Category: Skepticism

One of my favorite pet websites is RationalWiki, which is slowly transforming into it’s 3.0 iteration. It originated as a parody/rebuttal site to the execrable Conservapedia (and no, Conservapedia is not a parody, just an example of Poe’s Law at work). Eventually, it expanded to developing articles that examined irrationality in general, such as fundamentalism, evolution denialism, etc.

In its latest phase, it has implemented an interactive “What is Going On” (WIGO) feature. Initially this simply tracked inanity at Conservapedia. Now it will also track the best and worst of the blogosphere, the news, and anything else that seems interesting. It will allow readers to evaluate content real-time and see how idiocy is debunked. And, being a wiki, anyone can join in on the back-end helping to build content.

It’s fun. Check it out.

Oh. My. F-ing. God. All the news that’s fit to print???

I know some of my readers don’t think much of the New York Times (yes, PP, I’m talking to you), but despite some of my reservations, it’s still the Paper of Record. That’s why I was, er, um, was nauseated was flabbergasted threw up in my mouth was surprised when I saw a piece on the OpEd page today calling for better investigation of UFOs.

If you just did a spit take on your LCD, please wipe it off now.

OK, done? Good.

I did not make this up. Really. I’m not going to go through all the arguments regarding the utter improbability of alien visitors, or a conspiracy to cover up alien visits. It’s been done, and done, and done.

There are a few points about this particular piece worth pointing out. First,

It’s the New York Freakin’ Times!

Second, the main argument here is that the US reportedly stopped investigating UFOs in 1968, and in these days of hightened terrorist threats (what color are we now, RED!!111!!?) we should not be ignoring potential threats, especially threats that might be invisible to radar.

To parse it out, the author is essentially defining UFO’s as FO’s that are visible to credulous individuals, but not to radar. He points out that the US has stealth aircraft, so Bad Guys might have radar-evading craft as well.

OK, first, al-Queda can’t afford a stealth bomber, ‘k?

Second, does this guy think the US military is completely daft? Yes they have their problems, but the military is also staffed by some seriously smart professionals. D’ya think they are ignoring airborne threats to national security?

This whole piece is ridiculous. The only reason it isn’t fit for the National Enquirer is that it uses too many words. Why it’s in the Times is beyond me.

In case you haven’t heard, cooking food is bad–at least according to the raw food movement. This movement has developed over the last 5-10 years, and is still fairly fringe, but fad diets, restaurants, stores, and websites devoted to raw foods are flourishing. Let’s see what they’re up to.

According to one popular website, we should begin our story by thinking about a few questions:

What other animal on earth denatures its food by cooking?
What other animal on earth suffers from all the health challenges that we face?
What did people eat before there was fire?? They ate it RAW!

This is as good a place as any to start. The answer to question one is simple…none! To quote Sandy Templeton, my pathology professor, “Is this a good thing, a bad thing, or doesn’t it much matter?” I’ll report, you decide. Let’s add to that question–what other animal uses tools extensively to modify its environment? Uses medicines? Lives past its “natural” life span? Avoids disease through public health measures? Reads and writes books? None! Woo-hoo! We are actually different than other animals!

Question two, “health challenges”. OK, anyone out there grow up on a farm, or see any wild animals up close? Or read a biology book even? Animals are constantly battling disease. Humans are not unique in our “suffering”, although each species has its own health demons. Animals have parasites–lots of ’em. Animals suffer from horrible viral, bacterial, and prion diseases; animals starve in times of famine. They don’t usually, as far as we know, survive strokes and heart attacks–field mice don’t send a lot of their brethren to medical school.

Question three answers itself, so I guess I’m off the hook.

Continued below…
(more…)

Hat-tip to PZ for shining some light onto local idiocy. The basic story is an old one—family kills kid by refusing medical care for a curable condition. In this case, it’s a child with type I diabetes. This hits close to home for two reasons: I’m an internist, and my nephew is a type I diabetic, diagnosed at four years of age.

In the case above, an innocent child was killed by ignorance. Perhaps there is a preacher somewhere behind this murder. I’d like to know. The parents prayed for their ailing daughter, but “apparently didn’t have enough faith.” The child died of diabetic ketoacidosis—her death was likely slow and painful. No one would have confused her state for a minor problem.

I can’t tell you anything about the state of mind of these parents. I’m sure they loved their child. But whether they were delusional, or belonged to some Christian cult, they murdered their child just as sure as if they’d put a gun to her head.

There is no ethical principle that can be used to justify this behavior. Parental autonomy just isn’t important enough to justify murder.

Once upon a time, kids became diabetics, and either starved to death or died of ketoacidosis. Then insulin was discovered. People used it and lived. And people still believed in God. What is so different about this couple’s God, that It demanded a child’s life?

Nothing.

God did not come to their house, sit down for dinner, and tell them not to treat their child. God did not send a registered letter, or leave their name in the Bible with instructions to stay away from doctors. These are all human beliefs and human actions, and as such, are subject to human laws.

This idea is so bad that I might even agree with a Scientologist about it (OK, not really). A company I will not name or link to has developed a home genetic test for bipolar disorder. What could be so horrible about making it easier for people to diagnose diseases?

Well, first there is a problem of “begging the question”: does the test do what it is purported to do?

(Test X)™ – tests for two mutations in the GRK3 gene that are associated with bipolar disorder. Patients who have either of these two mutations, are Caucasian, of Northern European ancestry and have a family history of bipolar disorder, are three times more likely to have bipolar disorder.

Three times more likely than whom?
(more…)

Most of us around here know about internet memes, hoax emails, and other sources of scientific and medical rumor. After all, we’re geeks (or at least, I am). My wife, however, is not. She is a typical (and wonderful) woman, from a particular ethnic group, and particular part of town (and well-educated). I’m a fairly well-known physician, but when we go out to dinner, everyone stops to say “hi” to her—and is introduced to “her husband” for the third time.

So it isn’t really a surprise that she knows more about the “real world” than I do. I was sitting on the couch reading my feeds, and she was checking her email. She apparently belongs to a mailing list that “everybody” is on. I’m not sure how to reproduce the entire email, so I’ll describe it. It has pictures of an adorable child placing a Tupperware container in a microwave, a refreshing bottle of water, some chemical diagrams, and a headline that reads “Cancer update from Johns Hopkins”. It explains how plastic will poison you with dioxins and other nonsense.

Now, to most folks reading this, it looks like the internet-equivalent of a cut-out newsprint ransom note. But to a suburban mom…
(more…)