The Enemies of Reason, Channel 4, Monday 8pm

[MadWorld74]

Thank you Jeremy, I was beginning to think myself mad.

[Alan Dale]

You might believe you have got healing hands but you are certainly not mad Madworld.

[MadWorld74]

thank you Alan Dale. Not mad, yes. Healing hands, I belive so.

[Keef]

I watched it, and found myself a bit torn. On the one hand, I still think that he's an arrogant tw@t, but I agree that he gave some of these people a fair chance, and asked them fair questions, to which they often didn't have good enough answers.

I do however agree that he picked his targets rather well (an American woman, COME ON!!!!), and didn't really disprove anything either.

The bit about the placebo effect was interesting, and probably accurate in a lot of cases.

To me, I would have rather this been a series of several episodes, each looking in some depth at a particular therapy, and really giving it a chance, or really disproving it's theories. As it was, we had a very clever man telling us it's a bollocks, and people will tend to believe him because he sounds like he knows what he's talking about, and his subjects sound American (well some anyway).So, at the end of the day, it proved nothing, and was just a mouthpiece for Dawkins.

I have to say though, the whole quantum physics thing was a fair point, people going on about that like they have the first clue about it is a bit dodgy if you ask me...

Oh, and for anyone on this entire thread who can't have a debate or argument, or discussion without getting a bit personal, I say again, get a grip!

[bald marauder]

Definitely not mad, MW74. I suspect that this provocation is exactly what the programme was designed to elicit. And with the wonders of modern editing suites, you can make people say pretty much what you want them to, even if they never actually said it. Hence, it's no great surprise that the interviewees provided plenty of humour for the scientifically pure of heart.

[Mark]

Sorry, I was just being pedantic really, trying to make sure that Mad World realised that these days science and medicine don't just come from the West. I think that labelling current medicine either Eastern or Western is kiiding some people that there is now a global world of science, but yes I agree that eastern and western is more appropriate when talking about the old school medicinal world. I'll get over it.

[edited once]

[MadWorld74]

Thank you pedantic Mark, again, no need to spoon feed me, I am intelligent enough to understand you're point of view.

[*Bob*]

A faith healer asked Moshe how his family was getting along. "They're all fine," Moshe said, "Except my uncle. He's very sick."

"Your uncle is not sick," the faith healer said. "He THINKS he's sick."

Two weeks later, the faith healer ran into Moshe on the street. "How is your uncle getting along?" he asked.

Moshe shrugged, "He THINKS he's dead."

[Fear 'n boozin]

Keef said: I do however agree that he picked his targets rather well (an American woman, COME ON!!!!)

obviously a good point well made keef ;op

[david_carnell]

I thought an interesting note in the program, relating to the current stream of consciousness on East v West, was that people in the country's where alternative therapies originated from are now queing up to get their hands on "western" medicine and doctors trained in "science".

For example if you lived in India, Nepal or Sri Lanka you may be one of the millions who daily use Ayurvedic medicine (I use the term medicine loosely). It is an ancient form of treatment that has been around since approx 1000BC. It should be pretty shit-hot by now then, having accumulated 3000 years of knowledge and improvements. And yet they have not yet learned about somehting simple such as toxicity. A research study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found significant levels of toxic heavy metals such as lead, mercury and arsenic in 20% of Ayurvedic preparations that were made in South Asia for sale in America. Worrying.

Perhaps some statistics would be useful to highlight the plight of those countries who have been using Ayurveda for 3000 years.

India(pop. 1.049 billion)

Deaths from Hepatitis B - 23000

Deaths from Childhood Cluster diseases - 287000

Deaths from Meningitis - 53500

Life expectancy - 68.5 yrs

Infant mortality rate - 34.6 per 1000

Sri Lanka (pop. 18 million)

Deaths from Hepatitis B - 1000

Deaths from Meningitis - 4000

Life expectancy - 74.8

Infant mortality rate - 19 per 1000

And now a country that has placed its faith in Western medicine:

UK (pop. 60 million)

Deaths from Hepatitis B - less than 100

Deaths fomr Childhood Cluster diseases - 0

Deaths from Meningitis - 500

Life expectancy - 78.7 yrs

Infant mortality rate - 5 per 1000

If its all the same to everyone, I'll stick with "western" medicine, happy in the knowledge that what we don't know yet, we're working towards knowing. In the meantime, next time you are pregnant, in old age, or ill, be glad that you'll be treated by "western" science. I know I will be.

[*Bob*]

Maybe, David.. but apart from the blisteringly high mortality rates, are they 'appy?

[david_carnell]

They are, very. Then they get polio and find their local doctor can only give them witch-hazel or a lethal dose of lead.

[Jeremy]

The UK is one of the worlds richest countries... we have clean running water and sewage, welfare benefits... we don't live in slums, or pour human waste into the streets and rivers.

Yes we have modern medicine and a free health service, but that's just one of the factors!

[MadWorld74]

I don't think comparing a third world or developing country to us in the U.K. is a very fair example.....

[SeanMacGabhann]

India a third world country???? Have you not been keeping up with the news?

[MadWorld74]

I was talking about third world countries as a whole and not refering specifically to any country in particular.....go away SeanMacG

[Keef]

I don't think that is a particularly fair example, but truth doesn't always seem fair, and whilst there are plenty more factors, those stats are still valid.

[Brendan]

The fact that diseases like polio are not prevalent in the western world has precisely everything to do with vaccination and nothing to do with the fact that we are so scandalously privileged that we have a choice of 100 different kinds of soap.

[Jeremy]

Sean, India has a serious poverty problem (just as China does). I'm sure I read recently that 1/3 of India's population live on less than $1 a day. Preventable diseases are rife. "Third world" may or may not be accurate, but it is still a developing nation. It's a very unsuitable frame of reference.

[MadWorld74]

'unsuitable frame of reference'.....yes indeed.

[capt_birdseye]

Did anyone see "Tribe" last night? Very interesting programme. This week's tribe were from the Brazilian rain-forest, they first made contact with the outside world in the 1970s. Within something like 10 years of this contact they'd lost a third of their population to diseases. Most of their witch doctors died too and so they have now lost the ability to make their traditional medicines and are very much reliant on outside modern medical practices. Quite sad really.

[david_carnell]

Unfortunately, as there have been no scientific trials to assess the benefits of alternative medicines against controls with large subject groups, in double-blind tests, in peer-reviewed journals I had to do the best I could. If anyone would like to shopw me some other stats to contradict my pov please feel free.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Jeremy - I wasn't trying to deny India's poverty (much less it's various religious strands and instances of gender inequality)

But I would say it was an extremely suitable frame of reference, with so much money starting to be generated there, it's a society that can afford the infrastructure to reduce those numbers, and I fully expect it will. It just won't be because of 3000 year old belief systems

David - as I understand it, even if you did get your hands on "scientific trials" with "double-blind tests" my understanding is they would be disbelieved by some people as not relevant. I know, I know....

[SeanMacGabhann]

Reading today's G2 I came across this column which I thought appropriate for this thread:

G2

Three years ago we were here once again in August when a friend, Lady Victoria Waymouth, an interior designer, was rushed into hospital in the south of France. She died there a few days later, aged 57, of heart failure. As her elder sister was staying with us in Tuscany at the time, we learned of these tragic developments as they unfolded.

There would be no reason to recall them now were it not for the fact that they have resulted this summer in the suspension for a year of Victoria's former doctor for "contributing to her death". A tribunal of the General Medical Council ruled that Dr Marisa Viegas had been guilty of "inappropriate", "unprofessional" and "irresponsible" conduct. Victoria's identity was kept secret during the tribunal's proceedings - she was referred to throughout as "Ms A" - but her family is now happy for me to confirm that it was she who had been the gullible victim of her friend the doctor's extreme distrust of conventional medicine.

Dr Viegas had ceased to be Victoria's GP when she left London for Jamaica to work on alternative cures, but she continued to give her advice by phone and email. In August 2004, when Victoria fell seriously ill in France, Dr Viegas told her to stop taking the drugs that had been prescribed for her by a distinguished London professor of cardiac medicine.

The French hospital gave the cause of her death as "acute heart failure due to treatment discontinuation", and it is heartbreaking to think that Victoria could still be alive if she hadn't had such unquestioning faith in Dr Viegas's judgement. But there is no reason to doubt the doctor's sincerity, and with her dreadful advice she has at least shown us how crazy it is for anyone, even the greatest enthusiast for homeopathy, to undervalue conventional medicine.

[neil]

There are some really interesting posts on this thread illustrating one of the main points that Dawkins raised in his documentary.

The point that I believe Dawkins tries to raise (but fails due to his arrogance) is that alternative therapies are called such due to the lack of scientific evidence that supports them and that as a result it is scandalous that the NHS fund these whilst at the same time making deicsions through NICE not to license or openly prescribe medicines or treatments that have proven clinical efficacy based on cost (there have been recent high profile examples of this with alzheimers and cancer treatment.

He does however skirt around the point that any alternative therapy may be useful purely through placebo. Homeopathy (for which there is no proven efficacy - I'm sure some of you will dispute this) does possibly have a place in the NHS but what it doesnt need is its own hospital costing millions of pounds, the money could be better spent whilst not taking away the opportunity for people who want homeopathy to have access to it.

On the religion and alternative therapies issue Dawkins hasd a very good point about people ignoring reason or being frighteningly willing to suspend their disbelief in order to have faith or beleive in something. Dawkins however is himself guilty of the crimes he accuses society of. Dawkins dismisses agnostics and positions himself as a devout atheist. A true scientist would remain agnostic as there is no available evidence for or against the existence of a god/creator; and a similar stance can be taken on the issue of alternative therapies so lets not all get angry with each other for believing in something else. Reiki, homeopathy, resonance treatment... the list goes, on might work for people but the evidence suggests it does so because we want it to and not for any medical or scientific reason so lets spend the money allocated for medical treatment on that and not on unproven alternative therapies - we have to prioritise.