Guest post by Henry H. Bauer
WUWT readers might find some interest in my new book, Dogmatism in Science and Medicine: How Dominant Theories Monopolize Research and Stifle the Search for Truth
http://www.mcfarlandpub.com/book-2.php?id=978-0-7864-6301-5
Here’s a synopsis:
Unwarranted dogmatism has taken over in many fields of science: in Big-Bang cosmology, dinosaur extinction, theory of smell, string theory, Alzheimer’s amyloid theory, specificity and efficacy of psychotropic drugs, cold fusion, second-hand smoke, continental drift . . . The list goes on and on.
Dissenting views are dismissed without further ado, and dissenters’ careers are badly affected. Where public policy is involved — as with human-caused global warming and HIV/AIDS — the excommunication and harassment of dissenters reaches a fever pitch with charges of “denialism” and “denialists”, a deliberate ploy of association with the no-no of Holocaust denying.
The book describes these circumstances. It claims that this is a sea change in scientific activity and in the interaction of science and society in the last half century or so, and points to likely causes of that sea change. The best remedy would seem to be the founding of a Science Court, much discussed several decades ago but never acted on.
Reviews so far have been quite favorable, see http://henryhbauer.homestead.com/Dogmatism-Reviews.html
In 1989, the petroleum-based solvent, benzene, that is known to cause cancer, was found in Perrier mineral water at a mean concentration of fourteen parts per billion. This was enough to cause Perrier to be removed from supermarket shelves. The first process in the manufacture of margarine is the extraction of the oils from the seeds, and this is usually done using similar petroleum-based solvents. Although these are then boiled off, this stage of the process still leaves about ten parts per million of the solvents in the product. That is 700 times as much as fourteen parts per billion.
You may be interested in a list of the ingredients that may be present in butter and margarine:
Butter:
milk fat (cream),
a little salt
Margarine:
Edible oils,
edible fats,
salt or potassium chloride,
ascorbyl palmitate,
butylated hydroxyanisole,
phospholipids,
tert-butylhydroquinone,
mono- and di-glycerides of fat-forming fatty acids,
disodium guanylate,
diacetyltartaric and fatty acid esters of glycerol,
Propyl, octyl or dodecyl gallate (or mixtures thereof),
tocopherols,
propylene glycol mono- and di-esters,
sucrose esters of fatty acids,
curcumin,
annatto extracts,
tartaric acid,
3,5,trimethylhexanal,
ß-apo-carotenoic acid methyl or ethyl ester,
skim milk powder,
xanthophylls,
canthaxanthin,
vitamins A and D.
The point here is industry (both civil and public) creates a myth through the science they pay for with scientists who would keep their job rather than quit on principle. Huge profits are gained in duping the public who trust the words “science” and “scientist.” We argue the myth of CAGW while swallowing the lies of, for example, margarine and canola oil, or cholesterol lowering statins. Many people do not take the time to read, many can’t read or can’t tell a lie from truth, so they rely on what they see and hear from free media or their trusted doctor who is basically owned by insurance companies, pharmaceuticals, and the AMA.
The Kool-Aid gets drank and “…Dominant Theories Monopolize Research and Stifle the Search for Truth.”
How would adding a court of experts and academics be of any help in lifting the inertia in scientific paradigms caused by experts and academics? In economics, that would be like issuing another mandate to make a mandate work.
We have long trusted academics and experts with the duty of educating our children, with deciding what laws governing the Universe, and many of us do whatever a doctor says, so we lay down our very own bodies.
Greater individual responsibility and less trust in experts would bring about undrempt of possibilities, and an unimagined renaissance of science. But the scientists, experts and academics, one and all, are devoted to the reversal of progress, to making decisions for people “for the public good,” and are deeply indoctrinated in the idea that there are too many people on this earth. Anyone who believes that does not really mean any one else well, although he flatters himself that he does, and will reveal it by acting to reverse scientific progress and reduce choices best made by the individual. You will know them by this, not by their fair sounding words concerning “public good.” All scientists will be severely tested and tempted in this elite doctrine and opportunity for personal gain and standing, and a few will come forth as gold.
The frontiers now before us with instantaneous worldwide communication exceed even the discovery of new continents, and the discovery of AC power combined, but to use it will require individual liberty and rationality, and a refusal to accept the words of elite academics and experts unconditionally. They are just as freighted with their own metaphysical commitments and taste for political gain as everyone else. We have learned this and a new frontier beckons. Electricity, water, cattle, crops, fire and earth are plentiful for all, and a gift to all.
Surely we don’t really want some science court proclaiming from on high what is and is not “consensus” or acceptable science. It hasn’t been too long ago I remember some scientists dismissing a particular scientist’s views on climate based on his view on creationism. What if we had dismissed Newton based on his views on Alchemy? Personally, I believe in creation by evolution; this IMO does not require any distortion of the physical evidence and is what I believe the Elohim account of creation is attempting to describe with a limited vocabulary and other challenges. Nevertheless, I don’t dismiss everyone who doesn’t agree with me on that particular subject with respect to all other subjects. Indeed, as a sort of Preterist, I’d find myself dismissing nearly everyone if I made that the vital ideology; dismissing Atheists, Agnostics, most Christian denominations, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. etc. It’s that type of dogmatic behavior that should be ridiculed by the science “industry”. For example, if a scientist uses the word “denier” then every scientist, science correspondent, and science consumer should ridicule and denounce such activity. If we did this universally and consistently I think we could move science back away from being a new religion/ideology into being a system/process for understanding the universe and gaining knowledge where it should be. JMHO.
At present various governments have committees which hold their own science courts, such as the hearings before the subcommittee on oversight and investigations of the committee of energy and commerce, House of Representatives into questions about the hockey stick, on July 19 and 27 2006.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-109hhrg31362/html/CHRG-109hhrg31362.htm
Despite all the doubts about CAGW and Mannian hockey stick science, nothing is achieved other than the continued showering of billions of dollars of taxpayers money into the hands of scientists and assorted parasites to continue researching science which a supposed consensus believes has already been settled.
Why not spend the money on known, very serious and rapidly increasing problems such as dementia? The World Health Organisation estimated that there were 36 million dementia sufferers around the world in 2010. The number of people suffering from dementia is expected to triple by 2050. Climatologists included.
The AMA’s Code of Medical Ethics require that patients receive informed consent about all reasonably effective treatments. “The patient’s right of self-decision can be effectively exercised only if the patient possesses enough information to enable an intelligent choice. The physician has an ethical obligation to help the patient make choices from among the therapeutic alternatives consistent with good medical practice.”
However, the ethics of medicine is not all together practiced to the full wordy extent. The following statin effects was listed by Pfizer on their own web site; however it has been removed to “hide” the real danger of their product:
“The following adverse events were reported, regardless of causality assessment in patients treated with atorvastatin in clinical trials:
Body as a Whole: Chest pain, face edema, fever, neck rigidity, malaise, photosensitivity reaction, generalized edema.
Digestive System: Nausea, gastroenteritis, liver function tests abnormal, colitis, vomiting, gastritis, dry mouth, rectal hemorrhage, esophagitis, eructation, glossitis, mouth ulceration, anorexia, increased appetite, stomatitis, biliary pain, cheilitis, duodenal ulcer, dysphagia, enteritis, melena, gum hemorrhage, stomach ulcer, tenesmus, ulcerative stomatitis, hepatitis, pancreatitis, cholestatic jaundice.
Respiratory System: Bronchitis, rhinitis, pneumonia, dyspnea, asthma, epistaxis.
Nervous System: Insomnia, dizziness, paresthesia, somnolence, amnesia, abnormal dreams, libido decreased, emotional lability, incoordination, peripheral neuropathy, torticollis, facial paralysis, hyperkinesia, depression, hypesthesia, hypertonia.
Musculoskeletal System: Arthritis, leg cramps, bursitis, tenosynovitis, myasthenia, tendinous contracture, myositis.
Skin and Appendages: Pruritus, contact dermatitis, alopecia, dry skin, sweating, acne, urticaria, eczema, seborrhea, skin ulcer.
Urogenital System: Urinary tract infection, urinary frequency, cystitis, hematuria, impotence, dysuria, kidney calculus, nocturia, epididymitis, fibrocystic breast, vaginal hemorrhage, albuminuria, breast enlargement, metrorrhagia, nephritis, urinary incontinence, urinary retention, urinary urgency, abnormal ejaculation, uterine hemorrhage.
Special Senses: Amblyopia, tinnitus, dry eyes, refraction disorder, eye hemorrhage, deafness, glaucoma, parosmia, taste loss, taste perversion.
Cardiovascular System: Palpitation, vasodilatation, syncope, migraine, postural hypotension, phlebitis, arrhythmia, angina pectoris, hypertension.
Metabolic and Nutritional Disorders: Peripheral edema, hyperglycemia, creatine phosphokinase increased, gout, weight gain, hypoglycemia.
Hemic and Lymphatic System: Ecchymosis, anemia, lymphadenopathy, thrombocytopenia, petechia
REFERENCE:
http://www.lipitor.com/cwp/appmanager/lipitor/lipitorDesktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=prescribingInformation#contraindications
(No longer a valid link)
You know, the Precautionary Principle is an ancient religion also.
“One morning [the Titan Prometheus] came to Zeus, and said, ‘Oh Thunderer, I do not understand your design. You have caused the race of man to appear on earth, but you keep him in ignorance and darkness.’
‘Perhaps you had better leave the race of man to me,’ said Zeus. ‘What you call ignorance is innocence. What you call darkness is the shadow of my decree. Man is happy now. And he is so framed that he will remain happy unless someone persuades him that he is unhappy. Let us not speak of this again.’
But Prometheus said, ‘Look at him. Look below. He crouches in caves. He is at the mercy of beast and weather. He eats his meat raw. If you mean something by this, enlighten me with your wisdom. Tell me why you refuse to give man the gift of fire.’
Zeus answered, ‘Do you not know, Prometheus, that every gift brings a penalty? This is the way the Fates weave destiny – by which gods also must abide. Man does not have fire, true, nor the crafts which the fire teaches. On the other hand, he does not know disease, warfare, or old age….He is happy, I say, happy without fire. And so shall he remain.’” ~Evslin, Evslin and Hoopes
This is a very important topic: Does dogmatism (thus Warmism) “stiffle the search of truth?”….
There is no better headline to describe the misery of present day climate research…
Here we are at the very bottom of climate science…..dogmatism yes or no? …Since the Kyoto protocol there was no more warming, at least no 0.2C warming per
decade as forecast….the computer models, the greatest intellectual achievement of mankind,
foresaw 0.2 C temp increase per decade…. but we are on the flat temp plateau since KYOTO,
flat temps NOT FORECAST by one single “forecast model”….
Doubt and scepticism is the logical consequence: How can someone reckon he is right AFTER
our death in 2100, and at the same time: he is incapable to forecast temps fore the next five years?
Any forecast, which dares to provides numbers 100 years ahead of today, must be
correct for the next 5 to 10 years…..as the paper:
http://www.knowledgeminer.eu/eoo_paper.html
where an exact forecast is given, without any if’s, might’s. would’s and assorted
conjunctives…. straight to the facts…..JS
Climate modeller, Dr Andrew Weaver’s candidacy for political office with British Columbia’s Green Party, which opposes “Smart Meters” (made necessary by the unreliable nature of “sustainable energy” sources) with the literal “tinfoil hat” concern about the “toxic electromagnetic wave emissions” highlights the essentially non-scientific basis of AGW dogmatism.
Check the degree of acceptance of Green theology in one of Vancouver’s two major newspaper’s editorial and the depressing survey results: http://blogs.theprovince.com/2012/05/03/editorial-b-c-hydro-should-let-homeowners-opt-out-of-smarts-meters/
The puzzle of AGW supporters, whose belief in the objectivity and incorruptibility of climate scientists working for “Big Green” effortlessly coexists with infinite distrust of medical scientists working for “Big Pharma”, is essentially a doctrinal point. It is written that those things that flow from one shining source (government) are pure. Those contaminated by touching capitalism are impure.
Climatism offers all the appeals of the fading western religions, a well organized path for philanthropic impulses to boost your self esteem, to be a missionaryt, save your fellow man, to “make a difference” and to free yourself of the burden of doubt and introspection by accepting the “settled science” orthodoxy of the consensus priesthood. It offers all the ‘forcing” tools of the traditional religions as well. Fear, guilt, peer pressure, the chance for redemption by sacrifice, all supported by a massive amount of colourful visual aids.
Anyone who has put $500 into Al Gores collection plate to attend a “training” and borne witness to an altar call for 12 year olds to come forward and dedicate their lives to “saving the planet” would recognize the environment.
Larry Ledwick (hotrod) says: They say if it cannot be quantified it cannot be managed or scored. What they forget to say is if it can be quantified and scored someone will figure out a way to cook the books.
Well said.
David Bailey says: …I’d be cautious about pursuing the analogies with the other issues discussed in Henry Bauer’s book – not because they may not be valid, but because warmists will try to smear you by association [my emphasis]. Likewise, I’d say that someone running a website devoted to cold fusion (say), would be well advised to avoid the climategate controversy.
Well said. Having said which, I am working overtime to try to solve this issue or at least move it on. My least favourite of all Wikipedia’s pages is the one on “pseudoscience”. That expresses my sentiment mildly.
Glad to see Halton Arp’s story being told again here. It needs repeating.
Thank you Anthony for hosting this article. It’s a winner as far as I am concerned, an important find, and I have enjoyed reading comments too. I need to contact Bauer direct!
TRM says:
November 5, 2012 at 9:53 am
“Today you have doctors like Dr Dzugan treating high cholesterol as a symptom of low hormone levels with almost 100% success rate and yet you have virtually every doctor out there prescribing statins to treat the symptom. I think he will eventually win a Nobel Prize like Dr. Barry Marshall”
A good example, yet perhaps Dr. Dzugan is merely finding the right answer to the wrong question. The cholesterol theory of heart disease is popularly misunderstood and likely erroneous, just as nearly everything “we” recently “knew” about dietary fat was wrong. An excellent starting point re a more plausible relationship of lipids, including cholesterol, to atherosclerosis can be found here:
http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/Does-Cholesterol-Cause-Heart-Disease-Myth.html
Nice one Henry. It wasn’t obvious how to obtain the ebook from the link provided, but Amazon’s whispernet sent it immediately to my Kindle.
Happens all to often and all to much. I have written any number of essays addressing just such foolishness. It is not only wrong headed to allow dogmatic thinking to overpower the skeptical questioning of science. It is downright dangerous to our mental and physical health too.
Great post, Dr. Bauer. I used some of your work when I helped (as part of a large team) teach a course on philosophy and ethics of research. Unfortunately, I think most institutions now offer a “research ethics” course that is designed to meet (just barely) the requirements of funding agencies, so philosophy of science is something that most Ph.D.s in biomedical sciences know nothing about. My bet is that less than one percent of them could explain why their degree is called Doctor of philosophy. Sad…
drjohngalan says: I was fascinated to see “cold fusion” quoted as one of the items on the list here. I had the privilege to have been a student of Martin Fleischmann in the late ’60’s and know that he was neither a charlatan nor a procurer of “pathological science”.
thank you Dr Galan.
Another poster here alerted me to “cold fusion” material being examined at MIT last week (thanks!). In three days time I go to a conference with the Breakthrough Energy Movement where I hope to hear the latest on this score (cold fusion aka LENR) and other “fringe” developments along the lines of post-Tesla etc.
The cholesterol hypothesis has been largely driven over the past few decades by the lucrative
business of selling cholesterol lowering drugs. What has been forgotten is that the
cholesterol laden plaques that block arteries are a symptom of heart disease, not a cause.
The underlying metabolic abnormalities leading to cardiovascular disease are:
• Free radical pathology
• Nutritional deficiencies
• Nutritional promoters of Cardiovascular Disease (CVD)
• Stress
• Inadequate exercise
• Prostaglandin imbalance
• Hormone imbalance
• Genetics
Increasing CVD is an event that started in the 1950’s, right along with the increased use of so called “healthy” fat free diets laden with invented fats with high trans-fatty acids. One could say that CVD is caused by increased atmospheric CO2 via some familiar logic we see in CAGW.
Nowhere is the failing of our medical system more evident than in the wholesale acceptance of
cholesterol reduction as a way to prevent disease; have all these doctors forgotten what
they learned in biochemistry 101 about the many roles of cholesterol in the human
biochemistry? Every cell membrane in our body contains cholesterol because cholesterol
is what makes our cells waterproof; without cholesterol we could not have a different
biochemistry on the inside and the outside of the cell. When cholesterol levels are not
adequate, the cell membrane becomes leaky or porous, a situation the body interprets
as an emergency, releasing a flood of corticoid hormones that work by sequestering
cholesterol from one part of the body and transporting it to areas where it is lacking.
Cholesterol is the body’s repair substance: scar tissue contains high levels of cholesterol,
including scar tissue in the arteries.
Cholesterol is the precursor to vitamin D, necessary for numerous biochemical processes
including mineral metabolism. The bile salts, required for the digestion of fat, are made
of cholesterol. Those who suffer from low cholesterol often have trouble digesting fats.
Cholesterol also functions as a powerful antioxidant, thus protecting us against cancer
and aging.
Cholesterol is vital to proper neurological function. It plays a key role in the formation of
memory and the uptake of hormones in the brain, including serotonin, the body’s feelgood
chemical. When cholesterol levels drop too low, the serotonin receptors cannot
work. Cholesterol is the main organic molecule in the brain, constituting over half the
dry weight of the cerebral cortex.
Finally, cholesterol is the precursor to all the hormones produced in the adrenal cortex
including glucocorticoids, which regulate blood sugar levels, and mineralocorticoids,
which regulate mineral balance. Corticoids are the cholesterol-based adrenal hormones
that the body uses in response to stress of various types; it promotes healing and
balances the tendency to inflammation. The adrenal cortex also produces sex hormones,
including testosterone, estrogen and progesterone, out of cholesterol. Thus, lowering
cholesterol, whether due to an innate error of metabolism or induced by cholesterol lowering
diets and drugs can be expected to disrupt the production of adrenal hormones and lead to blood sugar problems, edema, mineral deficiencies, chronic inflammation, difficulty in healing, allergies, asthma, reduced libido, infertility and various reproductive problems ( http://www.westonaprice.org/moderndiseases/statin.html ).
It does not take long to find similar science around lucrative cancer treatment, where science is for profit, and profit pays for scientists.
..guess I should use Word to
edit so the
paragraphing is
correct. 🙂
Is this author seriously suggesting that HIV causing AIDS is dogma? I appreciate people can be right on one thing and badly wrong on another, but that is a bridge too far for my liking.
From the long quote of Henry Bauer:
“Statements, press releases, and formal reports from these bodies often purport to convey scientific information, but in reality these releases are best viewed as propaganda designed to serve the corporate interests of the bureaucracies that issue them.”
There seems to be a lack of understanding of the difference between pure and applied science. Corporations do applied science to promote their products and services. The science *should* be directed toward the company’s bottom line. Otherwise, why waste the money?
It’s the corruption of pure science by government agencies that’s getting out of hand. The cold fusion topic is one example that is getting a lot of mentions here, so I direct you to a youtube video of the US Navy speakers at a cold fusion convention.
It’s dry and …. scientific, but it clearly shows many types of experimental evidence. These people do not have an axe to grind.
Edohiguma:
It was ‘childbirth fever’ not ‘childhood fever’. Mothers were dieing from doctors and midwives not washing their hands well.
Add the black hole to the dogmas of physics. It is apparently not widely known, but there is an infinite number of perfectly mathematically valid solutions of Einstein’s field equations for the empty space surrounding a point mass with no physical basis for choosing one rather than another. A “black hole” solution with a particular finite radius for the event horizon has been adopted as correct, but there is no physical reason for preferring it. In the meantime, NASA claims to discover new black holes almost daily despite the fact that no shred of evidence has ever been found which would demonstrate that the spacetime geometry around them is that of a black hole.
In many respects, it matters little that a black hole paradigm has been chosen in lieu of any other understanding of how matter can become so compact as in the observed black hole candidates. The thing that is wrong with this is that a big government agency pushes and defends this dogma so ferociously.
LRshultis said @ur momisugly November 5, 2012 at 1:12 pm
Actually childbed fever (puerperal sepsis).
I skimmed his site on the subject a couple of years ago. Apparently, IIRC, he thinks that HIV is a necessary (usually) condition, but that some other condition is usually necessary too. IOW, HIV isn’t normally a sufficient condition. Mostly he’s arguing that the science isn’t as settled as it’s made out to be.
You would think science, by definition, would be immune to dogmatism. At least that’s the way I’ve always viewed it. Yet, as this article points out, even scientists can “cling” to a belief in the name of science. Because science is our path to truth, it must be protected against such bias.
@DirkH
“But of course. Zwicky invented Dark Matter in the 50ies to explain the stable rotation of the galaxies and they’ve been looking for it ever since. But everybody in mainstream science accepts its existence as a fact.”
My (late) mathematician friend David Garcia-Andrade was particularly bugged by the invention of Dark Matter rather than to admit gravity varies with distance. In his book, “Casting paradox out of Cantor’s paradise” he corrects several errors in the very foundation of mathematics saying that the reason progress was so limited in mathematics is because of the refusal to correct (known) basic mistakes made by Cantor.
Anyone who has struggled with infinite series has done so because it is fundamentally flawed. One money quote is, “There is no such thing as ‘different sizes of infinity’. Infinity is a verb not a noun. It is like comparing apples and eating.”
You can’t bake a good mathematical cake when one of the ingredients is ‘stupid’.
Roger, I’m afraid that still makes little sense.
Yes, there are other causes of AIDS; but AIDS is a rare syndrome ordinarily, and there is very clear evidence (both empirically and from a biological mechanism viewpoint) that HIV leads to AIDS.
The mechanism through which HIV leads to AIDS is well understood, and the current epidemic in parts of Africa leave absolutely no question on this. Sadly, many quacks have claimed there is no link, leading to people experimenting with stopping antiretrovirals, which not only shortens their own life, but increases the risk to those around them (since the antiretrovirals reduce the viral load and reduce the likelihood of them spreading the disease).
This is a serious matter and one which I do not take lightly. While I have no problem questioning science, when that leads directly to harming peoples health (as it can in this instance), I’m afraid I have to call out that quackery.