New Info About Dr. Burzynski's Therapy?

As I follow the news about Dr. Burzynski's Antineoplastons' therapy rather closely lately, I stumbled upon this article from the Polish Daily News in New York:

Lek doktora Burzyńskiego wkrótce w aptekach (in Polish)

It states rather clearly that Dr. Burzynski's anti-cancer drugs will soon be available in US pharmacies:

"W końcu możemy odetchnąć z ulgą. Wielu pacjentów będzie miało szanse na skuteczne leczenie nowotworów, uważanych do tej pory za wyrok śmierci" – tak najnowszą decyzję Amerykańskiej Agencji Żywności i Leków (FDA) komentuje, w rozmowie z "Nowym Dziennikiem, dr Stanisław Burzyński, autor nowatorskiej metody leczenia raka.

Translation:

"We can finally breathe the sigh of relief. Many patients with cancers seen as the death sentence until recently, now will have a chance of successful treatment" - said Dr. Burzynski after the recent decision of the FDA.

The article also states that a new drug has been approved by the FDA, and it will treat some ailments of the liver, certain kinds of brain tumors and leukemia.

I was not able to find anything on the FDA site, nor on the Burzynski Clinic web site. Both of them have numerous mentions of the current clinical trials, but no mention of the upcoming drug release. Also, the NIH's Cancer site does not have any mention of a new drug from Burzynski's clinic.

As I said before, I hope this pans out, but I don't hold my breath for some breakthrough, and I certainly hope this is not yet another publicity stunt to get more desperate patients onto the clinical trials that never end.

EDIT: 07/12/2014

A new article in the Polish Daily News:

Tylko u nas rozmowa z dr Stanisławem Burzyńskim. Dokonamy rewolucji w medycynie - mówi dr Burzyński

This time it's an invitation to a conversation with Dr. Burzynski, published in the weekend print edition of the newspaper.

"Mam nadzieję, że dokonamy rewolucji w medycynie, przede wszystkim ze względu na nasze leki, jeden z nich już wkrótce trafi do aptek. Oprócz tego, w czwartek (10 lipca) przekazaliśmy cztery artykuły do specjalnego wydawnictwa, a dwa następne trafią tam za tydzień (17 lipca). Chcemy, by zostały one w najbliższym czasie opublikowane w specjalnych pismach medycznych. Jeśli to się uda, to – po pierwsze – już na zawsze skończą się ataki na nas i naszą klinikę, bo każdy lekarz będzie mógł stosować tę metodę i coś, co jest teraz absolutnym wyrokiem śmierci, już nim nie będzie. Pytanie tylko, kiedy lekarze wprowadzą nasze sposoby leczenia do swoich praktyk. Mam nadzieję, że się odważą, a to z kolei spowoduje przewrót w medycynie" – mówi doktor Burzyński. 

 Translation:

"I hope the we can revolutionize medicine, first of all, because of our new drugs, with the first one to be available in pharmacies very soon. In addition, on Thursday, July 10th, we submitted four research papers to a special publisher, with the next two articles to be submitted on July 17th. We would like them to be published in the near future in special medical publications. If we succeed, the attacks on our clinic will stop, because every physician will be able to use our methods, and what is a death sentence for some now, will cease to be. The question is: when will the doctors incorporate our methods in their practices? I hope, they will be brave enough, and that will cause the real breakthrough in medicine."  - says Dr. Burzynski.

The article on line, and probably the one in print seem the be just "infomercials" for Dr. Burzynski. The above quote is full of "if's" and "but's" and conditional statements, that do not mean much in the greater scheme of things. I remain skeptical, hopeful to be proven wrong (but I don't hold my breath).

Is Polish Community Blindly Patronizing a Crank?

Living around the Polish community in New York City for many years, I have been exposed to a fair share of cranks and weirdos. I have been to the Silva Method seminars, Reiki sittings and other New Age meetings and conventions that defied reason and common sense.

As I mentioned on this blog in the past, I had first heard about Dr. Burzynski from Texas in the early 1990s. All the local Polish newspapers and magazines were publishing rave reviews of his revolutionary cancer treatment method, and it seemed like the final victory in the war on cancer is about to happen and the future is brighter than ever.

I'd lost track of the brave and maverick doctor for a few years, until, in the mid-2000s, I started seeing reports of his deeds on the blogosphere. It seems that Dr. Burzynski was busy running a whole bunch of clinical studies on the effectiveness of his cancer treatment throughout the 1990s and early 2000s. He also had some run-ins with the FDA over those studies and how he used his yet unproven research to treat patients. This typically would not be a problem, however in this case, the results of those studies were either slim, or they were not reporting any results at all, continuing forever.

At the beginning of this year an article in USA Today caught my interest: Doctor accused of selling false hope to families.

The author, Liz Szabo, presents the history of Dr. Burzynski's research, his never-ending clinical studies, their costs to patients, and finally potential and very real side effects that could sometimes lead to death. The controversy did not stop there, as the topic has been picked up by a number of skeptics in the US, including Orac, Bob Blaskiewicz, and one the best medical information resources on the Net, the Science-Based Medicine Blog. There is also a site that presents stories of patients that were not as successful, as the Burzynski Institute would like us believe.

It is a real eye-opener to follow the history of Dr. Burzynski's research, his influence on politicians and his duels with the federal regulators. For most of the lay public, the understanding of the topic usually ends at the conclusion that it is the "all-powerful" medical establishment and the big pharma that want to destroy someone who has some miracle cure for the rest of us. The truth is probably on the other end of the spectrum, as it is with most of the "independent" medial research, usually funded by the desperate people, or some powerful interests (like the supplement industry).

In this particular case, the lack of skepticism and critical thinking is particularly strong in the Polish community, which has been propagating myths and half-truths about Dr. Burzynski for decades. He is usually portrayed as a hero of the medical field, which might have been the case many decades ago, but can be questionable after years of failed medical research. As Burzynski goes back to his research, after FDA lifts a hold on it, one of the most influential Polish newspapers in the US, "Nowy Dziennik", produces a semi-advertisement for him and his Institute (in Polish). As always, there is not a single ounce of skepticism in the article, and the author just swallows Burzynski's arguments hook, line and sinker.

At the same time, Center for Inquiry, a skeptical, education and advocacy organization, releases a very strong letter to the FDA, demanding better explanation of their decision.

Let's hope this time around Dr. Burzynski can actually deliver some results of his numerous studies, and that they are positive, showing that his miraculous methods actually work. Otherwise, FDA should just circle back and take a hard look at his operation again and again, to ensure that people are not led to believe in therapies that have no result.

If he does, I'll be the first to cheer him up and wave the Polish flag in pride.

Dr. Oz Gets What He Deserves

This news is almost too easy to comment on:

Dr. Mehmet Oz, host of "The Dr. Oz Show," was grilled Tuesday by senators on Capitol Hill about the promotion of weight loss products on his show.

Senators grill Dr. Oz about 'miracle' weight loss claims

Yes... he is a peddler of nonsense and just pure crap. Whether he is just a "cheerleader" for his crowd (see above), or he really believes in what he preaches, is irrelevant. As a doctor, he should know better how to tell real science from woo-woo.

Do I think he really believes in all he "sells"? I dare to say, probably not, as evidenced in this short bit from his interview a while ago:

Oz sighed. “Medicine is a very religious experience,” he said. “I have my religion and you have yours. It becomes difficult for us to agree on what we think works, since so much of it is in the eye of the beholder. Data is rarely clean.” All facts come with a point of view. But his spin on it—that one can simply choose those which make sense, rather than data that happen to be true—was chilling. “You find the arguments that support your data,” he said, “and it’s my fact versus your fact.”

I wrote about it here...

Oh, That Dr Oz - The King of Nonsense

What's not to like about Dr Oz? He's engaging, uses his audience to make his points, gives people information and good advice... NOT!

Yes, he's a great TV personality and he does know hoe to sell himself to the masses, not because he has anything good to say, but simply because he delivers what the masses want to hear and see: "feel good" advice. His ideas don't help you much (maybe except the general: "live a healthy life"), they are usually pretty generic and not tested out, but they make you feel like you are in charge, doing something (anything) to get yourself in a better shape.

His problem is not only the fact that he peddles unproven therapies and medicine, which can be harmful in itself; his greatest sin is that he promotes other people who are filled with nonsense to the brim and who'll sell you their dangerous medical advises at all cost, even if it really means harm to you.

I'd say, skip Dr Oz's programs as they are not reliable source of real  information.

As always, Orac has the best take on Dr Oz on his blog: America’s quack: Dr. Mehmet Oz

Here is the best description of who Dr Oz really is (in his own words):

King finishes by asking Oz to respond to the idea that doctors should be optimists and that no doctor should tell a patient that he is terminal, because “no one knows.” To this, Oz responds that we “actually have to be more than just optimists, but irrational optimists.” Well, Dr. Oz has the irrational part down cold, at least when he’s on his television show. Sadly, my original quip about him becoming more like Mike Adams turned out to be more true than I could ever have imagined.

What's the Harm? - Part 2

So, after a brief hiatus on my part, with too many projects to complete to count, I have time to brows the news from time to time again.

And, after my last post, I have another depressing news item to share from the "what's the harm?" department.

There are news links in Polish here and here (sorry, I could not find an English version).

To summarize:

A six moth old girl was found dead a few weeks ago in the town of Brzezna in the south of Poland, while in care of her parents. It was determined that she had died as a result of malnutrition. After some initial investigation, it was also determined that the parents started using a "natural" approach for the baby's care, including refusal of any vaccines, lack of medical care and a whole bunch of holistic feeding techniques. They attempted to follow advice from a faith healer, who allegedly told the parents to use skim milk and herbs as the baby's diet staple. The healer, called "God's Man" in the area, is well known for advocating abandoning regular medical care and using herbs, fasting and prayer as remedies for any ailments (including cancer!!!).

This case is not the first one for the supposedly "godly" man. A few years ago it was alleged that he had caused a death of a five year old boy, who had kidney problems. After initial, positive reactions to the standard, hospital medical care, the mother took the boy to the healer and believed in his "miraculous" approach, which ultimately resulted in boy's death.

Those two cases are clear answers to the argument for the alternative medicine that I hear very often: "what's the harm?". The answer is very simple, the harm is in believing that unproven, often completely nonsensical treatments can and do work. When someone abandons reason and critical thinking in small cases, it is easy to do the same in cases that can cause harm, death and destruction. Belief in miracles, prayer, alternative medicine (like homeopathy, chiropractic, acupuncture, etc) when your life, or life of your loved ones, is at stake, can really be deadly.

Burzynski Clinic: Collapsing Under the Lack of Evidence?

I have written about Dr Stanislaw Burzynski before. He was somewhat of a hero / celebrity in a Polish community in the U.S., especially in the early 1990s, when his therapies had looked promising and there was little evidence of wrongdoing.
Since then, he seems to be on a sliding path to obscurity, and, by the news reports, it looks like he's getting there fast. We can only hope he does nor drive too many people to poverty, and he does not break too many hearts with false hope in the process.

Here is a great article from USA Today, by Liz Szabo Doctor accused of selling false hope to families, and  a very descriptive commentary by Orac: Stanislaw Burzynski in USA Today: Abuse of clinical trials and patients versus the ineffectiveness of the FDA and Texas Medical Board

Herbal Supplements - Not What You Think!

An interesting paper has been published recently in the BMC Medicine journal:

"DNA barcoding detects contamination and substitution in North American herbal products"

The idea sounds complex, and it is, but the general results of this study are pretty scary, especially if you, like many Americans, use a number of very popular herbal remedies for all kinds of ailments.
The idea that herbal remedies are not as harmless as they are advertised to be, has been known in a skeptical community for a long time, but it is something that filters to a general public very slowly. That's because the supplement industry has been selling herbs as miracle cures that can treat anything and are harmless and side-effect-free, which is not true, of course.

Ayurvedic Medicine - Same Crap, Different Name

If you are looking for an "ancient" wisdom (as in, from the times when people had no idea how the world worked, and made up thinks as they went along), an alternative way of thinking about health, and a new (old) way of treating your ills... look no further... try ayurvedic medicine!

Ayurvedic medicine, in my view, is just a step up from homeopathy, since it actually utilizes "active" ingredients (unlike most of the homeopathic drugs, which are either pure water or sugar), like herbs and various chemicals contained in them. It also focuses on proper diet, which, of course is probably a good idea in any healthy lifestyle.
The first problem with ayurverdic medicine is the fact that it uses magic made up body types for diagnostics, and those types are governed by three "doshas": air/space, fire/water and earth/water. Sounds like nonsense? It, probably is!

The second issue with ayurvedic treatments is that a lot of them contain dangerous substances, and sometimes, just plain poisons. Since, they are mostly classified as supplements in the U.S., they are not in any way controlled, nor regulated. So, buyer beware!

More on the topic can be found in the Skeptic Dictionary (Ayurvedic medicine) and on the Rational Wiki.

So, the next time, someone attempts to sell you this newest fad, just say no. It'll save you a lot of money, and maybe your health too.

Now... That's Funny!!!

Here, laugh away!!!

Is Science an Enemy of Humanity?

There is an interesting debate going on, on the virtual pages of the New York Times. It's a rather standard creationism vs. science/evolution exchange of ideas, started by an article "Why I'm a Creationist", written by Virginia Heffernan, that attracted some well-deserved criticism, and was answered by Steven Pinker in an article titled "Science Is Not Your Enemy". I have to confess that I find myself much more attached the Pinker's side (obviously):

In other words, the worldview that guides the moral and spiritual values of an educated person today is the worldview given to us by science. Though the scientific facts do not by themselves dictate values, they certainly hem in the possibilities. By stripping ecclesiastical authority of its credibility on factual matters, they cast doubt on its claims to certitude in matters of morality. The scientific refutation of the theory of vengeful gods and occult forces undermines practices such as human sacrifice, witch hunts, faith healing, trial by ordeal, and the persecution of heretics. The facts of science, by exposing the absence of purpose in the laws governing the universe, force us to take responsibility for the welfare of ourselves, our species, and our planet. For the same reason, they undercut any moral or political system based on mystical forces, quests, destinies, dialectics, struggles, or messianic ages. And in combination with a few unexceptionable convictions— that all of us value our own welfare and that we are social beings who impinge on each other and can negotiate codes of conduct—the scientific facts militate toward a defensible morality, namely adhering to principles that maximize the flourishing of humans and other sentient beings. This humanism, which is inextricable from a scientific understanding of the world, is becoming the de facto morality of modern democracies, international organizations, and liberalizing religions, and its unfulfilled promises define the moral imperatives we face today.

than to any of his opponents, especially, the religious and the politically motivated ones. Like the one from Ross Douthat:

Because we know the universe has no purpose, we must imbue it with the purposes of a (non-species-ist) liberal cosmopolitanism! Because of science, we know that modern civilization has no dialectic or destiny … so we must pursue its “unfulfilled promises” and accept its “moral imperatives” instead!

Ouch... do I smell "ad-hominem" attack? Call Pinker some names, and disregard his stance that only rational analysis and scientific thinking has been proven to better the human race for ages.

There is also a typical "science requires faith too" gibberish:

But this belief in science collapses on itself: there is no scientific evidence to prove that science is the only reliable way to discover truth. Once we take unproven hypotheses and dogmatize them, we have moved beyond scientific evidence into philosophical reflection on truth and the scientific method. Naturalist or not, when it comes to the world’s origins, we are all in the realm of faith.

Nope... there is no faith in science. Not in the way you would want to. It's just about simple rational thinking and understanding that, only via this avenue, we can learn anything useful about the world that surrounds us.

It's good to see that there are some, who understand it:

We need not, however, enter into simplistic debates that lead to endless conflict. Rather, we can bring science and the humanities together to explore a new synergy of scientific fact and human values. Recognizing that we are now understanding these evolutionary processes through science and appreciating them through art, poetry, literature, music and spirituality gives us an opportunity to discover our own role in this unfolding story.

Science does not invalidate humanism, poetry, art, and countless other "soul-based" activities. It enhances them and makes them work pursuing, especially when we realize we have very little time to do it.

Discovery Channel Lost Its Credibility

My son is a big shark fan, so it was no surprise that the beginning of the Discovery Channel's Shark Week, was a big hit in our house.
We tuned in to see the documentary on Megalodon last Sunday night, and what an epic FAIL it was. The crap they put up, with fake footage, crappy interviews and made up stories, all packaged in a pseudo-documentary format, was terrible!!! I would not mind seeing it, even on Discovery Channel, if it was made as a regular fiction, but when you try, as much as you can, to pass it as a documentary and real, it is just too much.
So, sorry, Discovery Channel, but I will have to start looking at your programs with a little more doubt from no on, and, as History Channel and Animal Planet in the past, you are moving to the "trash" category in my channel lineup. Can Morgan Freeman still rescue you? Doubtfully...

Here is a great summary: Shark Week Jumps The Shark: An Open Letter To Discovery Communications

Do You Believe In Magic?

You do, if you use homeopathy, acupuncture, chiropractic, Reiki, some kind of faith healing, and countless other alternative medicine modalities that have absolutely no roots in modern science, reality and critical thinking. Most of them are just ways of "wishing away" the problem, and while some might "work" as a placebo, the might have some dangers associated with their use, and, when used instead of real medical interventions, all of them can be deadly (see here, here, and here).

So, why do we do it? Because we want miracles? Because we don't know any better? Because science is complex and, sometimes, difficult to understand? Probably, all of the above.

It is good to know that we can count on a few brave authors, who do the research, dig out the details and present it in a nice fashion, digestible by the regular folks like us. Among them is Paul Offit, a medical doctor, a researcher, and a strong proponent of reality-based medicine, including vaccines. His previous books, "Autism False Prophets: Bad Science, Risky Medicine and the Search For a Cure", and "Deadly Choices" were both excellent descriptions of the vaccine "controversy", how it started, evolved from bad science to social movement, and how it threatens our health and the well-being (and lives) of our children. Knowing his great writing style and deep commitment to science and research, I was very excited to find out that his new book "Do You Believe in Magic?: The Sense and Nonsense of Alternative Medicine" is out. I should have more of my own thoughts about it in a few days (or weeks, it's summer after all), but in the meantime, here are two reviews available on line:

Book raises alarms about alternative medicine - from USA Today, by Liz Szabo
and
Vaccine advocate takes on the alternative medicine industry - NBC News

There is also more on the topic from Liz Szabo: Alternative therapies, supplements can cause side effects and How to guard against a quack

Go, read it all, and stop believing in magic. It's the 21st Century!

On Cognitive Dissonance, or How We Reinforce Our Beliefs

We all go through life with a set of solid, well established beliefs. We acquire some of them from our parents, other ones in a process of our education, and some we seek out on our own, settling into something comfortable and familiar that drives our everyday lives.

This process of establishing one's identity is interesting, but what is even more captivating, from my point of view, is how we hold on to those beliefs throughout our lives. After all, we get most of them in our formative years, when we are young and easily influenced. However, we manage to hold on to many of them for the rest of our lives, even when they don't make sense, even when facts and everyday experiences tell us there are absolutely no reasons behind them.

This ranges from deeply "spiritual" beliefs, to those that might affect our health (e.g. alternative medicine vs. science-based medicine), to something as mundane as superstitions (knock on wood anyone?). I've been always fascinated with how this works... people, who are seemingly very rational, who pride themselves in conducting their daily lives based only on rational, methodical decisions, who spend better part of their education in science, can completely disregard reason and logical thinking when it comes to some beliefs, which seem to be completely immune from any criticism and skepticism. How many rational people would use oscillococcinum, or echinacea for cold, even though there is no clinical evidence that they work. Why do we ridicule homeopathy, but think that some other alternative medicine modality will help? Why do we laugh at beliefs from other parts of the world, but get offended when someone does the same to our own convictions?

Of course, in psychology, this is not a new question. A theory of cognitive dissonance has been around since 1957, and it states:

The theory of cognitive dissonance in social psychology proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by altering existing cognitions, adding new ones to create a consistent belief system, or alternatively by reducing the importance of any one of the dissonant elements.^[1] It is the distressing mental state that people feel when they "find themselves doing things that don't fit with what they know, or having opinions that do not fit with other opinions they hold."^[4] A key assumption is that people want their expectations to meet reality, creating a sense of equilibrium.^[5] Likewise, another assumption is that a person will avoid situations or information sources that give rise to feelings of uneasiness, or dissonance.

Even better source of popular information about this fascinating topic is a book by Caroll Tavris and Elliot Aronson: "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts".

It is easy, in line with the theory of cognitive dissonance, to point mistakes in others, to see their foolishness and stupidity, but much harder to do the same to ourselves. As great physicist and Nobel Prize winner, Richard Feynman once said:

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool."

But the first step of not fooling yourself is the knowledge of the principles and psychological mechanisms of such processes. Questioning every belief, and every idea, seemingly set in stone, is the only way to weed out the nonsense and superstition.

Dr. Oz - The Smooth Operator

I am no fan of Dr. Oz. I've been watching (metaphorically speaking, as I can hardly take watching him on TV) his raise to stardom from Oprah's "America's Doctor" wonder boy, to his own TV show, and the beginning of his own Day TV media empire, and I see a scary, scary future ahead of us.

At first, I thought that Dr. Oz basically sells a very typical and widely known advice of good diet, exercise and less daily stress, heavily coated in nonsense of alternative and herbal medicine and, increasingly, in funky spiritualism and pure crap (examples abound). I do realize that just saying "eat well and exercise daily" is not going to sell well on TV, since most of us just want quick fixes for our problems. However, Dr. Oz's endorsement of unproven herbs, vitamins and modalities that belong in Middle Ages, not in the 21st Century, is more dangerous than useful. Dr. Oz is also a proponent of Reiki, which is basically a type of therapeutic touch, which was completely discredited by a 9 year old Emily Rosa years ago. So, there you have it... would you trust that doctor with your health?

I'm glad the mainstream media has finally started noticing. I stumbled on this great article from the New Yorker: "The Operator", written by Michael Specter (the author of “Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives”, which I also highly recommend).
There is a number of really good points in the article, but this one really shows what Dr. Oz is about:

Oz sighed. “Medicine is a very religious experience,” he said. “I have my religion and you have yours. It becomes difficult for us to agree on what we think works, since so much of it is in the eye of the beholder. Data is rarely clean.” All facts come with a point of view. But his spin on it—that one can simply choose those which make sense, rather than data that happen to be true—was chilling. “You find the arguments that support your data,” he said, “and it’s my fact versus your fact.”

His facts are driven by his popularity and how well his show is doing, not by objectiveness. That's why I would never trust neither them, nor him.

Quote of the Day - From a "Science-Loving" Politician

So, where are we heading as a country, if a person, who sits on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology says something like that:

“All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and Big Bang theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of hell, and it’s lies to try to keep me and all the folks who are taught that from understanding that they need a savior.”

Impressive and scary, given the fact that this guy, U.S. Rep. Paul C. Broun (R., Ga.), is partially responsible for making decisions that drive science and engineering in this country and potentially affect our future.

But... Mr. Broun is not alone on the committee. Salon.com has some additional "science-literate" politicians:

Least scientific members of the House Science Committee

It's also good to see the Science Guy, Bill Nye weighting in:

Bill Nye: Paul Broun 'Unqualified To Make Decisions About Science, Space, And Technology'

I guess, your brains are not really important in politics, but it should not come as a surprise after all. You can go pretty far in this country, believing that Jews came to America in 600 B.C. and left their story written on the golden plates that can be translated by looking into a magic hat with some stones in it... Priceless!

Faithful Get Offended... Again

Recently I wrote about a case of a bad "blasphemy law" in Poland (well, there is no "good" blasphemy law in my opinion, since they all infringe on people's freedom of speech in the name of someone unvalidated opinion), and this week brings us another case, this time from India (thanks to the New Scientist).

This particular case has been brewing for a few months, but finally, it is getting attention it deserves in the "mainstream" media, not just in the skeptic and rational circles. Senal Anamaruku, a skeptic from India, is accused of "hurting religious feelings" by exposing a purported miracle. The case is very straightforward: people believe in a miracle, they are swindled by others, who are trying to make money, someone exposes the fraud (intentional, or not, it's irrelevant) and gets blamed for "hurt feelings" of those who prefer to cling to irrational beliefs at all costs.

The main point to learn from this case, is of course, freedom of speech. And someone's opinion, is, and always should be, protected by this basic freedom, even if others don't agree and even if it goes against people beliefs.

There is also an important nugget of wisdom by Senal:

Once trapped into irrationalism, they become more incapable of mastering reality. It is a vicious circle, like an addiction. They become vulnerable to exploitation by astrologers, godmen, dubious pseudo-psychologists, corrupt politicians and the whole mega-industry of irrationalism.

Great point and worth repeating every day, when someone says "what's the harm?"

Boiron Settles, Can't Prove Homeopathy Works

Boiron settles one of the lawsuits against them and their bogus homeopathic product Oscillococcinum. They can't prove the product works, so they rather settle than expose themselves to more scientific scrutiny. As written in the lawsuit:

According to the class action lawsuit, the active ingredients in Boiron’s products are so diluted that they are “effectively non-existent,” making them nothing more than sugar pills.

Yet, those products are still available in our local pharmacies and people still continue to use them, despite the fact that there is absolutely no evidence they do anything more than emptying your pockets.

Here is some additional info on a different lawsuit (Coldcalm): The CAM Docket: Boiron II

I wrote about a Canadian lawsuit earlier this year: Boiron, the Maker of Oscillococcinum Gets Sued

Let's hope, if nothing else, the public gets to see what homeopathy really is, and how alt-med is used by those big, bad pharmaceutical conglomerates to make tons of money from selling us pure sugar. The next time you hear someone defending alternative medicine as opposed to the Big Pharma, think twice... the reality is not always what it seems.

Boiron, the Maker of Oscillococcinum Gets Sued

It's good to see that a crappy sugar pill flu medicine Oscillococcinum, which I blogged about more than a year ago, finally gets a fair treatment from the public in a form of a lawsuit filled in Canada.

As I pointed out before, the pill:

Each 0.04 oz. dose (1 g) of Oscillo contains 1 g of sugar

or, if you want to be picky:

1g pill contains 0.85g sucrose and 0.15g lactose

Hmmm... you do the math...

Those pills are all over the pharmacies in the USA and Canada, and, since they do nothing (just as the Airborne used to do) to improve your health, except emptying your pockets, I hope the makers (Brion, a big pharma!!!) get their pockets emptied too.

More: Class Action Lawsuit Filed against Homeopathy Manufacturer Boiron and Shoppers Drug Mart

Chiropractic Is Bogus

I have no love for the alternative medicine. I think it is based on bogus evidence, or a complete lack of thereof, its various "branches" are mutually exclusive, it feeds on people fears and weaknesses, and it sucks up valuable resources (as in $$$) not only from our individual pockets, but also from larger public funds and governments.

Recent blog activities on the interwebs (some of this can be found here and here), reminded me of a case from a few years ago, in which chiropractic, a widely-accepted, "medical" practice, based on pretty much magic, was put to a test, not only by scientists (this has been settled long time ago), but in a court of law in Great Britain.
In this case, a British science writer, Simon Singh, was accused of libel by the British Chiropractic Association, after he had published an article in The Guardian, claiming that the practice of chiropractic is based on unscientific, unproven principles, and that promoting such practices equals false advertising. Even under the libel-friendly British law, the BSA was forced to withdraw the law suit, after it became evident that Singh was correct in his criticism. A side effect of the case was a magnified focus received by chiropractic and its principles, which boils down to a very simple thing: it is crap.

The problem is that a lot of insurance companies in the US will pay for chiropractic visits and that's the money that eventually comes out of our collective pockets. While I do realize that not all medical treatments are perfect (as all sciences are not perfect and definitive), when I'm paying for something, I would like to make sure that it has at least some validity. In the meantime, chiropractic is based on wishful, magical thinking and 100+ years of coming up with bs to justify charging people for a "fancy" massage. You'd be better off going to a real, licensed physical therapists. At least they get education and training in real medicine, and you get a real treatment.

If you want to find out more about chiropractic, The Skeptic Dictionary is a great place to start.

2011 - Summary

2011 was a fun year...
First of all because Andrew Wakefield, the infamous MMR scare "doctor", got taken down after all those years of spreading misinformation, and pure lies. Unfortunately, the results of his dubious work will be felt across the globe for years to come, as we can see when childhood diseases come back in places they should have been gone forever.
2011 also marked the beginning of the presidential elections season in the US, and the "right side" (the Republicans) has a strong bunch of contenders going into the primaries. The problem is that they are not too handy with their brains, using them in ways that make it hard to believe we are members of the same species. James Carville summed it up the best earlier this year, when he said:

As I watch the Republican debates, I realize that we are on the brink of a crazy person running our nation. I sit in front of the television and shudder at the thought of one of these creationism-loving, global-warming-denying, immigration-bashing, Social-Security-cutting, clean-air-hating, mortality-fascinated, Wall-Street-protecting Republicans running my country.

As our national political stage appears to be open to almost anyone, smart, or not, the same seems to be happening locally, where I can see another "America-loving" candidate running for the local school board:

"I do have some concerns about the curriculum," he said. "I would like to do what I can as a School Board member ... to focus on maybe a little bit more of a traditional curriculum." He mentioned specifically social studies lessons, and suggested that International Baccalaureate is "anti-American" and might be replaced.

Ad executive announces bid for Pasco School Board 
and
Is International Baccalaureate anti-American?

While, it is too early to see what this new candidate brings to the table, I'm always very suspicious when the essence of any political campaign is focused around "patriotism" and flag waving. It usually turns out that there is not much more there to be found. In this case, we'll need to watch Mr. Stevenson's campaign very closely to make sure it's not about taking people's freedoms, instead of guarding them.