February 8, 2008 at 11:25 am · Filed under Science & Skepticism
BBC News reports Acupuncture ‘boosts IVF chances’ others such as the Chicago Tribune are a bit more sober, yet still misleading, using the headline Acupuncture might help with fertility.
To be true to the meta-analysis study, the headline should really read:
Acupuncture might help one out of ten women get pregnant via IVF treatment at Chinese clinics that have relatively low rates of success; patients in European clinics with high rates of success will get no benefit.
Let me break this down into easy to read bullet points:
- This is not a new study just a meta-analysis of seven previously published studies
- These studies used different methodologies and we don’t know what the selection criteria was or what bias there might have been
- The studies at European clinics showed no effect
- The only studies that showed any effect were Chinese IVF clinic studies
- Since the only positive research came from Chinese research this calls the entire meta-analysis into doubt
- Unless — acupuncture only works in China — Ha!
For a more in depth breakdown on this recent study, read Peter Sanderson’s blog post Misleading acupuncture / IVF headlines.
In another study back in september, acupuncture was shown to have no effect beyond the placebo effect. Again the media distorted this acupuncture study. Others have already done an excellent job dissecting the acupuncture back pain studies here and here.
The only real conclusion to make from all of this is that acupuncture has one solidly empirical benefit: with enough positive manipulation any researcher can get international headlines.
January 30, 2008 at 5:52 pm · Filed under Minds, Brains, & inbetween + Science & Skepticism
A lot of science geeks enjoy lambasting the press for their excessive use of hype in reporting science and medical news. The excellent Bad Science blog specializes in this sort of media skewering, as do several ScienceBlogs writers and other science bloggers.
One problem with all this finger pointing is the fact that scientists and doctors often infuse quite a bit of hyperbole themselves whenever they discuss their research. The discussion section of any paper is often where the forest of wild tangents lives. This is especially true with basic science research where they use this section to say “See! See! Our research is relevant too! It’s worth the funding since it’ll lead to new cures for the Whathaveyou Syndrome.”
Case in point, I was recently gleaning a few recent cocaine research study news releases and I noticed a distinct lack of reality with the conjecture. All these come from Science Daily which prints articles in their original form from universities and research organizations. This all hyperboles are coming straight from the horses mouth.
“We have a brain hard-wired to appreciate rewards, and cocaine and other drugs of abuse latch onto this system. We are looking at the potential for new medications that reduce the brain’s sensitivity to these conditioned drug cues and would give patients a fighting chance to manage their urges.” (Subconscious Signals Can Trigger Drug Craving) 1
“Based on this study, it appears that promising new therapies for addiction may be based on treatments that mute the desire to escalate cocaine intake by blocking the elevation of brain reward thresholds produced by chronic cocaine use.” (Research Helps Explain Why Perception Of Pleasure Decreases With Chronic Cocaine Use) 2
Anyone with an ounce (28.3495231 grams) of scientific skepticism can see right through any of this, tear into the meat of the study, toss out the wild tangents, and hunt for connections to broader theories and future research ideas. This however is not the journalist’s job. There job is to make the science seem more like SCIENCE!
SCIENCE! journalism — as opposed to science journalism — is useful for keeping science interesting and relevant to the public at large, and hopefully inspiring the next generation of scientists. Of course, it also has it’s problems in that distorts the science, but as I mentioned, scientists are pretty good at doing that themselves.
Footnotes
- I.E., put the addict on an antipsychotic (aka dopamine antagonist). Antipsychotics have fun side effects like the desire to sleep a lot, reduced libido, weight gain, and a general anhedonia (they don’t get too exited about anything). Sure it may deaden the cravings (and possibly protect D2 receptors), but will addicts really willingly take a drug that makes them feel like they are in continual withdrawal?
- I.E., somehow get the addict to take some sort of anti-psychotic when they are in the middle of their drug binge — even better if it’s their first drug binge. Sorry to burst your bubble but this ain’t gonna happen.
- The cocaine vaccine while not a panacea shows some promise — if ethically awkward. I’ve been meaning to write something on it but I want to put a bit more research into that post.
November 21, 2007 at 12:31 pm · Filed under Politics + Science & Skepticism
Recent stem cell advancements have been been exploding across the headlines. If you somehow missed these headlines, the bulk of it is “researchers have figured out how to reprogram adult cell into a state that is nearly indistinguishable from embryonic, pluripotent stem cells.”
Unlike some science stories in the news this isn’t pure hype; it is truly important and has been tested by multiple labs. However, like normal, the media reports are mostly lacking in details and full of loud pronouncements about how this tolls the end of the culture wars and how using embryonic stem cells is now “old-fashioned.”
Like always the truth is more complex. And of course the fabulous ScienceBlogs lays it all out where the media falls flat. PZ Myers, of Pharyngula offers an excellent explanation of the research and it’s implications entitled Stem Cell Breakthrough. Also, the Denialism Blog has a great post about it entitled, Reprogramming adult cells into pluripotent stem cells - what do these new results mean. The blog Framing Science wrote two posts detailing how this is going to effect the future of the stem cell debate: The Next Stage in the Stem Cell Debate Begins! and THE DISCOVERY: What It Means for Framing & News Coverage.
I highly recommend you read these excellent articles, but for those of you who are too busy I offer a few important bullet points:
- “Americans did not make this discovery; Japanese researchers did. It required understanding of gene expression in embryonic stem cells, an understanding that was hampered in our country. ” (PZ Myers)
- This discovery is truly important and has been tested by multiple labs.
- “What the investigators have accomplished is to discover the reset button for the cell, but the way they currently press it is by hitting it hard with a ball peen hammer.” (PZ Myers)
- This new method is still somewhat crude and this means that the cells cannot be used for theraputic purposes as these cells have a higher chance of becoming cancerous than embryonic stem cells.
- This does not spell the end of embryonic stem cells as in order to find a more eloquent way of switching the “reset button” more research using embryonic stem cells will be needed.
Sadly, I think science has already lost the (religiously polarized, scientifically illiterate) American public on this issue. The media has already spin this as a win for the Christian Right and is ignoring that fact that it is really a win for embryonic stem cell researchers — and more importantly that more embryonic stem cell research is needed.
November 16, 2007 at 2:52 pm · Filed under uncategorized + Minds, Brains, & inbetween + Politics
The Society of Homeopaths is holding a symposium on the treatment of AIDS in December. Their flier states that “Harry van der Zee will introduce us to a completely different and controversial treatment for AIDS in Africa using a new set of healing remedies created by Peter Chappell.”
And what is this “completely different and controversial treatment” you ask? He offers “healing downloads”:
“Downloads are based upon resonance which is an ancient principle for healing and resonance is a natural law that has always existed. Modern quantum physics is confirming resonance works on all levels of existence.”
And how do you get these “healing downloads”? Well he sells them on iTunes of course “engrafted” onto jazz music!
“The music is simply the carrier and alerts you to listen. The download is engrafted on the music by a special process. That is the new technology.”
Hell maybe we can just preload his quantum engrafted ancient healing resonance music on all those XO Laptops! That’ll solve the African AIDS crisis in no time!
ugh
It’s this sorta shit that pisses me off about hemopathology and all the other new ager placebo crap. I’m not gonna even bother disproving hemopathology for you here as others have done it better than me.
I ran into someone tangentially in my social circle the other day who exclaimed the benefits of using magnets to balance the body. I admit that my initial response was mildly snarky, and in turn their response was basically an outright distrust of “western medicine” because that’s “how [they] were raised.” For them it had become a religion.
Reiki, acupuncture, hemeopathology, prayer, MMR vaccine hysteria, witch doctors, raping virgins to get rid of AIDS — it’s all part of the same circle of faith-based medicine. At best it’s hucksterism sucking money out of wallets of dupes; and at worst it’s spreading disinformation and killing patients who forgo vaccines and real treatment. Obviously, it’s mostly the latter that pisses me off about the former.
When faced with this sorta new ager stuff (fairly common here in San Francisco), I think it’s important to challenge these ideas. However, it can be hard not to come off sounding disdainful (because frankly that’s basically how I feel).
Any other skeptics out there have ways of approaching these conversations?
September 10, 2007 at 8:28 pm · Filed under Design & Web Geekery + Politics
Ben Stein is flashing some skin for the new Intelligent Design propaganda documentary film “Expelled.”
He’s the film’s mascot and showman as evidenced by the movie’s slick hyperbole filled website. With his bare knees, grotesquely enlarged head, and sour expression, Stein manages to permanently ruin the school uniform fetish for anyone who isn’t a 60 year old Nixon speech writer.
Oh, gotta love the Big Science logo they created (see it waving on the flag on the website) with the globe, book, and the lock, and the slogan “No Intelligence Allowed.” Their marketers and designers are really good! (and they’ve probably played too much of the game Bully)
There’s obviously a decent bit of cash behind this film. The website is slick as is the trailer, and it’s being promoted by Motive, the people behind Gibson’s Passion of the Christ marketing blitz. This isn’t another nutjob with a movie camera, we’re looking at a full out well-crafted propaganda film that stands to revitalize the ID movement left bruised after the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District court case.
This time they’re coming at it with the free speech angle so beloved by the right wing crowd as of late — as evidenced by Ben Stein’s megaphone and the graffiti font. As The Bad Idea Blog states, “Considering the audience and marketing, the focus of the film is savvy: almost entirely on the meta-issue of the alleged intellectual suppression of ideas, complete with folks like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris as the bogeymen getting ready to man the gulags.”
The movie will probably be full of hyperbole, re-edited hidden-agenda interviews, and outright lies. PZ Myers of Pharyngula will be probably be seen in the movie as he was interviewed earlier this year by Mark Mathis, the associate producer of Expelled, who lied about the title and nature of the film. What we’re looking at is Ben Stein as a conservative Michael Moore, but probably with even less fact-checking.
Sadly, the movie is probably going to go over well with it’s target audience, and it’ll probably sway over a bunch of people who could have cared less before. This renewed push will probably result in more stupid ID legislation and more IDiots being elected to local school boards. Intelligent Design is bankrupt without anything to hold it up scientifically, but the facts didn’t stand in the way of our President’s case for war.
The fight with ID obviously isn’t over yet. One day, it may finally fizzle out as public opinion grows tried of it — I’ll rejoice when that day comes — but in the mean time our bedraggled academic system continues to have to waste it’s time and resources battling ID’s incessant PR machine.
January 16, 2007 at 7:16 pm · Filed under Art Freak Culture + Life, Meaning, & Selfhood
I’ve been involved in an interested email exchange lately with a friend who sent me a mass email about Reiki. My request to be removed from his “bullshit Reiki spam list” was admittedly a bit overly confrontational. However, the dialog since has been more cordial and has had the benefit of allowing me to better reflect on my attitude and behavior towards Reiki and other specious claims.
Of course, I could have just said a simple “no thank you” (or run a email filter of his name and the word “reiki”). This avoidant approach feels wrong to me given my desire to discourage medical psuedoscience, and my basic underlying goal of encouraging skepticism for unproven ideas/beliefs of all stripes.
In asking myself why this has become important to me, I came upon an answer that links with my artist/punk/freak roots: “Question Authority”
I run in circle of burners, artists, punks, and related freaks for whom the motto of “Question Authority” is often tossed about. Unfortunately, many of these same people end up mistaking the lure of sub/anti-culture authority for the noble act true questioning. While rebelling from mainstream thought, they fall for specious claims like reiki and astrology and echinacea and the utopian dreams of a worldwide gift economy. These beliefs are tantalizing due to the intrinsic draw of anecdotal experiences of ones peers or idols and the sense of freedom invoked by believing something seemingly novel.
True questioning is a search for answers beyond any authority sprouting it’s opinions—whether that authority is a priest, guru, teacher, politician, scientist, celebrity, tv, book, blog, parent, friend, lover, or even one’s self. Separating the underlying reality from the influence of authority, the tyranny of peer pressure, and our own cognitive biases is often a difficult process full of half starts and dead ends, but it is an admirable and worthwhile goal.
The motto of “Question Authority” may be rooted in punk, but it is grounded in scientific empiricism.
