P S E
U D O S C I E N C E
by
Anthony
S. Zummer
Presented To The
Chicago
Literary Club
at The Cliff Dwellers
Chicago, Illinois
December 12, 2005
©2005 Anthony S. Zummer
P S E U D O S
C I E N C E
by
Anthony
S. Zummer
We
live in a sea of natural phenomenon.
Some we understand. Some we think
we understand. Some we believe we
understand. Some we do not
understand. Some we do not know that the
phenomenon exists. Some self-anointed
experts offer basic explanations and possible effect and use of these
phenomenon. These self-anointed experts
are not always accurate. When the
so-called experts engage in speculation, they predicate their position on
pseudoscience. Examples of pseudoscience
espoused by self-anointed experts are legion.
Tonight, we consider a few examples of pseudoscience at its best. Through the ages, man has observed that
the dawn of each day starts with the sun rising in the east. The sun transverses the sky in the course of
the day. It rises to its zenith for the
day at noon, and sets in the west as nightfall begins. For thousands of years, man believed that the
sun moved across the sky. The Holy
Scriptures fortified man's belief that the sun moved across earth's sky. Thus, God could stop the sun from moving and
have continuous sunlight in a selected part of the earth. The Bible records the fact that God stayed
the sun for almost a whole day at Joshua 10:12-14:
"Then spoke Joshua to the LORD in
the day when the LORD gave the Amorites over to the men of Israel; and he said
in the sight of Israel, 'Sun, stand thou still at Gibeon, and thou Moon in the
valley of Ai`jalon.' And the sun stood
still, and the moon stayed, until the nation took vengeance on their
enemies. Is this not written in the Book
of Jashar? The sun stayed in the midst
of heaven, and did not hasten to go down for about a whole day. There has been no day like it before or
since, when the LORD hearkened to the voice of a man; for the LORD fought for
Israel."
There was no doubt
that the earth is the center of the universe, and the sun travels around the
earth. In the early 1600's, Galileo of
Florence and Nicholas Copernicus of Poland studied the sun, the planets and the
stars and corresponded regarding their findings and their conclusions. Galileo authored a book; the title being, Dialogue
by Galileo Galilei on the two Chief World Systems, Ptolemaic and
Copernican. The book argued that the
Earth is not the center of the world, but rather the sun is the center of the
world and the Earth travels around the sun.
Galileo's proposition was considered to be heretical by seven princes of
the Church who carefully studied Galileo's work and compared it with the sacred
scriptures. The study by the seven
cardinals resulted in a Papal Condemnation of Galileo which issued in June,
1633 finding in part:
"Whereas you, Galileo, son of the
late Vaincenzo Galilei, Florentine, aged seventy years, were in the year 1615
denounced to this Holy Office for holding as true the false doctrine taught by
some that the Sun is the center of the world and immovable and that the Earth
moves, and also with a diurnal motion; for having disciples to whom you taught
the same doctrine; for holding correspondence with certain mathematicians of
Germany concerning the same; for having printed certain letters, entitled 'On
the Sunspots,' wherein you developed the same doctrine as true; and for
replying to the objections from the Holy Scriptures, which from time to time
were urged against it, by glossing the said Scriptures according to your own
meaning: and whereas there was thereupon produced the copy of a document in the
form of a letter, purporting to be written by you to one formerly your
disciple, and in this divers propositions are set forth, following the position
of Copernicus, which are contrary to the true sense and authority of Holy
Scripture: This Holy Tribunal being
therefore of intention to proceed against the disorder and mischief thence
resulting, which went on increasing to the prejudice of the Holy Faith, by
command of His Holiness and of the Most Eminent Lords Cardinals of this supreme
and universal Inquisition, the two propositions of the stability of the sun and
the motion of the Earth were by the theological Qualifiers qualified as
follows: The proposition that the Sun is
the center of the world and does not move from its place is absurd and false
philosophically and formally heretical, because it is expressly contrary to
Holy Scripture. The proposition that the
Earth is not the center of the world and immovable but that it moves, and also
with a diurnal motion, is equally absurd and false philosophically and
theologically considered at least erroneous in faith...We say, pronounce,
sentence and declare that you, Galileo, by reason of these things which have
been detailed in the trial and which you have confessed already, have rendered
yourself according to this Holy Office vehemently suspect of heresy, namely of
having held and believed a doctrine that is false and contrary to the divine
and Holy Scripture: namely that Sun is the center of the world and does not
move from east to west, and that one may hold and defend as probably an opinion
after it has been declared and defined contrary to Holy Scripture. Consequently, you have incurred all the
censures and penalties enjoined and promulgated by the sacred Canons and all
particular and general laws against such delinquents. We are willing to absolve you from them
provided that first, with a sincere heart and unfeigned faith, in our presence
you abjure, curse and detest the said errors and heresies, and every other
error and heresy contrary to the Catholic and Apostolic Church in the manner
and form we will prescribe you. Furthermore,
so that this grievous and pernicious error and transgression of yours may not
go altogether unpunished, and so that you will be more cautious in future, and
an example for others to abstain from delinquencies of this sort, we order that
the book Dialogue of Galileo Galilei be prohibited by public edict. We condemn you to formal imprisonment in this
Holy Office at our pleasure. As a
salutary penance we impose on you to recite the seven penitential psalms once a
week for the next three years. And we
reserve to ourselves the power of moderating, commuting, or taking off, the
whole or part of the said penalties and penances."
Galileo retracted his
position about the stationary position of the sun and movement of the earth
around the sun after spending some time in prison.
Copernicus,
on the other hand, did not have to deal with the Church. Copernicus continued to publish his work that
the earth revolves around the sun.
Copernicus is now considered by some to be the father of modern astronomy,
which is predicated upon the earth traveling around the sun. There still may exist some individuals on
this earth who accept the literal word of the Holy Scripture that the earth is
the center of the world. Those
individuals are in the minority since the landing of Apollo on the moon in
1969.
Astronomy
was not the only natural phenomenon which was infected with error. The care and treatment of the human body was
fraught with pseudoscience. George
Washington, commander of the American Revolutionary War Army and First
President of the United States of America, was stricken with pneumonia on
December 13, 1799. He was cared for by
his personal physician, Dr. Craik and two consulting physicians, Drs. Dick and
Brown. In spite of having his veins cut
to let the bad blood flow out of his body, Washington died the next day,
December 14, 1799.
Henry
Clutterbuck, MD, a member of the Royal College of Physicians, presented a paper
in London in 1840, entitled On the Proper Administration of Blood-Letting,
for the Prevention and Cure of Disease. He
wrote:
"The importance of blood-letting, as
a medicinal agent, in comparison with other means of cure, is shown in various
respects...it is the least equivocal of remedies: its good effects, when properly administered,
are, in most cases, so immediate and striking as not to be mistaken...In short,
blood-letting is a remedy which, when judiciously employed, it is hardly
possible to estimate too highly."
He also considered the various methods of
blood-letting.
"Different methods are in use for
taking away blood from the system, for therapeutic purposes; as, 1st by
phlebotomy, or venesection, where the blood is drawn from one or more of the
larger external veins that are conveniently situated for the purpose; 2dly, by
arteriotomy, or the puncture of an artery, which is sometimes resorted to;
3dly, by scarification of the superficial vessels, with or without the aid of
the syringe, or cupping-glass; 4thly, by leeches, which are likewise in
frequent use. These different modes of
abstracting blood from the system have their respective advantages and disadvantages,
which require discussion, the one mode being often applicable, where the others
are less appropriate."
There
may be some members of the medical community who may continue to endorse
blood-letting as a cure today. However,
it does not seem to be in great favor.
The
Church and self-important bodies continued to issue pronouncements about
physical phenomenon which were not clearly understood well into the early
1800's. An interesting example of such
pseudoscience relates to Robert Fulton's steamboat.
Fulton
was born in Lancaster, Pennsylvania in 1765.
His father died just before the outbreak of the Revolutionary War when
Robert was eight. Robert was raised in
genteel poverty. He was socially
acceptable, became a painter, and had the good fortune to have one or more
benefactors. He went to England in 1786
and accepted the patronage of Viscount William Courtney. While he was in England, he learned about
Watts steam engine and how it could produce motive power.
Fulton
went to France where he met Joel and Ruth Barlow. The Barlows accepted him and introduced him
into Paris society. Through the Barlows,
he met Robert N. Livingston, who had been sent to France by President Thomas
Jefferson to negotiate the right of American vessels to sail the lower
Mississippi. Livingston was fascinated
with Fulton's idea of a steam powered boat and the two became partners on a
handshake.
Fulton
proposed to Citizen General Napoleon in 1802 that the French government finance
Fulton's construction of a self-propelled boat operated by steam. The French Academy of Science called the
steam powered boat "an insane idea, a gross blunder and
absurdity." The Catholic Church,
being infallible, declared a steam powered boat to be a heresy stating:
"In the beginning, fire and water
were separated by special ordinance from the Creator, and man has no right to
join together what He has put asunder."
In spite of the
opposition by the Catholic Church and the French Academy of Science, Fulton and
Livingston built a steam powered boat.
On August 9, 1803, the Fulton steamboat traveled three miles per hour on
the Seine River in Paris.
Fulton
and Livingston returned to the United States.
Fulton proceeded to build a steam powered boat with Watts steam engine
as the source of power. In August of
1807, Fulton's steamboat, the Clermont, made its maiden voyage on the
Hudson River between New York and Albany.
Thus, though the French Academy of Science thought the idea absurd and
the Church considered it heresy, the steam powered boat became the vehicle of
choice for commerce in the United States in the early 1800's.
The
automobile, another means of transportation, made its importance felt in the
United States at the start of the twentieth century. It changed the way of life for America. It also produced an interesting quirk in
American city architecture. The
automobile was fueled by gasoline. The
fear of a gasoline fire was heartily recognized by many experts. Fire experts and city fathers wished to
protect the homes of the citizenry from the likelihood of a gasoline fire. In order to protect dwellings, ordinances
were enacted that required that an automobile garage be positioned at a safe
distance from a dwelling. Thus, the
dwelling would have some degree of protection should there be a gasoline fire
in the structure housing the automobile.
The
result of this concern for gasoline fires can still be seen in some towns and
villages that do not have alleys.
Garages are placed at the back of the property, spaced away from the
dwelling, and a driveway extends from the street through the length of the
property to the garage. This concern for
the likelihood of gasoline fires began to wane with the passage of time. By the third decade, the ordinances no longer
required that the garages be spaced away from the dwelling and attached garages
became popular and generally accepted.
Pseudoscience
is still in vogue in medicine. In the
late 1980's, a theory was propounded that chronic fatigue syndrome was created
by prolonged exposure to environmental level power line frequency
electromagnetic fields. There were
newspaper articles, magazine articles and television reports of how persons and
animals living near power lines were adversely effected because of fundamental
disruption of the central nervous system.
Though this theory was espoused by pseudoscientists, there was no clear
evidence that the electromagnetic frequency is the cause of chronic fatigue
syndrome. The advocates seem to be
diminishing since there is no clear scientific evidence to support the causes
of chronic fatigue syndrome.
Evidence
is often produced in a courtroom to advance a case that a certain disease is
caused by a particular substance, so that the damaged party has a right of
recovery from someone who produces the substance. Dr. Gary Ordog was trained in emergency
medicine. He spent 17 years at the
Martin Luther King/Drew Medical Center in Los Angeles. He now holds himself out as an expert witness
in lawsuits to testify that mold can cause a terrifying array of diseases from
lung cancer to sclerosis of the liver.
His rate for expert testimony is $9,800, plus $975 per hour. Dr. Ordog's testimony is often the basis for
a judgment against a defendant for diseases caused by mold. On the other side, the American College of
Occupational and Environmental Medicine says that mold exposure does not cause
significant diseases. It leaves it to a
jury to decide whether mold is the culprit in a given case.
Cancer
of the lungs caused by prolonged inhalation of asbestos results in the sufferer
dying by suffocation. The prenitious
effect of asbestos lead to a number of lawsuits against producers of asbestos
and users of asbestos. These lawsuits
caused a demise of some companies and decimated the assets of the
shareholders. On the other hand, it made
fortunes for some plaintiff's lawyers, as well as physicians. The Rand Corporation estimates that over
Forty Billion dollars has been awarded in compensation to sufferers of asbestos
poisoning. In order to provide for
persons who are suffering from asbestos poisoning, trusts have been set up
wherein a person suffering from asbestos poisoning need only show that the
individual is suffering from asbestos poisoning, then that individual receives
compensation from the trust. The typical
way of showing that someone is suffering from asbestos poisoning is to provide
a medical history of the individual showing exposure to asbestos, along with
x-rays showing how the lungs are effected by the asbestos. The x-rays are accompanied by a report by a
radiologist to form the basis for recovery from the trust.
An
industry has developed for the collection of compensation from various asbestos
and silicosis trusts. A law firm will
engage in a medical screening company to screen individuals to determine
whether individuals are suffering from asbestos poisoning. The screening company will go into an area
where asbestos had been produced or used and advertise that free screening will
be available to persons who were exposed to asbestos and possibly compensation
will be recovered for those who are unfortunate enough to suffer from asbestos
poisoning. The screening company will
rent a ballroom, American Legion hall, or some other area. Portable x-ray equipment will be
installed. Employees will interview the
prospective claimants to establish their medical history and exposure to
asbestos. The prospective claimants are
x-rayed. The x-rays are then read by a
radiologist. The medical history and
x-rays are then submitted to the trust by the law firm to collect compensation
for the claimant after the costs of the examination and attorney's fees are
deducted.
At
least one radiologist has spent his entire working time reviewing x-rays in the
last ten years. Ray A. Harron was
graduated from New York Medical College in 1957. He completed an internship at the U.S. Marine
Hospital in 1958. He was a radiology
resident in New Orleans and then moved to West Virginia in 1961 where he
practiced as a radiologist for more than 30 years. In the mid-1990's, he stopped treating
patients and began reading x-rays and identifying possible cases of
dust-related diseases. In 1994, his
medical reports supported fewer than 2,000 claims from the Manville trust. The next year, the number grew to 6,000. He averaged 6,430 reports each year
thereafter.
Dr.
Harron reviewed as many as 150 x-rays a day and produced medical reports for
$125 for each x-ray. Additionally, if he
had to travel from West Virginia, he might charge an additional basic charge of
$10,000 for travel expenses. Dr.
Harron's credibility came into issue before Judge Janis Graham-Jack in the U.S.
District Court in Corpus Christi, Texas.
Judge Jack found that when Dr. Harron first examined 1,807 x-rays for
asbestos litigation, he found them all to be consistent with asbestos and not
with silicosis. After re-examining the x-rays of the same 1,807
people for the silicosis litigation, Dr. Harron found evidence of silicosis in
every case. The judge found that the
diagnoses were manufactured for money and imposed sanctions on one of the
plaintiff law firms. Judge Jack wrote:
"The record does not reveal who
originally devised this scheme, but it is clear that the lawyers, doctors and
screening companies were all willing participants."
The Manville trust no
longer accepts claims based upon Dr. Harron's expert opinion.
Different
sides on a medical question are always of interest. The question is whether pseudoscience is in
place.
Obesity
is now one of the buzz words in medicine.
In March, 2004, four scholars from the Center for Disease Control and
Prevention issued a report stating that 400,000 people a year in the United
States were dying early as a result of obesity.
More importantly, obesity may pass smoking as the country's leading
cause of death. One of the scholars was
Julie Gerberding, who earlier compared the obesity epidemic with the plagues of
the middle ages. The media found the
announcement to be particularly newsworthy and there were over 1,400 articles
on the mortality competition between smoking and obesity.
In
April, 2005, a research report offered a different perspective. This report was led by Center for Disease
Control and Prevention epidemiologist, Catherine M. Flegal. This later report estimated that
obesity-driven deaths were 112,000 and added that moderately overweight people
gained some protection from the extra poundage so that net deaths from
overweight were in the neighborhood of 26,000.
The new finding removed obesity from a marauding killer to 7th place in
the list of causes of death published by the Center for Disease Control and
Prevention behind gun-related incidents.
The second report showed that there were major statistical errors in the
first report. The most egregious error
dealt with the population sample which was the basis for the first report. A standard approach for epidemiological
studies is to first gather health data on a cross section of the population in
some past period. Then over time,
observe death rates of different groups in the sample. There are three large population samples which
are customarily used. One sample was
created in 1971-73. Another in 1976-80
and a third in 1988-94. The first paper
which provided the media basis for the widely reported news only used the first
sample for its follow-up study. Thus, it
used the mortality rates of the obese and the non-obese put together in the
early 1970's. This distorted reality
that obesity causes deaths primarily because it is associated with higher
levels of cardiovascular disease. The
treatment of heart attacks and strokes has improved steadily and enormously
over the past 30 years. Obviously,
obesity was far more life threatening to the first population than those in the
latter samples. Thus, generalizations drawn from the first group are not
transferrable to those who are obese today or even those who were obese in the
years covered by later samples. The
second study showed that obesity-caused deaths declined by 63%. Pseudoscience is alive and well even in the
Center for Disease Control and Prevention.
Personal
prejudice is often disguised as morality which is predicated upon a
questionable scientific opinion. The
morning-after pill has generated heated national debate. Some pharmacists refuse to fill prescriptions
for the morning-after pill on moral grounds, that is, the pill causes an
abortion.
There
are many theories about the morning-after pill, but the mechanics of the
morning-after pill or Plan B pill is still unclear. The morning-after pill is designed to be
taken by a woman to prevent pregnancy after having had unprotected sex the
night before. The National Institutes of
Health, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the American College of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists take the position that the pill effects
contraceptive prevention of pregnancy.
The operation of the pill prevents the egg from being released from the
ovary. Thus, the sperm does not
impregnate the egg and there is no pregnancy that follows.
On the
other hand, the Family Research Council and the Catholic Conference of Illinois
take the position that the pill is one that causes abortions.
The
anti-abortion doctors and the anti-abortion activists argue that the pill does
not always block ovulation. Rather, if
the egg has left the ovary and has become impregnated with the sperm. In those cases, the pill would abort the
early embryo by "probably causing changes in the uterine
lining." This change in the uterine
lining prevents the fertilized egg from attaching itself to the uterus and
proceed to grow. This change in the uterine
lining may be the same as the change in a uterine lining which occurs with a
nursing mother who may not become pregnant for approximately six months. Another postulate is that the pill causes the
egg to coat so that the sperm is unable to penetrate the coating and impregnate
the egg.
The
problem for both sides is that there is no way to determine when fertilization
has taken place inside the body. Thus,
the position as to what happens when an egg has left the ovary is unclear and
some positions are predicated on pseudoscience.
It is
difficult for scientists to acknowledge ignorance especially when
representatives of the news media are seeking definitive answers. Furthermore, definite pronouncements by
scientists are reported by the media while those scientists who plead ignorance
are ignored. Thus, the media encourages
pseudoscience. The next time an
announcement is made that scientists have discovered something, a question
should be raised as to what evidence supports the disclosure. It may be more prudent to withhold blind
acceptance and comment "Really?"