Study "Disproving" Mercury-Autism Link Published in Journal with Financial Ties to Vaccine Manufacturers

On Mar 31, 10:40 pm, Peter Bowditch wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 31, 4:25 pm, "Stephen Wilson"
wrote:
"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message

. ..

I can assure you that "the causative factors related to the
unexplained effects" definitely have nothing to do with homeopathy,
but are all to do with incompetent research or self-delusion (or
both).

Sceptic James Randi is so convinced that homeopathy will not work, that he
has offered $1m to anyone who can provide convincing evidence of its
effects. For the first time in the programme's history, Horizon (a respected
BBC TV programme) conducted its own scientific experiment, to try and win
his money. If they succeeded, they would not only be $1m richer - they would
also force scientists to rethink some of their fundamental beliefs.

The programme gathered a team of scientists from among the most respected
institutes in the country. The Vice-President of the Royal Society,
Professor John Enderby oversaw the experiment, and James Randi flew in from
the United States to watch.

As with Benveniste's original experiment, Randi insisted that strict
precautions be taken to ensure that none of the experimenters knew whether
they were dealing with homeopathic solutions, or with pure water. Two
independent scientists performed tests to see whether their samples produced
a biological effect. Only when the experiment was over was it revealed which
samples were real.

To Randi's relief, the experiment was a total failure. The scientists were
no better at deciding which samples were homeopathic than pure chance would
have been.

Meaningless. NOBODY will ever collect
the Randi challenge for ANYTHING. To find
out why, google for the antics of Randi and his
magician sidekick as they made a complete
shambles of the research that Benveniste,
a fully credentialed and legitimate researcher,
was attempting. Questioning every
single thing, the air, the dust in the room
the cosmic rays that might be passing
by to "influence" the results... etc.,
ad infinitum, Randi
can argue his way out of any result.

Ennis, completely skeptical of Benveniste's
results, repeated the experiments without
Randi and got positive results. Three out
of four international labs also got
positive results when scientfic
amateur Randi and cohorts were kept away.

CitizenJimserac

Was I right, Stephen?

Did you notice how CJ responded to your description of what happened
by saying "google for the antics of Randi"? He didn't even bother to
read what you wrote.

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Projecthttp://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraudhttp://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skepticshttp://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

I did read it. If you google for Randi's antics, you will learn
that he distracted the experimenters constantly and turned
a scientific experiment into a circus sideshow, just as intended.

Citizen Jimserac

Citizen Jimserac wrote:

If you mean me, I rejected the Horizon episode because
ANONYMOUS "scientists" changed Ennis' test protocol.

Because the way Ennis conducted the experiment was wrong. If you
exactly repeat a mistake you get the same wrong result.

You would say they "refined" and "corrected" it,

I don't remember using those particular words, but what they did was
redo the experiment with better controls and/or blinding. You have
said that blinding doesn't matter to you but it does for real
scientists, especially in cases where belief can effect observation.
Have you looked up Rene Blondlot and N-rays yet?

but there is NO article or link anywhere to justify
the alteration of the test parameters and it was,
therefore, NOT a valid repetition, in my opinion.

Of course it wasn't a repetition, because a repetition would have
repeated the mistakes and added no new information.


Sloppy refutations are as worthless as sloppy science.

So you agree that Ennis was doing sloppy science?

When are you going to address my question - if Ennis is correct
doesn't this mean that homeopathy can make asthma and hay fever worse?


--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

On Apr 1, 4:30 pm, Peter Bowditch wrote:
wrote:

Re Ennis experiments:

If you could provide some sort of link that the
Horizon "improved" Ennis test protocol
or introduced superiour controls, that
would help matters - but how could
you - were they not anonymous?

Regarding your comments about Ennis'
experiments proving that Homeopathy
made allergies worse... I am INCLINED
TO AGREE but have insufficient information
to fully support this conclusion.
It most certainly seems so.

For one thing, the Ennis experiment
does not vindicate Homeopathy - it
is just a step in the direction of demonstrating
possible causative action from a substance
that supposedly has NO MOLECULES left of the
original substance. Theoretically,
there is just water present, yet
we are seeing a provoked histamine
reaction, as though the histamine
triggering substance were still there.

One explanation is your position that
the controls or other aspects of the
experiment were flawed, leading
to illusory or mistaken results.

I most certainly am willing to entertain
that idea once the ANONYMOUS scientists
are ready to publish their corrections.
That they have not done this,
NEITHER in Lancet, NOR anywhere
else, I find rather curious.
One would have thought that
they would jump at the chance
to definitively sink the water
memory theory (pun intended).

I'm as reasonable AND as skeptical
as you are, but NOT when the
"refutation" is being done in
the manner above described.

Thanks
Citizen Jimserac

On Mar 31, 5:26 pm, (Richard Schultz) wrote:
In misc.health.alternative wrote:

: Meaningless. NOBODY will ever collect
: the Randi challenge for ANYTHING.

That may be true, but not because Randi's offer was not made in
good faith.

-----
Richard Schultz
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."

What's that? You got positive results with a substance
which could not possibly have any molecules left of the
ultra diluted original substance? Well, there's the cosmic
rays, neutrinos, anomalies in the earth's magnetic
field, dust particles, the static electric field of the
experimenters... etc. ad infinitum, "Randi" might
say. Once you've accounted for all that, we've
got tens of thousands more...

See? Nobody collects any money no matter what
happens. The "challenge" is a farce.
Great promo though.

Citizen Jimserac

In misc.health.alternative Citizen Jimserac wrote:
: On Mar 31, 5:26 pm, (Richard Schultz) wrote:
: In misc.health.alternative wrote:

: : Meaningless. NOBODY will ever collect
: : the Randi challenge for ANYTHING.

: That may be true, but not because Randi's offer was not made in
: good faith.

: What's that? You got positive results with a substance
: which could not possibly have any molecules left of the
: ultra diluted original substance? Well, there's the cosmic
: rays, neutrinos, anomalies in the earth's magnetic
: field, dust particles, the static electric field of the
: experimenters... etc. ad infinitum, "Randi" might
: say. Once you've accounted for all that, we've
: got tens of thousands more...
:
: See? Nobody collects any money no matter what
: happens. The "challenge" is a farce.
: Great promo though.

Does it bother you even a teeny tiny bit that you have just demonstrated
that you are completely ignorant of the challenge itself, where the money
is being held, the conditions under which a claimant will be tested, and
the conditions under which the money will be awarded. All of this information
is freely available to you; I assume that you would rather remain ignorant.

-----
Richard Schultz
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."