Do you want Tony Blair as EU President?

Well, if you don't, then add your name to this petition:

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stopblair.html

And pass the message on

Could this be the question?

Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of legislation to protect (a) whistleblowers and (b) press freedom following the injunctions obtained in the High Court by (i) Barclays and Freshfields solicitors on 19 March 2009 on the publication of internal Barclays reports documenting alleged tax avoidance schemes and (ii) Trafigura and Carter-Ruck solicitors on 11 September 2009 on the publication of the Minton report on the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast, commissioned by Trafigura.

Trafigura and Carter-Ruck threatening democracy

Trafigura is a large (and I mean LARGE)  company which trades in oil and similar things. They have been (allegedly) caught dumping very nasty things in Africa which ave injured, maimed and killed people.

Carter-Ruck are lawyers who work for Trafigura, and Carter-Ruck decided to stop the Guardian reporting a question to be raised in Parliament! Yes, really!

Anyway, the full details are eloquently reported here by MJR:

http://www.layscience.net/node/687

What we have is a wonderful example of the Streisand Effect, where the attempted muzzling has resulted in vastly greater  public exposure than would have happened if they had done nothing.  

So, pass it on; spread the word........

Some sense on the so called Macclesfield Forum

Pete makes a fine point:

"I'm not sure, reading Vic Barlow's column this week, if we should rage with anger or laugh with the joy of someone seeing the light.

Vic doesn't once mention here his own highly relevant experience - he ran a forum and allowed people to be 'spiteful' on that forum precisely because those who administered Barlow's Beef turned a blind eye to all of the vices he notes in this article. He allowed people to use untraceable email addresses; he allowed people to use proxy servers; he didn't like people being 'anonymous' (remember how he used to say 'everyone knows who I am'? -or how forumster Frank Fisher screamed out 'make everyone use their name!') but he allowed anonymity to reign; and he knew, damned well, that multiple IDs were being used.

We should be grateful he has learned - but more than a little surprised that he makes no mention of Barlow's Beef in the piece in today's Macclesfield Express:

http://www.macclesfield-express.co.uk/n ... er_bullies"

More grubby obscenity from "Old and"

Oh dear, Mr or Ms "Old and" is back with their obscene bile. Regrettably I am unable to publish this contribution as it is a string of obscenities and perrverted insults and is quite unsuitable for a public forum.
One does have to wonder at what drives this person. It seems that they don't like anyone having views other than their own, but fail to express what those views are, or anything except puerile insults and filth. Stripping out the nastiness, their comment was, in essence, that I should not be allowed to contribute to online discussions because they don't want me to! Make of that what you will. They seem, simply, to want to shut down free expression in the Macc media. It is telling that one of their comments (and about the only one repeatable) was that they wanted me banned from the internet. Now what could frighten them so much that they would want to ban someone from expressing their opinion?
Given the strange ad homs I do wonder abut this person's prejudices, fears and fantasies; they clearly need some help or is it perhaps that they maybe a danger to others? I still have this vision of the park flasher, or, having read their latest attempted contribution, maybe something darker and more sordid.
They do seem to be worried about being a sock puppet though! Given some of the obsessions they raised, I suspect this may be "Macc Man" who seems to be either a sock puppet or a clone. The posts online are either indications of sock puppetry or the vicious thug (to quote another local blog, albeit one that seems to be moribund) on the old ASTM who apparently threatened violence against some others, definitely launched an astonishing series of ad hom attacks against others and is reported to have lied about other contributors. NB. The current leaders of the so called "Macclesfield" forum have welcomed him with open arms! This person exhibited the same fear of rational debate as the sock puppets. Not much difference between them.
They are clearly not particularly brave though.

For the record, my moderation policy is to avoid cutting posts with the exception of personal insults, obscenity, filth, illegality and anything that may compromise anyone's desire for privacy. Discussion about evidence and opinions etc are welcomed.

So if "Old and" can come here and enter a discussion then he or she will be welcomed. He or she does not have to agree with me or anyone else, but just to join in discussion.
That is, after all, the basis of most internet forums and blogs.

Anyway, let's see if Mr or Ms sordid reappears..................

Beware the Spinal Trap

Beware the Spinal Trap

The following is a reprint of an article by Simon Singh that appeared in the Guardian last year. It is highly critical of significant aspects of chiropractic. As a result the British Chiropractic Association decided to sue Simon Singh.

The article is being posted and reprinted on many blogs and in magazines as a sign of solidarity with Simon as he fights this misconceived libel case. His lawyers have edited several sections that are at the heart of the BCA claim. As you can see, the substantive article remains – that chiropractors lack evidence for their treatments. I believe it is in the public interest that such criticism is not allowed to be stifled by the legal actions of vested interests.

Some practitioners claim it is a cure-all, but the research suggests chiropractic therapy has mixed results – and can even be lethal, says Simon Singh.

You might be surprised to know that the founder of chiropractic therapy, Daniel David Palmer, wrote that “99% of all diseases are caused by displaced vertebrae”. In the 1860s, Palmer began to develop his theory that the spine was involved in almost every illness because the spinal cord connects the brain to the rest of the body. Therefore any misalignment could cause a problem in distant parts of the body.

In fact, Palmer’s first chiropractic intervention supposedly cured a man who had been profoundly deaf for 17 years. His second treatment was equally strange, because he claimed that he treated a patient with heart trouble by correcting a displaced vertebra.

You might think that modern chiropractors restrict themselves to treating back problems, but in fact some still possess quite wacky ideas. The fundamentalists argue that they can cure anything, including helping treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying – even though there is not a jot of evidence.

I can confidently label these assertions as utter nonsense because I have co-authored a book about alternative medicine with the world’s first professor of complementary medicine, Edzard Ernst. He learned chiropractic techniques himself and used them as a doctor. This is when he began to see the need for some critical evaluation. Among other projects, he examined the evidence from 70 trials exploring the benefits of chiropractic therapy in conditions unrelated to the back. He found no evidence to suggest that chiropractors could treat any such conditions.

But what about chiropractic in the context of treating back problems? Manipulating the spine can cure some problems, but results are mixed. To be fair, conventional approaches, such as physiotherapy, also struggle to treat back problems with any consistency. Nevertheless, conventional therapy is still preferable because of the serious dangers associated with chiropractic.

In 2001, a systematic review of five studies revealed that roughly half of all chiropractic patients experience temporary adverse effects, such as pain, numbness, stiffness, dizziness and headaches. These are relatively minor effects, but the frequency is very high, and this has to be weighed against the limited benefit offered by chiropractors.

More worryingly, the hallmark technique of the chiropractor, known as high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust, carries much more significant risks. This involves pushing joints beyond their natural range of motion by applying a short, sharp force. Although this is a safe procedure for most patients, others can suffer dislocations and fractures.

Worse still, manipulation of the neck can damage the vertebral arteries, which supply blood to the brain. So-called vertebral dissection can ultimately cut off the blood supply, which in turn can lead to a stroke and even death. Because there is usually a delay between the vertebral dissection and the blockage of blood to the brain, the link between chiropractic and strokes went unnoticed for many years. Recently, however, it has been possible to identify cases where spinal manipulation has certainly been the cause of vertebral dissection.

Laurie Mathiason was a 20-year-old Canadian waitress who visited a chiropractor 21 times between 1997 and 1998 to relieve her low-back pain. On her penultimate visit she complained of stiffness in her neck. That evening she began dropping plates at the restaurant, so she returned to the chiropractor. As the chiropractor manipulated her neck, Mathiason began to cry, her eyes started to roll, she foamed at the mouth and her body began to convulse. She was rushed to hospital, slipped into a coma and died three days later. At the inquest, the coroner declared: “Laurie died of a ruptured vertebral artery, which occurred in association with a chiropractic manipulation of the neck.”

This case is not unique. In Canada alone there have been several other women who have died after receiving chiropractic therapy, and Edzard Ernst has identified about 700 cases of serious complications among the medical literature. This should be a major concern for health officials, particularly as under-reporting will mean that the actual number of cases is much higher.

If spinal manipulation were a drug with such serious adverse effects and so little demonstrable benefit, then it would almost certainly have been taken off the market.

Simon Singh is a science writer in London and the co-author, with Edzard Ernst, of Trick or Treatment? Alternative Medicine on Trial. This is an edited version of an article published in The Guardian for which Singh is being personally sued for libel by the British Chiropractic Association.

Grubby obscenity and a nasty contributor

Sadly I have had to delete a comment, posted by Mr or Ms "Oldand". The comment was so grubbily obscene that I could not put it on a public board.
Now, it does raise questions about this person's motives and, possibly, their mental state. What I suspect it that he or she is one of those who restrict or try to restrict free expression and discussion in our locality; either a Maccforum clone or one of the current infestation of puppets at the Express. Rather than simply accepting that people have differing views and the right to express them (which should be particularly important when you claim to be offering a forum for the community and when you appropriate the name of that community for your forum), these people want to restrict them, which is a shame.
The comment that this individual posted was really rather disturbing. I would worry, for example, about this person being around children or vulnerable people. I have an image of him or her thumbing though the dictionary to find rude words and get a little excitement. My other, and less nice, image is of them in a grubby mac, flashing in the local park.
Let's hope that he or she keeps his or her sordid little fantasies to him or herself in future.