Featured topic: coronavirus
On Science-Based Medicine, Jann Bellamy wrote:
“FDA and FTC issue more warning letters citing products and services making illegal COVID claims.” “The FDA and FTC have responded to the gravity of the pandemic by more aggressively pursuing unlawful claims that products and services can treat or cure COVID-19. It is unfortunate that they do not have the resources to mount this type of campaign against more pedestrian bogus remedies, which remain on the market to bilk the public.”
Mark Burkard wrote:
“JAMA promotes the false equivalence of focused protection’.” The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published “a livestream video/podcast” featuring Jay Bhattacharya, a signer of the Great Barrington Declaration, opposed by Marc Lipsitch. “JAMA has promoted the false equivalence of a fringe view and placed it publicly on social media. In a world where even Facebook and Twitter now fact check claims that impact public health, JAMA oddly failed to do so. As a result, a misleading and misplaced set of claims could lead many in the public to oppose or ignore public health policies, worsening the severity and impact of the pandemic. While it is of value to vigorously debate policies and interpretation of scientific evidence, JAMA has a responsibility to accurately portray scientific information on social media, to base discussions on facts and evidence, and to avoid allowing its platform to promulgate a false equivalence, particularly when doing so may adversely impact public health.”
Scott Gavura wrote:
“Zinc and COVID.” “Malnutrition in general is associated with reduced immunity, so situations where zinc deficiency is known, or highly likely, should be addressed, just as they should be for other vitamin deficiencies. There is some evidence that that lower zinc levels may be associated with poorer outcomes from COVID-19 infections. Whether it’s the zinc, or zinc is just a surrogate for another factor, is not established.”
David Gorski wrote:
“There is no COVID-19 'casedemic.' The pandemic is real and deadly.” “...antivaxxers and COVID-19 deniers try to claim that what we are seeing is an epidemic of positive tests, not of real disease, hence the term. Indeed, if you do a search of the term ‘casedemic,’ you’ll find articles from the usual COVID-19 denying suspects arguing that the now-exponential increase in COVID-19 cases is not due to real disease, but rather an artifact of wider testing... yes, there are false positives on PCR testing, but false positives are not nearly as huge a problem as people like Del Bigtree and Joe Mercola want to lead you to believe, and, contrary to their portrayal of scientists, physicians, and public health officials as oblivious to this problem, all these people working to find science-based methods to slow the spread of COVID-19 and bring the pandemic under control do consider the potential for false positives and seek to find ways to account for them and reduce them... Bigtree and Mercola are latching on to a legitimate controversy over the minutiae of a lab test and vastly exaggerating the significance of the controversy and magnitude of the problems it causes in order to cast doubt on the very process of testing for the disease itself, which is their real purpose... They are doing their best to deny that COVID-19 is as huge and deadly a problem as it actually is, because if COVID-19 really is that big a problem then it does, contrary to their views, justify massive public health interventions to decrease infection and death rates, and, ultimately, a mass vaccination program.”
“No, the Moderna and Pfizer RNA vaccines for COVID-19 will not ‘permanently alter your DNA’.” “The bottom line is that the mRNA used in RNA vaccines can’t integrate with your DNA, much less ‘reprogram’ it.”
Harriet Hall wrote:
“Jumping the gun: antibody drugs for Covid-19.” “I’m puzzled. Eli Lilly did a clinical trial, and its product failed to do what it was supposed to do, but the US government agreed to buy the product anyway, for over $300 million, and give it to patients… when one company has positive evidence from clinical trials, is there any justification for making a deal with another company that has only negative evidence and ‘confidence’?”
Stephen Novella wrote:
On Respectful Insolence, “Orac” posted:
“Of course, homeopaths are promoting homeopathy for COVID-19.” “If there’s one recurrent theme I’ve noticed about COVID-19 and pseudoscience, it’s that the pandemic represents an irresistable [sic] opportunity for pseudoscience promoters, conspiracy theorists, antivaxxers, quacks, and grifters. That’s why it’s utterly unsurprising that homeopaths have jumped on the COVID-19 grift train, with homeopathy believers even doing their best to promote their quackery in the peer-reviewed medical literature, with homeopaths pushing homeopathy for COVID-19 all over the world.”
“Antivax pediatrician Dr. Larry Palevsky hops on the COVID-19 denial grift train.”
“’Censorship!’: The common bogus complaint of science deniers.” “However, those who deny science do view information as a weapon, and when they refer to ‘weaponizing information,’ in reality what they are referring to is weaponizing disinformation in order to attack the science they know that they can’t refute using the actual methods of science…That is why they view pushback against their disinformation as ‘censorship’.”
“About that Danish mask study that ‘shows that masks don’t work’…” Among other flaws, the study was of a population with extremely low infection rates, using a test prone to false positives. “The bottom line is that this study does not show that masks don’t work to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2!”
“Anti-lockdown ideologues’ ‘science’ is now as bad as antivaccine ‘science’.” “Larochelambert et al have published a truly crappy and uninformative epidemiological study of lockdowns as a predictor of nationwide COVID-19 mortality using methods very similar to, albeit more statistically sophisticated than, those used by antivaxxers. However, the higher degree of mathematical sophistication doesn’t change the fact that what we are looking at here is ecological fallacy, nothing more…The bottom line is that COVID-19 pandemic deniers/minimizers are now using the same sort of bad science that antivaxxers have been using for a very long time.”
Edzard Ernst posted:
“Vitamin D and omega-3 supplements help the elderly avoid Covid-19 infection – no, sorry, this was more fake news from the DAILY MAIL.” “The study has noting [sic] to do with COVID-19 and very little with infections. The bit about infections shows almost the opposite of what the MAIL claims.”
“Chiropractic misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic,” discussing a Paper by Axén and others (Chiropr Man Therap. 2020 Nov 18;28(1):65). “We have often heard it said on this blog and elsewhere that chiropractors are making great strides towards reforming themselves and becoming an evidence-based profession. In view of the data cited above, this does not ring all that true, I am afraid. Is the picture that emerges not one of a profession deeply embroiled in BS with but a few fighting a lost battle to clean up the act?”
“’Vitamin D deficiency aggravates COVID-19…???…really?…perhaps!” He discussed a review by Pereira and others (Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2020 Nov 4:1-9 Epub ahead of print Paper). “My conclusion: it seems well worth conducting more and more rigorous clinical trials.”
November – Lewis wrote “COVID-19 misinformation that won’t go away” for Scientific American (323(5):41-3). Eight falsehoods were discussed.
November 9 – An Editorial by Saag was entitled “Misguided Use of Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19: The Infusion of Politics Into Science” (JAMA. 2020 Dec 1;324(21):2161-2162). The editorial accompanied a paper in the same issue, which is “yet another study, and certainly among the best published to date, demonstrating the lack of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)” (Self WH et al. JAMA. 2020 Dec 1;324(21):2165-2176 Paper). “US health officials, such as members of the Coronavirus Task Force, leaders from the National Institutes of Health, and officers of physician organizations and societies, who resisted being forced to promote the politically motivated use of hydroxychloroquine were correct and should be recognized for their steadfast commitment to science…The clear, unambiguous, and compelling lesson from the hydroxychloroquine story for the medical community and the public is that science and politics do not mix. Science, by definition, requires diligence and an honest assessment of findings; politics not so much. The number of articles in the peer-reviewed literature over the last several months that have consistently and convincingly demonstrated the lack of efficacy of a highly hyped ‘cure’ for COVID-19 represent the consequence of the irresponsible infusion of politics into the world of scientific evidence and discourse. For other potential therapies or interventions for COVID-19 (or any other diseases), this should not happen again.”
November 15 – Carmichael wrote “Vaccine rumours debunked: Microchips, ‘altered DNA’ and more” for BBC News.
November 23 – A Press release from the Center for Inquiry was entitled “Health Officials Must Disavow Carson’s Reckless Endorsement of Homeopathic COVID Treatment.” “Dr. Carson, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, had taken a product known as Oleander 4X after he became ill with COVID-19. Oleander 4X is a homeopathic product advertised as providing ‘temporary relief of flu symptoms’.”
Other topics
Best of the blogs, November – on Science-Based Medicine, Jann Bellamy:
Discussed an article on "Aroma Acupoint Therapy". “…the authors credulously assume the existence of (1) acupoints, (2) a ‘bioenergetic frequency’ of essential oils, (3) the ability of this ‘bioenergetic frequency’ to transfer information to an acupoint, (4) the ability of the acupoint to accept this information, and (5) a ‘synergy’ between the oil and the acupoint that triggers a ‘therapeutic action.’ No one has bothered to establish that any of these phenomena actually exist.”
Scott Gavura:
Discussed Regener-Eyes Ophthalmic Solution, which uses placenta-derived material. “Whether or not they provide any medicinal benefits hasn’t been shown in published randomized controlled trials…Until some robust evidence emerges to show that placental-based eye drops are both safe and effective, it would seem to be a better strategy to rely on ophthalmic experts to guide the management of ocular injuries and disorders.”
David Gorski:
Wrote “Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump. Now what for science-based medicine?”
Harriet Hall:
Posted “Biofield tuning: another example of tooth fairy science.” “This monumentally silly study could be labeled ‘For entertainment purposes only.’ It may be good for laughs, but it’s not science.”
On Respectful Insolence, “Orac”:
Wrote “Even COVID-19 can’t stop antivaxxers from publishing crappy ‘vaxxed/unvaxxed’ studies.” “They published a crappy study based on a metric they made up that hasn’t been validated elsewhere and use that to claim that ‘vaxxed’ children are much less healthy than ‘unvaxxed’ children, when in fact the data we have suggest emphatically that the opposite is true. This study is propaganda, not science…”
Edzard Ernst:
Discussed “The Gerson Therapy: possibly the worst cancer quackery of them all.”
Wrote “Reflexology: a new systematic review claims it is effective, but is it true?”
Posted “Informed consent: why chiropractors don’t like it,” discussing a paper by Simpson and Innes (Chiropr Man Therap. 2020 Nov 4;28(1):60 Paper). The authors wrote, “We argue that a patient cannot provide valid informed consent for the removal of vertebral subluxation. Further, vertebral subluxation care cannot meet code of conduct standards because it lacks an evidence base and is practitioner-centered.”
Proposed “A challenge to all the homeopaths of the world.” Can homeopaths identify unlabeled homeopathic remedies?
Published “An outstanding article on the subject of harms of chiropractic.”
Summarized the many unscientific positions of Prince Charles in his post “Happy 72th birthday, Charles.”
Discussed a review of acupuncture for recurrent urinary tract infections. The review noted the limitations of the evidence but said that acupuncture “appeared to be beneficial.” Ernst found the five reviewed trials highly flawed, and wrote: “I take the liberty to re-formulate the conclusions drawn by the review authors as follows: Due to the lack of reliable RCTs, the effectiveness of acupuncture as a treatment or prevention of rUTIs remains unproven. Due to the implausibility of the therapy, its effectiveness seems highly unlikely. PS The BJOG should never have published such a deeply misleading paper.”
Posted “Can dietary interventions improve the cognition of Alzheimer patients?” Concerning a new review, he wrote: “The authors concluded that the effect of most dietary interventions on cognition in AD patients remains inconclusive, however, several nutrients, isolated or not, show potential to improve cognitive function in AD, especially in its early stages .I am relieved that the authors of this thoroughly-researched review phrased their conclusions as cautiously as they did. The thing is, most of the primary trials are truly not worth writing home about. Some are just 4 weeks long, others include merely 30 odd patients. Many look more like marketing excercises than science.”
Wrote “Melatonin: a ‘full-service anti-cancer agent’?” Two reviews found benefits of melatonin, when combined with conventional treatments. “So, is this evidence compelling? While all this does indeed sound encouraging, it is necessary to mention several important caveats:
---The primary studies of melatonin suffer from several methodological shortcomings.
---Their vast majority originate from one single research group.
---In recent years, there have been no further clinical studies trying to replicate the initial findings.
This means that definitive trials are still missing, and it would seem wise to interpret the existing evidence with great caution.”
Posted “Acupuncture is more than useless for patients recovering from breast cancer surgery,” discussing a study in which acupuncture plus massage gave worse results than massage alone.
Wrote “'DRX9000' for back pain: a nice little earner for chiropractors and other back pain quacks.” “...there seems to be no good evidence that the DRX9000 works for low back pain (LBP). This can hardly come as a surprise to anyone who has kept up with the evidence. What is more, traction can also cause significant harm.”
Asked “Are antioxidant supplements good or bad for cancer patients?” After reviewing conflicting studies, he notes: “Antioxidants seem to have evolved as parts of elaborate networks in which each substance plays slightly different roles. This means that each antioxidant has a different spectrum of actions. And this means that it is probably not very constructive to lump them all together and excect [sic] to see uniform effects. What we would need to create more clarity is a series of RCTs on single antioxidants.”
Posted “The 'OBERON': revolutionary invention or dangerous con?” The device is claimed to be able to scan and repair the body using electromagnetic waves. “My conclusion is this: There is no evidence that the OBERON does anything useful other than putting money in the bank accounts of those charlatans who use or manufacture it.”
November – Steinmetz wrote “The scientific frauds underlying the false MMR vaccine-autism link” for Skeptical Inquirer (44(6):30-4). “Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 paper purporting that the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine causes children to subsequently develop autism contained five specific frauds, and his subsequent comments on it contained another.”
November 23 – The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry announced the selection of new Fellows. Among those honored were Jann Bellamy, a regular contributor to Science-Based Medicine, “where she tracks state and federal bills that would allow pseudoscience in health care”; Timothy Caulfield, a critic of stem cell clinics and other areas of alternative medicine; and William London, “Consumer Health columnist for Skeptical Inquirer, the editor of Quackwatch’s e-newsletter Consumer Health Digest, and cohost of the Credential Watch website.”
November 23 – The Center for Science in the Public Interest announced an agreement with homeopathic manufacturer Boiron concerning labeling. “On Boiron’s Oscillococcinum and two similar products, Boiron will substantially increase the prominence of the words ‘Homeopathic Medicine’ on the front of the box and the disclaimer on the back of the box that says the product’s uses have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). These changes will make it easier for consumers to identify that the products are homeopathic products, and are not FDA approved over-the-counter medicines. For all of the other homeopathic products manufactured by Boiron, consumers will receive much more information on the packages. In addition to increasing the prominence of the words ‘Homeopathic Medicine,’ a new disclaimer in large and contrasting font will be added to the back of the package (endorsed by the American Association of Homeopathic Pharmacists) stating: ‘Claims based on traditional homeopathic practice, not accepted medical evidence, and not FDA evaluated’.” Edzard Ernst discussed the agreement.
November 24 – Lightsey wrote “Marketing’s holy grail of terms: antioxidants” for the American Council on Science and Health. “You need a balance of both oxidation and antioxidation reactions to be healthy. Free radicals are a normal part of cellular metabolism. There are no magic bullets or panaceas which can be bottled and swallowed that replace wise food choices.”
November 26 – MacMillan wrote “A tough pill to cover: What journalists need to know to report on alternative medicine.” “Reporting on alternative medicine comes down to interpreting and reporting on the scientific consensus.”
Additions to previous months
April 8 – Grosshagauer and other published “The true value of spirulina” (J Agric Food Chem. 2020 Apr 8;68(14):4109-4115 Abstract). Spirulina, also known as blue-green algae, is promoted as a source of protein, other nutrients, and especially vitamin B12 for vegans. The authors point out the potential concerns with contamination by cyanotoxins, heavily metals, pesticides, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Also, a large fraction of the B12 is in a form not usable by humans.
September – Vranou and others reviewed the Mediterranean diet for rheumatoid arthritis (Mediterr J Rheumatol. 2020 Sep 30;31(3):325-329 Paper). In their “Conclusion” section they wrote: “circumstantial evidence appears to highlight the beneficial effect of MD in the development and treatment of RA. However, the clinical studies are few, and more work is needed at the clinical level with well-conducted clinical trials to reach safe conclusions regarding its true impact,” while in the Abstract they wrote: “Based on the available studies, the evidence appears low and adherence to the MD does not appear to affect RA indices.”
October – Lopresti and others reviewed herbal treatments for migraine (Phytother Res. 2020 Oct;34(10):2493-2517 Abstract). They found that “Overall, findings on the efficacy of feverfew were mixed and there was positive, albeit limited evidence for butterbur. There were positive, preliminary findings on curcumin, citron, and coriander as a prophylactic treatment for migraine, and the use of menthol and chamomile as an acute treatment. However, the risk of bias was high for many studies.”
October 1 – An essay by Gliemann (Am J Clin Nutr. 2020 Oct 1;112(4):905-906), entitled “Dodging physical activity and healthy diet: can resveratrol take the edge off the consequences of your lifestyle?,” discussed a study published in the same issue (de Ligt M et al. Am J Clin Nutr. 2020 Oct 1;112(4):1029-1038 Paper). “In sum, the overall effects of 6 mo of resveratrol treatment are limited, and the article by de Ligt et al. adds to the body of literature that questions the positive effects of resveratrol on human health.”
October 13 – Wadyka wrote “The real deal on collagen” for Consumer Reports.
October 21 – Eisner wrote “Americans took Prevagen for years – as the FDA questioned its safety.” The article addresses safety issues but does not address the fact that the idea behind Prevagen is absurd and has no evidence in support.
October 28 – Truth in Advertising provided fact-checks of Joe Rogan's ads. Products reviewed included Neuro Gum, Four Sigmatic “mushroom coffee with lion’s mane,” Roka blue light glasses, cbdMD for pain relief, and Liquid I.V. “hydration supplement.”