Medical hypotheses
-
Fake treatments work. That is a well established medical fact. This is why the golden standard of evidence-based medicine requires double-blind testing. ⋯ The hypothesis shall have to be tested experimentally, before "meta-placebo" treatments can become evidence-based medicine. Such validation involves several medical philosophical complications. How can the hypothesis be tested following the golden double-blind standard? What syndrome would be suited for a meta-placebo-experiment? What would a treatment in a meta-placebo experiment look like? How can meta-placebo be distinguish from placebo? What ethical aspects do meta-placebo's have? This article discusses these questions in detail.
-
The inverse association between maternal folate status and incidence of infants born with neural tube defects (NTD's) was recognized over twenty years ago and led the US health agencies in the early 1990s to recommend that women of childbearing age consume 400 microg of folic acid each day. The FDA followed by mandating that certain foods be fortified with folic acid and this has resulted in a significant enhancement of maternal folate status to levels that are often difficult to otherwise achieve naturally. At least one study indicates that this has decreased the incidence of NTD's. ⋯ This also points directly to an increased rate of births of infants with higher postnatal requirements for folic acid needed for normal methylation during this critical neurodevelopmental period. If these numbers have increased then so have the absolute number of infants that after birth fail to maintain the higher folate status experienced in utero thus leading to an increased number of cases of developmental disorders such as Autism. Detection of the C677T polymorphism as well as other methionine cycle enzymes related to folate metabolism and methylation at birth as part of newborn screening programs could determine which newborns need be monitored and maintained on diets or supplements that ensure adequate folate status during this critical postnatal neurodevelopment period.
-
Although the classical ideal is that scientific theories are evaluated by a careful teasing-out of their internal logic and external implications, and checking whether these deductions and predictions are in-line-with old and new observations; the fact that so many vague, dumb or incoherent scientific theories are apparently believed by so many scientists for so many years is suggestive that this ideal does not necessarily reflect real world practice. In the real world it looks more like most scientists are quite willing to pursue wrong ideas for so long as they are rewarded with a better chance of achieving more grants, publications and status. The classic account has it that bogus theories should readily be demolished by sceptical (or jealous) competitor scientists. ⋯ If zombie science is not scientifically-useable--what is its function? In a nutshell, zombie science is supported because it is useful propaganda to be deployed in arenas such as political rhetoric, public administration, management, public relations, marketing and the mass media generally. It persuades, it constructs taboos, it buttresses some kind of rhetorical attempt to shape mass opinion. Indeed, zombie science often comes across in the mass media as being more plausible than real science; and it is precisely the superficial face-plausibility which is the sole and sufficient purpose of zombie science.