"Please reply "STOP" to stop receiving these messages" - naming organisations who spam academic email addresses

As someone with an ac.uk email address I am regularly added to mailing lists without my permission. The first time I'm aware of it is when I get some spam and it ends with something like -

"Please reply "STOP" to stop receiving these messages."

or

"You have received this email because you have subscribed to The Bridge to Success LLC as [my email address]. If you no longer wish to receive emails please unsubscribe."

Since I've not signed up to receive these messages in the first place I suppose, by definition, I'm unable to unsubscribe ;)

I've had two of these today so am naming the organisations who spammed me here.

• The Bridge to Success LLC (web address includes thebridgesuccess)
• EdifyOnline

I've no objection to people emailing me to tell me about their organisation and invite me to join their mailing list but adding me and requiring me to take action to remove myself is guaranteed to get me irritated enough to start a new blog post about it. 

Naturally I searched on Twitter to see what others had to say about either of these organisations.

I keep getting solicitations from EdifyOnline and it's all sorts of red flags:
1. Looks like another "disrupt education" plan- uberizing higher ed, and more efficient exploitation of adjunct labor
2. An ed tech company w/ no twitter account pic.twitter.com/nGR107HaYJ

— Dr. Shawna M. Brandle (@ProfBrandle) September 18, 2020

Twoogling also indicate that MIT and EdifyOnline are collaborating so it seems to be a legitimate organisation, but I still hate being spammed.

 

 

Where you can watch the film Elf in London in 2021

It's almost but not quite Christmas and thoughts turn to seeing festive favourite Elf in the cinema (it's not on UK terrestrial TV this Christmas). Every year, from about October, I start to collect together all the London cinema listings I can find and the 2021 Elf db (spreadsheet) is here, or you can view it in its embedded forms below.

This list is as accurate as I can make it but there will always be smaller events that are advertised locally that I may not hear about. Grateful for any tip-offs :) 

https://bit.ly/Elf2021London  ← short link

There's a special edition of John Debney's score on CD and this article, from Art of the Title, about the creation of the film and its opening sequences is amazing.

1. Version for mobile phones (scroll up/down or left/right) 

 

2. Wider version for desktop / web (scroll up/down or left/right) 

My submission / response to the Consultation on the future regulation of medical devices in the United Kingdom

This follows on from my earlier blog post published Sun 21 Nov 2021
Open to all but closing 25 November 2021 - Consultation on the future regulation of medical devices in the United Kingdom, which has a full list of the questions. 

The consultation closes on 25 November 2021 and is open to everyone (patients, healthcare professionals, industry, academics, anyone). I've focused solely on the questions for members of the public in Chapter 17 and have replied as a member of the public. I previously worked on the CHI+MED project (which looked at ways of making medical devices safer) but not as a researcher. 

You might read my answers and think I've got something wrong or misunderstood something. If so, the best thing you can do is to fill in the consultation survey yourself as my answers can't be changed now (all submitted).

(1) You can read Chapter 17 "Questions for members of the general public" as a web page or download it as a PDF.

(2) You can give your views online here. 

(3) The full consultation (all chapters) is here. 

 

My responses
Here are my answers to the questions where a written response was possible. They were usually preceded by Yes / No / Not sure responses, which I've left out.

Q78.1 Do you think these products should be regulated under the UK medical devices regulations? (Yes/No/No Opinion/Don’t Know)

Q78.2 If you have answered ‘yes’ to question 78.1, which products should be regulated under the UK medical devices regulations (please select all those which apply) [see list in web page or PDF linked above in (1)]

Q78.3 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 78.1-78.2 or any general comments on key considerations for the regulation of products without a medical purpose.

I hadn't realised liposuction tools weren't regulated and am surprised. I can only hope that the people who use them are regulated in some way, and have appropriate training in their use.

Some of the devices listed sound like they could be dangerous if used by poorly trained people but I expect that's out of the scope of your consultation. Genomic tests seem to be pretty harmless while being used but the advice given out alongside them is probably what's more concerning, so it's hard to separate the technical aspects from the way they're used to make decisions etc.

What about phone apps that offer vaguely medical support? I don't know if they're regulated, or if they should be - but probably outside your remit.

Q78.4 Do you think the classification rules for general medical devices and IVDs should be amended as above? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)  

Q78.5 Please provide your reasoning for your answer to question 78.4 or any general comments on the classification of medical devices (including ideas for other ways classification may need to change).

I'm between YES and DON'T KNOW as this seems a bit too technical for me, and I don't know what it is about some of these devices that makes them riskier (eg is the thing inherently risky or is it the way it's used - I've no idea how to do surgery so could probably do a lot of harm with a replacement joint that would be fine in competent hands).

What about devices that are used in quackery? For example bioresonance machines are Class IIa and don't seem to do anything useful. Alternative therapists who use them highlight the fact that they're Class IIa, which suggests they hope to benefit from the implication that they're 'approved' and 'a bit medical'. I'd suggest a new category - Class X (Entertainment) for those types of things ;)

Hearing aids that don't have lockable battery components should be in a higher risk class as button batteries can kill.

Q79.1 Do you think that health institutions should be required to meet certain requirements for ‘in house’ manufactured devices, such as those laid out above? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q79.2 If you have answered ‘yes’ to question 79.1, please choose which requirements should be met by health institutions (select all those which apply from the list below): [see list in web page or PDF linked above in (1)]

Q79.3 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 79.1 and 79.2, or any general comments on the rules that should apply to ‘in house’ manufacturing of medical devices.

I really don't know much about this, nor about the scale of manufacture (how often it occurs) or of modification (a minor tweak or a big change). It seems sensible that smart, technically-minded competent people - working within an appropriate healthcare framework - should be free to adapt things, within reason, to suit their needs without this being onerously regulated, but given that it's possible to do harm while intending to solve a problem I think records need to be kept as a bare minimum.

I think, as with 'official' devices, that near misses should be reported as well as actual incidents - and that these should also be fed back to the manufacturers. 

Q79.4 Do you think that medical device importers/distributors should meet additional requirements such as those outlined above? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)  

Q79.5 Please provide your reasoning for your answer to question 79.4 or any general comments on rules applying to importers/distributors of medical devices in the UK

I'm a bit surprised that this isn't already the case(?).

Q79.6 Do you think manufacturer should be required to assign UDI numbers to medical devices before they enter the UK market? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q79.7 What types/classes of medical devices should be included in the requirement for UDI storage (select only one)? [see list in web page or PDF linked above in (1)]

Q79.8 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 79.6-79.7 or any general comments on UDI requirements for medical devices.

I thought devices already had unique IDs, possibly given by the hospital or other care setting. It seems like a good idea but I suppose there's the possibility of giving people an awful lot of work in managing it. Q79.6 asks only about UDIs for devices entering the UK but it seems sensible to have this for devices made in the UK too, unless I am missing something about the scale of this (there are millions of medical devices!). Don't bandages have lot numbers? I'm doing regular LFTs and each one has its own QR code...

As part of modifications mentioned in 'Health Institutions' above is it possible that a component from one medical device might be transferred into another (if one breaks, using spare parts I mean)? I'm not sure how that would work with UDIs.

Q80.1 Do you think the UK medical devices regulations should include stricter requirements for claiming equivalence? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q80.2 If yes, should it be the requirements above or other? [multi-choice options of the above requirements plus other – please specify

Other: It seems like manufacturers should have to first prove that Device B *is* equivalent to Device A first, rather than claiming it.

Q80.3 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to question 80.1 and 80.2 and/or any general comments on rules that you think should apply to claiming equivalence to another medical device as set out above.

 This feels quite far beyond my knowledge of how this might play out in practice. I agree with the first three statements of Q80.2. I am not sure if the first statement is really just the same as my 'other' comment (might be). For the second statement (documentation) I think it would also be necessary to have access to some information about any underlying software too, as devices can differ in the ways they're programmed to do stuff, also if two similar devices have slightly different modes or states.

I don't know, for statement 4, where the cut-off should be, but agree that there should be a point at which manufacturers can't claim equivalence.

Q80.4 Do you think the UK medical devices regulations should introduce the requirement for an SSCP for medical devices? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q80.5 What types/classes of medical devices should require a SSCP (select all that apply)?

[I picked Other]: I think all medical devices (not medical spoons, bandages though) should have this.

Q80.6 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 80.4-80.5 and/or any general comments on introducing a requirement for medical devices to have SSCPs.

This seems like a good idea. Definitely needs to be understandable by non-medical people. Seems useful to let many eyes look at stuff too. Again I would include information about any underlying software in this (I remember people trying to get hold of this sort of info for their implanted defibrillators and the companies were reluctant to share that info).

Any SSCP should be uploaded to and held by MHRA (with version control, should be possible to see earlier versions and what's changed). It should not be a link in case the document is moved / the URL is changed and no redirect set up.

Q82.1 Do you think manufacturers should be required to consult with patients when investigating device incidents? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q82.2 If you have answered ‘yes’ to question 82.1, how do you think manufacturers should consult with patients when investigating incidents (you may want to consider: how the manufacturer would find patients with lived experiences, methods of communication, how the manufacturer would demonstrate that they have taken into account patient views).

82.1 says Mfrs must submit reports to MHRA under certain circs. Does that include near misses? Do healthcare professionals report problems directly to the MHRA too?

I don't know if there's value in consulting with patients & public during the *technical* investigation. Possibly their input could be useful in gathering info about how the device is being used in the real world (may differ from expected). That said as 'someone who flies' I'd not expect to be consulted on an aircraft accident investigations - perhaps this analogy only works if the medical device is used BY patients, rather than ON patients by healthcare prof's.

I'd assume consultation would be sensible at the FSN stage, to ensure the info made sense and was unambiguous. As far as I know Patient Information Leaflets are 'road tested' in this way (at least I thought they were!), there's also an entire genre / industry of people ensuring the readability and applicability of patient information.

Finding patients with lived experience
Companies may want to use a third party if they're not allowed to chat directly with the public (I'm thinking about ABPI regulations on pharmaceutical companies, not sure if that applies here). People are pretty easy to find on Twitter / Fb etc though that does open up the possibility of negative publicity if replies are negative. There are charities and patient support groups for almost every possible illness or condition, Google or Charity Commission should uncover them, also healthcare professionals would be able to suggest patients or patient groups. The Association of Medical Research Charities covers a couple of hundred larger medical charities. I think going through healthcare professionals would be a good place to start as there is already a familiar, trusted relationship. Mfrs should reimburse costs.

Methods of communication
Patient comms infrastructure is in place for patient and public involvement in medical research (eg NIHR, Wellcome). The Patient Information Forum (PiF) provides relevant advice, NHS Digital ensure info on the NHS website is language-appropriate and readable at lower literacy levels. There are plenty of science communicators and people working in public engagement with science who could help here too.

Demonstrating patient views considered
Not sure. Paying 3rd party facilitator to find patients, undertake consultation & report patient views might work, as then facilitator could sign off on it (if patients don't wish to be named).

Q82.3 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 82.1-82.2 or any general comments on patient and public engagement during incident investigation.

I think patients harmed during the use of a medical device, and those who might be harmed by its continued use (until investigation produces a solution) should be *invited* to be involved in the investigation, and certainly to have sight of any report before it's submitted. I'm just not sure about how involved they'd want or need to be in technical aspects (eg discussions about software used in a blood glucose meter might not be that relevant to someone with diabetes who's not very familiar with programming, but I think it's helpful for manufacturers to be open and invite patients in).

Presumably usability experts and other designers would also be involved at the investigation stage, as they may have input on improvements to design and also in spotting what might have gone wrong. Probably these types of people are automatically included in a root cause analysis anyway.

The output document from the EPSRC-funded CHI+MED project might be of use too https://chimedblog.wordpress.com/2016/01/29/making-medical-devices-safer-insights-from-the-chimed-project-funded-by-epsrc/.

Here is a list of communities of practice; the focus is on science communication more widely but there are several medical-based groups within it that may be able to offer advice https://scicommjobs.wordpress.com/2021/01/30/scicomm-communities-of-practice/

Both of those links will rather give away who's filling this submission in but I am going to blog my answers so feel free to make this public / no need to redact the links etc.

Q83.1 Do you think that the UK medical devices regulations should include the requirements for manufacturers and health institutions to provide patients with implant information? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q83.2 If you have answered ‘yes’ to question 83.1, is there any other information which should be included within the implant information? If so, please outline below.

Who to contact in case of questions (it may just be "contact your consultant" of course).

Q83.3 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 83.1-83.2 or any general comments on patient implant information.

It sound like patients aren't already getting some info about their implant (which surprises me as I assume everything comes with a patient info leaflet). It might be helpful for these various information sheets to be held centrally by MHRA as packet leaflets are easily lost (and PILs and SPCs are easily findable on the internet).

Q83.4 Do you think the MHRA should introduce a tailored pathway to market approval for: ...

Q83.5 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to question 83.4 or any general comments on possible pathways to approval to bring a device to the UK market.

I don't think I have enough knowledge or information to answer this one. I'm not really sure what a tailored pathway would involve. I'm also not certain about the difference between A and B. It does seem sensible to accept other jurisdictions' approvals (with some checks and balances of course) and not make companies repeat largely similar work for each territory. 

C Innovative Devices seems to have come out of nowhere and I'd assume they could be handled by either A or B, so I'm not sure I've understood this question.

Open to all but closing 25 November 2021 - Consultation on the future regulation of medical devices in the United Kingdom

Update: I've now submitted my responses to the Chapter 17 (for members of the public) of the consultation and you can read them here.

*******************************

 This is a wide-ranging consultation on medical devices (which includes big serious medical machines that go 'ping' in hospitals as well as contact lenses and spectacles). Everyone is welcome to give input and there's a chapter (chapter 17) specifically for members of the public (though they're also welcome to comment on any or all chapters too). 

The full thing is here: Consultation on the future regulation of medical devices in the United Kingdom

 

 

 

Chapter 9 is about In vitro Medical Diagnostic Devices, eg lateral flow tests
Chapter 10 is about Software as a Medical Device
Chapter 11 is about Implantable Devices, and so on.

(1) You can read Chapter 17 "Questions for members of the general public" as a web page or download it as a PDF.

(2) You can give your views online here.

The Sections for Chapter 17
Note that Chapter 17 begins at Section 76 (as sections 1 - 75 are in earlier chapters) and ends at Section 83.

There are questions for members of the public associated with Sections 78, 79, 80, 82 and 82. Read the section then answer the questions that follow it, using the 'give your views' link in (2) above.

Section 76 - Introduction
- a bit of scene setting, who's behind this consultation and what does it cover

Section 77 - Background Information on Medical Device Regulation
- how medical devices have been approved so far

Section 78 - Scope and classification
- what's included, and what should be included
• Products without a medical purpose
includes 3 questions (Q78.1, Q78.2 & Q78.3)
• Classification
includes 2 questions (Q78.4 & Q78.5)

Section 79 - Economic operators, registration of medical devices and Unique Device Identification
• Health Institutions (inc 3 questions, Q79.1, Q79.2 & Q79.3)
• Importers and Distributors (inc 2 questions, Q79.4 & Q79.5)
• Unique Device Identification (UDI) (inc 3 questions, Q79.6, Q79.7 & Q79.8)

Section 80 - Clinical investigations and performance studies
• Clinical investigations of medical devices (inc 3 Qns, Q80.1, Q80.2 & Q80.3)
• Summary of Safety and Clinical Performance (SSCP) (inc 3 Qns, Q80.4, Q80.5 & Q80.6)

Section 81 - Approved Bodies and Conformity Assessment
81.1 This section does not contain questions on the above topic in light of its technical nature. To share your thoughts on this topic, see Chapters 5 and 6 of the full consultation.

Section 82 - Post market surveillance, vigilance, and market surveillance
• Vigilance (reporting of incidents) (inc 3 questions, Q82.1, Q82.2 & Q82.3)

Section 83 - Specific products and topics
• Implantable medical devices (inc 3 questions, Q83.1, Q83.2 & Q83.3)
• Routes to market (inc 2 questions, Q83.4 & Q83.5)

The Questions about Chapter 17
The 27 questions are listed below but some contain options to select 'a' or 'b' etc and I've not included those here, please see the web page or PDF linked above. 

Q78.1 Do you think these products should be regulated under the UK medical devices regulations? (Yes/No/No Opinion/Don’t Know)

Q78.2 If you have answered ‘yes’ to question 78.1, which products should be regulated under the UK medical devices regulations (please select all those which apply) [see list in web page or PDF linked above in (1)]

Q78.3 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 78.1-78.2 or any general comments on key considerations for the regulation of products without a medical purpose.

Q78.4 Do you think the classification rules for general medical devices and IVDs should be amended as above? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)  

Q78.5 Please provide your reasoning for your answer to question 78.4 or any general comments on the classification of medical devices (including ideas for other ways classification may need to change).

Q79.1 Do you think that health institutions should be required to meet certain requirements for ‘in house’ manufactured devices, such as those laid out above? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q79.2 If you have answered ‘yes’ to question 79.1, please choose which requirements should be met by health institutions (select all those which apply from the list below): [see list in web page or PDF linked above in (1)]

Q79.3 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 79.1 and 79.2, or any general comments on the rules that should apply to ‘in house’ manufacturing of medical devices.

Q79.4 Do you think that medical device importers/distributors should meet additional requirements such as those outlined above? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)  

Q79.5 Please provide your reasoning for your answer to question 79.4 or any general comments on rules applying to importers/distributors of medical devices in the UK

Q79.6 Do you think manufacturer should be required to assign UDI numbers to medical devices before they enter the UK market? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q79.7 What types/classes of medical devices should be included in the requirement for UDI storage (select only one)? [see list in web page or PDF linked above in (1)]

Q79.8 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 79.6-79.7 or any general comments on UDI requirements for medical devices.

Q80.1 Do you think the UK medical devices regulations should include stricter requirements for claiming equivalence? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q80.2 If yes, should it be the requirements above or other? [multi-choice options of the above requirements plus other – please specify

Q80.3 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to question 80.1 and 80.2 and/or any general comments on rules that you think should apply to claiming equivalence to another medical device as set out above.
 
Q80.4 Do you think the UK medical devices regulations should introduce the requirement for an SSCP for medical devices? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q80.5 What types/classes of medical devices should require a SSCP (select all that apply)? [see list in web page or PDF linked above in (1)]

Q80.6 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 80.4-80.5 and/or any general comments on introducing a requirement for medical devices to have SSCPs.

Q82.1 Do you think manufacturers should be required to consult with patients when investigating device incidents? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q82.2 If you have answered ‘yes’ to question 82.1, how do you think manufacturers should consult with patients when investigating incidents (you may want to consider: how the manufacturer would find patients with lived experiences, methods of communication, how the manufacturer would demonstrate that they have taken into account patient views).

Q82.3 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 82.1-82.2 or any general comments on patient and public engagement during incident investigation.

Q83.1 Do you think that the UK medical devices regulations should include the requirements for manufacturers and health institutions to provide patients with implant information? (‘Yes’ / ’No’ / ’Don’t Know/No Opinion’)

Q83.2 If you have answered ‘yes’ to question 83.1, is there any other information which should be included within the implant information? If so, please outline below.

Q83.3 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to questions 83.1-83.2 or any general comments on patient implant information.

Q83.4 Do you think the MHRA should introduce a tailored pathway to market approval for: [see list in web page or PDF linked above in (1)]

Q83.5 Please provide your reasoning for your answers to question 83.4 or any general comments on possible pathways to approval to bring a device to the UK market.

Things I don't know the answer to - facial expressions in history / history of emotion

I've just seen a tweet and blog post from the Public Domain Review with self-portraits from 1790 showing the artist (Joseph Ducreux) pulling a series of unusual faces.

With their odd combination of directness, ambiguity, and exaggerated expression Joseph Ducreux's unorthodox self-portraits received a mixed reception in their day, but a strong and curious rebirth in the age of social media and the all-powerful meme —https://t.co/1LkyiRJ4WN pic.twitter.com/TVwjttcInd

— Public Domain Review (@PublicDomainRev) August 25, 2021

 

It reminded me that I don't seem to have drawn together (in blog post form) the notions I occasionally have about Facial Expressions through History. I think this concept popped into my head after seeing an Emma Stone gif in my timeline in which she pulls quite a face. It turns out there are quite a few gifs of her being facially expressive :) 

It struck me that I couldn't imagine someone making such a face in the 1500s. That might just be a failure of my own imagination and of course those expressions might not have been included in any art that survives. Facial expressions are an outward sign of what's going on in our heads and it seems reasonable to assume that a case could be made in either direction - either we're not that different from people living hundreds of years ago, so we'd pull the same faces, or the environment in which modern people and previous people lived isn't comparable and the facial expressions 'available' to people would differ (and difficult to prove).

Having seen Ducreux's paintings (perhaps 1790 is not that long ago) I'm moving towards 'failure of my imagination', but it still feels as if people would have conducted themselves, and what their faces were doing, very differently in the past. A lot of reaction gifs are reasonably performative, I wonder if people bothered with that sort of thing as much in the 1500s. 

Coincidentally where I work, Queen Mary University of London (QMUL), has its very own Centre for the History of the Emotions, so every so often I see if they have anything on facial expressions of yore ;)

I tend to notice people's facial expressions and wonder if they'd have pulled that face in the Umpteenth century ;) https://t.co/XWtHoaKKfZ

— Jo Brodie (@JoBrodie) April 17, 2020

 

Agreed - great i/view.
"There’s often a debate about how people expressed emotion, whether they expressed it. There’s a contemporary register and there’s a period register." - I often wonder about people's facial expressions & gestures from previous decades / centuries! :) https://t.co/VkwLt3XAl7

— Jo Brodie (@JoBrodie) June 18, 2018

 

Eg Emma Stone has some amazing and funny expressions and I struggle to imagine someone from a few centuries ago pulling some of those faces (maybe they did, perhaps the fault is my imagination!).

Also, I wonder *where* this debate about how ppl expressed emotion takes place...? pic.twitter.com/PgB8WuxVzA

— Jo Brodie (@JoBrodie) June 18, 2018

 

 

 

A bad take from Alan Freestone though not his first - undercover reporting and Trading Standards on homeopathy and autism claims

Summary: in addition to writing nonsense on Twitter about incels Alan Freestone has been investigated by Trading Standards for claiming to cure autism with homeopathy and CEASE therapy. The post below includes links to articles in The Times and The Telegraph about his claims, and to his listing on a page of people referred for their persistent misleading claims to Trading Standards by the Advertising Standards Authority.

I've added a bit at the end about homeopathy societies in the UK. Two have since publicly distanced themselves from his statements.

Update: his awful tweet was taken down on 14 August between 22:56 and 23:14pm. I can be that accurate as I sent a tweet when I got home bemoaning that it was still up then it disappeared, so I sent another. I've added a copy below.

See also, this thread
https://twitter.com/robertsproggit/status/1426501423718617089

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

This post is for the benefit of people following up on Alan Freestone's particularly bad tweet from Friday 13 August 2021, in response to the horrendous incident in Plymouth. He muted me (and presumably others) several years ago after I / we challenged him on his claims to treat / cure autism using CEASE therapy and homeopathy. 

Pic 1. Tweet from Alan Freestone sent on 7 June 2018 (still live at time of writing) which says "Jo, your endless attempts to try & stifle positive homeopathy stories are very telling. You attempt to use social media to suppress views you disagree with. That's not an ethical past time. You should reflect on that. P.S. I have cured autism. I'll continue to cure autism."

 

This tweet is still up. Quite surprised. He's added a few more in similar vein, some bleating about how badly received his intended nuance-ing was. pic.twitter.com/Gk67lBLGzt

— Jo Brodie (@JoBrodie) August 14, 2021

Pic 2., Pic 3. w are screenshots which were taken 11 hours apart, Pic 4. (embedded Tweet) was taken at 23:56 on 14 August. These are all copies of the same tweet (sent on 13 August 2021 and still live at time of writing) which says said "I hope the women of Plymouth collectively take some responsibility for this. Misandry & the anti-man rhetoric from teachers causes incels. Young men without hope, without a path, without anything meaninfgul to strive for become dangerous to the societies around them." The earlier screenshot shows 1.5k replies, 890 retweets ( and 15 likes, the later one has 3.1k replies, 1.8, retweets and 49 likes. At time of writing his tweet has 28 retweets and 1,865 quote tweets.

Not surprisingly he's received a remarkable amount of pushback in the replies to the tweet which you can find indirectly here (until he wisely deletes it, but screenshots will remain).

In early 2019 the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) took compliance action on at least three homeopaths claiming to treat autism with homeopathy / CEASE therapy and referred them to Trading Standards (TS) in November, one (Paula Lattimer) has now made their marketing material compliant but Alan Freestone and Carolyn Stevens are still on the list. The ASA wrote a post in March 2019 outlining their position on CEASE "Why so-called CEASE Therapy claims to 'cure' autism really have to stop".

Here is the list of Trading Standards Referrals (you'll need to scroll down and click 'see more' to see everyone that the ASA has referred to TS). I don't know if Trading Standards are still investigating him or if the pandemic has made that harder.

Pic 5. shows the list of homeopaths who've been referred to Trading Standards, two are still making misleading claims.

In April 2019 Alan Freestone was the sole subject of an article in The Times about his wild claims to treat autistic children with homeopathy "Homeopaths ‘treat’ autistic children with rabid dog saliva". 

"...claims to have treated 1,185 autistic patients with remedies such as carcinosinum, made from cancerous breast tissue; lyssin, made with rabid dog saliva; and medorrhinum, made from the discharge of a man with gonorrhoea." Note that you can buy these products (which are HEAVILY diluted you'll be relieved to hear!) from Helios UK, see the links.

In November that year he, along with another homeopath, were caught by an undercover reporter for The Telegraph (see video below) offering advice to a parent (reporter) about how to evade vaccination and what to do about schools requiring children to be vaccinated (fib, basically): "Homeopaths warning mothers not to have children vaccinated, investigation reveals". The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Authority (MHRA) expressed concern that consumers were buying dangerous unauthorised treatments from him but I don't know if any further investigation was made.

Additional info on homeopathic societies in the UK
Several people on the thread created from Alan's tweet have CCed in the Society of Homeopaths (SoH) or asked if he's a member. Alan is not a member of the SoH and to the best of my knowledge I don't think he has ever been. I also don't think he's a member of Homeopathy UK (formerly known as the British Homeopathic Association, BHA) but I think he used to be a member of the Alliance of Registered Homeopaths (ARH) but I don't think he is now. 'Homeopath' is not a protected term in the UK so anyone can call themselves that and can "practise" without being registered. There is a fourth society, the Faculty of Homeopathy, which is reserved for qualified healthcare professionals (hcp) who have also trained in homeopathy. As he's not a doctor or allied hcp he wouldn't be able to join that one anyway. 

But this isn't the Society of Homeopaths' fault. Since I'm often the first to criticise them, and celebrated their accreditation with the Professional Standards Authority (PSA) being withdrawn* earlier this year, I think it's only fair to point out that they have nothing to do with the nonsensical pronouncements by Alan Freestone, being more than capable of emitting their own nonsensical pronouncements.

Update 1: The Society of Homeopaths (he's not a member) have distanced themselves from Freestone's statements, the same also appears on their Facebook page.

Update 2: Freestone is a member of Homeopathy International (HINT) and they have distanced themselves more vaguely (website statement).

Update 3: (Fri 24 Sep 2021) - I've just noticed that HINT's Steering Committee met to discuss the matter on 17 August and decided that as the tweet was made in a 'personal capacity' that was the end of the matter. 

HINT previously published (April 2019) a guide for its members advising them not to worry to much about letters from the ASA (May 2018, made public March 2019) which told them to "make no direct or implied efficacy claims for CEASE therapy".

Further reading
* The Society of Homeopaths, and the issues with regulating healthcare in the UK (6 August 2021) By Michael Marshall (project director of The Good Thinking Society, writing in The Skeptic - the PSA suspended the SoH's accreditation in January 2021 and, presumably unable to address the problems (and citing cost), the SoH later withdrew from the accredited register scheme in July 2021.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Open air travel, open air film screenings - which of London's piers are nearest an open air cinema?

You can steal and adapt the content of this post - I think it's quite important to share info about enjoying London as safely as possible.

To the extent possible under law, Jo Brodie has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to Open air travel, open air film screenings - which of London's piers are nearest an open air cinema?. This work is published from: United Kingdom. 

This means that you can copy, paste and amend the text of this post (and this post only) and republish it without my permission or without crediting me :) Tell everyone about the films and the ferries.

**********************

Yesterday afternoon I went to see Moana at Archlight's open air cinema, at the Coaling Jetty at Battersea Power Station. I travelled there from Greenwich Pier on a Thames Clipper ferry and arrived at Battersea Power Station Pier around 40 minutes later and then made the reverse journey home later. Sometimes you have to change at Canary Wharf (or London Bridge) but mine was a direct service.

Archlight also linked up with Thames Clippers and offered a pair of free tickets to one of their events (not just cinema) and have a section on ferries in the 'how to get here' part of their page. 

Given that people are encouraged to avoid 'too many other people while inside' I think travelling to open air cinema screenings by ferry is rather on point. Nearly all of the Thames Clippers ferries have seats at the back which are open to the elements and it's rather nice, especially on a hot day, to enjoy the breeze. Quite a few of them have an on-board bar as well (also soft drinks and snacks).

NOTE: not all piers are open all the time, some routes miss some piers out and the last boat home may not include your preferred end or starting pier so do check timetables and delays info on Twitter before booking tickets.

Big list of open air film screenings in London
http://bit.ly/OpenAirCinemaLondon2021 

Thames Clippers ferries
https://www.thamesclippers.com/

Thames River Boats
https://www.thamesriverboats.co.uk/

Thames River Services
https://www.thamesriversightseeing.com/

The following piers are reasonably near an open air cinema screening.

Battersea Pier
Thames Clippers run a regular service to Battersea Power Station's pier which is right next to the place where Archlight's open air cinema is (exit the pier's gangway, turn left). 

[Summer Showtime at Battersea Power Station] [Archlight Open Air Cinema] [PDF of screenings] [Battersea Pier info - it's wheelchair accessible, Last boat to central London, Canary Wharf and Greenwich: 21:32 weekdays, 22:30 weekends. Last boat to Putney: 20:24 weekdays.]

 

Blackfriars Pier
Pop Up Screens will be showing The Greatest Showman, Moonlight, Philadelphia, The Beach, Dreamgirls and The Adventures of Priscilla Queen of the Desert at Guildhall Yard in the City of London, in August. The venue is about a 15-20 minute walk from Blackfriars Pier [route]. 

[Pop Up Screens] [Blackfriars Pier - it's wheelchair accessible]

 

Cadogan Pier (Chelsea)
Luna Cinema is showing four films (Top Gun, The Greatest Showman, Grease and Star Wars: A New Hope) at the Royal Hospital, Chelsea which is a 15-20 minute walk from Cadogan Pier [route], but note that the pier has only a limited service in the evenings. 

[Luna Cinema] [Cadogan Pier - is NOT wheelchair accessible. This pier is only open in the morning and evening, last boat to central London, Canary Wharf and Greenwich: 21:26 weekdays, last boat to Putney: 20:54.]

 

Greenwich Pier (Cutty Sark)
Tramshed in Woolwich are showing a free sing-along version of The Greatest Showman in Greenwich Park. Greenwich Pier is a short walk from Greenwich Park / National Maritime Museum and is well-served by Thames Clippers. The pier is right in the heart of Greenwich and is usually very busy, particularly in good weather. During busy times arriving is easier than leaving as you may have to queue for a departing boat and might not get on the first one. 

[Tramshed screening] [Greenwich Pier - is wheelchair accessible, last boats from Greenwich Pier to North Greenwich, Royal Wharf and Woolwich: 23:11 weekdays, 23:29 weekends, last boat to Canary Wharf, central London and Putney: 21:38 weekdays, 21:36 weekends]

 

Hampton Court
Luna Cinema are showing five films (The Dark Knight, Top Gun, Dirty Dancing, The Greatest Showman [sing-along] and Bohemian Rhapsody) at Hampton Court this year. There is a pier here but at the moment there are no ferries from Westminster running, but there are occasional services from Richmond Pier. I'd not rely on this for a timed performance though, it's also very dependent on the tide. 

[Thames River Boats] [Luna Cinema]

 

London Bridge City Pier
#SummerByTheRiver at Scoop, More London (next to City Hall and near HMS Belfast) screens free subtitled films every Tuesday evening at 7.30pm. London Bridge City Pier is the closest and on the same side of the river. Tower Bridge is also very close too but its piers (there are two) are on the opposite side of the river. 

[London Bridge City's Summer By the River] [London Bridge City Pier - is not wheelchair accessible. Last boat to Canary Wharf, Greenwich and Woolwich: 22:44 weekdays and 23:02 weekends. Last boat to Westminster, Battersea Power Station and Putney: 22:04 weekdays and 21:59 weekends.]

 

London Eye pier (Waterloo)
Bar Elba in Waterloo is screening loads of films on its rooftop and London Eye pier isn't far away (granted trains /buses are closer!).

[Bar Elba] [Film screenings PDF] [London Eye pier - is wheelchair accessible, last boats from London Eye pier: 22:29 weekdays, 22:11 weekends but on weekends it's a ~10m walk across Hungerford Bridge [route] to get to Embankment Pier for a last boat to Greenwich at 22:50]

 

Millbank Pier
Luna Cinema is screening three films (Romeo + Juliet, Sister Act and Moulin Rouge!) at Victoria Tower Gardens in Westminster (8.45pm 3-5 August) and the venue is closest to (and on the same side of the river as) Millbank Pier, but note that ferries can get you to the cinema but not back again as the last boat leaves before the film begins. 

[Luna Cinema] [Millbank Pier - is wheelchair accessible, last boats from Millbank Pier to Embankment, Tower and Bankside (for Tate Modern): 17:20 weekdays, 20:45 weekends, last boat to Battersea Power Station or Putney: 16:28 weekdays, 20:20 weekends]

North Greenwich Pier
Pop Up Screens is showing Grease, Back to the Future and 500 Days of Summer this weekend (Fri, Sat, Sun / 23, 24, 25 July) at Greenwich Peninsula.

[Pop Up Screens] [North Greenwich Pier - is wheelchair accessible, last boat towards Woolwich: 23:19 weekdays, 23:37 weekends, last boat to Canary Wharf, central London and Putney: 21:30 weekdays, 21:26 weekends]

 

Putney Pier
Pop Up Screens is showing Rocket Man, A Star is Born and The Greatest Showman in Bishop's Park Fulham on the 3-5 September, and 10 Things I Hate About You, Dirty Dancing and The Goonies in the same place from 24-26 September. Putney Pier is on the opposite side of the river, cross Putney Bridge. 

[Pop Up Screens] [Putney Pier - is wheelchair accessible. Last boat to London and Canary Wharf: 21:00 weekdays. First boat arrives there at 17:08 so the ferries can get you there but not home, for these screenings.]

 

St George Wharf (Vauxhall)
Summer Screen Vauxhall has some free (need to reserve a ticket) screenings, every Tuesday, from 27 July to 17 August: Emperor’s New Groove, Mamma Mia!, Paddington 2 and Black Panther - all start at 7pm and take place at Vauxhall Pleasure Gardens which is not too far [route] from St George Wharf, Vauxhall.

[Summer Screen Vauxhall] [St George Wharf - is wheelchair accessible. Last boat to central London, Canary Wharf and Greenwich: 22:44 weekdays, 23:02 weekends. Last boat to Battersea Power Station and Putney: 20:18 weekdays, 22:22 weekends] 

 

Tower Bridge piers
St Kat's Floating Film Festival is screening Rocketman (today 22 July, 7pm), Jojo Rabbit (23 July 7pm), Aladdin Live Action and Misbehaviour (both on 24 July, 2pm and 7pm) and The Lion King - live action (2019) on 25 July at 2pm. The screening pontoon is near Cote, by Tower Bridge.

Last week I saw an earlier screening of Jojo Rabbit at St Kat's, on a floating pontoon at the St Katharine Docks marina. I took a ferry there and back again which was perhaps overdoing it a little for water-based entertainment. There are two piers, Thames Clippers has a more frequent service stopping at Tower Millennium Pier - if you arrive after the riverside passage through the Tower of London has closed use the grey route here, otherwise the blue is fine. Tower Bridge Quay is closer and served by Thames River Services but boats are less frequent and stop early.

[St Kat's Floating Film Festival] [Tower Millennium Pier (Thames Clippers) - is wheelchair accessible] [Tower Bridge Quay (Thames River Services) - accessibility not listed, serves Westminster, Embankment, Tower Bridge Quay and Greenwich (Cutty Sark) piers]

 

Wandsworth Riverside Quarter Pier
Luna Cinema is showing Some Like it Hot, Bohemian Rhapsody and The Princess Bride but note that while you'll be able to arrive using the Thames Clippers you're unlikely to be able to get the last boat home (9.10pm) to London / Canary Wharf. The films all start at 7.30pm and the one with the shortest run time is The Princess Bride (at 1hr 38).

[Luna Cinema] [Wandsworth Pier - is not Wheelchair accessible, but nearby Putney Pier is, and is on same side of the river. The pier is only open in the morning and evening, first boat arrives at 17:03. Last boat to London and Canary Wharf: 21:10]

 

Westminster Pier
Luna Cinema is showing Knives Out, The Dark Knight, The Greatest Showman and Notting Hill at 9pm from (29 July to 1 August) at Westminster Abbey, nearest pier is Westminster but you won't be able to take a boat home as they stop too early.

[Luna Cinema] [Westminster Pier - is wheelchair accessible. Last boat towards Tower, Canary Wharf and Greenwich: 22:25 weekdays, 22:45 weekends. Last boat to Battersea Power Station, Millbank (for Tate Britain) and Putney: 22:20 weekdays, 22:15 weekends]

 

Woolwich Pier
St George's Garrison Church is a ~20 minute long walk (uphill, route) from Woolwich Pier, and is showing Coco on 14 August and Dunkirk on 3 September, both free (but need a ticket for August, not for the September screening).

[St George's Garrison Church] [Woolwich Pier - is wheelchair accessible. Woolwich is a terminus pier (on weekdays it's open in the morning and evening - first boat arrives at 17:22). Last boat to Greenwich, Canary Wharf and central London: 21:20 weekdays, 21:00 weekends]

What was this video, at the Science or Natural History Museum?

I'm trying to remember / find info about a short video that was part of an exhibition at either the Science Museum or the Natural History Museum in London. It would have been somewhere between 1985 and 1995 I think. It had a woman dressed and painted as an alien (she had deeley bopper type things on her head) and she spoke a piece to the camera, addressing the viewer in her alien language, aka incomprehensible gibberish.

Moments later she repeated the exercise but this time she accompanied the piece with gestures, pointing to things and of course suddenly the spoken text made perfect sense. The viewer now knew her name, how to greet people and how to count to three (she had 3 deeley boppers and pointed to each 'one', 'two', 'three' in her language). 

I don't remember spotting the phrase "comprehensible input" in the video or accompanying text but that must have been what the exhibit was about, something I realised later when watching an interesting video about the topic as it applies to language acquisition (subconsciously, naturally) as opposed to learning (conscious effort / rote learning). 

Small children learn language by surmising meaning from sentences - in general they're not taught explicitly that X represents or means Y or how tenses work. Their brains can work out the underlying relationships between words, tenses and meanings from the information they're given, reinforced by repetition and variety.

Anyone who has no idea what a 'cow' is could work it out from someone pointing at some and saying "Look, cows".  

I think the alien was called 'Mim' and that she called her deeley boppers something like flumes or flunes but I can't remember anything else. She might have used 'Borag Thungg!' as 'hello' - but at the time I didn't know that that phrase came from Tharg the Mighty and it's possible I'm mis-remembering that.

Anyone know what I'm talking about?

 

Some of my favourite posts - a sort of retrospective post.

Occasionally I have what I think of as quite a good idea or at least an enjoyable notion so I've gathered up some of those posts, tagged them as 'brilliant wheezes' and have listed my favourites below. 

This blog has been running for twelve years now and most posts are 'hyperlocal' to a particular thought or event (eg a conference I've been to or something in the news), others are a bit more timeless... I hope you enjoy them :)

I've also been blogging long enough to know that shortly after publication of this post I'll start getting enthusiastic spam emails from people who hope that I can add a link to their really useful (and totally relevant) post on breathing difficulties ;)

The Imaginary Paddington 2 Science Festival (30 March 2021)
- there's plenty of science in the Paddington films.

Combining Careers - the interdisciplinary game / activity (30 June 2020)
- loved this idea of making a game of trying to think up possible careers based on picking any two subjects. I was very pleased to discover hairdressing archaeology, where someone works out the topology of complicated hairstyles of yore.

Art and medicine: visual literacy and things faithfully (though unwittingly) recorded in art and spotted later by medically trained people (3 January 2020)
- one of the most enjoyable posts I've ever written, on a topic that utterly fascinates me

Wondering if birds have perfect pitch (7 May 2017)

The Imaginary Maritime Science Festival - what would you have in your perfect science festival? (3 April 2017)

How to get tickets for something that might be sold out (1 October 2016)

The world is divided into people who listen to song lyrics and people who don't (17 November 2013)

 

 

Film quiz - "Match the aircraft to the film it appears in" edition with answers

Here are the answers (below) to an earlier post called Film quiz - "Match the aircraft to the film it appears in" edition. 

Note that some aircraft are ‘acting’ as well (eg in one film a Yakovlev Yak-52TW was modified to resemble a Supermarine Spitfire, but this is listed here as the intended Spitfire) or CGI and other sneakery might be used. Information is correct according to the internet; I welcome arguments :) 

First, the original quiz questions

Match the aircraft to the film it's in

Number and film	Letter	Letter and aircraft
1. The Silence of the Lambs		A. Bell UH-1 Iroquois 'Huey' helicopter
2. Jurassic World		B. Supermarine Spitfire
3. The Dam Busters		C. Thurston TSC-1A Teal
4. Quantum of Solace		D. Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress bomber
5. Apocalypse Now		E. Boeing 707
6. North By Northwest		F.  Douglas DC-3
7. Independence Day		G. Avro Lancaster B.VII
8. Memphis Belle		H. Grumman F-14 Tomcat
9. Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation		I.  Airbus A320-214
10. Airplane!		J. Boeing-Stearman Model 75   PT-17 (Kaydet)
11. The Wicker Man		K. Lockheed C-130 ‘Hercules’
12. Dunkirk		L. Airbus Helicopters H130
13. Top Gun		M. Naval Aircraft Factory N3N Canary & a Boeing-Stearman Model 75 (Kaydet)
14. Sully: Miracle on the Hudson		N. Airbus A400M Atlas

 

And now, for the answers...

Here's the Google Docs version.

Answers

1K, 2L, 3G, 4F, 5A, 6M, 7J, 8D, 9N, 10E, 11C, 12B, 13H, 14I

More detailed version in the table below.

Number and film	Answer (Letter and aircraft)
1. The Silence of the Lambs	K. Lockheed C-130 ‘Hercules’
2. Jurassic World	L. Airbus Helicopters H130
3. The Dam Busters	G. Avro Lancaster B.VII
4. Quantum of Solace	F.  Douglas DC-3
5. Apocalypse Now	A. Bell UH-1 Iroquois 'Huey' helicopter
6. North By Northwest	M. Naval Aircraft Factory N3N Canary & a Boeing-Stearman Model 75 (Kaydet)
7. Independence Day	J. Boeing-Stearman Model 75 PT-17 (Kaydet)
8. Memphis Belle	D. Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress bomber
9. Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation	N. Airbus A400M Atlas
10. Airplane!	E. Boeing 707
11. The Wicker Man	C. Thurston TSC-1A Teal
12. Dunkirk	B. Supermarine Spitfire
13. Top Gun	H. Grumman F-14 Tomcat
14. Sully: Miracle on the Hudson	I.  Airbus A320-214

Evidence, with which you are welcome to disagree
because it mostly comes from Wikipedia :)

1. The Silence of the Lambs - Lockheed C-130 ‘Hercules’ 
https://www.146aw.ang.af.mil/News-Photos/News/Article/448858/a-little-bit-of-hollywood-lands-in-the-desert/

Other aircraft in this film: https://www.impdb.org/index.php?title=The_Silence_of_the_Lambs

2. Jurassic World - Airbus Helicopters H130
https://jurassicpark.fandom.com/wiki/JW001
https://verticalmag.com/news/jurassiccopter/  made from a modified Eurocopter EC130 B4

3. The Dam Busters - Avro Lancaster B.VII
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dam_Busters_(film)#Production

4. Quantum of Solace - Douglas DC-3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_of_Solace

5. Apocalypse Now - Bell UH-1 Iroquois 'Huey' helicopter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_UH-1_Iroquois

6. North By Northwest - Naval Aircraft Factory N3N Canary and Boeing-Stearman Model 75 (Kaydet)
“An iconic movie image is a Stearman cropduster chasing Cary Grant across a field in North by Northwest (the airplane that chased Grant was actually a Naval Aircraft Factory N3N Canary; the plane that hits the truck is a Stearman). [citation needed]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing-Stearman_Model_75

7. Independence Day - Boeing-Stearman Model 75 PT-17 (Kaydet)
https://www.answers.com/Q/What_sort_of_plane_was_the_crop_duster_in_independence_day_movie
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing-Stearman_Model_75
https://independenceday.fandom.com/wiki/Russell_Casse

8. Memphis Belle - Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress bomber
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memphis_Belle_(aircraft)

9. Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation - Airbus A400M Atlas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A400M_Atlas
https://www.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/tom-cruise-hitches-ride-side-airbus-a400m-emmission-impossible-rogue-nationem-180954805/

10. Airplane! - Boeing 707
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080339/trivia

11. The Wicker Man - Thurston TSC-1A Teal
https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?201463-Plane-used-in-the-1973-quot-Wicker-Man-quot
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/233531

12. Dunkirk - Supermarine Spitfire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunkirk_(2017_film)

13. Top Gun - Grumman F-14 Tomcat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F-14_Tomcat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gun

14. Sully: Miracle on the Hudson - Airbus A320-214
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549
“Several major airlines, including American Airlines and British Airways, did not include the movie in their onboard entertainment, since it could upset viewers. Virgin allowed it, "to celebrate the fantastic skills, training and dedication of airline pilots".”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sully_(film)