• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Marshall E. Deutsch at TAM??

Eos of the Eons

Mad Scientist
Eos of the Eons
Joined
Jul 23, 2003
Messages
13,749
was appalled to see that one of the speakers scheduled for The Amazing Meeting 4 is Marshall E. Deutsch, who is going to repeat the nonsense about cholesterol that he wrote about in Skeptic magazine and that I thought I had demolished in my response in the next issue. He essentially threw out the entire body of medical knowledge and practice in lieu of his own reading of an encyclopedia and of one popular book about cholesterol myths.
Click to expand...

http://www.ssr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?1:msp:104897:fbeobbnoeehjaabalggh

The doctor who wrote this will be at TAM. I would hope she fires off some questions to Deutsch.
 
One of the great things about skepticism is that sometimes those outside a field can have insights that the practicing body might not see. Randi has many a great story about scientists fooled by magicians for instance.

I'm not saying that Mr. Deutsch has such insight... so now we'll see if he can stand up to critical questioning.

The fact that Skeptic Mag published his article played a role in his invitation on Sunday.

Although, I only saw the heated response letters in the next issue after the invitation was made.

Eos, I agree-- I hope Dr. Hall (the MD) is there to add her perspective.
 
yeah....

because it sounds like his thinking is much like that of many an alternative medicine person.

When it comes to medicine, I think I might rather have a doctor than a magician (except in the Phillipines).

I mentioned this theory to my physician and she went balisitic. Just because she said that good health is a matter of hard work, and short cuts are always welcome. She said you check check check and double check through the proper medical journals and avenues before you go out and get that infomercial. She was confusing him with someone else we all know and do NOT love, but the point she was trying to make was that medicine IS playing with human lives, and there is a proper protocol for a reason.

I didn't get it all being an artist. I've found medical care that I trust and seeing that my doctor is in Vermont I drive by about 4 different alternative practices to get to her office. She HAS to keep up on this stuff as the use of alternative medicine is so pervasive in Vermont. So she was glad I brought this to her attention.

My husband had a cousin that smoked only an important brand of Asian cigarettes because the people that smoked this brand (from a small part of China) did not suffer from lung disease or lung cancer. She read a few studies that "proved" these were safe. She died in her 40's from lung cancer. She knew smoking was bad, but since quitting was so hard she found an alternative.

Sorry side rant. But throwing out medical advice even if you add in "this is just my theory" can be sometimes dangerous. There is a reason for the system as slow and ponderous as it seems at times.
 
Thank you kitty, and to all those who responded. Will anyone try with questions if the mic doesn't make it to Dr. Hall? Her response is in the link I provided. Please read it if you haven't already, and go prepared.

Another response from the origination:

Now I wish I got tickets to TAM4. The Q&A after this lecture alone
would be worth the price of admission.
Click to expand...
http://www.ssr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?1:mss:104913:fbeobbnoeehjaabalggh
:)
 
Last edited:
cosmic said:
One of the great things about skepticism is that sometimes those outside a field can have insights that the practicing body might not see. Randi has many a great story about scientists fooled by magicians for instance.
Click to expand...

Equaly those out side the field can produce a load of rubish. While Randi is in a far better position to deal with magicians than me I doubt he is going to be able to match my knowlage of say organic synthesis.
 
There was one question asked of Dr. Deutsch. It was probably by the MD mentioned in the opening post. She had a prepared question that was very long and was more of a challenge than a question. To the best of my recollection, it consisted of her saying "you never responded to our criticisms and lots of people disagree with you." It sounded much like a supreme court confirmation hearing.

Deutsch said that two responses were forthcoming in the next issue of Skeptic.

Because the question was so long, there was no time for others to ask questions. I think it would have been better if she hadn't been there.
 
Thanks Loon, as much as it seems to be bad news. I'll be looking forward to the issues of Skeptic then as well.

And, I'll happily report that at least 3 out of 5 fellow co-workers are skeptical of chiros at work! My boss's last trip to one was also not satisfactory. She noted that her massage therapist did more for her. She may yet be one that stops going to see one :)
 
I found Harriet Hall's version of things, and I find it good news:

http://www.ssr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?1:mss:105167:ddchaeoommpdnhogpdgf

I said that multiple systematic reviews of the literature all agreed that (1) cholesterol is an independent risk factor for heart disease, (2) lowering cholesterol lowers risk of heart attacks, and (3) if you already have heart disease, lowering cholesterol not only reduces your risk of heart attack, but also reduces your risk of death.

I also recommended that no one change their diet and medication on the basis of what they had just heard without first contacting their personal physician about their individual case...

I think there are two issues:
what the evidence shows about cholesterol as a risk factor,
and what recommendations are made (which is more a matter of opinion).

I think he is so upset about what he perceives as bad recommendations that it has impaired his ability to view the evidence objectively.

He belongs to the International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics. A visit to their website might be of interest to listmembers: http://www.thincs.org/index.htm.
It reminds me a bit of the anti-vax and other websites that collect lots of
evidence on one side but fail to provide any balance.
Click to expand...

As laypersons it is hard to get the pertinent information out of such an exchange. It would be hard to evaluate Deutsch's information as well. I just wondered why Deutsch even wanted to present, I guess as a skeptic of medical information? What are his credentials? I can't even dig up where he was educated or works/worked. He is listed as a chemist/inventor. I took organic chemistry in college...but I don't think that would allow the title of chemist, so I wonder how he adopted the title.

I find it an interesting chance to exercise critical thinking though. What would happen if an anti-vaccination person presented? It would be interesting!
 
Last edited:
His credentials were mentioned in his intro, and they seemed fairly impressive (and are probably true, since the lady who challenged him didn't challenge his credentials). He's an analytical chemist, not an MD.

Of course, Dr. (?) Hall's stating her opinion doesn't really help things much since us layfolk are just watching what is essentially dualling authorities. I would much have prefered if she had just asked him a single question to poke a hole in his theory.
 
Credentials are irrelevant; authorities are irrelevant; opinions are irrelevant. What matters is what the evidence shows. Deutsch got some of his facts wrong and misinterpreted others. For the record, I am the lady who challenged him. I am a long-time skeptic, an MD, and have written several articles for Skeptical Inquirer and Skeptic magazine, including a rebuttal to Deutsch in the issue following his article. I have contacted Deutsch by e-mail to start a discussion which I hope to bring to this forum. I will post my initial e-mail to Deutsch under a new thread: Cholesterol Myths. I am doing this to attract people who are interested in the cholesterol issue who may not read this thread because they don't recognize Deutsch's name.
 
Hi! And welcome! I'm so excited to see your post and will look forward to that awesome thread:thumbsup:
 
I was at the meeting, heard the paper and spoke to that doctor afterwards.

I'm new here, but I'm a second-year medical student and I'd like to say just a couple of things because I think I can provide a middle-ground perspective:

First, the gentleman's credentials were not terribly impressive to me. I'm sure he has the degrees he says he has and that's great. He certainly knows more about chemistry than I'm ever going to. But what you all who so capably participate on this site can do that he cannot is pretty simple: he can't think critically. (See Randi's great line about the limitations of people with PhDs.)

Second I have to take gentle exception to the person who said it would have been better had the MD not posed her question. She was exactly the right person to address him. I was ready to jump up, but he probably would have demolished me because I wasn't prepared with citations (or an advanced degree). She asked him to reply to any of (I think) four succinct and direct challenges to his paper. He didn't. He just rambled on and avoided the questions. Which goes to show you, right there. He *knew* he couldn't bluster through it, because she knew both his evidence and her own. This is why it's problematic to get scientists to go up against creationists, too, but I digress.

Last, it is not that difficult to evaluate the evidence for yourself, whether you're a doctor or a med student or an artist. (And I was an actress before I went back to school, so I should know. ;) ) The difference is whether you think critically about what you're reading or not. I'm not in any privileged position and neither is an MD--the literature is out there.

I have to say, one great way to boost the sales of your book is to "explode a myth". If you can claim something that everyone "knows is true" isn't, you get a lot of attention. It seems to me that this guy has just found the joys of tapping into that market. (Or maybe not. I have no idea what he did before he showed up at TAM4.)

Anyway. Long-winded way of saying it, but the further I go in med school, the more tired I get of the paranoia that revolves around health care. Okay, off to read the other thread.
 
Thank you so much for that HawkeyeMD.

I have to say, one great way to boost the sales of your book is to "explode a myth".
Click to expand...

He's selling a book? Sounds typical. He does remind me of the anti-vaccine crowd as well. Take something that helps people (reducing cholesterol) and tell them they are wasting their time watching what they eat, take something to lower cholestrol, etc.

What is his alternative? What does he suggest to reduce heart attacks?

I'm kind of a normal size, not skinny, not fat, but cholesterol is high, and so is other family members'. We just don't have a high rate of heart attacks in the family, and live a very long time, for the most part, without ever having a heart attack.

Thing is, everyone is an individual, and I think my cholesterol measurement may be high because it's not clogging up my arteries (stationary) and can come out with my blood? Is that crazy thinking, or where can I go to read up on individual cholestrol levels?

We do eat healthy for the most part, and stay active, and don't store a lot of fat (high metabolisms).

The only person I've met with heart related problems does love a high fat diet, smokes, and drinks quite a bit. He has gotten healthier and fitter since taking on a better diet, eating more fibre and walking. You now can barely tell he's had a surgery for a clogged artery.

So what is the alternative if we ignore cholesterol levels? What is Deutsch suggesting exactly?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom