Respectful Insolence

I know I have quite a few readers in the Washington, DC area; so I thought I’d just take advantage of the prerogative of the blog to do a little pimping. (And what good is having a blog if you can’t do a little shameless promotion every now and then?) A “very good friend” of mine will be in DC this weekend giving a talk forthe National Capital Area Skeptics. The talk will take place at the National Science Foundation in Arlington, VA on Saturday, March 9, 2013 at 1 PM. So if you’re in the DC area and want to hear a familiar voice pontificate about quackademic medicine (and, really, what reader of this blog wouldn’t want to?), feel free to mosey on over.

Full details about the time and location of the talk be found here.

Comments

  1. #1 Scottynuke
    March 6, 2013

    I think the snow should all be melted by then, Orac…

    I’d love to attend but will be assisting the spousal unit. Any other meetup opportunities? :)

  2. #2 Lawrence
    March 6, 2013

    Darn, I have a birthday party to attend with my kids on Saturday – otherwise I would have loved to attend.

  3. #3 Todd W.
    http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com
    March 6, 2013

    If you need any additional material with a local hook, Dr. John Young (one of Mark Geier’s partners in the Lupron Protocol) has had his Maryland medical license suspended.

  4. #4 Orac
    March 6, 2013

    I don’t know if there’ll be other meetup opportunities on this visit. Unfortunately, I have to catch a plane not long after my talk. I’ll hang out after my talk for as long as I can before I have to go to the airport, but I can’t go out to dinner or hang out Saturday night. At this point, I don’t know for sure when I’ll actually get there. All flights today from my locale to Reagan National have been canceled. The earliest I’ll get there is tomorrow sometime.

    I will be in Washington again in April for the AACR meeting.

  5. #5 Composer99
    March 6, 2013

    You saw Orac? Aw, I missed him again!

  6. #6 Orac
    March 6, 2013

    BTW, at random: Does anyone have access to this journal:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23449559

    This soooo needs some not-so-Respectful Insolence.

  7. #7 Mark
    March 6, 2013

    Count me in, see you Sat.

  8. #8 S
    March 6, 2013


    This soooo needs some not-so-Respectful Insolence.

    What it needs is a revolution.

  9. #9 Narad
    March 6, 2013

    What it needs is a revolution.

    I’m still puzzling over this Vickers entry.

  10. #10 Militant Agnostic
    Where homonyms are a waste of thyme.
    March 6, 2013

    @Narad

    It sounds like something Ben Goldacre has been advocating to do drug vs drug trials using (in the case of the UK, the NHS database).

  11. #11 BrewandFerment
    on the megabus, big apple bound
    March 6, 2013

    awww…did someone’s wittle feelings get hurt? whatever happened to formal dispassionate style for technical papers? (I only read the abstract but that was enough)

    Oh wait, that’s from the Acupuncture in Medicine: Journal of the British Medical Accupuncture Society. That explains it…

  12. #12 Narad
    March 7, 2013

    It sounds like something Ben Goldacre has been advocating to do drug vs drug trials using (in the case of the UK, the NHS database).

    This one, which I admittedly still haven’t fully comprehended, seems an awful lot like just putting up a bigger antenna and hoping to filter out the noise, which is going to increase disproportionately to the signal. (To extend the radio analogy, one does exactly the opposite when DXing.) With a bit of complaining about burdensome IRBs.

  13. #13 Darwy
    Røde grøde med fløde
    March 7, 2013

    Unfortunately, I can’t get access to that particular gem either. I’ll have to ask around if someone can.

  14. #14 S
    March 7, 2013

    …a near complete absence of substantive scientific critique… intellectual sterility and ad hominem attacks

    If Vickers really wanted to make a difference and educate people, especially the general public, then he wouldn’t hide his objections behind a pay wall.

  15. #15 Martin
    March 7, 2013

    My university appears to have an access to the journal … will have to ask why they are wasting our very limited resources on this scheiseblatt.

  16. #16 herr doktor bimler
    March 7, 2013

    wasting our very limited resources on this scheiseblatt

    The publishers bundle them… you can’t just subscribe to the banana; you have to pay for the entire gorilla.
    Sometimes (as seems to be the case here) the institutional subscription deal includes a “one year embargo” clause, so you can’t access the most recent issues.

  17. #17 Narad
    March 7, 2013

    The publishers bundle them… you can’t just subscribe to the banana; you have to pay for the entire gorilla.

    Well, you can, but it makes little sense to from the point of view of a library. It’s reminiscent of the fallacy that advocates of à la carte cable-television fall prey to, although I don’t know the revenue model for Acupuncture in Medicine.

    Sometimes (as seems to be the case here) the institutional subscription deal includes a “one year embargo” clause, so you can’t access the most recent issues.

    I think this is the EBSCO deal. (EBSCO sucks, BTW.) Subscribers to the real BMJ package naturally have immediate access.

  18. #18 lilady
    March 7, 2013

    Orac, I’m sure you will be prominently *mentioned* in Vicker’s article. You already did an analysis and delivered some Respectful Insolence of his meta analysis of acupuncture for pain studies. Scroll on down to see Vickers’ comment at # 63.

    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/09/12/can-we-finally-just-say-that-acupuncture-is-nothing-more-than-an-elaborate-placebo-can-we-2012-edition/

  19. #19 Darwy
    Røde grøde med fløde
    March 7, 2013

    It’s a little odd; I have access to just about every other BMJ bundled journal… except that one.

  20. #20 SteveJ
    March 7, 2013

    Our library only has issues of Acupuncture in Medicine from 2006 to 2008.

  21. #21 herr doktor bimler
    March 7, 2013

    Well, you can, but it makes little sense to from the point of view of a library.
    The bundling results in me having access to Medical Hypotheses — obviously a waste of the library’s money, but good for lazy bloggers looking for easy targets to make fun of.

  22. #22 Narad
    March 7, 2013

    The bundling results in me having access to Medical Hypotheses — obviously a waste of the library’s money, but good for lazy bloggers looking for easy targets to make fun of.

    Fowler’s going to get you for that, not-pedant.

  23. #23 Matt Carey
    March 8, 2013

    I’ve never seen Orac and Bonnie Offit in the same room.

    Then again, I’ve never seen either Orac nor Bonnie Offit.