This post is only if you’re not bored of the rather trying electrosensitivity lobby. Here is a letter which has popped up all over the interweb, I assume it is genuinely from Dr Carlo, who is hawked about as a rather eminent figure, and not a fake created in an effort to smear him.
Read the rest of this entry »
Dr George Carlo responds to Andrew Goldacre
“It’s not a trial… wait… it is… and the evidence does show… and… and it’s for the KIDS…”
Kelliher’s been busy with letters@guardian.co.uk
It’s a definite improvement on the really rather revolting blog postings from the Portwood camp but addresses none of the interesting questions, and simply re-states the blander aspects of the case which have already been torpedoed. There are now much more interesting things to say on this than go over old ground, but one thing that amuses me is: if their “initiative” hadn’t been presented as important scientific research, four weeks ago, but instead had been presented merely as a company giving a nice freebie to a council, how many peak time national terrestrial TV news flagships do you think would have put the fish oil tablet story in their running orders?
Letters
Durham council’s fish-oil initiative
Tuesday October 3, 2006
The Guardian
Readers of Ben Goldacre (Bad science, September, 9, 16 and 23) might come away with the idea that my company’s collaboration with Durham county council to supply free eye q capsules to all GSCE students for the 2007 academic year is a publicity gimmick aimed at generating bogus research data. Nothing could be further from the truth. Read the rest of this entry »
Bad Science in Guardian.co.uk Top 5
Comment: Editor’s week
Emily Bell, Saturday September 17, 2005, The Read the rest of this entry »
Letters in Guardian about Dumb Me Down
9th September, 2005
Does Ben Goldacre (Life, September 8) have any peer reviewed papers with statistical proof that “humanities graduates” are so woefully Read the rest of this entry »
Letters in Guardian about the Placebo piece
Letters: Observing the benefits of placebos
Wednesday August 31, 2005
The Guardian
Ben Goldacre’s thought-provoking piece (A tonic for sceptics, August 29) moves forward the debate about Read the rest of this entry »
Published MMR Mumps Letters
Letters
Thursday June 2, 2005
The Guardian
Generation before MMR is falling ill
I agree with Ben Goldacre about MMR (Bad science, May 26) but I am not sure that the mumps outbreak is due to low uptake of the vaccine.
The young people who are catching mumps at the moment are in their late teens and early twenties, too old to have been offered MMR. My 18-year-old daughter had separate injections. We were not offered MMR but could have an injection for mumps if wanted. I don’t think many parents had it done; there has been an outbreak of mumps at her college.
Jane Chetwynd-Appleton
Wigston, Leicestershire
· Surely, since the immunity offered by vaccination does not exceed a decade, we are seeing a new generation of adults who have been denied the chance to catch and defeat mumps safely as children, and so achieve full, lifelong immunity. Should any of them suffer orchitis, they might question whether their mumps shots were really such a good idea.
Patrick McGuiness
Stoke Newington, London
· The citation from Ben Goldacre’s column would have been much easier to find if it had included the name of the first author (Savage, E) and the title (Mumps outbreaks across England and Wales in 2004: observational study), though I appreciate that space constraints may make it impossible to give the title. Adding a link to the abstract on PubMed would give him extra brownie points.
Martin Jones
Blaxter Nematode Genomics Group, University of Edinburgh
Published Letter
Letters
Thursday May 26, 2005
The Guardian
Court out
Bad science is compulsive reading, but is there no redress against the ridiculous claims Ben Goldacre exposes? I would like to see a Lawyers Against Bad Science (Labs) group set up to test these misleading ads in a court of law.
Kurt Weithaler
Norwich
