28 July 2009

D-Notice: Simon Singh

Via The Lay Scientist comes news of a mass-posting of an article which the Guardian's Science writer Simon Singh is being sued for by the British Chiropractic Association (see the numerous articles on The Lay Scientist for background information):
BEWARE THE SPINAL TRAP

Some practitioners claim it is a cure-all, but the research suggests chiropractic therapy has mixed results – and can even be lethal, says Simon Singh.

You might be surprised to know that the founder of chiropractic therapy, Daniel David Palmer, wrote that "99% of all diseases are caused by displaced vertebrae". In the 1860s, Palmer began to develop his theory that the spine was involved in almost every illness because the spinal cord connects the brain to the rest of the body. Therefore any misalignment could cause a problem in distant parts of the body.

In fact, Palmer’s first chiropractic intervention supposedly cured a man who had been profoundly deaf for 17 years. His second treatment was equally strange, because he claimed that he treated a patient with heart trouble by correcting a displaced vertebra.

You might think that modern chiropractors restrict themselves to treating back problems, but in fact some still possess quite wacky ideas. The fundamentalists argue that they can cure anything, including helping treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying – even though there is not a jot of evidence.

I can confidently label these assertions as utter nonsense because I have co-authored a book about alternative medicine with the world’s first professor of complementary medicine, Edzard Ernst. He learned chiropractic techniques himself and used them as a doctor. This is when he began to see the need for some critical evaluation. Among other projects, he examined the evidence from 70 trials exploring the benefits of chiropractic therapy in conditions unrelated to the back. He found no evidence to suggest that chiropractors could treat any such conditions.

But what about chiropractic in the context of treating back problems? Manipulating the spine can cure some problems, but results are mixed. To be fair, conventional approaches, such as physiotherapy, also struggle to treat back problems with any consistency. Nevertheless, conventional therapy is still preferable because of the serious dangers associated with chiropractic.

In 2001, a systematic review of five studies revealed that roughly half of all chiropractic patients experience temporary adverse effects, such as pain, numbness, stiffness, dizziness and headaches. These are relatively minor effects, but the frequency is very high, and this has to be weighed against the limited benefit offered by chiropractors.

More worryingly, the hallmark technique of the chiropractor, known as high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust, carries much more significant risks. This involves pushing joints beyond their natural range of motion by applying a short, sharp force. Although this is a safe procedure for most patients, others can suffer dislocations and fractures.

Worse still, manipulation of the neck can damage the vertebral arteries, which supply blood to the brain. So-called vertebral dissection can ultimately cut off the blood supply, which in turn can lead to a stroke and even death. Because there is usually a delay between the vertebral dissection and the blockage of blood to the brain, the link between chiropractic and strokes went unnoticed for many years. Recently, however, it has been possible to identify cases where spinal manipulation has certainly been the cause of vertebral dissection.

Laurie Mathiason was a 20-year-old Canadian waitress who visited a chiropractor 21 times between 1997 and 1998 to relieve her low-back pain. On her penultimate visit she complained of stiffness in her neck. That evening she began dropping plates at the restaurant, so she returned to the chiropractor. As the chiropractor manipulated her neck, Mathiason began to cry, her eyes started to roll, she foamed at the mouth and her body began to convulse. She was rushed to hospital, slipped into a coma and died three days later. At the inquest, the coroner declared: "Laurie died of a ruptured vertebral artery, which occurred in association with a chiropractic manipulation of the neck."

This case is not unique. In Canada alone there have been several other women who have died after receiving chiropractic therapy, and Edzard Ernst has identified about 700 cases of serious complications among the medical literature. This should be a major concern for health officials, particularly as under-reporting will mean that the actual number of cases is much higher.

If spinal manipulation were a drug with such serious adverse effects and so little demonstrable benefit, then it would almost certainly have been taken off the market.

Simon Singh is a science writer in London and the co-author, with Edzard Ernst, of Trick or Treatment? Alternative Medicine on Trial. This is an edited version of an article published in The Guardian for which Singh is being personally sued for libel by the British Chiropractic Association.
Spread it!

UPDATE: Via Jack of Kent comes the two sentences that were removed due to them being the allegedly libellous ones
"The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus treatments."
As Jack points out the BCA refer to them on their own website so it is difficult for them to be libellous.

The Sun Lies: Paedophil(i)Ie Dectector

I have another new post over on the Sun Lies.

This one covers one of the Sun's favourite topics: paedotriciansphiles.

24 July 2009

23 July 2009

Home Office: Drug possession is a victimless crime

From Transform comes word that the Home Office's latest report(PDF) regarding crime in England and Wales includes the following:
"The BCS excludes.... those crimes termed as victimless (e.g. possession of drugs)"
Is this perhaps the first very faint glimmer of hope towards the government-possibly-considering-thinking-about-becoming-interested-in-the-concept-of-a-proposal-of-an-idea-of-maybe-getting-around-to-look-into-a-start-of a more sensible drugs policy. I won't hold my breath, but who knows?

21 July 2009

Goodbye SOCPA; Hello Public Order Act?

Via Spy Blog comes this from the Parliament Protest blog:

The Labour Government has today published its long awaited

Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill

The Good News - the abhorrent and undemocratic requirement for Prior Written Authorisation by the Police and arbitrary Restrictions on small or spontaneous demonstrations, near Parliament seems to be on its way to being repealed.

Part 4

Public order

32 Demonstrations etc in the vicinity of Parliament

(1) Omit sections 132 to 138 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (c. 15) (which regulate demonstrations in the vicinity of Parliament).

Hurray !!

However, do not get too excited because:

(2) Schedule 4 (which inserts new powers into Part 2 of the Public Order Act 1986 (c. 64) etc) has effect.

This amendment to the Public Order Act 1986 is even longer and just as complicated as the SOCPA legislation it replaces.

It does not spell out any of the details, as it is enabling legislation, allowing for the creation of arbitrary laws via Statutory Instrument Orders, which can only be accepted or rejected by Parliament, and not amended in any way.

The main difference seems to be the "area around Parliament", defined as no more than 250 metres in a straight line from the nearest point in Parliament Square, rather than the still current Designated Area of up to 1 kilometre (the current Designated Area does not extend as far as that in all directions).

On the plus side it's significantly reduced, but it's still there. Sigh...

There's also this:
N.B. the existing Public Order Act 1986 already covers the 250 metres Area around the Parliament Square, so there must be something sneaky being planned for the Secondary Legislation Statutory Instrument Orders, which this Clause and Schedule would enable.
Let's see what happens. Of course, when I get in power the whole thing will be scrapped.

19 July 2009

"It was my job to apply The Formula"

I was reading this article on the Consumerist about ironic advertising which links to an internal memo from Ford which dates from the late-60s.

While reading the memo this quote from Fight Club sprang to mind:
JACK (V.O.)

I'm a recall coordinator. My job is to apply the formula.

Take the number of vehicles in the field, (A), and multiply it by the probable rate of failure, (B), then multiply the result by the average out-of-court settlement, (C).

A * B * C = X

If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
It's always reassuring to know they have their priorities sorted...

Tories v Brian Haw

From the BBC:
A Tory government would attempt to remove the long standing peace camp in Parliament Square, David Cameron says.

Anti-war campaigner Brian Haw has been camping opposite Parliament since 2001, surrounded by banners and placards.

He has been joined in the square by other protesters over the years - most recently a large group of Tamils.
For those who don't know Brian is the excuse behind the SOCPA Parliament protest law - the one that bans any unauthorised "demonstrations" within 1 km of Parliament.

Apparently Labour haven't done enough damage to the right to protest so the Tories will go even further. He's not harming anyone - in fact he's now a tourist attraction, just see the number of people who take photos of him when they visit the Westminster area - so leave him alone. Twats.

13 July 2009

The Sun Lies: "Schizo"

I have *another* new post over on the Sun Lies.

This is about complaints to the Press Complaints Commission about people suffering from schizophrenia.

[via a tip-off from Distillated]

Fuck the pain away...

From the BBC:
Uttering expletives when you hurt yourself is a sensible policy, according to scientists who have shown swearing can help reduce pain.

A study by Keele University researchers found volunteers who cursed at will could endure pain nearly 50% longer than civil-tongued peers.
Yay!

I think this is the best bit of the article:
Rohan Byrt of the Casual Swearing Appreciation Society said he thought the study was the first time swearing's benefits had been proved.
The "Casual Swearing Appreciation Society"?! Motherfucker!

The Sun Lies: Ghoul-gle Streetview

Another new 'un on the Sun Lies.

This time it covers patterns spotted on Google Streetview.

12 July 2009

D-Notice: Wikipedia and the National Portrait Gallery

According to the Londonist, a Wikipedia user is having legal proceedings threatened against him by the National Portrait Gallery who claim that by uploading onto Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Commons his own photographs of their paintings he's breaching copyright.

The problem is, the ones he's uploaded date from the Victorian age at the latest and so are well out of copyright. The NPG claim that the copyright is being broken by high-res images being uploaded a claim which according to the Londonist - and the law firm itself - has never been tested in an English court.

We appear to have the situation where a publicly-funded body is wasting taxpayers' money in an attempt to enforce copyright on public domain articles. It also comes across as a complete waste of time: for example, e.g. the Londonist's article has another photo so logically they should be sued, Google has numerous photos and there are also quite a few pictures on Flickr.

The only response is the old "I'm Spartacus" a.k.a. the Streisand Effect:

[a portrait of Charles Abbot, 1st Baron Colchester by John Hoppner]

EU v E-borders scheme

From the Observer:
A £1.2bn scheme to secure the UK's borders risks breaching European law because it restricts the right to free movement, say Commission officials.

Their verdict has thrown the future of the e-Borders scheme into question and prompted accusations that ministers are ignoring legal advice.
Sounds about right; we'll carry on with it no matter what. The fact that we are being criticised proves that we must be right!
The flagship government project, which will collect the electronic records of everyone who enters and leaves the UK, aims to tackle terrorism, crime and illegal immigration. Passengers will have to supply detailed personal information with their travel plans to their carrier.
Please can someone give me a good reason, not an excuse based on fear-mongering as to why this is needed?
A letter from Ernesto Bianchi, acting head of the General Justice, Freedom and Security Directorate, raises doubts about the legality of asking passengers for anything other than their passport.
Damn Eurocrats trying to control our way of life!

11 July 2009

The Sun Lies: V-sign Baby

I was going to put this article over on the Sun Lies, but it is so ludicrous and physically and biologically impossible, that I'd just be wasting my time in going through it properly.

Therefore, I'll do it briefly:

Sun: 23-weeks old foetus gives "V-sign" on an ultrasound scan.

Me: no, it can't possibly do that because it lacks the brain functions and motor skills until well after it is born.

9 July 2009

The Sun Lies: Easter Island Wonder Drug

I have another new (very brief) post on the Sun Lies which is about a miracle cure.

Hmm... That's three-in-a-row on here that are anti-Sun articles. Should I write about summat else?

6 July 2009

The Sun Lies: Lottery

Another article in the Sun Lies.

This time about how the Sun both supports the Lottery and raises concerns about it.

4 July 2009

The Sun Lies: BMI Calculator

I've got a new post over on the Sun Lies.

This one is about the Sun's good intentions with its BMI calculator.

2 July 2009

Sun <3 EU?

I was going to put this on the Sun Lies but decided against it, because it's more self-promotion.

Today's Sun has an article celebrating the fact that mobile phone roaming charges have been cut due to the EU.

Given the Sun's reputation to be not-entirely-favourable to Brussels I left the following comment:
What is with these Eurocrats always trying to control our way of life?
Impressively it's been published. I'm now wondering if anyone else will say anything about the Sun supporting the EU?

Inside the mind of Conspiracy Theorist Truth Seeker

I left the following comment on Lay Science about a post which explains the truth about Ben Goladacre et al:
Anonymous:

It's clear that you've been mislead by the CIA and their "Cuban" stooges.

The truth is that it's actually an off-shoot of the late-1930s Nazi-Soviet pact: both Hitler and Stalin wanted to ensure that in the future no-one would have a choice but to be "treated" by "evidence-based" or "science based" "medicine".

It's a little know fact that this one document - which led to the carving-up of eastern Europe - had an addendum attached to it in very-small print. It stated that both the Germans and the Russians would get together with the nascent pharmaceutical industry in the UK and the US - which was on its last legs due to the combined crippling effects of the Great Depression and Roosevelt's socialism-inspired "New Deal" - to ensure that they would help profit from the up-coming WWII by creating "cures" for "diseases".

Is it a co-incidence that "penicillin" (a known placebo) was first used during WWII? No! Think that it was - as the legend goes - stumbled upon by mistake by a "Scottish" scientist called "Alexander Fleming"? Don't be so blind! How else do you think it could have happened? These things don't just happen.

"But how do the CIA fit into this?" you might ask. It's very simple, the "CIA" were a front-group created by Hitler and Stalin to ensure that the US would no longer be free: the "CIA" is there to protect the US's interests and it is well-known that the best kind of slave is one who thinks that he is truly free. Not many people know what "CIA" actually means; the usual explanation for its acronym is "Central Intelligence Agency"; however, it really means "Created In Auschwitz", which proves how evil it is.

As for the "Cubans", well they're just a front group, including "Alexander Fleming" or, to give him his real name, "Alexandria Flamenco". They're not actually Cuban but are Mexican.

QED!
Have I been reading too many paranoid, right-wing websites?