satire
Guest post by Ken McLeod
O’Neill has graced these pages several times. Now we report on the developing conflict between her and the Seventh Day Adventist Church she uses to facilitate her lecture tours.
The General Conference of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, the top governing body for the SDA worldwide, has issued a statement calling banned naturopath Barbara O’Neill “disingenuous”, referring to the “questionable nature” of her teachings. Signed by Fred Hardinge, the General Conference’s nutrition and lifestyle specialist, says “it [the Conference] is not able to recommend her as a speaker for churches or any gatherings”.[1]
O’Neil was made the subject of a Permanent Prohibition Order in 2019 by the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission, which found that she provided dangerous advice to vulnerable patients, that she did not have any qualifications in a health-related field, and that she failed to meet the expected standards of unregistered health professionals. [2]
That action stopped her from conducting her health seminars in Australia, so she has taken her business overseas. She has toured the world, conducting her health ‘lectures’ for the more credulous and naïve.[3]
At first her lecture tours were arranged via the Seventh Day Adventist Church community, and one interview refers to her program as “her ministry” several times.[4] Over time the Church leadership has become more concerned about the health misinformation that O’Neill provided to their congregants in that ‘ministry’.[5]
The General Conference statement was made public in the SDA newspaper The Fulcrum on 4 February 2025. The paper listed the SDA’s history of their concerns about O’Neill and reprinted a report to the General Conference by Hardinge.[6]
The Seventh-Day Adventist Church states “We encourage responsible immunisation/vaccination and have no religious or faith-based reason not to encourage our adherents to responsibly participate in protective and preventive immunisation programs. We value the health and safety of the population, which includes the maintenance of ‘herd immunity.” [7] O’Neill is an anti-vaxxer.
However, the statement does not mean that O’Neil is banned from SDA facilities. It says: “We are not the conscience of the individual church member and recognise individual choices.”
One insider told us that the General Conference has some authority, but it is not set in stone as would be a Catholic Church ex-cathedra ruling. SDA congregations could still invite her, but it becomes less likely because the local conferences will keep an eye on them, especially if they’re intending on having her speak in the church itself. “Adventists are very gullible when it comes to this kind of thing”, they said.
At first, Barbara O’Neill’s main venue was Living Springs Retreat in Alabama. Recordings of some of her recent seminars appear on their website but all they say now is “Please Note: We Occasionally Host Programs With Barbara O’Neill But She Is Not Here.” [8]
O’Neill’s current events program is quite packed and, at time of writing, included five lecture series at SDA venues in the USA and 19 at non-SDA venues.[9] Some of those non-SDA venues are linked to SDA churches. Queries were sent to each church asking if they intended to ignore the General Conference’s ‘recommendation’ but did not receive a response.
This is opening a schism of sorts within the Church, with some churches hosting her lectures, overtly or covertly.
Most of the 826 comments (so far) following The Fulcrum’s article are bitterly opposed to the General Conference’s statement and supportive of O’Neill, with posts like “Is the GC getting money from big pharma” and “Recommendations such as this from conference level and higher, means ‘uninvitable’ or, you know, risk losing your church building. It’s called soft power and our leaders are experts in that. This whole saga is nothing more than an attack on our God-given health message.” The phrase “Big Pharma” appears eight times.
O’Neill and her husband Michael have conducted interviews with supporters and attacked the General Conference. In one of seven video interviews that we found on YouTube, Barbara O’Neill says: “Honestly, just even writing this letter and distributing it to conferences and churches, this is not following the counsel of Jesus. … God is moving, and in the background, my beloved church is attacking the very work that God ordained me to do.”
Following that, the SDA magazine ‘Adventist Today’ ran another article on 14 March 2025 headlined ‘Defying General Conference Advice: Amazing Facts Promotes Aussie Health Crackpot Barbara O’Neill’[10] attacking her while naming and shaming the SDA broadcaster “Amazing Facts’ and the recalcitrant Sacramento Central Seventh-day Adventist Church. (Amazing Facts is an SDA broadcaster ‘with multiple television and radio programs on hundreds of media outlets around the world.’ [11])
It seems that there is a real campaign going on within the Church to jettison her. Good.
References
1 SDA magazine The Fulcrum https://www.fulcrum7.com/news/2025/2/4/the-gc-takes-a-stand-against-barbara-oneill
2 https://www.hccc.nsw.gov.au/decisions-orders/public-statements-and-warnings/public-statement-and-statement-of-decision-in-relation-to-in-relation-to-mrs-barbara-o-neill
3 For example https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/controversial-wellness-coach-barbara-oneill-set-to-host-talk-in-ireland-this-month/a1781099169.html
4 Belt Of Truth Live Ep 30 February 2025 https://www.youtube.com/live/A8-LJUMQP_I
5 https://atoday.org/whos-protecting-adventists-from-misinformation-part-2-health-quackery/
6 https://www.fulcrum7.com/news/2025/2/4/the-gc-takes-a-stand-against-barbara-oneill
7 https://gc.adventist.org/official-statements/immunization/
8 https://www.livingspringsretreat.com/june-training-with-barbara-oneill?rq=Barbara%20o%27neill
9 https://officialbarbaraoneill.com/pages/events
10 https://atoday.org/amazing-facts-endorses-health-crackpot-barbara-oneill/
11 https://www.amazingfacts.org/about-us/our-story
In 1993, I was appointed Professor of Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter. After settling in, I started to wonder what a suitable initial research project would be. Someone alerted me to some funds made available by the University for small projects – if I remember corretly, the amount was less that £30 000. Apparently, the grant was to be unbeaurocratic and, as I was newly appointed and everyone was wondering what I might get up to, I decided to go for it.
I sat down and recycled an idea that I had long wanted to test by never quite has the time to realize: a simple clinical trial where patients suffering from a common, benign condition [I think I chose insomnia] would be randomized into two groups. Both groups would be treated with a mild sleeping aid [I think I chose valarian]. The only difference between the two groups was that
- the experimental group would get an empathetic consultation, while
- the control group would get a normal one.
Thus the aim of the trial was to see whether empathy would impact on the outcome. My plan was that the prescribing clinician would be trained such that he/she could behave either normally or empathetically at will.
After I had submitted the proposal it was ‘peer reviewed’ by University staff. As it happened, my reviewer was John Tooke – he later became professor and medical director of the medical school at Exeter and later again moved to London and became the ‘Head of the School of Life & Medical Sciences’ at UCL but, at the time, he was just a doctor in the local hospital (if you are interested, there is more about Tooke in my memoir). Tooke’s assessment of my proposal was, to put it mildly, not positive and, of course, I never did get the funding. His critique explained that in the English language we call it ‘sympathy’ and not ’empathy’.
So, the study outlined above never got done, and every time I hear the word ’empathy’, I am reminded of this little anecdote. Like, for instance, a few days ago when I read that Elon Musk in his infinite wisdom had pronounced that: “The fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy”
I have to admit: this thought scares me!
The question I ask myself is this: to what extent does a neglect of emapthy contribute to the professional success of some people?
In any case, I am jolly glad that in the English language does have a word ’empathy’. I am even more profoundly glad that many people I know do have empathy. And I agree with Hannah Arendt who once wrote that “The death of human emapthy is one of the earliest and most telling signs of a culture about to fall into barbarism”
PS
sympathy = (an expression of) understanding and care for someone else’s suffering
There are many interesting and complex interrelationships between religion ond so-called alternative medicine (SCAM). Some of them were discussed here:
- ‘The power of all religions’ is being tested in a study with severely ill corona-virus patients
- Alternative medicine = ‘Ersatz’ religion?
- The ‘Healing Power of God’: a religious group was found guilty of manslaughter of a diabetic girl
- UK politician dabbles in faith healing
- The spiritual healers who sexually harass, molest, and rape female patients
- A ‘Christian Checklist’ for so-called alternative medicine
- Biblical Naturopathy, another SCAM that is new to me
- The ‘WORST PAPER OF 2022’ COMPETITION. Entry No 3: Effects of an Islamic-Based Intervention on Depression and Anxiety
- Daily prayer against severe COVID – an update of a study started two years ago
- Reincarnation therapy “can change your life”
- Does religiosity influence post-operative survival?
- Scientology and chiropractic: is there a link?
- he real danger of yoga!
The list might need to be up-dated with ‘Prophetic Medicine’. This term, I must admit, was new to me. So, I studied the paper and was enlightened. Here is its abstract:
Integrative medicine (IM) aims to create a comprehensive healthcare system by combining conventional medicine with complementary and alternative approaches. This model prioritizes patients, emphasizing the importance of the doctor–patient relationship. By integrating the most beneficial elements of both conventional and complementary medicine, patients can benefit from enhanced therapeutic outcomes while minimizing risks associated with their combination. Given this complexity, patients need access to qualified IM practitioners who can provide guidance on the potential benefits and drawbacks of these combined approaches. One notable complementary approach is prophetic medicine (PM), particularly prevalent in Muslim communities. This practice offers preventive and curative treatments based on the teachings and practices of Prophet Muhammad. Its global recognition is on the rise, attracting increasing interest from scientists regarding its potential benefits. For instance, cupping therapy, a technique employed in PM, has been shown to offer advantages over conventional medications for various ailments, including pain management and blood conditions, such as thalassemia, offering potentially superior outcomes. A precise delineation of the scope of PM practices is crucial for a comprehensive understanding of the methodologies employed, their potential integration into contemporary healthcare systems, and the multifaceted factors influencing patient outcomes. By combining conventional medical practices with the principles of PM, IM can provide a more holistic approach to patient care. Hence, this paper explores this new model, its diverse applications, and its potential impact on IM.
The author’s lengthy conclusion in the article itself is as follows:
IM is gaining traction as it aims to improve patient care and alleviate suffering. Unlike merely combining CAM, IM emphasizes the holistic healing of the mind, body, and spirit. IM can be offered through consultations, standalone clinics, or even as a primary service. Many therapies rooted in PM can be particularly beneficial for patients facing challenging illnesses. However, the successful implementation of PM within an IM framework may be constrained by certain limitations. The most significant challenge is adapting cultural and religious beliefs to modern healthcare practices. To overcome these challenges, it is essential to establish clear, comprehensive, and universally applicable definitions and frameworks for IM. These frameworks should be comprehensive, well-developed, and consider historical roots, religious influences, and modern applications. Moreover, studies indicate that PM therapies are widely used around the world, yet there is a pressing need for a clear definition that encompasses these factors. Defining the scope of PM practices will facilitate a better understanding of the common methods, how they can be integrated into healthcare systems, and the various factors that influence patient care. Furthermore, PM practitioners require enhanced education and training to improve their understanding of traditional remedies and their effective application. Ultimately, addressing these challenges will likely lead to an improved IM model.
Who writes such remarkable nonsense?
The author of the paper is Saud Alsanad, an Associate Professor of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) in the College of Medicine at the University of Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University (IMSIU), Kingdome of Saudi Arabia. He is a founding member and the former CEO of the Saudi National Centre for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Riyadh, Kingdome of Saudi Arabia. Dr Alsanad is a registered pharmacist at the Saudi Commission for Health Specialists. He completed his PhD in Complementary and Alternative Medicine at the Reading School of Pharmacy, University of Reading, UK, under the supervision of Professor Elizabeth M Williamson.
Alsanad defines PM as medicine “based on the teachings and practices of Prophet Muhammad”. It includes a weird mix of modalities (for instance: spiritual and religious therapy as well as cupping). Would it not be reasonable to demand that each modality of whatever medicine must meet the accepted standards of effectiveness and safety that are applied in conventional medicine? If a therapy demonstrably generates more good than harm, we might consider it for integration into routine care. If not we shouldn’t even be called ‘medicine’!
Most of the treatments listed under the PM-umbrella fall into the second category. Therefore PM is arguably not medicine at all. Whether or not a therapy was mentioned by a this or that prophet is utterly immaterial and should really not matter in the age of evidence-based medicine.
I have to admit I don’t normally read the DALLAS MORNING NEWS -but perhaps I should! Here are a few excerpts from an article they just published:
Texas health experts are warning that vitamin A — found in food and in supplements such as cod liver oil — is not an alternative to measles vaccination. They’re urging Texans to vaccinate themselves and their children, as the West Texas measles outbreak continues to grow and after an unvaccinated child died from the illness.
Kennedy’s comments in the column — that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend vitamin A for people hospitalized with measles, and that studies have found vitamin A can help prevent measles deaths — are not inaccurate.
But they lack important context, said Dr. Peter Hotez, a vaccine expert at the Baylor College of Medicine. Hotez worries the missing context might mean people put their faith in vitamin A over vaccination — a decision that could cost lives. “The thing that I worry about is by [Kennedy] playing this up and others playing this up, it sends a false equivalency message, that somehow treating with vitamin A is equivalent to getting vaccinated, which is clearly not the case,” Hotez said…
“There’s zero evidence that it’s preventative,” said Dr. Christopher Dreiling, a pediatrician at Pediatric Associates of Dallas. Dreiling said he hasn’t had parents ask him about vitamin A for measles, but he wouldn’t be surprised if it started popping up after Kennedy’s comments. Dreiling’s main concern, he said, is that parents have correct information to make informed decisions…
____________________
Kennedy is, of course, not alone in pushing Vitamin A for measles. On this blog, we recently saw Dana Ullman (MPH, CCH) doing the same. On Feb 28, he wrote the following comment:
Thank YOU for verifying that the Texas hospital here seems to have killed these children. According to your article above, the head of this Texas hospital asserted, “Unfortunately, like so many viruses, there aren’t any specific treatments for measles.”
And yet, according to the New England Journal of Medicine, Vitamin A has clearly been shown: “Treatment with vitamin A reduces morbidity and mortality in measles, and all children with severe measles should be given vitamin A supplements, whether or not they are thought to have a nutritional deficiency.”
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199007193230304
And what might Kennedy and Ullman have in common (apart from being dangerous nut-cases and quackery-promoters)?
Simple: they both don’t understand science!
I was fascinated and horrified in equal measure to watch Donald Trump speaking at the CPAC talking about a medical topic – autism to be precise. Here are his words (minus the gibberish he always adds to disguise the stupidity of his phrases):
…15 years ago, there was one case per 10 000, some say 20 000 US citizens. Now the figure is 1 in 36. There’s something wrong. Bobby (Robert F. Kennedy Jr.) is gonna find it, working with Dr. Oz; by the way, working with Dr. Oz…
The audience of conservatives cheered blissfully!
What Trump said at the CPAC was not original. He uttered almost identical nonsense before (except he also claims the rate is now 1 in 34); it seems to be one of his set pieces for amusing the intellactually challenged.
A few days ago Trump signed an executive order (EO) calling for the creation of a ‘Make America Healthy Again’ Commission, which the White House says will be “tasked with investigating and addressing the root causes of America’s escalating health crisis.” In the EO, the figures are, however, a little different: “Autism spectrum disorder now affects 1 in 36 children in the United States — a staggering increase from rates of 1 to 4 out of 10,000 children identified with the condition during the 1980s.”
- 15 years ago was not the 1980s;
- 1 in 10 000 is not the same as 1 to 4 out of 10,000 children.
But, as we are often told, we must not take Trump literally; it’s the ‘BIG PICTURE’ that counts!
A little research reveals that the 1 in 36 prevalence figure originates from this survey. It was not focussed on autism but on autism spectrum disorder (ASD).
- Autism is a specific disorder within the broader category of ASD.
- ASD refers to a range of conditions that share some commonalities.
- Autism has distinct characteristics and symptoms.
- ASD includes conditions like autism, Asperger’s syndrome, childhood disintegrative disorder, and an unspecified form of pervasive developmental disorder.
Is it really too difficult for Trump to differentiate between autism and ASD?
Or is the reason that this would not fit his agenda?
The survey concluded that “findings from the ADDM Network 2020 surveillance year indicate higher ASD prevalence than previous estimates from the ADDM Network and continuing evidence of a marked shift in the demographic composition of children identified with ASD compared with previous years. Although earlier ADDM Network reports have shown higher prevalence among higher-SES White children compared with other groups, the latest data indicate consistently higher prevalence among Black and Hispanic children compared with White children, and no consistent association between ASD and SES. Furthermore, this is the first ADDM Network report in which the prevalence of ASD among girls has exceeded 1%. Since 2000, the prevalence of ASD has increased steadily among all groups, but during 2018–2020, the increases were greater for Black and Hispanic children than for White children. These data indicate that ASD is common across all groups of children and underscore the considerable need for equitable and accessible screening, services, and supports for all children.”
The authors of the survey caution that the findings in their report are subject to at least seven limitations.
- First, the methods rely on the availability, quality, and completeness of existing information and records to ascertain ASD cases and other indicators. Although all sites had access to special education classification data, certain sites did not have access to education records for their entire population, limiting the ability to identify children with ASD exclusively identified and served through their schools. Sites requested records from public school special education programs but did not review private school education records. Incomplete information could lead to misclassifying children’s cognitive ability, overestimating the age when they were first evaluated or when ASD was diagnosed, or failing to ascertain that the children were identified as having ASD. Sex information reflects what is represented in children’s records and might not reflect their gender identity.
- Second, the case definition for intellectual disability was measured using a child’s latest cognitive test or examiner statement of a child’s cognitive ability. Diagnostic and special education eligibility criteria for intellectual disability requires concurrent adaptive functioning deficits. IQ scores are not necessarily stable measures of intellectual ability over time, can increase among children with ASD in response to intensive early therapeutic interventions, and might be unstable during early childhood. The age at which children had their most recent test or examiner impression of cognitive ability varied by site.
- Third, the ADDM Network sites are not intended to be representative of the states in which the sites are located. ADDM Network sites are selected through an objective and competitive process, and findings do not necessarily generalize to all children aged 8 years in the United States. Interpretations of temporal trends can be complicated by changing surveillance areas, case definitions, data source access, and diagnostic practices.
- Fourth, small numbers result in imprecise estimates for certain sites and subgroups, and estimates falling below the selected threshold for statistical precision were suppressed.
- Fifth, the surveillance data system does not collect the number of ASD ICD codes a child received at a specific source, limiting comparability to analyses of claims/billing databases that consider number of ICD codes received.
- Sixth, the COVID–19 pandemic resulted in reduced access to records from some sources at certain sites; it was often possible to electronically obtain some data elements from these sources but not manually review the full contents of records. Disruptions in services and school closures during 2020 might have resulted in less documentation of ASD in records, which could decrease ASD ascertainment by ADDM sites.
- Seventh, the prevalence of undetected ASD in each community as well as false-positive ASD diagnoses and classifications are unknown.
So, Trump charged Robert F. Kennnedy Jr. to investigate why ASD is on the increase. As it happens, Kennedy already knows the conclusion of this investigation. He has often stated widely debunked claims that autism is caused by vaccinations. For instance, in a 2023 interview with Fox News, he squarely claimed that “autism comes from vaccines”. This theory was popularised by the discredited ex-doctor Andrew Wakefield based on a fraudulent paper that was later retracted by the Lancet. Multiple studies have subsequently demonstrated that there is no link between vaccines and autism.
Luckily Kennedy has Dr. Oz – yes the very Dr. Oz who has featured many times on my blog (see for instance here, here and here) – to help him get to the bottom of what Trump believes to be a mystery. Those two will be quite an unbeatable team (neither of them has ever done proper research in this area; Oz promotes any quackery that fills his pockets, and Kennedy would not recognise reliable science, if it bit him in his behind)! Perhaps they could start their investigation by reading the many papers that have already found at least some of the plausible reasons for the above-cited figures, e.g:
- The Real Reasons Autism Rates Are Up in the U.S. | Scientific American
- Is Autism Really Increasing?
- Factors Causing an Increase in Autism | Psych Central
- Autism: Cases on the Rise; Reason for Increase a Mystery
- Recognising autism in healthcare – PubMed
Oh, I almost forgot: they don’t need to read such demanding papers. They already have the answer to the autism mystery!
PS
Hair loss is prevalent and can affect both males and females of different age groups. Despite the availability of many conventional treatment options, these might cause side effects, leading to a growing interest in natural and herbal remedies (HRs).
This review aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of various HRs for hair loss and examine the current scientific evidence behind them. A literature search identified relevant studies published up to March 2024. The results suggested potential benefits in promoting hair growth and treating various forms of hair loss (HL). Several remedies were found to be effective in different conditions, including:
- androgenetic alopecia (AGA),
- telogen effluvium,
- alopecia areata (AA).
Various mechanisms of action (MOA) seem to be involved,
including
- 5α-reductase inhibition,
- increased microcapillary blood flow,
- antioxidant effects,
- modulation of the hair growth signaling pathways.
The authors concluded that natural and herbal remedies show promise in treating hair loss, However, many of these studies have limitations such as lack of long-term follow-up, small sample sizes, and short treatment durations. Due to this variation in the quality of evidence, further well-designed randomized trials with larger sample sizes are required to confirm the efficacy of these HRs.
The herbal remedies included in this review are:
- rosemary,
- saw palmetto,
- onion juice,
- Korean red ginseng,
- pumpkin seed oil,
- azelaic acid,
- olive oil,
- coconut oil,
- henna,
- honey,
- rice bran extract,
- Ashwagandha,
- Amla.
The authors claim that they “show promise”. Is it ‘splitting hair’ to ask: all of them? Closer inspection finds significant ‘hair in the soup’ and reveals that this statement is ‘pulled by the hair’ and based largely on wishful thinking. The truth is that evidence from rigorous clinical trials is almost totally absent.
I am tempted to say that this review is ‘hair-raising’ – alas there is not much hair left on my head to raise – even for a review as poor and misleading as this one.
In case you are new here and don’t know, the ‘ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HALL OF FAME’ is an illustrious group of people researching so-called alternative medicine (SCAM). They have been elected [by myself] for one main reason: they have managed to go through their entire carrer publishing nothing but positive results related to their ‘pet SCAM’.
So far, the group consists of:
- Josef M Schmid (homeopathy, Germany)
- Meinhard Simon (homeopathy, Germany)
- Richard C. Niemtzow (acupuncture, US)
- Helmut Kiene (anthroposophical medicine, Germany)
- Helge Franke (osteopathy, Germany)
- Tery Oleson (acupressure , US)
- Jorge Vas (acupuncture, Spain)
- Wane Jonas (homeopathy, US)
- Harald Walach (various SCAMs, Germany)
- Andreas Michalsen ( various SCAMs, Germany)
- Jennifer Jacobs (homeopath, US)
- Jenise Pellow (homeopath, South Africa)
- Adrian White (acupuncturist, UK)
- Michael Frass (homeopath, Austria)
- Jens Behnke (research officer, Germany)
- John Weeks (editor of JCAM, US)
- Deepak Chopra (entrepreneur, US)
- Cheryl Hawk (chiropractor, US)
- David Peters (osteopathy, homeopathy, UK)
- Nicola Robinson (TCM, UK)
- Peter Fisher (homeopathy, UK)
- Simon Mills (herbal medicine, UK)
- Gustav Dobos (various SCAMs, Germany)
- Claudia Witt (homeopathy, Germany/Switzerland)
- George Lewith (acupuncture, UK)
- John Licciardone (osteopathy, US)
Inspired by my post from yesterday which focussed on a study by NAFKAM, I had a look at the director of this institute, Miek C Jong. Her pet SCAM seems to be homeopathy. She has published, as far as I can see, 4 clinical trials and two reviews of homeopathy (in case I have missed any, please let me know). Here are the links and key sentences from all of these papers:
CLINICAL TRIALS
- …the added value of homeopathy compared with usual care was demonstrated by significant differences in symptom score changes…
- An integrative treatment approach where SilAtro-5-90 (a homeopathic product) is given alongside mainstream symptomatic treatment may bring therapeutic benefit to patients suffering from recurrent tonsillitis.
- Both complex homeopathic products led to a comparable reduction of URTIs.
- In primary care, homeopathic treatment for acute respiratory and ear complaints was not inferior to conventional treatment.
REVIEWS
- This meta-analysis revealed that the proportion of patients experiencing adverse effects was significantly higher when receiving conventional medicine and herbs, compared to patients receiving homeopathy.
- Our systematic evaluation demonstrated that the reporting rate of ADRs associated with anthroposophic and homeopathic solutions for injection is very low.
I hope you agree that publishing all these homeopathy-papers without even a hint of a negative finding is a remarkable effort (bearing in mind that trials of highly diluted homeopathic remedies are, in fact, testing one placebo against another) In my view, this achievement is so remarkable that, today, I take the pleasure to admit Miek Jong into my ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HALL OF FAME.
WELCOME MIEK JONG!
I am sure you remember Didier Raoult:
- Didier Raoult’s research is being called into question
- Didier Raoult and the hydroxychloroquine controversy ( part 1 )
- A census of untruths about chloroquine ( part 2 )
- HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE: This is NOT a Hollywood blockbuster ( Part 3)
Raoult has been banned from practising medicine for two years, and his ‘landmark study’ on hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for Covid-19 has been retracted. But, as the French magazine ‘LE POINT’ reported, he can’t stop himself from producing BS. On the ‘Magnifiscience’ website, the name of the cosmetics company in which he is a partner, we learn that (my translation):
Magnifiscience, the alternative to injections and facelifts!
Science at the service of skin health
Discover a range that smoothes the skin, reduces wrinkles and fine lines, while plumping and firming for a more radiant complexion.
Our skin care products work deep down to improve the skin’s natural composition. They stimulate the production of collagen, elastin and hyaluronic acid, while moisturising, optimising cell renewal and strengthening the skin’s barrier.
A molecular innovation that redefines the boundaries of science.
Scientific Cosmetics
At Magnifiscience, we push back the boundaries of beauty by combining the power of science with cosmetic innovation.
Our formulas are the result of advanced biomedical research, combining high-performance active ingredients to stimulate skin regeneration, protect against external aggressors and slow down the visible signs of ageing.
Each skin care product is designed to work in depth to deliver proven, visible and long-lasting results.
__________________________
For 75 euros per 60 ml, LE POINT explains, the Tonitence 1 and Tonitence 2 contain DRNB7 and DRNB8 ‘powerful active ingredient’ complexes. These acronyms are based on the initials of the partners: Didier Raoult and Nina Basri, a ‘specialist in the formulation of cosmetic active ingredients’. Her LinkedIn profile shows no studies or degrees in pharmacy or dermatology, but a series of company start-ups in beauty products. A Forbes Brand stories advertorial explains that her vocation was born ‘from the observation of a curious little girl: the powers of water. Since most of the human bodý is made up of water, Nina Basri saw this as a lever for action.’ Water is indeed present in both creams. It’s even their main ingredient. In addition to water, there are mainly nourishing sunflower and safflower oils. For hydration, there’s squalane, but no hyaluronic acid or even glycerine; they chose propylene glycol, which is less effective. For 75 euros for 60 ml, you’d expect something better. Vitamin C is also present, albeit indirectly, via orange extract, and in low doses. The formula also contains a number of active plant ingredients, including extracts of ginseng, apple… and ‘garlic bulb and onion.
In addition to the AMAP basket, which, let’s be fair, may contain small doses of exfoliating fruit acids and antioxidant vitamins and polyphenols, there’s a good ladleful of polymers that deposit a film on the skin: hydroxyethyl acrylate/Sodium acryloyldimethyl taurate copolymer and cetearyl dimethicone crosspolymer, as well as silicone (dimethicone), which also forms a film. The result is a temporary, mechanical filling effect that disappears when the make-up is removed. More worryingly, the cream contains Benzyl Alcohol and Tetramethyl Acetyloctahydronaphthalenes, which (like garlic and onion) are potentially allergenic.
_________________________
So, what about Raoult’s/Magnifiscience’s dermatological claims that their creams:
- reduce wrinkles,
- reduce fine lines,
- improve the skin’s natural composition,
- stimulate the production of collagen, elastin and hyaluronic acid,
- optimise cell renewal,
- strengthen the skin’s barrier,
- stimulate skin regeneration,
- protect against external aggressors ,
- slow down the visible signs of ageing?
Any evidence?
As far as I can see, no!
Harald Walach is probably known to many of my readers (he is also a co-author of the paper that was the subject of yesterday’s post), not least because I posted numerous articles about him on this blog, e.g.:
- Prof Walach: what lies ahead for research into SCAM?
- Walach’s new meta-analysis of homeopathy revisited
- A new review of the ‘efficacy’ of homeopathic Arnica by Harald Walach & Co
- Prof Harald Walach and the intriguing ‘Vaccination Control Group’ project
- Prof Harald Walach is really unlucky
- Is Prof Harald Walach incompetent or dishonest?
- Prof Harald Walach’s new ground breaking study of praying the Rosary
- COVID-19 vaccinations: Prof Walach wants to “dampen the enthusiasm by sober facts”
The reason I dedicate yet another post to Walach is that recently I looked him up on Wikipedia where I learned things I did not previously know. As Walach is (since 2021) a member of our illustrious ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HALL OF FAME, I find it appropriate to discuss him once more. The following is a slightly abbreviated version of his impressive Wikipedia page:
Walach was born in 1957. He received a degree in Psychology from the University of Freiburg in 1984, a PhD in Clinical Psychology from the University of Basel in 1991, and a PhD in History of Science from the University of Vienna in 1995. In 1998 he received his habilitation in psychology from the University of Freiburg. He was affiliated for a time with the Samueli Institute before its closure in 2017.
He worked for a time at the University of Northampton, then as director of the Institute of Transcultural Health Studies at Europa Universität Viadrina, where he led a training course for doctors in complementary medicine and cultural sciences. In 2012, the state of Brandenburg’s commission for reviewing Universities concluded that Walach’s institute should not be continued within the university.
In 2017, he was a part-time associate professor at Poznań University of Medical Sciences, teaching mindfulness to the international medical students. In July 2021 the university cut its ties with Walach, in response to a paper that he published in Vaccines, stating that Walach’s work “misleadingly used data to yield conclusions that are wrong and may lead to public harm.”
In 2017, he started the CHS Institute to publish his own writing, including COVID-19 satire and denial. Starting in 2001, along with theoretical physicists Hartmann Römer and Harald Atmanspacher, Walach developed what they termed a model of “weak quantum theory” or “generalised entanglement” that purported to explain anomalous phenomena, such as non-specific therapy effects and parapsychological claims. This was not taken seriously by other physicists.
In 2012, Walach received the negative prize “Goldenes Brett” from Austrian skeptics, an annual award for the “most astonishing pseudo-scientific nuisance” of the year. The prize was awarded in part for a masters thesis about the Kozyrev mirror conducted under his supervision, which was widely regarded as unscientific.
Walach was on the scientific advisory board of a blog called “CAM-Media Watch”, which was sponsored by the alternative medicine company Heel, among others. The blog described itself as a “spin doctor” for promoting Complementary and Alternative Medicine (“CAM”). In 2012, it was reported that the blog had been paid to smear Edzard Ernst, a scientist critical of homeopathy.
As of 2024, Walach has had three publications retracted.
In June 2021, Walach published two high profile papers containing research pertaining to the COVID-19 pandemic, one exaggerating the risks of vaccination, and the other concluding that children should not wear masks. Both papers were retracted the following month.
- The first paper, published in Vaccines, was retracted within a week because of “misrepresentation of the COVID-19 vaccination efforts and misrepresentation of the data,” “several errors that fundamentally affect the interpretation of the findings,” and “incorrect and distorted conclusions”. Five members of the editorial board of Vaccines resigned when the article was published, protesting it as “grossly irresponsible”.
- The second paper was published in JAMA Pediatrics, to immediate criticism. This study was funded by an organization (MWGFD) that was founded to fight governmental pandemic protocols, and is known in Germany for promoting COVID conspiracy theories and distributing anti-vaccine flyers. The journal retracted the paper 12 days later, after the authors did not provide sufficiently convincing evidence to resolve the scientific issues raised about the study.
In 2023, another paper about the efficacy of homeopathy was retracted “due to concerns regarding the analysis of the articles included in the meta-analysis”.
In a press statement, the Poznań University of Medical Sciences dissociated itself from Walach and asserted that his vaccine study “misleadingly used data to yield conclusions that are wrong and may lead to public harm.”
_________________
I know, some people are not impressed by Wikipedia, yet I must say that I did learn a lot from this page. I thought I knew everything relevant about Walach, but I was mistaken.
In any case, I am proud to have – since already 3 years! – such a prominent man in our
ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HALL OF FAME.
PS
I should perhaps mention that the ‘ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HALL OF FAME’ is a gathering for pseudo-scientists who managed during their entire career to publish only or almost only positive results of their favorite SCAM (feel free to search on my blog for other members of this exceptional club)
The full title of this paper is “Role of Energy Medicine in enhancing hemoglobin levels – A case study”. Readers who thus expect to learn about the effects of ENERGY MEDICINE (a branch of so-called alternative medicine based on the belief that healers can channel “healing energy” into patients and effect positive results) might be disappointed.
The abstract reveals that the article “explores the potential benefits of Acupuncture and Energy Medicine as energy therapies in managing anemia”. If you now expect to learn something about the combination of ACUPUNCTURE and ENERGY MEDICINE, you would be mistaken.
Here is the abstract of the case report:
A 43-year-old female with severe anemia (hemoglobin 6.5 g/dL) participated in a three-month treatment plan that combined acupuncture and energy therapy. Acupuncture targets specific points to enhance Qi flow, stimulate blood production, and restore energy balance. The energy therapy plan focused on blood-nourishing foods aimed at supporting hematopoiesis.
After three months of treatment, the patient’s hemoglobin levels increased by 4.9 g/dL, reaching 11.4 g/dL. Clinical symptoms, including fatigue, dizziness, and weakness, showed marked improvement. Additionally, the patient reported better sleep, enhanced mood, and an increase in appetite, all of which contributed to an improved overall sense of well-being.
The authors concluded that the results suggest that Acupuncture and Energy Medicine can serve as effective energy therapies in managing anemia, particularly for cases that do not respond well to conventional treatments. This case study provides preliminary evidence of their potential to improve hemoglobin levels and alleviate anemia-related symptoms. However, further research is necessary to validate these findings and explore the broader application of acupuncture and energy medicine in anemia management.
The authors of this paper, who come from the ‘International Institute of Yoga and Naturopathy Medical Sciences‘, Chengalpattu, Tamilnadu, India, never bothered to explain what type of ENERGY MEDICINE they applied to their patient. As it turns out, they used no ENERGY MEDICINE at all! Here is what they disclosed about the treatments in the full paper:
The patient was treated with energy medicine and the treatment protocol includes Acupuncture, Diet therapy that was designed in such a way to improve the blood circulation, balance energy flow, and address underlying deficiencies in Qi and blood, particularly in relation to the Spleen, Liver and Kidney meridians, which are believed to play a role in blood production in Traditional Chinese Medicine.
So, we now know that the case report entitled “Role of Energy Medicine in enhancing hemoglobin levels – A case study” was, in fact, about a patient receiving ACUPUNCTURE and DIET.
Next, we might wonder what condition the patient had been suffering from (anemia is not a disease but a sign that can be caused by a range of diseases). All we learn from the paper is this:
She had been diagnosed with anemia three months prior and had been taking iron supplements without significant improvement in her hemoglobin (Hb) levels.
So, we now know that despite the title of the paper ( “Role of Energy Medicine in enhancing hemoglobin levels – A case study”), the authors used no ENERGY MEDICINE. We also know thet they did not bother to adequately diagnose the patient. But we are told that the case shows that Acupuncture and Energy Medicine can serve as effective energy therapies in managing anemia, particularly for cases that do not respond well to conventional treatments. Just to be clear: if a doctor sees a patient with a dangerously low hemoglobin and does not bother to establish the cause and treats her with acupuncture and diet, the physician is, in my view, guilty of criminal neglect.
At this point, I have to admit that I lost the will to live – well, not quite, perhaps. But I certainly have lost the will to take the ‘International Institute of Yoga and Naturopathy Medical Sciences‘, Chengalpattu, Tamilnadu, India, seriously. In fact, I seriously doubt that this institution should be allowed to educate future doctors. If they are able of doing anything useful, they could try to publish a book on:
HOW NOT TO WRITE A MEDICAL PAPER.
