Damned Heretics

Condemned by the established, but very often right

I am Nicolaus Copernicus, and I approve of this blog

I am Richard Feynman and I approve of this blog

Qualified outsiders and maverick insiders are often right about the need to replace received wisdom in science and society, as the history of the Nobel prize shows. This blog exists to back the best of them in their uphill assault on the massively entrenched edifice of resistance to and prejudice against reviewing, let alone revising, ruling ideas. In support of such qualified dissenters and courageous heretics we search for scientific paradigms and other established beliefs which may be maintained only by the power and politics of the status quo, comparing them with academic research and the published experimental and investigative record.

We especially defend and support the funding of honest, accomplished, independent minded and often heroic scientists, inventors and other original thinkers and their right to free speech and publication against the censorship, mudslinging, false arguments, ad hominem propaganda, overwhelming crowd prejudice and internal science politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, AIDS, evolution, global warming, cosmology, particle physics, macroeconomics, health and medicine, diet and nutrition.

HONOR ROLL OF SCIENTIFIC TRUTHSEEKERS

Henry Bauer, Peter Breggin , Harvey Bialy, Giordano Bruno, Erwin Chargaff, Nicolaus Copernicus, Francis Crick, Paul Crutzen, Marie Curie, Rebecca Culshaw, Freeman Dyson, Peter Duesberg, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman, John Fewster, Galileo Galilei, Alec Gordon, James Hansen, Edward Jenner, Benjamin Jesty, Michio Kaku, Adrian Kent, Ernst Krebs, Thomas Kuhn, Serge Lang, John Lauritsen, Mark Leggett, Richard Lindzen, Lynn Margulis, Barbara McClintock, George Miklos, Marco Mamone Capria, Peter Medawar, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling, Eric Penrose, Max Planck, Rainer Plaga, David Rasnick, Sherwood Rowland, Carl Sagan, Otto Rossler, Fred Singer, Thomas Szasz, Alfred Wegener, Edward O. Wilson, James Watson.
----------------------------------------------

Many people would die rather than think – in fact, they do so. – Bertrand Russell.

Skepticism is dangerous. That’s exactly its function, in my view. It is the business of skepticism to be dangerous. And that’s why there is a great reluctance to teach it in schools. That’s why you don’t find a general fluency in skepticism in the media. On the other hand, how will we negotiate a very perilous future if we don’t have the elementary intellectual tools to ask searching questions of those nominally in charge, especially in a democracy? – Carl Sagan (The Burden of Skepticism, keynote address to CSICOP Annual Conference, Pasadena, April 3/4, 1982).

It is really important to underscore that everything we’re talking about tonight could be utter nonsense. – Brian Greene (NYU panel on Hidden Dimensions June 5 2010, World Science Festival)

I am Albert Einstein, and I heartily approve of this blog, insofar as it seems to believe both in science and the importance of intellectual imagination, uncompromised by out of date emotions such as the impulse toward conventional religious beliefs, national aggression as a part of patriotism, and so on.   As I once remarked, the further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.   Certainly the application of the impulse toward blind faith in science whereby authority is treated as some kind of church is to be deplored.  As I have also said, the only thing ever interfered with my learning was my education. My name as you already perceive without a doubt is George Bernard Shaw, and I certainly approve of this blog, in that its guiding spirit appears to be blasphemous in regard to the High Church doctrines of science, and it flouts the censorship of the powers that be, and as I have famously remarked, all great truths begin as blasphemy, and the first duty of the truthteller is to fight censorship, and while I notice that its seriousness of purpose is often alleviated by a satirical irony which sometimes borders on the facetious, this is all to the good, for as I have also famously remarked, if you wish to be a dissenter, make certain that you frame your ideas in jest, otherwise they will seek to kill you.  My own method was always to take the utmost trouble to find the right thing to say, and then to say it with the utmost levity. (Photo by Alfred Eisenstaedt for Life magazine) One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny, and is likely to interfere with happiness in all kinds of ways. – Bertrand Russell, Conquest of Happiness (1930) ch. 9

(Click for more Unusual Quotations on Science and Belief)

BEST VIEWED IN LARGE FONT
Expanded GUIDE TO SITE PURPOSE AND LAYOUT is in the lower blue section at the bottom of every home page.

Retrain the brain – CBS tip for Dr Fauci

Reading the scientific literature might be helpful

This morning CBS News Sunday Morning reminds us that scientists are proving that training the brain with exercise is a more effective treatment for stroke, Alzheimers and similar problems, than drugs or surgery.

What was striking about the imaging was the astonishingly rapid improvement over a matter of four months – the brain at first as smooth as an apple, then crinkly as a dried apricot.

Perhaps we misunderstood through inattention, but the story was clear in its import: the brain is quickly responsive to exercise at any age, growing a whole new structure almost as easily as it did in the womb.

This is a lesson that might be taken to heart by Dr Anthony Fauci and other scientific leaders who apparently are loathe to read the scientific review literature on HIV as the cause of AIDS.

Sadly we realise that this recommendation comes at an inopportune time for Dr Fauci and his colleagues at the NIAID who are probably currently preoccupied with keeping their rear ends out of the way of the meat grinder that Congress may yet roll through the corridors of power that the good Dr Fauci walks, when he is not appearing on Charlie Rose mouthing trite homilies about the need to combat bird flu with billions when if he had bothered to read any of the scientific literature on the topic he would have seen that this dire threat is easily deflected by running to the local drug store and popping a few Vitamin A pills (see earlier posts).

Of course, given this oversight we are now led to assume that the only reason Dr Fauci MD may have had for ignoring the scientific literature for over twenty years in the case of HIV?AIDS may be that he cannot understand it without using his index finger to trace the text while he moves his lips to the difficult words, and not that he has any deeper and darker reasons for avoiding it. Certainly not any understandable preoccupation he may have had with his personal and bureaucratic ambitions which have been so gratifyingly realized.

We are moved to this supposition by contemplating the way the cohort of Dr Fauci and other scientific leaders at the NIH and elsewhere treated Dr Peter Duesberg so shabbily for two decades for writing the reviews of HIV?AIDS which rejected the idea of HIV as “the virus that causes AIDS” as stupid.

All they had to do was be nice to Duesberg and give him plenty of research funds for his highly promising cancer research (which was privately funded in the end and has apparently brought us much closer to a solution to that dread killer) and his objections to HIV as “the cause of AIDS”: would have quietly floated downstream just as they so fervently wished. Instead they aroused the fighting spirit of any idealist anywhere who supported free speech in science and smelled a very large rat when they looked into the way Duesberg’s career was blighted by his once so friendly colleagues.

Apart from the stupidity issue however we respectfully grant the NIAID chief the benefit of the doubt as far as his motivations go and salute his efforts to solve the great health problems of the world as his chief priority in life, including the immense HIV?AIDS pandemic which is supposedly sweeping the world, at least in the fevered brains of Ms Laurie Garrett of the Council of Foreign Relation, Jeffrey Sachs, Dr Fauci and other leading advisers of where, in matters of global health, to spend our national and international resources.

That is to say, now on combating bird flu rather than “deadly scourges like tetanus, rabies, swine fever and poultry cholera” in the words of Keith Bradsher in the Times yesterday (Sat Jan 14), reporting from Laos, which hasn’t seen any bird flu at all so far but has been forced to spend its limited resources on making sure of this for the past two years.

As Keith remarks in Laos, Apparently Without Bird Flu, Is Still Pressed by the West to Join Global Fight.

Not one human case of bird flu was ever confirmed in Laos, and thousands of chickens have been tested in recent months without finding the slightest trace of the disease.

Despite the seeming disappearance of bird flu here, it has consumed most of the time and attention of Laos’s best doctors and veterinarians for the past two years.

Pressed by United Nations agencies, the United States, the European Union and other big donors, top officials at the health and agriculture ministries have set aside previous priorities – deadly scourges like tetanus, rabies, swine fever and poultry cholera – to focus on a disease that could someday set off a global epidemic but poses less of an immediate threat here.

As the global effort to combat bird flu has increased, Laos and other poor countries have become the front lines, expected to manage extensive programs to battle bird flu despite struggling to marshal enough doctors and veterinarians against diseases even in the best of times.

Next week, those pressures will reach a new level when health ministers, leaders of United Nations agencies and top officials from the World Bank and other lending institutions gather in Beijing to raise as much as $1.5 billion to fight bird flu.

(show)

The New York Times

Printer Friendly Format Sponsored By

January 15, 2006

Laos, Apparently Without Bird Flu, Is Still Pressed by the West to Join Global Fight

By KEITH BRADSHER

VIENTIANE, Laos, Jan. 14 – Khamla Sengdavong, the manager of a state-owned farm here, still remembers his horror and dismay when bird flu suddenly killed a quarter of the farm’s 2,000 chickens in five days in January 2004.

“They bled from the nose and the backs of their heads turned purple and then black, and then they died,” he said, gesturing with his hands.

But bird flu seems to have disappeared almost as quickly as it appeared in Laos, and Mr. Khamla and others in this impoverished Communist country on China’s southern border have restocked their coops.

Not one human case of bird flu was ever confirmed in Laos, and thousands of chickens have been tested in recent months without finding the slightest trace of the disease.

Despite the seeming disappearance of bird flu here, it has consumed most of the time and attention of Laos’s best doctors and veterinarians for the past two years.

Pressed by United Nations agencies, the United States, the European Union and other big donors, top officials at the health and agriculture ministries have set aside previous priorities – deadly scourges like tetanus, rabies, swine fever and poultry cholera – to focus on a disease that could someday set off a global epidemic but poses less of an immediate threat here.

As the global effort to combat bird flu has increased, Laos and other poor countries have become the front lines, expected to manage extensive programs to battle bird flu despite struggling to marshal enough doctors and veterinarians against diseases even in the best of times.

Next week, those pressures will reach a new level when health ministers, leaders of United Nations agencies and top officials from the World Bank and other lending institutions gather in Beijing to raise as much as $1.5 billion to fight bird flu.

Almost nobody questions that a global campaign is needed to stop the disease: if the bird flu virus, A(H5N1), evolves to be able to pass easily from person to person in the next few years, it could kill enormous numbers of people. But health experts are starting to raise questions about the trade-offs involved in such a huge effort.

The danger, even some managers of bird flu programs are starting to say, is that donors focus so intently on a single disease that they unintentionally disrupt many other health programs. “We could overlook that people could quite literally be dying because of this,” said Finn Reske-Nielsen, the top United Nations official in Laos.

In separate interviews, Mr. Reske-Nielsen and two of Laos’s top disease fighters – Dr. Phengta Vongphrachanh, the country’s foremost epidemiologist; and Dr. Somphanh Chanphengxay, the director of veterinary planning – said continued routine testing had not yet shown a resurgence here of other diseases despite the preoccupation with bird flu. But they and other officials in Laos and at aid agencies elsewhere said participants in the Beijing conference would face a series of hard choices.

Among the first of those trade-offs will be between short-term programs, useful mostly for fighting bird flu, and longer-term programs that may carry broader health benefits but do less to stamp out bird flu this winter or next winter.

The Asian Development Bank, a Manila-based multilateral lending institution like the World Bank, is one of the first organizations to start worrying about the bird flu trade-offs, partly because it has already had to make a hard choice.

Indu Bhushan, the leader of the bank’s bird flu task force, said that after approving a $40 million preventive health program in Vietnam last year, the bank decided this winter to turn the effort into a bird flu project instead, saving time over having to design a program from scratch.

The redesigned project will still address other communicable diseases, like dengue fever, because it may improve detection. But it will no longer cover noncommunicable diseases like hypertension and diabetes, Mr. Bhushan said.

He noted that the Asian Development Bank was also preparing $68 million in new grants for bird flu that do not involve taking money from other programs. But he said it would be important at the Beijing conference that donors not redirect large sums previously approved for other programs.

“While emergency response is great, let’s not get carried away here,” he said.

The emerging debate over spending on bird flu closely parallels the debate in the 1990’s over whether donor nations were paying so much attention to AIDS in the developing world that they were neglecting diseases like malaria and tuberculosis. That debate has helped lead to increased aid for research into tropical diseases, mostly from rich countries and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Following that example, it is possible that bird flu may yet prompt broader and more strings-free aid to poor countries in areas like veterinary care. But for now, much of the money being offered to poor countries to fight bird flu involves loans, not grants.

And health officials in poor countries are leery of borrowing heavily; no country has yet tapped the Asian Development Bank’s $300 million in loans available for bird flu programs.

Laos is one of the world’s poorest countries, rivaling Chad in Central Africa in having one of the world’s highest maternal death rates – problems related to pregnancy kill one mother for every 2,000 births, mainly in childbirth.

With the government able to spend less than $2 per person annually for health care, officials have been reluctant to take on debt.

“We try our best to utilize the grants first, and we reserve the loans for emergency response,” Dr. Phengta said.

That emergency response has not been needed.

Unlike in neighboring Vietnam, Thailand and China, where live poultry is often transported large distances to markets, sometimes on bicycles, most chickens and ducks in sparsely populated Laos are raised in backyards and eaten by their owners. That limits the spread of the disease, Dr. Somphanh said.

Turkey has captured international attention with 18 human cases, three of them fatal, in the past two weeks.

But Dr. Shigeru Omi, the World Health Organization’s regional director for the Western Pacific, noted Thursday that Asia remains the center of the disease because contact between infected birds and humans is greatest in this region.

Laotian government officials reported to the W.H.O. within hours on a weekend last September the country’s only suspected human case of bird flu so far. A lab in Japan determined it was a false alarm.

The quick notification was one of several signs that Laos does not appear to be concealing any bird flu cases, although it may be hard at times even for the government to determine what is happening in the one-third of Laotian villages that lie a day’s walk or more from the nearest road of any sort, said Dr. Dean A. Shuey, the top World Health Organization official in Laos.

Dr. Shuey’s aunt and grandmother died in the Spanish influenza outbreak of 1918, which scientists now attribute to another avian influenza virus. Despite that family history, Dr. Shuey of Nebraska says he worries that too much emphasis now on bird flu may create problems for Laos’s health system.

“The intense donor meetings, the number of conferences, the travel is taking a lot of time for people who have other things to do,” he said.

The United States, Japan and the European Union have donated advanced virus freezers and other high-tech gear to help Laotians gather any viral samples and ship them to labs in rich countries as fast as possible, where they can be analyzed for the possible creation of a vaccine.

But with flu vaccine production capacity short in industrialized countries, no one expects Laos, with no vaccine factories, to receive more than a few doses of any vaccine.

American aid has included hundreds of sets of masks, goggles and full-body suits that would be sweltering in the tropical climate here and that have limited use except for slaughtering sick birds.

Dr. Phengta called for general-purpose protective equipment. Health workers in Laos now receive only one gown and one surgical mask each year.

Meanwhile it is worth noting that the CBS report contained the thought that this retraining the brain approach is novel because it doesn’t involve drugs or surgery, which tend to be the only two approaches that occur to established medicine for any ailment.

They refer to two places where the retraining is carried out which have a good reputation, Taubtherapy and Positscience

One Response to “Retrain the brain – CBS tip for Dr Fauci”

  1. Ayla Vue Says:

    Retraining the brain is not as profitable to the pharmaceutical companies that pay their bills for them, so of course, they have to use mind-control words like ‘novel.’ What I want to know is, what is so novel about thinking? What is so novel about using the brain for what it was meant to be used for? I mean, isn’t that how the brain makes new connections to compensate for the ones that have been damaged?

    What IS novel is the thought that the body cannot sufficiently mend itself without drugs. What IS novel is that we should somehow put up with dreadful side effects in order for one symptom to subside. What is that all about anyway?

    If one pays close attention, it’s easy to see the embedded mind-control words used to shape our opinions and instigate skepticism for things we would otherwise take for granted.

    -Salma

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Bad Behavior has blocked 292 access attempts in the last 7 days.