Elevating Science, Elevating Democracy

Very nice and well written piece in the New York Times.

"The knock on science from its cultural and religious critics is that it is arrogant and materialistic...So the story goes...But this is balderdash. Science is not a monument of received Truth but something that people do to look for truth."

Statistical Literacy Guide

DC's Improbable Science has an interesting link -the Statistical Literacy Guide- located in the UK commons library archive regarding the oft misunderstood and abused science of statistics.

This is a great read and introduces the reader to many of the nuances of statistical analysis and how these important tools can be inappropriately spun "a la politico" into down right meaningless and vacuous interpretations.

A very helpful piece for those of us trying to tease out real meaning from a sea of confusion regarding "new" (or old) research purported to "prove" or support grandiose claims that pop up from most every sector in the medical and -especially- the psuedo-medical world.

Medicines that contain no medicine and other follies

David Colquhoun wrote a very nice article regarding the blurring between "alternative medicine" and outright quackery and self delusion. This is an important statement in the struggle to redirect all too limited funds towards more appropriate areas of medical research.

It also brings to the fore a telling problem for Complementary and Alternative supporters. They just don't know when to call off or discontinue a modality when there is little or no supporting evidence of efficacy.

Some of the commentators I read on this humble blog seem to exude a mix of active denialism, ignorance or mistrust of scientific methodology and a curious rigid undergirding of belief based opinions not very amenable to objectivity.

Indeed, many in the CAM field defend their particular fixations (be it acupuncture, homeopathy, nutritional supplement...etc.) claiming "more studies are needed"ad infinitum, that you just can't properly test it -when you can if it's real, that it's "complicated" (appeal to complexity) or "you do it too" accusations (Tu Quoque).

They very commonly support demands and claims with an astounding quagmire of classical fallacious reasoning (dare I say mental masturbation) and resist reality and science based information - especially if it is unsupportive of their cause.

Dr Colquhoun nicely sums up some CAM modalities as follows (I'm sure to the shagrin of beleivers) thusly:

"Homeopathy: giving patients medicines that contain no medicine whatsoever.

Herbal medicine: giving patients an unknown dose of a medicine, of unknown effectiveness and unknown safety.

Acupuncture: a rather theatrical placebo, with no real therapeutic benefit in most if not all cases.

Chiropractic: an invention of a 19 th century salesmen, based on nonsensical principles, and shown to be no more effective than other manipulative therapies, but less safe.

Reflexology: plain old foot massage, overlaid with utter nonsense about non-existent connections between your feet and your thyroid gland.

Nutritional therapy: self-styled ‘nutritionists’ making unjustified claims about diet to sell unnecessary supplements."

At any rate, read the article when you can.

How can you recognize pseudoscience?

What is it?....How can I recognize it?

From the Pseudoscience blog:

"A pseudoscience is a belief or process which masquerades as science in an attempt to claim a legitimacy which it would not otherwise be able to achieve on its own terms; it is often known as fringe- or alternative science. The most important of its defects is usually the lack of the carefully controlled and thoughtfully interpreted experiments which provide the foundation of the natural sciences and which contribute to their advancement.

Of course, the pursuit of scientific knowledge usually involves elements of intuition and guesswork; experiments do not always test a theory adequately, and experimental results can be incorrectly interpreted or even wrong. In legitimate science, however, these problems tend to be self-correcting, if not by the original researchers themselves, then through the critical scrutiny of the greater scientific community. Critical thinking is an essential element of science -----------------------------------------

science	pseudoscience	comment
The primary goal of science is to achieve a more complete and more unified understanding of the physical world.	Pseudosciences are more likely to be driven by ideological, cultural, or commercial goals.	Some examples: astrology (from ancient Babylonian culture,) UFO-ology (popular culture and mistrust of government), Creation Science (attempt to justify a literal interpretation of the Bible), "structure-altered" waters (commercial quackery.)
Most scientific fields are the subjects of intense research which result in the continual expansion of knowledge in the discipline.	The field has evolved very little since it was first established. The small amount of research and experimentation that is carried out is generally done more to justify the belief than to extend it.	The search for new knowledge is the driving force behind the evolution of any scientific field. Nearly every new finding raises new questions that beg exploration. There is little evidence of this in the pseudosciences.
Workers in the field commonly seek out counterexamples or findings that appear to be inconsistent with accepted theories.	In the pseudosciences, a challenge to accepted dogma is often considered a hostile act if not heresy, and leads to bitter disputes or even schisms.	Sciences advance by accommodating themselves to change as new information is obtained. In science, the person who shows that a generally accepted belief is wrong or incomplete is more likely to be considered a hero than a heretic.
Observations or data that are not consistent with current scientific understanding, once shown to be credible, generate intense interest among scientists and stimulate additional studies.	Observations or data that are not consistent with established beliefs tend to be ignored or actively suppressed.	Have you noticed how self-styled psychics always seem eager to announce their predictions for the new year, but never like to talk about how many of last years' predictions were correct?
Science is a process in which each principle must be tested in the crucible of experience and remains subject to being questioned or rejected at any time.	The major tenets and principles of the field are often not falsifiable, and are unlikely ever to be altered or shown to be wrong.	Enthusiasts incorrectly take the logical impossibility of disproving a pseudoscientific priniciple as evidence of its validity.
Scientific ideas and concepts must stand or fall on their own merits, based on existing knowledge and on evidence.	Pseudoscientific concepts tend to be shaped by individual egos and personalities, almost always by individuals who are not in contact with mainstream science. They often invoke authority (a famous name, for example) for support.	Have you ever noticed how proponents of pseudoscientific ideas are more likely to list all of the degrees they have?
Scientific explanations must be stated in clear, unambigous terms.	Pseudoscientific explanations tend to be vague and ambiguous, often invoking scientific terms in dubious contexts.	Phrases such as "energy vibrations" or "subtle energy fields" may sound impressive, but they are essentially meaningless.

Chiropractic wishfull thinking...

...pediatric specialty???

The chirotak discussion forum has a very enlightening thread regarding chiropractic perdiatric specialty training.

Really, no surprises.

Pediatrics: DC vs. MD Training« Thread Started on Dec 6, 2007, 10:34pm »

I have been looking through websites of various "Pediatric" Chiropractors and most seem to be very proud that they obtained their "Pediatric Certification" by completing a 300 hour course.

Let's compare the number of hours of training in Pediatrics:

DC= 300 hours at the Holiday Inn

MDPediatrician= 80 hrs/week X 50 weeks X 3 years= 12,000 hrs

Now how about those who treat childhood asthma and allergy:

DC= 300 hours at the Holiday Inn

MD Pediatric Allergist :-----12,000 hrs for basic Pediatric Residency------8,000 hrs for Pediatric Allergy Fellowship GRAND TOTAL= 20,000 hrs of training

QUESTIONS:

1) Do they bring newborn babies to the Holiday Inn so the DCs can practice adjustment?

A. Yes

B. No

2) If not, where do the DCs get their clinical practice on newborns?

A. Motel 6

B. Airport Best Western

C. Days Inn

D. They get no clinical practice

3) How delusional must one be to adjust a newborn or treat childhood asthma or epilepsy with some bogus nonsense?

A. Very

B. Very, very

4) What in chiropractic "philosophy" allows a DC to be an expert in vaccination and infectious disease?

A. Sid said so

B. It has to do with nerve energy

C. C3 is pressing on the pituitary

D. Nothing.....nothing at all

5) Is the infectious disease seminar always held at the Holiday Inn or can it sometimes be at the Ramada?

A. Always at the Holiday Inn

B. Sometimes at the Ramada

C. Holiday Inn on South Cobb Parkway only

D. Holiday Inn off of Delk Road and I-75 only

Detoxin' your wallet dry!

...on todays snake oils
Steven Novella at Nuerologica blog has -as usual- an excellent take down of some really juicy pseudoscience and related hubris that can only be described as classic scam artistry.

He notes "There is a cycle to the snake oil market - like the fashion industry. Words and claims come in and out of fashion, used for marketing impact rather than scientific accuracy. Some words, like “natural” and “energy” have staying power, while others last for a time and then may fade, but can come back into fashion like wide ties.... Recently “detox” is all the rage."

Dr Novella notes that the Sense about Science group is in the forefront of taking down the ridiculous and spurious claims purveyors of "detox" nostrums blantantly trumpet to a sadly creduluos populace.

As their Debunking Detox pamphlet puts it:

" The multi million pound detox industry sells products with little evidence to support their use. These products trade on claims about the body which are often wrong and can be dangerous."

Dr Novella concludes his post noting that "What the marketers of detox products have done is made the term “detox” meaningless - actually the term now is nothing but a red flag for snake oil."

On a related note, I was recently introduced to a "super juice" supplement product called Goji juice. Of course it's supposed to be nothing short of some miraculous nectar from the gods.

Not!

Under closer scrutiny, other than being made from dehydrated goji berrys from China, this product does not live up to the rather outlandish claims of many of its distributors (looks like fodder for a future investigative post!).

In fact, these wild statements are reminsent of the false hype and hyperbole from the Mangosteen crowd. It's the same old pimping up of some "exotic" special elixir....basically fruit juice in a golden wrapper. An interesting skeptical blog seeks to take this issue head on. I wish them well!

The Emperor’s postmodern clothes

The often over the top relativism in much of today’s academic environment (perhaps with emphasis in the humanities) is an increasingly frustrating phenomenon. The seemingly stunning disregard for evidential empiricism and apathy towards observable reality has resulted, for example, in the metastasis of un-proven and dubious medical modalities into the very institutions charged to protect reason and critical thought.

Here is a humorous comparative list translating some “politically correct” phrases into what is really meant when they are uttered. Postmodernism is an interesting philosophical exercise with respect to human social interactions, but it does have one major drawback if extended beyond the realm of the mind – reality.

A brief guide to deconstructing academically fashionable phrases for the uninitiated (partial exerpt)

David A. Levy

All points of view are equally valid

…….I am willing to abandon all logic and evidence just to maintain the illusion that I am being open-minded and fair.

There is no objective reality

…….except for what I’m saying right now.

In our culture, empiricism is over-privileged

…….I don’t have any facts to back up my argument.

I’m not saying better,I’m saying different

…..I’m saying better.

Let us start a dialogue

….Let me start a monologue.

This warrants more conversation

…I can’t believe that you have the temerity not to agree with me.

Don’t you think that sounds kind of racist?

….good luck disagreeing with me now.

One can prove anything with statistics

…I should have paid more attention in stats class.

The interreferential nature of our phenomenological field can be neither deconstructed nor decontextualized from our ontological meta-narrative

…Don’t I sound really intellectual and hip?

Science is merely one more opinion

…My Uncle Bill told me so.

Ref: Skeptical Inquirer Vol32, No. 6 Nov/Dec 2008