Cultural Dwarfs and Junk Journalism Ben Goldacre, Quackbusting and Corporate Science Martin J Walker Slingshot Publications London 2008 Cultural Dwarfs and Junk Journalism Ben Goldacre, Quackbusting and Corporate Science First Published January 2008 © Slingshot Publications 2008 BM Box 8314, London WC1N 3XX, England Type set by Viviana D Guinarte in Times New Roman & Verdana Edited by: Rose Shepherd and Viviana D Guinarte Cover Design by Andy Dark [email protected] British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Written by Martin J Walker Cultural Dwarfs and Junk Journalism: Ben Goldacre, Quackbusting and Corporate Science. 1.Ben Goldacre 2. Corporate Science 3. Quackbusters 4. Pharmaceutical companies 5. Lobby Groups. 6. Journalism 7. The Guardian Newspaper ISBN 10 0-9519646-9-0 ISBN 13 978-0-9519646-9-9 This book is given away as an e-book subject to the condition that it shall not, as a whole, or in parts, by way of trade or other- wise, be lent, resold, hired out, or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form, with any cover, or any layout, than which it is published in this Pdf, and without a simi- lar condition being imposed upon the subsequent receiver. Selected non-continuous pieces of the text may be quoted in reviews and other works or campaigning leaflets and pamphlets or on the internet. You cannot hope to bribe or twist, Thank God, the British Journalist, For seeing what the man will do Unbribed, there’s no occasion to.1 Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible …2 Health fraud activists tend not to be scientists them- selves, but journalists, philosophy lecturers, sociolo- gists and others in ‘soft’ disciplines. They claim to be on the side of Science, but when results appear which contradict their prejudices, they try to ‘debunk’ them, heap abuse on them, and finally simply ignore them.3 What is true cannot be minted into a falsehood, even by the most distinguished professor.4 1 Anon. 2 Malcolm, Janet. The Journalist and the Murderer. Bloomsbury. London 1991. 3 Adams, Jad. Dirty tricks to discredit alternative medicine. i to i, April-June 1994. 4 Samuel Hahnemann. Dedication To Jacques Benveniste 1935-2004 and all the innocent, honest and principled victims of mercenary skeptics and quackbusters. C O N T E N T S vii Introduction ONE 1 The campaign against Patrick Holford TWO 19 The return of a bad bug THREE 25 The Placement 52 MMR 62 Electro Magnetic Sensitivity 79 Homoeopathy FOUR 89 Returning to Holford 94 Attacks on nutritionists FIVE 149 Conclusions 149 Conclusion I 152 Conclusion II 154 Conclusion III A P P E N D I C E S ONE 159 Some notes on skepticism TWO 205 Beware the ambassadors of science THREE 209 The Skeptic connection FOUR 215 Subjects on Cloquhoun’s web site FIVE 217 HealthWatch web links SIX 219 The other medicine SEVEN 225 Advertising Goldacre EIGHT 229 Another placement NINE 241 The usual dog’s dinner TEN 243 Holford’s reply to Colquhoun’s Nature article ELEVEN 245 Burne’s responses to Goldacre TWELVE 253 Professor Simon Wessely 259 Index Introduction Broadly speaking, the essay that follows is the latest addition to my ongoing analysis of the British corporate science lobby and its popu- lar campaigning arms, skeptics and quackbusters.5 Specifically, the essay focuses on attacks on Patrick Holford, the independent nutri- tionist, while trying to place the quackbusting journalist Ben Goldacre, who began this round of attacks, in a social and political context. In its method, the essay suggests ways of investigating and pre- senting information about quackbusters, whether they appear dis- guised as journalists or lecturers in Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM). The object of the essay is to familiarise contempo- rary activists in the area of alternative health with quackbusters and to give some suggestion as to how they might be exposed and cam- paigned against. As I explain later, a great deal has changed, especially in relation to the structure of the quackbuster campaign in England over the past decade; the initial amateur campaign begun in the mid eighties is now a professionally-organised lobby. But something else has changed – something that bodes ill for honest journalism and the integrity of the scientific community. As I described in my book Brave New World of Zero Risk,6 the pro-industrial science lobby now professes a philo- sophical position that should be untenable to any sane person in a 5 The other books in this series are: - Walker, Martin J., Dirty Medicine: Science, big business and the assault on natural health care. Slingshot Publications. London, 1993. 2nd edition, 1994. - Walker, Martin J., Skewed: Psychiatric hegemony and the manufacture of mental ill- ness in multiple sensitivity, Gulf War syndrome, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome. Slingshot Publications. London, 2003. - Walker, Martin J., Brave New World of Zero Risk: Covert strategies in British sci- ence policy. Slingshot Publications, 2006. Available as an e-book from: www.slingshotpublications.com 6 Ibid, Brave New World of Zero Risk. VIII Cultural Dwarfs and Junk Journalism developed society. Previously, the campaign maintained that it was unlikely that industrial or environmental factors were responsible for ill health. It now holds that technological development, and major industries such as the biotech and pharmaceutical industry, are incapable of creating human health damage: there is, in the view of The Lobby, no such thing as an adverse reaction. What was originally the ‘Health Fraud’ movement has joined with the pro-industrial science and technology lobby7 and they now travel this road together. The results of this growth in the movement and the concentration of its message were inevitable, and have been far-reaching. While pre- viously therapists and doctors, together with schools of thought, came under attack, now the attacks include as targets, the victims of adverse reactions and the damaged consumer and citizen on a much wider scale. The Lobby has left in the wake of its campaign against the envi- ronmental causes of illness, large groups of people suffering from so called ‘undiagnosed’ illnesses. From the mid-Eighties, when the pres- ent strategy was being resolved, people with myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) were publicly insulted by academics, clini- cians, lobby activists and politicians.8 Everything was done in relation to them except to carry out clinical investigations on their behalf; instead, it was said that they were mentally ill. Although this strategy 7 It was always difficult to give a name to the ‘Health Fraud’ movement, as they called themselves, or as part of it was, the ‘anti-quackery’ movement. Now that these groups are all part of the industrial science and technology lobby, I have chosen to call them collectively The Lobby, as they constitute in their various forms the biggest lobby, organised against the recognition of all kinds of environmental health hazards in Britain. 8 Op. cit., Skewed. Also, Williams, Margaret, Denigration by Design: A review, with references, of the role of Dr Simon Wessely in the perception of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME), Vol. 1. 1987 – 1996 & Vol. II. 1996 – 1999. Published pri- vately, for information contact, the Environmental Issues Forum, C/o, 176, Perth Road, Ilford, Essex IG2 6DZ. Also, the archive of the One Click Group: http://www.theoneclickgroup.co.uk Introduction IX has been evident over the past two decades in the Lobby’s continuous assault upon those who have ME-like illnesses and such things as Gulf War syndrome, it has come to a head recently, with the cases of vac- cine-damaged children and their parents.9 The Lobby will do everything in its power to ensure that no clin- ical or popular media voice is given to those who experience adverse reactions to new drugs or new technologies. It accuses those who try to speak out about adverse reactions to these, not just of bad science, but of being liars and cheats whose analysis, especially if they are ill, stem from mental instability. If any of these straw men are knocked down, being disproved by proper scientific inquiry and clinical research, The Lobby simply moves on in the hope that no one is tracking their performance. A clas- sic example of this is its early attack on those who suffered from or advocated diagnosis of food intolerance or allergy. From the early Eighties, as more cases of food intolerance began to be reported, industrial interests in Britain and America reported that both sufferers and therapists who claimed that this was a real phenomenon were mentally unstable or in the pay of vitamin companies and New Age Health gurus, that they had commercial interests in attacking dairy farming and additive manufacturers.10 Advocates of these theories were active in all the major institu- tions of health in Britain, and managed to influence large bodies of general practitioners, consultants Associations and societies.11 There came a time, however, when the objective clinical evidence began to outstrip the absurdity of the idea that everyone who claimed to have 9 See my reports of the GMC ‘fitness to practice’ hearings against Dr Andrew Wakefield, Professor Simon Murch and Professor Walker-Smith on: www.cryshame.com 10 Op. cit., Dirty Medicine. 11 See the Report of the Royal College of Physicians: Allergy: Conventional and alterative concepts, 1992. This report was completely taken over by the Campaign Against Health Fraud and written for the RCP by non-doctor Caroline Richmond, the founder of CAHF. (Cont.) X Cultural Dwarfs and Junk Journalism an allergic condition was mentally ill.