On October 18, 2010 at 2:47 am ben goldacre said:
I would never describe my dayjob as boring, it’s the most interesting and exciting part of my life. It’s boring dealing with people like you who casually misrepresent facts, but out of interest I checked, and in the email I wrote to Josephson declining his invitation to your talk, I explained I couldn’t come to Cambridge on account of my “humble” dayjob.
I’d be grateful if you could clarify this in the zillion places that you’ve posted over excitedly about the outrage of my not coming to see you speak about clathrates. I’m relieved to say that I doubt anyone would take anything you say seriously for obvious reasons, but it’s still not correct of you to say that I described my dayjob – about which I’m extremely passionate and committed – as “boring”.
I’ve just taken some unpaid leave to finish a book about bad behaviour in the pharmaceutical industry, and have flown to Canada and the US to do a couple of talks as Bad Science has just come out there, and to interview some people about dodgy behaviour in big pharma. It’s not clear to me why you regard this as an unacceptable activity for me to engage in.
Obviously there are a lot of pressures on everyone’s time, but I’m afraid that like a lot of people I don’t find your ideas very interesting. To be honest, like most people, I also don’t think I’d spend 4 hours travelling to Cambridge and back to see a man who makes videos as unpleasantly homophobic as yours:
For interest – and god knows this I barely interesting – pasted below is my email to Brian Josephson in response to his invitation, which I think makes it fairly clear why I didn’t come. Perhaps in future people should be forewarned that an invitation to a lecture from Brian Josephson will result in indignant fury at your non-attendance, and tedious unpleasantness from his speakers alleging that you think your dayjob is “boring”. If you are looking for explanations as to why people don’t take you seriously, you might look carefully at your behaviour in episodes like this.
> it’s never particularly interested me, i’m nore interested in EBM and its
> application to homeopathy shows that their pills work no better than
> i’ll pass it on to ppl who are interested tho, cheers.
> cant make cambridge, humble dayjob!
MY RESPONSE TO GOLDACRE’s WHINING DIATRIBE
Boring yes, humble, no. A lack of humility is Ben Dover Goldacre’s problem here. It’s what prevents him from seeing the naked truth. The point is, he was invited by one of the greatest minds of the 21st century to discuss the undeniable facts regarding biological effects of supramolecular substances and their relevance to one of the most controversial and greatest healing modalities of all time. But he begged off, with contradictory reasons, one being that he doesn’t like my videos. Well, Josepshon found them just as disgusting and homophobic. I pointed out to him, though, myself being a suspected homosexual, that there is nothing prima facie derogatory against homosexuality in any of them. Specifically, the one welcoming Randi out of the closet and into the openly gay community is complimentary of his sudden found insight and honesty with himself, and has been hailed as a masterpiece of satire.
Homosexuality fits him well, as it does Ben Dover Goldacre.
Goldacre’s whining statement fit’s the Upper House review of his testimony before Parliament ass well.
“The written submission by Dr. Goldacre [Ev. 8] was notably short on supporting evidence, but contained unqualified statements on the ineffectiveness of homeopathy, forcefully expressed (more and link below-ed.)
It should be pointed out, Ben has commented on the impossibility of detecting liquid aqueous structuring (LAS), being that he believes it to be impossible. When he does try to objectively address the science of homeopathy, like he did before Parliament, he starts rewriting the evidence to fit what he wants it to say, and makes some general denunciations. He does this most notably re: Rao (Roy) as being nothing more than what he claims is a misreading of the ethanol; but what is slippering past Dover is that LAS, as found in clathrates, is prosaic, even more so than his getting up each day to go to his “boring day job,” as has been stated in “a zillion places.”
RAO: The defining role of structure (including epitaxy) in the plausibility of homeopathy
Goldacre commentary on Rao:
What Goldacre also misses is yet another FTIR study (Sukul) that addresses the ethanol issue, and tunes for it.
SUKUL: Variation in Fourier Transform Infrared Spectra of Some Homeopathic Potencies and Their Diluent Media
Goldacre also handily ignores nine other indices for physical distinctions in the homeopathic remedy. But no matter. He’ll just wave them away anyway, just like he did with the biggest revelation of his life, his own opportunity to come out for homeopathy, so let’s work our way up to a real challenge, and see if he can handle that.
Allow me to preface by saying that the dog the Journalist Doctor thought was following him all these years, the hydrogen bond, has left him to follow a new master. Of course Ben will try to slip out of it and rewrite history like he did regarding his boring day job, noted in a zillion places. He and these other shills for Avandia and the criminal organizations that make it for 83,000 heart attacks, have just been pinned down by a lowbrow amateur, a clown who makes deeply offensive videos, Goldacre’s excuse, forcefully expressed, for not talking about the science, which he can’t address, because science isn’t his destination; defamation is. Defamation is all Ben Goldacre can respond to because that’s all Ben Goldacre knows. As Bewdley describes him, he’s a “journalist doctor,” a doctor of words, not science. Otherwise he’d pick out the salient point and go in for the killshot.
He should of come to the lecture. It was his big chance to tear apart my stupid (if that’s what it is) theory with a proper dialectic. Isn’t that what he’d have us believe he and his science compadres want us to think they’re all about? Ah yes, an objective, logical approach, instead of all of this wankering. Just ad rems, ferreted out like diamonds among the slag of ad hominem . . and concentrate on those alone, like a jeweler, loupe in eye: We see him bend over the precious stone.
Well, as the Master once said, Ben Dover, reach out to the publicans, its a boring day job to preach to the choir, such as the bobbleheads at McGill University, Toronto, where Goldacre, Shermer and Randi have been waggling their tongues. It brings the world nothing. Convert the unwashed, teach me. No? Then come to me to learn, I am your new master. I will lead the discussion.
BTW, just what IS the job placement rate for grads coming out of McGill? Can’t be too good if they’re listening to the misinformed like Goldacre and yawn and sawn-in half illusionists like Linking Rings Randi. Who wants to hire a dupe? Wait, maybe there are a lot of jobs for the grads at McGill . .
But look. If their argument against homeopathy is not due to ignorance, or deception, then they should prove me wrong ad rem about LAS. They say it can’t exist, but now all of a sudden, alakazam, it does! Note that Ben had his chance to address this subject, as did Colquhoun, as did Ian Brooks, as have all of them, yet none of them did, none dare come near it, for it is the hot burning truth, when poured overr them in their hiding places, is what will bring them boiling out of their stinkholes.
And Ben thinks animals are affected by the placebo.
Well, there’s an easy way to prove it. Before he passed away last month, Professor Rustum Roy of Penn Stae, the lead author for “Structure of Liquid Water, Novel Insights from the Material Sciences and Relevance to Homeopathy,” suggested to me in an email, that I use their methods (Rao) to take Randi apart.
Fair enough. I am the major contender, Randi has been dodging my application for 10 years now with a variety of excuses. After accepting my application, the way he and I left the protocol 10 years ago, was that in order to win Richaard Adam’s money/Randi’s/JREF’s prize, the Million Dollar Challenge, was to identify homeopathic remedies from their liquid aqueous/ethanol vehicles.
Randi’s Team Skeptic has identified the fundamental issue in this debate as being that the only way for water to retain a memory is through LAS, but that LAS is impossible because of the intransigence of the hydrogen bond, that such bonds last only a few femto, nano or pico seconds, depending on which pseudoscientist you’re following today. What cuckholds these pseudo scientists, though, is direct observation of the bond in surface tension and bubbles, you can see the srength of the hydrogen bond with your own eyes, and clathrates have been noted by spectroscopy. Google it. See the many refernces and images of these curiosities noted by observers for 200 years now.
So the question is an easy one: Set up a series of double blind tests at various universities, using Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, to determine whether or not they can determine the identity between the inert vehicle and verum.
I propose that Richard Adams, the treasurer of the James Randi Educational Foundation, assure the prize with a legal contract bearing his signature.
So what will it be? Will Ben Goldacre continue to skip classes at the Cavendish, or will he join with me, hand in hand, in this simple determination, skipping merrily down the halls of science? This is not about someone’s boring day job. This is about the future of human health. It is the Trial of the Millenia, the usher of supramolecular medicine into the corpus mundi of science.
If homeopathic substances are real, then we should be able to identify them in objective analysis.in multi centered trials.
I suggest, that in the interests of science and medicine, Adams put up the expenses for such an endeavor. THat is, unless they’d becontent to accept the science. After all, what could be more convincing than the existing reports? Certainly not a trial in which poor Randi stands to lose his million dollars.
But if they won’t accept science as science, I suggest that the following institutions and people participate in a replication of detecting homeopathic verum.
Cavendish Laboratories, Cambridge (Josephson)
Queens College, Belfast (Ennis)
Pennsylvania State University, USA (Hoover)
University of Arizona, Tucson (Bell)
Stanford University, Palo Alto, California (Tiller)
University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy (Betti)
Chieti-Pescara University, Italy (Borghini)
Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin (Witt).
University of Berne, Switzerland (Baumgartner)
1Laboratório de Controle de Qualidade, Departamento de Medicamentos, Faculdade de Farmácia, UFRJ. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (Garcia)
Nuclear Medicine Department, General Hospital, Haguenau, France (Demangeat)
Institut André Lwoff , Villejuif Cedex, France (Thomas)
Vironix LLC, New York, USA (Montagnier)
Now, one last observation. If this seems too ad hominem, allow me to remind you that ad hominem is all there is and has been against homeoapthy, and mine is nothing more than is the action of a poor homeopath working his craft and applying a bit of similia to his deeply offending patients.
After the evidence of action on biochemical subjects, plants and animals has been taken into account, along with the extensive case notes of MDs and clinical trials, and now theory for supramolecular action, the only response left to the detractor is to continue to malign those who are concutingthe realscience, inevitably the competence of those making the reports of homeopathic action.
That’s what this argument has been all along. The allopathic medical profession wants the world to believe that the medicine of opposition is all that is available to it, that its vaccines and toxic chemicals that serve as pharmaceuticals are all you got.
Well let me tell you something, and a profound thing it is, that there is a second, very effective form of internal medcine that has been used successfully, clinically and in epidemics, for two centuries. It is the medcine of similia. Its effects are profound. It is called homeopathy, and there will come a time, if it has not already arrived, when you will need it.
Your friend, your best friend, your only friend,
John BENNETH, PG Hom (Hon)
Further reading Google:
2008 July 26 Journal of Molecular Liquids NMR water proton relaxation in unheated and heated ultrahigh aqueous dilutions of histamine: Evidence for an air-dependent supramolecular organization of water
Jean-Louis Demangeat !
Nuclear Medicine Department, General Hospital, Haguenau, France
Effects of pulsed low frequency electromagnetic fields on water using photoluminescence spectroscopy: role of bubble/water interface
Philippe Valléea) and Jacques Lafait Laboratoire d’Optique des Solides (UMR CNRS 7601) Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France; Pascale Mentré, Paris, France Marie-Odile Monod Aubière Cedex, France; Yolène Thomas Institut André Lwoff , Villejuif Cedex, France
Electromagnetic Signals Are Produced by Aqueous Nanostructures
Derived from Bacterial DNA Sequences
Luc MONTAGNIER1,2*, Jamal A¨ISSA1, St´ephane FERRIS1,
Jean-Luc MONTAGNIER1, Claude LAVALL´EE1
1(Nanectis Biotechnologies, S.A. 98 rue Albert Calmette, F78350 Jouy en Josas, France)
2(Vironix LLC, L. Montagnier 40 Central Park South, New York, NY 10019, USA)
GOLDACRE SLAPPED DOWN BY UPPER HOUSE
Observations on the report Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy by the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, February 2010
“5.1. The Committee in two sessions called twelve witnesses to give oral evidence, all but one with relevant affiliations. Selection of witnesses can affect outcomes in the same way as selection of written evidence. It is therefore legitimate to examine the choices made.
5.2. It is not easy to see why a journalist doctor was invited to appear in preference to some other non-representative contributors to the inquiry. The written submission by Dr. Goldacre [Ev. 8] was notably short on supporting evidence, but contained unqualified statements on the ineffectiveness of homeopathy, forcefully expressed (“extreme quackery” was mentioned). By contrast, the submission by the Complementary Medicine Research Group from the Department of Health Sciences at the University of York presented a well argued summary with 68 references [Ev. 143]. In this appears the statement “To date there are eight systematic reviews that provide evidence that the effects of homeopathy are beyond placebo when used as a treatment for [five childhood conditions]”. This claim from a mainstream academic centre, rated joint first nationally for health services research in the latest Research Assessment Exercise, stands in stark contradiction to Prof. Ernst’s referenced claims, noted above, and to Dr. Goldacre’s unreferenced statements. It would have been illuminating if the Committee had probed the Group about this, face to face as a witness, and attempted some resolution before agreeing in unequivocal terms with the two witnesses who were invited to appear and were quoted favourably. The Committee criticised the supporters of homeopathy for their “selective approaches” to evidence . They could fairly be accused of the same.
Unfortunately they did not (presumably) have the scope to solicit the views of Dr. Linde from Germany, which would have differed from those of Prof. Ernst with regard to the evidence.”