Don't drink the water

So, in our last installment of Learning About Chemistry From People Whose Last Science Class Was In The Seventh Grade, we found out that breathing air causes all of the diseases known to man.  Today we will hear about how drinking water is slowly killing us all.

Man, with all of the air we breathe and water we drink, it's a surprise that the human race isn't extinct by now.

This latest sermon from the Church of Wingnuttery ties into the whole anti-fluoridation movement.  You probably are aware of the controversy surrounding fluoridation of water to prevent tooth decay; despite multiple peer-reviewed studies that have shown that this is safe and effective (read two of them here and here), there are people who think that fluoridation is basically the government's way of slowly murdering us all.  (Of course the government wants to kill all of its citizens.  Don't make me use the word "sheeple" in your general direction.)  Further, because of the presence of fluoride minerals in soils and bedrock, fresh water is naturally fluoridated, with a concentration averaging around 0.2 ppm.  Seawater has concentrations ten times higher than that, and aquatic animals seem to be able to tolerate it just fine.

So, fluoride is pretty safe, in low doses, and will save you the cost and trauma of multiple trips to the dentist.  But don't take my word for it.  Don't take the scientists' word for it, either.  No, instead, you should trust the likes of "April," who wrote an article for the website Starseed411 called "How Does Your Drinking Water Affect You?" that should be inscribed forever in the annals of Making Shit Up.

April starts out with a chemistry lesson:

We have all known all our lives that our drinkng [sic] water supply is H20, 2 parts hydrogen and 1 part oxygen. There is an old book called Natural Philosophy by: G.P. Quakenbos, A.M., entered according to act of Congress in the year 1859, by G.P. Quakenbos, the Clerk Office of The District Court of The United States, for the Southern District of New York. This book states that towards the end of the 18th century water was found to be a compound substance made up of a combination of oxygen and hydrogen, combined in the proportion of 1 to 8. Meaning 1 part oxygen and 8 parts hydrogen. H80.

I knew it!  I knew there was something wrong with my well water!  It just isn't hydrogen-y enough.

So, anyway, if water is supposed to be eight parts hydrogen to one part oxygen, how did it end up as familiar old H₂O?

The answer, of course, is fluoridation:

Fluoride was infused into the water to destroy and remove 6 parts hydrogen. Our water supply affects us by hardening our pineal gland, by age 12 the pineal gland is calicified [sic], and by adulthood it is atrophied.

That nasty old fluoride!  Stealing away 75% of the hydrogen from our water, and hoarding it all for itself!  And making our pineal glands go all... crusty.  Terrifying!  But what effects does this have, and what can we do about it?

The pineal gland (third eye) is the seed of our soul and our connection to the spiritual, physical world, and higher frequencies. This gland is our power source. The pineal gland is like a built in wireless transmitter. when the pineal gland becomes awaken, learning abilitys are heightened; enhanced creativity; intuition; triggered psychic abilities, and experience bliss. Fluoride in the drinking water seals these capabilitys [sic]. You can awaken your pineal gland through eliminating bad sugars, processed foods, and fluoride from your body.

Well, that explains why I've experienced so little bliss lately.

Now, lest you think that "April" is just one aberrant wacko, take a look at the highly scientific editorial "Water is Poison" (gist: fluoride rots your bones, destroys your immune system, and is being used by the government for purposes of "eugenics"), not to mention "Fluoride: The Lunatic Drug" (which reads like a compendium of anti-scientific craziness ranking right up there with the best of David Icke).  The upshot: fluoride doesn't prevent cavities.  It causes cancer, osteoporosis, Alzheimer's disease, and kidney problems, not to mention making you "stupid, docile, and subservient."

In any case, let's clear a few things up.  Fluoride, in the miniscule doses you'd get from either naturally or artificially fluoridated water, is completely harmless, and has little other effect than strengthening your tooth enamel.  This has been repeatedly demonstrated to the satisfaction of panels of scientists trained in human physiology.  Of course it's poisonous in large doses; so are a great many other things, including caffeine, aspirin, and table salt.  If you don't understand how this works, there's this thing called a dose-response curve that you might want to investigate that will hopefully clarify the point.

Also, it bears mention that if fluoride is as horrible as these people claim, there should be a fairly strong correlation between living in a community that fluoridates its water and terrible health.  So, take a look at this map, from the National Center for Health Statistics:

Percentage of communities, state-by-state, that fluoridate their water

So, from this map, we should expect the greatest number of sane and healthy people should be in states like New Hampshire, and that the citizens of New Mexico should be... worried.  But take a look at this map of cancer incidence, from the Center for Disease Control:

Do the words "no correlation" mean anything to you?  And none of the other diseases the anti-fluoridation crowd wants to attribute to fluoride in the water -- Alzheimer's, osteoporosis, type-2 diabetes, and kidney failure -- show any greater degree of correlation.

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find maps showing the incidence of being "stupid, docile, and subservient."  Maybe the Center for Disease Control isn't putting that data out there because it's too damning, I don't know.

Anyhow, that's about all I have time for today.  It's amazing to me that there are people who swallow this stuff (figuratively speaking; I hear that anti-science nonsense is toxic in high doses!).  But judging by the controversy that erupts every time a community puts fluoridation up to the vote, apparently there are a great many people who aren't swayed by research, and instead are convinced by alarmist rhetoric.  I suppose I can't do much about that, but I do hope that they have their dental insurance paid up.

All I need is the air that I breathe

I think my most common thought, while reading a lot of woo-woo writing, is "Learn some damn science before you pretend you know what you're talking about."

Okay, I know that sounds pretty arrogant of me, as if I always know what I'm talking about.  I don't; I make mistakes as often as the next guy.  But one thing I do try to do is research what I'm writing about, find out what science and experimentation have shown, before I launch off into thin air.

I use the "thin air" metaphor deliberately because of a website discovered by a student of mine, a frequent Skeptophilia contributor with a sharp eye for searching out nonsense.  And this time, she found a doozy.  The title of this website, "CO2 and Oxygen in Evolution of Air on Earth and Health," by itself caused some puzzled eyebrow-raising, but nothing like the actual content -- because its author, Artour Rakhimov, seems to be in serious need of basic training in human physiology.

The gist of this website is that all of the medical problems you've ever experienced were caused by having too much oxygen, and too little carbon dioxide, in your tissues.  Yes, you read that right.  Furthermore, we "hyperoxygenate" during times of high activity because we evolved during a time when there was less oxygen in the air, and we had to breathe harder.  Now, hyperventilation is killing us:

Appearance of the first vertebrates (about 550 millions years ago) and the development of prototypes of human lungs took place when air was made up of only about 1% O2, while having much higher percentage of CO2 (Maina, 1998), likely over 7%. Normal air today has many times more O2  (about 20%) and only a fraction of the CO2 (0.03%). However, our cells now still live in the air that existed hundred millions years ago: “But the cells of animals and humans need about 7 % CO2 and only 2% O2 in the surrounding environment. This is the way how our cells live: cells of the heart, brain, and kidneys” (Buteyko, 1977).

Yup.  We still live in "hundred million year old air."  That's why my knees hurt and I have sinus problems.

Anyhow, there we were, millions of years ago, happily consuming our "main nutrient" -- yes, this is what he calls carbon dioxide -- when along came plants to mess everything up:

However, the main parameter of our environment, our air, had dramatic change during later stages of our evolution due to advance of green life that transforms CO2 into O2 during photosynthesis.  We can see that air had dramatic change during evolution. It now has too much oxygen and almost no CO2. Hence, the chief parameter of our environment (we can survive for days or weeks with no water or food, but only for minutes with no air) became abnormal in its composition. It is only existence of our lungs that protected us from extinction. Nature could not anticipate this cardinal change in air, but it did provide us with the means for survival.

No, apparently he doesn't know that photosynthesis predated aerobic respiration as an evolved metabolic pathway.  How exactly our ancestors could have evolved to use oxygen before there were photosynthesizing organisms there to produce oxygen, I have no idea.  Nor do I know how they survived.  I have this strangely amusing image of dinosaurs crashing about in a completely plant-free ecosystem, gasping for breath, and cursing the fact that they'd appeared too soon.

In any case, now that we've established what the problem is, what do we do?   Well, Artour Rakhimov has the solution -- learn to breathe more slowly, or use a "Frolov Breathing Device" -- a thing that basically gets you rebreathing exhaled air.  Oh, and by the way, Rakhimov is selling "Frolov Breathing Devices."  Did I even need to mention that?

Could there be any truth to this?  The answer is "no."  Raising carbon dioxide levels in your blood is called "respiratory acidosis" (carbon dioxide in solution in your blood plasma creates a weak acid, carbonic acid, dropping the blood pH).  This, in turn, is the signal to your brainstem to speed up your breathing rate.  Put simply: carbon dioxide levels, via their effects on your blood pH, are how your body keeps track of how fast you need to breathe.  Slowing down your breathing, or rebreathing exhaled air, will just make you feel uncomfortable, and stimulate the unpleasant sensation that you need to breathe faster.

Don't believe me?  Check out sources here and here -- the latter source stating that humans start showing signs of hypercapnia (carbon dioxide toxicity) at an inhaled air concentration of 3%, and that at 7% -- the level recommended as healthy by Artour Rakhimov -- you will experience "labored breathing, headaches, tinnitus, as well as impaired vision... You are likely to become confused in a few minutes, followed by unconsciousness."

Rakhimov himself seems pretty confused on the topic.  Maybe he's been breathing too much carbon dioxide.

See why I yelled at my computer several times while reading all of this?  Of course, Rakhimov couldn't hear me, and it wasn't because of the tinnitus.  But still, I find the whole thing immensely frustrating, especially given the fact that this is hardly the only idiotic pseudo-medical idea out there -- in fact, I've got another one planned for Monday, to the effect that the problem isn't the air, it's the water.

It's got too little hydrogen in it.  Two hydrogens to one oxygen just isn't enough.

I can barely wait.

Establishing a state religion

There is something going in on North Carolina right now that I bet a lot of you haven't heard about.  It's gotten barely any press coverage, which is weird, because if it doesn't scare the absolute hell out of you, you're not thinking hard enough.

A bill, filed by two Republican lawmakers from Rowan County on Monday (and backed by nine others), had as its intent to supersede the United States Constitution with respect to the establishment of a "state religion."  The bill was written by Representatives Carl Ford (R-China Grove) and Harry Warren (R-Salisbury), and says, in part,

SECTION 1. The North Carolina General Assembly asserts that the Constitution of the United States of America does not prohibit states or their subsidiaries from making laws respecting an establishment of religion.
SECTION 2. The North Carolina General Assembly does not recognize federal court rulings which prohibit and otherwise regulate the State of North Carolina, its public schools, or any political subdivisions of the State from making laws respecting an establishment of religion.

Backers claim that the bill is in response to President Obama's moves to establish universal health care and to alter gun laws, and they characterize it as fighting "federal tyranny."

Now, before you start writing letters, allow me to mention that this bill died yesterday afternoon in committee.  But the fact that it got as far as it did is like a dash of cold water down my back.  And if you think that this is a feint, or a political move intended just to "send a message," consider what Michael Bitzer, a professor of political science at Catawba College in Salisbury, had to say about the bill: "[I]t is attempting to appease to a certain base of supporters here in Rowan County, but also probably throughout the state, that believe very firmly in the needs for religious liberty."

Now wait, Dr. Bitzer, let me get this straight: allowing North Carolina to establish an official state religion, and thus compel prayers in schools, prayers before governmental functions, and (presumably) state control over what can and cannot be taught in science classrooms, is a move toward religious liberty?  Can I just take a moment to remind you of what theocracies are actually like?

Because a move toward a Christian theocracy is what this is, of course.  No one in his or her right mind believes that all religions in North Carolina will be given equal respect.  This is just the old "America is a Christian nation" thing, rebranded as some kind of fight against the power of the federal government.  Take a look, for example, at the billboard campaign that has begun, in support of this move:

Many local churches have been vocal in their support of the bill, and vow to continue the fight now that this iteration of it will not be voted on.  "It's very exciting," minister Bill Godair of Cornerstone Church in Salisbury told WBTV on Wednesday.  "I was thrilled about it...  I know this money could have been given to the poor and I feel like we do so much and I feel like we elected these men, the fact that they're standing together unified, all five of them, I just feel like that we have to stand with them."

I find the whole thing profoundly frightening.  In this time, when there are large, organized, well-funded private groups that have as their official goal mandating the infiltration of religion into every aspect of our lives -- determining what we can do with our own bodies, how we have to teach our children, what we can and cannot say in public -- that this sort of thing is now being considered by government officials is horrifying.

And for those of my readers who are yourselves Christian, I hope you have the sense to recognize why this would be a terrible move.  Because, after all, it's not like Christianity is one thing; it is a diverse system of belief, a term that encompasses everything from the liberal, bible-as-metaphor approach of the Unitarian Universalists to the hard-as-nails biblical fundamentalism of the Pentecostals.  (Notwithstanding the fact that some of these sects say about the others that they are "not true Christians.")  So, if there's to be a state religion, which one?  If you take just that parts they all agree on, there won't be much left.  One of them has to be chosen as the actual state religion -- which should rightly terrify members of the others.

In any case, keep an eye on North Carolina, and other states in the "Bible Belt."  This fight isn't over yet.  And for those atheists, rationalists, agnostics, and freethinkers who somehow survive down there -- speak up.  Now.

Before it's too late.

Ghost spotting

My wife and I just got back from a trip to Boston -- my first visit to that fascinating and historical city.  And as part of our visit, we got to participate in a ghost tour.

I thought of it as an "undercover mission."  My wife, on the other hand, thought of it as a prime opportunity for me to be obnoxious in public.

"Before I buy tickets for this," she said last week, her finger poised on the "Enter" button on her laptop keyboard, "you have to promise me one thing."

"What's that?"

"That you'll BE NICE."

So I reluctantly agreed, she bought the tickets, and Monday evening, we dutifully showed up in the chilly, windy evening in front of Faneuil Hall.  There we met our guide, Jim, who represented Boston Ghost Tours -- and also a "real" ghosthunting group, RTS Paranormal Investigations, of Wrentham, Massachusetts.

I decided right away that I wouldn't blow my cover and announce my status as a doubter.  I played along, even generating some naive-appearing enthusiasm at the beginning of the tour as Jim told us that Boston was one of the "most haunted cities in North America."  It was kind of a heady experience, being a spy, although the fact that Jim was dressed in Revolutionary War garb kept reminding me of what happened to Nathan Hale.

The first thing Jim told us was that there was no guarantee that we'd see a ghost.  Ghosts, he said, were notoriously unpredictable and uncooperative.  "After all," he told us, "ghost hunting isn't like whale watching."  Which, technically, is correct, because whales exist.  But I didn't mention that.

So off we went.  Our first stop was the site of the Boston Massacre, which we observed from the warmth of the glassed-in foyer of Bank of America.  We were told that bunches of people had seen the ghost of Crispus Attucks, one of the first victims of the Revolutionary War, and that the likely reason Attucks had appeared in the early years of the 21st century (he apparently hadn't been seen before then, and hasn't been seen in the last couple of years) was that they were renovating the area.  Ghosts, apparently, don't like renovations, which I can sympathize with.  We just finished remodeling our bathroom, and it was a nuisance.  Why ghosts care, I don't know, but apparently they do, and Crispus Attucks dealt with his frustration by dying over and over in front of the Old State House.  I guess everyone handles stress in his own way.

After that, we went to the Old South Church, where we heard about a British soldier who shot at a ghostly priest and then got flogged for discharging his weapon without orders.  After this rather cautionary tale, we went to the Omni Parker Hotel, "the most haunted building in Massachusetts."

We went up to the second floor, which seemed to mostly be comprised of meeting rooms and was empty unless you counted the three-dozen-odd middle school students, all in eye-damaging yellow t-shirts, who were touring the place.  So the ambiance wasn't exactly what it could have been.  We waited until the teenagers had departed and the airborne hormone levels had returned to normal to view the main attraction -- the "Charles Dickens mirror," a gilt-framed mirror in which many people have seen ghostly reflections.  Some have even taken photographs of it, only to find that there's the ghostly image of a man in the picture -- a man who hadn't been there when the photo was taken.  So, naturally, my wife had to give it a try herself:

And lo and behold, if you look carefully, you can see -- to the left of her (you can't see her face as it's being obscured by the camera flash) -- the figure of a ghostly man wearing a brimmed hat, staring into the mirror!

Oh, wait, that's me.  Never mind.

So we didn't see a ghost in the mirror, and believe me, I tried.  I stared into that thing like a madman, but all I saw was my own rather questionable face.

Afterwards, we went out into a large open space on the second floor, and Jim regaled us with tales of "Room 303," which "some of the hotel staff deny even exists."  They apparently tell people it's a broom closet.  But then he told us that it still gets rented out, which seems odd, for a broom closet, but what do I know about hotel administration?  In any case, Jim said we couldn't go up to room 303, but if we did -- man, there is one malevolent spirit there.  It grabs people's ankles while they're sleeping, and one time slapped one of the hotel staff across the face.  But even though we couldn't visit room 303, as a consolation prize we would get to see if there were any ghosts about -- using equipment, and everything.

So Jim got out a flashlight and an electromagnetic field detector (he said that an electronic stud finder, or even a compass, would also work).  He turned the flashlight on, and handed the EMF detector to a teenage girl who was on the tour and told her to ask any ghosts who were present to show themselves by turning off the flashlight or making the detector light up.

Giggling nervously, the girl did as Jim requested.  Silence fell in the group, as we looked around us at the opulent carpeting, the old woodwork, the empty halls receding into shadow.  And then... suddenly...

... nothing happened.  And after a while, nothing continued to happen.  There was one momentary tiny blip on the EMF detector, which Jim said was probably caused by the building's WiFi.  "Always look for the rational explanation first," he said, which seemed like good advice to me.  In fact, my rational explanation for no results is that there's nothing there, but Jim disagreed, apparently, and asked a couple of other members of the group to request that the ghosts make themselves known.

Which they did.  But the ghosts weren't cooperating that night, so we reluctantly packed it in, and Jim walked us all out of the hotel and back to the MTA subway station.

Anyhow, all in all, it was an entertaining evening, and I encourage any of you who are visiting Boston to check it out (you can make reservations at the link I posted above).  Maybe you'll have better luck than I did.  You'd almost have to, actually, given that I didn't see a damn thing and nearly froze to death on the outdoor part of the tour.  But I have to say that Jim is quite a storyteller, and even if I'm not the most receptive of audiences, I did enjoy myself and hardly rolled my eyes at all.

Well, a little, but I tried to keep it to a minimum.  You never know how ghosts are going to react to being laughed at.  For example, I suspect that the one in room 303 would not be amused, and however much I'd like to see a ghost, I think I'd prefer not to get slapped in the face by one.

Rainbows over Antarctica

So, in the past couple of days we've looked at the scientific evidence of some rather unexpected medical modalities, with their possibility of opening up new avenues for diagnosing and treating human disease.  Today we're going to look at a more pressing issue, namely: did Martians build a city out of Legos in Antarctica?

You may think I'm joking, but yesterday I ran across an article that claimed exactly that.  I try not to spend much time in this blog writing about things that are simply ridiculous, but this one was so far off the deep end that I just had to.  I kept thinking that it had to be a spoof, but once again, Poe's Law has bitten me on the posterior.  Mike Perry, the author of "The Rainbow City Built by Martians in Antarctica," seems entirely serious.

Here's what he says about this amazing place:

Rainbow City is an ancient Martian City right here on Earth, most of it is made from a form of plastic, a bit like Lego perhaps.

And where is this city? Somewhere hidden beneath the icy wastes of Antarctica. It's actually only one of network of Martian cities built over two and a half million years ago. The other cities are now abandoned but Rainbow City remains inhabited by a few of the original colonists who made their way to Earth.

It is said that warm springs keep out the cold and ice walls 10,000 feet high guard it from intruders.

Believable so far?

Um, no.  Thanks for asking.  But please do continue.

Millions of years back Mars was an okay place to live but their ancients realised that the planet was dying and it's oxygen and water was getting in shorter and shorter supply. It became a necessity to move, so they packed some of their bags and headed for Earth.

The Great Ruler of Mars sent a fleet of spaceships to Earth and they settled in the area we now know as Antarctica. Here they built seven cities each of a different colour but Rainbow City, the greatest of them all, was made up of all of the colours of the rainbow.

At the time Antarctica was a good, warm place to live, but a great catastrophe of some sort occurred and the Earth was tipped on it's [sic] axis. The survivors of this disaster had to abandon all but the Rainbow City and tmany [sic] settled in the northern hemisphere and gradually lost there [sic] technological knowledge.

Only Rainbow City remained - and remains to this day.

And to my delight, we're treated to a picture of this Eighth Wonder of the World:

Now, my question is, why on earth, other than having a mild mental illness, should anyone believe that this is true?  The answer, Mr. Perry tells us, is the Hefferlin Manuscript, which tells us all about it.

So what, other than "fiction," is the Hefferlin manuscript?  It's a document that was written by William and Gladys Hefferlin of Sheridan, Wyoming in the 1940s, which alleged the colonization of Antarctica by Martians.  A colony of Martians was still there, they said, and could travel all over the world via a network of tunnels, one of which conveniently ended in Sheridan.  The Hefferlins had been in contact with a Martian named "Rani Khatani," and he'd given them the information in the manuscript.

What's pretty clear is that the whole thing was a publicity stunt from the get-go.  In 1946 the Hefferlins sent the manuscript in to the science fiction magazine Amazing Stories, which published it in October of that year.  The readers were, by and large, outraged by what they saw as woo-woo nonsense infiltrating a magazine whose purpose was to publish good short fiction.  One of them wrote in that he could only "heartily suggest that Mr. Hefferlin buy a good book on radio and electricity and learn a little about the subject before he writes any more articles...  I honestly cannot see how anyone with a high school education could read Mr. Hefferlin's article without laughing."

So the whole thing seemed to be pretty much a non-starter, and it's astonishing that there are still people around who take the whole thing seriously.  And they do, judging by the comments that follow Mike Perry's post.  Here's a sampling:

• Fascinating post and well, who can say for sure, right?
• The Easter Islanders (when you can get them to stop telling you what you want to hear) claim to have come from Antarctica, before the cold. They say it's the source of 'The Mana" that was used to move the moai.   From the book, "Mysteries of Easter Island" by Francis Maziere.
• todays [sic] post was v interesting for me. some of it could be true :-)

All of which makes me want to sob softly while pounding my forehead on the desk.

Anyhow, that's it for today.  I don't know what else I could possible add, here, other than to mention that according to Mike Perry and others who buy the Hefferlin manuscript as gospel, the Hefferlins themselves were taken to "Rainbow City" when they got old and have been rejuvenated and are living there still as "wise immortals."  Which sounds nice enough, until you realize that this means they have to spend eternity in freakin' Antarctica.  I mean, I think upstate New York is cold enough.

Seizure dogs

Yesterday I looked at a possible "alt-med" treatment modality that may actually work -- "Intranasal Light Therapy."  Today, I want to look at another odd claim, and one that also seems to have some sound research to back it up: the idea that some dogs are able to sense when people near them are about to have a seizure.

I have a personal connection to this one, because our neurotic border collie, Doolin, has a strange ability to recognize when my wife is going to get a migraine.  Now, Doolin's behavior is peculiar at the best of times, but in the hours before a migraine strikes, she becomes even weirder -- following Carol around, staring at her mournfully, and whenever she comes to a complete stop, Doolin presses herself up against Carol's leg.  Once the migraine hits -- which it invariably does -- Doolin won't leave her side until it abates.

Doolin, the Migraine Dog, with one of her diagnostic instruments

Now, I know that one anecdotal report doesn't prove anything, especially that "dog behavioral weirdness" is hardly a quantifiable dependent variable.  But there have been peer-reviewed studies done (read two of them here and here) that indicate that some dogs are able to detect seizures before they begin, and potentially give their owners advance warning.

Here's the thing, though.  Once there are claims like this, the woo-woos get involved, and you get all sorts of wacky explanations flying around.  Here are a few that I saw, after perusing woo-woo sites as long as I could stand to:

• Dogs are in psychic contact with their owners, and are sensing the oncoming seizure through ESP.
• Dogs can see auras, and seizures cause changes in the color or configuration of the aura.
• Dogs have a special god-given talent for protecting their owners from harm.  The whole thing is "spiritual."
• Dogs are living in "several different realms simultaneously" (whatever the hell that means) and get their information about our medical conditions from some other "astral plane."

So.  Yeah.  Predictably, I think all of the above are unadulterated horse waste.  But assuming that there is something going on, here -- and it very much appears that it is -- what are the dogs picking up on?

It's pretty well established that dogs can be trained to detect when a diabetic's blood sugar is too high, and the likely cue is that high blood sugar triggers ketoacidosis -- and results in chemicals being expelled via the breath that the dog could detect by smell.  While it's unlikely that seizures (or migraines) result in a chemical in the blood, and therefore in the sweat or breath, that a dog could sense, it's a possibility.  On the other hand, it's been suggested that dogs may simply be picking up on changes in mannerisms that occur prior to the onset of the seizure.  Dog behavior, and particularly their sensitivity to human expressions, has been studied extensively, and it's not too far a stretch to think that changes in a patient's demeanor prior to a seizure might be detected by a dog who knew the person well, resulting in changes to the dog's behavior that the owner might be able to learn to recognize.

Whatever is going on here, however, it's a pretty cool phenomenon.  I know that I feel more at ease knowing the Doolin the Migraine Dog is on the job.  On the other hand, most of what she spends the rest of her time doing is pacing around the house, looking guilty, sneaking onto the recliner when no one's looking, and bossing around our other dog, Grendel, so I'm not sure that her migraine-detection skills are quite enough to put her in the "useful" column just yet.

Nose lasers redux

One of the nice things about science, and skepticism in general, is that it self-corrects.  Properly applied, skepticism leads you along based upon one thing and one thing only; the data.  Hard evidence is always the ultimate arbiter.

Now, you can still go astray, especially with complex data sets or experimental protocols that require extreme precision.  And there are the unfortunately unavoidable pitfalls that come from having a fallible human brain that can sometimes take all of the right information and still put it together wrong.  But with sufficient time, effort, and energy, and usually helped by having many pairs of eyes trained on the same question, science usually arrives at a pretty solid answer.

That self-correcting mechanism, however, means that we skeptics have to eat crow sometimes.  A few weeks ago I posted a rather sardonic piece about "Intranasal Light Therapy," to the effect that the practice of aiming a beam of light up your nose couldn't possibly generate any positive therapeutic effects.  A couple of days ago I got a very courteous response to the post, informing me that the procedure had, in fact, been double-blind tested and was found to have results that definitely land it in the "hmmm, interesting" department.  The gentleman who responded sent me some source material, and asked me to study it and reconsider my position.

The most interesting link he sent me was to a paper published in the International Journal of Photoenergy, entitled "Randomized, Double-Blind, and Placebo-Controlled Clinic Report of Intranasal Low-Intensity Laser Therapy on Vascular Diseases," by Liu et al.  I encourage you to take a look at it.  The researchers postulate that the laser light used might be generating its effects via stimulation of the olfactory nerve, but they were up front that there are other possibilities.  What made me sit up and take notice is that the findings were statistically significant, with patients in the experimental group showing reduction in blood indexes associated with inflammation, including plasma viscosity, red blood cell aggregation, and low-density lipoprotein levels, as compared to the control group.

So far, it's suggestive that there is "something going on here" beyond the usual woo-woo placebo effect that I have written about so many times before.  I do have two quick caveats, though, neither of which may be all that significant, but which are still enough to keep me from being sold 100%.

First, the lead author of the study, Timon Cheng-Yi Liu, is the science adviser for MedicLights, Inc., the company that is in business to sell intranasal light units.  This doesn't exactly constitute a conflict of interest -- many scientists have connections to industry, and it would be cynical indeed of me to think that they were all biased because of it.  But it is interesting that Liu listed in the "affiliations" section of the paper his connection to South China Normal University, and not his connection to MedicLights, Inc., given its relevance to the topic at hand.

Second, and more troubling (to me at least) is a mention in the introduction that the effects of intranasal light therapy may be mediated through the "meridians" that are described in traditional Chinese medicine.  As far as I can tell, "meridians" don't exist.  According to a 1997 statement from the National Institute of Health,

Despite considerable efforts to understand the anatomy and physiology of the "acupuncture points", the definition and characterization of these points remains controversial. Even more elusive is the basis of some of the key traditional Eastern medical concepts such as the circulation of qi, the meridian system, and the five phases theory, which are difficult to reconcile with contemporary biomedical information but continue to play an important role in the evaluation of patients and the formulation of treatment in acupuncture.

Which sounds pretty unequivocal to me.  So bringing in claims from a system of questionable medical knowledge hardly earns any validity points in my estimation.  Still, it must be said that even when people medicated themselves with herbs and credited the improvement in their conditions to spirits that inhabited the plants, the effect was there even though the explanation was wrong.  So I'm not willing to jettison the entire thing because they decided to dip their toes into the rather muddy waters of traditional Chinese medicine.

Anyway, there you have it.  At least a partial retraction, and a desire to learn more.  Woo-woos are fond of quoting Hamlet -- "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."  Usually, it's meant to throw a literary version of "You don't know everything" at skeptics -- a statement that is literally correct, but that doesn't give you license to claim that any damnfool thing you came up with has to be true because of it.

However, interpreted correctly, I think the quote from Hamlet is quite right.  You never know what curve ball nature will throw at you next, and if there's one thing I've learned, it's that science is always capable of surprising me.  There are far weirder ideas than improving your health by shining a laser up your nose -- and although it very much remains to be seen what exactly the laser is doing, just the fact that it's doing something leaves Intranasal Light Therapy filed under "this deserves further investigation."