The Crackpot Index, Alternative Medicine Version

I'm sure most are already familiar with the crackpot list.

I figure that physics should not be the only discipline such a list exists for.

With that in mind, I am building a new crackpot list. This one will be for anyone supporting alternative medicine.

I plan on podcasting this list eventually, but would like to know if I missed anything.

Should a new list be created for other categories as well?

For what is it worth, enjoy.

The Crackpot Index – Alternative Medicine Version
A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to medicine:
By Gene S. of The Shallow Gene Pool (http://www.theshallowgenepool.com)

A -5 point starting credit. Any positive rating indicates level of crackpot.

• 1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.
• 2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.
• 3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.
• 5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction.
• 5 points for using a thought experiment that contradicts the results of a widely accepted real experiment.
• 5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those with defective keyboards).
• 5 points for each mention of "Big Pharma", "The Cancer Industry", "The HIV Industry" or claims that imply such.
• 10 points for each claim that modern medicine is fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).
• 10 points for pointing out that you have gone to school, as if this were evidence of sanity.
• 10 points for pointing out that you belong to selective organizations whose membership is determined by IQ.
• 10 points for claiming that some form of alternative medicine cured you when conventional medical treatment failed. (10 more for emphasizing that you cured it on your own.)
• 10 points for claiming you have a revolutionary cure for a disease or diseases but giving no concrete, testable or verifiable sources of a legitimate nature.
• 10 points for claiming that any legitimate medical treatment with a similar sounding name, containing terms similar or procedures similar to the alternative medicine you support is support for the claims of your alternative medicine.
• 10 points for claiming to be more an authority in medicine than anyone questioning your claims even though you are not a doctor or similarly skilled physician.
• 10 points for arguing that a current well-established theory is "only a theory", as if this were somehow a point against it.
• 10 points for arguing that while a current well-established theory predicts phenomena correctly, it doesn't explain "why" they occur, or fails to provide a "mechanism".
• 10 points for claiming that your work is on the cutting edge of a "paradigm shift" or of such worth that it has been stolen from you by others. (10 more points if they became millionaires from such a theft. )
• 20 points for emailing me and complaining about the crackpot index. (E.g., saying that it "suppresses original thinkers" or saying that I am working for “Big Pharma”.)
• 20 points for claiming that the FDA has declared “war” on your particular form of alternative medicine. (10 more point for also claiming the FDA is actively spreading “disinformation” about your particular form of alternative medicine.)
• 20 points for every use of science fiction works, medical myths or medically erroneous claims as if they were fact.
• 20 points for defending yourself by bringing up (real or imagined) ridicule accorded to your past theories.
• 20 points for naming a prominent person in the medical or biotech fields or research who supports your claims. (10 more if the same person is claimed by you to have once had their researched stopped by the FDA, AMA, Big Pharma, etc.)
• 20 points for talking about how great your favorite alternative medicine is, but never actually supporting it by verifiable research form a legitimate source.
• 30 points for comparing those who argue against your ideas to Nazis, stormtroopers, or brownshirts.
• 30 points for claiming that the "medical establishment" is engaged in a "conspiracy" to prevent your particular form of alternative medicine from gaining its well-deserved fame, or suchlike.
• 40 points for claiming that when your particular form of alternative medicine is finally appreciated, present-day medicine, pharmaceutical, FDA, etc will be seen for the sham it truly is. (30 more points for fantasizing about show trials in which doctors, scientists, etc who mocked your claims or people who questioned your claims will be forced to recant.)
• 50 points for going to research sites or support site for diseases and chronic ailments and suggesting people so afflicted should use a certain type of alternative medicine. (10 more if it is a form of alternative medicine that you yourself use).

How about 20 points for causing more harm? 50 if you kill someone?

Excellent addition. And I will credit you with that entry (entries) when it goes to a podcast.

This post has been edited by GeneSplicer on Sep 5 2008, 05:13 AM

How about 100 points just for being Lui DiMartino?

redthird!

ah HA! alternative treatments for cancer... Interesting topic, and I have to toss in my 2.35 cents plus tax so that you can buy that cup of special joe.

My first wife died from pancreatic cancer, 163 days from diagnosis to death. She worked in a hospital and even though her oncologist told her it wouldn't do any good, she chose the standard Gemzar and something else palliative treatment for pc. Based on results, it didn't do much.

My mom died from small cell lung cancer, perhaps the result of smoking for 40 years. She chose chemotherapy, and it bought her about 3 years, based on results. the chemotherapy did what it is designed to do, attack the tumor. She died anyhow.

My mother in law died from some form of lung cancer, when diagnosed (roughly) she chose to do nothing. She ended up starving to death, as the tumor closed off her esophagus and she could no longer get anything down..

My current wife was diagnosed with stage 3a breast cancer and underwent a mastectomy. She chose to treat the rest with holistic naturopathic methods. She changed her diet to Vegan, chose foods and supplements that have a cancer fighting capability, has created an environment in her body that is caustic to cancer, and as of today, 2 years later, still clear of cancer. Healthier than she has ever been in her life.

The truth about chemotherapy is that it is incredibly toxic to the body. That is the reason they do a heart test to see if your heart can survive the punishment that chemo puts out. often, the patient ends up dying from "complications of cancer" which is doctor speak for the chemotherapy side effects killed them. A prime example of that is Randy Pausch, the professor that was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. He died from heart failure due to the chemotherapy. It is not unusual. there is also kidney failure, heart failure, stroke, liver failure, bleed outs, and so on..

The issues with chemotherapy is that it does not specifically attack cancer cells, it attacks any fast growing cell, so hair, finger nails and so on tend to fall out. It also destroys the immune system, and it often does not recover fully. For over 20 years I have heard of "new things on the horizon" but they always seem to peter out. Works well on rats, tends to malfunction on people.

Radiation, in my opinion, is incredibly bad. you are, in a sense, microwaving the flesh. When my wife was told she needed radiation, they told her there was a chance they might "nick" the lung, as they cannot curve radiation treatments, and her breast was removed to the chest wall. If they nick the lung, it can and usually does create a permanent case of pneumonia or pneumonia like symptoms. if they had to radiate the other breast, they would "do their best" not to damage the heart, but in most cases, it is damaged. Again, cannot curve the shot. My sister in law had breast cancer and did chemo and radiation. you can see the places on her neck where the radiation contacted the skin. looks leathery in those areas only. She also has lost strength in her chest, and her heart has to be monitored periodically for damage there.

Now, my point to that entire rant is this. All of those treatments have been peer reviewed, and FDA approved. and their statistics are miserable at the very best. and if you take apart the statistics, you quickly discover that after the magical "5 year" time frame, those who chose those treatments often die from side effects later on... and they count those that die of side effects as "successful" as they did NOT die from cancer.

So, from all that, I would feel as though I were doing myself a disservice to engage these "scientifically backed treatments" prior to going the holistic naturopathic route first. which are unproven... except that they have real world results, such as my wife, versus laboratory results from the companies selling the drugs.

Remember too, that there is no money in holistic or naturopathic treatments. So there is no study, nor any company inclined to do so.

Comments?

MM

MM,

To your claim that there is not money in holistic naturopathy, what exactly are you referring to?

The reason I ask is due to the massive research effort undertaken into possible cancer treatments or cures from herbal remedies and the like.

Out of such investigation(s), a few compounds showed to be promising. Out of that only one or two proved viable in humans.

And you are right to point out how testing of treatment that prove viable in animals do not always work in humans.

If anything of alternative medicine is viable and effective, it should be testable and repeatable.

If it cannot stand up to such scrutiny, then you have to either conclude that they are ineffective or that science is wrong.

I would also disagree with the claim that there is no money in holistic or naturopathic treatments. I cited before an article from the 90’s that stated the AM industry was a multi-billion dollar industry.

Lets go with a specific drug I know something about.

Tamoxifen. Used to block estrogen positive cancer cells from binding at a molecular level to estrogen hormones, then float through the body and attach the cancer cell to another area, called metastasis.

According to our medical oncologists, Tamoxifen has a 50% chance of being effective in PR-positive breast cancer. With that percentage, pretty much a no-brainer... until you dig a bit. Tamoxifen is usually prescribed for 5 years then discontinued after that, assuming that cancer is no longer in the womans system. The downside is that it causes stroke, heart failure, endrometrial cancer, clots and the list goes on. Pretty nasty stuff. and here is the kicker. It will buy you 50% of 1%. NOT 50% of 100%. I was absolutely floored. (I have the data on that if you want it)

We did some research, and based on a Harvard study, I3C is 90% effective of 100%. and it has zero side effects. It is nothing more than an concentration of certain cruciferous indoles. over the counter, costs about 10.00 or so a month.

But, it is over the counter... no real money to be made. Tamoxifen is not, and it is rather spendy. for 5 years.

The oncologist had not heard of it. We took the write up from Harvard in and it went poof. Sooo. if you want the studies and the links, kick me an email and happy to share...

Just a single example of our research.

I would be interested in the links, but you are making my point for me.

You are talking about research and studies. I’m assuming that this was done by legitimate researchers since you mentioned a Harvard study.

When I talk about alternative medicine, I am speaking about irrational pseudoscientific claptrap such as homeopathy or similar junk science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy

Even the sound notion of treating and addressing a person’s emotional state has been taken to ridiculous levels.

One prime example was an online debate I was part of where a person who identified themselves as a certified homeopath claimed that holistic medicine would simply not work on atheists since most atheists deny the existence of a soul and that was a crucial part of holistic medicine.

Nope, not part of my world, science and common sense, and a zen type balance, but atheists not being helped due to their lack of belief in a soul?

Sounds like a fruitcake to me...

And yes, the studies were completed by Georgetown, Harvard, and a few other universities. Seems I3C helps with prostrate cancer as well.

There is something to be said for a persons mental state while dealing with cancer, as stress dumps an incredible amount of toxins into the system. So finding a balance, and a sense of well being is paramount to keeping the immune system at an optimum level.

But atheism? weird people out there

Thanks Genesplicer hope all is well.

I read about I3C a while ago when it was mentioned to be a factor in the prevention of prostate cancer and the study of people who did not have a high incidence of it.

Of course, now I also read about another study, repetitive I think, that regular masturbation or sexual intercourse also lowers the risk.

Thanks for the replies.

Bonehead is running in the 200+ range. Wonder what his numerology says that number means???

duh! is off the chart. A guppy out of his bowl.

zerkoff is out in space somewhere. They don't have water there, which explains the SMELL emanating from his posts.

coberst, phillip007, and many others have proven the many universe theory, because it is obvious they cannot be living in ours.

Grumpy

Well if you want statistics, there are about 30 people I know that think you're a nasty little @sshole, and judging by your feedback here, no more than 8 or 9 that cheerlead you. Facts are facts dear boy. And I wager that the vast majority of humans would regard you in a negative light.

Also, you don't get the judge chair, because judges need to scrutinize with a toothpick before casting judgment.

And lastly, statistically speaking I am far more used to people being positive toward me, than the negative childishness from the cookie motley crew here.

There's your facts sunshine. Be thankful the world won't get to know who the dickwad is that calls himself Grumpy.

bonehead

Your confusion about numbers extends beyond your book. For you, comparing feedback scores is a bad way to go. If we add up the negs you have received with all of your sockpuppets, the number reaches spectacular depths, you might want to consider that people are trying to tell you something, clown.

Grumpy

64 unique positives somehow equates to 8 or 9 people possing him?

Facts are facts, dear boy.