Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

In Britain, Better Not Call It Bogus Science

Posted by timothy on from the oh-nothing-just-dowsing-for-magnetic-vitamins dept.

Geoffrey.landis writes 'In Britain, libel laws are censoring the ability of journalists to write stories about bogus science. Simon Singh, a Ph.D. physicist and author of several best-selling popular-science books, is currently being sued by the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) for saying that there is no evidence for claims that visiting a chiropractor has health benefits. A year earlier, writer Ben Goldacre faced a libel suit for an article critical of Matthias Rath, who claimed that vitamin supplements can treat HIV and AIDS in place of conventional drugs like anti-retrovirals. In Britain, libel laws don't have any presumption of innocence — any statement made is assumed to be false unless you prove it's true. Journalists are running scared.'

7 of 754 comments (clear)

  1. Proof of absence by jklovanc · · Score: 1, Troll

    The statement "there is no scientific proof" is not provable; it is only disprovable by presenting the scientific proof. Proving absence is very difficult; e.g prove there is no god.

  2. Britain has no freedoms. by 7-Vodka · · Score: 0, Troll

    This is why every colony tried unsuccessfully to be completely free of them.

    News at 11.

    --

    Liberty.

  3. Re:Well Then by MightyMartian · · Score: 0, Troll

    You must be one of the lying evil turds who modded my parent post down.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  4. Re:Well Then by MightyMartian · · Score: 0, Troll

    And stuffing french fries up your nose until they're coming out your eyes cures knee pain. Don't scoff, because I'll bet you never tried it.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  5. Re:Did Singh really say anything bogus about the B by techno-vampire · · Score: 0, Troll

    I do: you're allowed to bring it up as a defense, but even if you prove your point it may not be enough for you to win the case.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  6. Re:Well Then by Cyberax · · Score: 0, Troll

    "Again, there is no massaging of muscles involved with chiropractic. Only direct rapid adjustments design to push misaligned vertebra back into alignment."

    Which is just a form of massage. So?

    "Our methods of evaluating efficacy have been demonstrated to be false repeatedly. The miracle drug prozac doesn't even beat placebo in studies anymore."

    WRONG! You're so wrong, that it burns.

    You're telling me that double-blind studies do not work by providing an example of double-blind study. Way to go.

    Also, your example is trivially wrong - do a PubMed search yourself.

  7. Re:Well Then by Cyberax · · Score: 0, Troll

    "A double blind study that didn't work..."

    That's incorrect by definition.