UPDATED: Boiron vs Blogzero...

UPDATE 24 AUG 11: Boiron has written a letter in which they state they will not pursue legal action. The wording is interesting in which they claim to be open to debate but leaving the classic argument that science has not reached the realms of the "infinitely small".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Boiron is a multi-billion dollar manufacturer of homeopathic concoctions. They have subjected an Italian blogger for daring the criticize their product Oscillococcinum. This is promoted as a treatment cure for the flu and cold (although in the United States it bears the FDA required disclaimer that it is "not intended to treat or cure any disease"). ANY company which provides a product to the public is subject to critical review by the public and hence the markets.

If our Blogzero friend is saying something untrue, this site's most popular post is related to the efficacy of Sinupret, then by all means he should retract or correct it. If he is making fundamentally true statements, which I believe he is, then Boiron is engaging in cyber-bullying.

This is a free speech issue. Read for yourself and decide!

Boiron vs Blogzero (English page) :B-log(0)

MP David Tredinnick is Wrong...

The UK's govevernmental Homeopathy Report is a good mix of science and policy recommendations. It takes issue with the irresponsible expenditure of government funds (read UK citizen tax pounds) on ineffective, non-scientific therapies. MP David Tredinnick, a consummate woo-fan, seeks to discredit this well researched and vetted report.

MP David Tredinnick is Wrong about the Homeopathy Report

The Doctors Sheds its Last Vestige of Credibility...

CBS, in a desperate bid for ratings, on its medical equivalent to The View, The Doctors, is planning to put vaccine denialist Jenny McCarthy on its show. It will be interesting to see if any of the paid medical performers are willing to counter any of her non-science rhetoric.

The press release on the event is here. The show has been roundly criticized in serious medical circles and the show itself is as staged as any “reality” TV production. Each of the medical pundits wears a variety of lab coast, scrubs or standard “doctor casual” clothing. They all look great and present a beautiful multi-cultural front which continues to support their presumed godlike powers.

I think I will tune in to XM’s ReachMD, a serious channel with real topics on medicine and science.

Sinupret, con or cure...

There is a wave of marketing on television, in print and over the internet of an “herbal remedy” called Sinupret.  Sinupret is a concoction of a German company named Bionorica.  Sinupret falls into the grey area of a supplement, largely unregulated by the FDA.  There is no guarantee of standardization of dosage and the rules for efficacy are non-existent as compared to OTC (over-the-counter) medications.  Ironically, a pan European court ruled Sinupret “superfluous” and “ineffective” as early as 1992.   

 

Some have spent some time pondering the possible negative effects of the  "herbal remedy".  The product itself is 8% alcohol and many are under the mistaken impression that this is a homeopathic medicine, which it is not.  I am always very wary of any company claiming to have a “proprietary” claim on their ingredients.  This product is clearly an herbal, akin to St. John’s Wort and other herbs which have proven to be problematic for individuals when combined with other medicines. 

 

Sinupret is marketed by Dr. Bob Sears, a paid physician spokesman on Bionorica’s staff.  He carefully excludes any claims of efficacy and dances around the edges as to exactly what the mechanism of action is behind the drug.  Much like the bally hooed Head-On product, it is likely that any review of the product’s capabilities will come up far short.

 

Parents who administer this product to their children do so with good intent.  However, the lack of oversight, trials and data supporting even the most benign claim puts their children at risk.  There is no scientific data supporting the claims of stronger immune systems.  A stronger immune system is best enhanced by a healthy diet, good hygiene and rest.  Children who are stressed from too little of the aforementioned and placed in close contact (i.e. school or preschool) with other similar germ factories are likely to get colds.

 

In a world where the Snugli can sell more than 40 million units in a few months, a slickly promoted bottle of snake oil, pushed by the fears of millions of parents, can gain equal, if unearned profits. 

 

At least the Snugli will keep you warm.

 

Caveat emptor.

 

 

There is no science in Scientology...

Jett Travolta dies in the Bahamas under suspicious circumstances. His cremated remains are being returned to the family compound in Ocala, Florida. The loss of a 16 year old boy is a tragedy for any family. A life cut short so early is a loss to all. John Travolta and Kelly Preston are Scientologists – different from the medically averse Christian Scientists. However, the tenets of their beliefs may have had some impact on Jett’s life, and even his death. John’s brother, Joe, is an autism activist. Truthfully, I don’t know whether he is on the fringes with the lunatic Jenny McCarthy or mainstream. That’s for another post.

Scientology is a dangerous, controlling cult. It operates a global network dedicated to controlling its members, suppressing opposition and accumulating wealth. It holds bizarre beliefs and opposes mental health treatments in all its forms.

I now offer a primer for the unmitigated. Below is paraphrased from other sources, most notably Gawker.

Scientology, which questionably calls itself a new "religion", is the brainchild of 1950's science fiction writer, occult enthusiast and former Naval officer (*sigh*) L. Ron Hubbard. The organization, by means of Hubbard's self created psychotherapy technique called "Dianetics", claims to be able to help rid members of any and all mental constraints including but not limited to emotional scarring (from this and "past" lives) due to "engrams" (past negative experiences stored in our unconscious mind), psychological disorders and chemical imbalances (the solution is to convince members that these things don't actually exist) and drug dependence (including legally prescribed psycho pharmaceuticals which counteract the effects of psychological disorders Scientologists believe to be nonexistent). Their "treatment" of substance abuse includes little more than massive, often dangerous doses of vitamins and unhealthy extended sessions in a sauna.

[en.wikipedia.org] - Dianetics review: [dir.salon.com], [www.time.com] [www.cs.cmu.edu] [www.nypress.com]

Scientology is most certainly NOT a religion. In fact, one of the only reasons they enjoy "tax exempt status" on religious ground in the United States is because they bullied the IRS into a "deal" through extremely aggressive barratry (which is the offense of persistently instigating groundless lawsuits) against said government agency and its officials, and arranged to drop all 2,500 frivolous lawsuits only when an "agreement" was reached. In addition, Scientology's lawyers hired private investigators to dig up any "dirt" on IRS agents which was then used to blackmail or publicly smear all "vulnerable" agents. It was an all-out WAR that Scientology had waged against the IRS, and was even described as such by Scientology's "CEO", David Miscavige, in his 1993 speech to the International Association of Scientologists.

[legalminds.lp.findlaw.com], [www.lermanet.com], [www.factnet.org], [www.cs.cmu.edu]

The official Scientology organization is composed of a number of "levels". One begins as a "preclear" and works their way up. One must purchase virtually every service crucial to advancement directly from the "church" and at staggering prices. "Auditing", for example, is purchased in 12½ hour blocks, costing anywhere from $200-$750 for introductory sessions to between $8,000 and $9,000 for advanced sessions. Basically, Scientology claims to possess exclusive knowledge of the path to religious redemption and then charges obscene amounts of money for every tiny incremental step towards this end. Visit this link to see how $380,000 is a conservative estimate for the total cost of moving all the way up the Scientology hierarchal ladder:

[www.xenu.net]

These are the total costs for auditing alone:

[en.wikipedia.org]

Here's an explanation of what "auditing" is:

[answers.yahoo.com]

At level OT III (Operating Thetan Level 3), some very strange and fiercely guarded secrets are imparted upon worthy members who have paid enough money to advance to such a level (and no, this isn't a joke): The evil alien ruler Xenu killed millions of aliens (Thetans) from around the universe by kidnapping them, bringing them to earth in golden DC-8 "space-planes", stacking them around volcanoes and blowing them up by dropping "h-bombs" into the volcanoes. Scientologists believe the souls of these aliens (these souls are "Body Thetans") were captured, brainwashed and released; they then attached themselves to our ancestors (and according to Scientology's belief in Thetan immortality, they also attached to us during "past lives") and cause many of our mental and physical ills to this day. Auditing is said to "clear" us of these Body Thetans as well as the "mental implants" they supposedly impose on our minds.

[www.spaink.net], [sf.irk.ru], [xenu.net], [www.cs.cmu.edu]

Scientology has taken a very hostile stance towards psychiatry and psychiatric drugs irrespective of the fact that some people require medication to remain adequately functional during everyday life. It doesn't recognize legitimate conditions like autism, epilepsy, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, or ANY neurological disorder / chemical imbalance at all, and the "church" has been known to withhold prescription pharmaceuticals from members (often with harmful and deadly results). The "Church" blames psychiatry for the Holocaust, as well as school shootings and even September 11th. It's been suggested that Hubbard's vehement opposition was born of the psychiatric community's rejection of his "tech" as a valid treatment method, but it's also possible that Hubbard chose psychiatry as a scapegoat. Organizations like Scientology are notorious for villainizing a specific out-group because their "stand against the enemy" fosters cohesion within said organization, and psychiatry was an effective rallying point considering many people already distrust and oppose the mental health profession.

[www.anti-scientologie.ch], [www.lacitybeat.com], [dir.salon.com], [perkinstragedy.org]

L. Ron Hubbard, the man behind the creation of Scientology, was and still is a controversial figure. Biographies and lists of personal accomplishments differ greatly between Scientology and non-Scientology publications as the "church" tends to exaggerate and outright lie about his early life, his education, his travels, his achievements etc, preferring to paint a distorted, flattering picture. Several books and articles present facts which flatly contradict these church-published accounts (links to free online copies of these books and articles are provided below), showing conclusively that he was NOT the brilliant, accomplished figure revered by Scientologists. During his autopsy, the sedative Vistaril™ was present in his body, which several of his assistants would later attest was only one of many psychiatric and pain medications Hubbard ingested over the years. It had also been said by many who knew Hubbard personally that at the end of his life he was "a psychopathic insane person screaming about BT's [Body Thetans]…"

[www.apologeticsindex.org], [www.cs.cmu.edu], [www.clambake.org], [lisatrust.bogie.nl]

To be blunt, Scientology is a cult. It employs semi-legitimate psychotherapy and self-help methods to keep people loyal and convinced of its merit while it simultaneously sucks them dry financially and attempts to keep them far away from ANYONE, even friends and family, who would dissuade them from remaining in such a harmful situation. It bullies all known critics, opponents, "enemies", etc, often through malicious litigation and character assassination. It's a particularly greedy as well as manipulative and dangerous cult that takes its anti-psychiatry fanaticism to deadly limits.

[www.solitarytrees.net], [www.factnet.org], [www.garloff.de], [www.sptimes.com], [www.xenu.net]

* 1 month ago

Source(s):

Watch this very revealing video that will, in about 5 minutes, show you EXACTLY what Scientology is all about: [theunfunnytruth.ytmnd.com]

This is an hour long special report on Jeremy Perkins, the mentally disturbed son of Scientologist parents who refused to put him on the anti-psychotic drugs that would have stabilized him and prevented him from killing his own mother: [www.scientomogy.com]

Is Scientology a cult? Yes, and this is why:[answers.yahoo.com]
Scientology in relation to God, Jesus and Christianity:[answers.yahoo.com]
This is how they sell their cult to others:[answers.yahoo.com]

*** This shows how dangerous the cult really is: *** (important!)

[answers.yahoo.com], [xenu.net] aka Operation Clambake [clambake.org], [www.philosoraptor.com], [en.wikipedia.org], [www.modemac.com], [www.scientology-kills.org]
[www.scientology-lies.com], [www.cs.cmu.edu], [www.holysmoke.org], [www.watchman.org]
[www.whyaretheydead.net], [holysmoke.org], [www.rollingstone.com], [www.time.com]

Cult information - [www.cultinformation.org.uk]
Official site - [www.scientology.org]

Here ends the lesson.

Sleep tight !

The Great Supplement Swindle...

I work on a regulated industry.  My civilian career is governed by organizations like the FDA, EPA, OSHA and others too numerous to mention.  Routinely my facility is inspected, scrutinized and I have even had to submit information to congressional committees.  This, I believe, is a good thing.  Someone needs to watch over the firms providing public services.  It is reasonable to check on airlines, food producers and others who possibly could affect the health and welfare of the public at large.  There is a lot of pressure to take short cuts to preserve profits, maintain competitiveness and sustain one's business.  VLC's (Very Large Corporations) are under intense scrutiny to comply.  They represent deep pockets and consumers routinely target them with litigation, complaints and queries. 

 

The sheer size and scale of the modern corporation is such that it presents a monolithic appearance to the outside world.  It can appear impersonal and intimidating.  Past performance of some firms in the 1970s and earlier has been less than perfect in the stewardship of their constituency.  Even today, scandals rocking the financial world engender a deep distrust of corporate entities.  Without sounding too much like a spokesperson for the entire corporate culture, let me offer some observations from inside.

 

Earlier in my career I worked for a multi-national which got involved in a consumer safety issue.  Unlike Johnson and Johnson's handling of the Tylenol crisis, this firm took a far more hands off approach to a real threat to its integrity.  As such, the market punished this firm ruthlessly (more than half its market share evaporated overnight) and it was acquired by another firm which collected the remains of a once dominant company.  This occurred almost two decades ago, long before the instantaneous transmission of information via the internet and the twenty-four hour news cycle. 

 

In the 21st century, corporations are being held to increasingly strict standards of behavior.  Consumers are better equipped than ever and information is only a keystroke away.  And yet there exists a remaining realm of shadowy uncertainty.  Within the United States, nutritional supplements are a realm of para-regulated products which may (or may not) be helpful to the public.  Websites promising fantastic results tread the line between deception and marketing.  Each of these products is marketed with the standard disclaimer that the products' claims have not been evaluated by the FDA nor is their product designed to treat, cure or diagnose any disease.  As a consumer, I would stop and rethink my purchase based upon such a caveat.  And yet the supplement industry is a multi-billion dollar enterprise. 

 

Many supplements are manufactured by major pharmaceutical firms (Bayer, etc.).  Some are produced by large, standalone supplement companies such as Boiron.  These companies report expenditures to the financial markets in similar formats.  What is noted is the gap between R&D spending for the traditional pharmaceutical (also known as Big Pharma - oooh, can't you feel the evil!!) and supplement only companies.  In most cases, the sales and advertising dollars are disproportionately high among the supplement only companies.  Why is this?  Wouldn't you expect that these firms would be researching new products, providing benefits to their customers, on a regular basis?

 

The simple fact is often that there is no research because their is no good effect (typically there is no negative effect either).  The supplement only companies sell hope in a pill, elixir, tincture or powder.  Sometimes there is some basic research to support claims - the body needs vitamins, for example - but most often the claims are vague or even misstated.  These firms count on the public's ignorance of science and desire for self-improvement not involving traditional hard work (diet and exercise) or acknowledgement of a real medical issue (depression, etc.).  Whole industries have sprung up preying upon the public suspicions of traditional institutions.  In most cases these industries are loosely or un-regulated.  They are quick to fan the flames of doubt and dissatisfaction but even quicker to divert objective analysis of their own offerings.

 

Next time you go grocery shopping, walk down the supplement aisle.  Take some time and really peruse the labels of what is offered for sale.  Look at the manufacturer's claims and then apply a little of Occam's Razor to them. 

 

Remember, if it sounds too good to be true - it probably is.

Put your money where your mouth is...

the quackometer: 10,000 GBP if you can show homeopathy works



As we have just been debating in a prior post, not the lack of clothing on one Birtney Spears, but the general lack of clothing covering much of modern media.

The publishing of a challenge by Ernst and Singh in the United Kingdom seeks to draw out definitive proof of the efficacy of homeopathy. As detailed in this post - it is a challenge made by James Randi (albeit in a higher quantity). What is most interesting is the description of a major homeopathic manufacturer's allocation of funds. As a billion dollar company, Boiron has no appeciable R&D funding and yet spends more than 9 times the ratio in advertising and marketing than "traditional" pharmacological firms.

What is equally interesting is that with a little historical research, one will find many of the top pharmaceutical firms had (at one time) produced homeopathic remedies - until, one may infer - they realized that they didn't work.

The wane of reason...

It started innocently enough. The enlightenment began when humanity began to question the accepted doctrines and dogma of faith. A few learned people started to realize that without facts or evidence, a belief was simply an opinion. And thus that belief was subject to dispute and discussion. In the latter days of World War II, the age of science entered its golden period. Atomic energy was harnessed (for good and ill), air travel became the joining connection for the shrinking globe and science was rigorously applied to the combat of disease and medical maladies.

That wonderful period continued until the turbulent era of the 1960s. Prior to that, every movie had a hero scientist. The scientist was someone to whom everyone looked to for the answers to the challenges of their predicament. But that changed in the 1960s. The tremendous cultural changes which swept the United States also carried over to the rest of the world. Science became suspect. It’s reckless application as the solution to all problems (it was once suggested that atomic weapons be used to stop hurricanes) tarnished it when it failed to live up to the promise. Rachel Carson’s work Silent Spring brought attention to the risks of science applied without adequate safeguards.

Regrettably, rather than reinvigorate debate over process and validation, a wholesale rejection of science began to form. Our space program, once the object of rapt admiration of a hopeful world, withered and faded into salacious stories of astronauts in diapers and metric to English conversion catastrophes. Individuals appropriated science for their own agendas. Greenpeace, beginning with some grounding in ecology has wandered far afield into the realm of pure politics and the philosophy of luddites (Why I left Greenpeace). Al Gore, once a simple politician from Tennessee has emerged as the high priest of climate paranoia. Various new age (or New Wage – courtesy of Cosmic Connie) folks have assigned all manner or scientific attributes to their pet theories, cure alls or philosophies. Oprah Winfrey, purveyor of pop psychology, has embraced the beliefs of Eckhart Tolle, a post-modern nihilist and expounded them through a brilliant webcast program – complete with globally connected callers (all sponsored by Skype, Chevy, Post-it, and others).

Science remains at the core of our modern lives. And yet few people understand the scientific method, the development of scientific principles or the basis for our technological world. Thus, lacking any firsthand knowledge or critical thinking skills, often science is glorified or demonized by the very beneficiaries of its application. In the case of desperate parents of autistic children, they are conned into believing that somehow mercury, heavy metals or other “unnamed toxins” are at the heart of their children’s condition. It is, to some degree, understandable. There is a powerful desire in the heart of parents to cling to hope for their children, no matter how irrational. It underpins the behavior of the parent who speaks to the media, after their own son or daughter commits an unspeakable criminal act, describing them as “the nicest child you would ever meet”. This said in the face of the fact that their child is 27 and has just stabbed fifteen people to death with a spork.

Setting deep emotion aside, it is the lack of understanding of scientific principles that permits the abuse, misuse and ignorance of science in all parts of our lives. Most damaging is when this occurs in the development of policy. We see the detrimental effects in the rush to manage climate change – based partly on incomplete science which has yet to prove causality between. This is not to say that reducing the amount of emissions into the environment should not be a goal – but the CBA (cost benefit analysis) must be weighed with real facts, not rhetoric and half truths.

Some years ago beta carotene was touted as the next cure all for cancer and a host of other maladies. With little supporting data, our irresponsible media trumpeted it as the next great thing. People began consuming this in supplement form across the United States. A little while later, several significant studies revealed that high doses of beta carotene may actually increase cancer risk in certain populations!

We see this ignorance of reasoned debate play out in the present political campaigns. Individuals simply make up their own facts, deride and abuse those who challenge their preconceived notions and make no effort to become educated on the issues at hand.

There is no arbiter of truth.

The best we can hope for is the continued use and growth of the internet as a source for verification and validation. There are ways to determine if the individual you are debating is playing from a position of integrity or emotion. I hope that we will continue to support reasoned discussion and action.

I am concerned that those people who are the true subject matter experts will shrink back from such discussions, leaving a vacuum to be filled with empty air.

The new war, continued...

It seems that the assault on Scientology has gained the attention of one of my favorite news publications. The Economist reports the issue in typical matter of fact style with just the soupcon of humor that is the style of the magazine. I am also aware of several mysterious mail items showing up at Scientology sites. This is disturbing. It risks shifting the reasonable protest against a dangerous cult to a criminal attack on human beings. I certainly hope the group Anonymous has the good sense to disavow any association with such activities!

read more digg story

Science is losing the media war...

In the conflict over extremist ideology, the United States is still behind the power curve when it comes to matching information and propaganda. This is not a good thing as any struggle is almost always won or lost first in the minds of the contenders. The same battle is being fought in the political arena, with claim and counter-claim being launched in all avenues of the media world. Regrettably, the greatest battle is being fought in the realm of scientific education and information.

A recent survey, for example, conducted by the University of Toronto identified the number of YouTube videos on vaccination and immunization and categorized them as to their perceived slant. Disappointingly, the overwhelming view was negative. This on a topic of science which has proven its efficacy and safety to the human species for nearly a century.

Like the perpetual pleas for money from Nigeria and bogus internet virus alerts, anti-science luddites continue to dominate the media war with half-truths, cherry picked data and emotionally charged claims. Science, a methodical process can not keep up. And so the slight defense of "full disclosure" falls to a handful of dedicated scientists, journalists and skeptics who doggedly point out logical flaws, falsehoods and other inconsistencies in the scaremongers tactics. And for their efforts, they are labeled "obstructionists" and worse.

The problem is compounded by a public mistrust of authority - blossoming in the 1960s. And a desire for solutions to really challenging problems. We are a hopeful animal and will stake our tents in any camp which promises answers to questions which keep us up at night, even if those answers are wrong.

NOTE - The short article is here

UPDATE - Why is this important you ask? In our post-modern anything goes, relatavist world shouldn't alternate (even minority) views be considered? The answer simply is no. It is all well and good to consider and debate fringe ideas, but to act on them is foolhardy in the extreme. Sen. Diane Feinstein, from the uber-nanny state of California, proposes to ban a set of key chemicals essential to the manufacture of plastics. Why, you may ask? Because of a misplaced fear of possible harm which is unsupported by science! This possible national legislation will have far reaching and unintended consequences from toy makers to dialysis patients.

Holy crap - do some research!

Sic semper ignorance...

Skeptic magazine is running a tribute to one of the greatest popularizers of science and wonder of the 20th century. He is, of course, Carl Sagan. I became a Saganite in high school. When the first airing of his COSMOS series appeared on PBS, I forced the school play rehearsals for Sweeney Todd to be adjusted in order that I could see the series.

Sagan provided the necessary wonder and layman's language for the immense possibilities, discoveries and limitations of science. He gently addressed myth and its place in the human psyche and fought against "pseudoscience" and promoted a political viewpoint of humanity as a custodian of the planet (very anti-war / disarmament / etc.).

Cosmic Connie, one of my favorite writers, posted a great essay on the continual struggle between skepticism and the "unknown". I must confess to being in a similar quandry.

I want to believe in aliens, ghosts, magnetic fields, the Bermuda triangle and other amazing possibilities. I have had some strange personal experiences (seeing a "ghostly figure" on the USS LEXINGTON, recording some EVP in Charleston, etc.). However, until we can measure these things in a meaningful way, they are simply that, possibilities. What is disheartening is that there are a LOT of people who profess to "know" the answers and a lot of folks who simply believe them

I think this is an age old struggle and is unlikely to end anytime soon. For each time we unveil a new level of knowledge, there is still the next horizon to be imagined and unlocked. This is, actually, a good thing. It forces us to think of the possible while proving the probable.