Quick update on Simon Singh vs the back quacks

You may remember that the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) took legal offence to an article by Simon Singh that cast doubt on the efficacy of their therapies, well Jack of Kent has informed us that the preliminary High Court hearing will on Thursday 7th May.  You can read the legal background to this case on Jack of Kent’s blog by following this link.

This case may prove quite important to the bad habit many quacks have of turning to the courts of law in the face of criticism.

Derek Draper clarifies his qualifications and promotes his ignorance

Derek Draper, former Labour spindoctor and psychotherapist of uncertain qualification, has been offering paeans to psychotherapy in the popular press from The Guardian to The Daily Mail.  The inspiration for Draper’s public statements of praise seems to be the imminent publication of his new book “Life Support: A Survival Guide for the Modern Soul“.  While there is a small correction of his qualifications in the media and on his personal blog there are other problems that negatively affect further his professional credibility.

The educational correction comes in his profile in this recent Guardian appearance:

Derek Draper gained an MA in psychology after three years full-time training at the Wright Institute, Berkeley, California

This of course differs somewhat from previous profiles where Draper was claiming a Clinical Psychology MA in/at Berkeley, California*.  Should you think that Draper’s educational honesty in one media profile signals a more transparent approach in others then this Observer article may surprise as it contains a rather misleading claim.

His work on curing depression won a Mind award.

Draper has no academic publications.  He does not work on curing depression in any academic or research sense.  He did not win a Mind award for curing depression.  He won the ‘BT MIND journalist of the year‘ award in 2007 in conjunction with his co-author, Cecilia d’Felice, a genuine Clinical Psychologist, for the workbook, Break Free From Depression – which he sells for £4 on his website.

It is interesting to note that although Draper now seems to present his credentials somewhat more accurately in the media he has failed to do so on his professional website, where he is still claiming an MA in Clinical Psychology despite being informed, several times, that this is not true.  Derek Draper’s continued misrepresentation of his professional credentials on his website is of greater concern than the continued confusion in the press over his achievements.  It is one thing to allow journalists to repeat inaccuracies, it is quite another to openly permit them on a professional website.  Derek Draper will enter a practitioner/patient relationship based on trust with people who have been misled by his inaccurate presentation of his qualifications.  Not only that, they will pay him money, money he will earn by the wilful and wrong misrepresentation of credentials.

But the concerns with Draper are not just about his contempt for professional responsibility and his displays of personal dishonesty, a recent Daily Mail article where Draper expresses his views on gender differences led Dr Petra Boynton, who has a PhD in Psychology, to highlight a few confusions in Draper’s understanding of the scientific literature, to add to his ignorance of nutrition, and raise serious concerns about his competence as a practitioner.

[I]f Mr Draper truly had read the literature in this area he’d know even the very concepts of ‘natural’ and ‘gender’ within such debates has been questioned and perhaps wouldn’t use the terms in such a cavalier manner.

Being critical about Mr Draper’s ability to understand evidence is only one part of this problem. The other part is much more worrying and a lot more sinister.

Mr Draper is a psychotherapist who publishes self help books. Couples often look to these when having problems within their relationship, and frequently relationship difficulties are related to the division of labour within the home.

Research suggests that where gender roles are unequal and where women do more of the unpaid work in the home, resentment, arguments and psychosexual problems can often follow.

[...]

If Mr Draper truly operates a gender divided approach within his own home, believes this are natural and can be supported by science, and thinks we should all live this way, then what hope is there for a client whose husband refuses to help her with the ‘household chores’? Would Mr Draper recommend she learns to see this as part of the natural order and accept her position? Is this in keeping with current good practice in psychotherapy?

By way of contrast between the attitudes of Dr Boynton and Derek Draper to media inaccuracies, Dr Boynton felt it nececessary to blog to correct inaccurate media reports of a story where she was asked for an opinion and included this passage critical of the media presentation of her credentials.

I’m a Social Psychologist and I work in health care. But that doesn’t make me a ‘medical expert’. I never used that term when talking to the journalist and carefully pointed out that while I may research and teach medics (as well as non medics) I am not a clinician. As someone who frequently takes issue with those who claim qualifications they don’t have I’m always dismayed to see myself misquoted like this. Mostly because I know those reading it (particularly my employers) may be less than sympathetic at what they might see as me passing myself off as something I am not.

Derek Draper threatened to sue me when I challenged, correctly, his qualifications as presented by the media.

As well as being ignorant of the literature in research areas on which he gives opinions to journalists Draper displays an ignorance of historical individuals he cites in support of his arguments, as shown in this quote from the Daily Mail piece:

Men are competitive and goal-orientated (think Horatio Nelson), while women are nurturing and consensual (think Florence Nightingale)

Florence Nightingale was a remarkable and brilliant woman, she took on the unsanitary conditions in the male dominated army establishment to improve hygeine in hospitals during the Crimean War, she helped found and develop the modern nursing profession, she was a gifted statistician and the first woman to be awarded membership of the Royal Statistical Society as well as making important contributions to developing ways of conveying complex statistical information to civil servants and MPs.  She is also considered an early feminist and spoke out against the idea that women should be over-feminised and thought of as helpless.  Nurturing and consensual she was not.

This leads to my final concern about Draper – like Florence Nightingale he wants to influence the provision of healthcare.  Among his media appearance he is quick to offer his opinions on the role of various therapies on the NHS.  He has even shared these opinions in articles written for MPs.  Unlike Florence Nightingale, Draper does not appear to understand what he is talking about.  Instead his approach uses inaccurate reports of his qualifications, misrepresented research and historical ignorance.  I suspect Draper is listened to because of his involvement with the Labour establishment supporting blog, LabourList, his personal relationship with senior politicians and his presenter wife.  He is certainly not listened to because of his professional competence.

* To reiterate, Draper failed to complete a doctoral ClinPsych programme at the Wright Institute in Berekeley, California, and was awarded an (unaccredited by any professional Psychology body) an MA Psychology by default for sustaining a certain duration of study.

[BPSDB]

Society of Homeopaths respond on Sherr – dishonestly

After a week in which Jeremy Sherr managed to get a mention in Private Eye and his funders, the Homeopathic Action Trust (HAT), were treated to a presentation on why people have concerns about him, the Society of Homeopaths (SoH) have finally made a public statement on Jeremy Sherr in response to the Private Eye piece.  Sadly this statement squeals and squawks in the familiar dishonest tone and tenor typical of the organisation.

Matthias Rath plans to illegally spam every politician in the the EU with the help of his supporters

I received an astonishing email this morning from the European Referendum Initiative (ERI), the Matthias Rath funded organisation working with alternative health groups and, in the past, MEPs.  In this email the ERI detail their strategy for emailing every single MP in Europe with an automated campaign of spam in favour of no regulation of vitamin supplements*.

Prince Charles wants to make you ill

Not content with wringing the last few drops of cash from the gullible middle classes with his Tinctures of Royal Bullshit, Prince Charles has now decided to offer a new experience in the world of quackery.  If you are not content with your good health and would like to remind yourself of the suffering of those not blessed with a privileged standard of healthcare, then you can with Duchy Herbals Echina-Relief Tincture.

[BPSDB]

Homeopathic Action Trust are aware of the issues regarding Jeremy Sherr

Angus Wood, who has been very active in investigating and challenging Jeremy Sherr – the homeopath working on AIDS in Tanzania, was invited to give a presentation to the Homeopathic Action Trust (HAT), funders of Sherr, on Friday 6th March about his concerns. Without further ado, I am pleased to have the opportunity to present Angus’ presentation, already given to HAT, as well as an edited version of his description of the slides and his interpretation of HAT’s immediate response.  I hope to have the opportunity to publish HAT’s formal response at a later date.

The perils of privately commisioned polls – Auschwitz and Beer

Both today’s Telegraph and Yahoo News carry a press association story condemning children for not understanding the holocaust and confusing Auschwitz with a beer.  According to the Telegraph:

a survey of more than 1,000 secondary school pupils aged 11-16 revealed that a quarter still did not know its purpose.

Of those, about 10 per cent were not sure what it was, 8 per cent thought it was a country bordering Germany, 2 per cent thought it was a beer, the same proportion said it was a religious festival and a further 1 per cent said it was a type of bread.

This survey was carried out by the firm Dubit Limited who specialise in market research involving teenagers, and commissioned by Miramax and the London Jewish Cultural Centre to promote the release of the film The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas on DVD.  The data from the survey appears worrying and the reportage is quick to condemn the perceived ignorance of the young about the greatest atrocity to have taken place on European soil.

However there are a number of problems with this survey, as a private company whose polling method is clearly of commercial value, Dubit do not describe in any detail their methodologies on their site.  This means that the validity of the poll in terms of the questions asked, statistical weightings used and data collection method are impossible to analyse and such research would not pass muster in the halls of academia.  It is not possible to know how credible this poll can be with respect to its methodology and data set.

But this is not the greatest concern I have with this story as it is reported.  The curriculum for history specificially states that the Holocaust is to be covered in some detail, but not until Year 9, when the pupils are 13-14 years old.  This means that a large part of the dataset used by Dubit, covering ages 11-16, would not have studied the Holocaust, thus skewing the findings of the poll.  Given this it is a fairly positive finding that three quarters of the polled students know the purpose of Auschwitz.  This was not the line taken by the press, Dubit, Miramax and the London Jewish Cultural Centre. Were none of these organisations or individual journalists capable of checking what proportion of 11-16 years olds would be expected to understand the Holocaust based on the curriculum, or did they just not care?  Miramax have publicised their film, the London Jewish Cultural Centre have increased their media profile and Dubit have taken money for a useless survey.  The only loser here is the public who have been misled by all of the above.