Table of Contents:
A heavy discussion has being going on for weeks now about a study that appeared to validate the power-of-prayer notion that has been under question for so many decades. I've declined to address the current exposure of the farce until it was definitively settled; that time has arrived.
Dr. Bruce Flamm, a clinical professor of gynecology and obstetrics at the University of California, beginning in 2001, published critiques of the study, which purportedly demonstrated that prayer could help infertile women to conceive. In The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine, and in the current issue of Skeptic magazine, Flamm exposed the farce, which had been positively accepted and heralded in the media — printed in the New York Times, and featured on ABC's Good Morning America.
New York's Columbia University and the Journal of Reproductive Medicine (JRM), through three "researchers," had accepted that the study results were positive, proving that so-called intercessory prayer (IP) had resulted in a pregnancy rate of 50% for those who received it, compared with only 26% for those who did not. One of the researchers they had accepted was Daniel Wirth, who had previously published many research articles claiming miraculous, supernatural healing. He was not a medical doctor; he had a law degree and a masters degree in parapsychology, and headed up "Healing Sciences International," in California, where he taught and practiced "non-contact therapeutic touch," a far-out example of prime quackery if ever there was one. The other two researchers were Columbia University fertility specialists, Dr. Kwang Cha and Dr. Rogerio Lobo. Dr. Cha has since left Columbia and now helps to run fertility clinics in Los Angeles and in Korea. He will not respond to inquiries on the scandal. Dr. Lobo, until recently chairman of obstetrics and gynecology at Columbia, and who was originally identified by the university as the team's leader, is still at Columbia, but will not return phone calls or emails about the matter. Silence is their entire defense.
On 18 May, 2004, Daniel Wirth pleaded guilty to multi-million-dollar fraud charges against US cable telecommunications company Adelphia Communications. He now faces up to five years in jail and up to $250,000 in fines.
The protocol of the study relied on different groups of pray-ers addressing their attention to different groups of Korean women, and some actually assigned to pray for some of their fellow pray-ers. In their report, the researchers had claimed that women at a South Korean hospital who had received in vitro fertilization were twice as likely as others to conceive if, unknown to them, prayers were uttered in their behalf. These were not ordinary prayers, but prayers made by strangers, Christians located thousands of miles away in the U.S.A., Canada, and Australia who were only shown unmarked photos of the Korean women in the experiment.
An alarmed Dr. Flamm had immediately sent e-mail and critical letters to Dr. George Wied, the editor of the JRM, and had tried repeatedly to contact him by phone, but heard nothing from him. Three years later, he has still not received any response. Perhaps Dr. Wied is not yet as satisfied with Dr. Flamm's academic standing, as he was with Wirth's?
Obviously embarrassed, but not enough to bring them to acknowledge their accountability, both Columbia University and the Journal of Reproductive Medicine have chosen to simply ignore attempts by the media and the public to obtain explanations for this fiasco. Columbia now says that Lobo only provided "editorial review and assistance" with the publication of the study, and the press release announcing the study has just now been taken off their website. The JRM has announced that it is "investigating the matter" for a future edition, and has removed the discredited study from its site.
Still, serious questions arise, succinctly asked by Leon Jaroff for TIME Magazine:
How could Dr. Lobo, a respected scientist, have permitted the release of a flawed study co-authored by a medically-illiterate con man like Wirth? And why did the JRMs peer-review system fail, before publication, to detect the inconsistencies and unsound methodology in the in-vitro study? Who were the peers who vetted it? And why did both Dr. Lobo and Dr. George Wied consistently stonewall for nearly three years when challenged about the study?
When cornered, scientists appear to scurry into those crowded Ivory Towers. Benveniste, Josephson, and so many others are making that Tower very unstable….
MORE PSEUDOSCIENCE EARNING CREDITS
Reader "R. B., Psy.D." tells us about the latest in accepted quackery:
I just had to write after receiving an unsolicited brochure that epitomizes quackery in the mental health world. My husband winced when he retrieved it from our mailbox, as he knew it would spark a tirade. And boy, did it. I quote:
Keep Your Energies Humming! A hands-on workshop in Energy Medicine. A growing number of professionals believe that the ability of energy psychology to non-invasively shift electromagnetic processes in the brain makes it one of the most exciting developments to emerge from the mental health field in the past decade....Energy Psychology shows you how to stimulate specific energy points on your body at the same time that you have brought to mind a psychological problem or goal you would like to address. Activating these points sends electrical impulses that can be harnessed to help overcome emotional problems and to install positive mental habits.
The brochure goes on to define "Energy Medicine":
The human body is composed of 75 trillion cells, each connected electrochemically with up to 10 thousand other cells. Energy medicine works directly with the electromagnetic and more subtle energies that orchestrate health, emotions, and behavior within this incomprehensively complex network...
Goals for this workshop are:
Understand the central role of the "energy body" to the health of the physical body.
Using energy techniques to improve psychological problems.Ideas for incorporating Energy Medicine into your practice.
So then, I think, maybe I can be a micron less embarrassed because CEUs for clinical psychologists like myself, are not included in this list. To my dismay, I discover one of the presenters is a "clinical psychologist" from a Western state. I don't know about that specific Western state, but usually the term "clinical psychologist" means someone with a 5+ year doctoral degree who is licensed as a clinical psychologist.
I ended my membership with the American Psychological Association because they do nothing about this type of thing but take lots of my money. In my mind, CEU credits give "validity" to this nonsense and this just further demonstrates how far we are slipping down an extremely slippery slope. I can only hope someone sues over this and the state board disciplines these people, otherwise I may as well hang up my hat now; no one will be able to tell the difference between empirically-validated treatment by research-minded clinicians and irresponsible, shoot-from-the-hip hooey, in a few years.
Oh, and by the way, you have to pay ten dollars for your CEU certificate in addition to about $200 for the workshop. Amazing.At this point, I'm thinking: please tell me this is a joke. Unfortunately, not only is it not a joke, but some Continuing Education bodies have even granted CEU [Continuing Education Unit] credit for this hooey! Those agencies are as follows: The National Board for Certified Counselors, California LCSWs and MFCCs, Illinois Department of Professional Regulation (Social Workers), the California Board of Registered Nursing, and the American Massage Therapy Association. Is there a scarlet letter "Q" for these people?
It's not only on these "extra credits" plans that such carelessness is found. This shows up in very well-respected and "traditional" campuses and educational systems, as well. And I see no present sign of improvement in the discrimination between pseudoscience and reality. What is happening to our standards of education in the USA?
Two weeks ago, hundreds of Muslims flocked to a German hospital where an Internet site — www.Turkdunya.de had reported that "The Messiah" was being breast-fed by its "resurrected" mother. A hospital said large groups of women with children were among those who had traveled across Germany and from the nearby Netherlands in the last two weeks, asking the Essen university clinic to let them visit the "Messiah." The story was that a woman in the clinic had given birth to the Messiah, and then had died. The story went that she was later dug up, still alive but with her whole body burned, with the exception of her two breasts — conveniently. The naïve were told that Allah had ordered the woman to feed the child for forty days, and to then die again.
No, this is not a re-write of "Plan Nine from Outer Space," the 1959 movie generally believed to be the worst movie ever made. This crazy story was published on a Turkish Internet site, and even though hospital officials told visitors there was no such woman in the maternity clinic, many still chose to believe it and persisted in clamoring to see the mother and child.
Well, www.Turkdunya.de also features an "Astroloji" section…. Read into that, what you will.
THE ONGOING ARGUMENT-FROM-IGNORANCE
After making clear that these are his own personal observations, UK reader Huw Roberts enlightens us about a recent BBC2 news analysis program in the UK, Newsnight (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight), a discussion about the inclusion of complementary medicines on the National Health Service there:
The discussion was presented and chaired by Gavin Esler, who introduced it with some quotations and statistics from the Prince of Wales Foundation for Integrated Health:
In 1999 the UK spent £1.6 billion on complementary healthcare compared to £59 billion for the NHS. One survey suggests around 1 in 5 of us turn to complementary medicine at one time or another and perhaps approximately half the G.P. [General Practitioner] medical practices in England offer some kind of access to complementary and alternative therapies.
The main discussion on the program was between Lord Dick Taverne, who is the chair of "Sense about Science," and David Tredinnick, Tory MP on the "House of Commons All-Party Group on Integrated Medicine." Lord Taverne argued convincingly that, regardless of their popularity, alternative medicines should not be offered on the NHS unless there is evidence that they work. He argued, for example, that a lot of people believe in astrology but that this doesn't mean that the government should pay for it.
Lord Taverne rallied well and attempted to answer the facts in the blitz as best he could:
David Tredinnick pointed out that a lot of "this stuff" (alternative medicine) is already available on the Health Service. He further stated that some Chinese methods have been used for thousands of years, so that for Dick to state that there is no evidence for the methods, would be quite wrong. Finally he said that Homeopathic medicine has been available on the Health service since its inception (whether he meant the inception of homeopathic medicine or of the health service, I'm not sure). Mr. Tredinnick basically used a fact blitz to attempt to carry the issue. Quite what motivates him in this, I'm not sure.
The Royal Society [the UK national academy for science] is looking and hasn't found any evidence to speak of [for the effectiveness of alternative medicines] … The fact that a practice of medicine is hundreds of years old ... means often that it's simply based on superstition…. Homeopathy ... there's no evidence.
Tredinnick countered:
Well there are five hospitals offering homeopathy in the NHS now. There's a new one in Glasgow and they're re-building the Royal London Homeopathic, so surely, if there's no evidence and it doesn't work, why are we wasting money on it? ... The more reduced the dose, the more effective it is in making the body repair itself.
And he sees this as a "choice" issue! He continued:
I would be very disappointed if the next Conservative Government ... doesn't offer a much greater range of complementary therapies....I have to say to Dick that his approach is rather out-dated.
For me, the best quote, and the real reason I'm writing in, was the following from David Tredinnick where he defended astrology by saying: At various points in the debate, Lord Taverne likened complementary medicines to astrology. He also took a poke at journalists by mentioning that the most highly-paid journalist, just-about, in Britain, is an astrologer. He did this as a way of pointing out that just because something is popular, or a widely-held belief, that does not make it true or advisable.
It's a very weak argument to rubbish astrology when we rely on the Sun going round the Earth and its influence on us, and the Moon cycles are known to affect tides and women.
Refreshingly, the presenter Gavin Esler made it fairly clear (to those of use who were listening) that he has little time for such rubbish. The terrifying thing is that this man Tredinnick is a Member of Parliament! He was elected by the public and he has a real office where he can actually spend large amounts of my money and influence my life based on these absurd notions!
Huw, at least he doesn't have his horoscope cast to find out what he should do as President of the United States; we Americans can lay claim to that distinction. One must wonder if Tredinnick regularly has his horoscope drawn up, though. I wouldn't be at all surprised….
Kudos to Lord Dick Taverne! Now he knows how junk science and illogic can confound reason and common sense. As for M.P. Tredinnick, I suspect he knows where the votes are to be found.
Reader Eric Miles writes:
I used to sit near the stage at the end of many shows and listen to members of the audience approach the trainers (notice that they were clearly identified as "trainers") and the animals, and gush about how intelligent and intuitive that one of our birds was.I'd like to share with you a variation on the "Clever Hans" trick that you've recently written about. Until 2 months ago when my daughter was born and I retired to become a full-time father, I was a producer of shows for theme parks around the U.S. One of the most successful shows involved what we generalized as a "domestic animal" presentation. In the show that I speak of, there was a very well-trained parrot who was able (through the cunning of his trainers/handlers) to convince the audience that he had a thorough command of basic arithmetic.
People were convinced that this bird could do math. It was as if they believed that animals could not be party to a basic trick/swindle and it had to be on the up-and-up.
As long as there were batteries for the laser pointer and a person backstage with a basic knowledge of arithmetic — the act was a success.
Hans lives.
Here was the gag: We would place a bird on a piece of piping with his back to the stage curtain. On the audience side of the pipe, we would sequentially have 10 pieces of wood with the digits 0 through 9 printed on them. Imagine the audience seeing 10 numbered "tombstones" with a bird on a pipe running back-and-forth behind them. We would ask the audience to call out any basic math problem that had a solution that was from 0 to 9. Without fail — save human error — the bird would shuffle along the pipe and knock down the correct plank with the answer on it.
Yep. He looks just like a parrot, but he lives….! And so does Phineas Taylor Barnum…. Ever see a cat react to a laser pointer….?
Reader Kevin Delgado:
What is it that makes people like me, who value science and rationalism above almost anything, anathema to almost everybody else? I can't tell you the number of times I've been condescended to, with phrases like "you just need to believe in something," or "there are things that we can never understand." I don't believe either of these things. Believing in something, without any reason for doing so, is just plain nuts. And recognizing that we don't understand something, but assuming we can't, is just as nuts.
I have a friend who believes his "chi" power makes him a better reservist soldier (nothing said about its ability to make him a better trash collector when he's not on duty). Conserving his chi extends to not having an orgasm, as the medium of male chi is semen, in his philosophy, which means that he's had several very annoyed and disappointed girlfriends in the last few years. When I pointed out that this is an incredibly old belief not supported by any kind of science, he derided me for only listening to science — obviously I'd been seduced away from the true way as our ancestors knew it, and I'd do better to open my mind to realities I couldn't see.
I have another friend — my closest friend in world — who has a tumor in his brain that can't be treated with surgery, radiation or chemicals. His only hope, according to his doctor, is to have the best possible attitude he can, and to reduce stress in his life wherever possible. This type of tumor doesn't grow very fast, so he goes in for MRIs only about every six months to see if any growth can be seen. Since being diagnosed, he's looked into acupuncture, Chinese herbal medicine (including some weird chicken blood concoctions) and meditation. The good news is that he's had zero growth in his tumor. While I am inclined to bust his chops for buying into what I think of as garbage, I do recognize that there may be some benefit to just hoping that it will work — the placebo effect.
I'm confronted on all sides by people who believe in idiotic things. What can I do? Logic and reason don't seem to do anything, except prove to them that I'm too close-minded about energy fields, ancient healing, or some such other garbage. All I'm left with is smiling, and saying "Good, I hope it works for you." How do you deal with people you respect and like, sometimes love, who believe absolutely idiotic crap?Recently a friend of mine who I hadn't seen in years visited my folks, and I showed up to say hi to her. After reacquainting, trivial daily things came up. The important thing to know is that we have the same birthday (February 8th), but separated by four years. I found out that earlier that day she'd won $20 in a lottery scratch-off contest. I, however, got rear-ended at an intersection. When I pointed out that these kind of disparate events shouldn't happen to two people with the same sign, let alone the same exact birthday, she, being a big-time astrology fan, said that it was very important that we had four years between us. I pointed out that the horoscope published daily in the paper didn't have anything to do with years, only months, and her response was that that wasn't true "scientific" astrology. For the record, the entry in the paper for Aquarius that day was 3 out of 5 stars and "stay home tonight and grow closer to family." Not so much of a prediction, but not bad advice in general, depending on your family.
Kevin, have you any idea just how many times I've been asked this heavy question? I really wish I had a satisfactory — generalized — answer for you, but each situation has a different solution. The bottom line must always be — for me, at least — the compassionate and least damaging method. And that only brings on more such questions….
Reader Mario Tamboer, Oostkapelle, the Netherlands, notes:
Despite pressure from the National Dutch Homeopathic Organization, he has not retracted his words. I'll vote for this guy next time! Actually, no response from him at all showed up in the press. I assume he didn't think it worth any more of his time. The further reaction of the homeopaths was predictable (reading skeptics' pages on the web does allow one the predict things in some cases):It's been a few months since this news, January or February of 2004 as I recall, but I haven't found anything in your commentary archives, so I thought I'd drop you an email about it. The Dutch Minister of Health caused an uproar in the homeopathic community here; he was quoted in the newspaper as saying, "I cannot imagine why anyone with proper scientific medical education would ever get into homeopathy. Everyone knows you'll be prescribing nothing but plain water."
2) Was the minister aware how much damage was done by side-effects of conventional medicine and errors made by regular doctors?1) We have many satisfied customers (= testimonials).
Testimonials, as all skeptics know, don't mean anything, and even complete failure of any sort of medical treatment does not automatically validate yours. However, the homeopaths have been completely quiet since then. Though I have no evidence, I deduct that the Minister's words have had no lasting impact on their sales, alas.
Mario, you know what I've said about such beliefs: People don't just want them to be true, they need them to be true. And therefore they will reject and ignore any evidence contrary to their needed beliefs. And, please don't expect that items you send here will be posted immediately; they have to be checked out and appropriately edited….
Reader Carlos A. Quintana of the Asociación para la Difusión del Pensamiento Racional (www.geocities.com/sceptikos/) informs us of a new/old "magnetic" fraud that has re-surfaced in his country. This sort of device is also sold for fuel-lines in autos, for water-supply lines in homes, for any and all pipes that conduct any and all gases, liquids or notions:
In Argentina we are having an energy crisis, and actions of solidarity have of course arisen, along with the expected deceits and frauds. The "MDQ55" is being sold (US$10) in our city, Mar del Plata, as a device to save on natural gas. According to the maker, this apparatus increases the caloric power of the flame. The operation is based on the farce of "lining up the molecules," an absurd idea — certainly for a gas! But when we measure the temperature of the flame with a pyrometer, we verify, obviously, that the apparatus doesn't affect it. It consists on two magnets that are placed around the tube that supplies gas to each home. These magnets have "attraction" only to naïve persons, with enough force to create belief in this old deceit. We will wait to see what action the local authorities take.
Not holding your breath, of course….
Reader Germán Buela:
Carmen Argibay, a renowned penologist, is a present candidate for the High Court in Argentina. But she has committed a major sin: publicly declaring that she's an atheist. She's also against the penalization of abortion. This country is mostly Catholic, so many groups have protested heavily about her candidacy. Apart from this, she has a reputation for being "incorruptible" and supporting the Constitution no matter what her personal views are. The reason I'm telling you this is because of the following letter from a reader of a local paper, an attack on Argibay, and an alarming one, as I'm sure you'll agree.
From 1947 until the early 90's I taught thousands of students of Law and Philosophy (UCA, UBA and other universities) that their main positive rights are based on natural law. Denying the existence of such (as done by Dr. Argibay) may bring, as a consequence, for example, tyrannical political regimes. If it is denied that Man has a body/spiritual nature, and if it is believed through social consensus that Man is reduced to pure matter, there wouldn't be any reason to ban torture, and no reason that would make us respect life from conception until natural death. This would mean the justification and legalization of all aberrations that, unfortunately, are committed as well in countries with supposedly democratic governments.
Perhaps the article by Asimov you offered us recently — "The Reagan Doctrine" — would be of help to this man!
TOM PAINE REVISITED AND FOUND UP-TO-DATE
Reader Tom Freeman of Nokomis, Florida, writes:
I am rereading Thomas Paine's The Age of Reason again for the first time in over 40 years. Much more meaningful in my sixties than it was in my twenties. I find passage after passage which describe to a "T" the charlatans of today. Thinking by using reason as a tool, has no age. A particular passage reminded me of your dear friend, Sylvia Browne! To quote Paine on prophecy and miracles (my italics):
If there were [such powers], it is consistent to believe that the event so communicated would be told in terms that could be understood, and not related in such a loose and obscure manner as to be out of the comprehension of those that heard it, and so equivocal as to fit almost any circumstance that might happen afterward.
Keep those articles coming. Thomas Paine, although a Deist, still ain't bad company.
Reader Haukur Thorgeirsson, of Reykjavik, Iceland, observes one of the "expert" observers of Saddam Hussein at his recent courtroom appearance:
At Fox News: Alice Weiser, a certified graphologist who studies body language, pointed out that Saddam at times would continuously jab his finger or his fist at the judge, his eye would slightly twitch when he got really angry, as would his eyes widen and face turn red. Said she:
His demeanor to me shows … [that he's] arrogant, combative, controlling, when he points with his fist, it's intimidating and it's arrogant and when you continue to do that, at one point he used two fists to point … that's double defiance and rebelliousness and pointing the guilt at you.
Really? That's the expert opinion? I would have thought the red-faced finger-jabbing, eye-twitching and fist-pointing were signs of calm and good will. Oh, or maybe not. And what does graphology (certified graphology, no less) have to do with body language? Perhaps that is a mystery our favorite conjurer could explain.
I'm flattered to be your "favorite conjuror," Haukur, but regardless of my far-ranging knowledge of nutty ideas and people, the logic behind this escapes me. Maybe Saddam gave Alice an autograph that we don't know about….?
I promised you another Geller video from which you can draw conclusions. Here it is. It runs 18 seconds, and is taken from the same RAI3 (Italy) TV show as the last one I offered you.
Click here for the video.
Note: You will need Apple Quicktime to view the file.
Geller is about to do a key-bending demonstration. As usual, a chain of keys has been provided for him to use. As a magician, I can tell you that this is the ideal prop situation if the intention is to do a trick rather than using genuine psychokinetic forces to cause a bend in a key. Primarily, with a fat chain of keys there is a variety of different sorts present so that the performer can choose a suitable one — one that is easily bent by simple handwork. Geller is seen to fumble with the key-chain, then he selects one.
Pause. Remember that this videotaping was done in a monstrous studio with a unique feature: no cameras were visible. All the performers see are niches in the walls where the actual cameras are located. The "tally lights" — red indicator lights that designate from which camera the recording is actually being taken at any given moment — are not present, and very-long-focus lenses are in use, so that an ECU (extreme close-up) shot can be obtained from a considerable distance. This of course requires adequate stabilization of the camera and its mount. In short, we have here an excellent arrangement for interviews, since the participants are not distracted by knowing from where the current shot is being made. A magician, on the other hand, does not prefer such a setup, since he's unable to present the best angle of any "move" to the recording camera, and cannot tell when he'll best be able to perform a move that he doesn't want to be seen; his "misdirection" is seriously hobbled.
Back to the video clip. You will probably have a time-elapsed code on your screen — I use Adobe Photoshop Album — and can advance the action frame-by-frame. At 1.8 seconds into the sequence we see Mr. Geller — holding the selected key in both hands, for whatever reason — hunch up and do what appears to be a bending movement. Then at 3.2 seconds, he does it again. And, incredibly, as he appears to be simply bending it with his hands, he actually says:
It's important that you don't bend it like this.
Read that again. Geller emphasizes that you must not do what he appears to be doing, with the emphasis and the bending action on the word, "this"!
Pause. I'm reminded at this point of the great mentalist Joseph Dunninger, who I knew well. He used a similar bit of psychology. In a performance before a select group of actors at the Lambs Club in New York, I once saw him perform the classic trick known as the Chinese Linking Rings. For some unknown reason, he seemed to want to show them that he was capable of regular trickery…. He knew that his audience there would have among them many who would see his "in" joke, while others would allow it to pass as part of the performance. Joe showed a set of nine steel rings about ten inches in diameter, picked one from the top of the stack, and indicated clearly that there was a wide break in it. He solemnly intoned:
This is what the magicians refer to as a 'key' ring — one that is faked so as to enable them to do this routine easily. They handle it so that the audience does not get to see the break! I will not use this fake ring!
He tossed the offensive object offstage and proceeded to do the classic 8-ring routine. Since this routine also needs a "key" ring, this is the use of what can only be called, "chutzpah." Look it up….
Back to Geller's performance in Italy. Look at the frame of the video clip at 7.9 seconds. This is an ECU in which Geller is vigorously rubbing the selected key with the index finger of his left hand, perhaps to give the impression that such a process causes mystical powers to go to work. Note the angle at which the key is already bent — about 30 degrees. Look at each frame from then on, up to frame 18.0, and you will see that in the 10.1 seconds, there is no change in the shape of the key, though Geller rotates it upward and it — perhaps co-incidentally — appears to bend. To a trickster such as myself, this seems to be the technique known as "hinging," which can be used when making a spoon, fork, or other object appear to be bending, after it's already been bent.
To illustrate my observations, here are tracings made from my viewing screen at the 7.9 seconds and the 17.4 seconds positions. No change in the angle of the bend is seen, but the angle of presentation is much different, exactly as if Mr. Geller were using the "hinging" technique. I leave each reader to his/her conclusions….
Next week, we'll tell you about an excellent experiment done by the Observatoire Zététique group in France, and — at last! — final, absolute, positive, definitive, convincing, scientific proof from Professor Gary Schwartz (the epitome of the University of Arizona's faculty, proudly embraced as a Harvard alumnus) that there is Survival After Death! Only a fool could refuse to accept this ultimate proof!
Or maybe a 12-year-old with some common sense….
