Magnet therapy

Richard · 6th September 2004, 11:34 PM

Here's an item from Australian Choice Mag

http://www.choice.com.au/viewArticle.aspx?id=104440&p=1

In brief
We couldnâ€™t find any conclusive scientific evidence to support magnet therapy.
Despite this, some people are certain itâ€™s relieved some of the pain associated with their particular condition.
Thereâ€™s no evidence itâ€™s harmful either, except maybe to your hip pocket.

SkepticPete · 7th September 2004, 12:54 AM

Hi Richard,
that's promising news about the Therapeutic Goods legislation being tightened later this year. Having to provide clinical trial results to back up their extraordinary claims might make them more cautious with the "truth".

I was wondering if someone could explain to me why getting the "gender balance" correct is so important particularly in trials of alternative therapies?

quote - "The groups werenâ€™t always gender-balanced (which is particularly important when studying pain and complementary medical treatments). "

I am wondering if this is implying that maybe females are more susceptible to suggestion..........or what?

Cheers
Skeptic Pete

"My acupuncturist keeps needling me, I don't see eye-to-eye with my iridologist, my graphologist can't read my writing, I feel manipulated by my chiropractor, my touch therapist won't keep her hands off me, I can't count on my numerologist, my homeopath doesn't give me much of anything, and my psychic healer makes me sick." - John Stone

The Don · 7th September 2004, 01:03 AM

Here in the UK they've been tightening things up a little regarding claims for treatments which don't require medical trials.

Seven seas cod-liver oil have changed their claim to "people report improvements......." in their TV ads.

I suspect the magnet people will do likewise

SkepticPete · 7th September 2004, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Richard

Thereâ€™s no evidence itâ€™s harmful either, except maybe to your hip pocket.

I don't like this disclaimer much even though it may be true enough.

I think there are various aspects of harm that need to be considered.
Certainly the financial cost of these products is exorbitant and way beyond any reasonable cost for a few cheap magnets sewn into an underlay or similar.

Isn't there also the possibility that people will neglect or ignore other possible treatments that may actually work? Surely pharmacists should be pointing people in the right direction for pain management rather than stocking this snake oil.
My local Chemist (thats drug store for you yanks) stocks a huge range of herbal and alternative pills and potions, magnetic products, and even iridology courses!

The harm is multiplied when people "spread the word" as they do with these kinds of products. I find that if someone has spent a bit of money on a product, it then makes it even harder for them to admit they been duped.

Cheers
Skeptic Pete

Zep · 7th September 2004, 01:07 AM

1) I've been totally PO'd for months with that annoying woman on the Bert Newton Show who flogs the magnetic underlay blankets. Her little whiny spiel is full of "might", "could", and "is said to" comments. Nothing provable, that is, and everything capable of being backed away from with startling rapidity if it all goes pear-shaped on the science front. And she goes on with lots of anecdotal evidence from "satisfied customers" who are actually poor old dodderers for whom a new woollen underlay, with or without magnets, would have been a major improvement anyway. I am hoping against hope this new legislation will put an end to this annoying crap, but I'm willing to bet that she will just alter it to scrape in under the new guidelines.

2) I do hope that the testers of magnets as therapy went to the trouble of ENSURING the patients were COMPLETELY blinded as to magnet/placebo. The startling ease with which some scientific protocols can be sidestepped should be made VERY clear before the protocol is applied. For example, the patients in the studies may be given a magnet/placebo to use unsupervised at home for their therapy, on the understanding that they could not tell which it might be by sight. But a quick trip to the fridge will make it all too clear to even a little child - the magnet will stick to the door (even weak magnets), the placebo won't at all. Therefore it would have been remarkably easy for the patient to (a) find out what they had been given, and to (b) react accordingly, thus spoiling the findings totally. I do hope this wasn't the case...

SkepticPete · 7th September 2004, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zep

2) I do hope that the testers of magnets as therapy went to the trouble of ENSURING the patients were COMPLETELY blinded as to magnet/placebo. The startling ease with which some scientific protocols can be sidestepped should be made VERY clear before the protocol is applied. For example, the patients in the studies may be given a magnet/placebo to use unsupervised at home for their therapy, on the understanding that they could not tell which it might be by sight. But a quick trip to the fridge will make it all too clear to even a little child - the magnet will stick to the door (even weak magnets), the placebo won't at all. Therefore it would have been remarkably easy for the patient to (a) find out what they had been given, and to (b) react accordingly, thus spoiling the findings totally. I do hope this wasn't the case... [/b]

You have an excellent point here that I hope would be unnecessary to explain to the designers of these trials. I always assumed that any trial claiming to be blind would require a protocol that included no access to any ferrous metals at all during the trial. Seems so obvious doesn't it................

Cheers
Pete

Zep · 7th September 2004, 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SkepticPete
You have an excellent point here that I hope would be unnecessary to explain to the designers of these trials. I always assumed that any trial claiming to be blind would require a protocol that included no access to any ferrous metals at all during the trial. Seems so obvious doesn't it................

Cheers
Pete

Alas, it is often NOT obvious to the designers of these protocols. They often don't (initially) believe that subjects would want to deliberately fool the trial and manipulate the results in any direction. They believe the subjects are quite trustworthy to participate without bias. The reality is that most of these test subjects have no idea what a blinded trial is, how or why it works, and the reasons why such care needs to be taken. Instead, if they know they are testing some product and they like or subscribe to the product's efficacy, chances are they will at least try to find out if they have the real or fake test product. This is "unblinding", and immediately ruins any chance of reliable results being obtained from this subject. That's IF the researcher gets to know it has happened, of course...

Interestingly, I read here only earlier today of Randi's "Alpha Kids" project, in which exactly these types of oversights were exploited undetected for nearly three years, to remarkable and even amusing effect.

SkepticPete · 7th September 2004, 01:44 AM

I guess this demonstrates very well what Randi himself has always stressed..............the best advisors to scientists when designing protocols are professional magicians and illusionists.

He so often exposes inadvertent bias and non-blinding in tests designed by genuine researchers.

Zep · 7th September 2004, 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SkepticPete
I guess this demonstrates very well what Randi himself has always stressed..............the best advisors to scientists when designing protocols are professional magicians and illusionists.

He so often exposes inadvertent bias and non-blinding in tests designed by genuine researchers.

For a start, yes. But it takes only a little real world thinking for the researchers to conceive and take account of these problems. All that is needed is the spark to do so, I imagine. After all, they aren't all nerdy bespectalled boffins in white coats, and most do have "real lives".

The amusing/scary stuff comes from people like Gary Schwartz, who you expect would know for absolute certain these problems exist but nevertheless allow them to significantly affect their results...I suggest most likely because these affected results keep him in his position of tenure, the university in the headlines, and the sponsorship dollars flowing in. It's all about the money...

SkepticPete · 7th September 2004, 03:48 AM

Yeah.........the money.

Apparently Ian Turpie of "The Price is Right" fame has admitted that his testimonials for impotence spray was all bulls**t. For $100,000 he was prepared to lie about being impotent and the efficacy of the product.

On a related note I have nominated Tony Barber of "Sale of the Century" (Australia) fame for the Australian Skeptics "Bent Spoon" award............"Presented annually to the perpetrator of the most preposterous piece of paranormal or pseudo-scientific piffle."...............for his endorsement of "Dick Wicks" magnetic therapy products.

http://www.skeptics.com.au/features/...bs-04tonyb.htm

Zep · 7th September 2004, 04:04 AM

Good work!

Yep, he must be short of beer money at the moment...

Marrena · 7th September 2004, 04:21 AM

Hmm, don't know a thing about magnet therapy, sounds rather silly to me. But cod liver oil should be helpful for things; it contains omega-3 fatty acids which in fish oil have passed plenty of double-blind placebo-controlled trials for various ailments. Perhaps cod liver oil is too low in EPA and DHA to have a beneficial effect. And (thinking of the other thread where I got chastised for not saying this) cod liver oil should be taken in limited amounts because of the danger of Vitamin A toxicity.

But here's a link of various studies done on omega-3 fatty acid benefits:

http://www.oilofpisces.com

BTW, I'm pretty sure snake oil was probably high in omega-3 fatty acids.

The Don · 7th September 2004, 04:36 AM

Here is a link to a press release about a cod liver oil study

http://www.omega-3info.com/press-release.htm

I note that the study has not yet been published and has therefore not yet been subject to full peer review.

SkepticPete · 7th September 2004, 04:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Marrena
[b]Hmm, don't know a thing about magnet therapy, sounds rather silly to me. But cod liver oil should be helpful for things; it contains omega-3 fatty acids which in fish oil have passed plenty of double-blind placebo-controlled trials for various ailments. Perhaps cod liver oil is too low in EPA and DHA to have a beneficial effect.

I'm sorry if am sound ignorant Marrena but aren't you contradicting yourself here?
You say that cod liver oil has passed numerous trials for "various ailments" ..........then you say that it is too low in EPA and DHA (whatever they are?) to have a beneficial effect?

Anyway I know nothing about cod liver oil, but I DO know that magnetic therapy is bunk and am very surprised that you haven't heard of it. It is promoted heavily here in Australia on television with testimonials from celebrities etc and in magazines and print media.

It is a multi million dollar business just here in Australia (pop=20 million) and I have many workmates who swear by the healing properties of magnets. I have another friend who buys magnetic inlaid blankets for her HORSE!

In the shopping malls here I am often accosted by a "magnetic" salesperson at least a couple of times per year along with the late night TV "advertorials" and advert's in magazines and newpapers.

I guess I should just finish with one of my fave quotes.........

"My acupuncturist keeps needling me, I don't see eye-to-eye with my iridologist, my graphologist can't read my writing, I feel manipulated by my chiropractor, my touch therapist won't keep her hands off me, I can't count on my numerologist, my homeopath doesn't give me much of anything, and my psychic healer makes me sick." - John Stone

Marrena · 7th September 2004, 08:17 AM

The numerous rigorous peer-reviewed studies have been done on fish oil rather than cod liver oil. Fish oil is beneficial because it is high in the omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA and is safer to consume than actual fish because contaminants from ocean pollution are filtered out (like mercury). Cod liver oil also has omega-3 fatty acids so it would be logical to assume that it could also be somewhat beneficial--low omega-3 fatty acids are better than no omega-3 fatty acids.

I've seen magnet therapy advertised in many of the same places as aromatherapy. I wouldn't say I'm being clubbed over the head by it, but maybe I'm not watching enough TV.

As for aromatherapy, I wouldn't rely on it to cure cancer, but it can be useful for some things, for example increasing libido. There have been some studies showing men oddly enough respond to the smell of pumpkin pie spice. I'm not sure how rigorous those studies were, but I can hunt them down if anyone is interested.

6th September 2004, 11:34 PM	#1
Richard Muse Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Sydney Posts: 969	Magnet therapy Here's an item from Australian Choice Mag http://www.choice.com.au/viewArticle.aspx?id=104440&p=1 In brief We couldnâ€™t find any conclusive scientific evidence to support magnet therapy. Despite this, some people are certain itâ€™s relieved some of the pain associated with their particular condition. Thereâ€™s no evidence itâ€™s harmful either, except maybe to your hip pocket.
	__________________ Richard Saunders Producer of 'The Skeptic Zone Podcast' http://www.skepticzone.tv and Mystery Investigators http://www.mysteryinvestigators.com

7th September 2004, 12:54 AM	#2
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33	Hi Richard, that's promising news about the Therapeutic Goods legislation being tightened later this year. Having to provide clinical trial results to back up their extraordinary claims might make them more cautious with the "truth". I was wondering if someone could explain to me why getting the "gender balance" correct is so important particularly in trials of alternative therapies? quote - "The groups werenâ€™t always gender-balanced (which is particularly important when studying pain and complementary medical treatments). " I am wondering if this is implying that maybe females are more susceptible to suggestion..........or what? Cheers Skeptic Pete "My acupuncturist keeps needling me, I don't see eye-to-eye with my iridologist, my graphologist can't read my writing, I feel manipulated by my chiropractor, my touch therapist won't keep her hands off me, I can't count on my numerologist, my homeopath doesn't give me much of anything, and my psychic healer makes me sick." - John Stone
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33

7th September 2004, 01:05 AM	#4
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33	Re: Magnet therapy Quote: Originally posted by Richard Thereâ€™s no evidence itâ€™s harmful either, except maybe to your hip pocket. I don't like this disclaimer much even though it may be true enough. I think there are various aspects of harm that need to be considered. Certainly the financial cost of these products is exorbitant and way beyond any reasonable cost for a few cheap magnets sewn into an underlay or similar. Isn't there also the possibility that people will neglect or ignore other possible treatments that may actually work? Surely pharmacists should be pointing people in the right direction for pain management rather than stocking this snake oil. My local Chemist (thats drug store for you yanks) stocks a huge range of herbal and alternative pills and potions, magnetic products, and even iridology courses! The harm is multiplied when people "spread the word" as they do with these kinds of products. I find that if someone has spent a bit of money on a product, it then makes it even harder for them to admit they been duped. Cheers Skeptic Pete
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33

7th September 2004, 01:07 AM	#5
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985	1) I've been totally PO'd for months with that annoying woman on the Bert Newton Show who flogs the magnetic underlay blankets. Her little whiny spiel is full of "might", "could", and "is said to" comments. Nothing provable, that is, and everything capable of being backed away from with startling rapidity if it all goes pear-shaped on the science front. And she goes on with lots of anecdotal evidence from "satisfied customers" who are actually poor old dodderers for whom a new woollen underlay, with or without magnets, would have been a major improvement anyway. I am hoping against hope this new legislation will put an end to this annoying crap, but I'm willing to bet that she will just alter it to scrape in under the new guidelines. 2) I do hope that the testers of magnets as therapy went to the trouble of ENSURING the patients were COMPLETELY blinded as to magnet/placebo. The startling ease with which some scientific protocols can be sidestepped should be made VERY clear before the protocol is applied. For example, the patients in the studies may be given a magnet/placebo to use unsupervised at home for their therapy, on the understanding that they could not tell which it might be by sight. But a quick trip to the fridge will make it all too clear to even a little child - the magnet will stick to the door (even weak magnets), the placebo won't at all. Therefore it would have been remarkably easy for the patient to (a) find out what they had been given, and to (b) react accordingly, thus spoiling the findings totally. I do hope this wasn't the case...
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985

7th September 2004, 01:17 AM	#6
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33	Quote: Originally posted by Zep 2) I do hope that the testers of magnets as therapy went to the trouble of ENSURING the patients were COMPLETELY blinded as to magnet/placebo. The startling ease with which some scientific protocols can be sidestepped should be made VERY clear before the protocol is applied. For example, the patients in the studies may be given a magnet/placebo to use unsupervised at home for their therapy, on the understanding that they could not tell which it might be by sight. But a quick trip to the fridge will make it all too clear to even a little child - the magnet will stick to the door (even weak magnets), the placebo won't at all. Therefore it would have been remarkably easy for the patient to (a) find out what they had been given, and to (b) react accordingly, thus spoiling the findings totally. I do hope this wasn't the case... [/b] You have an excellent point here that I hope would be unnecessary to explain to the designers of these trials. I always assumed that any trial claiming to be blind would require a protocol that included no access to any ferrous metals at all during the trial. Seems so obvious doesn't it................ Cheers Pete
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33

7th September 2004, 01:03 AM	#3
The Don Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Cymru Posts: 8,223	Here in the UK they've been tightening things up a little regarding claims for treatments which don't require medical trials. Seven seas cod-liver oil have changed their claim to "people report improvements......." in their TV ads. I suspect the magnet people will do likewise

7th September 2004, 01:39 AM	#7
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985	Quote: Originally posted by SkepticPete You have an excellent point here that I hope would be unnecessary to explain to the designers of these trials. I always assumed that any trial claiming to be blind would require a protocol that included no access to any ferrous metals at all during the trial. Seems so obvious doesn't it................ Cheers Pete Alas, it is often NOT obvious to the designers of these protocols. They often don't (initially) believe that subjects would want to deliberately fool the trial and manipulate the results in any direction. They believe the subjects are quite trustworthy to participate without bias. The reality is that most of these test subjects have no idea what a blinded trial is, how or why it works, and the reasons why such care needs to be taken. Instead, if they know they are testing some product and they like or subscribe to the product's efficacy, chances are they will at least try to find out if they have the real or fake test product. This is "unblinding", and immediately ruins any chance of reliable results being obtained from this subject. That's IF the researcher gets to know it has happened, of course... Interestingly, I read here only earlier today of Randi's "Alpha Kids" project, in which exactly these types of oversights were exploited undetected for nearly three years, to remarkable and even amusing effect.
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985

7th September 2004, 01:44 AM	#8
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33	I guess this demonstrates very well what Randi himself has always stressed..............the best advisors to scientists when designing protocols are professional magicians and illusionists. He so often exposes inadvertent bias and non-blinding in tests designed by genuine researchers.
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33

7th September 2004, 03:30 AM	#9
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985	Quote: Originally posted by SkepticPete I guess this demonstrates very well what Randi himself has always stressed..............the best advisors to scientists when designing protocols are professional magicians and illusionists. He so often exposes inadvertent bias and non-blinding in tests designed by genuine researchers. For a start, yes. But it takes only a little real world thinking for the researchers to conceive and take account of these problems. All that is needed is the spark to do so, I imagine. After all, they aren't all nerdy bespectalled boffins in white coats, and most do have "real lives". The amusing/scary stuff comes from people like Gary Schwartz, who you expect would know for absolute certain these problems exist but nevertheless allow them to significantly affect their results...I suggest most likely because these affected results keep him in his position of tenure, the university in the headlines, and the sponsorship dollars flowing in. It's all about the money...
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985

7th September 2004, 03:48 AM	#10
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33	Yeah.........the money. Apparently Ian Turpie of "The Price is Right" fame has admitted that his testimonials for impotence spray was all bulls**t. For $100,000 he was prepared to lie about being impotent and the efficacy of the product. On a related note I have nominated Tony Barber of "Sale of the Century" (Australia) fame for the Australian Skeptics "Bent Spoon" award............"Presented annually to the perpetrator of the most preposterous piece of paranormal or pseudo-scientific piffle."...............for his endorsement of "Dick Wicks" magnetic therapy products. http://www.skeptics.com.au/features/...bs-04tonyb.htm
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33

7th September 2004, 04:04 AM	#11
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985	Good work! Yep, he must be short of beer money at the moment...
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985

7th September 2004, 04:21 AM	#12
Marrena Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 321	Hmm, don't know a thing about magnet therapy, sounds rather silly to me. But cod liver oil should be helpful for things; it contains omega-3 fatty acids which in fish oil have passed plenty of double-blind placebo-controlled trials for various ailments. Perhaps cod liver oil is too low in EPA and DHA to have a beneficial effect. And (thinking of the other thread where I got chastised for not saying this) cod liver oil should be taken in limited amounts because of the danger of Vitamin A toxicity. But here's a link of various studies done on omega-3 fatty acid benefits: http://www.oilofpisces.com BTW, I'm pretty sure snake oil was probably high in omega-3 fatty acids.
Marrena Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 321

7th September 2004, 04:36 AM	#13
The Don Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Cymru Posts: 8,223	Here is a link to a press release about a cod liver oil study http://www.omega-3info.com/press-release.htm I note that the study has not yet been published and has therefore not yet been subject to full peer review.

7th September 2004, 04:48 AM	#14
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33	Quote: Originally posted by Marrena [b]Hmm, don't know a thing about magnet therapy, sounds rather silly to me. But cod liver oil should be helpful for things; it contains omega-3 fatty acids which in fish oil have passed plenty of double-blind placebo-controlled trials for various ailments. Perhaps cod liver oil is too low in EPA and DHA to have a beneficial effect. I'm sorry if am sound ignorant Marrena but aren't you contradicting yourself here? You say that cod liver oil has passed numerous trials for "various ailments" ..........then you say that it is too low in EPA and DHA (whatever they are?) to have a beneficial effect? Anyway I know nothing about cod liver oil, but I DO know that magnetic therapy is bunk and am very surprised that you haven't heard of it. It is promoted heavily here in Australia on television with testimonials from celebrities etc and in magazines and print media. It is a multi million dollar business just here in Australia (pop=20 million) and I have many workmates who swear by the healing properties of magnets. I have another friend who buys magnetic inlaid blankets for her HORSE! In the shopping malls here I am often accosted by a "magnetic" salesperson at least a couple of times per year along with the late night TV "advertorials" and advert's in magazines and newpapers. I guess I should just finish with one of my fave quotes......... "My acupuncturist keeps needling me, I don't see eye-to-eye with my iridologist, my graphologist can't read my writing, I feel manipulated by my chiropractor, my touch therapist won't keep her hands off me, I can't count on my numerologist, my homeopath doesn't give me much of anything, and my psychic healer makes me sick." - John Stone
SkepticPete Student Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 33

7th September 2004, 08:17 AM	#15
Marrena Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 321	The numerous rigorous peer-reviewed studies have been done on fish oil rather than cod liver oil. Fish oil is beneficial because it is high in the omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA and is safer to consume than actual fish because contaminants from ocean pollution are filtered out (like mercury). Cod liver oil also has omega-3 fatty acids so it would be logical to assume that it could also be somewhat beneficial--low omega-3 fatty acids are better than no omega-3 fatty acids. I've seen magnet therapy advertised in many of the same places as aromatherapy. I wouldn't say I'm being clubbed over the head by it, but maybe I'm not watching enough TV. As for aromatherapy, I wouldn't rely on it to cure cancer, but it can be useful for some things, for example increasing libido. There have been some studies showing men oddly enough respond to the smell of pumpkin pie spice. I'm not sure how rigorous those studies were, but I can hunt them down if anyone is interested.
Marrena Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 321