Skip to main content

Stick up for Simon Singh

You may well have come across science writer Simon Singh, probably best known for writing Fermat's Last Theorem.

His most recent book, Trick or Treatment, was a superb analysis of alternative medical practices, showing just what rubbish many of them are. Singh wrote an article (as you do) along the theme of his book and made some negative comments about chiropractors. This wasn't attacking them for what they can do for backs, but rather their claims to be able to help with a whole host of conditions that having nothing to do with the spine - such as colic and asthma in children.

In response, the BCA, their UK national organization, has sued Singh. The first hearing, to determine just what he is alleged to have done, went badly for Singh. The judge decided that Singh's comments were 'statement of fact' rather than fair comment, and that his use of the word 'bogus' meant that he was accusing the BCA of deliberate dishonesty, despite Singh specifically defining what he meant by 'bogus' in the article, and it was clearly something different. Apparently this judgement, which is almost impossible to appeal, means that the actual case will be much harder for Singh to win.

Whether or not you agree with Singh on alternate medicine, it's hard not to see this as a terrible attack on free speech. If you want to follow what's going on, the best way is to keep an eye on Jack of Kent's blog, which is detailing the legal proceedings. There's also a Facebook support group - and if you're in London on Monday (18 May), there's a public support meeting (which Simon and arch-supporter Dave Gorman will be at) at the Penderel's Oak pub at 6.30pm.

I'm appalled, both by the lawsuit (anyone who uses chiropractors should really be thinking 'is it time to switch to an osteopath?' as a result of this action), and by the initial judgement. Spread the word - support this excellent author.

Comments

  1. You're right. This is appalling! Can you put on facebook the time of the meeting? I may be able to make it....

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sorry, Sue - forgot to put the time on. Amended above to show it (6.30pm).

    ReplyDelete
  3. hear hear. it's astonishing to me that the libel suit got further than a solicitor's desk, let alone in front of that idiot judge.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for the heads up, Brian.

    You're right - it's appalling.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is totally outrageous. That book needed writing - we need to be able to question medical practice in all formats, especially the kind that costs large sums of money. Simon is a fabulous writer. I'll be signing anything I can to support. Thanks for the head's up Brian.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Dark Ages snap once more at the gates.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's recent gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some ex

Which idiot came up with percentage-based gradient signs

Rant warning: the contents of this post could sound like something produced by UKIP. I wish to make it clear that I do not in any way support or endorse that political party. In fact it gives me the creeps. Once upon a time, the signs for a steep hill on British roads displayed the gradient in a simple, easy-to-understand form. If the hill went up, say, one yard for every three yards forward it said '1 in 3'. Then some bureaucrat came along and decided that it would be a good idea to state the slope as a percentage. So now the sign for (say) a 1 in 10 slope says 10% (I think). That 'I think' is because the percentage-based slope is so unnatural. There are two ways we conventionally measure slopes. Either on X/Y coordiates (as in 1 in 4) or using degrees - say at a 15° angle. We don't measure them in percentages. It's easy to visualize a 1 in 3 slope, or a 30 degree angle. Much less obvious what a 33.333 recurring percent slope is. And what's a 100% slope