More on Dr. Oz

Wow... Dr. Oz is really hitting the waves this week.

After a great article in The New Yorker, exposing Dr. Oz's bland disregard for facts and reality, as well as the real motivation behind his media persona (ratings, money and fame), he dives ever deeper into the abyss of irrationality and pure stupidity. Dr. Oz embraces and endorses homeopathy!

Homeopathy irks me more than other alternative medicine woo, simply because a few years ago I myself watched helplessly, while a homeopathic "doctor" milked hundreds of dollars from someone with no good outlook for improvement and with very limited resources. The money went into useless "interviews" that had nothing to do with the condition of the patient, and into even more useless, "custom-designed drugs" that did nothing (it was pure water after all).

I'm glad that there is finally some bad publicity Dr. Oz gets from the media. Maybe exposing his program for what it really is, an elaborate fraud, not to help people, but to stuff his pockets, will turn away some of his viewers. I'm not against stuffing your own pockets at expense of others, especially when they are willing participants (yes, I go to the movies, and sometimes I even pay to see a really bad movie). What's dangerous about Dr. Oz is the fact that he has positioned himself in a health care "edutainment" sector of the media, and by promoting dubious therapies and just pure intellectual junk, he endangers people who believe him.

In the meantime, there are usual places on the Web that do a great job analyzing Dr. Oz's homeopathic claims:

Orac: Dr. Oz’s journey to the Dark Side is now more than complete: It’s Oz and homeopathy versus science-based medicine

and

Science-Based Medicine Blog: Are You Ready For the Oz Manifesto

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.

New Year Resolutions

Yes, the New Year resolutions never really get done, or at least most of them don't, but it's still good to place some goals in front of ourselves to strive for better, more peaceful and reasonable world.

So, in the World that did not end in 2012, what's out there for me in this coming New Year 2013:
- keep the ridicule and doubt high, in the spirit of Thomas Jefferson:

“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them"

and

"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."

- follow one of the best advices I have ever heard, the one from Christopher Hitchens:

“What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.”

- finally, as Hippocrates said:

"There are, in fact, two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance"

All of the above can help us in making this "unreality"-based world, a better, more humane place to live.

Final Post: Good Bye!

So, it's less than an hour before the December 21, 2012 is upon us, and, as we all know, our World will end soon. By the way, I assume the people in other time zones are toast already!

Therefore, I figured, some goodbyes are in order, to all who have ever ventured here...

I don't think we have any way out of this one, since the Mayan calendar (or at least its long count, known as b'ak'tun) ends tomorrow, and we all know how good the Mayans were with predicting the future. And if the Mayans don't get us (rightly so, for all the wrongs we've done to their great civilization), our own calendar ends just a few days later, so I do not think we'll see the light of day on January 1st, 2013.

Seriously though, click over to the Bad Astronomy blog and see why the World will probably NOT end tomorrow: Worried About the End of the World on Dec. 21? Don’t Be.

To those who still believe in this nonsense: please, send my your money, before you close down your bunker hatches!

Stupid Is As Stupid Does (Or Says)...

One of our local Florida geniuses, Dennis Baxley, a State Representative from Ocala, said last Monday that we should give guns to our teachers to protect the kids in schools. Not a surprise, since he's a lifelong National Rifle Association member and a co-sponsor of the bill that became our "stand your ground" law.
My take on the NRA is pretty simple: they are here to protect moneymaking interests, at any cost, even when it means killing innocent children. They have no excuses anymore. They belong in the Dark Ages, not in the 21st Century civilization.

So, even after the unspeakable tragedy like the one in Connecticut last week, when it is pretty evident that making firearms widely available to anyone is a terrible idea, we still have people who want to turn our streets, stores, work and public places, and now even schools, into a wild West of the 1800s.
One can only hope that the cooler, more intelligent and rational heads in politics will finally wake up, get a spine and stand up to those special interests, that's been driving this pro-gun insanity recently.
You want to have a gun in your home, fine, even though it is a disaster waiting to happen (see here, here, and here) but no one in today's world needs a semi-automatic rifle, or a military grade weapons for private use. Period.

So, it's time to ban the assault weapons altogether, because, as data shows, it is very effective: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings. It's not only necessary to ban them, but it would be best to get the ones currently in private hands off the market by buying them back. In addition, stricter gun control laws should be imposed as soon as possible. Fighting guns in hands of crazy people with more and more guns, will only make the matters worse.

A great place to start is at demandaplan.org and mayorsagainstillegalguns.org

Finally, Rationally Speaking blog has a great (as always) entry on the topic, with some really, really good arguments. Massimo Pigliucci's final conclusion can't be expressed any better:

Another way to put this is in terms of virtue ethics. We need to think about what an openly armed society would do to our character as individual members of that society. I personally doubt even the quality of character of someone who thinks that hunting is a sport worth engaging in, but I am okay with that and other limited use of lethal weapons (“sport” is another questionable application, and even self-defense is reasonable only under fairly unusual circumstances and as a last resort). But I am pretty sure that there is something fundamentally flawed in the character of a person who thinks it’s a good idea to arm teachers and students in school, to allow concealed guns in churches and bars, or to provide citizens with the sort of weapons that other countries reserve only for their military. The most profound damage the NRA and its supporters are doing to this country is not just in allowing the sort of carnage of young children we have seen this past week, as horrible as it is. It lies in a deep corruption of our very character as human beings and in the threat to the very idea of a free and open society.

It is high time for some real action!

Vaccinate or Not? Different Year Same Questions.

Very short post, as I seriously lack any time to blog...

I found a great article on Slate about the "controversy" that we all face every year: a flu vaccine.
I personally don't think it is a controversy, as data is pretty much in, and, with some necessary uncertainty found in any scientific problem, we know that generally flu shots are good for the general population as a whole.

In the end, it’s easy to ascribe sinister motives to flu control efforts, especially if you’re unwilling to tolerate uncertainty. With a slight shift in perspective, however, one can see our evolving flu control programs as a triumph of public health.

The article is a good read and it presents this complex issue rather clearly:

The Flu Vaccine Controversy

The Apocalypse Is Upon Us

So... December 2012 is almost here and we have measly 21 days to go. As we all know on December 21, 2012, we are all toast!

You don't believe it? Have you seen the movie 2012? It was all there, with detailed explanations for every little disaster that will occur in just a few weeks. If you don't trust Hollywood, you surely would trust the SCIENTISTS!!! I mean, the books were all well researched and full of scientific language. And if that was not enough, what about all your friends, who told you about the terrible things that were to happen in 2012, about building bunkers, and buying survival gear? They surely must have been right?

We are only three weeks away from the final date, but I'm still making plans for the weekend of the 22nd. Can the Earth be destroyed on December 21st? Sure, there are plenty of ways for this to happen, as nicely described in Philip Plait's book "Death from the Skies!", but I would not bet on them, as the odds are pretty slim (on the other hand, say that to the dinosaurs). If we want to see the real Apocalypse, we need to wait 4 - 5 billion years for the Sun to turn this planet into a burnt out cinder (hey, NASA, time to get to work, and find us a new place to live).

The reality is that, as always (think May 21, 2011 and the "Apocalypse of Mr. Camping"), all the fear mongering is purely done for profit: books, movies, lectures, and don't forget big donations for churches and cults that spread the crazy news. As long as enough people fall for it, because they think people a few thousand years ago knew more about our universe than we do now, it'll continue, and I'm sure on December 22nd, 2012, we'll hear of a new date that will bring fire and brimstone to our little, insignificant planet.

In the meantime, I think we should start worrying about our own human-made apocalypses, like the global warming. Hurricane Sandy gave us a preview of what's to come, and given the latest news ("Rapidly melting polar ice raises concerns of rising seas", "Climate Change Threatens Long-Term Sustainability of Great Plains", and "This Drought's No Dry Run: Lessons Of The Dust Bowl"), and the current simulations ("What Could Disappear"), our children and grandchildren are not looking at a bright future.

Why Do We Pick Idiots To Run Our Country?

Yes, I agree it's rather harsh to say that, but after Florida's very own senator, Marco Rubio said this:

I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I'm not a scientist. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.

in an interview for GQ, as an answer to the question about the age of the Earth, the only two choices are:

1. Crackpot.
2. Liar, who knows the real and scientific answer, but lies to all of us for political reasons.

I admit, #2 is very probable for any politician, but I also want to believe that nobody would consciously and purposefully, expose himself or herself to this kind of ridicule, so I'll stick with my initial assessment.

Let me point to an excellent Bad Astronomy blog, for an expanded explanation of why we all should start picking our government representatives a bit more carefully: they are elected to make decisions that are very complex, require critical thinking skills and can affect all of us (and sometimes even the world). Of course, this is not new and not even rare, especially from the politicians on the right (a.k.a. the Republicans). The scary part is that Rubio is considered a "rising star" in the Republican Party and we might have to endure his misguided views more than we care for.

Finally, the 2012 Election is Over

I'm very glad the crazy political season in America is over. This time around it was especially annoying, with all the adds and calls and e-mails, and just plain insanity of pushing one candidate over the other (and that's not to mention all the local political ads that were equally bad, if not worse).

I'm also very happy with local Florida voters overwhelmingly rejecting a few constitutional amendments, including misguided Amendment 8, which, despite its name (Florida Religious Freedom Amendment), was not about religious freedom, but rather about tax dollars funding religious activities. Amendment 6 also went down in flames and for good reasons, as it was injecting politics into personal health care issues.

Generally speaking, while it's good to see reason and critical thinking winning (I'm glad our president will not be making important decisions peering into a magic hat), it's still pretty scary to see that "unreason" can be sold to almost 50% of the nation, hook, line and sinker.

I also hope that, after highly political campaign, when some issues could not be mentioned, out of fear of loosing precious votes, we might finally deal with problems like global warming, especially since the Hurricane Sandy clearly showed us what direction our planet is heading.

Now, it's time to move on to more important things, like everyday skepticism and fighting lack of critical thinking in our lives.

Election Season

There is not much on the US news recently outside of the Elections. Seemingly the rest of the world just stopped in a great anticipation, to see who will be the next, great "leader of the Free World".

Thanks to our great Postal Service, I already voted by mail, refusing to wait in those enormous lines, like four years ago. The choice was pretty clear this year, despite the fact that, as it happened too often in the past, it was more the vote of opposition, than approval.

In my book, the most important factor in making such decisions is The Golden Rule in a form of "live and let live" (or sometimes, unfortunately, "live and let die"). For me, it mostly means living your a good life, helping others as much as possible, and letting them do the same, without imposing any of my own views and beliefs on them. As long as everyone plays nice and does not try to impose their ways on others, we should be fine.

Rationality matters as well. Since the President of the Unites States has rather imposing powers, I would not want anyone in the office, who drinks Kool Aid too often. We all have our own "blind spots" of rationality, some coming from our culture, upbringing, people we meet in our lives, and some coming from our hard-wired brains that are very difficult to override.However, believing in divining rods, homeopathy, prophets, translating golden plates by looking into a hat with magic stones, and similar things, is a NO-NO in my humble opinion. The same goes for believing in some alternative history of America and other places, that has absolutely no basis in science and reality. When somebody has power to make decisions that influence millions of people, I want at least to hope that reality and reason are the main decision points.

Hopefully, this crazy season of unreason will be over soon, and we can all go back to fighting simple, everyday stupidity in our lives.