Articles

“Electromagnetic hypersensitivity” and “wifi allergies”: Bogus diagnoses with tragic real world consequences

Is there such a thing as an "allergy to wifi"? Lots of people claim there is; science, not so much.

Is there such a thing as an “allergy to wifi”? Lots of people claim there is; science, not so much.

I debated about writing about this topic, given that I just wrote about it last week on my not-so-super-secret other blog. However, as I thought about it during the weekend, I realized that the tragic story that so saddened and disturbed me to prod me to discuss so-called “electromagnetic hypersensitivity” or “electro-hypersensitivity” (EHS) was so horrific that a more detailed, SBM-level discussion was indicated, particularly in light of a similar case that didn’t end so tragically discussed by Harriet Hall in September. I’m referring, of course, to the case of Jenny Fry, a British teen who hanged herself in June and whose mother has been claiming that her “allergy to wifi” was what drove her to suicide. So, while there will be some overlap with my previous discussion, I will try to step back and take a broader view of the evidence regarding the fake diagnosis of EHS, interspersed with examples (hopefully) illustrating my point. Think of this as the post I wished I had written the first time around but, due to time constraints, couldn’t.

Bogus science and lawsuits over EHS

By way of background, it’s worth briefly revisiting the case that Harriet discussed. Indeed, if you Google “lawsuit” and “electromagnetic hypersensitivity” and “wifi” the first page of results consists almost entirely of articles about the lawsuit that Harriet discussed, and the second page consists mostly of articles about it. That’s probably because this is just the latest lawsuit that made the news. It happened in Massachusetts, where the parents of a 12-year-old boy (designated “G” in court records) who was attending Fay School in Massachusetts alleged that the school violated his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to make accommodations to protect G from electromagnetic radiation from the school’s wifi routers. From the complaint’s summary statement:
(more…)

Posted in: Basic Science, Neuroscience/Mental Health, Public Health

Leave a Comment (0) →

Hospitals Slow to Adopt Pediatric Pneumonia Guidelines

sick kid

While it is both easy and fun to point out the inadequacies of unscientific modalities such as chiropractic and homeopathy, our goal at Science-Based Medicine is the application of a single standard to all medical practice, even if it stings a bit. We are far from perfect. While I firmly believe that most conventional healthcare professionals are good people who strive to provide the best care possible for their patients, I accept that there is room for improvement and pediatric medicine is certainly no exception.

In fact, one of the characteristics that best distinguishes conventional from so-called alternative medicine is the simple fact that we systematically attempt to recognize and correct our errors on an individual and system wide level. That we evolve in the light of new and better evidence, albeit sluggishly as a rule rather than an exception, allows me to sleep at night. There is no quality control in alternative medicine. There are only shifting trends in the marketing of nonsense to the curious, desperate, and gullible.

One of the most recognized areas where improvement is needed in regular medicine is in the use of antibiotics. For too long we have been cavalier when it comes to prescribing antibiotics in situations where supportive care and appropriate observation would suffice, and too liberal with our use of broad spectrum agents. In fact, up to half of all antibiotic prescriptions are unnecessary according to the CDC. Based on my own clinical experience, admittedly anecdotal as it is, this seems about right. As a hospitalist, once a child arrives on the inpatient unit I probably discontinue more antibiotic courses than I start.

Over the past few years there has been a significant increase in the awareness of this problem, however. Many hospitals have even dedicated resources and personnel to antibiotic stewardship programs in order to study patterns of antibiotic use in their facility, design protocols to reduce antibiotic misuse, and to even enforce their implementation. It is a sad reality that inappropriate practice is sometimes best addressed by restricting a physician’s ability to order certain tests or medications, or to at least set up enough hoops to jump through to make them think twice about it.

The best way to improve care, however, is through education and guidance, often in the form of practice guidelines published by reputable organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics. In 2011, the Pediatric Infectious Disease Society and Infectious Disease Society of America published guidelines on the management of pneumonia in children. As with most new guidelines, pediatricians have been slow to change their practice, but new data presented at IDWeek 2015 revealed a more nuanced pattern.

Pneumonia, which kills more young children around the world than any other condition, is also one of the most common infections diagnosed in the pediatric population in the United States. It can be caused by a variety of viral, bacterial, and even fungal pathogens, and despite the overwhelming success of the childhood vaccination program, pneumonia remains a leading cause for admission to the hospital. Well over 100,000 children are hospitalized because of pneumonia each year, and many more cases are treated in an outpatient setting. It is also the leading indication for antibiotic use among hospitalized children.

The 2011 pediatric pneumonia guidelines, which gave evidence-based recommendations on numerous aspects of medical management of children with lower respiratory infections, put considerable emphasis on antibiotic choices. Based on the latest antibiotic resistance data, for example, the drug amoxicillin was preferred as the first line agent when treating children in the office, urgent care or emergency department, while the intravenous drug ampicillin was recommended for children requiring hospital admission. These medications are much more narrow in coverage yet as effective if not more so than other popular choices, in particular oral 3rd generation cephalosporins like cefdinir (Omnicef) and the parenteral (i.e. IV or intramusclar) antibiotic ceftriaxone (Rocephin). And when it comes to antibiotic use, the more narrow the coverage the better since this reduces the opportunity for resistance and the development of complications..

In the study presented at IDWeek 2015, researchers compiled data from pediatric pneumonia admissions to hospitals across the United States in 2013, particularly looking at antibiotic prescribing patterns. The study consisted of a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of admissions to over 323 hospitals, 49 of which were identified as children’s hospitals, which was defined as a facility where more than 75% of the admissions, not counting newborns, were children. In this study, 15,495 cases of pediatric pneumonia requiring admission were identified, with a bit over 9,000 of the admissions being to children’s facilities.

So what did they find? In general, children’s hospitals were more likely to adhere more closely to the guidelines than community, non-children’s facilities. But the overall numbers were terrible, with not even half (46%) of the patients admitted to hospitals specializing in pediatric care receiving appropriate antibiotics for their pneumonia. Only 15% of pediatric admissions to non-children’s hospitals got guideline therapy. And this was after weeding out high risk patients and patients with a complicated pneumonia that would be more likely to justify use of a more broad spectrum antibiotic.

Conclusion

Ignoring evidence and refusing to update clinical practice is one of the hallmarks of quackery. Conventional medicine must always work to avoid sinking to such depths. Unfortunately, because the practice of medicine is ultimately a human endeavor, there will always be challenges. And although new data such as this is upsetting, I stand by my trust in the overall process.

Medicine is hard and the human mind is complicated. The reasons why we are slow to adopt new guidelines even years after their publication, or why we continue to throw antibiotics at viral infections, while somewhat understandable are still extremely frustrating. I wrote a post on this subject over two years ago and I am no more able to fully wrap my head around it today than I was back then.

Organizations like the AAP and Pediatric Infectious Disease Society will continue to do their part, as will hospitals and committed, science-based pediatricians. I will continue to do my best to practice according to the evidence and to model this approach for the medical students and resident physicians under my guidance. Parents and patients can help us do a better job by becoming better informed and taking a more active role when possible. I don’t believe that the response to this newly presented information should be to avoid non-children’s hospitals if your child has pneumonia, however. But it should serve as a reminder that it is always okay to ask questions, and even to question the recommendations of a treating physician or other healthcare professional.

 

 

 

Posted in: Science and Medicine

Leave a Comment (0) →

Holding the supplement industry to account: Can we learn from tobacco regulation?

When it comes to supplements, you can't trust what's on the label

When it comes to supplements, you can’t trust what’s on the label

The idea that “natural” products are safe and effective has been so effectively marketed to us that many don’t recognize it as a fallacy. Much of the supplement industry is built around an appeal to nature. Supplements are described as natural, gentle, and “holistic”. Medicine, especially prescription drugs, is the opposite. They’re “chemicals”. They’re risky and dangerous – just look at that list of side effects! Supplements are packaged beautifully, have impressive claims, and are for sale at Whole Foods. Drugs are hazardous: They may come in a plain vial, with warning labels, detailed information sheets, and cautious statements about their effectiveness. Is it any wonder that many consumers, when faced with health concerns or medical issues, instinctively think of supplements as a safer alternative? Purveyors of supplements and alternative medicine have leveraged this fallacy so effectively that it’s even guided the regulations that allow their sale. Regrettably, the result is a marketplace that puts consumers’ interests last. The supplement industry has completely stacked the odds against the consumer, challenging their ability to make informed decisions about their health. Most supplements on the market have never been properly tested for safety or effectiveness. And those that have been tested have largely been shown to be ineffective – or in the case of products like vitamins, often unnecessary. And while there are undoubtedly some ethical companies out there, the industry is regularly revealed to resemble a wretched hive of scum and villainy. Despite this, the industry has gone from success to success – in terms of sales, at least. In 1994 supplement sales were about $4 billion in the US. It’s now a $37 billion industry that is remains only lightly regulated – or largely unregulated. With recent action taken against fraudulent products, there are more questions than ever about how to force the supplement industry to make consumer protection a priority. A new paper in Drug Testing and Analysis makes a provocative suggestion: Local and state governments already regulate another hazardous product: tobacco. Can lessons learned from the tobacco wars improve the safety of supplements? (more…)

Posted in: Epidemiology, Health Fraud, Herbs & Supplements, Politics and Regulation, Public Health

Leave a Comment (0) →

CRISPR and the Ethics of Gene Editing

CRISPR-conf

If you have not heard of CRISPR yet, you should have. This is a truly transformative technology that allows for cheap and easy gene editing. It makes a powerful technology easily accessible.

Powerful biological technology, like stem cells to give another example, always seem to provoke profound hope and fear. The ability to manipulate human biology comes with it the hope of treating horrible and currently untreatable diseases. At the same time such technology provokes fear that it will be abused, or that it will violate the sanctity of what it means to be human.

As the public debate over stem cells seems to be fading into the background a bit (like IVF before it), debates over CRISPR and gene editing are likely to come to the forefront.

What is CRISPR?

(more…)

Posted in: Ethics

Leave a Comment (0) →

Is Addiction a Disease? Yes and No

Yes, it's a disease

Yes, it’s a disease

No, it's a habit

No, it’s a habit


Addiction is a puzzling phenomenon. Why do addicts persist in self-destructive behavior even after it has lost them their jobs, their family, their health, and their self-respect? Do they have any control over their behavior? If so, why don’t they control it? If not, why not? Two recent books shed light on these questions: The Biology of Desire: Why Addiction Is Not a Disease, by Marc Lewis, and The Thirteenth Step: Addiction in the Age of Brain Science, by Markus Heilig.

Lewis is a neuroscientist and former addict; Heilig is a physician and addiction researcher. Lewis is convinced that addiction is not a disease, but a habit created by the neural circuitry of desire in the course of its normal functioning. Heilig is convinced that addiction is a chronic disease like diabetes that can’t be cured but that must be managed by lifelong treatment.

While they disagree about whether addiction is a disease, they actually agree about almost everything else. They agree that we should reject the stigma of addiction as a kind of moral failing. They reject the hypotheses that addiction is a matter of choice or self-medication. They think current diagnostic labels are inadequate. They both try to integrate two levels of information: the case histories of addicts and the scientific knowledge from research. They are both skeptical of AA and of conventional rehab programs. They both support evidence-based treatments. They both think addicts are not all alike and that individual addicts will respond better to individualized approaches. (more…)

Posted in: Book & movie reviews, Neuroscience/Mental Health

Leave a Comment (0) →

How not to debate a “pro-vaxer”

When people debating against vaccines win, children lose.

When people debating against vaccines win, children lose.

To say that the relationship that antivaccine activists have with science and fact is a tenuous, twisted one is a major understatement. Despite mountains of science that says otherwise, antivaccinationists still cling to the three core tenets of their faith, namely that (1) vaccines are ineffective (or at least nowhere near as effective as health officials claim; (2) vaccines are dangerous, causing autism, autoimmune disease, neurodevelopmental disorders, diabetes, sudden infant death syndrome, and a syndrome that is misdiagnosed as shaken baby syndrome; and, of course, (3) the Truth (capital-T, of course!) is being covered up by a nefarious combination of big pharma, the medical profession, and the government (in the US, primarily the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which works with pediatricians to produce the recommended schedule of vaccines). Because vaccine rejectors don’t have science on their side, they have to resort strategies common to science denialists like those who reject the scientific consensus about evolution or human-caused global climate change. These fallacious strategies include (but are not limited to) selective citation of evidence (i.e., cherry picking), misrepresentation and logical fallacies, impossible expectations about what science can deliver (e.g., vaccine denialists expecting 100% efficacy and 100% safety from vaccines or cancer quacks expecting 100% cure rates and no side effects from chemotherapy); fake experts (e.g., Andrew Wakefield); and, of course, conspiracy theories. Add to that appeals to personal freedom and “health choiceüber alles and painting any form of vaccine mandate as incipient totalitarianism, with those rejecting vaccines taking on the role of the Jews in Hitler’s Germany, and you have a pretty good idea of the sorts of arguments antivaccine activists resort to.

Not surprisingly, even the most diehard antivaccine advocate can get frustrated. After all, it must be very frustrating to have one’s posterior handed to one in arguments on the science of vaccines time and time again. Of course, for that purpose, like most science denialists, antivaccine activists have the Internet. In particular, they’ve taken full advantage of Facebook, and, more recently, Twitter. One such online gathering place is the public group known as Vaccine Resistance Movement (VRM). I encourage pro-science advocates to peruse this group, just to see that when I refer to people being anti-vaccine, there is no doubt that that is what they are. It was there that I found a rather telling document posted, for the benefit of antivaccine advocates everywhere.
(more…)

Posted in: Critical Thinking, Vaccines

Leave a Comment (0) →

No, Purell Does Not Breed Super-Anything

Pictured:  Mechanism of pumpy doom, or savior to us all?  Neither!

Pictured: Superbug spawner, or savior to us all? Neither!

Recently, I was sitting in a meeting and reached for the dispenser of Purell hand sanitizer sitting on the conference room table. A colleague of mine gave a small, rueful shake of her head to the person on her other side. Apparently I had erred. I asked what was the matter, and got a brief answer to the effect of “because superbugs.” We exchanged nothing more about it; the interaction was over before the alcohol had dried from my hands.

I wouldn’t have thought anything of such an interaction with anyone else, but my colleague is a PhD student in immunology, six years older and more schooled than I, doing her doctoral research in a lab run by a physician-scientist — a specialist in infectious disease, no less. A touch ironic.

And so I noticed a need for some mythbusting: alcohol-based hand sanitizers do not breed resistant bacteria. (more…)

Posted in: Epidemiology, Evolution, Public Health, Science and Medicine

Leave a Comment (0) →

Announcing: Video Lecture Course on Science-Based Medicine

A couple of years ago, the James Randi Educational Foundation commissioned me to develop a series of 10 video lectures on Science-Based Medicine. After a lot of work and many vicissitudes, it has finally gone live on YouTube. http://web.randi.org/educational-modules.html The lecture titles are:

  1. Science-Based Medicine vs. Evidence-Based Medicine
  2. What Is CAM?
  3. Chiropractic
  4. Acupuncture
  5. Homeopathy
  6. Naturopathy and Herbal Medicine
  7. Energy Medicine
  8. Miscellaneous “Alternatives”
  9. Pitfalls in Research
  10. Science-Based Medicine in the Media and Politics

The series is accompanied by a Course Guide that can be downloaded as a pdf.

 

 

Posted in: Announcements, Science and Medicine

Leave a Comment (0) →

SCAM Cell Therapies

Surprisingly, the best youth is in the chump.

Pictured: Stem cells.  Surprisingly, the best youth is in the chump.

Injecting animal cells into humans for therapeutic reasons has a long history. The most infamous was John Brinkley who injected goat testicles into 16,000 men in the 1920s and 30s to treat impotence. Harriet wrote a review of Charlatan: America’s Most Dangerous Huckster, the Man Who Pursued Him, and the Age of Flimflam, which covers the topic. I wonder who would get the title today. Chopra…Gesundheit.

I had thought this therapy was consigned to the sharps container of history. Of course not. No SCAM ever fades away.

As part of my ID reading I came across the headline “Q Fever Outbreak Among Travelers to Germany Who Received Live Cell Therapy — United States and Canada, 2014.”

It surpasses the classic “Notes from the Field: Campylobacter jejuni Infections Associated with Sheep Castration — Wyoming, 2011” for foolishness, where:

…men reported having used their teeth to castrate some of the lambs.

Really. A most curious way to acquire Campylobacter. But at least the castrators were doing practical, albeit eeewwwwwwww, work. And there is an alternative to teeth, including the Burdizzo Emasculatone, which is:

an elegant little tool especially suited to crushing the spermatic cords of a variety of male mammals. It really helps to make a neat job of what would otherwise be an unpleasantly messy endeavor, and the Burdizzo achieves the goal of bloodless castration admirably.

But I digress and leave to the commenters to make completely inappropriate remarks. Only the SCAM universe can be odder than infectious diseases. (more…)

Posted in: Homeopathy, Humor

Leave a Comment (0) →

Brian Clement claims Hippocrates treatments “reverse” multiple sclerosis

Brian Clement

Brian Clement

American charlatan Brian Clement made another trip to Canada recently and was caught on audiotape claiming multiple sclerosis could be “reversed” at the Hippocrates Health Institute (HHI), where he serves as Director. This is yet another in a series of his misrepresentations about the effectiveness of the quack treatments offered at HHI. Indeed, Clement calls to mind the old joke about inveterate liars:

Q: Know how can you tell this guy is lying?

A: His lips are moving.

Once again, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), which has done an outstanding job exposing Clement and his mendacity, caught him in this particular fabrication. (The American media, by contrast, has largely ignored the story, even to the point of printing credulous puff pieces about Clement.) According to the CBC, it:

obtained a recording of a lecture Clement gave in September in Montreal where he said, “Last week, we had somebody at the institute that reversed multiple sclerosis.”

He went on to claim that many other people who visited his Florida spa, the Hippocrates Health Institute, saw similar results.

“A nurse that came to us two years ago was crippled, had braces on. By the time she left Hippocrates, she reversed the multiple sclerosis.

“And mainstream medicine, they think it’s remarkable. I’ve seen lots and lots of people over the years did that.”

(more…)

Posted in: Cancer, Health Fraud, Legal, Politics and Regulation, Science and the Media

Leave a Comment (0) →
Page 1 of 246 12345...»