM 908, he has tabled an additional four (yes, four) EDMs. Each one offers a smidgen of support to homeopathy:

EDM 284 expresses concern about the British Medical Association’s recent motions concerning homeopathy. EDM 285 welcomes the publication of a paper in the Journal of Oncology, which appears to show that some cancer cells can be killed by homeopathic preparations (which of course, isn’t the case). EDM 286 similarly welcomes a Brazilian study on homeopathic antidepressants, while EDM 287 welcomes yet another study, this time from South Africa on homeopathic insomnia treatments.

Of course, each EDM from David Tredinnick contains factual inaccuracies and references to poorly controlled studies. To point these errors out, step forward Dr Julian Huppert MP of the Liberal Democrats  (who else?). Julian has tabled an amendment for each of Tredinnick’s EDMs, correcting each of David Tredinnick’s mistakes.

So now we have another tool for quickly judging the scientific competency of our MPs. With EDM 908 it was simple: if they signed it, they were an idiot. Now, if your MP signs EDMs 284-287 in their original forms then they are an idiot, but if they sign the amended forms then they are showing some respect for science and evidence based policy.

I would advise you to write to your MP to ask them to sign EDM 284A1-287A1. They can be found and contacted via the site www.theyworkforyou.com, and the Merseyside Skeptic Society have written a template to make things a little easier. Hopefully together we can put a stop to David Tredinnick’s quackery nonsense.

Today was a good day in the fight against woo. The Prince of Wales Foundation for Integrated Health has announced that it is to close. But why is this cause for celebration?

When the FIH talk about ‘integrated health’, they aren’t talking about a considered approach to evidence-based healthcare. They are talking about debunked nonsense such as homeopathy, reiki and reflexology. The charity’s aim was to promote that sort of garbage on the NHS, in an effort to waste taxpayers money.

What caused the downfall of this “charity”? The answer is simple: fraud. The Foundation has failed to submit it’s accounts, and on Monday 26th of April two people were arrested on suspicion of fraud and money laundering. £300,000 is reportedly unaccounted for.

So, hopefully that will be the end of them, but the fact they existed in the first place sickens me somewhat. The foundation was set up by Prince Charles, a man in a hereditary position. We no longer live in the 16th century. How on earth is it right for someone in an extremely privileged position to use said position to support such utter bunk? If and when Charles becomes King, the UK is in danger of becoming a laughing stock.

OK, a very simple premise here: if you are a quack and you don’t want people to know about your nonsense, don’t make legal threats against anyone.  If you do, you risk the wrath of the Internet (this has become known as the Streisand effect).

One such quack who failed to adhere to this simple rule is Charlene Werner. So, as many others have already done, I present to you this extraordinary video:

The stupidity here is bum-blowing. First she calls e=mc² a theory, which puts any scientific claims she may have under extreme scrutiny. It’s not a theory, it’s a law. Then she goes on to say that the mass within the universe is so small, it can be discounted. And it goes downhill from there…

Arguments with homeopaths conducted on the Internet always seem to follow a certain pattern. Bill Fahber, a member of the 10²³ campaign, has summed it up beautifully in this chart:

Nice one Bill!

As we’ve already seen, the recent evidence check by the House of Commons Science and Technology committee has come down hard on homeopathy, and their recommendations include a halt to research on homeopathy and stopping the NHS from funding it. If you are a UK citizen, you can sign this petition to get these changes implemented:

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/nohomeopathy/

As I’m sure you are all aware, Haiti (and more recently Chile) is still feeling the effects of a devastating earthquake. The death toll is currently at around 230,000 with up to 1,000,000 homeless. Of course, aid is still needed, and there are many charities that need donations.

Sadly, legitimate aid workers have been joined by some undesirable types. One such organization is the Homeopathy World Community (HWC), who are trying to treat the needy with homeopathy. That might be bad enough, you might think, but it gets worse:

Reports indicate that insecticidal nets and distribution of drugs will be their answer. We must teach them about the homeopathic malarial remedies. So far, we have not heard reports of these epidemic diseases in the locations that have been visited by our team.

Clearly, they are trying to prevent malaria with homeopathy. However, it also sounds like they are trying to prevent the distribution of anti-malarial drugs and insecticidal nets. I just hope they aren’t that stupid…

As we already know, the UK House of Commons Science and Technology committee slammed homeopathy in their recent evidence check. In response to this, MP David Tredinnick (Conservative) has sponsored an Early Day Motion (EDM), ‘expressing concern’ at the report.

So far, 12 other MPs have signed the motion:

• James Gray, Conservative
• Gregory Campbell, DUP
• David Simpson, DUP
• Harry Cohen, Labour
• Jeremy Corbyn, Labour
• Andrew Dismore, Labour
• David Drew, Labour
• John McDonnell, Labour
• Stephen Pound, Labour
• Alan Simpson, Labour
• Mike Hancock, Lib Dem
• Bob Russell, Lib Dem

As you can see, all the major political parties are represented, with Labour being the largest group. If any of these MPs represent you, you can ask them why they have signed the EDM here.

Here is the motion in full:

That this House expresses concern at the conclusions of the Science and Technology Committee’s Report, Evidence Check on Homeopathy; notes that the Committee took only oral evidence from a limited number of witnesses, including known critics of homeopathy Tracy Brown, the Managing Director of Sense About Science, and journalist Dr Ben Goldacre, who have no expertise in the subject; believes that evidence should have been heard from primary care trusts that commission homeopathy, doctors who use it in a primary care setting, and other relevant organisations, such as the Society of Homeopaths, to provide balance; observes that the Committee did not consider evidence from abroad from countries such as France and Germany, where provision of homeopathy is far more widespread than in the UK, or from India, where it is part of the health service; regrets that the Committee ignored the 74 randomised controlled trials comparing homeopathy with placebo, of which 63 showed homeopathic treatments were effective, and that the Committee recommends no further research; further notes that 206 hon. Members signed Early Day Motion No. 1240 in support of NHS homeopathic hospitals in Session 2006-07; and calls on the Government to maintain its policy of allowing decision-making on individual clinical interventions, including homeopathy, to remain in the hands of local NHS service providers and practitioners who are best placed to know their community’s needs.

Of course, you’ll notice that the arguments the motion brings up are completely erroneous. They complain about a ‘limited number of witnesses’, even though one of the said witnesses was none other than Robert Wilson, chairman of the British Association of Homeopathic Manufacturers! They also talk about ’74 randomized controlled trials’, even though it doesn’t say what the trials are.

Asking for evidence from other countries perplexes me somewhat. No matter where homeopathy is applied in the world, the ingredients are the same: sugar!

Of course, with only 13 signatures this EDM is very unlikely to be heard, but I still find it very worrying that there are MPs who are prepared to completely ignore the scientific method and support quack medicine. I just hope people let their MPs let them know how they feel about this…