President's Blog, Thursday 6 October 2011
Two things have really pushed my buttons in the past week. If you’ve been keeping up to date with the news, you can probably guess what they are.
The first is the deal between the Pharmacy Guild of Australia and Blackmores to promote complementary medicines with prescription drugs.
I have described this deal as outrageous.
The Guild’s withdrawal of the deal and its endorsement of the Blackmores Companion range of complementary medicines is a win for patients, a win for the independence of clinical pharmacists, and a win for the doctor-clinical pharmacist relationship.
There is no place in medicine for a co-comprised approach to care.
The second button-pusher has been the obvious absence of health at this week’s Tax Forum in Canberra.
The AMA last week hosted the National Alliance for Action on Alcohol (NAAA) Alcohol Tax Forum, which called on the Federal Government to start a process of alcohol taxation reform.
The NAAA Communiqué proposes alcoholic drinks to be taxed - and priced - on the basis of the amount of alcohol in the drink.
Many stakeholders vied for their interests at the Government’s Tax Forum, but the health of our community and the costs to our community associated with alcohol are way too great to ignore.
As doctors on the frontline of providing care to our community, we see the significant harms that can result from excess alcohol consumption.
It’s encouraging to see that a number of participants raised the issue of alcohol taxation on the Forum agenda.
But we need action now from the Government on alcohol taxes to make it easier for people, especially young people, to make healthier choices.
We saw this happen in Denmark this week, with the Danish Government becoming the first in the world to introduce a ‘fat tax’ on unhealthy food.
The health and community costs associated with obesity are rivaling those of tobacco.
Taxation is not just about revenue raising, but changing behaviour. Any penalty such as a tax on unhealthy foods and beverages will help people to make healthier choices.
Should Australia increase taxes on unhealthy foods to help improve food choices? Vote now
If you’ve missed the AMA in the news this week, you can catch up on the latest here.
To see what the NPS thinks of the Companion products, see Companion Products.
Dr Steve Hambleton
President
Printer-friendly version
AMA National Conference 2012
Poll
AMA Annual Report 2011
Traffic Light Food Labelling - The Evidence
You will be receiving my
You will be receiving my resignation from the AMA shortly. Good luck spending my colleagues money trying to increase our taxes, I won't be involved. I have had enough of social engineering by left wing governments and the AMA.
Fed. AMA and TAxes & Health
Laudible as noting that Health wasn't on the recent Fed. Labour Tax love-in Agenda, the President or the Elfs who assist with scripting cannot be that dumb or disconnected not to know or be concerned of the Roxon's Legislative push to crush the Howard Govt's 30% Private Health subsidy and return what they feel is "Equity" in the Mediocre-Care NAtional Health system as the standard we are prepared to sink down to.
Are there that many Greens on the Federal AMA Executive/Council?
Why isn't the AMA actively opposing dumb, left wing initiatives from our current surviving Govt which will only further stampede a frightened community of citizens about their security /insecurity about Health Care?
president's column
Can the AMA please desist from fostering the nanny state approach that already exists from governments?
I don't want my professional organisation to tell me what I can eat/what I can drink, what activities I can pursue - at a cost different to others who choose to act differently.
How is the AMA going to advise what food is "healthy" vs that which is not?
And does the AMA not promote to its members purchasing wine from its wine club?
Is the proposed tax not hypocritical?
This is crazy stuff.
Just because the Danes have introduced a stupid tax does not mean we should follow.
Can we just be allowed to look after our patients, counsel them if we think their lifestyle needs modification, but let them have a choice in how they live their lives.
George Hamor
Fat and other taxes
A fat tax? Not well thought through.
How will "fat" foods be defined? On the basis of animal fat content, total fat content or what? Who will decide the cut points (fat food vs not fat food) and who will continue to monitor this? Is the cut point fixed for all time or is it to be a moveable feast? Who will collect the tax? Where will it go and what will it be used for? Will the tax be set at a level that "dissuades" or "punishes"? What about the sugar and salt content of the foods? Will the tax apply to the consumer or the manufacturer? Either way it will finish up with the former who are more likely to be lower income families who will have to absorb yet another cost if they can't afford healthier choices.
Back to the drawing board!
My understanding is that
My understanding is that parmeggiano reggiano cheese or saturated oil for shallow frying tofu would be considered "junk food" under the Danish law which gives some example of how ridiculous the whole thing is. I love the Orwellian language...we are making certain foods unaffordable for the poor to "improve their choices". It would comical if my own professional organisation wasn't partly responsible.
fat tax
Please stop this social engineering! It is ridiculous to try and legislate to control or modify human behaviour. Remember Prohibition and how well that worked? By all means educate, encourage, advise but do not interfere with the way we lead our lives. Did anyone read "1984". The nanny state has well and truly arrived! People are sick and tired of being patronised and told how they should live their lives- It is also incredibly discriminatory. Why should wealthy people be able to eat what they like and just make it difficult for financially disadvantaged folk? If the AMA continues to think like this it will have one less member!
Fat tax etc
AMA must NOT become a proponent of the nanny state - absolutely agree with George Hamor. Our job is to advise people as to how to achieve good health outcomes, not suggest taxing them when they don't. The Danes have got it wrong.
As for alcohol surely we should be pushing for reduced licensing hours which will reduce bad health outcomes every weekend and make life a lot easier for those of our colleagues in the front line - something taxes will only minimally influence.
"achieve good health
"achieve good health outcomes, not suggest taxing them when they don't"
But who's saying they don't? Is it because they are buying something at McDonalds? I love eating a Big Mac from time to time (or a big meal at a fancy French restaurant, which is probably more calorie-laden), and I have a BMI of 19. It's a matter of how often and what exercise you do as well. It is NOT fundamentally unhealthy to eat a single serve of fries or a cheese-laden pizza.
Unwanted AMA social activism
Just adding my "hear, hear" to the preceding blog replies. On another, somewhat related topic, I was appalled by the picture (that hoary old depiction of cooling towers spewing not pollution but merely steam)and article on Climate Change in the September issue of the MJA. Since when have the Globable Warming Gullibles taken control of the AMA agendum? Just represent us in profesional matters and protect doctor members from Government and burgeoning bureaucracy. I don't recall the membership being polled for the extremist views being promulgated. Stick to your mission.
AMA social activism lunacy
AMA must NOT become a proponent of the nanny state - absolutely agree with George Hamor, Andrew Russell and Howard Kingston.
Response to comments
Colleagues,
The NAAA Forum was presented with findings of a new report commissioned by the Alcohol Education & Rehabilitation Foundation on Australia’s wine tax regime. The report found that that the Wine Equalisation Tax, or WET tax, has pushed the production of large volumes of cheap wine sold for prices cheaper than water. The high level of demand for cheap cask wine caused by the WET tax has had a perverse outcome on the use of precious irrigation water by grape growers, with 1,000 litres of water being used for cheap cask production.
It has also exacerbated the harms caused by alcohol, particularly in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, where rates of alcohol dependence and harmful alcohol use are eight times higher than among other Australians.
A volumetric alcohol tax is a win-win for patients and for the Government.
Steve Hambleton
Fat Tax
How odd that at a time when there is more junk food than ever we are living longer than ever before! The AMA should promote education about health not legislation to make rules about eating.
fat tax
Just as taxing cigarettes has helped lower rates of smoking, this will work.Well done for acting as an altruistic health promotong (not just doctor promoting) body AMA!
AMA-funded MJA propaganda
Copy to the President of the AMA - Dr Steven Hambleton.
10 October 2011
The Editor
Medical Journal of Australia
Dear Dr Katelaris
As an AMA member and stakeholder whose subscription finances the MJA one finds the presentation of the MJA 16 September 2011 edition disappointing.
The front cover has a bold heading referring to 'climate debate' - yet there is no debate in the journal. There is a propaganda article about wealth re-distribution claiming carbon pricing somehow helps poor people; there is a non-peer-reviewed but AMA/MJA-commissioned article by a journalist from Byron Bay spruiking WHO propaganda about 'climate change'; and, there is an article about coal mining that implies cheap and abundant electricity is a detriment to civilisation.
The front cover features a picture no doubt meant to imply 'greenhouse gas emissions' of carbon dioxide 'pollution'. But the picture shows cooling towers emitting clouds of water vapour from steam - what a juvenile mistake - what a pathetic confidence trick.
The MJA has drifted far from a science base to now represent cheap partisan propaganda - its reputation will be tarnished.
While the MJA is publishing this propaganda there are many doctors who actually studied physics, chemistry and mathematics at undergraduate university level and beyond who are truly sceptical of the IPCC alarmist 'climate change' science - or anthropogenic global warming (AGW) as it was called before the earth stopped warming up around 12 years ago.
Here is an experiment designed by me to test the 'greenhouse effect hypothesis' - that is the theory which underpins everything about AGW. The experiment has been reviewed by experts in climate science and astrophysics who found the results valid. One day I hope the MJA returns to publishing science articles, not propaganda - but I will not hold my breath waiting.
Kitchen Chemistry and the Greenhouse Effect theory
The greenhouse effect theory as it relates to Climate Change science can be stated as a process
whereby back scattered radiative transfer of infrared heat from atmospheric gases and vapors
that have thermal capacity causes additional surface temperature warming of the earth above
that from the effects of insolation from the sun alone. The effect is said to be a ‘positive forcing’
factor for the surface temperature of the earth.
Insolation from the sun heats the earth – over time an equilibrium state exists with a balance
between incoming solar radiation and outgoing radiation. The earth radiates heat back into the
atmosphere and space in the form of infrared radiation. Infra red radiation is invisible unless
the object emitting it is very hot – red or white hot. It is a long wave form of radiation just
outside the visible light spectrum.
John Tyndall’s experiments in 1861 demonstrated carbon dioxide is a gas with thermal capacity
–it can absorb radiant heat. In 1896 the original ideas about an atmospheric greenhouse effect
and carbon dioxide (then called carbonic acid) came from Svente Arrhenius in Sweden. These
ideas found little scientific support. Revival of the ideas came from the Swedish climatologist Dr
Bert Bolin in the early 1970’s. Activists including Al Gore and the UN IPCC that was founded in
1988 to demonstrate human influence on global warming have reinvigorated interest in the
Greenhouse Effect theory.
An experiment devised to utilise the ‘greenhouse gas’ properties of carbon dioxide and
demonstrate the Greenhouse Effect theory is described below.
The initial experiment was done at Tewantin, Queensland, Australia on 28 August 2011 from
1.15 pm to 2.30 pm. Temperature was 25 degress Celsius in the boxes before they were sealed
and exposed to insolation. The barometric pressure 1014 hpa. The humidity was 66 %.
Two polystyrene foam 5 kg fish cooler boxes were painted inside with matt black paint. The
black surface absorbs heat from sunlight and causes infrared radiative transfer of heat within
the box. Heat energy is maintained in the box by the plastic wrap creating a ‘true’ greenhouse
effect whereby convection is prevented from moving the hot air or CO2 away from its
contained space. The heat energy is measured by monitoring the temperature. Infrared
radiation can pass freely through the plastic wrap surface of the boxes.
Type K thermocouples were inserted into the boxes with the sensor tip dangling in the mid
space of the boxes.
One box was sealed up with plastic wrap (Glad Wrap ®) and contained air.
The second box was filled with carbon dioxide before being sealed with plastic wrap (Glad
Wrap®). Carbon dioxide was generated using kitchen ingredients baking soda and white vinegar
to achieve the following chemical reaction with production of CO2.
Na HCO3 + HC2 H3O2 –>Na C2H3O2 + H2O + CO2
Sodium bicarbonate + acetic acid –> Sodium acetate + water + carbon dioxide.
6 heaped teaspoons baking soda + 300mls vinegar –>carbon dioxide to fill the box (12.3L)
The carbon dioxide was produced in a bowl in the box in a closed room with little air
movement. The bowl was then gently removed from the box. A burning taper (long match) was
used to confirm the presence of CO2 by extinguishing the flame just below the rim of the box.
CO2 is retained in the box since it is heavier than air. The box was then sealed with plastic wrap
(Glad Wrap ®).
Both boxes were then placed outside and tilted towards the sun – apart from one containing air
and the other containing carbon dioxide the boxes could be considered identical in makeup and
placement.
The initial temperature before placement outside was 25 degrees Celsius. When placed outside
the temperature in both boxes rose quickly and after a few minutes the temperatures were
around 40 C. The box containing air heated more quickly for around 20 minutes – being about 4
C hotter than the box with the CO2.
After an hour both boxes were observed to have the same temperature – the temperature
fluctuated between 65 C and 70 C with small clouds coming over at times. The temperature was
assumed to have reached its equilibrium state and the experiment was terminated.
To confirm that the CO2 was indeed still in one of the boxes –the box was taken inside a closed
room. Its plastic wrap was slit open and a lighted taper was introduced into the box by an
independent observer on my invitation. The match was extinguished just below the rim of the
box confirming the continued containment of CO2.
Result – this preliminary experiment shows there is no such thing as back-scattered infrared
radiative transfer causing additional temperature rise above that from insolation by solar
radiation. The Greenhouse Effect theory is not confirmed by this experiment and may be
disproved by it.
Further experiments are planned with attention to accurate recording of temperature changes.
The boxes will be dehydrated using calcium chloride as a dessicant to produce dry air. The air
can also be ‘sweetened’ by Tyndall’s method of lining a surface with glycerin to remove
invisible particulates like pollens and bacteria from the air.
Comment – the independent observer mentioned above is my young adult daughter. “But how
can an experiment like this disprove a theory that hundreds of climate scientists around the
world say is true – surely they know far more than you do”, she asked. “That my darling is
science”, say I.
Yours faithfully
Richard Pearson M.B.,B.S., F.R.A.C.G.P., LL.B.
cc. Dr S Hambleton , President, Australian Medical Association.
Dear Dr Pearson I am writing
Dear Dr Pearson
I am writing in response to your comments on a recent edition of the Medical Journal of Australia.
Firstly, the front cover’s bold heading stated “Fuelling the climate debate”. We were not implying that there was a debate within this issue of the Journal. We were implying that there was content related to the ongoing climate change debate.
You refer to a “propaganda” article on wealth redistribution. I am assuming you are referring to a manuscript authored by Howden – Chapman, Chapman, Capon and Wilson. These respected authors are well credentialled to write on this topic. Independent peer review of the manuscript was extremely favourable.
I am unclear as to the relevance of the Byron Bay domicile of the commissioned journalist Ray Moynihan. The style of his piece is clearly opinion based and is indeed a change of style for the MJA. The aim of the Perspectives section of the journal, in which the Moynihan piece occurs, is to provide opinion and comment in the relaunched MJA, and is explicitly indicated as such. It is similar in aim to sections in many peer reviewed journals, especially the British Medical Journal. It has been welcomed by many of our readers. You will note that his article, although not peer reviewed, is referenced.
With regard to our clinical focus article “The mining and burning of coal: effects on health and the environment”, I do not believe this article implies what you claim. Instead, it outlines the detrimental health effects of coal mining that are well documented, well referenced and peer reviewed. As with all good scientific research, it does not dictate how these results should be interpreted within other debates.
The front cover does, and was intended to, show cooling towers of a coal fired power station. I chose the cover believing that doctors had sufficient knowledge to understand that this is what was intended to be represented. There was no intention to dupe, and no possibility of duping, our very well educated audience, all of whom have strong grounding in the sciences.. It is their expectation that the MJA adheres to a strong science base – a role which the MJA fulfils according to best practice.
I am not in a position to judge whether your Gladwrap® and baking soda experiment disproves climate change, but I assume you would be willing to submit it to a scientific journal for peer review in the interests of properly validated scientific enquiry. You are more than welcome to submit a letter to the editor and we will consider your letter for publication. I think this would be an interesting exercise to gauge the general impression and views of our readership. I welcome your contribution.
Yours sincerely
Dr Annette Katelaris
Editor MJA
What was that again about those cooling towers?
cc. Dr Steven Hambleton, President of the AMA
The Editor
Medical Journal of Australia
Dr Annette Katelaris
To me science is all about observation and discussion and verification of results. Reproducibility of the findings of others is absolutely basic to science. Trying to verify or disprove theories and hypotheses is an ongoing task.
This is where 'climate change science' is so different - proponents of 'climate change science' shut down debate, refuse to publish papers not part of the 'consensus' view - even when there is clearly no such consensus among qualified scientists in the particular field or among interested scientifically literate people not involved in the field. They refuse to share data for checking. They conveniently lose data when legitimate requests or legal demands are made to produce it - the IPCC's Phil Jones who lost adjusted British meteorological data after FOI applications and the IPCC's Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University with his 'hockey stick' graph based on questionable tree ring data that he refused to give up for verification - are good examples. The Editor of the MJA on the AMA President's blog says I should submit material for consideration - she might look up these references for previously submitted material : MJA-2011-10657 and MJA-2010-10357.
Those who are scientifically literate might enjoy the CERN CLOUD experiment published recently in Nature and the Supplementary material to it - look particularly at the figures S2 and S4 in the supplementary material. Some are saying they are 'hidden' to reduce their 'eye-popping' importance - what we are seeing here is well on the way to 'proving' Henrik Svensmark's theory that the climate is truly controlled by insolation from the Sun with its fluctuating solar wind causing a magnetic shield for the earth that deflects cosmic rays (from galactic supernovae) which constantly bombard the earth inducing low atmospheric cloud formation - thereby it is the sun and cosmic rays that control global surface temperatures and climate.
By contrast the Greenhouse Effect theory is bunk. There is not a scintilla of science to prove it. If you think there is we are all most interested to see it - please show us and the world. That the Greenhouse Effect theory defies the second law of thermodynamics is easy to demonstrate. This means the theory is unstable and unphysical. My simple experiment demonstrates that fact. That experiment is designed to be reproduced, refined, improved, and tested by interested individuals anywhere anytime - the results will always be the same. Why? Because thermodynamics is known by laws not theories - and that my friends is science not propaganda.
The manuscript of my experiment was submitted to Nature and a kind reply was received on 6 September 2011 from the editor - it stated inter alia;
' In this case, while your simple experiment appears nicely to demonstrate the Greenhouse Effect theory using simple kitchen ingredients and equipment, we [are] unable to conclude that this manuscript contains the sort of significant conceptual advance in understanding that will be of immediate interest to a broad readership of researchers in the climate community. Yours sincerely, Rory Howlett, Editor, Nature Climate Change.'
I take the reply to indicate that 'researchers in the climate community' are already well aware of shortcomings in the Greenhouse Effect hypothesis.
Here's a quote that might seem illogical, philosophical or absurd to some - it will be reproduced many times in the future I think. It is transcribed verbatum from a Henrik Svensmark video record - ' Instead of thinking of clouds as a result of climate - it is actually showing that the climate is a result of the clouds - because the clouds take their orders from the stars.'
Richard Pearson
Tyndall's eloquent experiment
Dr Pearson, I note Dr Kateralis declined to comment on your experiment detailed above ( which interestingly is a carbon copy of your post at the "Galileo Movement" blog ), but as someone with an interest in climate science and highly amused by it, I cannot help myself.
I am rather bemused as to why you would wish to publish it for all the world to see. No matter, it is your choice.
Tyndall's original 1864 ( and rather elegant ) experiment is detailed here ( for your and others interest )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TyndallsSetupForMeasuringRadiantHeatAbsorptionByGases_annotated.jpg
Quite a contrast to your polystyrene boxes with gladwrap!
I note the AMA does have a policy on climate change and hope that the AMA publish more on the health effects of climate change. After all it is now widely recognised as the greatest threat to human health this century by the Lancet and many public health bodies, including WHO.
By George
By George
My contributions here represent communication with the President of the AMA by a stakeholder member of the AMA.
Not sure if you are a member of the AMA but as a medical practitioner you have legitimacy here – yet your credentials as a DEA activist and political candidate for the Greens are no doubt what piques your interest.
As a political candidate you should read the recent Wall Street Journal article - 'No Need to Panic About Global Warming- there's no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonize' the world's economy.'
Thanks for alluding to the AMA 'policy' on climate change – it looks tired, stale and full of plagiarism - this at a moment in time when people are dying like flies in the northern hemisphere from the extremes of yet another bitterly cold winter. Can I hereby ask the AMA President to have the AMA 'climate change' policy reviewed, changed and at best, junked. The process needs to come from the membership and be balanced. Here’s a start.
I sent an open letter to the editor of the MJA nearly a year ago – MJA 2011-10657. Through the President's blog, because it is directly relevant to any review of AMA ‘climate change’ policy perhaps it’s now time to let it fly - here goes. Hope you enjoy it George.
Restore integrity to science - an open letter to medical doctors in Australia
Post-normal science props ‘climate change’. ‘Climate change’ is the latest slippery term for global warming and is conflated with more accurate descriptors like anthropogenic, man-made or human-induced global warming for the political agendas of proponents. Alarmists avoid using global warming or climate change to describe the steady warming of the planet coming out of the Little Ice Age for the last three hundred years.
Science, normal science, has given the practice of medicine, engineering and most professions credible evidential bases. If the practice of medicine or engineering changed to the post-normal science heuristics and corruption that so dominates climate science they would very quickly be found out by poor patient outcomes and all manner of unnatural structural failures.
For all the taxpayer dollars spent in 'climate research’, physical evidence is lacking to prove the anthropogenic (human-induced) global warming argument. Evidence comes from a clutch of computer models using the same base inputs variously adjusted by fictional ‘forcings’ to show a desired output that is predetermined. The ‘greenhouse effect’ theory is seriously flawed, flouting physical laws of thermodynamics – yet it is thrown around as if fact even in scientific papers. Entropy, the first and second laws of thermodynamics and the ideal gas law explain global temperatures without the need for a ‘greenhouse effect’ theory. ‘Climate change’ alarmists avoid debate with those that will trump them.
Apologists for climate change alarm monopolise the Australian medical literature and press with editorials and letters tainted by classical fallacies of logic. Some authors react badly when challenged on their published articles – for example, Garry Egger et al with his letter from ‘300 authors’ in the MJA deserves exposure. •
The IPCC is not an organisation that does science rather it collates published climate science and opinions. It reports using post-normal scientific methods based on the consensus of its ‘bureaux’. It forms policy for the United Nations with intent to court sovereign government favour. Such favour is waning – in the United States on 19 February 2011 the Congressional House of Representatives has voted against continued funding of the IPCC. India has also abandoned the IPCC. The Climategate scientific fraud and academic misconduct is not forgiven because it is whitewashed. The great architect of the ‘climate change’ scam and socialist world government planning, Maurice
Strong, resigned from the UN and fled to China when found out for corruption – having endorsed for himself a million dollar cheque from the Iraq Oil-for-Food program. Ross Garnaut was chairman of Lihir Gold with its tailings disposal scandal, dumping toxic gold mining waste into the pristine tropical waters off PNG – yet he sternly lectures Australia on risks from generating plant food- carbon dioxide. Among multiple conflicts of interest Tim Flannery works as a consultant for Siemens ‘Sustainability Advisory Board’. Siemens manufacture and commission desalination plants – remember Flannery’s dire predictions about drought and the desiccation of Australia. Instead of being sent to a corner to read Dorothea Mackellar’s 1904 poem ‘My Country’ about the land ‘of droughts and flooding rains’ he is rewarded by appointment as ‘climate commissioner’.
In Australia rising costs of electricity and food are annoying- with a Carbon Tax and ETS prices will accelerate. These taxes were spawned in Europe over 30 years ago – in advance of ‘climate change’ science. They are toxic impositions we should all resist. They appeal to socialist governments whose only skills are rent-seeking and taxes. They appeal to giant global investment banks that plunder the biggest profits from the world yet contribute nothing to utility. We all people are the losers. In poor countries the cost increases that result lead to starvation and revolt – already seen in north Africa and the Middle East.
There is the need sooner or later in Australia for a Royal Commission to bring a forensic blowtorch of scrutiny to bear on the veracity of the post–normal science of ‘climate change’. This Royal Commission will need a broad scope to include investigation of the social, economic and political implications. This is one way to restore integrity to science.
Richard Pearson, M.B.,B.S., F.R.A.C.G.P., LL.B. richard.n.pearsonATgmail.com 26 February 2011
Blackmores Deal
I am disgusted with your comments regarding the deal between Blackmores and the Pharmacy Guild. One only needs to search for 2 seconds before they find conclusive evidence showing that pharmaceutical drugs cause nutrient depletion. As the head of an association that claims to have the health needs of consumers at heart, you are remarkedly ignorant to the facts. You need to get your head out of the sand and realise that the health of our nation is most important; and instead of labelling this program as "smacking of commercial interest rather than clinical need", realise that in actual fact it is YOUR industry that has this trait. All the drugs mentioned in this program are used in medical conditions that can be reversed with a healthy diet and lifestyle. Wake up!
Blackmores Deal
Thank you for your commnents Aimee.
I would refer readers to the NPS who quickly researched each of the companion products at http://www.nps.org.au/topics/companion_products.
I would also refer readers to a pharmacy related publication at http://sciencebasedpharmacy.wordpress.com/2011/10/03/would-you-like-a-coke-and-fries-with-your-prescription/ and the views of the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia at http://www.pharmacynews.com.au/news/PSA-seeks-apology-from-Blackmores-over-comments .
Steve Hambleton AMA President
Blackmores Deal
Thank you for your reply Steve.
The links you mention simply go over the same reasons you provided, which still do not address my concerns. As stated, the first principle of the Pharmacy Guild's Code of Conduct is
"The primary concern of the pharmacist must be the health and wellbeing of both clients and the community."
How is this in any way being carried out when any attempt they make falls on deaf ears? This is a serious case of the pot calling the kettle black.
Reviewing the site (NPS) you mention, here is what I found -
Evidence for any benefit of zinc supplementation in the absence of zinc deficiency is limited. Results from the only trial investigating zinc supplementation with an antihypertensive (hydrochlorothiazide) were inconclusive.
No studies have investigated the use of a magnesium supplement to prevent magnesium deficiency during PPI therapy.
Two randomised controlled trials have investigated Co-enzyme Q10 for statin-associated myalgia, but they have conflicting results.
There is some evidence from trials that probiotics may prevent antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in some adults and children.
So this conclusion of a lack of evidence is because either -
ONE trial was carried out and was inconclusive
NO STUDIES have been carried out
TWO studies were carried out and conflicted with each other
THERE IS SOME EVIDENCE of effectiveness however more trials are needed
The second link you provided cannot be accessed by anyone other than a registered medical professional.
Steve, instead of always starting off on the defensive, why don't you take some time to research this issue and truly ask yourself if your Association truly has the health needs of consumers at heart?
Regards,
Aimee
Blackmores Deal
Aimee,
You are being very stereotypical as you are generalising all pharmacuticals to have lack of testings and are of no health benefit.
You however do not understand that without the help from our pharmacutical companies and medical societies we would have many more diseases which can not be cured or helped.
Look at the bigger picture here. There are so many drugs and supplements which have to be tested because there are so many different needs, that not all can be fully tested straight away.
Yes I agree a healthy lifestyle would cause much of these diseases in this society to decline but that same result has been proven time and time again and while there is right of choice in this country that will not change. People all know how to be healthy, they CHOOSE not to be.
So rather than repeating the same result to the public which will always fall on deaf ears as everyone already knows how to be healthy, it is time SOMETHING happens which isn't just proving what we already know.
If supplements and drugs help to find a way to fix this epidemic, then by all means I and alot of other people are willing to try them.
And it's quite obvious pharmacuticals will always be researched, changed and made to be better. It is science, new facts and discoveries are always to be found.
Thank you Steven.
Kind Regards
Comments sections is for nutters
Dear Dr Hambleton
I would encourage you to close the comments section as it is a magnet for climate change deniers, naturopaths, acupuncturists, and non-believers in science or logic. It drags down this worthy website into the gutter. Leave the comments section to the Herald Sun or other tabloid websites.
Yours respectfully.
Comments section
Yes, let's not have any debate. Let's shut out any contrary opinions.
Post new comment