Magic VS Science
I feel bad for expressing derogatory views on the efficacy of magic beans and wish to recall and clarify those opinions.
In a broad stroke it is fair to say that I feel badly about insulting the transformative essence of all things magic, not just beans. This includes unicorns, lamps, fairies, elves, glass slippers, leprechauns, dark forests, carpets etc…
To begin it will be helpful to understand the role of science for this discussion and make clear that scientific fact, is NOT THE SAME as opinion. A dictionary is a great resource to un-muddle these two words – if unsure. “Truth” however is another word entirely and it is quite possible one can be convinced of a truth that is not a scientific fact. That the Flat Earth Society still exists, makes this point nicely.
For the record, yes I do “believe” in science. If you do not, then we can part ways at this early juncture and you need not read further. My adherence to science also inherently means that EVEN if I don’t “like” the truth that science may reveal or how it may challenge my opinions – I will Still Believe the Science. For instance, I may feel conflicted about the notion of differences in gender intelligence, and have an opinion that women are smarter than men – science indicates this is not exactly true, so I will realize that I hold an opinion not a fact.
Back to beans.
Implicit in the concept of magic is the mental shift required of BELIEF… You either believe in magic or you don’t. Science exists whether you believe in it or not. For instance, Dinosaurs happened! A “truth” many creationists deny, despite lots and lots of physical evidence.
Let’s take one of the most frequently studied phenomena in the world that kind of seems magical – Placebo – and see what scientific facts were revealed in these many studies. Turns out; Placebos can work! Placebo Effect has been proven to exist, it is real, it is a phenomena – a low percentage of the time, but there it is, nonetheless. Whether those low percentage of the time results are ‘Scientifically Significant” or not – is argued, most recent meta analyses by Hróbjartsson and Peter Gøtzsche of 2001 and 2010 say no, too low.
Scientifically Significant is a term that refers to how low the frequency can be, that results occur and still warrant another investigation. When is this low rate of occurrence simply chance error, or un measurable influence? This low threshold is agreed upon before the tests are run, usually based on 0.05 or about 5%. Science is after all, all about measurements.
If placebo effect occurs 1 time out of a hundred, is it significant? I mean yes it’s significant enough to warrant dinner table discussion, but does science find it interesting enough to warrant further funding and study? That’s what Scientific Significance means. Don’t get me wrong, the fact that even one time someone can be deceived into health by a sugar pill I personally find quite fascinating… magical even; but does that fascinating one time mean we should sell sugar pills as a viable form of medicine? Should they even be labelled as medicine? We know that if told the pill is only a placebo the curative effect is lost. BELIEF is the magic ingredient in the pill and the mind, underlying the efficacy of the pill.
Do you see how magic enters the discussion now? If science has shown that Placebos can influence the subjective experience of better health, I maintain that if you therefore are able to create a belief in the realness of magic, it can become true. Ok statistically Jack will only perceive his beans are effective less than 7% of the time and objectively no stalk may grow and this is only if he is one of the 30% of people who are subject to Placebo Effect. But still! I apologize that in my attempt to diss homeopathy I threw magic beans under the bus too. It grows dark, excuse me while I light my magic lamp…
Now perhaps it is best to quickly define science – this is extra important in a time like ours when many other words that do not mean science are conflated with science; slippery words like anecdote, pseudoscience, personal experience, persuasive argument, widely held public opinion, coincidence, paid for political rhetoric, religious dogma etc…
When I say science what I mean is:
peer reviewed & predictable repeatable results
results compared with controlled group
bias accounted for by randomization & scientifically significant, usually 5% or higher
As a health care professional I would like it if we could use the appropriate language to say what we mean. So I will be clear.
There is no science to support that homeopathy is effective.
There is science that shows Placebo Effect occurs but not in reliably scientifically significant percentages.
Could it be that any positive effects of homeopathy are due to Placebo Effect I wonder?
Here’s an extract from Wikipedia under the definition of Placebo:
Referring specifically to homeopathy, the House of Commons of the United Kingdom Science and Technology Committee has stated:! In the Committee’s view, homeopathy is a placebo treatment and the Government should have a policy on prescribing placebos. The Government is reluctant to address the appropriateness and ethics of prescribing placebos to patients, which usually relies on some degree of patient deception. Prescribing of placebos is not consistent with informed patient choice—which the Government claims is very important—as it means patients do not have all the information needed to make choice meaningful. Beyond ethical issues and the integrity of the doctor-patient relationship, prescribing pure placebos is bad medicine. Their effect is unreliable and unpredictable and cannot form the sole basis of any treatment on the NHS.[15]
I would buy the magic beans, because it makes me feel good to believe in them. Like my lamp, they work 1 out of a hundred times, so clearly it is not a reliable tool, but Wow is it cool what my brain can do! Homeopathy however I cannot suffer, it offends my scientific and ethical sensibilities. In my profession deceiving the pubic is considered unethical, and for which, I can lose the right to practice my job. There is a big difference between glass slippers and medicine.
Let’s call a spade a spade, shall we?
I am a health care practitioner governed by a Code of Professional Ethics, which I must renew in writing annually in order to maintain my Medical Malpractice Insurance, and remain in good standing with my professional association. One of my association’s roles is to protect the public from mistreatment by harmful practitioners. I pay money annually to be a member of this association. I do not have to do this. I choose to because I take my profession and my clients wellbeing seriously. I am beholden to do my best for the safety of the public by operating within the capacities of my training – training which was based in science. Which also means I cannot treat beyond my training, if you have cancer I will refer you to an oncologist, because I am not trained to treat cancer. I am professionally obliged to do this, non regulated practices are not.
Pubic health in the country I live in is monitored, recorded and invested in heavily by all levels of government. I support that as a good idea, but it requires thought about what determines sound medicine and what does not.
Are homeopathic remedies dangerous? Not inherently, they are sugar pills, it’s like eating air. There is often not even one molecule of the “effective ingredient” present in the dilutions begin sold. That bears repeating – not one molecule! If you do not know how homeopathic remedies are made I suggest you look it up, it is pretty jaw dropping, it’s right up there with leeching and blood letting, or trepanning. In fact massive demonstrations have been held around the world where protestors intent to prove they are useless, “overdose” in public on seemingly powerful dilutions of homeopathic pills – to prove they are bunk. No one has been hurt in these demonstrations, nor healed for that matter.
Homeopathy becomes dangerous when used INSTEAD of appropriate medical care. Same goes for the beans. If your knickers are getting in a twist over this material so far I would suggest that A) You, your culture, religion or political party do not value science (there is a growing number of you, eeeek! ) and you read on after told I you not to. B) You are getting your language confused (if you want to talk energy, intention, frequencies or physics in healing – then that is another topic.) C) You are unaware of the current media furor going in Canada over homeopathy and its growing ill repute. Of particular media focus lately is the encouragement by some natural health practitioners of the use of a mythic “Homeopathic Vaccine Alternative.”
Let’s get this straight, vaccination is like pregnancy, you are or you are not; there is no alternative. Wearing a pillow under your shirt to trick yourself into getting pregnant is an actual remedy for infertility (witchdoctors in Tunisia prescribe this for example) and they don’t use a pillow it’s a carved wooden pregnant belly worn on the women’s front… same idea. I bought one once as wall art, it was gorgeous. Sadly, the public dangers of large numbers of people wearing pillows under their shirt does not compare to the public dangers of mass numbers of people taking a sugar pill instead of a vaccine.
The currently pointed criticism homeopathy is facing in North America media is in response to escalating worries by public health officials over dangerous breaches in herd immunity resulting in the return of deadly diseases like Measles. Google measles outbreak in Montreal. “No biggie” you say, until you have to attend a conference there for work and you have a newborn at home who is too young to have recieved protection yet, do you risk bringing that exposure home? Because the public has been sold “alternatives” to vaccines by some practitioners, in combination with the prevalent yet erroneous myth that vaccines were associated with autism; the spread of previously controlled diseases has risen dramatically.
This has prompted Government Regulatory bodies to launch investigations into Natural health practices institutes and their methodologies. Alternative health care practitioners in Canada should take note: a likely outcome is that insurance coverage of some natural health practices will be discontinued. This was entirely avoidable, and does a disservice to natural health practices that are based on science and ethics.
I had previously thought of homeopathic remedies as benign woo woo. No longer. I feel compassion for the confused public who just don’t research this stuff yet place their trust in practitioners. I feel dismayed by the practitioners who endorse and the companies who profit off such BS. I feel forced to make longwinded (hopefully slightly amusing) public statements defining simple terms in an effort to separate chance from evidence, and science from a hill of beans.
I get “wanting to believe.” I have no problem if you want to wear a pillow under your shirt, but please get educated on your health issues. Learn to Discern! Look up the words if you don’t know what they mean, wiki the concepts and then, if you are a betting sort, hedge you’re bets accordingly. What are the odds of your health and the heath of your community worth? And please, appropriately weigh the outcomes at stake before you place your bets.
Are you desperately trying to not die of cancer? Or are you desperately hoping to get to the Ball?