Neal’s Yard were nice enough to agree to feature on the Guardian’s Ethical Living Blog: to answer reader questions. Guardian readers donated thiee time in order to contribute plenty of interesting questions (the comments page on this story runs to five pages) on issues such as what level of evidence they demand before selling a product, the ethics of their previous policy of selling homoeopathic pills for malaria (now withdrawn), or the ethical problems involved in distributing non-evidence-based anti-vaccine information.
Sadly, though, Adam Vaughan of the Guardian was left to report that
Unfortunately, despite previous assurances that they would be participating in this blog post, I’ve now been told they ‘will not be taking part in the debate’.
So yes, as several people have pointed out, this has become something of ‘You Ask’, rather than a ‘You Ask, They Answer’. I’m still hoping NYR will reconsider.
Despite attempts to persuade Neal’s Yard to participate, that comments thread has now been closed.
This is a real shame: there are fascinating ethical issues around the marketing and selling of ‘complementary and alternative’ treatments, and it would have been great to have discussed this with Neal’s Yard. We were just putting together a question about their position on vaccinations, before we learnt that they were not going to respond.
Ever-optimistic, we will e-mail Neal’s Yard shortly: to invite them to address some of the questions raised on EthicalLiving here (in the comments, or a guest post). If there is anything else you would like to ask them, feel free to post the comment here – we will be sure to e-mail them a link to this thread. Continue reading
Former Visiting Professor Patrick Holford has what he calls a blog.[a]
So far, it contains the usual inaccuracies and reproduces articles that he wrote some time ago and Holford seems to regard it as a way of recycling his usual work.
However, this has been such a remarkable week for exposing the shoddy edifice that supports some of Holford’s cash cows and entrepreneurial enterprises that we had wondered if he would crack and write about them. Continue reading
It would take more time than we have to put together a post that could encompass all of the errors and fallacies in Jeni Barnett’s lamentable LBC Radio piece on MMR. Particularly as this is one of those times when there is more to blog about than time available to do it when you have noses to wipe and daylight bulbs to buy for your ailing indoor plants.
However, we’ve finally been roused to put together a quick list of some rebuttals to some of the more obvious canards in Jeni Barnett’s lamentable LBC Radio piece on MMR. We were partly prompted to this by a comment left on Ben Goldacre’s blog by Honesty in Science.
So Ben you believe censorship will not backfire and will not lead to more people questioning of Honesty of the vaccine debate?
When it becomes common knowledge that all debate is being stifled and the reasons why parents do not vaccinate are taboo the shit will really hit the fan.
You will face charges of not being able to defend the science of vaccinations openly and honestly and not able to tpp publically refute the claims of the anti vaxxers.
Jeni Barnett recently hosted a ridiculously bad discussion of the MMR vaccine, on LBC radio, 7th January 2009. Highlights included, for example, her admitting that she did not know what was in the MMR vaccine – after ranting at some length about what she perceived as the risks of vaccines and their ingredients.
We are therefore pleased to see Jeni admitting that she failed to act as one would expect a responsible broadcaster to Continue reading
We recently explained Why Medscape Should Have Issued A Correction rather than just withdraw their lamentable article on Gardasil and the safety profile of HPV vaccines.
We were wrong. Medscape should have published an adequate and appropriate correction. Continue reading
Former Visiting Professor Patrick Holford is still Head of Science and Education at Biocare so presumably they must believe that he enhances their reputation and scientific credibility. We look at Holford’s advice in “Vaccinations: what every parent needs to know” in 100%health Newsletter, No. 46, July 2008, pp. 5-8.[a] We focus on his coverage of the issue that the timing of vaccination is an asthma risk. Continue reading
Medscape has published HPV Vaccine Adverse Events Worrisome Says Key Investigator (free registration: we’ve had to change the link, see update Aug 6). Allison Gandey’s article is interesting but in some parts it is an annoyingly slight, inaccurate and inadequate exploration of some of the issues discussed in Professor Abby Lippman’s recently published editorial: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and the development of public policies. However, our reaction was unduly influenced by the introduction of topics that were not the subject of Lippman’s editorial. Continue reading
Former Visiting Professor Patrick Holford is still Head of Science and Education at Biocare so presumably they must believe that he enhances their reputation and scientific credibility. We are taking a multi-part look at Holford’s advice in “Vaccinations: what every parent needs to know” in 100%health Newsletter, No. 46, July 2008, pp. 5-8. We focus on Holford’s description of toxins in vaccines. Continue reading
Orac has issued a real challenge for science communication that is asking for ideas from framers on how to address the public health issue of anti-vaccination propaganda. Commenter DLC has suggested that bloggers should go through the vaccination schedule and discuss the rationale for each one in plain language. Continue reading