Stuff that occurs to me

All of my 'how to' posts are tagged here. The most popular posts are about blocking and private accounts on Twitter, also the science communication jobs list. None of the science or medical information I might post to this blog should be taken as medical advice (I'm not medically trained).

Think of this blog as a sort of nursery for my half-baked ideas hence 'stuff that occurs to me'.

Contact: @JoBrodie Email: jo DOT brodie AT gmail DOT com

Science in London: The 2018/19 scientific society talks in London blog post

Sunday, 10 November 2019

Support pedestrians at Globe Road / Mile End Road - my submission to Tower Hamlets Local Infrastructure Fund consultation

Update 14 Nov 2019: Found this petition to the GLA (Mayor's office), by Assembly Member Unmesh Desai, from March 2018 https://www.london.gov.uk/petitions/mile-end-roadglobe-road-crossing which says that "We understand these locations are under TfL’s jurisdiction as the A11 [Mile End Road] is a “red route” and that Tower Hamlets Council has also raised these concerns directly, but TfL have said they have no plans to change the traffic signals to introduce a pedestrian phase or any crossings."

tl;dr The Globe Road / Mile End Road pedestrian crossing improvement project

Recently I spotted a large advert near Stepney Green telling me that Tower Hamlets is undertaking a building expansion of some sort, and that developers are required to stump up some cash* for the Local Infrastructure Fund (LIF) with a link pointing to
https://towerhamlets.gov.uk/lif

When I arrive at Stepney Green tube station I have to get across Globe Road which is not easy as traffic comes from three directions and there is no pedestrian-gap in traffic flow. When traffic is turning left (in or out of Globe Road) the traffic coming from a third direction is stopped. When that traffic flow is ON the other one is stopped, but there's no point when the pedestrians have right of way - we just have to watch the road and wait for a gap. It's appalling.

Perhaps counterintuitively there are relatively few accidents or injuries there and I expect this is because pedestrians are mostly extra cautious. I've seen braver (or blither) road-crossers having to pick up speed halfway across when they spot a car bearing down on them, and cars often honk at pedestrians as it is always some car's right of way at that spot.

I'm glad it's relatively safe but it's useless in terms of supporting walking as it prioritises road traffic to the entire exclusion of pedestrians. I'd like Tower Hamlets to look again at this (I wrote to them about it in 2014 and blogged it here).

Below is my submission.

Useful websites
https://towerhamlets.gov.uk/lif points to https://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/lgnl/planning_and_building_control/Infrastructure_planning/local_infrastructure_fund.aspx which points (via a large green 'Take part in the consultation' button) to https://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/lgnl/council_and_democracy/consultations/2019_Local_Infrastructure_Fund_Consultation.aspx at which point you're shown a tiny map and have to decide which area you want. Mine's LIF Area 1 (https://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/GSR45/).

These are the projects that have been approved already: https://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/Documents/LIF_Projects_Awarded_Funding.pdf

My submission
1. I work in the borough
2. I selected "The road network (eg improving road access)" as my priority issue from a long list of important things, I could have selected loads
3. I dissed question 2 a bit ("Q2 is a bit silly, surely. All of these are important but I am writing to you solely about one aspect.")
4. I was asked to pick my top 3 from Q2 but had only picked one so put it again
- Then I was asked to outline my suggested improvement project (see below).
5. Demographic info about me - work locally, age 45-54, female, no health problems, white, straight, no religion, British, single, not pregnant in last year (!) - gosh they want a lot of info!

I've added bold and emphasis and hyperlinks in the bits below, the form is just plain text. The image wasn't included in the submission but added here for clarity, and to break up the text a bit!

What is the issue that needs addressing?
Title: The Globe Road / Mile End Road pedestrian crossing improvement project.

Better road crossing markings and traffic control at Stepney Green station, at the junction between Globe Road (B120) and Mile End Road (A11).


Pinched from Google Maps




How do you think the issue could be addressed by a new infrastructure project?
The problem: Pedestrians are very poorly served at this junction. There is no crossing. There is no time point in the traffic management signalling pattern that is *for* pedestrians, only for road vehicles. Pedestrians must wait for a gap in traffic to cross. This is easy enough for fit young people and those already familiar with the crossing, but not for older, slower or disabled people. Cars (technically correctly) assume anyone crossing is in their way and honk at people unhelpfully. It is an unpleasant place to be forced to cross.

Background to my submission: I've previously written (in 2014) requesting a new crossing (https://brodiesnotes.blogspot.com/2014/01/crossing-globe-road-near-stepney-green.html) and learned that it had been explored but had been deemed not feasible at the time. I also learned that there are relatively few accidents or injuries at the crossing - perhaps because people aren't sure what to do so behave more cautiously (pedestrians at least). While a lack of accidents is good it doesn't solve the difficulties some residents and visitors will have in walking in that area.

This is a 'sub-radar' problem I think. Because relatively few people are being injured it is easy to assume that the current crossing 'works' - but if you want to encourage and support people to walk then please make it easier for them to do so.

Solution 1: I think a proper crossing is the best and safest given the volume of people going to and from Stepney Green station. It's in constant use. It's a shame if cars are inconvenienced but I think Tower Hamlets should be prioritising non-car transport at this particular spot right by a tube station and also in these 'let's get everyone walking more' times.

Solution 2: indicate to drivers, cyclists and pedestrians that the area does not have a 'crossing cycle' for pedestrians. I don't know of other examples of how this might be implemented (perhaps this will be a pioneering road crossing format, invented by Tower Hamlets transport geniuses!). There are several possible examples -

Solution 2a:
  A sign to warn drivers that pedestrians are crossing and to be careful / watch out for them.

Solution 2b: paint the road surface in a different colour, investigate how (temporary?) signage could train pedestrians and drivers about how to use the 'crossing' - basically to remind cars that they don't have any particular right of way over pedestrians. By the way there are no instructions at a zebra crossing as everyone has learned how to use them.

Solution 2c: resurface the road to force a speed reduction as cars enter Globe Road from either Mile End (turning left if coming from Whitechapel) or turning right if coming via White Horse Lane - this is the more problematic traffic route).

Solution 3: Alert pedestrians with a sign pointing out the zebra crossing a few yards away up Globe Road by the post office. This involves an additional walk but may suit some, and it's not particularly obvious that it exists when at the junction.

Solution 4:
Force drivers exiting White Horse Lane to turn left onto Mile End Road before implementing some U-turn arrangement on Mile End Road itself so that all traffic entering Globe Road from Mile End Road is turning left

Solution 5: I'm only including the concept of 'flex space' (https://stepsfromthecanal.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/lets-talk-about-flex-space/) or shared space so that it can be discounted as it seems to be not that helpful in practice, and I suspect the area is too small to accommodate such a thing. The blog post linked in stepsfromthecanal is based in Canada but points out some wider problems with flex space.

Misc: I assume a ramped bridge across the road (!) is out of the question but I suppose I should mention it. Helpful to tube users (but not as much use for non-tube pedestrians) would be to have an exit on the same side of the road as the Co-op in addition to the current arrangement, but I realise that might be quite tricky.

Please tell us the exact location of the proposed project (road name, post code etc):

What 3 Words: https://what3words.com/stages.video.under

Google Map - https://www.google.com/maps/place/B120,+Bethnal+Green,+London/@51.5219429,-0.046597,20z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x48761cd78ded20ed:0x26c09ce6a775bb33!8m2!3d51.5246607!4d-0.0486583

I have also previously blogged about this problem https://brodiesnotes.blogspot.com/2014/01/crossing-globe-road-near-stepney-green.html





*Background from this page
"Tower Hamlets is one of the fastest growing boroughs in the country.

We know that every new development increases the pressure on things like your GP surgery or your school. It could also mean spaces like parks, roads and cycle paths feel busier than before.

That’s why we require developers building in Tower Hamlets to contribute to the Local Infrastructure Fund (LIF), a pot of money that is used to pay for projects in the communities where development is taking place.

We expect the fund to generate around £6 million between April 2019 and March 2020.

On Monday 30 September 2019, we launched a consultation to find out what you, our residents, think we should be spending our LIF money on. There will be an online questionnaire as well as a series of events held across the borough."



Sunday, 3 November 2019

Christmas 2019: How to watch #Elf in London this December

1. Film listings for Elf
1a. Google Spreadsheet version
2. Sources for listings

1. Film listings for Elf
Saturday screenings are in bold. Any errors or omissions? Please let @JoBrodie know, thanks! Also if you're just interested in the current week's and the following week (when the Elf season starts!) look at LondonNet's listings for Elf.

Note that some of these screenings are events and so time may be event starting time rather than screening time, check a venue's homepage if in doubt.

Some of the information below has come from Park Circus, the company which licenses the film to venues wanting to screen it. As such they know where it will be shown but the cinemas themselves might not yet be publicising the event so there may be gaps.

1a. Google Spreadsheet version

NOV/DEC 2019

  1. Saturday 16 Nov, 8pm - Backyard Cinema - Christmas at the Snow Kingdom, Wandsworth
  2. Monday 18 Nov, 8pm - Backyard Cinema - Christmas at the Snow Kingdom, Wandsworth
  3. Friday 22 Nov, 4pm - Backyard Cinema - Christmas at the Snow Kingdom, Wandsworth
  4. Thursday 28 Nov, 8pm - Backyard Cinema - Christmas at the Snow Kingdom, Wandsworth
  5. Tuesday 3 Dec, 8pm - Backyard Cinema - Christmas at the Snow Kingdom, Wandsworth
  6. Wednesday 4 Dec, 6.35pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  7. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Beckhenham
  8. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Camden
  9. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Covent Garden
  10. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Greenwich
  11. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Kingston upon Thames
  12. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Lee Valley
  13. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Richmond
  14. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon South Woodford
  15. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Streatham
  16. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Uxbridge
  17. Friday 6 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Wimbledon
  18. Friday 6 Dec, 7pm - St Katharine Docks Floating Film Festival, St Kats, Tower Bridge
  19. Saturday 7 Dec,  tbc - Empire Walthamstow
  20. Saturday 7 Dec, 3.20pm - Odeon Covent Garden
  21. Saturday 7 Dec, 3.20pm - Odeon Streatham
  22. Saturday 7 Dec, 3.20pm - Odeon Surrey Quays
  23. Saturday 7 Dec, 3.20pm - Odeon Uxbridge
  24. Saturday 7 Dec, 3.30pm - The Soho Hotel
  25. Saturday 7 Dec, 3.50pm - Odeon Greenwich
  26. Saturday 7 Dec, 3.50pm - Odeon Wimbledon
  27. Saturday 7 Dec, 6pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  28. Saturday 7 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Greenwich
  29. Saturday 7 Dec, 6.20pm - Odeon Wimbledon
  30. Saturday 7 Dec, tbc - Odeon Beckenham
  31. Saturday 7 Dec, tbc - Odeon Camden
  32. Saturday 7 Dec, tbc - Odeon Kingston upon Thames
  33. Saturday 7 Dec, tbc - Odeon Lee Valley
  34. Saturday 7 Dec, tbc - Odeon Richmond
  35. Saturday 7 Dec, tbc - Odeon South Woodford
  36. Sunday 8 Dec, 11.30am - The Exhibit, Balham
  37. Sunday 8 Dec, 2pm - South Place Hotel
  38. Sunday 8 Dec, 3pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  39. Sunday 8 Dec, 5pm - Showcase Cinema de Lux
  40. Sunday 8 Dec, 5pm - Showcase Cinema Newham
  41. Sunday 8 Dec, 6pm - Hush Mayfair - SOLD OUT
  42. Sunday 8 Dec, 7pm - Charlotte Street Hotel
  43. [Monday 9 Dec, 7pm - FEST Camden - not listed on their website but on Design My Night]
  44. Monday 9 Dec, 7.30pm - Picturehouse Ashford
  45. Monday 9 Dec, 7.30pm - Picturehouse West Norwood
  46. Monday 9 Dec, 8.30pm - Picturehouse 
  47. Monday 9 Dec, 8.30pm - Picturehouse Bromley
  48. Monday 9 Dec, 8.30pm - Picturehouse Clapham
  49. Monday 9 Dec, 8.30pm - Picturehouse Crouch End
  50. Monday 9 Dec, 8.30pm - Picturehouse East Dulwich
  51. Monday 9 Dec, 8.30pm - Picturehouse Greenwich
  52. Monday 9 Dec, 8.30pm - Picturehouse Hackney
  53. Monday 9 Dec, 8.30pm - Picturehouse Central
  54. Monday 9 Dec, 8.30pm - Picturehouse Ritzy Brixton
  55. Monday 9 Dec, 8.30pm - Picturehouse Stratford East
  56. Tuesday 10 Dec, 1.45pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  57. Thursday 12 Dec, 7pm - Nomad Cinema, Citypoint Moorgate
  58. Friday 13 Dec, 5pm - Rivoli Ballroom, Brockley
  59. Friday 13 Dec, 5.50pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  60. Saturday 14 Dec, 12.45pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  61. Saturday 14 Dec, 3pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  62. Saturday 15 Dec, 6.05pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  63. Monday 16 Dec, 12.45pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  64. Monday 16 Dec, 7.30pm - Showcase Cinemas (Cinema de Lux, Newham)
  65. Monday 16 Dec, 8.30pm - Luna Cinema, Kensington Palace
  66. Tuesday 17 Dec, 1.35pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  67. Tuesday 17 Dec, 8pm - The Exhibit, Balham
  68. Wednesday 18 Dec, 3.40pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  69. Wednesday 18 Dec, 8pm - The Exhibit, Balham
  70. Thursday 19 Dec, 3.40pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  71. Thursday 19 Dec, 5.30pm - Luna Cinema, Kensington Palace
  72. Thursday 19 Dec, 8pm - The Exhibit, Balham 
  73. Friday 20 Dec, 1.10pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  74. Friday 20 Dec, 8.45pm - Luna Cinema, Kensington Palace
  75. Saturday 21 Dec, 3.20pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  76. Saturday 21 Dec, 4pm - The Exhibit, Balham
  77. Saturday 21 Dec, 7pm - Nomad Cinema, Citypoint
  78. Saturday 21 Dec, 8.10pm - Open Air Cinema Kent
  79. Sunday 22 Dec, 12.30pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  80. Sunday 22 Dec, 2pm - Charlotte Street Hotel
  81. Sunday 22 Dec, 2.45pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  82. Sunday 22 Dec, 3.30pm - Exhibit B, Balham
  83. Sunday 22 Dec, 4pm - The Exhibit, Balham
  84. Sunday 22 Dec, 6.30pm - The Exhibit, Balham
  85. Monday 23 Dec, 12.45pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  86. Monday 23 Dec, 6pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
  87. Tuesday 24 Dec, 3.15pm - Prince Charles Cinema, Leicester Square
LondonNet's page for Elf lists some other cinemas which will apparently be screening the film between Sat 21 Dec and Fri 27 Dec but no other information is available at the cinema's websites, yet.
- Arthouse Crouch End
- BFI Southbank
- Curzon Aldgate
- Olympic Studios

2. Sources for listings
I've been collecting the published screenings of Elf in London for a few years so I now have a collection of venues that have previously screened the film so for those ones I do an occasional trawl through their sites to see if anything has been added. Park Circus own the rights so know who's screening it and have published some of them. Eventbrite and Design My Night sell tickets for lots of pop-up places so worth checking for things Elf-related. Twitter searches, Google. No potential candy cane left unchomped :)

These are pages from venues that have previously screened Elf (so links may be out of date until I fix them and those ones are in bold).
Any errors or omissions? Please let @JoBrodie know, thanks!


Wednesday, 30 October 2019

A burst of newspaper articles critical of homeopathy

tl;dr Thanks to efforts from the Good Thinking Society and skeptical activists homeopathy is in the news again, this time it's further criticism of the decision to accredit the Society of Homeopaths' register.
If you've enjoyed the recent burst of articles in the news that have been critical of homeopathy you might like to know that the Good Thinking Society are the people to thank for this. They are currently crowdfunding funds to support a Judicial Review against the decision to accredit the Society of Homeopaths. If you're able to, you can donate here.


The latest crop (and a bumper crop it has been!) of stories relates to the decision made by the Professional Standards Authority (PSA) to re-accredit the Society of Homeopaths (SoH) for 2019-2020 despite concerns that some of their members claim to treat autism and others offer 'alternatives' to vacination. Their re-accreditation is up again for renewal and anyone was able to share their thoughts about whether they should be re-accredited (I shared mine) as long as they submitted their thoughts by 22 October 2019. The SoH first received PSA accreditation in 2014.
  • Going forward - quite a few people think the PSA should not re-accredit the SoH from Jan 2020 and have written to ask them not to do this
  • Retrospectively - The Good Thinking Society (GTS) would additionally like a ruling on the PSA's previous re-accreditation of the SoH (2019-2020). They have been given permission to proceed with a Judicial Review to look into that decision, and to see if it can be rescinded. You can help with the costs of the judicial review too, with a donation.
The GTS have caused this latest splurge of newspaper articles because they asked the head of NHS England (Simon Stevens) to write to the PSA and share his thoughts about SoH accreditation - and he did, and it has caused quite a stir. I'll remember this next time I see homeopathy advocates saying that skeptics have no influence ;)

1. Daily Mail
NHS chief Simon Stevens blasts homeopathy as 'dangerous' and blames the industry for fuelling antivaxx myths
27 October, 22:01
They broke this story with a front-page which is itself a lovely surprise.

2. The Times (article)
NHS chief wants homeopathy to lose official stamp of approval
28 October, 00:01

3. The Times (editorial)
The Times view on calls to revoke accreditation of homeopathic practitioners: Bad Medicine
Homeopaths can cause great harm and deserve to be stripped of their accreditation
28 October, 00:01

4. The Guardian
Head of NHS voices 'serious concerns' about homeopathy
28 October, 07:51

5. BBC
Health bosses' 'serious concerns' over homeopathy
28 October, 10:57 (based on link's first appearance on Twitter)

6. The Independent
NHS bosses bid to blacklist ‘bogus’ homeopathy amid fears of anti-vaccine misinformation
28 October, ~12.31pm (based on the article's author's tweet)

The story has also spread into specialist news stories including The BMJ (Homeopathy should have professional accreditation revoked, NHS leaders urge, 29 October) and the Pharmaceutical Journal (NHS England expresses concern over accreditation of homeopaths, 29 October) and Google News lists plenty of other places where it's been published.

Background
With activism there are always two things - the meat* and the marinade. The meat is the big-change stuff like policy changes, regulatory action and so on whereas the marinade relates to the background in which opinion towards a topic changes. Both support each other.

With homeopathy it's become very clear that in the last few years there have been an increasing number of negatively-framed newspaper articles on the topic, a notable comparison with articles in previous years which were often rather fawning towards homeopathy and other alternative medicines.

It feels like it might have reached a bit of a peak this week with a front cover on the Daily Mail (which is finally pivoting towards encouraging parents to vaccinate) criticising homeopathy.

Apparently there may be some more stories in the pipeline on homeoprophylaxis though possibly Brexit and election news have taken over for now. Anyway I've written a Wikipedia article on Homeoprophylaxis just in case.

Three days after news of Simon Stevens' letter to the PSA broke the SoH had not issued any response - no news story on their blog, no tweet or Facebook post and they've either declined to comment to the authors of these articles or not replied as far as I can tell.

Inexplicably the British Homeopathic Association published a short piece bemoaning the latest crop of news articles but much of it is mistaken or incomplete so I'm not sure that helps much.
*or meat substitute for veggies or vegans!




Tuesday, 22 October 2019

My submission to the Professional Standards Authority asking them to rethink their accreditation of the Society of Homeopaths

This is what I sent to the Professional Standards Authority today about their re-accreditation of the Society of Homeopaths. If this doesn't mean much then you may want to skip to the end and read the 'background explanation' first.

This submission was one of a few sent in by skeptics (scientists, doctors, bloggers) as part of the PSA's open invitation to 'Share Your Experience' (of whatever register they're currently considering). This opportunity is available for a few weeks whenever an accredited register indicates that it would like to be considered for re-accreditation. 

This relates to the next round of re-accreditation, note that the Good Thinking Society have been given permission to have a Judicial Review of the PSA's earlier decision to re-accredit them last year, in light of significant concerns about autism treatments and advice on vaccination etc.

A. Letter to the PSA
B. Background explanation






A. Letter to the PSA

Dear Accreditation team

Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the ‘Share your experience’ consultation regarding the Society of Homeopaths and its interest in having its register re-accredited.

My direct experience of the Society is that everyone I’ve communicated with there has been courteous so I have no complaints about any personnel. I have been frustrated with the slow pace of getting websites I complained about changed(1) (though they have mostly been changed) however my wider experience of the Society in terms of its public statements and responses has been more frustrating. I am also unhappy that members are still offering CEASE therapy, regardless of any claims made about it.

1. Lay homeopaths are not healthcare professionals
Taking the second clause first - “We help to protect the public through our work with organisations that register and regulate people working in health and social care.”

Homeopaths are not qualified to give health advice and cannot meaningfully diagnose or treat any condition. This alone could have excluded the SoH’s register from accreditation by the PSA in the first place.

Homeopaths’ training seems to be based on a fundamental misunderstanding of health, physiology or pathology (and frequently chemistry and physics too) and they are not always giving good or sensible advice.

Given the concerns that CEASE is harmful to and discriminates against autistic children (and that marketing compliance would not necessarily stop the ‘treatment’ from being offered) I am surprised that accreditation has been continued. I do not think the Society of Homeopaths should be re-accredited.

2. CEASE is problematic whether or not it’s mention in marketing
• Autism is not curable and implying (through the use of the acronym, the full version, or other text) that it can be cured, eliminated or otherwise lessened through supplements and homeopathy is cruel to autistic people and to the parents of autistic kids.
• The treatment itself is potentially harmful; the source material (though I have not seen the current training manuals) have recommended very high doses of vitamin supplements, against NHS advice, and seems to celebrate diarrhoea as a way of ‘detoxing’. This is nonsense. The CEASE therapy website (to which several SoH members still link (2)) recommends odd dietary restrictions and a baffling avoidance of microwaves.
• The concept of CEASE is linked to anti-vaccination sentiment with an inherent suggestion that vaccines are one of several ‘toxins’ that can lead to a toxic imprint which might be reversed by giving homeopathic “anti-toxins” based on vaccines such as MMR, this promotes the wrongheaded notion that there is any link between MMR and autism.
• Even with full marketing compliance SoH members could still be offering CEASE. The treatment isn’t a treatment for autism, it’s not been properly tested and is potentially harmful. It’s also not clear how anyone offering Skype consultations is able to properly assess a child. Anyone offering CEASE to an autistic child is acting against the child and the family’s best interests. By comparison people are no longer permitted to offer ‘gay conversion therapy’.

3. The SoH’s responses around CEASE have not been helpful
• The SoH’s 2016 Annual Review highlighted CEASE as something that was “noted as (a) popular CPD topic among our membership” instead of stating that it should not be on the market.
• Their position statement on CEASE says that it is “acceptable” for members to market CEASE therapy but that they should not imply a complete cure as that “would be unethical and in breach of the Code of Ethics” - rather than simply “not possible”.
• Members were slow to amend their websites after I complained about the websites of five RSHoms offering CEASE. Changes took several months though change did happen.(1)

4. Their responses to criticisms of homeopathy are also not helpful
• The SoH’s response to the ASA sending a compliance letter to UK homeopaths in September 2016 was to “seek legal advice on the legitimacy of the ASA and the actions it is taking pursuing homeopaths”, though they did follow legal advice not to pursue that further.
• Rather than sanctioning a member for spending half an hour talking about homeopathy and vaccines (homeoprophylaxis) to what turned out to be a newspaper reporter the Society complained about the journalist to IPSO. Their position statement on homeoprophylaxis starts out strongly but ends disappointingly by suggesting there may be something in it.
• News that the Good Thinking Society intended to request a judicial review into your decision to re-accredit the SoH was described as “whipping up hysteria.”

5. Accrediting the SoH does not protect the public
“We help to protect the public through our work with organisations that register and regulate people working in health and social care” - I would argue that the public are not protected by accrediting the SoH’s register of members. What is the benefit of recommending that people “only choose practitioners who are regulated or on an Accredited Register” when those practitioners are likely to be offering unwise advice about vaccinations or non- and potentially harmful treatments like CEASE?

6. Comments on menopause are also likely to be misleading
A separate statement from the SoH on menopausal symptoms shows that women are not
being given good advice either. I think this advice is likely to be misleading (and may well be at odds with ASA / CAP recommendations).

“Homeopathic remedies which can help to ease the symptoms of menopause are being highlighted to help women who are currently unable to get their hands on HRT” - this is from a news story in Sep 2019 in which I suspect the evidence offered is unlikely to satisfy the ASA. Surely no-one should be implying that homeopathy can help symptoms of menopause. (The compliance letter sent to homeopaths in the UK in Sep 2016 said “homeopaths may not currently make either direct or implied claims to treat medical conditions”).

7. Footnotes
(1) Website marketing claims took a long time to be amended
I wrote to the SoH on 9 November 2017 with details of five of their (then) members about problematic claims on their websites. I blogged about this a month later - I did not expect many changes to have been made by then but in several cases it took more than six months for changes to be made (it seemed to happen between June and July 2018). One homeopath is no longer a member (as of December 2017) and the websites of the remaining four are much improved, for example removing the link to the cease-therapy dot com website or not writing out the acronym in full.

(2) Examples of homeopaths currently linking to the ‘cease-therapy dot com’ website
Linking to this website is a problem because misleading claims are plentiful there but are not being said ‘directly’ by the homeopath, nor is the website within the UK’s jurisdiction.

[I have redacted from this post the names of the homeopaths and the links to their websites]


B. Background explanation
The Professional Standards Authority (PSA) regulates the regulators in healthcare. As an example they oversee the General Medical Council (GMC) and the GMC regulates doctors by keeping a register of members, setting standards, checking that doctors' education is up to scratch (and revalidating their learning) and by investigating complaints made about doctors. The GMC's operation is also regulated by the law (specifically by the Medical Act 1983).

The PSA also provides a similar scheme for organisations "that register health and social care practitioners who are not regulated by law" and this is where the Society of Homeopaths comes into the equation. They also keep a register of homeopaths, set standards, require a minimum of study and investigate complaints about homeopaths. Because of this their register of members (who can use the term RSHom to indicate that they are registered members of the Society) was accredited by the PSA in 2014 and has been re-accredited every year since.

In 2017 several skeptics expressed concern to the PSA that a number of their members were offering CEASE therapy to families with autistic kids and implying that it could help them (some of them made stronger claims). The PSA took action and in their re-accreditation asked the SoH to address this, adding conditions to their re-accreditation in 2018. The PSA considered at the next round of re-accreditation that the SoH had satisfied these requirements - however members are still offering CEASE and continuing to make misleading statements about autism and vaccination. Many of them give harmful advice around vaccination and some of them have even implied to potential customers that such a thing as a homeopathic alternative to vaccination exists (it does not).

Accreditation by the PSA does not mean that it thinks homeopathy works - they don't consider the efficacy of any particular treatment, only that the organisation registered keeps records of members. This is probably fine where an organisation is providing a valuable service but perhaps less so where an organisation has some of its members offering harmful autism treatments.





Wednesday, 16 October 2019

The London Institute of Mathematical Sciences is harshing my mellow - spam newsletter

Late last year "LIMS" the London Institute of Mathematical Sciences added me to a list to receive their newsletter.

At the bottom of the newsletter there was a link to change my subscription or unsubscribe. I'd never subscribed (nor heard of them, their website was unfamiliar) and wondered why on earth I'd been added. It is always possible that I've mistakenly signed up to something and can't initially assume that someone else is at fault.

While technically clicking unsubscribe should remove me, I'd argue (admittedly pedantically but for heaven's sake this is a maths organisation and you'd think they would appreciate the precision of my logical argument) by definition I cannot unsubscribe if I've never subscribed. So I asked how / why I'd been added. Below is a summary of the redacted communications which I'm adding here in case others google to find out why they've been added to LIMS' newsletter / mailing list.

My email address should never have been added to a mailing list / newsletter without my permission, so clicking 'unsubscribe' wouldn't have uncovered how that error was made in the first place. Sadly, as you'll see, none of the other efforts I've made have managed to unsubscribe me either. A friend has advised that I contact the ICO though I'm sure they'd say "Oh for heaven's sake just click Unsubscribe" ;)

LIMS joined Twitter (@London_Inst) this month, and sent me another newsletter to tell me. Hence this post.


1. 25 November 2018 (they first emailed me on 23rd Nov)
 
Subject: Re: The London Institute becomes an Independent Research Organization, and other news
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 21:56:44 +0000
From: Me
To: London Institute

Hi - can you clarify when I signed up to receive this? I'm not familiar with your website but the option to Unsubscribe suggests that I must have subscribed at some point.

Thanks,
Jo

2. My second reply following up, on 29 November 2018
 
Subject: Re: The London Institute becomes an Independent Research Organization, and other news
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 12:12:58 +0000
From: Me
To: London Institute

Just wondering what the status of this enquiry is, thanks, Jo

3. My third reply on 29 November 2018

Subject: Re: The London Institute becomes an Independent Research Organization, and other news
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:28:14 +0000
From: Me
To: [Redacted]

Thanks [Redacted] - I don't think I've been to a talk there and the website wasn't familiar to me. I am just always wary of finding myself subscribed to things as it seems to happen a lot with an academic email address (mine, I mean).

Best wishes,
Jo

On 29/11/2018 15:23, [Redacted] wrote:
Dear Jo,

I have sent an email around the Institute to see whom you are connected to/know and take it from there. I assume you would remember if you came to a talk here?

Best wishes

[redacted]


4. My fourth reply following up on 10 Dec

Subject: Re: The London Institute becomes an Independent Research Organization, and other news
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 17:09:56 +0000
From: Me
To: [Redacted]

Hi [Redacted]

Any news on this?

Thanks,
Jo

5. My fifth reply, to a new message

Subject: Re: Happy Christmas from the London Institute
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 17:39:10 +0000
From: Me
To: London Institute

What is going on here? Who signed me up for this? If I signed myself up (I genuinely don't remember) when did I do that? I've randomly started receiving messages from you in late November having never knowingly communicated with you before. Why?

Thanks,
Jo






6. Their reply reassuring me that they'd asked for my details to be taken off their database - this was in response to #4

Subject: Re: The London Institute becomes an Independent Research Organization, and other news
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 11:29:30 +0000
From: Redacted
To: Me

Dear Jo,

I am afraid I have no finite answers on this but have requested that you are removed from the database so you will receive no further updates or seminar notices from the London Institute.

Kind regards

[Redacted]



Didn't work ;)
Everything went quiet until April 2019

7. My sixth reply to a new newsletter

Subject: Re: London Institute in Times Higher Education and other news
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 16:04:59 +0100
From: Me
To: London Institute

How is it that my email address is still on your mailing list despite assurances in December 2018 that it would be removed (see attached)? I had never knowingly heard of LIMS before your first email to me in November 2018 and still have no idea how or why my address was added in the first place.

Jo

8. Six months after that we begin again...

Subject: Re: Follow our new Twitter account and see our range of research projects
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 19:03:52 +0100
From: Me
To: London Institute

Why am I receiving this?

Thanks
Jo