The Not So Wonderful Wizard of Oz
Posted by skeptologic on May 15, 2008
I think it’s a little ironic that the category of woo that I used to be least interested in is the one I seem to be writing about most, so called “complimentary and alternative medicine” or CAM. Oh wait, let’s add supplements to that so we get a more suitable acronym: SCAM. Much better. Anyway, it has recently come to my attention that Dr. Mehmet Oz, a favorite on the Oprah Winfrey show, is going to get his own show. From what I have seen of him so far, I think this is a bad idea. Normally with out and out promoters of nonsense this is where I would start the name calling. However, I am going to stop short (barely) of calling Dr. Oz a quack. I am sure he is a fine cardiothoracic surgeon and serves his patients well. My problem with Dr. Oz is that in addition to real medicine, he is a big promoter of non scientific medicine that is based on, well, crap.
I have seen Dr. Oz on the Oprah Winfrey show a couple of times and both times he made statements that were misleading and potentially harmful. On one episode a member of the audience asked him about having their feet massaged to relieve stress. Nothing wrong with that, it would have been fine for him to recommend a foot massage as a method of relaxation. However, instead of just telling the person to get a foot massage, he recommended a method of deep tissue massage known as Rolfing. A Google search of Rolfing quickly reveals tons of pseudo-scientific gibberish about how it is supposed to “align the human body with gravity” and can “restore energy flow.” It also leads people to other non evidence based “energy healing” modalities such as Reiki and Reflexology. So what is the problem with this? Nothing if all you want is a massage because it feels good, but many practitioners of these techniques claim that they can use them to actually cure serious diseases. If a person who is seriously ill avoids real medical treatment for one of these methods it can lead to their condition becoming worse or even to their death. By having a real doctor point a largely uncritical audience to these methods, it gives them an air of legitimacy that they don’t deserve.
On another episode, Dr. Oz recommended acupuncture to a woman who had pain in her shoulder. He sends her backstage for a treatment with an acupuncturist and (surprise surprise) when she comes back, she feels better. Many people watching this view it as a test that shows that acupuncture works. In order to test something like this properly, you would need a large group of people with similar symptoms. You would then need to divide them into two groups at random. One group would get so called “real” acupuncture where the practitioner inserts the needles where they should be inserted (acupuncturists believe there are what they call meridian points in the body) and another group would get sham acupuncture where the needles are inserted anywhere or are not inserted far enough. What is most important is that the study must be blinded so each group does not know what they are getting. Better yet, the test should be double blind so that neither the participants nor the person administering the test know which is which. Granted, this would be difficult to do with acupuncture, but some methods have been devised, such as having the needles inside of a sheath so the practitioner and patient don’t know if the needle is going in fully or not. These controls are important to filter out bias, the placebo effect, etc. Many studies have been done on acupuncture and other “energy healing” techniques and the all follow a similar pattern: The better designed the study is, the less of an effect there is and the best designed studies show no effect at all. Again, if all you are looking for is pain relief and you get a placebo effect from it there is nothing wrong with it. But right there on the show the acupuncturist, while giving Oprah herself a “wellness” treatment, claims that “Acupuncture treats any condition from allergies to, obviously, pain to gastrointestinal issues—a wide range of chronic diseases.” Telling people that sticking little needles into their skin can treat “any condition” and “a wide range of chronic diseases” is egregious, irresponsible, and dangerous.
Dr. Oz himself chimed in on the “science” of acupuncture and alternative medicine. The following quotes are taken directly from Oprah’s website:
“Here’s the irony—acupuncture has been around for 2,500 years in China,” Dr. Oz says. “There are a billion people in another part of the world who use these therapies.”
Here Dr. Oz makes logical fallacy of an appeal to ancient knowledge. Just because something has been around for 2,500 years does not necessarily make it valid. Just over a century ago in the west, before medicine became scientific, if you went to the doctor they would do something like try to bleed you with leeches in an effort to “balance your bodily humors.” I wouldn’t want 150 year old unscientific medicine performed on me, much less unscientific medicine from 2,500 years ago. When he states that a billion people use it, that is another fallacy known as argumentum ad populum or an appeal to popularity. How popular something is has no bearing whatsoever on whether it is true or not. Even if every person on the planet thought that one plus one equaled three, that would not make it true, one plus one would still equal two. It wouldn’t make any difference if six billion people liked acupuncture (or something else) and used it, that is not a criteria to judge its efficacy.
“But let’s broaden the discussion, because it’s not just about acupuncture,” Dr. Oz says. “The reason I’m so excited and passionate about alternative medicine is … [because it is] the globalization of medicine.”
Dr. Oz talks about his passion for alternative medicine, saying that it’s the “globalization of medicine,” presumably bringing together east and west. I don’t really like the term western medicine. It implies that where a particular treatment originated it what makes it real or better. The terms western medicine, Chinese medicine, Indian medicine, holistic medicine, alternative medicine, etc, are quite meaningless. This is not about one country or culture being better than the other. This is about whether or not the methods and treatments in question work, no matter where they come from. There is only scientific medicine which is based on evidence, and unscientific medicine which is based on superstition. There are plenty of unscientific medical methods that were made up in the west. Some examples are Homeopathy (Germany), Chiropractic (United States), and Iridology (Hungary). If any of these were to be scientifically proven, they would cease to be alternative and just be part of regular medicine.
Alternative medicines, Dr. Oz says, deal with the body’s energy—something that traditional Western medicine generally does not. “We’re beginning now to understand things that we know in our hearts are true but we could never measure,” he says. “As we get better at understanding how little we know about the body, we begin to realize that the next big frontier … in medicine is energy medicine. It’s not the mechanistic part of the joints moving. It’s not the chemistry of our body. It’s understanding for the first time how energy influences how we feel.”
I keep having to remind myself that this guy is a actually a medical doctor. Statements like that make me wonder if he ever cracked a science book in all those years of medical school. People who practice or promote unscientific healing techniques seem to think that energy is a substance. Their ideas center around “restoring the flow of energy”or “unblocking energy.” In this context the word energy is completely and utterly meaningless. Energy is not some kind of substance that can be manipulated to promote healing. Energy is a measurement of the capacity of something to perform work. In other words it is the potential or actual ability to move things. If Dr. Oz could prove or “measure” things like Chi, Prana, Auras, or any of the types of mystical “Life Force Energy” claimed in these practices, he would win the Nobel Prize for physics. Did he? Did I miss that news story? Of course not, it would major news because it would change everything we know about reality. Keep in mind here that energy is not something you measure, energy is itself a measurement of work. Sorry Dr. Oz but the next frontier in medicine is not “energy medicine” as you claim. Here’s a news flash for you: Metaphysical concepts such as vitalism were abandoned by medical science in the 19th century. You are over a century behind the times on that one.
In an ideal world, people like Dr. Steven Barrett, Dr. Steven Novella, or Dr. Mark Crislip would get their own television shows about the wonderful scientific medicine we have that has doubled our life expectancy in just the last century. As for Oz, just like in the movie, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, the magic he is pushing is not what it’s cracked up to be.
Alexa Fleckenstein M.D. said
Don’t you think you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater? Not every person who tries alternative methods is a flaky airhead – some methods have been tried and proven for thousands of years (and, yes, scientifically validated!) .
There is a reason that patients are seeking alternative healing environments – conventional medicine has failed them pitifully – may I just mention thalidomide, terfenadine, trovafloxacin, troglitazone, rofecoxib, quinidine, among others. Not to speak of ten-minute medicine and sky-rocking costs?
As a physician I suggest you make yourself knowledgeable about alternative methods because there are quacks out there. Unfortunately, there are also some in conventional medicine.
Alexa Fleckenstein M.D., physician, author.
skeptologic said
Doctor, I disagree. If any so-called alternative therapy becomes scientifically validated then it would simply be part of standard scientific medicine. You give some examples of what you think is wrong with medicine, including some harmful drugs. Nobody is saying that no mistakes are ever made in conventional medicine. Drug side effects, inadequate doctor/patient time, and high costs have nothing to do with whether the treatments I questioned in my blog entry are effective or not. The fact that many people are seeking out these ineffective treatments is due to many factors, especially a lack of critical thinking. Modern scientific medicine has doubled the average life expectancy in the last century. Medical science has eradicated small pox and is close to getting rid of polio. Thanks to science we have marginalized diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, hepatitis A&B, HiB, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, to name a few. It is difficult to hear that there isn’t a cure or vaccine for everything yet, but that doesn’t mean that there won’t be in the future. Running to methods that have no scientific validity is not the answer.
Doctor Steve said
I agree totally with the statement that if a therapy becomes “scientifically validated then it would simply be part of standard…medicine”. Therapies that have some basis in reality will have results (pro or con) that can be validated. Therapies that cannot be validated can’t be called scientific. Now, the placebo effect is a very powerful effect…so powerful that it must be subtracted from every scientific study we do. I think a lot of “alternative” treatments rely on the placebo effect, but are loathe to say so, rather substituting pseudoscientific reasons for their efficacy, such as “bioenergy fields” and so on. The “placebo effect” has taken on such a pejorative meaning that a new, more acceptable term needs to be used. I propose that purveyors of therapies that cannot be validated use the term “cryptogenic-therapeutic effect” and be done with it. Everyone else can try to validate their treatment modality scientifically. If it passes the test of efficacy, it will be adopted immediately by the medical field and will become part of mainstream medical practice.
I use H Pylori as an example. When it was first proposed that bacteria could cause stomach ulcers, people in the scientific community thought it was crazy. Now that it’s been proven, treating H Pylori is a routine part of medical practice. If you want your “alternative” therapy to be accepted by medical practitioners, simply prove that it works in a scientifically rigorous way and we’ll all send you patients.
Johanna said
Thank you! It is a great relief to read scientific reasoning in a world where every one is a scientist and everyone knows best, regardless of their educational background and their research. The scary part is that so many of these ‘experts’ are so very skilled at selling their ideas, and of course in extension, their products. I mean Dr. perricone, Dr. oz. must bothy be filthy rich by now, which would be fine and dandy if their fortunes were not amassed by selling falsities. the thing is there is no miracle cures to anything and all these ‘doctors’ are doing is selling false hope and worthless products.
Lousy Canuck » Wherein I explain how Oprah is quantifiably damaging humankind said
[...] now with his very own show with which to promote all manner of nonsense medicine and self-help; Dr. Oz is getting his own show too, where he’ll no doubt promote some ridiculous medical advice [...]
Anthony Bailey, MD said
Doctors like Oz amaze me. With the strong educational background like Harvard and going on to pursue a rigorous specialty like CT surgery, he has got to know that his ideas defy what we know about science and medicine. Based on the fact that he is heavily marketing his ideas, which he has to know are nonsense for monetary reward, combined with his obvious intelligence and “slicknesss”, the most likely explanation is antisocial personality disorder. People with this disorder are often intelligent, witty,financially successful, and cover their tracks with acts of philanthropy. It occurs in as many as 2% of the population. I do not think that he is delusional, based on his achievements, and the fact that he embraces so many different marketable ideas. He also graduated from Wharton, a wonderful business school, prior to medicine, suggesting an intent to pursue fortune. People like Oprah and others are easy prey. He will continue to do well.
zev said
..what does science really “know” ? Well, when it comes to the “static” and to the “lesser” dynamic sciences (with a few or several variables involved), we know quite a bit (physics, chemistry), even though we’re still a quarter of an inch off the floor, and, the things we’re not yet aware of extend to billions of light years away so-to-speak.
When it comes to the greater dynamic sciences, the number of variables grow into the thousands, the millions, and into the billions. Variables such as sciences related to people.
We don’t yet have the technology to incorporate so many variables.
Heck, we can’t even predict the weather with 100% accuracy, using the super computer power available to us now.. but we’re getting closer. How many dynamic variables are involved? Let’s say 100. Heck, let’s say a thousand variables are now involved in weather forcasting.
Compare this to the millions or billions of variables involved with the operation of the human body. Billions or even trillions of variables. Maybe I’m wrong, there could be more or less.
A new science, epigenetics, states that our genes may express themselves in thousands of ways each, and the method of expression is influenced by our thoughts and by the environment.
Quantum physics now states that a particle’s position is influenced by our “observation”. Meaning, not so much meaning how we look at it with our eyes, but rather, how we think about it. Some very high-profile physicists are publicly acknowledging these principls.
Now… tell me again..what’s so crazy about the ideas from this guy Oz ?
No offense, really, but if you’re an MD, and not familiar with any of this stuff.. then.. you’re out-of-”practice” !
Most of the Skeptologic content is truthful, though elementary. When it comes to pure science, I couldn’t agree more. When it comes to big pharma, fda, nih, ama, etc, each of those entities has an agenda. Some good, some bad. When they’re all in bed together, I would say that a certain amount of dishonesty paves the way, for cash is king.
We don’t see people arguing over the actual speed of light, or any other static concept. The answers are known.
But when the “establishment” is threatened with an alternative, it means that money is diverted away. It’s easy to poo-poo a new, out-of-the-establishment procedure which shows results.
Remember, there are a lot of variables involved, so maybe these alternative procedures don’t work every time. And it’s the same with pharma. It’s much easier to test new products in Europe or in Asia because the population type is very similar vs. here in the US where the clinical tests are much more extensive due to the varying makeup.
But maybe you could be right as well, this guy Oz could be in it just for the buck.
.
.
.
My Favorite Episodes of my Favorite Podcast: Skeptoid « Skeptologic said
[...] #3: New Age Energy (episode #1): The first episode is one of the very best. The word energy has been used and abused by so many new age, pseudo-scientific, and quack ideas that this episode kills a whole flock of birds with one stone. It’s simply an explanation of what energy is, and more importantly, what it is not. Energy is not a thing, it’s a measurement. If people can just get that concept they will be better equipped not to fall for false health scams like straight chiropractic or acupuncture. Can somebody please explain it to Doctor Oz? [...]
Oprah and Dr. Oz Sue Quacks, how Ironic! « Skeptologic said
[...] called psychics who claim they can help police find missing children), detoxing, anti-vaccination, energy medicine, Airborne, Suzanne Somers and her crazy hormone and vitamin mega-dosing, therapeutic touch, [...]
wrlord said
” I am sure he is a fine cardiothoracic surgeon and serves his patients well. ”
hardly. My father was his patient, and Oz didn’t give a damn about his post-operative complications. He barely even ever showed up after the surgery. He let his PAs do the follow-up, which led to a horrible infection in the wound.
SB said
The author, as entitled as they are to their opinion, epitomize Western sentiment about natural healing methods that don’t cost as much as “scientific” methods. This is a culture that the FDA has encouraged over its decades of existence, that if something costs little or nothing, it must be weeded out (The Big Pharma lobby will help the FDA come to that decision).
Over the decades, many simple drugs that Western drug companies manufactured were banned from USA citing strange and artificial reasons. The drug would then be sent to other parts of the world for continued usage without any problems. Tedral SA is one ephidra drug that comes to mind.
In the USA, unless science looks at each and every natural method and proves its validity, people don’t want to accept. Of course after science does it, some one puts a sticker price on it, and it suddenly becomes appealing.
Examples: India has been practicing Yoga and meditation for centuries, gaining health benefits. The West caught up centuries later after experimenting Yoga using scientific techniques.
Turmeric has been extensively used in South Asia as a remedy and food ingredient. The West then finds out and tries to patent it.
skeptologic said
Your entire comment is simply a false premise. The cost of a particular item or method has nothing to do with its safety or efficacy. The FDA’s primary job is to make sure that the drug companies can only sell drugs that do what they say they can do. So called natural healing practitioners are under no such restrictions, but they should be. They make unsubstantiated claims for all kinds of herbs and nonsense because they can get away with it by putting a disclaimer on the bottle. And did I miss something, since when does big placebo give away their snake oil for free? Go into any “natural health” store and you will find all kinds of untested crap being sold for very high prices. They talk about how terrible “big pharma” is because their drugs are expensive, while selling people expensive little vials of water with nothing in them (homeopathy). Drugs that are proven to work are expensive because it takes many years and hundreds of millions of dollars to research and develop those drugs, and they must be tested and proven to work and be safe. You said “In the USA, unless science looks at each and every natural method and proves its validity, people don’t want to accept.” I can’t even begin to tell you how false that is. Here in America s.c.a.m.s (supplements, complimentary, and alternative medicine) are widely accepted by a large segment of the population. Go to any major drug store like Walgreens or CVS and you will see detox diet items, herbal remedies, unnecessary supplements, homeopathy, and many more unscientific and unproven items. Your example of yoga and meditation is just plain silly. Yoga is exercise and meditation makes you calm. Gee, exercise and being calm are good for your health, what a surprise! Yoga is not a way to cure a disease or condition, it is simply good for your health in general, like any other exercise.
Zev Zwuurfman said
Do you believe that everything you now know & the things you were taught are true? Do you believe that the AMA was formed for the public good? Do you think you know everthing about body, soul, spirit, what we are, why we are here, and so on? Is the basis of every one of your very own belief systems perfect?
skeptologic said
I only “believe” in what can be shown to be true based on good quality scientific evidence. Yes, I think the AMA, and for that matter the FDA were created for the public good to promote a quality standard of care in medicine. Before organizations like that, any yahoo could sell snake oil out of a wagon and make whatever claims they wanted to about it. Unfortunately today under current regulations (DSHEA) snake oil is back under the guise of herbs and supplements (with a disclaimer most people don’t even notice).
“Do you think you know everthing [sic] about body, soul, spirit, what we are, why we are here, and so on?”
Interesting question. I see what you are implying and it is a logical fallacy. No, I do not know everything about the human body and neither do doctors or scientists. That is what science is for, to learn as much as we can. Just because we do not know everything does not make the things that we do know invalid. Nor does it allow you or anyone else to fill in the gaps with whatever mystical belief system you choose. As far as a soul or spirit, these are metaphysical concepts for which there is no scientific evidence.
“Is the basis of every one of your very own belief systems perfect?”
Let me clear this up for you. I do not have any belief systems, therefore I don’t make any claim to them being “perfect,” whatever that means. Any person can make up any belief such as religions, ghosts, conspiracy theories, alternative medicines, etc. Am I supposed to believe them all? Of course not. As a skeptic, I only believe in what can be proven to me scientifically. If that is not clear enough, here is a video that explains it very well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI
Z. Zwuurfman said
Thank you for your response. Let me first start off by saying that every person has a “belief system”, including you, and it doesn’t need to be tied to mystical/spiritual/religious facets.
Your own belief system centers around the need for acquiring scientific proof, which is great for the most part.
And just think about what you “know”. It’s the result of what you were “taught”. Maybe you were taught that medicine is practiced one way and one way only.
If a theory can’t be proven scientifically utilizing the several known laws of physics and rules of math, then that theory is moot until a further advanced notice.
But who says that the currently accepted quantum theory is accurate? Lewis Little doesn’t think so. Science is, after all, an understanding of how nature operates. We’ve a long way to go. Science can’t explain what “was” before the big bang, (the BB theory is an assumption). So, right there, the gap is alreasy too wide; it’s more of a void.
Getting back to Earth: If the AMA and the FDA were created to “protect” the public, then, they’ve veered off-course a bit (you remember Frank Zappa? He warned that our government will kill us if we let it be trusted). Actually, the AMA got started because of competition from homeopathic doctors. If homeopathy works, is it invalid just because it can’t be explained yet? If astounding observations involving epigenetics can’t be scietifically proven, does this classify the matter as invalid? In which part of the brain is our “self” situated? What makes you think so?
Back to FDA: Connect these words: Searle, Rumsfeld, aspartame, FDA. How is the FDA truly protecting us? Do I really need to offer evidence of other instances ad nauseum?
The FDA recently banned a naturally available ingredient which helped folks with thyroid issues. And exactly who did benefit from this move? (it was the company who couldn’t come up with an improved version over the naturally available product) Is everyone today crazy, or is the profit potential for prescribing mood drugs just too risky to overlook? Is fluoride harmful, and does it really help enamel.. or does it make it brittle? Are upcoming “fat” vaccines essential, or, do we simply need to outlaw HFCS (corn syrup)?
Sorry, but Big Pharma is the modern-day, gov’t approved, snake oil collective sales company.
Have a pleasant evening.
Zev said
Of course I agree on the longevity ascent due to health advancements. As you state, just because science can’t explain everything yet does not mean that what we do know is invalid; on the same note, just because science can’t explain the results we observe does not mean that the results are invalid. In fact, Lewis Little’s descriptions (where the particle and the beam travel in opposite directions) appear to be LOGICAL wheareas the currently accepted theories are downright mystical and silly, and the observations sound hokey. And what’s with all these mainstream physicists who are publicly donning the mystical pathways? Homeopathic results may be PSYCHO-logical in nature (the “other” form of logic) but of course the new & powerful observations in epigenetics blows homeopathy out of the water. Science says that aspartame affects ONLY those with phenylketonuria.. so do you really believe this “scientific fact”? You seem to know a lot, but the “bad” information that’s kept from us is quite a bit more. We have to understand that one particular element.. honesty.. is not as powerful a motivator as is the element of hard profits. I always remember that. Aspartame is not used by me nor by those I love. I wonder why we can’t label stevia as a sweetener? HFCS is not simply sugar; it affects our appetite functions, hence more obesity, but have more of it. If you feel that fluoride works, then go ahead & feel compelled to use it. There are whole civilizations who’ve never used fluoride, yet have great teeth. We all know how cavities can be prevented, and it’s not about the fluoride. But back to the HFCS, almost every food product now has some of it, turning people into diabetics, and the “honest” pharma industry will come to the rescue with an “anti fat” vaccine. I don’t know about you, but this would sound irrational to me. The processed food industry is worth hundreds of billions of dollars. So is pharma. You can’t use only “scientific studies” because they’re not always honest. In another word: they are INCOMPLETE, leaving out bad data. We need to use our intuition. Einstein was aware of this. So, if a doctor comes up with an out-of-the box suggestion for a cure, and it works, then, it works. Figure out why later, because I want to know as well.
skeptologic said
“In fact, Lewis Little’s descriptions (where the particle and the beam travel in opposite directions) appear to be LOGICAL wheareas the currently accepted theories are downright mystical and silly, and the observations sound hokey.”
Quantum theory is very hard to grasp. Things get very weird at the quantum level and I can see why you would think the current scientific explanations sound weird, I do too. If this guy has an interesting hypothesis, great. He needs to do experiments to try to falsify it and see if it holds up. If he is right, and others can repeat the experiment then his hypothesis will become a theory, that is how science works. He could be brilliant, or he could be a crank, I don’t know, but if he is right the scientific method will vindicate him. Just because his theory sounds more logical to you is not what makes him right and the others wrong. Saying that something isn’t true just because you can’t imagine how it could be possible is a logical fallacy, the argument from personal incredulity.
“Homeopathic results may be PSYCHO-logical in nature”
Exactly! Psychological, as in they are all in the heads of the people who believe it works. It does not actually cure anything. It is called the placebo effect, confirmation bias, and post hoc reasoning. This is why we can’t simply trust only our own observations, human thinking is often flawed. The placebo effect was little comfort to that poor little girl who died of a treatable condition though.
“Science says that aspartame affects ONLY those with phenylketonuria.. so do you really believe this “scientific fact”?”
Yes. Multiple independent studies confirm this. I don’t just take the opposite position of the government, which is what you seem to do for almost everything.
“HFCS is not simply sugar;”
Very basic chemistry disagrees with this statement.
“it affects our appetite functions, hence more obesity, but have more of it.”"
You are confusing correlation with causation. The cause of obesity (and hence the increase in diabetes from the obesity) is caused by eating too many calories and not burning more than you consume. I am not saying HFCS is healthy, after all it’s sugar and sugar has a lot of calories, but singling it out for some weird reason does not make sense. HFCS is used a lot in the US rather than cane sugar because of a few simple reasons. The main reason is that we grow a lot of corn in the US, rather than sugar cane, another is that it is easy to transport and easier to cook with since it is in liquid form. It’s not a big government conspiracy, it’s simple economics and practicality. I have quite a sweet tooth myself and have eaten and continue to eat products that have it. I am not obese or even overweight, I am actually quite thin.
“If you feel that fluoride works, then go ahead & feel compelled to use it.”
What I “feel” is irrelevant when is comes to the data that shows it works. I know why you think it does not: because the government put it in the water, so you don’t trust it.
“There are whole civilizations who’ve never used fluoride, yet have great teeth.”
Which ones? How do you know that? If that is true, there could be another explanation. Also, in many places, fluoride is in the water naturally. If fact, many municipal water companies actually take fluoride out of the water in places where there is too much. We know the right concentration that drinking water should have, since too little fluoride makes for too many cavities, and too much will turn your teeth brown.
“We need to use our intuition. Einstein was aware of this. ”
Ah, invoking Einstein, I was waiting for that. I agree that we need to use our intuition, to suggest new paths to try and think outside the box, absolutely. But then we need to test our assumptions. We need to filter these things through the lens of science and reason so we know what is true and what works. Einstein is a great example. His ideas were way out there, but guess what: they held up to the science. Every experiment ever done on relativity, for example, has confirmed his theory over and over again. That is why it holds up.
zev said
Big Food, Big Pharma, Big Markets, Big Anything… each is an expert at their own game. The
true purpose of business is to solve problems. The nature of Big gov’t is that it creates
big problems. When Big Business and Big Gov’t get together, the result is a Big Mess.
Science & tech has of course been of tremendous benefit to humanity. The issue is with
dishonesty, which happens whether or not business is in bed with gov’t. But it appears that
dishonesty levels rise when Big Business & Big Gov’t are sleeping together. I don’t believe
in big conspiracy theories because of the logistics involved; I think that mass social trends
appear and those in position take advantage of those changing trends to profit from, it’s
their right to do so. For example, we now have an obesity problem, let’s say it’s caused by
HFCS consumption. Joe, one of the heads of Big Pharma, has an idea. He knows that HFCS is
here to stay, and he knows that processed foods are expanding their presence around the
globe. He has a vision of creating a vaccine that will counteract the effects of obesity
caused by HFCS. Maybe the next step is to lobby Congress to get the product distributed.
Who knows. You say that aspartame is perfectly safe because you read that only those who are
allergic to it will suffer. All the tests cannot be in yet, because people have been
affected by it in various ways. I think that Monsanto ( a name we can fully trust ) owns a
major brand of aspartame. Monsanto claims that GM foods are safe, but they also know that
negative-effect trends caused by their products will not become apparent in quite a while.
Maybe Big Pharma will get an idea then to create a vaccine to counteract the effects of GM
foods. A particle accelerator test is hi-tech & complex and no one (except someone with an
ego issue) disputes the results and no one else really cares, there’s just NO real money
involved. The results are conclusive and the test can then be repeated anywhere in the
world. Tests involving humans or living creatures are complex and results are more
inconclusive. It’s more complex than ax2 +by + c = 0. I bet it’s something closer to an infinite series. Sometimes, it’s more effective to observe patterns because science doesn’t
have the means or time to perform expensive tests (and which don’t yet exist). If a trend
has been established (a trend being a collective), I would suspect that the cause of
the trend is common to most of each of the instances. Regarding common quantum theory: a particle’s position depends on our observation of it. This “science” is far-removed from Newtonian physics. It may even involve our thoughts. Epigenetics seems to be. Fluoride also has an affinity for aluminum, a suspected cause of Alzheimers.. When I read “there has been no scientific proof…” of a cause and an effect, it’s simply a warning to me to be cautious. Science is black and white, just look into any field such as math, chemistry, physics. But, when millions of variables are involved (such as the way our genes are expressed), the observations are powerful. In context, it’s about honesty. Everything you believe is absolutely true… for you. Good luck.
skeptologic said
Ah, I see that you believe all of those conspiracy theories for which there is no evidence. And that means that no matter what I say to you, I won’t be able to convince you that you are wrong because you think that any evidence against the conspiracy is evidence for the conspiracy. Oh well, guess I will give it a shot. Yes, what I know is what I was taught, and as I grew up I found out that a lot of what I was taught was in fact BS. As far as how medicine was practiced, I do know that before it become scientific (i.e. before we had any idea what caused disease) the average life expectancy was about half of what it is not. Countless children died of very serious diseases that are practically gone now because of vaccines. Antibiotics (hey, discovered from an all natural thing, you should like that!) have saved hundreds of millions of lives.
Just because science can’t explain everything yet does not mean that what we do know is invalid. And it does not mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairy tale you wish. This is a logical fallacy.
Homeopathy is completely and utterly ridiculous…it’s water. But I understand that me thinking it’s ridiculous is not a reason to think it does not work. The reason to think it does not work is that it has been tested over and over and over again. Every time, it has failed. You alt med promoters just don’t seem to understand that if you test something and it is found not to work that that means that it does not work, but you keep using it anyway. There is real harm in something like this. Homeopaths promote things like homeopathic “vaccines” for things like malaria. If someone who is going to go into an area where they might be exposed to the disease and all they got was an injection of magic spirit water invented in the 19th century by a guy who made up his own laws (e.g. law of similars) then that person may die. Did you hear about the parents who treated their baby with only homeopathy when she got eczema? The baby suffered and died because her parents were treating her with homeopathy (water). Conventional treatments would have easily cured her. She is dead now because of their silly beliefs. Want a bigger list? Go here: http://whatstheharm.net/homeopathy.html
Aspartame is not harmful unless you have phenylketonuria. Throwing in a scary sounding name like Rumsfeld is a red herring. I know I can’t convince you otherwise. I know that unlike a skeptics, who base ourselves in reality and change our minds when new evidence comes to light, there is no way I can convince you that aspartame is safe. You will never change you mind. But hey, if you want an explanation, you can listen to this: http://tinyurl.com/ybozn7y
Sorry, but there is massive evidence that fluoride helps enamel, but I know that it will not convince you. And HFCS is sugar in liquid form. It has the same effect on your body as sugar. We do not need to ban sugar, you just need to take off your tin foil hat. http://tinyurl.com/yzvepfd
You think “Big Pharma” is the modern day government snake oil? Why? Because they have to actually prove that their products work in controlled trials? You would prefer that they could just make up any claim they wanted and sell you something that has not been tested? Or do you just not trust them because they make money off of their products? Sounds more like anti-corporatism to me. The reason that their drugs are so expensive is that they take years and hundreds of millions of dollars in R&D to create. And they reason for that is that they actually have to do the research, unlike alt med that just makes things up. And by the way, last time I checked, s.c.a.m. (supplements, complimentary, and alternative medicine) was also a multi-billion dollar industry. Big Placebo does not give away their products for free either. How does that make one bad and not the other? Because one is all natural? All natural means nothing. http://skeptologic.com/2008/04/25/100-all-natural-nonsense/
zev said
dishonesty is easier.. big pharma stops validating at a certain point due to time and cost. it’s easier and more cost effective to help fund the fda. this facet is simply a tiny slice of the pie. good science is honest and productive. dishonesty motivates bad science and creates more problems than are solved to the benefit of a few and to detriment of many..