SGU Episode 414
|
This episode needs: transcription, time stamps, links, 'Today I Learned' list, categories, segment redirects. Please help out by contributing! |
How to Contribute |
| SGU Episode 414 |
|---|
| 22nd Jun 2013 |
 |
| (brief caption for the episode icon) |
| Skeptical Rogues |
| S: Steven Novella |
B: Bob Novella |
R: Rebecca Watson |
J: Jay Novella |
E: Evan Bernstein |
| Guest |
DL: Daniel Loxton |
| Quote of the Week |
Everybody has opinions: I have them, you have them. And we are all told from the moment we open our eyes, that everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. Well, that’s horsepuckey, of course. We are not entitled to our opinions; we are entitled to our informed opinions. Without research, without background, without understanding, it's nothing |
| Links |
| Download Podcast |
| Show Notes |
| Forum Discussion |
Introduction
You're listening to the Skeptics' Guide to the Universe, your escape to reality.
S: Hello and welcome to the Skeptics' Guide to the Universe, today is Wednesday, June 19th, 2013, and this is your host Steven Novella. Joining me this week are Bob Novella,
B: Hey, everybody
S: Rebecca Watson,
R: Hello, everyone.
S: Jay Novella,
J: Hey, guys.
S: and Evan Bernstein.
E: Salutations, everybody
R: Hello...
S: Salutations and felicitations, Evan.
E: Oh, and felicitations, how could I forget the Squire of Gothos. Shame on me,
S: I don't know (chuckles)
E: shame on me.
R: The hell you guys talking about.
E: Well, Rebecca, aren't you watching the Star Trek series?
R: I guess I haven't gotten up to that point, yet.
E: This is the original series.
R: I'm watching The Next Generation.
S: You know what I saw recently? "Star Trek Continues".
E: Hm?
S: which is a a
J: Wha?
S: fan.. "Star Trek Continues", it's a fan episode, a fan video, where it's as if the ep... the seasons continued as if it wasn't canceled after three seasons. So it's not, it's not like a parody, and it's not an update or a reboot or anything it's like what would a fourth season have actually been like,
B: Oh, cool.
S: and and they do their best to reproduce, the production value, the sets are identical, all the sound effects, the music the acting
R: Hm
S: the whole culture that was definitely embedded in that late '60s you know in terms of everything. And the
?: (inaudible)
S: some of the actors are damn good, the guy who's doing Kirk has his mannerisms down, absolutely down.
B: And it's not a parody of his mannerisms?
S: No, no it's not, it's not a parody, it's an imitation. And it like things like it's like "Yeah, Kirk does do that!" You know, it's like, (laughter) you uh things you wouldn't even think of. Like the
R: That is so Kirk.
S: ways he moves his arms when he walks. Yeah, it's just amazing.
R: Hey, remember that Star Trek episode where, uh, poisonous gas covered most of the planet, and murdered millions of people?
E: Ahhh.
R: Oh, wait, no, that was real life. Oh, my God!
B: (laughter)
E: That's worse.
This Day in Skepticism (1:58)
R: On June 22, 1783, a poisonous cloud caused by the eruption of the Laki volcano in Iceland, uh, finally reached France. So this is kind of, um, I really could have picked any date, uh, it's very interesting, it's something that I didn't even realize was the thing, uh, it was one of the most deadly if not the most deadly volcanic eruptions in human history, as I said it happened in Iceland but it spread all over the globe, uh, first of all though in Iceland it killed about 50% of the livestock which lead to a famine which killed a quarter of the population of Iceland. Uh, so it was pretty immediate but then it also went on to possibly cause droughts in India and Africa which lead to millions of more deaths, uh, as well as crop failures in Europe and air pollution and this deadly gas... from this deadly gas. So, all to... all told, it killed probably over 6 million people
?: What?
R: globally. Yeah, 6 million.
E: That's a lot (inaudible)
R: It was a pretty big volcanic eruption.
E: 1783, that's (inaudible) quite a bit.
B: Holy crap.
R: And the cloud was sulfur dioxide that
E: Oh, that'll do it
R: and also the hydrogen... the hydrogen fluoride apparently I think killed most of the people in Iceland but the sulfur dioxide is what drifted into Europe to start murdering people there. But yeah and it also caused severe global temperature change, uh, it was the hottest summer on record followed by really violent winter with hail and storms and all that good stuff which probably lead to more deaths.
S: It was the longest period of below zero temperatures in New England.
R: Oh, yeah, the US... the US area just had some severe weather. They don't... I.. I didn't find a whole of talk about deaths that resulted in it but I think people were just dying left and right anyway, at that point, so
S: A bad winter in 1783 was no joke.
R: Exactly, yeah, that's... that's what I'm sayin'. But...
B: So this gas released it wasn't part of like a.. a pyroclastic flow, it was just this, just this gas that came out and went
S: Just a bubble of gas
B: all over the place
R: Yeah, like a volcanic fart, silent but deadly
E: Probably wasn't too silent, either
R: Too soon?
?: Too soon (laughter)
S: Volcanoes are no joke, that superheated gas that kills people it's not just the lava and the ash, I mean, it's usually the gas, even if it's not poisonous gas if it's superheated it's like your lungs explode, you know. Well, let's move on, uhm, have you guys heard...
?: (stage inhalation)
?: Uh?
News Items
Osteoarthritis (4:41)
- Science-based Medicine: Knee Osteoarthritis: Thumbs Down for Acupuncture and Glucosamine
S: the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons has released their, uh, 1200 page report evaluating evidence for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis
R: Now the last time you lead us into one of these and we made all made light-hearted jokes about how boring the topic was, we got a bunch of angry letters from botanists, so, no, Steve, not gonna fall for it, this sounds fascinating, tell me more. (laughter)
S: Yeah, but like last time I convinced you how cool botany was, now I wanna convince you how cool osteoarthritis is.
E: Here come more letters (laughter)
S: Oh, boy. (laughter)
S: um, so osteoarthritis is, essentially degenerative arthritis of a joint, mainly from wear and tear, but there are other obviously biological factors involved, and so knee osteoarthritis, very common, uhm, as people get into their 40's and 50's they uh, their knees start to ache, you know, and they just wear out, they just don't really last 80 years unfortunately. There are lots of potential treatments for osteoarthritis including many that are not evidence-based. This report is interesting for a number of reasons, not just for the specific recommendations that are made. Harriet Hall writes about this on Science-based Medicine and I recommend that for those who are interested but I just want to highlight some of the interesting things. First of all, it shows that science-based practitioners actually care about evidence, despite all of the propaganda about "Oh, those doctors only want drugs and surgery" here we have a uh a major you know a professional organization in the United States dedicated to orthopedic surgery reviewing thousands of published studies, putting out a 1200 page comprehensive report looking in-depth into the evidence for many different approaches, and here are the highlights of what they found, where there was strong evidence you know for or against. So glucosamine chondroitin you guys are familiar with this, right, this is a dietary supplement that has been and still is promoted, um, has been for years, for arthritis. What do you think they found?
E: It doesn't work.
S: It doesn't work. So it was one of the few things where there was strong evidence against its effectiveness. Glucosamine and chondroitin doesn't work, there have been large studies. Exercise, strong evidence for, in favor of it. Weight loss, moderate evidence in favor of it. Acupuncture, what do you think they concluded?
R: No evidence.
?: Overwhelming evidence.
S: Strong evidence against its effectiveness. So very nice to see that they took a science-based approach to acupuncture research and didn't fall for the bait-and-switch of "Oh, it works like a placebo" you know, they didn't fall for that business. And also, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories strong evidence they are effective, that's not surprising. And here's one: arthroscopy with lavage and debridement --- strong evidence against.
B: Really?
E: Lavage, huh?
S: So lavage is like just washing it out. So arthroscopy is putting the scope into the knee and looking around, you know, for diagnostic, but if you take anything out then it becomes a therapeutic procedure, right, that's debridement, you know, cutting away any fraying pieces of cartilage and then washing out those pieces, that's the lavage part. So, this is a pretty lucrative, popular procedure for orthopedists to do. And here they are, the official organization of orthopedists, coming out with a statement saying there is strong evidence against the effectiveness of this procedure. This is something that we've written about on Science-based Medicine previously when there...there... when a review came out, I think now about two years ago, showing that arthroscopy was not effective, and there was some pushback from some orthopedists, and we said "Hey, this is the evidence, baby, this is, this is what it shows". So it's nice now to see the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons looking at the evidence and honestly saying "Yep, our beloved procedure, that we would love to have work, doesn't work". So it's hard in the face of this, if you look at the bigger picture, it's hard to justify the typical knee-jerk criticisms that alternative medicine proponents have against mainstream medicine
R: Heh, knee-jerk
S: Yeah, knee-jerk. That it's they only care about drugs and surgery, well here they are saying um, their favorite surgical procedure doesn't work, that they don't care about other things, here they're strongly in favor of exercise, moderately in favor of weight loss, Um, and that they're not, they don't care about actually treating people, well, this is, I think this shows their dedication to the evidence to what actually works regardless of what the modality is, and this is, this is, what we see in mainstream medicine all the time. This is a Herculean effort and it's great document, but this is what we see all the time, you know, the... academic professional uh physicians looking at the evidence objectively and the chips fall where they may, in its direct contradiction to all the anti-mainstream medicine conspiracy theories that you're going to hear from the alternative medicine side, so I thought that was worth pointing out. Also, Harriet pointed out something interesting, things like homeopathy didn't even make the list, it wasn't even worth their time to take a look at.
B: Oh, awesome.
E: Good.
S: Yeah.
R. Good (inaudible).
E: I don't know if we'd be able to say that if this were British Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, right? That probably would have made that list.
S: Homeopathy probably would have,
E: Yes
S: just because homeopathy is more popular across the pond, yeah.
B: Uh, Steve, did they mention why it wasn't on the list?
S: No, just... it didn't even... didn't even make the radar. Just wasn't even, yeah, not... not mentioned one way or the other.
B: OK
Patenting DNA ()
Foot Fungus ()
- Science News: Foot fungi a thriving, diverse community
Chinese Fake Alien ()
- The Telegraph: Chinese farmer jailed for making a rubber alien
New Type of Star ()
Who's That Noisy? ()
Questions and Emails ()
Can We Know Everything? ()
I have been listening to the show for 4 years and although I have always been a sceptic I have learnt a great deal from your show. I would like to hear the rogues view on whether science has the potential to explain the physical world in such a way that we understand everything. Is there a limit to what we can comprehend? For example a dog has no concept of quantum gravity and wouldn’t ask the question of himself “Is space-time fundamentally continuous or discrete?” We have gone from asking ourselves how to grow food to “why is there far more matter than antimatter in the observable universe?” Our brain appears finite in capacity so I would assume that would limit our ability to understand the world around us. Reaching a limit at some stage seems inevitable. Or will our brains develop as we need to solve increasingly more difficult questions, after all our brains appear not to need to store every bit of information we discover perhaps more the ability to solve a problem, and the capacity to grasp the variables at that time. I could be wrong though. Your opinions would be greatly appreciated and interesting.
Mark Dennehy
Melbourne
Interview with Daniel Loxton ()
About his new book: Abominable Science
Science or Fiction ()
Item #1: New fossil evidence reveals the presence of kangaroo ancestors 25 million years ago in what is now Europe. Item #2: Researchers find that male guppies can reproduce up to 10 months after they have died. Item #3: Scientists have discovered a material that gets larger under pressure, in apparent defiance of the laws of physics.
Skeptical Quote of the Week ()
Everybody has opinions: I have them, you have them. And we are all told from the moment we open our eyes, that everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. Well, that’s horsepuckey, of course. We are not entitled to our opinions; we are entitled to our informed opinions. Without research, without background, without understanding, it's nothing.
Harlan Ellison
Announcements ()
S: The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe is produced by SGU Productions, dedicated to promoting science and critical thinking. For more information on this and other episodes, please visit our website at theskepticsguide.org, where you will find the show notes as well as links to our blogs, videos, online forum, and other content. You can send us feedback or questions to info@theskepticsguide.org. Also, please consider supporting the SGU by visiting the store page on our website, where you will find merchandise, premium content, and subscription information. Our listeners are what make SGU possible.
References
|
|
|