Quackery
Book review–Don't Swallow Your Gum!: Myths, Half-Truths, and Outright Lies About Your Body and Health
Dec/04/09 10:16
I just finished reading Don't Swallow Your Gum!: Myths, Half-Truths, and Outright Lies About Your Body and Health (ISBN:031253387X, 2009) written by Aaron Carroll MD and Rachel Vreeman MD, both pediatricians and researchers at the University of Indiana School of Medicine.
First of all, the book is an amusing, easy read, using terms like “snot” and “poo” to describe bodily secretions. At some 200 pages, it was a quick read, not requiring a lot of time. Obviously, the book was written for a wide audience, debunking many pseudoscientific myths about health. For those of us who demand supporting research, it has a vast list of primary and secondary research citations for further reading. In fact, for me, those citations are going to be invaluable in future articles.
The book goes about debunking silly myths such as “don’t swallow your gum because it will get stuck in your intestine for 5 (10, 20, whatever) years” or the old “five second rule” which we all suspected wasn’t wise. There was one chapter on “double dipping”, which was popularized on a Seinfeld episode many years ago, in which the authors discussed research that showed that double dipping does in fact transfer a lot of germs from the chip to the dip. Not that I would confess to being a double dipper, but I may not be a single-dipper at a party after reading this book! Read More...
First of all, the book is an amusing, easy read, using terms like “snot” and “poo” to describe bodily secretions. At some 200 pages, it was a quick read, not requiring a lot of time. Obviously, the book was written for a wide audience, debunking many pseudoscientific myths about health. For those of us who demand supporting research, it has a vast list of primary and secondary research citations for further reading. In fact, for me, those citations are going to be invaluable in future articles.
The book goes about debunking silly myths such as “don’t swallow your gum because it will get stuck in your intestine for 5 (10, 20, whatever) years” or the old “five second rule” which we all suspected wasn’t wise. There was one chapter on “double dipping”, which was popularized on a Seinfeld episode many years ago, in which the authors discussed research that showed that double dipping does in fact transfer a lot of germs from the chip to the dip. Not that I would confess to being a double dipper, but I may not be a single-dipper at a party after reading this book! Read More...
The 124th Meeting Of The Skeptics’ Circle
Nov/21/09 08:19
One of my favorite bloggers on debunking medical quackery and pseudoscience is hosting a little party. Visit, and read some of the best articles on debunking myths, pseudoscience, quacks and anti-science. Read More...
Debunking H1N1 Vaccine Myths
Nov/05/09 10:06
The internet is a wonderful place for getting information. But it's also a disaster in finding good information. The problem is that if you read medical facts on the internet, you tend to give equal value to both scientifically supported and outright pseudoscientific statements. I read a few posts on Facebook, which seems to be the modern world's gossip center, that spouted all sorts of conspiracy theories and ridiculous myths about the H1N1 Vaccine. Read More...
Swine flu remedies
Sep/20/09 23:47
Sometimes, I just read the most awful pseudoscience with respect to swine flu, or the H1N1 flu variant. I had to read this woo over at Daily Kos, a liberal blog site. Let's review the authors "claims":
- Get sleep. OK, this is probably a good piece of advice for anyone. But there is no evidence whatsoever that sleep has any influence on subsceptiblity to infections. However, I won't be too critical of this advice, because sufficient sleep is important.
- Eat right. Once again, good advice. The author mentions shiitake mushrooms, but the evidence is only in animal models, and even there, the in vivo results required an unorthodox method to detect a change. The author mentions zinc, the effect of which has already been discredited. The rest of the claims are similar. No real research supporting it, or actually showing it doesn't work.
- Stay hydrated. Once again, good advice. But it's not going to do anything to prevent you from getting the flu.
- Exercise. The author makes two specious and unsupported claims. First, a little exercise strengthens your immunity, but, second, too much exercise makes you more subsceptible. Well, there's some evidence that aerobic exercise does improve immunity to certain infections. But it doesn't say anything about "too much." Of course, I would contend a healthy cardiovascular system through vigorous aerobic exercise would be worth the risk of a flu.
- Some woo about foods to eat if you do get the flu. None of it works. The flu will take its course, so it's important not to infect others, and if there are serious secondary infections, the patient should seek treatment.
The cost of medical woo
Apr/15/09 22:45
My blog entries wander between three broad topics: medical woo (pseudoscience, science denialism, vaccine denialism, and alternative medicine), market opportunities for medical products and healthcare policy. And one discussion about my beloved Syracuse Orange. My three broad interests in the medical arena are interrelated in such a fashion that medical companies (both pharmaceutical and medical devices) need to prepare strategic plans that maximize their success despite some difficult market forces.
First, let’s talk about the whole area of medical woo. The anti-vaccine movement (which I will continue to label as vaccine denialism), if it continues to gain traction in social consciousness, will require more investment in studies that continue to confirm that there is no link between vaccines and autism (OK, yes the proper scientific method would force me to say that there is a possibility that a link could be found, but after 100’s of clinical papers, I’m firmly on the side that this issue has been decided). If this movement becomes problematic, we might be dealing with infectious disease epidemics unseen in a generation. Can hospitals and clinics deal with these diseases? How large are the infectious disease wards in hospitals? How many infectious disease specialists are there? And what kinds of medical products will need to be available to treat these diseases? Read More...
First, let’s talk about the whole area of medical woo. The anti-vaccine movement (which I will continue to label as vaccine denialism), if it continues to gain traction in social consciousness, will require more investment in studies that continue to confirm that there is no link between vaccines and autism (OK, yes the proper scientific method would force me to say that there is a possibility that a link could be found, but after 100’s of clinical papers, I’m firmly on the side that this issue has been decided). If this movement becomes problematic, we might be dealing with infectious disease epidemics unseen in a generation. Can hospitals and clinics deal with these diseases? How large are the infectious disease wards in hospitals? How many infectious disease specialists are there? And what kinds of medical products will need to be available to treat these diseases? Read More...
Jenny says....
Apr/07/09 08:22
If you read my blog, you know I don’t have much respect for the anti-vaccination movement, and I have contempt for Jenny McCarthy, JB Handley, Andrew Wakefield, Generation Rescue and others for the damage they have done to health care. One of my favorite blogs to read is Science Based Medicine, which has several physicians editors (and guest editors) who discuss medicine from a scientific perspective. I share their point-of-view on medicine, and since my background is from the industry perspective, I cannot obviate the need for good scientific reasoning for product development. In Welcome back, my friends, to the show that never ends: The Jenny and Jim antivaccine propaganda tour has begun, David Gorski, MD, tears apart, in about as civil a manner as he can, Jenny’s recent interview. Read More...
If it looks like a duck...then it must be Quack medicine
Mar/03/09 22:29
One of the largest wastelands of medical science is something that has evolved into being called Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM). What is CAM? There’s no clear definition, but the epicenter for this pseudo-medicine is the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) which was funded by the US Congress to be a part of the National Institutes of Health. They define CAM as CAM is a group of diverse medical and health care systems, practices, and products that are not presently considered to be part of conventional medicine. The most common CAM therapies are homeopathy, chiropractic, acupuncture, naturopathy and herbalism. Typical of most pseudosciences, it does not rely upon the scientific method to generate results, it usually appeals to emotion, such as the great Big Pharma conspiracy against these potentially life-saving therapies.
I think that individuals should choose the therapy that they want, especially if it does no harm. If I had a chronic and terminal disease, I might choose an alternative therapy. If someone chooses to consume vast amounts of vitamin C to prevent cancer, despite little or no evidence that it works, that is their choice. What is troubling is when CAM is offered as an appropriate replacement to evidence based medicine, that is, “the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients.” Best evidence relies upon scientific and clinical research, publication in peer-reviewed (and respected) journals, and sometimes, the opinions of respected authorities in the field.
The National Institutes of Health is a US government agency responsible for biomedical and health related research. One of the “centers” of NIH is NCCAM, which was established in 1991 by order of Congress. In fact, Senator Tom Harkin (D, Iowa) pushed for the formation of the center because he had been cured of allergies by taking bee pollen supplements, despite the fact that there is no scientific evidence that bee pollen would do so. In fact, there’s more evidence that bee pollen will cause an adverse allergic reaction. Read More...
I think that individuals should choose the therapy that they want, especially if it does no harm. If I had a chronic and terminal disease, I might choose an alternative therapy. If someone chooses to consume vast amounts of vitamin C to prevent cancer, despite little or no evidence that it works, that is their choice. What is troubling is when CAM is offered as an appropriate replacement to evidence based medicine, that is, “the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients.” Best evidence relies upon scientific and clinical research, publication in peer-reviewed (and respected) journals, and sometimes, the opinions of respected authorities in the field.
The National Institutes of Health is a US government agency responsible for biomedical and health related research. One of the “centers” of NIH is NCCAM, which was established in 1991 by order of Congress. In fact, Senator Tom Harkin (D, Iowa) pushed for the formation of the center because he had been cured of allergies by taking bee pollen supplements, despite the fact that there is no scientific evidence that bee pollen would do so. In fact, there’s more evidence that bee pollen will cause an adverse allergic reaction. Read More...