“To paraphrase George Bernard Shaw, mainstream media has difficulties differentiating between a bicycle accident and the collapse of civilisation. Yet we rely on media to inform us of events and concepts in the world around us, despite the fact that they often get it terribly wrong, especially in the fields of science and medicine. In this talk we’ll outline some of the common mistakes journalists and indeed the public make, from shocking statistics to bogus balance, as well as discuss how they can be improved, and what sceptics, scientists, doctors and you can do to help rectify the situation.”

Our speaker: Dr David Robert Grimes is a writer, musician, actor, Doctor of medical physics, closet Jedi knight. 3menmakeatiger.blogspot.com

As someone who has battled with my weight over the last seven or eight years I know how beguiling all of these promises can be. However many times we are told that the equation is (relatively) simple, calories burnt > calories consumed = weight loss, you still hold out hope that there will be a magic pill, food combination or detox that will give you that quick fix. Even if it not a quick fix something that could get you kick started or help you one the way.

Having worked in a health food shop when I first attempted to lose weight, I quite steadily worked my way through the “Diet and Weight Loss” section. From Chromium to Zotrim – I tried them all, with no noticeable effects. It was only when I went to Weight Watchers that I actually lost weight. Now any article I write should not be read as a promo for WW but should be taken as an example of a calorie controlled diet. For me, without the accountability of going for the weigh in once a week, I have little or no self-control regarding food. I just love to eat!

This year two supplements that are new to me caught my eye, namely SlimSticks and African Mango.

The first one is very easy to unpick. SlimSticks are basically a controlled portion of low calorie high fibre food. Containing palm and oat oil they offer very little as way of nutrition, not to mention how strongly some people feel about the farming of palm oil… This conceit of fibre for appetite suppression is by no means new, in fact I myself tried fibre tablets in the past, and their results can be variable and can result in some gastrointestinal upset for some people. They can work as a mild appetite suppressant by allowing you to eat something that should make you feel fuller for longer than say a sugary snack. The same effect could be garnered by incorporating such high fibre complex carbohydrate into the overall diet, and would have the added benefit of having higher nutritional value. For those people who eat out of boredom or a more emotional response these would have little effect as studies have shown that people will consume a larger amount of a food if they believe it to be a low calorie option. Overall using a product such as these sticks does little to amend eating behaviour that results in being overweight, with the result that once “normal” eating is resumed the weight will in all likelihood be regained.

African Mango is another ball game however. A fruit that is found in Cameroon it has joined the ranks of being a “wonder food”. Those of you who listen to the Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe podcast or read Dr Novella et al’s excellent blog will already regard the name Dr Oz with the utmost suspicion. This product is just one of the many that Dr Oz and his website promote as wonder supplement that not only helps you lose weight but has numerous other beneficial properties such as lowing cholesterol and rids your body of the ever present “toxins”. It is sold as being an ancient remedy, well known for its manifold health properties whilst also being the new celebrity diet – the ad on my Facebook home page told me Kate Winslet swore by it.

Apart from these being two very obvious logical fallacies – arguments from antiquity and popularity these are claims that are regularly put to several supplements a year. When I worked in the health food shop it was the wonders of Acai and Green Coffee for example. All of these supplements purport to be “super” foods full of antioxidants, vitamins, minerals, boosting your metabolism (a “thermogenic agent”), decreasing fat absorption from food (promoting mal-absorption) and suppressing your appetite due to the natural high fibre. The concepts of thermogenic, mal-absorptive supplements are well documented on the Quarkwatch website here.

However some websites promoting African Mango have claimed you don’t even need to change your diet for it to have an effect! Even better – now this is really a magic pill. I can still eat brie, demolish all the Christmas chocolate left in the house and drink all the Baileys I like and still lose weight. If that doesn’t send up warning flares for people I don’t know what would. Even doctors prescribing medications designed and proven to aid in weight loss can’t make such assured claims.

Again then we are back to the idea of fruit fibre being one of magic properties of this African Mango. Evidence does show the health benefits of such fibre, not to mention how we should all be aiming for at least five different coloured fruits and vegetables every day but how do you get the same benefits from a pill version? Well you don’t. Part of the benefit is eating the fresh fruit itself, your body having to digest it fully, along with the water – not in a powder form mechanically broken down for you.

On a more serious note though, anyone who searches for scientific information on African Mango or Irvingia gabonensis will find some results that have a more convincing ring to them. Many websites cite a clinical trial in which the participants lost 28 pounds in a month. They allude to the activity of an enzyme within the seed of the fruit that acts to lower bad cholesterol in the body when coupled with diet and moderate exercise can result in relatively dramatic weight loss as well as lower cholesterol and blood pressure. The one thing that I noticed whilst looking in the specific clinical trials that are cited in the literature and more serious news articles, that they all have two recurring authors (Ngondi and Oben), in the same university (University of Yaounde) with trial sizes of around 100 people or less. The last trial I can find a reference to was in 2009, with other trials taking place earlier. It is the 2009 paper with 102 double blinded trial that is most cited. It is also not a generic supplement being tested however, but a specific isolated compound from within it – namely IGOB131. This data whilst positive is still regarded as preliminary and only pertains to a substance isolated from the plant. The paper concludes that the study should be the impetus for further larger scale studies, which as of yet don’t appear to have been conducted. It also applies to patients that were regarded as overweight or obese by the BMI scale and was coupled with a reduced calorie intake. It was noted that the placebo group also lost weight during the trial at a reduced rate. Some websites reviewing the African Mango supplement have used this data to encourage those looking to buy the supplement to look for a higher level of the active substance IGOB131 to ensure positive results. Whether or not it is listed within the active “ingredients” of a supplement, as we have seen in recent times such products that are sold over the internet are not subject to strict controls and the quantities could vary from pill to pill within a box.

So what can we take away from this? Well that our money is more than likely better spent on some regular, run-of-the-mill fresh fruit and vegetables, a good pair of walking/running shoes and to admit to what we all probably knew all along – weight loss is hard. It shouldn’t happen overnight, steady slow weight loss with permanent life style changes is the only way to ensure you will lose any excess weight and remain as healthy as possible. As I head back to WW for what I have promised myself will be the last, and ultimately successful, time I have to once again recognise that even though I know all of these things – it is often easier blogged about than done!

I fundamentally disagree with this. What followed was a bit of back and forth about the definition(s) of skepticism, the reach of it and how it can be applied. Now we both come from two distinctly different areas of research, unlike David I am an Arts graduate. Having spent the past few years studying museums (and by extension society) I would argue that the ideals of skepticism can and should be applied to all aspects of human endeavour. If you ascribe to a purely sciencitific mode of skepticism this may not either of interest or seem relevant.

It turns out I am not alone in having an interest in promoting the role of the Arts and Humanities in promoting critical or rational thinking . The good people at the Skeptical Humanities are on the case and if you listen to the Token Skeptic you would have heard them being recently interviewed (they do a much better job of “unpacking” this idea that I ever could). Just as I think museology can be examined through the prism of skepticism I look forward to seeing how this more formalised field will develop.

“As a feminist, I want to see fathers’ rights recognised in Irish law…”
This is the opening line of an article by Senator Ivana Bacik about why Irish fathers should get paid paternity leave, and to be honest I didn’t get past that first line before I’d opened Word and hammered out a few notes that I could turn into a blog later. The line floored me, because we (or at least “I”, but I think it’s a common enough problem) have a very set idea of how any sentence that begins with “as a feminist, I…” is going to end.* This stereotypical sentence will often include phrases like “a woman’s right to choose…” or talk about gender disparities in our male-centric culture. This is, of course, utter bollocks in the same way that people might expect any sentence which begins “as an atheist…” will end with an hour long lecture about why we shouldn’t say “Bless you” when someone sneezes. Feminism has come in every shape, size and strength of opinion you could ask for, and there are a great many feminists who care about issues that men face too.

As it happens, Senator Bacik’s article isn’t about a man’s right to have paternity leave so he can have just as much of a chance to take part in raising his children as a woman can, but rather about how men still dominate the workplace and so the introduction of paternity leave would level the playing field when it comes to women being prejudiced against because they take maternity leave. I’m sure this is a very valid issue, and discrimination in the workplace is certainly something that we still need to talk about, but I couldn’t help but feel that an opportunity had been missed here. With that first line, “As a Feminist, I [comment about an unfair disparity in male rights]“, I thought a new precedent might be set, with a feminist article in the mainstream press looking at gender equality from a gender neutral standpoint, rather than looking at it from a woman’s perspective. Of course, the clue’s in the name, it is FEMinism, so it’s only natural that people would focus on the female perspective, but it can sometimes leave men (and particularly male feminist) feeling a little isolated when it comes to talking about these issues. Sometimes it’s important to take a step back and say “I’m a feminist, and I care about men’s rights” in the same way it’s sometimes important to say “I’m an atheist, and I care about freedom of religion”.

I don’t want to make too much of a meal about this article, because I agree with the idea that men should have paternity leave, just as I agree that women have it tough in the workplace and that introducing leave for men would be good for women as well as men, but I can’t help but feel that “men should have paternity leave because it’s the right thing to do and we should all be equal” is a more powerful message than “men should have paternity leave because then women will have more of a shot to become CEOs” (particularly if the message begins “as a feminist, I believe…”). I don’t think Senator Bacik disagrees with either of these messages, and I don’t think I’m the audience she had in mind when she wrote that piece, so I acknowledge I’m almost certainly making mountains out of molehills here. It’s just that sometimes it’s too easy to read articles like this as saying that men are the problem to be fixed, and that’s when people start throwing words like “Feminazi” around. If feminism is about the quest for equality then it should fight gender inequality where it finds it, not because it will benefit women, but because living together in a fair society benefits everyone.

I may disagree with how Senator Bacik laid out her argument, but by God it was one hell of a first line…

*I appreciate that this reflects much more badly on me than it does on your average feminist.

As I have written about in the past I have not always identified as a feminist. However as I worked through a Masters, which led me to read a lot of scholarly works about feminist theory, and by talked to more people about it my understanding and acceptance of the term has grown. It has also become clear to me that a lot of people fundamentally misunderstand what feminism is.

One tweet started me on this train of thought:

Needless to say I was embroiled in a good few tweets back and forth. His arguments and train of thought felt very familiar – just where I was a few short months ago, but like a great man once said “When my information changes I change my mind. What do you do?” At the time I insisted on saying I was egalitarian, which I still am of course, but that the word feminist did not apply. As with a lot of people this was due to me disliking the use of the word feminism instead of its meaning. Feminism is, by classic definition, a movement that strives for the economic, social and political equality of the genders. Thus the argument follows that it is inherently egalitarian as in an equal society some people cannot (and should not) be “more equal than others.” Feminism, if it is ever fully born out, would ensure equality between all the sexes (male, female, transgendered etc).

Just because some people have misused the term themselves to promote an anti-man agenda or such an agenda has been prescribed to feminists does not invalidate the use of the term feminist. Just as the skeptical community has not handed over the term Skeptic to the climate change deniers, why should some miscommunication allow the word feminism to be so demonised? It stands for decades and decades of campaigning, suffrage, literary thought and critical, rational debate. So along with many others in the skeptical, atheist and rational thinking community I have chosen to take this word back. Just as people judge me if I call myself a goth, a gamer, a nerd or a skeptic if they judge me for calling myself a feminist so be it. They can live in a world of pigeon holes with no shades of grey but they need not drag me into it.

And on that note a plug for the glorious resource that is UK She Talks website. If you’re a woman with an inclination towards rational communication sign up and get some women talking.

Recently it has gotten me thinking if there is a way to apply skeptical or rational thinking to museums. I’m sure that if you asked many of those who work within museums, galleries and heritage institutions they may think their work has a sound grounding in rationality. Museums and other similar institutions generally care for the material elements of culture, science, art or of a nation and through the material attempt to offer interpretation and explanation. Having grown out of the age of Enlightenment the Victorian museum sought to educate the (generally unwashed) masses. Museums moved away from the personal cabinets of curiosities and from the private gentlemanly clubs into the purview of all. Seeking to be material encyclopaedias, in particular imperial museums gathered up masses of objects ranging from ethnographic artefacts to dinosaur bones.

These large scale museums, though highly impressive, can be difficult to negotiate in a modern (post modern or post-post modern, depending on who you talk to) world. One just has to mention the Elgin Marbles to know that artefacts and objects are vehicles through which humans express feelings and even reverential devotions. To think that an object can be devoid of meaning has been widely debunked. Regardless of whether or not the viewer knows anything about an object, like the Elgin Marbles, just through the process of experiencing it they will have an emotional response, even if that response is boredom. How one presents an object to a person can shape their reaction however. Choosing to go into great biographical details on Lord Elgin versus an explanation on the brand new custom built Pantheon museum in Athens will shade people’s reactions regardless of prior knowledge. It will either re-enforce their present assumptions and knowledge or challenge them to reassess their perceptions. So the theory goes, but how effective exhibitions and museum spaces are at challenging people can be debated at infinitum (and is).

One way or another, museums are changing how they collect, care for and present their collections. So as “the” museum moves away from the didactic Victorian model where has it gone to? Opinions vary wildly over what has been done right or wrong and what the future museum should be. Greater interaction, multisensory and multifaceted interpretations with layered information seems to be obligatory today. Think of objects you can touch, sound clips to listen to or how information panels are structured with hierarchies of information depending on age or specialised interest. A question has been asked as to whether these sorts of cacophonous installations can be called museum spaces at all through the power of what has been termed “edutainment”. So is there still a place for the more contemplative older museum styles or should they be all swept away and be replaced with the museum paradigm. Well as variety is the spice of life the answer is probably no.

I come back to my original query, can you look at museums, galleries or public spaces with a “skeptical eye” and if we can should we? Are cultural spaces outside of such scrutiny and thus should be left to their own devices? In light of articles such as those about the critisicism (or praise) of exhibitions exploring natural remedies in science museums is there a need for such institutions to think about their displays in light of rational thinking. In short this is something I think I may investigate over the following months – mostly as I think it may be an unoccupied niche out there. If you are a skeptic and work in a museum you are not alone. If you have any thoughts on the subject please let me know, perhaps it is a chance to look upon out cultural heritage in a new light.

Having become weary of church-based organised religion at an early age, the allure of a more spiritual, earth based, naturalistic belief structure was strong. Like many, I found the idea of there being no greater power, structure or meaning to the world quite terrifying. Akin to listening to a theoretical physicist explain the machinations of the known universe – thinking about how small and how insignificant you truly are, in the grand scheme of the universe, was deeply unsettling. Looking back the times in which I bought books about crystal healing, channelling your inner goddess or feng shui were times in which I felt as if I had little control of my life. At first this was due to being an awkward, rebellious and difficult teen and later due to relationship break down and financial difficulties. I cringe now to think of the money I spent on votive candles, shiny gemstones and essential oil when at the same time I struggled to have money for college supplies. However 19 year old me needed to feel like I could fix something through wishful thinking and positive energy rather than taking a cold hard look at what I was doing with my life and those I chose to include in it.

Even when I abandoned the overtly spiritual side of my life I replaced a lot of coping mechanisms with alternative health practises. Those who listen to the podcast will probably have gleaned that I suffer and have suffered from a few low lying but chronic conditions: migraines, eczema and acne. These types of conditions can be difficult to manage and the medications provided can have adverse side effects or can only be used occasionally. This, almost inevitably, led me to try a lot of alternative treatments. From ointments, exclusionary diets, dietary supplements, tonics and not to mention a whole host of essential oils and “centring exercises” I seemed to have tried it all. Just as my life had felt out of control at times it felt like my body was conspiring against me also. To be fair my ailments can be seen as not that devastating, a few bad headaches and blotchy skin, but over time can wear a person down to the point where they are susceptible to trying anything in an attempt to break the misery.

For most of my years in college I worked in a health food shop which meant I had no end to avenues to explore. Instead of frittering away my money on incense sticks and tarot cards, now I could spend my money as soon as I earned it on evening primrose oil, feverfew and a whole host of “slimming aids” (but I am only human – a magic pill to be thin? Yes please!). Although looking back, as remedy after remedy failed to yield any long standing or reliable relief a sort of cynicism grew inside me. At first it oscillated between a belief that I obviously wasn’t doing this “right” – I wasn’t excluding the right foods, I should go on a detox, I’m not taking the right combination of supplements – to a conclusion that a lot of what was being peddled was just that, being peddled. Working on the inside of the industry I saw it was like other retailers I had worked for. There were fashionable supplements like the Terri Hatcher promoted hyaluronic acid or the now infamous Gillan McKeith and her very ending range of powers, potions and snacks. Then there were seasonal sellers, like detoxing and slimming in the New Year and before “bikini season”, to immunity boosters and insect repellents. As I saw more years go by and the same products resurge in a new fresh package I started to realise it was just the same cycle I had seen working in Claire’s Accessories with the same recurring gloves ever winter.

Once I graduated I heaved a sigh of relief as a bid farewell to the retail world. Now with a nine to five job and working in a pretty scientific institution I suppose it was only a matter of time before I left all magical thinking behind. Having a job in which having something to listen doesn’t affect your productivity it was a colleague that introduced me to The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe. Like countless fledging skeptics before me it was listening to that podcast in early 2009 that lead me down the path I am on today. Starting to identify myself as a critical thinker lead me to help set up the highly informal but very enjoyable Dublin Skeptics in the Pub which in turn spawned this website and its accompanying podcast. I do find myself walking that fine line I found in the health food shop however: the one between skepticism and cynicism. At time I do find myself avoiding the more militant forms of skeptical campaigning as, to be perfectly honest, the lack of clear rational and critical thinking in the world is immensely depressing! It gives me even more respect for those who can put themselves out there to campaign in the wider public sphere, as they must be stronger than I to just keep going. For me, just once in a while, I hope that someday there will be a pill that will cure me of my eczema – ah sod that, on second thoughts give me the slimming one first…

So at 6pm on Sunday 9th October he will giving a talk about “The Rise of Skepticism In Uganda”. He is an author on the blog Free Thought Kampala if you would like some further reading!

Any and all donations to the cost of bringing James in Ireland are greatly welcomed, as well as donations to our wonderful hosts, Exchange Dublin.

As usual in the Exchange there shall be cake and refreshments – feel free to bring along some treats!

I am anxious to ensure I am up to date with all my jabs.

When I was a kid I had childhood eczema which precluded me from getting the MMR.. This meant that I was one of the kids who needed to be protected by herd immunisation.. sadly the herd were not fully immunised and I got all three of those wonderful illnesses by the time I was 5. It was not a good time for me or my parents (who had their hands full with my brother being ill at the same time).

I wouldn’t wish it on anyone else.

So back to getting vaccinated. It’s harder than it looks. There is no standard test for checking if you are up to date. When I  remember back to when we were kids, there was this 6-prong test thing, where they injected you and if you reacted (raised bumps at the injection site) you were grand. If you didn’t you got the requisite jab.

When I rang my local surgery the receptionist seemed a little confused. Aside from travel vaccines and tetanus adults don’t tend to ask for vaccine check ups. If I want to get a vaccine review it will involve a range of blood tests.

I did a little bit more research to see what the actual vaccine policy was in Ireland in relation to Adults.. I found this policy document:

http://www.hpsc.ie/hpsc/A-Z/VaccinePreventable/Vaccination/Guidance/File,3066,en.pdf

And here’s the relevant section:

Immunisation of specific groups

Adults

Adults should receive the following vaccines:

(a) Women sero-negative for rubella: MMR

(b) Women sero-negative for varicella: varicella vaccine (see Chapter 17)

(c) Previously non-immunised individuals: polio, tetanus, diphtheria and

MenC (if under 23 years) (see relevant chapters)

(d) Individuals in specific high-risk groups: hepatitis B, hepatitis A,

MMR, Hib, MenC, influenza, pneumococcal, varicella and BCG

vaccines (see relevant chapters)

(e) Those travelling abroad (see Chapter 19).

(f) Those aged over 50 years: influenza (see Chapter 7).

(g) Those aged over 65 years: pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine

(PPV23) (see Chapter 12).

If you do not fall into the above groups you are not really catered for. The Well Woman clinics will screen and immunise for Rubella and HPV.

After that I think it’s down to your individual doctor. So if you want to make sure you are fully immunised ask your GP. Most women will be given the booster shot for Rubella with no issues, but it’s worth asking for others like Whooping Cough at the same time.

I’ll be talking to my Doctor in the next month or so and will update accordingly.

**

Here’s a useful link for those in the states:

http://www.inboxrobot.com/article/43122513/4qjjkipHNx

And for those in the UK:

http://www.nhs.uk/Planners/vaccinations/Pages/Adultshub.aspx

The iTunes feed should be sorted this week too – hopefully. Enjoy!