Podcast appearances and mentions of Ben Goldacre

Hello everyone! Thanks to Tom's holiday and Stuart's job we weren't able to record this week, so we've put out a classic paid episode to tide you over. We hope this goes some way to scratching your Studies Show itch.Most people think it's obvious that you should wear a helmet when cycling. It might save your life if you fall off and hit your head. Duh.But over the years, many contrarian arguments have pushed back against this seemingly-obvious point. What if people engage in “risk compensation”, where they cycle more dangerously because they know they're wearing a helmet? What about if encouraging helments puts people off cycling so they miss the health benefits?In this March 2024 episode of The Studies Show, Tom and Stuart try to work out who's right.Show notes* The original 1975 study on what's become known as the “Peltzman Effect”: risk compensation (in this case about car safety)* Potential evidence for risk compensation in AIDS* Claims of risk compensation relating to mask-wearing at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic* The eye-tracking study on helmet-wearing, which used the Balloon Analogue Risk-Taking lab task* n=27 study on helmets and cycling with one hand on the handlebar* Study on risk compensation with the following confusing structural equation model diagram:* Academic cycles around and records thousands of cars passing him while he's either wearing or not wearing a helmet* Forbes article about the statistical controversy over these data* Bizarre study on how motorists “dehumanize” cyclists* Could helmets make “rotational injuries” worse?* Cochrane review on cycle helmets and injuries from 1999* Ben Goldacre and David Spiegelhalter on cycle helmets - “uncertainty… is unlikely to be substantially reduced by further research”* Systematic review on helmet use and injuries from 2016* Review of meta-analyses from 2023* 2006 BMJ article finding “no clear evidence” that mandating cycle helmets reduces injuries* Negative correlation between cycle numbers and helmet usage, across different countriesCreditsThe Studies Show is produced by Julian Mayers at Yada Yada Productions. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thestudiesshowpod.com/subscribe

- Murder of Jamie White and CIA Propaganda (0:00) - Chase Geyser's Swatting Incident (2:13) - Globalist War and UK Government Corruption (6:20) - Chase Geyser's Testimony on Swatting (9:35) - Elon Musk and the Enemies List (14:28) - Preparation for Cyber Attacks and Power Grid Disruptions (16:51) - Interview with Tina from the Satellite Phone Store (18:15) - Practical Solutions for Survival and Preparedness (42:03) - Final Thoughts and Call to Action (1:04:40) - Book Review: Bad Pharma by Ben Goldacre (1:04:57) - Special Report: Economic Activity and Government Waste (1:11:27) - Interview with Steve Quayle: World War Three Threat (1:23:19) - Special Report: Global Depopulation and Technocratic Elite (1:31:17) - Special Report: Economic Implications of Robotic Automation (2:02:54) For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport NaturalNews videos would not be possible without you, as always we remain passionately dedicated to our mission of educating people all over the world on the subject of natural healing remedies and personal liberty (food freedom, medical freedom, the freedom of speech, etc.). Together, we're helping create a better world, with more honest food labeling, reduced chemical contamination, the avoidance of toxic heavy metals and vastly increased scientific transparency. ▶️ Every dollar you spend at the Health Ranger Store goes toward helping us achieve important science and content goals for humanity: https://www.healthrangerstore.com/ ▶️ Sign Up For Our Newsletter: https://www.naturalnews.com/Readerregistration.html ▶️ Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/hrreport ▶️ Join Our Social Network: https://brighteon.social/@HealthRanger ▶️ Check In Stock Products at: https://PrepWithMike.com

This week, we're joined by Ben Goldacre, a renowned doctor, academic, author, and journalist. His books include “Bad Science” and “Bad Pharma,” among others, and he is currently a Professor of Evidence-Based Medicine at University of Oxford. There, he runs the Bennett Institute for Applied Data Science which aims to pioneer the better use of data, evidence and digital tools in healthcare and policy. Patrick and Ben discuss Join Patrick and Ben for an open conversation about Ben's choice to step back from the public eye and the power of the OpenSAFELY platform to improve security, transparency and analysis of Electronic Health Records.

In this week's podcast:   How AI will affect the clinician-patient relationship? Our annual Nuffield Summit roundtable asks how the promise of tech tools stacks up against reality, and how the future of the therapeutic relationship can be protected (participants below).   Your code is as important as your methods, which is why The BMJ now requires you to share it - Ben Goldacre and Nick De Vito, from the Bennett Institute for Applied Data Science at the University of Oxford, explain why it's so important, and how The BMJ's new data and code sharing policy could change research transparency.   Nye Bevin set up the NHS when the UK was in the economic doldrums, and the public's need for care was becoming an emergency - BMJ columnist Matt Morgan has helped turn that story into a play, currently showing at the National Theatre; and reflects on the parallels between now and then.   1:58 Nuffield Summit roundtable 17:32 New BMJ rules on data and code sharing 29:03 Aneurin "Nye" Bevan play   Taking part in our roundtable were: Rebecca Rosen, Senior Fellow at the Nuffield Trust and GP Juliet Bouverie, CEO of The Stroke Association Daniel Elkeles, CEO of London Ambulance Service Neil Sebire, Professor and Chief Research Information Officer at Great Ormond Street Hospital Reading list: How is technology changing clinician-patient relationships? Mandatory data and code sharing for research published by The BMJ Scalpels and spotlights: bringing theatre to the theatre

What does per capita GDP tell us about the UK economy? Did the government spend £94bn helping with rising energy prices? Was Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg right about the cost of the EU covid recovery scheme? How did Ben Goldacre persuade scientists to publish all their medical research?Tim Harford investigates the numbers in the news.Presenter: Tim Harford Reporters: Nathan Gower and Lucy Proctor Producers: Debbie Richford, Perisha Kudhail, Olga Smirnova Series producer: Tom Colls Production co-ordinator: Katie Morrison Sound mix: Neil Churchill Editor: Richard Vadon

Ben Goldacre continues this week explaining that it is teams of specialists working together which produce the ideas and methods for health research projects.

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_what_doctors_don_t_know_about_the_drugs_they_prescribe ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/116-academic-words-reference-from-ben-goldacre-what-doctors-dont-know-about-the-drugs-they-prescribe-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/QwMwROb1NRo (All Words) https://youtu.be/EHPoX5CsO4U (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/nteZi1G-i-4 (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_battling_bad_science ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/211-academic-words-reference-from-ben-goldacre-battling-bad-science-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/hk44pEn1_vo (All Words) https://youtu.be/A6n4PYuRTZk (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/S-MZ9h7F9n8 (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

In this episode, Martin speaks to Ben Goldacre, a psychiatrist and science writer who wrote the ‘Bad Science' column for the Guardian from 2003 to 2011 as well as four books – he is also a founder of the AllTrials campaign and OpenTrials, which call for greater transparency on clinical trials. They discuss the responsibilities of the media as gatekeepers, being sued for libel, and the Barbie Liberation Organisation – and much more.Episode transcript available at bma.org.uk/inspiringdoctorsThe interviewees on this podcast are just a selection of those who communicate medicine in fantastic ways. To join the conversation on social media and tell us about doctors whose communication skills inspired you, tag @TheBMA on Twitter and Instagram, and use #InspiringDoctors. For more information visit: bma.org.uk/inspiringdoctors Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Six Foot Penis Man or Tiny Man? Rich is back with another compilation of some of the best answers to the most popular emergency questions - watch out Channel 5! This week he's asking if comedians and celebrities would prefer to date a man who was a six foot tall penis or a man who, instead of having a penis has a tiny man down there. It produces some surprising answers from guests including Katherine Ryan, James Acaster, Sarah Millican, Ben Goldacre and Mary Lynn Rajskub. And the amazing thing is it's like none of them had ever been asked this question before.SUPPORT THE SHOW!Come and see us live GIGSWatch our TWITCH CHANNELSee extra content at our WEBSITE Become a member at https://plus.acast.com/s/rhlstp. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Do you consider yourself an inspiration? Most of us don't. But everybody has the capacity to inspire others to act and, in L&D, that's basically part of the job! In this episode of The Mind Tools L&D Podcast, Ross G and Owen are joined by author and adventurer Sue Stockdale, the first British woman to ski to the Magnetic North Pole. We discuss: ·       Sue's background and adventures ·       How we as individuals can inspire and motivate others ·       How to scale inspiration across an entire organization. To find out more about Sue, visit: https://suestockdale.com/ In ‘What I Learned this Week', Owen discussed the strange goings on at Reddit:  nytimes.com/2023/06/16/style/whats-going-on-with-reddit.html Ross discussed Dr Libby Sander's article on the psychological impact of where we work: news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/disastrous-experiment-real-reason-behind-hated-return-to-work-push/news-story/6f377ea396388a531de6cedf89936fe5 And Sue discussed positive visualization, leading to an unexpected appearance from Ben Goldacre's Golden Arse Beam: theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jul/08/bad-science-effective-things-silly-places For more from us, including access to our back catalogue of podcasts, visit mindtoolsbusiness.com. There, you'll also find details of our award-winning performance support toolkit, our off-the-shelf e-learning, and our custom work.   Connect with our speakers    If you'd like to share your thoughts on this episode, connect with our speakers: ·       Ross Garner - @RossGarnerMT or on LinkedIn ·       Owen Ferguson - @OwenFerguson or on LinkedIn ·       Sue Stockdale - @SueStockdale or on LinkedIn

…FYI, that's not James Randi talking This week we reflect a bit on the Eurovision Song Contest and how people misunderstand the news about a baby “with three parents”. In TWISH we wish Ben Goldacre a happy birthday and then Pontus brings us up to date with Pope Frankie. And then, of course, the news: GERMANY: The Golden Board Award is back! IRELAND: AI is here to stay: Fake article about fake tanning in the Irish Times UK: Retractions should not take longer than two months, says UK Parliament committee GERMANY: The schools that train ‘Heilpraktiker' in Germany: no standards and no control UK: Lost in the mall: Are the results of the classic false memory study not valid? “Voices from the Void” maybe hearing things, but the voices in their head do not include James Randi. Hear this instead: you are Really Wrong! Enjoy! Segments: Intro; Greetings; TWISH; Pontus Pokes The Pope; News; Really Wrong; Quote And Farewell; Outro; Out-Takes

This week, Josh and Nayana are joined by Ben Goldacre and Nick De Vito from the Bennett Institute for Applied Data Science at the University of Oxford. In a wide-ranging conversation, they explore how the Bennett Institute develops tools and platforms to enable safe, secure health analyses and promote open science.The Bennett Institute can be found online at https://www.bennett.ox.ac.uk and @BennettOxford on Twitter. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit skeptechs.substack.com

WHAT IS THE POTENTIAL OF EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE? British Physician, Ben Goldacre, 2013 says “I think there is a huge prize waiting to be claimed by teachers. By collecting better evidence about what works best and establishing a culture where this evidence is used as a matter of routine, we can improve outcomes for children, and increase professional independence.” Watch this interview on YouTube here https://youtu.be/Uh1BZOTGZQc On today's Episode #269 we will cover ✔  Professor Michael S.C. Thomas' new book Educational Neuroscience: The Basics ✔  Where is educational neuroscience NOW? Where it began, and where it's going. ✔ How this book can help students improve how they learn.  ✔ How this look at Educational Neuroscience can help us to become better teachers. ✔ The difference between evidence-based and neuroscience-based. ✔ Where we should ALL begin. What IS the BASICS of Neuroscience? ✔ What makes something forgettable and another thing memorable? ✔ Ways to make learning easier.   Welcome back to The Neuroscience Meets Social and Emotional Learning Podcast where we bridge the gap between theory and practice, with strategies, tools and ideas we can all use immediately, applied to the most current brain research to heighten productivity in our schools, sports environments and modern workplaces. I'm Andrea Samadi and launched this podcast almost 4 years ago, to share how important an understanding of our brain is for our everyday life and results. This season (Season 9) we will be focused on Neuroscience: Going Back to the Basics for the next few months, as we welcome some phenomenal pioneers in the field of Neuroscience, paving a pathway for all of us to navigate our lives with more understanding with our brain in mind. My goal with this next season (that will run until the end of June) is that going back to the basics will help us to strengthen our understanding of the brain, and our mind, to our results, and provide us with a springboard to propel us forward in 2023, with this solid backbone of science.  Today's guest and EPISODE #269, I've been wanting to have on this podcast since I came across his work in the field of educational neuroscience around the time we interviewed Dr. Daniel Ansari, back in June 2021 for EPISODE #138.[i] I saw their Annual Research Review: (called) Educational Neuroscience progress from April 2019, written by Michael S.C. Thomas, Daniel Ansari and Victoria C.P. Rowland that provided a thorough overview of the origins of educational neuroscience, outlining where it began, the challenges it faces as a “translational field” and addressed it's major criticisms.  I immediately wrote down Michael S.C. Thomas' name, along with his email address, to reach out to him to learn more of his perspective in this field. Since I was interviewing Dr. Daniel Ansari, it brought something to light for me that the people who write these research reports that we find on Pubmed.gov, are working hard somewhere, and not completely out of reach if you really want to find them, and ask them some questions about their work.  When I finally emailed him, I was thrilled to hear he had a NEW book Educational Neuroscience: The Basics[ii] and am grateful to have this opportunity to speak with him about this new book. Before we meet our next guest, Michael S.C. Thomas, let me orient you to his work. Michael S. C. Thomas is a Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience at Birkbeck University of London. Since 2010, he has been Director of the Centre for Educational Neuroscience, a cross-institutional research centre which aims to further translational research between neuroscience and education, and establish new transdisciplinary accounts in the learning sciences. In 2003, Michael established the Developmental Neurocognition Laboratory within Birkbeck's world-leading Centre for Brain and Cognitive Development. The focus of his laboratory is to use multi-disciplinary methods to understand the brain, including behavioural, brain imaging, computational, and genetic methods. In 2006, the lab was the co-recipient of the Queen's Anniversary Prize for Higher Education, for the project “Neuropsychological work with the very young: understanding brain function and cognitive development”. Michael is a Chartered Psychologist, Fellow of the British Psychological Society, Fellow of the Association for Psychological Science, Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy, and board member of the International Mind Brain and Education Society. Let's meet Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience, Michael S. C. Thomas, from Birkbeck University of London and see what we can learn about Educational Neuroscience: The Basics. Welcome Michael, thank you for sticking with me as we made this interview happen. I've been wanting to speak with you for so many years that I was trying to change Wednesday yesterday to Thursday to speed up time because I know how important this new book is, and am so very grateful for this chance to learn more about this topic directly from you. Thank you for being here today. INTRO: How did you find your way towards studying the brain as it relates to our educational system and establish the Developmental Neurocognition Laboratory within Birkbeck's Centre for Brain and Cognitive Development? If I look at Unlocke.org[iii] is this where your research is based? Moving towards your NEW book, Educational Neuroscience: The Basics that is the reason we are here today, what can you tell us about writing this new book with Cathy Rogers, who moved to this field of neuroscience after years of producing science television shows. I can only imagine how her background in television and film contributed to this book. Q1: When I first came across your work, it was when I was interviewing Dr. Daniel Ansari, and I found the Annual Research Review[iv] you wrote with him and Victoria Knowland. I don't often sit and read through Pubmed in my spare time, but I was working on a paper for a Neuroscience Certification that required me to know how to navigate through the research,  and after reading your report, this was the first time I was ever aware of criticisms in this field (this was before I learned about the Reading Wars[v]). Then I read Dr. Ansari's review Bridges over troubled waters[vi] and I wonder if you could bring our listeners up to speed of where this field began, where it is now (you say “it's barely out of the gates” and where do you see it going? Q2: This brings us back to your new book with Cathy Rogers, Educational Neuroscience: The Basics that is an introduction to this interdisciplinary field. British physician Ben Goldacre said that there's “a huge prize waiting to be claimed by teachers” with this book. What are your goals with this book, Educational Neuroscience: The Basics, and how do you see it improving outcomes for students, like Ben Goldacre mentioned, while “increasing professional independence” for our next generation of teachers? Q3: I've seen some graphics made over the years that show how Neuroeducation consists of the Pedagogy of Education and Learning, Neuroscience, with the brain and its functioning, and Psychology, combining the mind and behavior. (The 3 circles interconnecting) with Neuroeducation in the middle.  With your research between neuroscience and education, and your background in psychology, how would you draw this diagram? What disciplines would you say make up Educational Neuroscience? Q3B: I loved seeing a book that really does go back to the basics. This is fundamental for all of us, whether we work in the classroom with our students, in sports environments, or in the corporate workplace. I saw some of your testimonials at the start of the book say that “this book is essential reading for anyone who wants to learn how the brain works to enable learning” and after reading Chapter 1, I wonder “why do we need educational neuroscience, how can it help us to understand how we learn, and help us to become better teachers? Andrea thinks that Michael has answered this question, with the idea that we want our students to use movement, manage their emotions, and social interactions, so these don't get in the way of learning, thinking and cognition. Q4: Can we go next to the research. This question would benefit those who create programs for schools, or for those who are selling programs to schools, or even for those who work in schools to understand this difference. I've spent countless hours (from a program creator point of view) trying to figure this out for certain funding buckets. What is the distinction between “evidence-based” and “neuroscience-based and does one provide a more guaranteed outcome for student success?” Q5: When I read of the survey you mentioned of the teachers of Wellcome Trust (Simmonds, 2014) that found a high level of interest in neuroscience and 60% of teachers said they “knew little” about how the brain works, and 82% said they wanted to learn more, it reminded me of why we launched this podcast to help bring together all the leaders in the field like you said to address this “unmet appetite for neuroscience knowledge.” But then when asked about their current use it was noted there were many tools, and products that claimed to boost a student's brain level, without the evidence. I know that CASEL has a program rating system for social and emotional learning programs, but what do you is there a rating systems for neuroscience or evidence- based programs? Q6: I love that you quoted David A. Sousa (Hart, 1999, Sousa, 2011) in Chapter 1 with his quote that “teachers are the only people whose specific job is to change the connections between neurons in their students' brains.”  He's been on our podcast twice, most recently EP197[vii] with his 6th edition of How the Brain Learns was our third most listened to episode of 2022. I've got to say that when I was first handed his books back in 2014, and asked to add neuroscience to the character and leadership programs I had created for the school market, I took one look at the images of the brain, or even how our memory works, and I felt overwhelmed, and almost didn't go in this direction. What would you say to someone who looks at the word neuroscience, and feels the same level of intimidation that I felt in the beginning. Where should someone begin? What are the BASICS of Neuroscience? Plasticity Learning and Altering Neuron Connections Memories/Forgetting Q7: What makes something unforgettable while other things we struggle to remember?   Q8: To sum this all up, In chapter 5, Thinking is Hard, and different types of memories perform different types of functions, or working with memory for specific things or events. Then you cover “We feel, therefore we learn.” (Immordino-Yang & Damasio). What should we all take away to help us to all understand Neuroscience: The Basics and make learning easier?       If thinking is hard, why is learning harder? What makes learning easier?   Michael, I want to thank you very much for taking the time to come on the podcast (all the way from the UK) and for sharing your new book Neuroscience: The Basics with us. For people who want to purchase the book, is the best place https://www.routledge.com/Educational-Neuroscience-The-Basics/Rogers-Thomas/p/book/9781032028552#     CONTACT MICHAEL S.C. THOMAS Email m.thomas@bbk.ac.uk Research Unlocke.org   BUY Educational Neuroscience: The Basics   Educational Neuroscience: The Basics by Cathy Rogers and Michael S.C. Thomas Published November 15, 2022 https://www.routledge.com/Educational-Neuroscience-The-Basics/Rogers-Thomas/p/book/9781032028552#   Amazon https://www.amazon.com/Educational-Neuroscience-Basics-Cathy-Rogers/dp/1032028556   Professor Michael Thomas at Birkbeck University of London https://www.bbk.ac.uk/our-staff/profile/8006159/michael-thomas#overview   Center for Educational Neuroscience http://www.educationalneuroscience.org.uk/   YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMlW1aThiDY5TB8uxS3DU0w       Stay tuned for Michael's NEXT book How the Brian Works.   Thank you!   REFERENCES:   [i] https://andreasamadi.podbean.com/e/professor-and-canada-research-chair-in-developmental-cognitive-neuroscience-and-learning-on-the-future-of-educational-neuroscience/   [ii] Educational Neuroscience: The Basics by Cathy Rogers and Michael S.C. Thomas Published November 15, 2022 https://www.routledge.com/Educational-Neuroscience-The-Basics/Rogers-Thomas/p/book/9781032028552#   [iii] https://www.unlocke.org/team.php   [iv] Annual Research Review: Educational neuroscience: progress and prospects by Michael S.C. Thomas, Daniel Ansari and Victoria C.P. Knowland (April 2019)  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6487963/   [v] The Reading Wars by Nicholas Lemann  https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1997/11/the-reading-wars/376990/   [vi] Bridges over troubled waters: education and cognitive neuroscience by Daniel Ansari, Donna Coch March 10, 2006 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16530462/   [vii] Neuroscience Meets Social and Emotional Learning Podcast EPISODE #197 with David A Sousa on “What's NEW with the 6th Edition of How Your Brain Learns” https://andreasamadi.podbean.com/e/returning-guest-dr-david-a-sousa-on-what-s-new-with-the-6th-edition-of-how-the-brain-learns/

For this episode I am very excited to talk to Ben Goldacre. Ben has an outstanding career in medicine, science and science communication and is the author of many articles and books, like e.g. "Bad Science". Today is he running the Bennett Institute for Applied Data Science in Oxford, UK.I met with Ben Goldacre earlier this year (2022) to discuss his report on 'Better, Broader, Safer: Using Health Data for Research and Analysis'. This report, published in April 2022 and commissioned by the UK government, is based on more than 300 individual interviews and many more with key stakeholder groups. One of the key findings and recommendations is the need for proper software engineering. Needless to say that RSEs play an important part in this. In fact, Ben has been a strong supporter and promoter for Research Software Engineering as well as open science and software. Here a few linkshttps://www.phc.ox.ac.uk/team/ben-goldacre Ben Goldacre's web-sitehttps://twitter.com/bengoldacre Ben on Twitterhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/better-broader-safer-using-health-data-for-research-and-analysis - 'Better, Broader, Safer: Using Health Data for Research and Analysis' report, April 2022https://www.bennett.ox.ac.uk Bennett InstituteLicence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/Support the Show.Thank you for listening and your ongoing support. It means the world to us! Support the show on Patreon https://www.patreon.com/codeforthought Get in touch: Email mailto:code4thought@proton.me UK RSE Slack (ukrse.slack.com): @code4thought or @piddie US RSE Slack (usrse.slack.com): @Peter Schmidt Mastadon: https://fosstodon.org/@code4thought or @code4thought@fosstodon.org LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/pweschmidt/ (personal Profile)LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/codeforthought/ (Code for Thought Profile) This podcast is licensed under the Creative Commons Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

“If you want to reduce suffering and death, you don't do that by depositing a PDF in a journal archive that gets read by eight people. You've got to go out there in the real world, you've got to change activity and behaviour.”  In this week's episode of The G Word, Chris Wigley is joined by Ben Goldacre, Director of TheDataLab at Oxford University, author and and lead on an upcoming review about better use of NHS data. He discusses the use and safety of data, his book Bad Pharma and OpenSAFELY. He also talks about his early career and connecting data.   

A special episode featuring doctor, academic, writer, and broadcaster Ben Goldacre. The author of Bad Pharma, Bad Science and other titles, Ben's books have sold over 600,000 copies – and his TED talks have had over 4 million views.Ben now runs the Data Lab at Oxford University, working with a multi-disciplinary team of academics, healthcare providers and software developers. Last year, just as the COVID-19 pandemic hit, your donations helped us support the Open Safely project that Ben and his colleagues pulled together amazingly rapidly. It's been hugely influential in transforming the way health records are analysed by researchers – and had immediate impact in helping the UK government make decisions about how to respond to the pandemic.As well as getting to know Ben a little better, we'll also be asking him to take on our 60 second challenge. Can he explain the world of health data analysis in language so simple a nine year old can understand it? We'll find out…Help us fund more cutting edge research to bring hope to the millions living with lung conditions in the UK: asthma.org.uk/hopemachineSee acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Is The U.S. Healthcare System Failing Due to Greed, Ignorance, or Arrogance? Featuring Dr. Robert Yoho What's wrong with America's healthcare system? We are the richest most developed country in the world and we refuse to take care of our own. Even if you have decent insurance you have to fight for everything you get. Forget about those uninsured for whatever reason. We can and should be committed to doing much better. Let's start demanding more. Now!!! About Dr. Robert I was born in l953 in Richmond, Virginia, and grew up in Kent, Ohio, (known for the Kent State riots during the Vietnam war), was an Eagle Scout, and a Judo wrestler. I spent four years at Oberlin College and went to Small College National Championships in Varsity Wrestling my senior year. Then, was accepted at one of the finest medical schools in the United States, Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. At 22 years old, one year into my medical education, I decided that I needed to “find myself” and took a two-year sabbatical. After starting and managing a tree surgery business, I went to Wyoming to work on oil drilling rigs, and then spent the next year traveling to rock climbing areas. I became a master climber and traveled to cliffs in twelve states. Additionally, I published articles in climbing magazines and made “first ascents” at Devil's Tower, Wyoming, and Joshua Tree, California. I made an early ascent of “The Naked Edge,” a classic climb near Denver, and climbed the Long's Peak Diamond. As recently as the mid-1980s, I climbed such difficult classics as Astroman, the west face of El Capitan, and the Crucifix in Yosemite, free climbing up to a mid-“5.12” difficulty level. I climbed the Regular Northwest Face of Half Dome in 18 hours in 2004 and the Nose route on El Capitan in less than 24 hours in 2005. After returning to medical school in l978, I found that bodybuilding complemented my studies. With the added responsibility of specialty training and professional pressures, I had less opportunity for athletics in the past decade. However, I ran 14 triathlons in the late '80s and early '90s and made time for some Kempo Karate (though injuries sidelined me). I have practiced Astanga (flow) Yoga and trained with the legendary 70-year-old master Yogi, Frank White, at the “Center For Yoga” in Hollywood. More recently, I practiced Bikram Yoga and concluded, “it's way hot in there.” (105 to 115 degrees F). I currently practices Baptiste Yoga every day. I married a wonderful woman from Trinidad and had three kids. My son Alan became an All American cross country star in high school, and he and his twin Sarah graduated from Brown University. He now works at Google and Sarah at Nasdaq. Hannah, their older sister, managed a group at the Four Seasons Resorts by the time she was 24. Curriculum Vitae: cosmetic surgery career (now retired) DATE OF BIRTH October 3, 1953 INTERESTS Children, weight lifting, rock climbing, psychology, writing, kayak, Ashtanga and Bikram yoga. Bookworm: Reading averages 3 new books a week. Climbed El Capitan 4 x, Half Dome, Sentinel, Astroman (5.11c), Crucifix (5.12b) in Yosemite. New routes: a grade 5 in Zion and El Matador (5.11) at Devil's Tower, others at Joshua Tree. Climbed regular route on Half Dome in 17 hours 2004. EDUCATION 1971-1975 : Oberlin College Oberlin, Ohio 1975-1981: Case Western Reserve Univ. Medical School 10900 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, Ohio. 44106-4920 POSTGRADUATE TRAINING 1981 – 1982: Internal Medicine Internship R 1 year University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 1982 – 1983: Dermatology Residency R 2 years Hanover, New Hampshire at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center One Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, New Hampshire 1983 – 1985: Emergency Medicine Residency Training Los Angeles County Hospital LAC/USC Medical Center 1200 N. State St. Room 1011, Los Angeles, CA Huntington Memorial Hospital, Pasadena, CA WORK HISTORY 2020-2021 full-time writer. 2019: retired from my medical and surgical practice and resigned my medical license. I had a fantastic career, and I was initially sad to end it. But I was soon relieved that I was no longer responsible for patient care and was able to write full time without conflicts of interest. See also the first chapter of Butchered by Healthcare for the circumstances, included on this website under “Writing.” 1992-2019: Cosmetic surgery practice, Pasadena, Visalia, and Oxnard, California. Liposuction, breast implantation specializing in through the umbilicus (belly button), laser blepharoplasty, face-lifts, facial implants, laser resurfacing, vein treatments, hair transplantation. Operated medical hyperbaric chamber between 1996 and 2000. 1987-1994: General practice in Pasadena, California. 1984-1987: Employed by the Huntington Memorial Hospital Emergency Medicine Group, SPECIAL EXPERTISE One of the most extensive experiences in the United States with tumescent liposuction and Brazilian butt lift with fat. Some of our liposuction supply vendors say we are their largest account internationally for several years. Trans-umbilical breast augmentation is a surgery that many try, but few become proficient. Thousands performed. One of only two surgeons in the United States who passed the specialty boards in both cosmetic surgery and emergency medicine. PAST MEMBERSHIPS IN PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES Los Angeles County Medical Society California Medical Association American Society of Cosmetic Breast Surgery Fellow, American Academy of Cosmetic Surgery ACADEMIC STAFF APPOINTMENTS (INACTIVE) Drew-King Medical Center, assistant clinical professor, Department of Dermatology. Training residents in cosmetic surgery techniques. BOARD CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS TAKEN AND PASSED (NOW INACTIVE): American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM), 1987. Re-certification examination passed l999 and 2009. 3000 Coolidge Rd., East Lansing, Michigan 48823-6319 American Board of Dermatologic Cosmetic Surgery passed in 1999. Recertification passed ten years later. 18525 Torrence Ave., Lansing Illinois 60438. (708) 474-7200. American Board Laser Surgery passed in 2000. 417 Palmtree Dr. Bradenton, Florida 34210-3009. ACLS re-certification 1999, 2002, 2005. ATLS in past. Member, Fellow, and Past President, American Society of Cosmetic Breast Surgery: testing included written and oral examination as well as peer observation of surgical technique. PEER REVIEW WORK Produced with Robert Goldweber, M.D., Socrates Emergency Medicine Oral Boards Review Course, 1987. This was distributed nationwide for over 5 years. Emergency Medicine Residency Director Huntington Memorial Hospital (coordinated and trained Los Angeles County Hospital emergency medicine residents) 1985-1987. Board of Directors of California Academy of Cosmetic Surgery, 1998-2000. Outpatient surgical facilities reviewer training for IMQ surgical centers and AAAHC surgical centers. (Inactive) Testified before California Medical Board 6/01 regarding liposuction standards and 11/02 regarding expert witness problems. Robert Yoho Website – Hormone Secrets and Butchered by Healthcare www.robertyohoauthor.com www.feedingfatty.com Full Transcript Below Is The U.S. Healthcare System Failing Due to Greed, Ignorance? Featuring Dr. Robert Yoho Wed, 7/21 1:13PM • 1:08:42 SUMMARY KEYWORDS drug, people, doctors, studies, book, good, called, money, influence, fda, problem, patient, alzheimer, industry, patent, hormone, healthcare, crazy, years, standards SPEAKERS Dr. Robert, Terry, Roy Barker   Roy Barker  00:00 One. Hello and welcome to another episode of Feeding Fatty. I'm your host Roy.   Terry  00:08 I'm Terry   Roy Barker  00:08 Of course we are the podcast journaling chronicling our journey through this wellness process. You know, in the beginning, we talked a lot about diet, not a necessarily a diet, but you know what we eat, what, what we're trying to cut down on and be more healthy eating. We also talk a lot about exercise getting out and moving.   And we talk about mindset as well. That has kind of been the point it's led us to a lot of people know what they should be doing, trying to get in the right mindset to make the change, and then also to make it sustainable. That seems to be the difficulty and the challenge for us. But anyway, we also bring guests on from time to time experts in the field today is no different. We are very lucky to have Robert Yoho with us and I'm gonna let Terry introduce him.   Terry  00:55 Now. Robert Yoho is 67 years old. He has spent three decades as a cosmetic surgeon after a career as an emergency physician. His generalist training gives him perspective and allows him to avoid favoring any medical specialty. He's had little deal dealings with hospitals, Big Pharma or insurance companies before he wrote his his book Butchered by Healthcare. No one has ever considered him a whale prescriber or device device implanter he retired from the medical practice in 19. Excuse me, 2019 1999. Dr. Yoho, thank you so much for being on the show. We're so happy to have you as a guest.   Dr. Robert  01:38 Thanks, Terry. Well, let me just go over my sequence which led to my interest in this field. Yeah, I have all things. I did a career in cosmetic surgery, doing breast dog breast implants, liposuction, you know, facial, beautification, all that stuff. And I had two people in six months die in my offices. Oh, wow. And so that was quite a timeframe, introspection, and one of them I wasn't even operating on but it still was a heck of a shock.   And, you know, cosmetic surgeons or plastic surgeons usually have one fatality in surgery during their careers. And I'd had to in a very short sequence, so I started thinking and reading and I started uncovering what I later became started to think of as medical corruption. And so the basic, you know, I'm listening to your guys podcasts. And I see, it's an interesting process, because you have not had chronic diseases, you haven't had to worry about your health, you're, you're pulling your way through this material and thinking you're smelling a rat somewhere, that there's some. And I can tell you, after four years of studying this material, there's a lot wrong. And the bottom line is that we spend twice what the other developed countries spend per person, twice what Japan, Great Britain, France, and so on, and Canada spends per person.   In other words, we spent nearly 20% of our gross domestic product on health care, right? And twice as much per person. And the worst part is we get a bad product, okay? In other words, aren't we have earlier infant mortality. And it's not an academic controversy 50%, fully 50% of what we do, either doesn't work or actually is harmful. And there's many references for that you can look at my book butchered by healthcare to get more detail. But, but it doesn't work. Now, the simple bottom line for how this all developed is we raise money out of the sky, on our health care providers and the healthcare industry.   We gave them our insurance money, we gave them our federal Medicare money. And it was when free money happens, there's a lot of people come around to scoop it up. And these are entrepreneurs, you know, or possibly criminals, you know, that that got into this thing. Now, I'm not saying it's all bad, I don't want to make that message. You know, half of it works, you know, and a half as important and we have new therapies for certain things that are profoundly effective. But and the way these people have influenced our prescribing and the medical devices, and the insurance industry, is essentially through bribery.   Now bribery is a technical term, that term means something in legal jargon, so I really shouldn't use that term, but it's anytime money changes hands, the well is poisoned. And as we You see, you'll see when we go through these various medic medical specialty, there's a lot of money changing hands between industry and the rest of of the medical service providers. I mean, it's a phenomenal thing.   And so the important point, which you can read, if you start looking at influence theory in psychology, is that any amount of money changing hands profoundly affects the person's behavior, even taking a woman out to dinner and serving her a nice meal, you can get benefits that are far beyond the the cost of that meal. You know, that's a simple thing that drug reps come into their offices feed us food. And we think it doesn't influence our behavior, but it does. And it's a terrible thing. So that's the basic setup of medical care worldwide, but particularly in America.   And I'm, before I let you guys start the questions, I'm just going to tell you the three central insights I had during my study of this, and I didn't learn this right away. But the first one I've already mentioned, and that's the updated Golden Rule. And that is, those are the gold make the rules, right? That's, and the second is, science is being used to obscure the truth. Okay. So if you don't understand it ROI, that doesn't mean you're a dummy. What that means is somebody is BSE, you know, because you're just as smart.   As a storyteller, you're smart as the average physician. And sometimes, if you learn too much detail, that actually obscures the truth, because you don't need to be an academic to judge ethics. The last thing is, and this is the important one, if there's controversy about something, that doesn't mean that there's controversy, that means that it doesn't freaking work. Right? If if there's controversy, confusion, or contradictory evidence, don't fall into the trap of believing reasonable people disagree? Because you know, and I know, they've studied hundreds, if not 1000s of patients to produce the controversy. So forget about it, it doesn't work.   So you read a study that says, we don't know for sure they got these barely statistically significant figures or something like that, it means it doesn't work. So that's a good rule of thumb. I mean, I can't state that absolutely. Blanket fashion. But it, it is a good place to start. So ask me anything you want, I can develop the medical specialties or the insurance industry or, you know, a lot of other areas where we've essentially   Roy Barker  07:31 gone off the rails and say, Man, I got a I got a flat. But let's start out with your first concept. The, you know, the golden rule the people with the money, Mike the rule, because there's not only a lot of influence between the the pharmaceuticals and the doctors, that I would suspect with lobbyists and everything else, there's a lot with our lawmakers as well.   Dr. Robert  07:54 Yeah, the lobby for healthcare is far bigger than oil and gas and banking combined is, is monstrous. pharma has a $1.3 trillion gross worldwide, and it's something is well over half the profits occur in the United States and 40% of the sales, it might be 70 or 80% of the profits. So these guys have money to burn.   Roy Barker  08:19 One of the things that just just now thought of this when we were when you were doing your intro is is there a way to track the if I'm a drug maker cannot track the the doctors that are prescribing as though   Dr. Robert  08:33 they track a track exactly who it is. And I here's how they do it. They go to the pharmacy and they get the prescriber number, and then they go to the AMA, and the AMA sells them. The doctors name that associates with a prescriber number the AMA is a very economic organization. They shouldn't be doing this in my opinion. Yeah.   Roy Barker  08:55 Yeah. Because it's good to   Terry  08:56 know I was gonna say it's backlinks, it's like SEO, you know, computerized everything. It's all I don't even know where I was going with that, because I have so many things running through my head, I can't even form a good one.   Dr. Robert  09:12 Let me give you a stunning example of how money pollutes I mean this, this one is going to be hard for you guys to believe. But oncology is one of the most heavily influenced or, you know, cancer therapy. The cancer doctors is one of the most heavily influenced specialties and the reason is, well over half of their incomes come from retailing cancer drugs, they get about 25% and the average cancer drug costs $100,000 a year.   So these guys have these chairs, right the cancer chemotherapy chairs, the more chairs they have and the more patients they have, the more they can bill and they clip 25% off the top of the drugs price. Now you think this is terrible, but it's gets worse. It gets worse. This would be If a doctor sold them the drug, so another doctor, the drug, it would be called camping. It's a federal crime, they put both of them in jail. But the drug companies are allowed to do this because of some sort of exception. Now it gets even worse, they are rewarded, they are rewarded by the milligram. In other words, larger doses make more money for them. So they are incentivized to prescribe very high doses of whatever the most expensive thing is.   Now, I mean, doctors have integrity, we're trained to have ethics in a way that no other industry is. And you know, we're pretty good bunch. But I just want to say that there's no way anyone can get around a financial incentive, even a small one. And these guys well over half of their income, on average comes from far from sales of these drugs that they deliver in the office. Some of the other specialties, like the guys doing the testosterone blockers like Lupron to the best of my knowledge, they get, you know, the shot costs $10,000 or whatever the heck it is, takes two minutes. The doctor gets 25% It's crazy. I mean, it's absolutely crazy.   And that one that was a whole nother story. And that's it's a very damaging drug of questionable utility. According to Otis Brawley, who is the head of the American Cancer Society. Until recently, he thinks that it does more harm than good on average, because the drug actually, you know, the, the prostate cancer is cut by the fatalities are cut by a third, by using that drug. It sounds great, right? But the drug causes so many problems, the overall fatalities probably go up. I mean, it's just crazy. And you know, it's kind of not joke jokingly, but not jokingly, we listen to, especially during the evening news when we listen to these commercials, and they come out with the drug that helps you with this.   And then they've got 10 minutes worth of countries in the world ROI that allow that, yeah, that's direct to consumer advertising. It's an outrage, it got slowly slanted into our system over a period of five to 10 years, when they finally figured out there were no direct laws against it. And it's a complicated political battle, but they these pharmaceutical companies, is very effective is very effective, even though you're not sure what the hell it is, when they're talking about it on the TV. Ask your doctor, and then they go in and ask the doctors and the doctors are so busy. What are they going to do a lot of times they just write for the drug? Yeah,   Roy Barker  12:30 yeah. Well, nothing I was gonna say is they have like 10 minutes worth of but the side effects that this may cause, I mean, in some of the side effects that they list, it's like, wow, I would rather have whatever they're trying to treat is not near as harmful as all these potential side effects that they have. It's crazy. The studies are frequently   Dr. Robert  12:51 obscure the side effects and they measure, they, they measure, they're looking under the money tree, and not the tree of truth. You know what I mean? So, Ben Goldacre wrote a book about the frauds involved in pharmaceutical and device studies. And there are there are, I mean, you cannot imagine what these guys do.   They they mess with the statistics, they conceal studies that don't. Right, and they cherry pick their results in various ways. They change people and put them in the wrong group. So it looks like there are fewer fatalities. I mean, the HPV vaccine, you've heard of that it's a vaccine for venereal warts that supposedly affects cervical cancer. Well, they conceal 50% of the studies. And in my view, the best commentators at Cochrane you know, the Cochrane Institute in Europe, which does meta analyses, they don't think it works, you know, and at least the most sophisticated ones don't think it works. I mean, it's there.   They're influenced by pharma money also. So Japan abandoned the use of HPV, or at least they said it didn't work to their populace, and their inoculation rate dropped to 1% in one year. So that's the truth. They've got a public health system at least as robust as ours. And they they don't use HPV vaccine in any consequential fashion. The rest of the world still on it, pretty much. Yeah.   Terry  14:26 I was gonna ask, so what's the role? No, this is open up a can I was asked, What's the role of the FDA and all of this?   Dr. Robert  14:34 Okay. So the, the FDA, I have a chapter in butchered by healthcare about the FDA and the FDA is the most effective regulatory agent see in the world, but unfortunately, they are since 2003. A law was signed into effect that we could no longer negotiate prices with these. These pharma companies and Since then they've they've just bought everything and the prices have gone way up. But the the the FDA is fed or their revenues come from what's called user fees that the pharmaceutical companies pay them and well over half of their some some sources say 75% or more of their total budget of $5 billion is it comes from directly from pharma.   So they regard pharmaceutical companies as clients, rather than or entities to be regulated because if they refuse a drug, sometimes they can't make their own payroll. Now, you got to realize the the size of these entities they have to regulate, they have $5 billion, which sounds like a lot of money. But pharma is 1.3 trillion worldwide, 40% in the US, and the FDA doesn't have a prayer of watching all these factories in India and China. Inside the US, they inspect them once a year. And they you know, they do a little better job.   But in China, they all these there are the all these stories about these FDA inspectors getting fed fake facilities and fake paperwork and room. It Catherine even wrote a book called bottle of lies, if you're interested in the FDA and, and all that stuff. It's very illuminating. And it really gives you the feeling that the generics, we were I think were 90% generics because we've been so we've been so overpriced by the patent drugs, the patent drugs are good quality, they're actually what they are. They're manufactured under strict controls, but they're so expensive.   And they these guys have decided the price point of making them outrageous is the best strategy. And I guess it is they don't have to do as much and they sell all these things like, like bottled gold. And so we are buying 90% of our medications from India and China's about half and half. And these the generics often are adulterated with some in bad ingredient or they don't work as well. The long lasting generics physicians have often discovered that the long lasting generics are only they only last 12 hours instead of 36 hours.   Cleveland Clinic It was so bad at Cleveland Clinic that they developed their own mini FDA and they started testing their own medications. And they they found out what worked and what didn't. In Africa and other third world less advantaged countries that don't even have an FDA. The physicians keep a small stock of the good drug, the actual patent drug to use on people who are dying, that were the other drug doesn't seem to be working. And so they have to experiment with their patients. But the FDA is a mess. I have insiders quotes from whistleblowers and so on and so forth. But, I mean, it's the best any country has it's better than the one in Europe, you know, or who are who are respected.   Roy Barker  18:02 You know, also anyway. Yeah, unless it's a, you know, on the other show that we have, we've talked a little bit about the new release of the   Terry  18:12 Doom, Doom, that new Alzheimer's drug.   Dr. Robert  18:15 Oh, yeah, that's an outrage. Okay, so the there are about 10 of these patent Alzheimers drugs, and they cost probably a couple $1,000 a month. At a minimum, you know, they're very expensive. It might might only be $1,000 a month, what a bargain. But even the people who work with those drugs and you read their papers, they can't claim they freakin work. I mean, they, they have some small effects. But like the rest of these drug studies, they're basically half fake and half concealed.   And they use contract research groups, and out of the country, and if these guys don't produce the results that they want, they never use them again, you know, so. So anyway, so Alzheimers is a special case. This is very interesting subject because it's Alzheimer's is arguably the most expensive if long term care costs are included is the most expensive disease of all, but we've got excellent, we have an excellent thing to prevent Alzheimer's, right. So in my second book, on hormones, I showed how Astra dial prevents 50 to 80% of all Alzheimers, I mean this could save billions of dollars if it was used and not concealed right and not not derided basically.   Roy Barker  19:42 Yeah, well, this. I'll let Terry's speak a little more to it because she she's done the research but this new adullam it's $56,000 a year. But what they thought mine can't be what what they need, though, They found out two years from now. They found out that the committee that was assigned to assign it what our scientists study it, when they went ahead and said, okay, it's okay for sale. I think 10 of the 11 doctors that were on the panel all resigned because they had already it's it's not   Terry  20:22 it was a it was a an 11 member panels, three of them resigned. And their their vote, the voting on it was there. 10 of them said no, don't release it. And then one was uncertain. And then the FDA went ahead and said, Okay, well, they manipulate it seems like to me, they manipulated the study process, or, you know, the results that they got, and and made it   Roy Barker  20:48 and Okay, and then now I think there's an investigation. Yes, a lot. This   Dr. Robert  20:52 is a, this is a story you'll see over and over and over. And I've got stories like that all through my book, The tragedy of this whole thing, as you guys are finding out, you if you have a chronic disease, and Roy has a problem here. I mean, I think your problems simple compared to someone with cancer, but and you know, the the, the variety of you anyway, so but the tragedy is that you almost need physician level expertise to decipher what the heck to do next, and ever you need and you've got you got your woman by your side there who can help? Yeah,   Roy Barker  21:28 yeah. Well, and that's the thing to, you know, kind of get back to more general terms is, I guess what I see are concerned about is, instead of doctors taking the time to find out what is this underlying issue, they would rather prescribe to treat a symptom instead of actually having a conversation.   Terry  21:46 That's where they get their money is if they like give them the pharmacy, you know, give them the meds,   Dr. Robert  21:53 you know, they are trapped in a in a system that where they're their actions are dictated and even these guys who work for Health Maintenance Organizations, they if they don't have prescribing habits that mimic the, quote, standard of care, which is largely dictated by Big Pharma, influenced by the standards panels, who are paid each one of the persons on the panel has huge conflict of interest paid by two or three pharma companies, for example, antidepressants and statin drugs, right?   Both of those are should be thinly used, and they're the damn no depressants must be 10% of the whole country is on antidepressants, like drugs is 15% or more. But the influence is so the industry influence is so heavy, that your primary care doctor is not an independent actor anymore. He's got an individual license, he's responsible, but he operates under protocols. So they're not they're there.   They're not innocent, but they're not the they're not the real problem. The problem is they're in a matrix, you know, they're a matrix of control. And the money is so huge, that these companies are getting more overt or obvious about their influence. Now, in the last year, they all sort of came out of the closet and said, do as we tell you, or else you know, that's my opinion about what happened.   Roy Barker  23:20 Wow, yeah, it's unbelievable. Yeah, I was just gonna go down I was looking at the second one is the science is obscured, to hide the truth. And so I just was going to ask, you know, in your opinion, are, are these clinical trials large enough? Are they lengthy enough to actually you know, and the problem with anything is that something may be something may be doesn't come to light in the short term, but after you do it for 10 1520 years, all of a sudden, now, there's a big problem. But, again, in your opinion, are we even taking enough time to evaluate these drugs before we release them?   Dr. Robert  24:04 Okay, so Roy, you're asking the right questions, and you're trying, you guys are trying to Paul your way through this mess of data, and try to figure out what the heck is going on. But if you want to read about these clinical trials and the frauds I think the easiest and most approachable book is been gold acres, bad pharma, and that's 10 years old. But the answer is that the answer is that you can hardly trust anything.   Now the doctors are. We are conditioned to think that double blind placebo controlled trials are the beyond handle, but it's a garbage in garbage out situation and Geico situation. And it depends on the intentions of the people who are doing the trial. And so the answer is now, anecdotal medicine is almost better than the clinical trials and I it's almost a waste of time to look at them. Because if you go to the back of the paper and they're sponsored by the the company selling the drug, he was a gold makes the rules right. So they I mean, it's a it's a tragedy but everyone thinks they mean something. One of my friends says the whole thing has been almost garbage since 2000 is not crazy.   I because the the industry is just taking control of freakin everything now. So I don't say this stuff casually. I studied it for four years, I've got 500 References In this book, nothing I say. Everything I say is derivative of authors that have come before me. I didn't do original research. I I read the stuff that was available. And I looked at the references, you know?   Terry  25:52 Oh, my gosh. Shocking, isn't it dairy. It's shocking. And you don't take anything.   Dr. Robert  25:59 You don't want to take anything you want to you basically. And I think you guys are on the right track with your, your keto and your your controlled fasting and your prolonged fasting. I think all that stuff, there is better evidence than anything else we have. I think that the you know, all the fat stuffs turned around want to eat animal fat and all that all those narratives about about the animal fat is being bad for you.   That's all wrong. I mean, it's and it's all that's all food industry driven. And as you may recall the Food and Drug it the FDA is food and drug, right? So they spend half their money half that billion $5 billion, regulating the food industry, and they don't do a very good job there. And I've got references if you're interested in that, if you're interested in the vegan stuff. I have references for that, too.   Roy Barker  26:45 Okay, yeah, I mean, that that is because we are you know, we haven't gone total vegan, we are more what we call plant based. And, you know, we we do not, we eat protein, but not it's not the focal point of the meal. Like it used to be used to you had the, you know, the big meat and a side thing of potatoes or whatever. So, you know, we've tried to flip that. But, you know, it gets back to this this thing about I have read some research, this is not my my research, but I've read a number of studies that say, you know, kind of staying with Alzheimer's is that that can be traced back to the low fat diet of the 70s and 80s. Because we need this fat for our brain to keep those receptors lubricated. And, yeah,   Dr. Robert  27:31 I thought that was interesting. I listened to you. interview someone who'd given cook it on the world for three months to someone and they freakin improved, you know, so who knows? That's that's another anecdote. I have no expertise about this.   Roy Barker  27:46 Yeah, that was a very, it was a very, it was a one person, but it sparked some huge longitudinal studies on that just to, you know, see if this fat intake. But yeah, there's been a lot of saying that that's what has caused this huge spike right now is what we did. And I guess that's kind of our mission to it's changed a lot on this show. But you know, part of it is, you know, I'll speak for me, I'm going into an older phone into the older age brackets sooner than I would like to. And so I need to be sharing carry good health good habits into this. I mean, you can't wait to you're 18 years old and say, Wow, I need to change some things. I mean, yeah.   Dr. Robert  28:30 Well, another clue about my other book, which is the hormone book is after reviewing all the data for hormones, it's my opinion, and brace yourself. It's my opinion, that hormone supplementation over 40 or 50 years old is more important than exercise. Possibly as important as diet, you get it. So there's a lot of there's a lot of data on that a lot of a lot of studies and the standards that are promulgated are a pack of lies, you know, it's crazy. I mean, then we've got, we've got black box warnings on testosterone, estrogen and progesterone. Those three are vital, and they they can save your life and likely make you live longer. They save your alertness decrease Alzheimer's, I mean it has they have multiple good effects. Anyway,   Terry  29:23 is that why is that? I mean, do you do you think that is one of the reasons that all timers and dementia has increased, so   Dr. Robert  29:32 no doubt about it. There's no doubt about it. And the hormone levels are dropping, sperm counts are dropping, and we have good measurements in men about these trends over the last 20 years. We don't know why. It may be stress, it might be chemicals, it might be who knows it might be nutritional, and it might be something else but they it for any given age. Those are dropping and it's if we supplement we can prevent many, many problems.   Roy Barker  30:00 So I'm sure that this is difficult to prove collusion. But do you think that there's a link in not releasing certain products because we would rather sell the drugs on? Instead of being proactive? We'd rather wait and sell the drugs on the back end.   Dr. Robert  30:18 Yeah, you, you have to realize that these companies, they're not evil, and they're not good. They're only interested in money. And so they're willing, they're willing to, there are speculations that they, they would or do sell things that absolutely don't work in order to make the money and they can, they can fake the studies. In other words, you do 20 studies, and one of them is statistically significant, you know, when you that's the only one you publish. So, you know, I mean, they can sell wheat grass and a pill for God knows what.   But it's, it's it's truly a sad story, because some of the things are injurious. There's a class of antidepressants or anti psychotics, because it called atypical antipsychotics. These things are well documented to shorten your life by 10 to 20 years, through diabetes and all this other stuff. However, they're getting passed out like jelly beans to people who have simple depressions. The SSRI drugs like Prozac, they cause consequential violence and suicide in a small number. And those guys are passed out very casually, they're exceedingly addictive.   And, you know, it's it's basically an outrage. And the whole, the whole thing has been covered up since the start, the initial studies for Prozac showed the suicide rate, and that they paid off plaintiff after plaintiff for these things, rather than have it brought out. So, I mean, there's a lot of drugs that are just that are no good. And in fact, the whole psychiatric formulary. And I'm not, I'm not one of those, what do they call it the anti psychiatry is religion. What is that called? The Scientologists are not a Scientologist right?   The but the Scientologists got this one, right. The psychiatry is drugs are the way they're used. Currently, that means indiscriminately on almost everyone, with these standards that were essentially fabricated with hand in glove with the pharmaceutical companies. It's it's an outrage, and that's the most, that's the most expensive medical specialty. And that that whole thing is a mess. I mean, it's truly a mess. And there are a lot of psychiatry is the only specially that has a massive number of people who are essentially psychiatry deniers, they don't think they should be operating at all.   Every other specialty, they're doing something, you know, they're, they're making some mistakes, but psychiatry, the drugs have never been subjected to proper double blind placebo controlled trials. I mean, essentially, if you can't find any, you can't find anybody to put on a sugar pill these days, because we've got 15% of the country taking these darn drugs. Yeah,   Terry  33:08 it's crazy. Yeah. Which leads to which probably has led up to a lot of the violence that's happening, you know, all these I like to see it.   Dr. Robert  33:18 Yeah. The mass violence. Yeah. Everyone knows seems to be associated with with a psychiatric drug use. But of course, everybody's on the damn drugs. So   Terry  33:27 who knows? How do you know? Yeah, yeah.   Roy Barker  33:30 Well, you mentioned something, too, about settlements. And I, I just have mixed emotions about that. Because I feel like if, if I'm able, if I'm a $1.3 trillion industry, I'm able to offer some pretty big dollars for you to not take this to court. You know, it's like, okay,   Dr. Robert  33:50 it's this important point, right. The pharma industry, in terms of their settlements to federal prosecutors, is the most criminal industry in history. They have billions of dollars in settlements every year. It's an unbelievable scene. And essentially, they are paying everyone off to leave them alone and let them continue doing what they're doing. So I mean, it's, it's   Terry  34:16 about it, what and to shut up about it not saying well, you know,   Dr. Robert  34:20 they, when when they make a settlement, they don't admit wrongdoing. But when you give someone $2 billion to to to stop the prosecution, I mean, it's a rich pay off, and the prosecutors can stand on the pile of loot and say they've been, they've saved the world from, you know, one of these companies, and, I mean, it's crazy. Pfizer has profit margins of 40% for the last five years.   So if you know anything about industry, a 10% profit margin is a very good profit margin. It's in a competitive industry, but this is in an industry where the money falls out of the sky on healthcare, and and Pfizer Pfizer for what Have a reason, you know, which we won't speculate about. But you can speculate privately about their profit margins are very high. It's crazy.   Terry  35:08 And so what? How does that? So you mentioned Pfizer, so how does that tie into the COVID? vaccination? Maybe? Okay,   Dr. Robert  35:18 so, here now, I just want to make a comment about doctors and politics, right? So if you go to a doctor, and he talks politics to you, that's called a boundary violation. It's not considered cool in medical ethics, ethics term, just like, just like in polite company, we don't talk about religion, politics or net worth, right? It's not it's not considered reasonable. So this vaccine has been kicked around so much. It's being censored by YouTube and all these crazy media people. So I think we can consider the vaccine a political issue.   So I'm going to make a comment which will tip you off to what I think about these modern vaccines without specifically commenting on the COVID varieties. Right. So we have we have the the two vaccines that were have been promulgated in the last 20 years now, you know, measles vaccine, and all that was before that, and they all have robust effectiveness, right. But the two are the flu vaccine. And HPV, I already told you what I thought of HPV vaccine, Japan rejected it.   And they've got a very good public health service that seems less influenced by pharma. But for the flu vaccine, this costs billions and billions of dollars every year, Britain and France stockpile this thing. And their governments are influenced by the manufacturers, obviously, because that stuff doesn't work very well at all, it doesn't do much of anything. It may decrease the length of the the severity of the disease by eight hours or some crazy thing.   And this is not a controversial thing. You can go to Cochrane Reviews, you just Google Cochrane Reviews flu vaccine, you can read the summaries of the last few meta analyses and they, you know, read between the lines, but it does it doesn't say the freakin stuff works, you know, it doesn't work very well, it's very expensive. So we can, we can certainly extrapolate pharmas products, which we know a lot about the other products, I mean, these these site drugs, they've tracked the rise in disability very closely.   So that is a suggestion that the drugs cause the rise and disability, right? These there's a lot of other drugs like the stat that basically, I mean, there is arguable small use cases for it, but they've, they've gone so crazy, we've got 8060 or 80 million people in the US on status. And they are toxic, they can cause an occasional fatality and muscle wasting a lot of stuff like that. So the only two use cases for that one is hereditary hypercholesterolemia, which means you have a super high cholesterol and post heart attack. If you're not in those two groups, you're better off doing Roy's method of fasting or being careful with your ketone, you know, or intermittent fast.   Roy Barker  38:18 So what about Black Label or black? I can't remember, I think that's it, like off off label uses. Like, we designed this medicine for this because I hear that both ways. I hear there are some medicines out there that help other things they won't let them do. But then I also hear that there are some medicines for one thing that they're using for others that cause harm as well.   Dr. Robert  38:42 Something between a third and two thirds of drugs are prescribed off label. So it's completely conventional to do that. The thing that's not conventional is for Big Pharma to advertise there. patented medication for every freakin use under the sun. And there's many, many examples of this in my book, and that's what they get the fines for. That's all this left on the books to get these guys. I mean, research fraud, they sometimes identify some of that, but it's largely done outside of the country. Those studies are accepted, analyzed inside the country.   And I mean, that doesn't seem to do much. You know, they put an occasional doctor in jail for a couple of years for that, but they're, they're obvious their champion, their champion fraudsters, you know, but it's done universally. I mean, again, that Goldacre book is a good source. And I'll mention Whitaker's book about the psychiatrists in the psychiatry he uses. He's a seminal author about that, where he dislikes the data and shows that there. I mean, arguably, those drugs are if they work is for a very narrow group.   Roy Barker  39:52 Is there any studies on on that at all? Do they have to do any research on the off label? Or do they go on go through a whole new clinical trial for those?   Dr. Robert  40:01 Well, that's the thing they're on, you know, I mean, I suppose you see a clinical trials are done to create a patent, which is a monopoly for whatever it is 20 years, you know, from the very start of it. And that's the profitable stuff. When a drug passes off patent, other companies apply to produce it, right. And then in theory, it becomes a matter of supply and demand and whether this stuff really works.   Right. But it's not that clear, because there are all kinds of lawsuits that fall that go back and forth between these these big groups, the patent drug manufacturers, and the generic drug manufacturers, and, and sometimes they're just paid. The generic drug manufacturers are just paid not to produce the drug. I mean, it goes on and on.   I described that in butchered by healthcare. But Did that answer your question? Yeah, yeah, yeah. And so. So there are many good uses, there are many good uses for off label prescribing. And in fact, ineligible for physician does that. And I think that there are many, many treatments that are not recognized because they can't be patented. And among these are bioidentical hormones, because pieces of the human body cannot be patented.   In theory, they've got some loopholes, like they patent certain doses of these darn things, which doesn't make any sense to me so. So you go through what's called a compounding pharmacy, which is 5% or less of the total pharmacists, and they are allowed to make a drug only for one person, they can't mass produce the drug. So, and there, there are other constraints on those guys, too, that I   Roy Barker  41:46 yeah. So let's talk for a minute about, there's so many drugs prescribed about polypharmacy. And I know that some in theory are, if we use the same pharmacy, they should catch that, but I'm going to tell you that we use a national brand and have had some that slipped through like nobody's even taken a look at that.   Dr. Robert  42:11 So drug interactions are not studied when the drug is patented. In other words, only one drug at a time is, is studying, right? So we know, we know something about drug interactions from after market effects, and maybe studies that have been done on it. But in the modern nursing home, it's not uncommon to see patients on 20 drugs. And these include that a typical anti psychotic that shortens their lifestyle life lifespan, because it shuts them up.   I mean, they've got to control them somehow, I guess. But 20 medications is a medication farm and not a patient, they are just farming the revenues. And you can imagine these things, the expense of them and the insurance reimbursement and the insanity of the whole thing is just a, it's just a travesty. There are people who are studying this that I cited in butchered by healthcare, and they there are specialties that revolve around trying to take people off of as many of their medications as possible.   So if you're a patient and you're not sick, I would advise you just to be very careful about what you take. Because the indications for conditions that you can't feel like blood pressure have been trumped up. In other words, the standard for when you Medicaid for blood pressure, there was very little scientific evidence that medicating past the upper limit 160 or the systolic blood pressure that trying to get it lower than that there's very little evidence that it makes any difference.   And there's certainly almost no evidence that medicating past 140 systolic makes any difference. And so, especially if you're a senior, that they that, you know, there's there's it's ridiculous, but but the standards have been changed progressively for cholesterol for blood pressure for other medical conditions that are medicated prophylactically. And it prophylactically means before you get sick. So I mean, it's crazy.   The whole thing about the bone density drugs. I mean, that's a that's a crazy story. And these things are very toxic. And they create problems have their own, like fractures and certain long bones like the femur, they create rotty jaw bones, right. And in theory, they densify the bones as well. They are a net loss in my opinion, after reading all about it. I mean, it's it's a crazy crazy thing, and you get those things and they last years inside your body, and they're a shot administered in the office. So the doctor gets 25% of the gross revenue. I mean, it's just it's it's a conflict of interest. Nobody You can get around.   Roy Barker  45:01 Well, some of what led to that, too was, you know, in, in the nursing home expecially was, you know, when physical restraints, you know, people started taking a hard look at that, and they outlawed them. It's unfortunate, but, you know, we call it chemical restraints, all they did was just moved from having them, you know, tied down in the chair with the belt to chemical chemical restraint of the medication that they give them.   Dr. Robert  45:29 So I don't know what there's a good solution for that. But let me just draw a similar point in the insanity field in this psychotic field, right? Well, almost all psychiatric conditions. And these are defined as things for which there is no laboratory test. So the psychiatrists are going almost purely by their gut instinct and talking right, unlike any other medical field, but oh, let's see, I lost my thread. What was I talking about?   Right now we're talking about the chemic, chemical restraints, right? Okay. So, in psychiatry, every single psychiatric entity, like schizophrenia, like anxiety, like depression, waxes and wanes, it goes up, it goes down, goes up and goes down, right? But when we start people on psychiatric medications, it habituates them to the medication, and produces chronicity. So this has increased, or it's thought to have increased the number of people on social security disability, all this crazy stuff. So anyway, that's an that's, I don't have an answer for people who are completely out of it, you know, and letting them go through their thing in a walk facility, and then letting them out when they're when they're doing okay, that might be the way to go.   It's not inexpensive, but the drugs are not inexpensive either. Well, and the bad thing about the some of the, you know, worst cases in the nursing home, especially was it really wasn't about the patient acting out, it was just if you could medicate enough of them, you didn't have to spend time, you know, devote time and resources to them. Unfortunately, it takes a lot of expertise to carefully medicate these people. And you have to have someone who cares about often about people who are demented, you know, and it's, it's hard, hardly anybody. It takes kind of a safe saintly person to be interested in keeping these people clean and in the best possible condition.   And there are private places that do a good job, but the usual nursing home, Medicaid is heavily. I mean, it's crazy. The pharmacies who supply these nursing homes, make millions and millions of dollars per nursing home. I mean, it's crazy. It's like, they turn out blister packs for every patient in the nursing home, often 20 medications, I mean, in the hundreds of dollars a month at a minimum for the for the moderately priced ones, and just break it in, you know, and the nurses pass them out. And go ahead.   Terry  48:07 I was I was just gonna say I mean, that's. So what do we do back in the olden days, When, when, when Big Pharma wasn't in control? I mean, we they did, they did send people with senility and, and psychiatric issues, they did put them away for a while or a lifetime. But there weren't many of them, because they weren't taking the drugs to be able to cause whatever it is, they're   Dr. Robert  48:31 right, we've got a control group for psychiatry, and that's called the third world, right. And they don't have the money to spend on these drugs. So Whittaker and other Robert Whittaker, and other people have looked at that. And they get better results than we do. Our drugs encouraged chronicity and dependency in the third world, they'd lock them up for a while, maybe give them a few drugs, but they don't give them the drugs and definitely the way the way our standards have developed to, to do this, you know, depression, that you know, this chemical, chemical fault in the brain that's supposed to be depression that the SSRI antidepressants are supposed to fix. You've heard about that.   Right? It's a chemical deficiency in the brain. Well, that was made up, that idea was made up by a marketer. That was not there's no science behind that at all. We don't know what the hell's happening in the brain is made up by a marketer. So that thing took hold. And once a bell is wrong, it cannot be unrung. So everybody in the country thinks that the depressed people have a chemical deficiency in the brain. And that means that you have to take the drug forever and pay the pharma company forever. And, you know, I mean, it all falls right, made up by a marketer at Smith Kline and French.   Roy Barker  49:48 So what about allergies have has this overmedication or maybe it's the food source or whatever that it's, you know, we had a casual conversation about this the other day That, you know, as I was growing up, and I'm not, you know, mostly back in the 60s and 70s It's been a while, but it didn't seem to be kids with the chronic asthma, the chronic allergies, peanut butter, you know, things like that. And it seemed like nowadays there are so much   Terry  50:19 more. All right, yeah, they're all they can't have dairy, they can't they're an app have everything gluten free, no peanuts, all of that.   Dr. Robert  50:28 I don't have any specific knowledge about that, except for it sounds to me, like it's part of the diagnosis creep, that has been fostered by industry and abetted by the doctors, you know, just like for the blood pressure, the cholesterol, you know, the the bone density, the bone density story is a is a six story that started in some, you know, medical meeting where they got together and they all decided that bone density below a certain amount was going to be called osteopenia, which is not true osteoporosis.   But then they decided that osteo Pina peenya, had to be medicated with these toxic drugs to prophylactic or prevent osteoporosis, which that's the link was never proven. But now we've got, we got all these people on these drugs, they're getting less popular because their toxicities are more widely known. And who wants to have a patient who has a necrosis or a rotten jaw, you know, I mean, that's, but I guess if you're getting paid 20 $500 for a shot, you know, maybe you're risking, you know, you get a you get a herd of about 40 of men, they're coming in once a month, or whatever it is, you got a lot of money on your hands.   Terry  51:41 So what's a patient to do? That's the hard part. Okay, what do you do?   Dr. Robert  51:47 Right? Well, my wife has a chronic problem. And I be I become her advocate. And it's taken my background to keep her out of trouble. And she's doing very well. But I think that you guys, you guys don't have serious problems yourself. I think you can research what you're doing. You stay away from those drugs, Metformin is okay, but the rest of them are not good. And they'll keep you from losing weight. But if you have a complicated problem, you can go to the best doctors in the country virtually now. And Trump put out this executive order. And I don't think Biden is countermanded. That said that virtual consultations, even on the first visit, are cool, you get it. Whereas before, they would always insist that you come to the office to see them to see you. Because it was considered beneath the standard of care to see a patient virtually or on the phone, especially for the first visit, there's something to that an experienced physician can just look at somebody and they can see physical signs, they can see, they can see stuff they can't see as well over zoom.   Although these are very clear images, it's not as good. You know, they get you get your clothes off and look even without even listen to your lungs or looking, you know, just kind of look them over. And and they get hints to what's going on. And they can lead to good ideas about therapy and diagnosis. But you can go to Stanford, and you can do a virtual consultation with these people. And if they won't allow a first time virtual consultation, fly out there, pay for the whole thing, and then do the subsequent visits, and then get your local doctor to do whatever the other guy tells him to do. So you can get the best care in the country, anywhere you live.   You know, if you've got a few dollars to rub together, I mean, it's not free. But it's not so outrageously expensive that that you can't get it done. The Second. Second thing is, you know, the problem with healthcare is twofold. Right? Have I want to do too much those are the people on fee for service and fever services, enormous conflict of interest, right? It's impossible to get away from I mean, I was a cosmetic surgeon, I got paid for doing breast dogs. I wanted to do them, you know, and I would like to think I never oversold it on someone that had breasts that were big already or something but you know, you got to make the customers happy, right?   But the problem is for fee for service, they want to do too much but the other guys the HMO guys, they're on salary, and they're often incentivized in various subtle ways to do less. So you got to watch those guys and make sure that you're getting the best care from them. They have all the modern stuff. They can do whatever they want, but it often takes a supervising physician outside the system. If you have a complicated problem. If you're have cancer, cancer is there is many different diseases. It's complicated.   Many different specialties are required to manage it frequently. You get a cardiologist involved and you know the cancer doctor and he you know, I mean it just goes on and on and on. And there's many possible And the thing is an art, which doesn't work very well, if it's applied the way the standards go, two months of improved survival is what 95% plus of the cancers get from our chemotherapy. And that's not that's not controversial. Two months survival improvement, right? We can cure about five to seven of these cancers. If we catch them at the right stage. It really I mean, you know, what, testicular cancer, some lymphomas, leukemias, you know, some other some other entities get cured, which is, you know, that's a blessing.   But the rest of it is, it's definitely an art. And if you establish good relationships with the people, if you don't, if you don't think that they're relating to you, personally, you need to go elsewhere. I mean, doctors are human beings too. And if they seem like they're pushing patients through the clinic, and that's what they're up to. You can sense it your your judgment is better than you think. And you go on and study everything you can, if you have friends that are nurses, or doctors who can help advocate for you and learn everything they can, they'll they possibly will be more sophisticated, although sometimes they are just part of the freakin machine.   Roy Barker  56:11 So we're running way long. But I did want to ask you, you wrote another book about hormones. And so we just wanted to touch on that briefly. I know you talked a little bit about testosterone and estrogen earlier, but now kind of what's going on over in that realm? Well,   Dr. Robert  56:28 the interesting thing is, the amazing thing is that every single hormone has been run down by standards groups, right? The FDA has, there's a thing called a blackbox warning the FDA puts on drugs, that it deems it's a postmarket thing, right? They put on rather than send the drug back to the manufacturer, which would, you know, it's very expensive. And in theory, the drug works, they put a warning on the drug.   So theoretically, patients and physicians can be careful about it and not, not, you know, be aware that there there are risks, and they put black box warnings, unwarranted blackbox warnings on testosterone, estrogen and progesterone based on obsoletes drug studies. In other words, the drugs studies were done is called the Women's Health Initiative, which you probably heard of that thing evaluated drugs that shouldn't be used any longer for chronic care.   Okay, like Premarin, Premarin is horse urine, estrogen. Now that stuff has its place. But for chronic care, it has some low level risks, that true estrogen that's Astra dial, which is the compound that should be used is bioidentical doesn't have, right. And, you know, there's a whole series of caveats. But But basically, in testosterone, it's practically unbelievable what's happened with testosterone, they put a blackbox warning on testosterone based on two studies, or they look through the wrong end of the telescope. In other words, they took people on testosterone and look for problems.   So that's the wrong way to evaluate a drug. What you need to do is take 1000 people or whatever half up on the drug half, I'm off the drug and see what happens to them in the future. Right. So testosterone, they've stuck this blackbox warning on testosterone for stroke and heart disease, when this stuff has enormously beneficial effects on weight loss. It's the best weight loss drug we've ever had. It's much better than phentermine.   It has many positive effects. And you guys, you know, are of the age group where you should consider this stuff and you read my book and see what you think I've got referral sources in there. And even a drug as harmless as progesterone, which is the other female hormone. There's a story they started about that was you don't need anyway.   Terry  58:56 So it's it's a crazy I was put, I was given a cream.   Dr. Robert  59:00 I mean, the cream is the cream for progesterone is ineffective. It doesn't give you enough to drop like,   Terry  59:07 I quit. I mean, I didn't take it very well.   Dr. Robert  59:09 You should take oral micronized progesterone, and the doses and everything are in my hormone secrets book. Okay. So that's something that the women should study any woman over 50 should be intimately familiar with all that material. Because you're not going to get it your it's going to be hard to get from anywhere anywhere else. I mean, you can if you go to the right doctor, they can help but there's there's a lot of quote, controversy and the the subjects been just completely covered up. Sorry, Roy.   Roy Barker  59:40 Oh, no, no, no, I just I was thinking you might actually thought of something back kind of on the drug issue is that you know, we talked about how things kind of go around with the FDA looking down over this but I'm able to walk into any drugstore, any grocery store And by any form of some kind of a supplement, and they don't have a my understanding with them is they have little to no oversight except for the company. So most of them come from China to do like, okay, yeah. Oh, yeah, I guess the for briefly on that, you know the benefits versus the pitfalls of you know, walking in and, and one for me that I know as that I was told about was iron like, for most men, too much iron can be dangerous more dangerous than than low iron.   Dr. Robert  1:00:36 Don't take iron, don't take iron, right? But yeah, Terry if you don't have menstrual periods you shouldn't need iron to see. But the reason why you have low iron in the blood blood is you have blood loss, either through mineral or if you have a GI bleed a slow gut bleed, you can get a lower iron. And if you have that you want to check it out. You don't want to just take iron.   Roy Barker  1:00:57 Yeah, yeah, no, no, I wasn't taking it, I have a colon cancer. That was just an example of, you know, one that I know for certain that I've heard is detrimental to men. But then, you know, like some of the others I've heard that they can have interactions with, you know, certain medications that we're taking. So just you know, it kind of the more I've learned about the supplements, kind of the scarier that whole thing is, and the   Terry  1:01:21 fish and fish oil Didn't we just learned about fish? Well, we cut out the fish oil supplements, because we spoke to a neural neurologist, who told us that how it was processed, processes that out of what you need. So to go and get, you know, they have to, they have to cook it at such high heat that it actually makes it detrimental. But you can take there's a liquid three, six and nine, that's a lot more.   Roy Barker  1:01:48 It's more efficient. But it's also like it has all the nutrients that you really need. So little things like that, you know, like the Who would think you know, nobody ever talked to me about this whole thing with fish oil, everybody's like official is good, but it's the process that kills it.   Dr. Robert  1:02:04 I'm not an expert on fish oil I but I understand it's out. The thing I do know about is vitamin D, which actually is not a vitamin, it's a hormone. And you can get your levels drawn of D, your primary care can do that. Or you can go straight through life ext

Randy's words from a website about Armour porcine thyroid: I, too, was doing great on Armour. No more. They put me on levothyroxine [synthetic T4] and Cytomel [synthetic T3]. I felt awful, so depressed...Drugmakers fake and suppress their studies. Knoll Pharmaceuticals, the Synthroid maker, hid one showing that their drug was no better than the other thyroids. Knoll paid more than $100 million to consumers after the ensuing class-action lawsuit settled in 2000. Later, the pharmaceutical companies sponsored over ten bogus studies that purported to show porcine thyroid was no improvement over T4. Each trial used only 1/2 grain of the pork thyroid (30 mg), even though the proper dose is one to two grains (60-120 mg) or more (about the same as .075 to .15 mg of T4). Each study concluded that the tiny dose of pig thyroid did not work. With these doses, of course, it could never work. This type of false comparison is a routine strategy used by drugmakers to get FDA approval or to run down a competitor. For more, see Ben Goldacre's Bad Pharma (2012) and my FDA chapter here.There have been claims that the porcine thyroid manufacturing is faulty, and that this makes it inferior to Synthroid, the branded T4. However, Synthroid was recalled ten times between 1991 and 1997. This involved over 100 million tablets. The FDA requires T4 to fall within 5% of its stated potency, but most samples analyzed had far less active ingredient and some had none. Because many patients need thyroid to survive, there were hospitalizations. In 2001, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning that they might pull Synthroid from the market. There were also two recalls in 2012-13 involving issues with potency, stability, and manufacturing. See Mary Shomon's website for references, including the FDA letter documenting the story. This link is offline and may have been suppressed by special interests. I had to search for it on the Wayback Machine internet archive (archive.org). Physicians have used porcine thyroid for over a century. It was first approved by the FDA in 1939. In Thailand, it is an over-the-counter supplement. I could find only three recalls for this desiccated pig thyroid, including one started by the manufacturer in 2020 for a 13 percent drop in potency. This might have gone unnoticed, but since thyroid strength is critical, they were doing the right thing.T4 has been available since 1927 without a formal FDA evaluation. It was given “grandfather” status in 1938 because it was assumed to be equivalent to porcine thyroid, which was considered the “gold standard.” The Synthroid brand finally passed a perfunctory FDA review in Support the show (https://paypal.me/dryohoauthor?locale.x=en_US)

In these difficult times, no one's had a harder time than our medical professionals. They see death every day, and they fight it. What is it like to be a doctor in India? Lancelot Pinto joins Amit Varma in episode 229 of The Seen and the Unseen to talk about the practice of medicine in general, and the battle against Covid-19 in particular. Also discussed: the incentives of doctors, the importance of sleep, how to quit smoking, and the Epidemic of Sighing. Also check out: 1. Past episodes of The Seen and the Unseen on Covid-19, featuring (in reverse chronological order) Ashwin Mahesh, Gautam Menon, Ajay Shah, Anirban Mahapatra, Ruben Mascarenhas, Chinmay Tumbe, Rukmini S, Vaidehi Tandel, Vivek Kaul, Anup Malani and Shruti Rajagopalan.  2. Robin Cook on Amazon. 3. The Case Against Sugar — Gary Taubes. 4. The Big Fat Surprise: why butter, meat, and cheese belong in a healthy diet — Nina Teicholz. 5. UpToDate. 6. Understanding Indian Healthcare -- Episode 225 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Karthik Muralidharan). 7. Money for nothing: The dire straits of medical practice in Delhi, India (2007) — Jishnu Das and Jeffrey Hammer.  8. Dunning-Kruger Effect (Wikipedia). 9. Poker at Lake Wobegon -- Amit Varma. 10. Bad Science -- Ben Goldacre. 11. Homeopathic Faith (2010) -- Amit Varma. 12. Beware of Quacks. Alternative Medicine is Injurious to Health -- Amit Varma. 13. Is it risky to push alternative medicine in Covid pandemic? -- Lancelot Pinto. 14. The Kavita Krishnan Files -- Episode 228 of The Seen and the Unseen. 15. Amit Varma's episode of The Book Club on Mary Wollstonecraft. 16. Being Mortal -- Atul Gawande. 17. How Doctors Die -- Ken Murray. 18. Do not go gentle into that good night -- Dylan Thomas. 19. 24 & Ready to Die -- Economist documentary on euthanasia. 20. Complications -- Atul Gawande. 21. My Own Country -- Abraham Verghese. 22. Deep Medicine -- Eric Topol. 23. Other books by Gawande and Verghese.   24. The Looming Tower -- Lawrence Wright. 25. Do No Harm -- Henry Marsh. 26. The Rules of Contagion -- Adam Kucharski. 27. What Cricket Can Learn From Poker -- Amit Varma's essay on probabilistic thinking. 28. The Cochrane Collaboration. Links on Sleep 29. Lancelot Pinto's talk on sleep. 30. Lancelot Pinto on Sleep Apnea 31. What's keeping you up at night? -- Lancelot Pinto. 32. Are you terrified of falling asleep? -- Lancelot Pinto. 33. Why We Sleep: The New Science of Sleep and Dreams -- Matthew Walker. 34. Tetris Dreams. Links on Tobacco Cessation 35. Lancelot Pinto's Twitter thread on stopping smoking. 36. Global Adult Tobacco Survey. 37. The Odds of Ceasing to Smoke Tobacco -- A visual aid  Links on Tuberculosis 38. Tuberculosis Management by Private Practitioners in Mumbai, India: Has Anything Changed in Two Decades? -- Zarir Udwadia, Lancelot Pinto & Mukund Uplekar. 39. Private patient perceptions about a public programme -- Lancelot Pinto & Zareer Udwadia. 40. Mismanagement of tuberculosis in India: Causes, consequences, and the way forward -- Anurag Bhargava, Lancelot Pinto & Madhukar Pai. 41. A study on telemedicine during Covid-19 co-written by Lancelot Pinto. Links on Covid-19 42. An interview of Lancelot Pinto & Rajani Bhat by Govindraj Ethiraj. 43. India Covid SOS 44. Lancelot Pinto and others interviewed by Barkha Dutt on changed Covid protocols.. 45. Lancelot Pinto and others interviewed by Barkha Dutt on the use of steroids for Covid treatment. 46. Lancelot Pinto & Sumit Ray interviewed by Govindraj Ethirah on the need to update guidelines. 47. A CT scan for COVID merits a word of caution -- Lancelot Pinto. 48. Lancelot Pinto interviewed by Smitha Nair. 49. Comprehensive Guidelines for Management of COVID-19 patients. This episode is sponsored by CTQ Compounds. Check out The Daily Reader, FutureStack and The Social Capital Compound. Use the code UNSEEN for Rs 2500 off. Please subscribe to The India Uncut Newsletter. It's free! And check out Amit's online course, The Art of Clear Writing.

A new article from the OpenSAFELY team analyses 17 million NHS records to show the disparities in English COVID-19 outcomes for minority ethnic groups. Rohini Mathur talks about the results, and Ben Goldacre explains the many uses of the OpenSAFELY platform.

In this episode we talk about research in multiple facets! How do we define it scientifically and can we apply a similar rigor to our occult research? We talk about the different types of sources, their reliability, and our own personal tips on how to be an effective researcher. Try not to crush any glassware under that stack of books!*Apologies for some mic feedback - we were in a different recording location this week!Come join our discord! https://discord.gg/kJthJyxTBcSince this episode is mostly opinion, we have opted to list a few books below that may be useful in helping you be a more effective researcher and critical thinker!How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life by Thomas GilovichThinking Fast and Slow by Daniel KahnemanBad Science by Ben Goldacre (a great book on recognizing fallible science)Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (3rd edition) by John W. CreswellThe Craft of Research (4th edition) by Wayne C. Booth, Joseph Williams, and Gregory G. Colomb

Os presentamos el directo que hicimos el Sábado 20 de Febrero en el Espacio Fundación telefónica, dónde hablamos de la evidencia científica aplicada a la educación.Fuentes y recursoshttps://www.fecyt.es/es/FECYTeduhttps://www.mcguffineducativo.es/Mala ciencia, Ben Goldacre, Paidós¿Cómo aprendemos? Una aproximación científica al aprendizaje y la enseñanza de Hector Ruíz. Ed. Grao, 2020Jornadas sobre ciencia y pseudocienciahttps://educacienciaypseudociencia.wordpress.com/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDGwVUySuVo&list=PLR9UasEn9TDl0hoIcOE95opPSJss3K8HjHappycracia, Eva Illouz y Edgar Cabanas, PaidósGoldrace, Ben (2013). Building evidence into education. Educación basada en la evidencia. Entre la investigación y la práctica. II Congreso Nacional Scientix, 2019. https://madresfera.com/newsletter-diaria/https://t.me/NoticiasMadresfera

"Medicine is broken," warns Ben Goldacre, the British physician, academic, author of the Guardian's Bad Science column. In this live episode of Rationally Speaking, Massimo and Julia interview Ben about his new book, Bad Pharma, and how the evidence about pharmaceutical drugs gets distorted due to shoddy regulations, missing data, and the influence of drug companies. Sped up the speakers by ['1.13', '1.0']

Do you find learning science dry, academic and inaccessible? Then fear not: Learning Science Weekly is an email newsletter that provides short and practical advice... every seven days. This week on The Good Practice Podcast, Learning Science Weekly author Dr. Julia Huprich (Vice President of Learning Science at Intellum) joins Gemma and Owen to share her insights into the role of science in learning. We discuss: the importance of research in learning design common approaches to learning design that are not supported by research the role of practitioners in shaping our evidence base. Show notes For more from us, including access to our back catalogue of podcasts, visit emeraldworks.com. There, you'll also find details of our award winning performance support toolkit, our off-the-shelf e-learning, and our custom work. You can sign up for Learning Science Weekly at: learningscienceweekly.com  Learning Science Weekly is on Twitter at @LearnSciWeekly. The books that Julia recommended were: e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning, by Ruth Clarke and Richard Mayer, available from Amazon at: amazon.co.uk/Learning-Science-Instruction-Guidelines-Multimedia-dp-1119158664/dp/1119158664  Evidence-Informed Learning Design: Creating Training to Improve Performance by Mirjam Neelen and Paul A Kirschner, available at: amazon.co.uk/Evidence-Informed-Learning-Design-Creating-Performance/dp/1789661439  Mirjam also spoke to Ross G and Owen about her book in episode 177: podcast.goodpractice.com/177-evidence-informed-learning-design  Owen's evidence-informed 'people to follow' were friends-of-the-show Dr Will Thalheimer (@WillWorkLearn) and Clark Quinn (@Quinnovator). He also recommended Bad Science by Ben Goldacre: amazon.co.uk/Bad-Science-Ben-Goldacre/dp/000728487X  If you're interested in the calculation for 'blue Monday', see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Monday_(date)#Calculation Note that there are two different formulas, so you can pick one or suffer both. In What I Learned This Week, Owen recommended 'Your job application was rejected by a human, not a computer', by Christine Assaf of HR Tact: hrtact.com/2020/10/05/your-job-application-was-rejected-by-a-human-not-a-computer/  Gemma's 'word of the week' was 'empleomania': a mania for holding public office. Connect with our speakers If you'd like to share your thoughts on this episode, connect with our speakers on Twitter: Gemma Towersey @GemmaTowersey Owen Ferguson @OwenFerguson Dr. Julia Huprich @juliahuprich

In this episode, I am talking to Nesem Al-Ali, a medical professional who is specialised in Haematology. We talk about a variety of things, about her journey in the medical profession, the way she works, what she thinks is important in the Dr. - patient relationship and communication and more. This episode is purely a podcast. Here are further links to mentioned topics, further literature and Links to Nesem's profiles: Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nesem-al-ali-32681585/?originalSubdomain=uk Twitter: https://twitter.com/NaseemMcSheeky Mentioned Blog: https://listentoyourbody.uk/follow-my-blog/ An interesting article to understand the difficulties medical professionals have to deal with emotional: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/sep/26/forensic-pathologist-richard-shepherd-ptsd-cutting-up-23000-bodies-not-normal Two books Nesem recommends: 'Bad Science' by Ben Goldacre: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3272165-bad-science 'Bad Pharma' by Ben Goldacre: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15795155-bad-pharma?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=6RE6MEBn4s&rank=1

Quacks, Hacks and Big Pharma Flacks.

Is it possible to have a mystical mindset without getting lost in magical thinking? Or worse, getting hijacked by harmful fantasies? In the chaos of coronavirus, I’ve noticed an increasing deficit of critical thinking within conscious communities. With an upswell in conspiracy theories and lack of good sensemaking on social media, I asked Dr. Anna Zakrisson of the Swedish Skeptics Association to help us think about thinking in this confusing time. On the podcast, we discuss how to notice and own the emotional triggers that hijack our deeper thinking. We talk about how not to be manipulated by our personal mythologies (which has been a big challenge for me). We discuss how to effectively engage with people who disagree with us, and finally, how to keep the mysticism without magical thinking. Along the way we discuss groupthink, the Dunning Kruger effect, ad hominems, and a host of other impediments to critical thinking. One thing we don’t do on the show is discuss or debunk any of the specific conspiracy theories floating around the internet right now. We leave that up to you. For further supplemental reading, I recommend reviewing Carl Sagan’s “Fine Art of Baloney Detection,” (via Brainpickings) which offers a helpful list of cognitive biases. Dr. Zakrisson is a biologist, a green roof specialist, and a science communicator. She is a member of Föreningen Vetenskap och Folkbildning (Swedish Skeptics Association) and Gesellschaft zur wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung von Parawissenschaften - GWUP (German Skeptics Association). Her primary platform for communication is Doctor Anna’s Imaginarium, which debunks faulty science on Facebook and elsewhere. Growth requires discomfort, so if we can sit with our triggers long enough, we may be able to unravel our own biases and possibly touch the ineffable just as it is. LINKS: Doctor Anna’s Imaginarium Website: https://annazakrisson.com/ Doctor Anna’s Imaginarium Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/doctor.annas.imaginarium Doctor Anna’s Imaginarium Telegram: https://t.me/doctorannasimaginarium Föreningen Vetenskap och Folkbildning (Swedish Skeptics Association): https://www.vof.se/about/ Gesellschaft zur wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung von Parawissenschaften - GWUP (German Skeptics Association): https://www.gwup.org/ Ben Goldacre: https://www.badscience.net/ The Baloney Detection Kit: Carl Sagan’s Rules for Bullshit-Busting and Critical Thinking: https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/03/baloney-detection-kit-carl-sagan/ ‘Conspirituality’ — the overlap between the New Age and conspiracy beliefs: https://medium.com/@julesevans/conspirituality-the-overlap-between-the-new-age-and-conspiracy-beliefs-c0305eb92185 TIMESTAMPS :10 - Proper skepticism is being willing to say “I don’t know” :14 - Awe-inspiring experiences in the psychedelic realm vs the real world :23 - Noticing and owning your emotional triggers, including Anna’s oily black triggers :33 - Using H.A.L.T. to check in with yourself emotionally :37 - It’s liberating to recognize that you were wrong :47 - The pharmaceutical industry and the alternative medicine industry :58 - Alternative medicine can help you feel seen and engage the placebo effect for healing, but promising unfounded cures is unethical  1:07 - If you want to know if you are being manipulated, look for the shop 1:18 - How we get tricked by our own personal mythologies and how faith and critical thinking can possibly coexist 1:25 - Create a toolbox for understanding your own biases  1:28 - Invite people into your life who trigger you and challenge your thinking 1:37 - That liberated feeling when your worldview expands  1:46 - How to create an in-group with someone who disagrees with you 1:58 - How do we keep our mysticism without magical thinking?

Big data is being crunched to help us tackle some of the enormous amount of uncertainty about covid-19, what the symptoms are, fatality rate, treatment options, things we shouldn't be doing. In these podcasts, we're going to try to get away from the headlines and talk about what we need to know - to hopefully give you some insight into these issues. This week. (3.10) Calum Semple, professor of outbreak medicine at the University of Liverpool talks about the ISARIC project - predesigned research brought off the shelf and deployed during a pandemic. (14.20) Ben Goldacre, doctor, researcher and director of the EBM datalab at the University of Oxford, joins us to talk about how his team have managed to pull together records from 40% of NHS patients to look for patterns in covid-19 morbidity and mortality. Reading list OpenSAFELY: factors associated with COVID-19-related hospital death in the linked electronic health records of 17 million adult NHS patients. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.06.20092999v1 Features of 16,749 hospitalised UK patients with COVID-19 using the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.23.20076042v1

Big data is being crunched to help us tackle some of the enormous amount of uncertainty about covid-19, what the symptoms are, fatality rate, treatment options, things we shouldn't be doing. In these podcasts, we're going to try to get away from the headlines and talk about what we need to know - to hopefully give you some insight into these issues. This week. (3.10) Calum Semple, professor of outbreak medicine at the University of Liverpool talks about the ISARIC project - predesigned research brought off the shelf and deployed during a pandemic. (14.20) Ben Goldacre, doctor, researcher and director of the EBM datalab at the University of Oxford, joins us to talk about how his team have managed to pull together records from 40% of NHS patients to look for patterns in covid-19 morbidity and mortality. Reading list OpenSAFELY: factors associated with COVID-19-related hospital death in the linked electronic health records of 17 million adult NHS patients. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.06.20092999v1 Features of 16,749 hospitalised UK patients with COVID-19 using the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.23.20076042v1

This is part 2 of a mini-series of shows about how the stories we tell ourselves and our imaginations run our lives without us realising. Part 1 was in episode #7 of the podcast if you haven't heard it already. In this show, I talk about how we can assess information in order to identify what is actually true in our lives and what isn't. (As a sub-note, I mentioned a book during the show by Ben Goldacre. The title of that book is Bad Science, not Bad Medicine.) ------ If you're ready to start changing your life and you'd like my help to do it, there are a range of resources available ranging from completely free of charge to a great value online course and having me help you direct through one-on-one coaching or consultancy work: Download the first four chapters of my book ‘How To Solve Any Problem In Life: The Root Causes Of Everything' for free by clicking here: https://www.paul7cope.com/ For some free online training that summarises the key parts of the work I do and goes on to talk about an online course, click here: https://www.solveanyproblem.online/freetraining (You don't need to share your name or email address to watch the free training - the link takes you straight to the video) For details of the online course through which you can Learn in 3 days how to solve any problem in life for less than the cost of a weekend to Blackpool (that you can currently get with a 40% discount), click here: https://www.solveanyproblem.online/onlinecourse Click here for details of my one-on-one coaching: https://www.paul7cope.com/coaching If you run or work in a business and would like some help, see details here of how I work with businesses: https://www.paul7cope.com/corporate

In a packed pilot episode of The Lancet Voice, our EBioMedicine Editor-in-Chief, Julie Stacey, reports on how SARS changed our approach to treating and tracking coronaviruses, The Lancet's Editor-In-Chief, Richard Horton chats with Ben Goldacre about researchers owing the US Government $7bn, and we discuss the planetary health diet – what’s the real link between food and the climate?

This week I'm talking about sceptics. Dictionary definition is: Sceptic  person who doubts truth of (esp.religious) doctrine or theory etc; person inclined to question truth of facts or statements or claims;philosopher who questions the possibility of knowledge. Sceptical of scepticism; inclined to disbelieve, doubtful, incredulous These are some people who like to call themselves this: Ben Goldacre  (Poss Virgo Asc no definite time of birth) Sun Taurus, Moon Taurus, Mercury Gemini Mercury square Jupiter, Venus square Mars, Mars square Uranus, Jupiter square Neptune James Randi Gemini Asc, Sun Leo, Moon Aries,  Sun square Jupiter, Mercury square Jupiter, Venus and Mars square, Mars square Neptune. David Colquhoun (no birth time) Sun Cancer, Moon Leo, Mercury conjunct Mars, Jupiter square Saturn, Moon square Uranus Big cluster of planets Sun conjunct Pluto Simon Singh (no birth time) Sun Capricorn, Moon Leo Sun square Jupiter, Mars square Jupiter, Mercury square Jupiter,   Jimmy Wales Taurus Asc, Sun Leo in 3rd, Moon Aries Moon square Mercury, Venus conjunct Mars, Mars conjunct Jupiter Richard Dawkins (no birth time) Sun Aries, Moon Pisces Mars opposition Pluto, Jupiter conjunct Saturn.    

Presented and produced by Seán Delaney. On this week's programme I bring you an interview with Liam Murray who is secretary of Ficheall, a network of teachers around Ireland who teach chess in primary school. Among the topics discussed and the resources mentioned are the following: Is chess a curricular or extra-curricular activity? What students learn from playing chess: developing their social, cognitive and mental fitness skills How he organises chess teaching in his own classroom, using the lesson plans on the website and adopting a “(mini-) game-based” approach Organising a school chess tournament Helping students lose and win gracefully Using a points system to decide who wins a game of chess with limited time to play Describing the game of chess (what is meant by checkmate and castling?) History of the game How chess compares to draughts How children respond to playing chess How Liam first became involved in teaching chess in schools when he was a student teaher How different children respond to learning or playing chess Playing face to face versus playing on apps or computers Children getting better at chess over time The “Masters” competition (for fifth and sixth class) and the “Budding Masters” competition (for third and fourth class). Children playing chess from first class onwards Why it’s good to play chess with players who are better than you (“If you’re not losing, you’re not learning”) Resources available on the Ficheall website The Ficheall network of teachers How inter-school chess tournaments are organised (the “Swiss System, ” timing games) The role of chess arbiters in inter-school tournaments Relationship of Ficheall to Moves for Life How Liam got interested in chess himself Follow-on opportunities for children to play chess Opportunities for playing chess in post primary schools (Leinster Schools Chess Association) The use of clocks in professional chess games What is school for/what are schools for Volunteering with Graham Jones and the Solas Project How he is inspired by the selfless dedication of teachers Evidence-Based Teachers’ Network Anseo podcasts Book Bounce by Matthew Syed. Book Black Box Thinking by Matthew Syed. Book Bad Science by Ben Goldacre

W tym odcinku recenzuję książkę "Szkodliwa medycyna" Bena Goldacre.Więcej o tym odcinku dowiesz się na: http://krewmozg.pl/km-049Subskrypcja podcastu: https://www.spreaker.com/show/3035173/episodes/feed

Physical Therapist and Certified Strength and Conditioning Coach Zac Cupples has a passion for human anatomy and helping people meet their health and performance goals. He excels at providing individualized treatment through rehab, training, nutrition, sleep, stress management, and sports science.  What’s amazing to me is that he does online consultation, and helped me fix my chronic back pain by video conference! On this podcast, Zac and I discuss his approach to working with clients and mentoring other practitioners. He talks about some of his assessment methods and strategies for helping people reduce pain while getting remarkable health and performance results. He shares simple breathing techniques that helped me tremendously and discusses some tried-and-true methods for improving client adherence with daily exercises. Here’s the outline of this interview with Zac Cupples: [00:00:06] Dr. Ben House; Podcast: Ben House, PhD on Strength Training: a Discussion at the Flō Retreat Center in Costa Rica. [00:00:52] How Zac got into physical therapy. [00:02:04] Book: Bad Science: Quacks, Hacks, and Big Pharma Flacks, by Ben Goldacre. [00:03:19] Physical Therapist Bill Hartman. [00:05:48] Shawn Baker; Podcast: Life at the Extremes: Fueling World-class Performance with a Carnivore Diet. [00:06:25] Working with NBA basketball players. [00:10:23] Dr. Bryan Walsh. [00:11:36] Sleep as a keystone behaviour; Ashley Mason podcast: Mindfulness and Cognitive Behavioral Strategies for Diabetes and Sleep Problems. [00:13:43] The effect of sleep on performance; Zac’s post: He Sleeps He Scores: Playing Better Basketball by Conquering Sleep Deprivation. [00:15:53] Fixing pain. [00:21:01] Assessing movement. [00:22:02] Variability in movement positively associated with health and performance. Study: Stergiou, Nicholas, and Leslie M. Decker. "Human movement variability, nonlinear dynamics, and pathology: is there a connection?." Human movement science 30.5 (2011): 869-888. [00:22:16] Study of javelin throwers: Bartlett, Roger, Jon Wheat, and Matthew Robins. "Is movement variability important for sports biomechanists?." Sports biomechanics 6.2 (2007): 224-243. [00:24:26] Doing assessments remotely/online. [00:27:13] NBT Head of Strength and Conditioning, Zach Moore; Podcast: Overcoming Adversity and Strength Coaching. [00:27:37] Pain vs. tissue damage. [00:30:30] Book: Back Mechanic by Stuart McGill. [00:30:46] Barbell Medicine videos on YouTube. [00:31:06] Harvard Health article: Babying your back may delay healing. [00:34:21] Consulting with Zac on my chronic lower back pain. [00:39:29] Using the anal sphincter to tilt the pelvis. [00:43:35] Breathing for 3D expansion of the body; Video: “Stacking” the Ribcage on top of the Pelvis. [00:45:55] Influencing client behaviour to ensure follow-through. [00:53:54] Tim Ferris, author of The 4-Hour Work Week. [00:55:11] Minimal effective dose. [00:56:56] Lesley Paterson, Braveheart Coaching, Podcast: Off Road Triathlon World Champion Lesley Paterson on FMT and Solving Mental Conundrums. [00:58:30] Altis; Dan Pfaff and Stuart McMillan. [00:59:55] Comparing recovery postures; Study: Michaelson, Joana V., et al. "Effects of Two Different Recovery Postures during High-Intensity Interval Training." Translational Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine 4.4 (2019): 23-27. [01:01:47] Zac’s website. [01:02:08] Human Matrix Seminars. [01:05:21] Find Zac on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube. [01:05:40] Book: Digital Minimalism: Choosing a Focused Life in a Noisy World, by Cal Newport. Podcast: How to Live Well in a High Tech World, with Cal Newport.

'Bad Science' is a book about breaking down the research behind some of the outrageous claims that certain industries make. Ben is a doctor and does a great job breaking down how you should look at these claims and if they actually make sense. He also does a great job breaking down the research and how to break down the data, all while keeping it entertaining. #complicatedsimple #progressive #openminded #PBE #EBP #noagenda #performance #training #nutrition #health #wellness #athlete #athletictraining #science #chiropractic #rehab #prevention #clinicallypressed #science #quacks #badscience #research #data #physician

If you've listened to more than one of our podcasts, you'll probably be aware of the problem of the opacity of clinical trial data - trials which are conducted by never see the light of day, or results within those trials which are never published. Pharmaceutical companies have their own policies on what they are willing to make public, when, and for the first time a new audit, published on bmj.com, collates and analyses those policies. To discuss that study I'm joined by two of the authors - Ben Goldacre, senior clinical research fellow at, and Carl Heneghan, director of, Oxford's Centre for Evidence Based Medicine. Read the full audit: http://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j3334

[button link="https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-self-help-podcast/id663490789" bg_color="#2d7ec4"]Subscribe to The Self Help Podcast in iTunes[/button] What's Coming This Episode?   Depression ain't no walk in the park, that's for sure. It's a debilitating condition that can wreak havoc on a persons life. But is there light in amongst the darkness? Can some good come from depression? Enjoy the show, it's The Self Help Podcast! Show Notes and Links Sean wrote a blog post on this subject. Have a read... 10 good things about depression Depression can be good for you Bad Science by Ben Goldacre is a great read Resource of the Week Sean recommended a book called Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Depression Ed watched a great short film: Lessons from 100-Year Olds Stay in Touch We're all over the web, so feel free to stay in touch: Follow Live in the Present on Twitter and Facebook for daily doses of inspiration Follow presenter Edward Lamb on Twitter Follow therapist Sean Orford on Facebook and Twitter Subscribe to our weekly podcast on iTunes Leave us an Honest Review on iTunes We'd be amazingly grateful if you could leave us a review on iTunes. It will really help us to build our audience. So, if your like what you hear (and would like to hear more great free content) then visit our iTunes page and leave us an honest review (all feedback gratefully received!).  

In a clinical trial, we usually think of risk in terms of the new active compound - will it have unwanted effects. However, two analyses in The BMJ are concerned about the risk associated with the control arm. Robin Emsley is a professor of psychiatry at Stellenbosch University in South Africa, he and colleagues have written about the risk associated with forgoing treatment in patients with schizophrenia. Read the full analysis: http://www.bmj.com/content/354/bmj.i4728 Jonathan Mendel, lecturer in human geography at the University of Dundee, and Ben Goldacre, senior clinical research fellow at the University of Oxford, have examined the ethical approval given to trials, and are concerned that identified risks are not adequately communicated to patients. Read the full analysis: http://www.bmj.com/content/354/bmj.i4626

Given the number of effective treatments for type II diabetes, which have good evidence about safety and efficacy, should any new drugs for the condition be subject to a higher regulatory bar? In this podcast, Huseyin Naci from the London School of Economics, John Yudkin from Univerity College London, and Ben Goldacre from the University of Oxford, explain why they believe the current process is inadequate, and suggest some ways in which it could be improved. Read the full analysis article: http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h5260

The very best journalism from one of Britain's most admired and outspoken science writers, author of the bestselling "Bad Science" and "Bad Pharma" and his new book "I Think You'll Find It's a Bit More Complicated Than That"

Continental drift could have been started by a massive meteorite impact 3 billion years ago. Fossilised daddy longlegs reveal the arachnids had an extra pair of eyes 305 million years ago. And weren't cute then, either. A new study suggests that even if there was liquid water on the surface of Mars billions of years ago, there wasn't enough atmospheric pressure to keep it liquid for long. The UK Government has stockpiled over £500m worth of the antiviral drug Tamiflu. A study now finds that the drug would have little to know effect on the spread of influenza or the duration of flu symptoms. According to medical journalist Ben Goldacre, this finding is symbolic of substantial transparency issues within the pharmaceutical industry. Ten world-class violinists tested expensive 'Old Italians' - Stradivarius and del Gesu violins - against modern, much cheaper instruments. The modern instruments were overwhelmingly preferred.

Influenza causes up to five million cases of severe illness and half a million deaths globally every year. Yet, as Adam Rutherford finds out, our current vaccination strategy is a seasonal game of chance, based on guessing the strain that will appear next. Research published this week in Science Translational Medicine, by a team from Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, offers hope for a universal flu vaccine, based on newly discovered antibodies.Earlier this week, a game to help combat ash dieback was launched on Facebook, called Fraxinus. Reporter Gaia Vince looks at the growing trend for using games to solve scientific problems. Is this new way of gathering and analysing data changing the way science is done?Currently half of all clinical trials are not published worldwide. Adam talks to Ben Goldacre, author of Bad Pharma, about his new campaign 'AllTrials', which aims to change that.Finally this week, physicist Peter Barham shows us his instrument - a spy camera system that he's designed to recognise penguins.

Dr. Ben Goldacre, author of Bad Pharma: How Drug Companies Mislead Doctors and Harm Patients, discusses the pervasive bias in reporting clinical trials of medications. He calls for all trials to be registered and for all trial results to be reported. Otherwise, he says, doctors, researchers, and patients are prevented from making discerning decisions about treatments and the field of evidence-based medicine is pointlessly hobbled. For more, see alltrials.net.

Strongly divergent opinions are aired on this week's edition of A Good Read as acclaimed children's author Michelle Paver brings Tove Jansson's 'Summer Book' to the table, a moving account of the relationship between an old woman and her granddaughter. We hear how she struggles with the choice of medical journalist Ben Goldacre, who discusses 'Testing Treatments', an account of how drug trials are conducted. Presenter Harriett Gilbert likes both, but proposes an autobiographical novel, 'Jigsaw' by Sybille Bedford, which for Goldacre misses the mark by a million miles. Producer: Mark Smalley

Is there any evidence to support the Beecroft Review's recommended changes to employment law? Plus: hard-working Greeks, infidelity, and Ben Goldacre on publication bias.

Ben Goldacre explores the battle to protect science writers from the threat of libel action.

Interview with Ben Goldacre; News Items: Dark Matter Strangeness, Vaccine Case in Supreme Court, Gliese 581g Follow Up; Who's That Noisy; Your Questions and E-mails: Magic Burgers; Science or Fiction

Interview with Angie McQuaig; News Items: The Pose and Darwin, Ben Goldacre vs the Media, Healing Laser; Your Questions and E-mail: Starseeds, the eHolster; Randi Speaks; Science or Fiction; Whos That Noisy