Earlier this week, a reader of ours wrote to Steve and me with a request: First off, I just want to say thank you for everything you gentlemen do. I find that your sites are extremely helpful when trying to figure out what level of information is BS, and what is real. In short, I was wondering if either of you two...
A study of On Guard™, a mixture of essential oils, showed that it reduced the infectivity of influenza virus in dog kidney cells in the lab; but that's irrelevant to the question of whether the product has any clinical effect in humans.
Legally licensed, unbridled subluxation-based chiropractors who offer unproven treatment for a broad scope of health problems endanger public health, stigmatize appropriate use of spinal manipulation, and deter development of chiropractic as a legitimate back-care specialty.
There’s a new clinical trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine showing a beneficial effect due to cannabidiol, a chemical isolated from marijuana, on drug-resistant seizures due to Dravet syndrome. Although there are a fair number of caveats, this is how you begin to turn the herbalism that characterizes medical marijuana advocacy into science-based medicine.
An acupuncturist complains about Wikipedia, saying it is under the control of self-styled skeptics who bias the content and bully anyone who disagrees. She only demonstrates her own bias; Wikipedia had good reason to ban her from editing.
Two (now retracted) studies purporting to show that vaccinated children are sicker than unvaccinated children show nothing of the sort
Antivaccine websites have been touting two recently published studies as strong evidence that vaccinated children are less healthy than unvaccinated children. The studies are so flawed that they show nothing of the sort. Even more hilariously, the bottom-feeding predatory open access journal that published them appears to have retracted them.
Multilevel distributors of the dietary supplement Protandim think that evidence from scientific studies supports their claims for their product. The FDA disagrees.
A recent article in Popular Science argues that medicine has a bias against acupuncture, holding it to a higher standard of evidence than conventional medical interventions. Even if there is a double standard, the answer is not to recommend acupuncture, but rather to stop recommending medical procedures that don't work.